기상변수들의 확률밀도함수(PDF)에 따른 CalTOX모델을 이용한 BTEX 인체노출량 및 인체위해성 평가 연구

Human Exposure to BTEX and Its Risk Assessment Using the CalTOX Model According to the Probability Density Function in Meteorological Input Data

Objectives: The aim of this study was to secure the reliability of using the CalTOX model when evaluating LADD (or ADD) and Risk (or HQ) among local residents for the emission of BTEX (Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene) and by closely examining the difference in the confidence interval of the assessment outcomes according to the difference in the probability density function of input variables. Methods: The assessment was made by dividing it according to the method (I^†) of inputting the probability density function in meteorological variables of the model with log-normal distribution and the method of inputting (II^‡) after grasping the optimal probability density function using @Risk. A T-test was carried out in order to analyze the difference in confidence interval of the two assessment results. Results: It was evaluated to be 1.46E-03 mg/kg-d in LADD of Benzene, 1.96E-04 mg/kg-d in ADD of Toluene, 8.15E-05 mg/kg-d in ADD of Ethylbenzene, and 2.30E-04 mg/kg-d in ADD of Xylene. As for the predicted confidence interval in LADD and ADD, there was a significant difference between the I^† and II^‡ methods in LADD_Inhalation for Benzene, and in ADD_Inhalation and ADD for Toluene and Xylene. It appeared to be 3.58E-05 for risk in Benzene, 3.78E-03 for HQ in Toluene, 1.48E-03 for HQ in Ethylbenzene, and 3.77E-03 for HQ in Xylene. As a result of the HQ in Toluene and Xylene, the difference in confidence interval between the I^† and II^‡ methods was shown to be significant. Conclusions: The human risk assessment for BTEX was made by dividing it into the method (I^†) of inputting the probability density function of meteorological variables for the CalTOX model with log-normal distribution, and the method of inputting (II^‡) after grasping the optimal probability density function using @Risk. As a result, it was identified that Risk (or HQ) is the same, but that there is a significant difference in the confidence interval of Risk (or HQ) between the I^† and II^‡ methods.