| Literature DB >> 28654005 |
Daniela Ducci1, Stefano Albanese2, Lorenzo Boccia3, Egidio Celentano4, Elena Cervelli5, Alfonso Corniello6, Anna Crispo7, Benedetto De Vivo8, Paolo Iodice9, Carmela Langella10, Annamaria Lima11, Maurizio Manno12, Mario Palladino13, Stefania Pindozzi14, Marina Rigillo15, Nunzio Romano16, Mariangela Sellerino17, Adolfo Senatore18, Giuseppe Speranza19, Nunzio Fiorentino20, Massimo Fagnano21.
Abstract
This paper deals with the environmental characterization of a large and densely populated area, with a poor reputation for contamination, considering the contribution of environmental features (air, soil, soil hydraulic and groundwater) and the potential effects on human health. The use of Geographic Information System (GIS) has made possible a georeferenced inventory and, by overlaying environmental information, an operational synthesis of comprehensive environmental conditions. The cumulative effects on environmental features were evaluated, taking into account superposition effects, by means of the Spatial MultiCriteria Decision Analysis (S-MCDA). The application of the S-MCDA for converging the combination of heterogeneous factors, related to soil, land and water, deeply studied by heterogeneous groups of experts, constitutes the novelty of the paper. The results confirmed an overall higher potential of exposure to contaminants in the environment and higher mortality rates in the study area for some tumours, but hospital admissions for tumours were generally similar to the regional trend. Besides, mortality data may be strictly dependent on the poor socioeconomic conditions, quality of therapy and a lack of welfare in the area relative to the rest of Italy. Finally, as regards the possible relationship between presence of contaminants in the environment and health conditions of the population no definite conclusions can be drawn, although the present study encourages the use of the new proposed methods, that increase the possibilities for studying the combined effect of more environmental factors.Entities:
Keywords: air pollution; aquifer vulnerability to contamination; geochemical characterization of soils; health assessment; multi-criteria environmental analysis; soil hydraulic parameters
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28654005 PMCID: PMC5551131 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph14070693
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Location of the study area and main sources of contamination. In the square on the top-right corner the provinces of Napoli and Caserta compared with the study area boundaries.
Figure 2Main hydrogeological features of the study area. In the upper right corner the partition of the study area in groundwater bodies (GWBs).
Figure 3Flow chart of the integrated environmental-health characterization of the study area, via GIS inventory and Spatial MultiCriteria Decision Analysis (S-MCDA). Suitability map refers to areas suitable for bioremediation reclamation techniques.
Total annual emissions of major air pollutants in the Litorale Domitio-Agro Aversano area, disaggregated by CORINAIR sectors.
| SNAP Sector | CO | COV | NO | PM10 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (t) | % | (t) | % | (t) | % | (t) | % | |
| Combustion in energy and transformation industries | 2.3 | 0.01% | 3 | 0.02% | 250.9 | 1.72% | 4.1 | 0.16% |
| Nonindustrial combustion plants | 1092.5 | 3.54% | 104.3 | 0.54% | 482.8 | 3.31% | 280.3 | 10.89% |
| Combustion in manufacturing industries | 1260.4 | 4.09% | 164.2 | 0.86% | 2984.2 | 20.47% | 202.7 | 7.88% |
| Roduction processes | 478.5 | 1.55% | 818.5 | 4.26% | 508.2 | 3.49% | 383 | 14.88% |
| Extraction and distribution of fossil fuels/geothermal energy | 0 | 0.00% | 275.1 | 1.43% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% |
| Solvent and other product use | 0 | 0.00% | 7780 | 40.53% | 0.6 | 0.00% | 0.7 | 0.03% |
| Road transport | 25,714.1 | 83.41% | 7846.5 | 40.87% | 4054.5 | 27.81% | 1006.3 | 39.10% |
| Other mobile sources and machinery | 2109 | 6.84% | 975.9 | 5.08% | 6292.6 | 43.16% | 677.2 | 26.31% |
| Waste treatment and disposal | 47.9 | 0.16% | 432.2 | 2.25% | 5.7 | 0.04% | 9.9 | 0.38% |
| Agriculture | 45.1 | 0.15% | 698.7 | 3.64% | 0.8 | 0.01% | 4.7 | 0.18% |
| Other sources | 78 | 0.25% | 98.5 | 0.51% | 0 | 0.00% | 4.6 | 0.18% |
| Total | 30,827.8 | 100% | 19,196.8 | 100% | 14,580.4 | 100% | 2573.5 | 100% |
Total annual emissions of PTMs in the Litorale Domitio-Agro Aversano area, disaggregated by CORINAIR sectors.
