中文摘要：

应用美国的RBCA模型和荷兰的Csoil模型对某挥发性有机物污染场地中的2种主要污染物1,2-二氯丙烷和1,2-二氯乙烷进行健康风险评价。结果表明,2种模型计算出的健康风险基本一致,除14号采样点存在潜在的健康风险外,其余各采样点的健康风险均在可接受的范围内。由土壤污染引起的各暴露途径中,直接经口摄入途径引起的健康风险最大,占65%以上;皮肤接触途径次之;呼吸摄入途径最小。在呼吸暴露途径中,室内挥发暴露明显比室外挥发暴露的健康风险大。Csoil模型计算出的所有采样点由地下水暴露途径引起的健康风险都超过土壤,说明由地下水暴露引起的健康风险不容忽视。RBCA模型在考虑地下水暴露途径时仅考虑了饮水摄入这一途径,与RBCA模型相比,Csoil模型在进行健康风险评价时特别考虑了洗澡暴露途径,对于地下水受到污染的场地来说,Csoil模型考虑得更全面,使用Csoil模型进行健康风险评价更具有针对性。

英文摘要：

Volatile chlorinated hydrocarbons are poisonous,cumulative and diverse and may cause serious harm to human health and environment.This research was performed on a volatile chlorinated hydrocarbons contaminated site and RBCA model and Csoil model were applied for the assessment of the health risks of two main contaminants,1,2-dichloropropane and 1,2-dichloroethane.The results showed that the health risks calculated either by the RBCA model or Csoil model were generally concordant within the same order of magnitude.The health risks of each sampling point were in the acceptable range excepted for the No.14 sampling point.The risk through mouth intake was the highest in all exposure pathways caused by soil pollution,accounting for more than 65% of the proportion.Skin contact ranked the second place,whereas the intake through breathing was the minimum.The health risks caused by indoor volatile exposure was significantly greater than outdoor volatile exposure among breathing exposure pathways.The risks caused by groundwater exposure calculated through Csoil model was larger than soil exposure,indicating that the health risk caused by groundwater exposure could not be neglected.RBCA model only considered the water intake when considering groundwater exposure pathway,Compared with RBCA model,Csoil model considered bath exposure as a special pathway,so Csoil model might be more suitable for health risk assessment in the sites where groundwater was contaminated,due to its more comprehensive consideration.