Cargando…

Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River

BACKGROUND: Billions of dollars are spent on environmental dredging (ED) to remediate contaminated sediments, with one goal being reduced human health risks. However, ED may increase health risks in unanticipated ways, thus potentially reducing net benefits. OBJECTIVES: To assess the ways that ED ma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kvasnicka, Jacob, Stylianou, Katerina S., Nguyen, Vy K., Huang, Lei, Chiu, Weihsueh A., Burton, Semrau, Jeremy, Jolliet, Olivier
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Environmental Health Perspectives 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6957280/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31834828
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP5034
_version_ 1783487285959852032
author Kvasnicka, Jacob
Stylianou, Katerina S.
Nguyen, Vy K.
Huang, Lei
Chiu, Weihsueh A.
Burton,
Semrau, Jeremy
Jolliet, Olivier
author_facet Kvasnicka, Jacob
Stylianou, Katerina S.
Nguyen, Vy K.
Huang, Lei
Chiu, Weihsueh A.
Burton,
Semrau, Jeremy
Jolliet, Olivier
author_sort Kvasnicka, Jacob
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Billions of dollars are spent on environmental dredging (ED) to remediate contaminated sediments, with one goal being reduced human health risks. However, ED may increase health risks in unanticipated ways, thus potentially reducing net benefits. OBJECTIVES: To assess the ways that ED may increase health risks in unanticipated ways, thus potentially reducing net benefits, we quantitatively assessed a subset of population health benefits and risks of ED, using the 2009–2015 remediation of the Hudson River Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Superfund Site as a case study. Three remediation scenarios were evaluated: No Action (NA), Source Control (SC), and ED. METHODS: We quantified health benefits for each scenario from reduced PCB levels in Hudson River fish, and health risks from ED operations due to increased inhalation exposures to PCBs and fine particulate matter ([Formula: see text]), using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as a common metric. Occupational health risks were also considered in a separate sensitivity analysis. Estimates of population-level benefits and risks included Monte Carlo simulation-based uncertainty analysis. RESULTS: Under NA, fish consumption would result in an estimated health burden of 112 DALYs, and ED would lead to a reduction of 15 DALYs in excess of SC. ED operations were estimated to induce a total burden of 33 DALYs, dominated by [Formula: see text] impacts from rail transport emissions (32 DALYs). Including uncertainty, the net health benefit of ED ranged from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] avoided DALYs (90% confidence), with a median of [Formula: see text] avoided DALYs. CONCLUSIONS: For the considered impacts, ED in the Hudson River might not have led to an overall net positive human health impact. The benefits and risks of ED, however, have different degrees of uncertainty and involve different populations. Reducing long-distance transport of dredged sediment is a priority. This comparative approach could be used prospectively to better determine trade-offs involved in different remediation scenarios and to improve remediation design to maximize benefits while minimizing risks. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5034
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6957280
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Environmental Health Perspectives
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69572802020-01-17 Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River Kvasnicka, Jacob Stylianou, Katerina S. Nguyen, Vy K. Huang, Lei Chiu, Weihsueh A. Burton, Semrau, Jeremy Jolliet, Olivier Environ Health Perspect Research BACKGROUND: Billions of dollars are spent on environmental dredging (ED) to remediate contaminated sediments, with one goal being reduced human health risks. However, ED may increase health risks in unanticipated ways, thus potentially reducing net benefits. OBJECTIVES: To assess the ways that ED may increase health risks in unanticipated ways, thus potentially reducing net benefits, we quantitatively assessed a subset of population health benefits and risks of ED, using the 2009–2015 remediation of the Hudson River Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Superfund Site as a case study. Three remediation scenarios were evaluated: No Action (NA), Source Control (SC), and ED. METHODS: We quantified health benefits for each scenario from reduced PCB levels in Hudson River fish, and health risks from ED operations due to increased inhalation exposures to PCBs and fine particulate matter ([Formula: see text]), using disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) as a common metric. Occupational health risks were also considered in a separate sensitivity analysis. Estimates of population-level benefits and risks included Monte Carlo simulation-based uncertainty analysis. RESULTS: Under NA, fish consumption would result in an estimated health burden of 112 DALYs, and ED would lead to a reduction of 15 DALYs in excess of SC. ED operations were estimated to induce a total burden of 33 DALYs, dominated by [Formula: see text] impacts from rail transport emissions (32 DALYs). Including uncertainty, the net health benefit of ED ranged from [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text] avoided DALYs (90% confidence), with a median of [Formula: see text] avoided DALYs. CONCLUSIONS: For the considered impacts, ED in the Hudson River might not have led to an overall net positive human health impact. The benefits and risks of ED, however, have different degrees of uncertainty and involve different populations. Reducing long-distance transport of dredged sediment is a priority. This comparative approach could be used prospectively to better determine trade-offs involved in different remediation scenarios and to improve remediation design to maximize benefits while minimizing risks. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5034 Environmental Health Perspectives 2019-12-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6957280/ /pubmed/31834828 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP5034 Text en EHP is an open-access journal published with support from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health. All content is public domain unless otherwise noted.
spellingShingle Research
Kvasnicka, Jacob
Stylianou, Katerina S.
Nguyen, Vy K.
Huang, Lei
Chiu, Weihsueh A.
Burton,
Semrau, Jeremy
Jolliet, Olivier
Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River
title Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River
title_full Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River
title_fullStr Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River
title_full_unstemmed Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River
title_short Human Health Benefits from Fish Consumption vs. Risks from Inhalation Exposures Associated with Contaminated Sediment Remediation: Dredging of the Hudson River
title_sort human health benefits from fish consumption vs. risks from inhalation exposures associated with contaminated sediment remediation: dredging of the hudson river
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6957280/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31834828
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/EHP5034
work_keys_str_mv AT kvasnickajacob humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT stylianoukaterinas humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT nguyenvyk humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT huanglei humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT chiuweihsueha humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT burton humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT semraujeremy humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver
AT jollietolivier humanhealthbenefitsfromfishconsumptionvsrisksfrominhalationexposuresassociatedwithcontaminatedsedimentremediationdredgingofthehudsonriver