刘磊, 李鹏飞, 彭洋洋, 唐昆, 程婷婷, 彭晓萍. 风险评估法结合文献类比法在垃圾焚烧发电项目职业病危害预评价中的应用[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2018, 35(4): 341-346. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2018.17337
引用本文: 刘磊, 李鹏飞, 彭洋洋, 唐昆, 程婷婷, 彭晓萍. 风险评估法结合文献类比法在垃圾焚烧发电项目职业病危害预评价中的应用[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2018, 35(4): 341-346. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2018.17337
LIU Lei, LI Peng-fei, PENG Yang-yang, TANG Kun, CHENG Tingting, PENG Xiao-ping. Application of risk assessment method and literature analogy method to pre-assessment of occupational hazards in waste-to-energy projects[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2018, 35(4): 341-346. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2018.17337
Citation: LIU Lei, LI Peng-fei, PENG Yang-yang, TANG Kun, CHENG Tingting, PENG Xiao-ping. Application of risk assessment method and literature analogy method to pre-assessment of occupational hazards in waste-to-energy projects[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2018, 35(4): 341-346. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2018.17337

风险评估法结合文献类比法在垃圾焚烧发电项目职业病危害预评价中的应用

Application of risk assessment method and literature analogy method to pre-assessment of occupational hazards in waste-to-energy projects

  • 摘要: 目的 研究风险评估法结合文献类比法在垃圾焚烧发电项目职业病危害预评价中的应用。

    方法 综述文献资料,分析垃圾焚烧发电项目存在的职业病危害因素及其浓度(强度)。利用风险评估方程式R=MLSN计算评价单元中各职业病危害因素风险值R,根据R值测算出各评价单位职业病危害风险值Rg,进而评估拟建项目职业病危害风险值I。对照I值分级标准确定拟建项目职业病危害风险级别和风险程度。

    结果 文献资料分析显示,垃圾焚烧发电项目存在的主要职业病危害因素以粉尘、噪声、高温为主,其次是化学毒物,还存在工频电磁场、生物因素等;粉尘、化学毒物、高温、工频电磁场监测结果均未超过工作场所职业病危害因素职业接触限值;噪声强度超标率范围为14.3%~28.3%,强度分级最高达Ⅱ级;微生物监测指标合格率低至33.3%。风险评估结果显示,主体工艺单元职业病危害风险值Rg为176.6,风险级别为Ⅲ级,风险程度属于高度风险;辅助单元职业病危害风险值Rg为89.5,风险级别为Ⅱ级,风险程度属于中度风险。拟建项目职业病危害整体风险值I为153.3,风险级别为Ⅲ级,风险程度属于高度风险。

    结论 风险评估法与文献类比法相结合可以应用于垃圾焚烧发电项目职业病危害预评价。解决了单纯依赖类比法识别职业病危害因素及其浓度(强度)和无法对建设项目职业病危害风险程度定量分类的问题。

     

    Abstract: Objective To study the application of combined risk assessment method and literature analogy method to the pre-assessment of occupational hazards in waste-to-energy projects.

    Methods Through literature review, we analyzed occupational hazardous factors and corresponding concentrations (intensities) in waste-to-energy projects. We used risk assessment equation R=MLSN to calculate a risk value R of each occupational hazardous factor, then a risk value Rg of occupational hazards in each assessment unit, and finally a risk value I of occupational hazards in a selected construction project. The risk levels and risk degrees of occupational hazards in a proposed construction project were determined accrording to I value classification standard.

    Results Literature analogy results showed that the main occupational hazardous factors in waste-to-energy projects included dust, noise, and high temperature, followed by industrial toxicants, power frequency electric field, and biological factors. Among them, dust, industrial toxicants, high temperature, and power frequency electric field monitoring results did not exceed occupational exposure limits for hazardous agents in workplace; the unqualified rate of noise intensity was 14.3%-28.3%, reaching intensity grade Ⅱ; the qualified rate of microbial indicators was 33.3%. The risk assessment results showed that the risk value Rg of occupational hazards in the main unit was 176.6, grade Ⅲ risk level, high risk degree, and the risk value Rg of occupational hazards in the auxiliary unit was 89.5, grade Ⅱ risk level, medium risk degree. The overall risk value I of occupational hazards in the selected propsed construction project was 153.3, grade Ⅲ risk level, high risk degree.

    Conclusion Risk assessment method combined with literature analogy method are suitable for the pre-assessment of occupational hazards in waste-to-energy projects. The combination solves the problem of relying solely on analogy method to identify occupational hazards and their concentrations (intensities) without quantitative classification on risk levels of occupational hazards in target construction projects.

     

/

返回文章
返回