Experience of Substantiation and Results of Monitoring of Priority Air Pollutants in Norilsk within the Federal Clean Air Project

Introduction: Long-term multicomponent ambient air pollution in residential areas is one of the serious threats to human health. The Federal Clean Air Project implemented within the National Ecology Project aims at fundamental improvement of the quality of life of the Russian population through reduction in emissions of priority (hazardous) pollutants posing the highest health risks.

Objective: To substantiate the choice and to analyze the results of monitoring of priority air pollutants in the city of Norilsk included in the Project.

Materials and methods: Priority chemicals were determined based on the results of a health risk assessment. The exposure was assessed on the basis of dispersion calculations using a consolidated database of stationary and mobile emission sources (1,970 sources from 110 enterprises and 175 sections of the urban road network) and the “Ecologist – City” 4.60.1 software with the “Average” calculation block, realizing atmospheric dispersion modeling techniques approved in the Russian Federation. The airborne pollutant accounting for at least 95 % of the unacceptable carcinogenic and/or non-carcinogenic risk was considered a priority. The estimates were then verified by the results of measuring ambient concentrations of 20 pollutants within socio-hygienic air quality monitoring in Norilsk for 2020–2021.

Results: We established that both short- and long-term exposure to air pollutants posed unacceptable health risks to more than 180 thousand people affected. The list of priority contaminants subject to monitoring and priority regulation comprised ten chemicals, including nitrogen oxide and dioxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, sulfuric acid, carbon oxide, copper oxide, nickel compounds, lead and its compounds, and benzene, of which seven were confirmed as such by the monitoring data. In fact, the measured concentrations of sulfur dioxide, particulate matter, copper and nickel compounds at a number of sites were significantly higher than those estimated by dispersion modeling. Vapors of sulfuric acid, carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxide were below the limit of detection.

Conclusions: The health risk assessment methodology used for selecting priority air pollutants is an adequate and effective tool of environmental management. Verification of the lists of priority chemicals compiled on the basis of dispersion modeling using the merged database on the urban sources of air pollution is expedient and necessitates improvement of techniques and mechanisms for stocktaking of emission sources. A significant discrepancy between the estimated and measured data on pollution levels should be discussed by all interested parties and result in changes to the consolidated databases and an increase in the accuracy of subsequent hygienic assessments, including that of public health risks.

1. Pisareva LF, Ananina OA, Odintsova IN, Zhujkova LD. Urban pollution and population health: a review of literature. Profilakticheskaya Meditsina. 2016;19(4):60-64. (In Russ.) doi: 10.17116/profmed201619460-64

2. Prüss-Ustün A, Wolf J, Corvalán C, Neville T, Bos R, Neira M. Diseases due to unhealthy environments: an updated estimate of the global burden of disease attributable to environmental determinants of health. J Public Health (Oxf). 2017;39(3):464-475. doi: 10.1093/ pubmed/fdw085

3. Veremchuk LV, Tsarouhas K, Vitkina TI, et al. Impact evaluation of environmental factors on respiratory function of asthma patients living in urban territory. Environ Pollut. 2018;235:489-496. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2017.12.122

4. Kolpakova AF, Sharipov RN, Kolpakov FA. Air pollution by particulate matter as the risk factor for the cardiovascular diseases. Gigiena i Sanitariya. 2017;96(2):133-137. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18821/0016-9900-2017-96-2-133-137

5. World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe. Health Aspects of Air Pollution with Particulate Matter, Ozone and Nitrogen Dioxide: Report on a WHO Working Group. Bonn, Germany 13-15 January 2003. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe. Accessed October 17, 2022. https://apps.who.int/iris/ handle/10665/107478

6. Revich BA, Khar'kova TL, Kvasha EA. Selected health parameters of people living in cities included into «Clean air» federal project. Health Risk Analysis. 2020;(2):16–27. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2020.2.02. eng

7. Popova AYu, Zaitseva NV, May IV. Population health as a target function and criterion for assessing efficiency of activities performed within “pure air” federal project. Health Risk Analysis. 2019;(4):4–13. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2019.4.01.eng

8. Dolgushina NA, Kuvshinova IA. Air pollution and non-cancenogenic risk assessment in industrial cities of Chelyabinsk Region. Human Ecology. 2019;26(6):17–22. (In Russ.) doi: 10.33396/1728-0869-2019-6-17-22

9. Revich BA, Ushakova TI, Sergeyev OV, Zeilert VYu. Breast cancer in Chapayevsk. Gigiena i Sanitariya. 2005;(1):18–21. (In Russ.)

