Developing a screening method for the evaluation of environmental and human health risks of synthetic chemicals in the mining industry

International Journal of Mineral Processing

Volumn 101, Issue 1-4, 2011, Pages 1-20

  Singh, Khareen ^a   Ihlenfeld, Christian ^b   Oates, Christopher ^c   Plant, Jane ^a   Voulvoulis, Nikolaos ^a  

^a IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b ANGLO AMERICAN PLC   (United Kingdom)

^c Applied Geochemistry Solutions   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Chemical risk; Mining chemicals; Screening

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL CLEANING; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; CHEMICAL OPERATIONS; HEALTH; HEALTH HAZARDS; HEALTH RISKS; INDICATORS (CHEMICAL); MINING LAWS AND REGULATIONS; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK PERCEPTION; SCREENING;

ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE; CHEMICAL PROCESS INDUSTRY; CHEMICAL PROCESSING INDUSTRY; CHEMICAL RISKS; HAZARD IDENTIFICATION; HAZARDOUS PROPERTIES; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PROPERTY; RISK TO HUMAN HEALTH;

CHEMICAL HAZARDS;

EID: 80055014027     PISSN: 03017516     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.minpro.2011.07.014     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. J.A. Arnot, D. Mackay, E. Webster, and J.M. Southwood Screening level risk assessment model for chemical fate and effects in the environment Environ. Sci. Technol. 40 7 2006 2316 2323
2. N. Arunraj, and J. Maiti Development of environmental consequence index (ECI) using fuzzy composite programming J. Hazard. Mater. 162 1 2009 29 43
3. Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing NICNAS Priority existing chemical assessment reports. PEC no. 5 Sodium Ethyl Xanthate 1995
4. I. Brooke A UK scheme to help small firms control health risks from chemicals: toxicological considerations Ann. Occup. Hyg. 42 6 1998 377
5. S. Bulatovic Handbook of Flotation Reagents, Volume 1 2007 Elsevier The Netherlands
6. S. Cave, and D. Edwards Chemical process route selection based on assessment of inherent environmental hazard Comput. Chem. Eng. 21 1997 S965 S970
7. G.A. Davis, M. Swanson, and S. Jones Comparative evaluation of chemical ranking and scoring methodologies Prepared by 1994 University of Tennessee Center for Clean Products and Clean Technologies for the United States Environmental Protection Agency Knoxville, TN EPA Order No.3 N-3545-NAEX
8. A. Donoghue Carbon disulphide absorption during xanthate reagent mixing in a gold mine concentrator Occup. Med. 48 7 1998 469
9. Encoder - The Newsletter of the Seattle Robotics Society Fuzzy Logic - An Introduction - Part 4 2006 (15/09/2010)
10. Environment Directorate General, European Commission REACH in brief 2007
11. European Chemicals Agency REACH guidance for downstream users 2008
12. European Chemicals Agency Member state committee support document for identification of trichloroethylene as a substance of very high concern because of its CMR properties 2010
13. M. Gentile, W.J. Rogers, and M.S. Mannan Development of an inherent safety index based on fuzzy logic AIChe J. 49 4 2003 959 968 (Pubitemid 36504560)
14. J. Gupta Application of DOW's fire and explosion index hazard classification guide to process plants in the developing countries J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 10 1 1997 7 15 (Pubitemid 28111852)
15. B.G. Hansen, A.G. van Haelst, K. van Leeuwen, and P. van der Zandt Priority setting for existing chemicals: European Union risk ranking method Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 18 4 1999 772 779
16. H.L. Hartman, and J.M. Mutmansky Introductory Mining Engineering Second Edition 2002 Wiley
17. M. Hassim, and D. Edwards Development of a methodology for assessing inherent occupational health hazards Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 84 5 2006 378 390 (Pubitemid 44972246)
18. M. Hassim, and M. Hurme Inherent occupational health assessment during process research and development stage J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 23 1 2010 127 138
19. International Agency for Research on Cancer Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans 1995