| SNAP Sector | As | Cd | Cr | Cu | Hg | Ni | Pb | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (kg) | % | (kg) | % | (kg) | % | (kg) | % | (kg) | % | (kg) | % | (kg) | % | |
| Combustion in energy and transformation industries | 0.1 | 0.05% | 0.1 | 0.09% | 0 | 0.00% | 0.1 | 0.01% | 0 | 0.00% | 0.1 | 0.01% | 0.5 | 0.02% |
| Nonindustrial combustion plants | 5.6 | 2.52% | 7.2 | 6.28% | 14.1 | 4.01% | 7.2 | 0.68% | 2.3 | 2.06% | 197 | 20.30% | 8.2 | 0.36% |
| Combustion in manufacturing industries | 215 | 97.07% | 101 | 87.78% | 201 | 57.15% | 45.9 | 4.34% | 109 | 97.40% | 572 | 58.99% | 1882 | 81.71% |
| Production processes | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 107 | 30.32% | 2 | 0.19% | 0 | 0.00% | 158 | 16.31% | 7 | 0.30% |
| Extract. and distrib. of fossil fuels/geothermal energy | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% |
| Solvent and other product use | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% |
| Road transport | 0 | 0.00% | 4.7 | 4.10% | 23.7 | 6.73% | 806 | 76.24% | 0 | 0.00% | 33.1 | 3.41% | 380.2 | 16.51% |
| Other mobile sources and machinery | 0.6 | 0.27% | 1.8 | 1.57% | 6 | 1.71% | 195 | 18.47% | 0 | 0.00% | 8.6 | 0.89% | 19.6 | 0.85% |
| Waste treatment and disposal | 0.1 | 0.05% | 0.2 | 0.17% | 0.3 | 0.09% | 0.8 | 0.08% | 0.6 | 0.54% | 0.8 | 0.08% | 5.7 | 0.25% |
| Agriculture | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% |
| Other sources | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% | 0 | 0.00% |
| Total | 222 | 100% | 115 | 100% | 352 | 100% | 1057 | 100% | 112 | 100% | 969 | 100% | 2303 | 100% |
Figure 4Distribution of CO, NO, VOC total emission, with spatial disaggregation at municipal level.
Figure 5Map of inorganic contamination of soils in the central part of the study area, based on the distribution of 15 potentially toxic metals.
Figure 6Map of Available Water index (AWindex) in soils.
Figure 7Map of susceptibility of aquifers to contamination.
Comparison matrix for Environmental Characterization—WATER (ECW).
| Smin | AWindex | NW | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Smin | 1 | 0.5 | |
| AWindex | 1 | 1 | 0.5 |
Smin = Depth to groundwater; AWindex = Avaibility of Water Index; NW = Normalized Weights.
Comparison matrix for Environmental Characterization—SOIL (ECS).
| SnB | BeB | TlB | VB | NW | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SnB | 1 | 0.10 | |||
| BeB | 3 | 1 | 030 | ||
| TlB | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0.30 | |
| VB | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.30 |
SnB = Baseline value Sn; BeB = Baseline value Be; TlB = Baseline value Tl; VB = Baseline value V; NW = Normalized Weights.
Comparison matrix for Environmental Characterization—TERRITORY (ECT).
| Er | LC | Rad | PAd | Rd | Ad | NW | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Er | 1 | 0.062 | |||||
| LC | 3 | 1 | 0.187 | ||||
| Rad | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0.187 | |||
| PAD | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.187 | ||
| RD | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.187 | |
| AD | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.187 |
Er = Erosion; LC = Land Cover; Rad = Radon; PAD = Protected Areas Distance; RD = Road Distance; AD = Artificial surface Distance; NW = Normalized Weights.
Comparison matrix for Environmental Characterization—Intermediate Factors.
| ECW | ECS | ECT | NW | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ECW | 1 | 0.33 | ||
| ECS | 1 | 1 | 0.33 | |
| ECT | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0.33 |
ECW = Environmental Characterization—WATER factor; ECS = Environmental Characterization—SOIL factor; ECT = Environmental Characterization—TERRITORY factor; NW = Normalized Weights.
Suitability value for the Environmental Quality Standards EQS classes.
| Environmental Quality Standards (EQS) | Suitability Value (0–1) | |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Areas with natural or anthropic constraints | 0.00–0.01 |
| 2 | Areas with very low EQS | 0.01–0.58 |
| 3 | Areas with low EQS | 0.58–0.64 |
| 4 | Areas with medium EQS | 0.64–0.69 |
| 5 | Areas with high EQS | 0.69–0.74 |
| 6 | Areas with very high EQS | 0.74–0.76 |
Figure 8Suitability map referred to areas suitable for bioremediation reclamation techniques (from medium to very low Environmental Quality Standards).