10. Balabolkin II, Terletskaya RN, Modestov AA. Allergic child morbidity in actual ecological conditions. Siberian Med Rev. 2015;(1(91)):63–67. (In Russ.)

11. Kostyleva NV, Gileva TE, Oputina IP. Summary calculations of pollution of atmospheric air. Antropogennaya Transformatsiya Sredy. 2017;(3):106-107. (In Russ.)

12. Magdeeva AR. [Summary calculations as a tool for managing atmospheric air quality.] Ekologiya Proizvodstva. 2022;(5(214)):26-35. (In Russ.)

13. Dvinyanina OV, Shemyakov PM, Lukovenko AS, Kucherenko AV. Directions and possibilities of air pollution in cities summary calculation’s application. Okhrana Okruzhayushchey Sredy i Prirodopol'zovanie. 2014;(4):39-49. (In Russ.)

14. Lobkovsky VA, Lobkovskaya LG. [The ecological situation in the area of location enterprises of the polar branch of the MMC Norilsk Nickel: current state and forecast.] Problemy Regional'noy Ekologii. 2015;(5):40-43. (In Russ.)

15. Aryshtaev AA. Problems of emissions to the atmospheric of pollutants in the city of Norilsk and ways of their solutions. Forum Molodykh Uchenykh. 2017;(6(10)):79-83. (In Russ.)

16. Kochanov DA, Chebotarev IA, Nesterov VV, Kochanov ID, Klimenyuk MP. Analysis and characteristics of oncological urology diseases in the city of Norilsk of the Krasnoyarsk Region over a period of 2005–2014. Mezhdunarodnyy Zhurnal Prikladnykh i Fundamen­ tal'nykh Issledovaniy. 2017;(1-2):245-249. (In Russ.)

17. Ananina OA, Pisareva LF, Odintsova IN, Khristenko EL, Popkova GA, Khristenko ID. Cancer incidence among population of Norilsk. Formation of high risk groups for cancer. Sibirskiy Onkologicheskiy Zhurnal. 2013;(4(58)):58–61. (In Russ.)

18. Longhin E, Holme JA, Gutzkow KB, et al. Cell cycle alterations induced by urban PM2.5 in bronchial epithelial cells: characterization of the process and possible mechanisms involved. Part Fibre Toxicol. 2013;10:63. doi: 10.1186/1743-8977-10-63

19. Semenova IS. Difficult fate of the Noril''sk miracle. Russia in the Global World. 2017;(10(33)):27-38. (In Russ.)

20. Künzli N, Kaiser R, Medina S, et al. Public-health impact of outdoor and traffic-related air pollution: a European assessment. Lancet. 2000;356(9232):795-801. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02653-2

21. Prosviryakova IA, Shevchuk LM. Hygienic assessment of PM10 and PM2.5 contents in the atmosphere and population health risk in zones infleunced by emissions from stationary sources located at industrial enterprises. Health Risk Analysis. 2018;(2):14-22. doi: 10.21668/ health.risk/2018.2.02.eng

22. Wei M, Li S, Xiao H, Guo G. A comparison study on the combustion and particulate emissions of 2,5-dimethylfuran/diesel and ethanol/diesel in a diesel engine. Therm Sci. 2017;22(3):1351-1361. doi: 10.2298/TSCI170704192W

23. Nikolenko DA, Solovyova TV. Analysis of experience of monitoring fine-particulate air pollution of roadside territories of the European Union countries and Russia. Inzhenernyy Vestnik Dona. 2015;(3(37)):98. (In Russ.)

24. Volkodaeva MV, Kanchan YaS, Levkin AV, Lomtev AYu. [On the development of the methodological basis for estimating emissions.] Ekologiya Proizvodstva. 2021;(5(202)):72-75. (In Russ.)

25. Ivanov AV. [Trust and risk communication in public space: a normative dimension.] Nauka i Sovremennost'. 2015;(37-2):65-70. (In Russ.)

26. Barg АО, Lebedeva-Nesevrya NА, Kornilitsyna МD. Methodical approaches to assessing subjective health risk perception by population under exposure to ambient air pollution. Health Risk Analysis. 2022;(2):28–37. doi: 10.21668/health.risk/2022.2.03.eng