20. F. Khan, T. Husain, and S. Abbasi Safety Weighted Hazard Index (SWeHI): a new, user-friendly tool for swift yet comprehensive hazard identification and safety evaluation in chemical process industries Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 79 2 2001 65 80
21. G. Koller, U. Fischer, and K. Hungerbuhler Assessing safety, health, and environmental impact early during process development Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 39 4 2000 960 972 (Pubitemid 30210638)
22. J. Lechevin, and R.M. Poche Activity of LM 2219 (Difethialone), a new anticoagulant rodenticide, in commensal rodents 1988
23. D. Mackay Multimedia Environmental Models: The Fugacity Approach Second Edition 2001 CRC Press LLC
24. H. Marquart, C. Northage, and C. Money Exposure scenarios for workers J. Exposure Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 17 2007 S16 S25
25. O.V. Martin, and N. Voulvoulis Sustainable risk management of emerging contaminants in municipal wastewaters Philos. Trans. A 367 1904 2009 3895
26. R.R. Mitchell, C.L. Summer, and S.A. Blonde SCRAM: a scoring and ranking system for persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic substances for the North American Great Lakes-resulting chemical scores and rankings Hum. Ecol. Risk Assess. 8 3 2002 537 557 (Pubitemid 41679655)
27. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Guidelines for testing of chemicals, section 3, degradation and bioaccumulation 1982
28. Ozone Secretariat United Nations Environment Programme The Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer, Secretariat for The Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer & The Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, Kenya 2000
29. J. Pan, C. Oates, C. Ihlenfeld, J. Plant, and N. Voulvoulis Inorganic substances screening and prioritization (ISSP) in risk assessment for mining operations Mineral. Mag. 72 1 2008 477
30. J. Pan, C.J. Oates, C. Ihlenfeld, J.A. Plant, and N. Voulvoulis Screening and prioritisation of chemical risks from metal mining operations, identifying exposure media of concern Environ. Monit. Assess. 2009
31. A. Paralikas, and A. Lygeros A multi-criteria and fuzzy logic based methodology for the relative ranking of the fire hazard of chemical substances and installations Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 83 2 2005 122 134 (Pubitemid 40557908)
32. M.G. Ribeiro, and R. Walter Filho Risk assessment of chemicals in foundries: the International Chemical Toolkit pilot-project J. Hazard. Mater. 136 3 2006 432 437 (Pubitemid 44192527)
33. L. Rondeau, R. Ruelas, L. Levrat, and M. Lamotte A defuzzification method respecting the fuzzification Fuzzy Sets Syst. 86 3 1997 311 320 (Pubitemid 127683585)
34. Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution Twenty-fourth report: chemicals in products 2003 (24/11/2009)
35. M. Scheringer, T. Vögl, J. von Grote, B. Capaul, R. Schubert, and K. Hungerbühler Scenario-based risk assessment of multi-use chemicals: application to solvents Risk Anal. 21 3 2002 481 498
36. E.M. Snyder, S.A. Snyder, and J.P. Giesy SCRAM: a scoring and ranking system for persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic substances for the North American Great Lakes Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 7 3 2000 176 184
37. M.B. Swanson, G.A. Davis, and L.E. Kincaid A screening method for ranking and scoring chemicals by potential human health and environmental impacts Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 16 2 1997 372 383 (Pubitemid 27113559)
38. The Commission of the European Communities Approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labeling of dangerous substances 1967 Council Directive 67/548/EEC of August 18, 1967. Off J Eur Commun L96/1
39. The Commission of the European Communities Commission Directive 2003/112/EC of 1 December 2003 Amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include Paraquat as an active substance 2003
40. The International Council on Mining and Metals Good practice guidance on health impact assessment 2010
41. United States Environmental Protection Agency Risk mitigation decision for ten rodenticides 2008