Examination of Mercury pollution on urban built environment with regard human health and emphasis on drinking water (Case study: Drinking water of Alborz Industrial city)

Document Type: Original Article

Author

PhD. Candidate of Urban Planing ,Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Qazvin Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

The quality of water in different usages especially drinking water has an important role on human health. As increasing the urban population and developing the industries, the releasing different materials into water cause various pollutions and problems for human cycles. The important goal of the present study is analyzing the mercury existence and pollution on different part of urban built environment especially drinking water.
Incompatible association between residential areas and other functions have been recently examined and studied. Being adjacent of the residential and industrial areas could generate various pollution, high road traffic, noise, emissions, wastes and wastewaters with heavy metals. For achieving the goal, an important hypothesis was considered, “the existence of industries next to the residential land use, cause to increasing the mercury contents in drinking water”. The method of this study was analytic-descriptive and experimental procedure for examining the mercury pollution. Alborz industrial city was the case study. Its drinking water was selected for examining the existence of mercury. The results show that the mercury contents in this area are critical more than WHO guidelines for drinking-water quality. Therefore some important recommendations for decreasing the mercury contents were presented.
 

Keywords


  1. Bermudez, G.M.A., Jasan, R., Plá, R., Pignata, M.L., (2011). Heavy metal and trace element concentrations in wheat grains: assessment of potential non-carcinogenic health hazard through their consumption. J. Hazard. Mater. 193, 264–271.
  2. Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). (1999). Canadian environmental quality guidelines (PN 1299). Winnipeg, Canada.
  3. Dale. I.M., 1985. An unusual case of mercury contamination. Journal of the Society of Occupational Medicine. 35, 95-97.
  4. European Economic Community (EEC). (2001). Commission regulation (EC) No. 466/2001. Official Journal of the European Communities. Brussels, Belgium.
  5. European Union, (2008). Commission Regulation (EC) no. 629/2008, Official Journal of the European Union, Brussels.
  6. Frumkin, H. (2001). Beyond toxicity human: Health and the natural environment. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 20, 234e240.
  7. Gopal. K.V, Neurotoxic effects of mercury on auditory cortex networks growing on microelectrode arrays: a preliminary analysis, Neurotoxicol. Teratol. 25 (2003) 69–76.
  8. Ioan Ioj. C., Alina Tudor. C., (2012). Temporal analysis of incompatible land-use and land-cover:The proximity between residential areas and gas stations in Bucharest suburban area. Procedia Environmental Sciences. 14,  49 – 58
  9. Liu. S.L., Nadim, F., Perkins, C., Carley. R.J., Hoag, G.E., Lin, Y., Chen. L.,(2002). Atmospheric mercury monitoring survey in Beijing, China. Chemosphere 48, 97–107.
  10. Mombeshora. C., Osinbanjo, O., Ajayi. S.O., (1983). Pollution studies on Nigerian rivers. The onset of lead pollution of surface water in Ibadan. Environ.Int. 9, 81-84.
  11. Maller. C., Townsend. M., Pryor. A., Brown. P.,  St Leger. L., (2005). Healthy nature healthy people: ‘Contact with nature’ as an upstream health promotion intervention for populations. Health Promotion International, 21(1), 45-54. http:// dx.doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dai032.
  12. Mason. R. P., Benoit. J. M., (2003). Organomercury compounds in the environment.
  13. Mergler. D., Anderson. H.A., Chan. L.H.M., Mahaffey. K.R., Murray. M., Sakamoto. M., Stern, A.H., (2007). Methylmercury exposure and health effects in humans: A worldwide concern. Ambio. 1, 36.
  14.  Quinn. A.,  Vlahov. D., Ompad.D.,(2011). Physical urban environment,  Reference Module in Earth Systems and Environmental Sciences Encyclopedia of Environmental Health. 526-533.
  15. Qiu. J., (2013). Tough talk over mercury treaty. Nature, 493, 144–145.
  16. Senn. D. B., Chesney. E. J., Blum. J. D., Bank. M. S., Maage. A., Shine. J. P., (2010). Stable isotope (N, C, Hg) study of methylmercury sources and trophic transfer in the northern gulf of Mexico. Environmental Science and Technology, 44, 1630–1637.
  17. Tyrväinen. L., Pauleit. S., Seeland. K., de Vries. S., (2005). Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees. In K. Nilsson, T. B. Randrup, & C. C. Konijnendijk (Eds.), Urban forests and trees in Europe: A reference book. Springer Verlag.
  18. US Enviromental Protection Agency (US EPA). Mercury in solids and solutions by thermal decomposition, amalgamation, and atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Method 7473. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/osw/hazard/testmethods/sw846/pdfs/7473.pdf
  19. -USFDA, (2004). What you need to know about mercury in fish and shellfish, EPA and FDA advice, EPA-823-R-04-005.
  20. WHO.(1990). Environmental Health Criteria. Methylmercury. vol. 101, Geneva, Switzerland. Available at: http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc101.htm
  21. World Health Organization's Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (2011).
  22. www.perkinelmer.com
  23. www.ndhealth.gov.
  24. www.who.int/en.
  25. www.alborzic.ir.
  26. Xi.C., Xinghui.X., Shan.W., Fan.W., Xuejun.G., (2010). Environmental Pollution 158, 48–54.