冯玉超, 赵远, 高原, 张海, 刘移民. 多种职业健康风险评估方法在污水处理行业中的应用研究[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2021, 39(1): 45-49, 79. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.01.009
引用本文: 冯玉超, 赵远, 高原, 张海, 刘移民. 多种职业健康风险评估方法在污水处理行业中的应用研究[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2021, 39(1): 45-49, 79. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.01.009
shu
FENG Yuchao, ZHAO Yuan, GAO Yuan, ZHANG Hai, LIU YiMin. Application of different risk assessment methods in occupational health risk assessment in sewage treatment industry[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2021, 39(1): 45-49, 79. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.01.009
Citation: FENG Yuchao, ZHAO Yuan, GAO Yuan, ZHANG Hai, LIU YiMin. Application of different risk assessment methods in occupational health risk assessment in sewage treatment industry[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2021, 39(1): 45-49, 79. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2021.01.009
shu

多种职业健康风险评估方法在污水处理行业中的应用研究

Application of different risk assessment methods in occupational health risk assessment in sewage treatment industry

    摘要
  • 摘要:
      目的  比较多种职业健康风险评估方法在污水处理行业重点岗位中的适用性。
      方法  以3家污水处理企业为研究对象，采用美国国家环境保护署吸入风险评估模型法（简称EPA法）、GBZ/T 229工作场所职业病危害作业分级法、GBZ/T 298-2017综合指数法、国际采矿和金属委员会职业健康风险评估模型法（简称ICMM法）以及澳大利亚职业安全健康风险评估方法（简称澳大利亚法）对接触氨（NH3）和硫化氢（H2S）、粉尘作业岗位的职业健康风险进行评估，比较多种风险评估结果。
      结果  3家污水处理厂各岗位NH3、H2S和粉尘检测结果均符合国家接触限值要求。经风险比值对各方法的风险评估结果进行标准化后，EPA法的评估结果显示各岗位H2S的职业健康风险均为极高风险（5级），NH3均为中等风险（3级）；GBZ/T 229作业分级法和ICMM矩阵法的评估结果显示NH3、H2S和粉尘的职业健康风险均为低风险（2级）；ICMM定量法的评估结果显示NH3、H2S及粉尘的职业健康风险均为可忽略风险（1级）；GBZ/T 298-2017综合指数法的评估结果显示NH3、H2S的职业健康风险均为中等风险（3级），粉尘为可忽略风险（1级）；澳大利亚法的评估结果显示NH3、H2S的职业健康风险为高风险（4级），粉尘为中等风险（3级）。
      结论  几种风险评估方法对污水处理行业职业健康风险的评估结果不尽一致，GBZ/T 298-2017综合指数法结合澳大利亚法更适用于污水处理行业的职业健康风险评估。

     

    Abstract:
      Objective  The applicability of different risk assessment methods to occupational health risk assessment of key work places in sewage treatment industry was compared.
      Methods  The EPA method, GBZ/T 229 workplace occupational hazard classification method, GBZ/T 298 -2017 comprehensive index method, ICMM method and Australian method were used to assess the occupational health risk in 3 sewage treatment enterprises. The occupational health risk in the key workplaces where workers exposed to ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and dust were evaluated. The risk levels got by different methods were standardized and compared.
      Results  The exposure levels of NH3, H2S and dust in each workplace in 3 sewage treatment plants were lower than national exposure limits. EPA method showed that the occupational health risk of H2S in each workplace was extremely high (level 5), and risk of NH3 was medium (level 3). Both GBZ/T 229 job classification method and ICMM matrix method showed that the occupational health risks of NH3, H2S and dust were low (level 2). The ICMM showed that the occupational health risks of NH3, H2S and dust were negligible (level 1). GBZ/T 298-2017 comprehensive index method showed that the occupational health risks of NH3 and H2S were medium (level 3), and risk of dust was negligible (level 1). Australian method showed that the occupational health risk of NH3 and H2S was high (level 4), and the risk of dust was medium (level 3).
      Conclusions  The different risk assessment methods showed various results of occupational health risk in the sewage treatment industry. GBZ/T 298-2017 comprehensive index method combined with Australian method is more suitable for occupational health risk assessment in sewage treatment industry.

     

    • HTML全文
    • 参考文献(22)
    • 相关文章
    • 施引文献
  • 资源附件(0)

/

返回文章
返回