4.6 Article

Addressing the environmental risk of persistent organic pollutants in China

出版社

HIGHER EDUCATION PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11783-011-0370-y

关键词

persistent organic pollutant (POPs); environmental risk assessment; inventory; environmental monitoring; fugacity model; emerging POPs

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50838002]
  2. National Key Project of Scientific and Technical Supporting Programs [2007BAC03A09]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants (POPs) was adopted in 2001. This year is the 10th anniversary of the adoption of the Convention. Until now, 22 chemicals or chemical categories have been listed as POPs in the Stockholm Convention. The POPs Research Center was established in Tsinghua University in the same year when the Convention was adopted. In the last ten years, much work has been done by Chinese researchers to understand the environmental risk of POPs in China. This article aims to review the recent research progress of our POPs Research Center and some other Chinese researchers' studies in addressing the environmental risk of POPs, including the priority screening and inventory study of POPs, monitoring and modeling of POPs pollution and exposure, and environmental risk assessment and modeling of POPs. Although great advances in addressing the environmental risk of POPs have been made in recent years, we are still facing quite a few problems, such as data scarcity and uncertainty in environmental risk assessment of POPs. The study on the effect of POPs mixtures is in its infancy and currently POPs are usually assessed from legal perspective by risk assessment of single chemicals. These problems should be well addressed by further efforts. Further studies should also be taken in future to study environment risk of POPs by considering aspects of coupled dynamics between climate processes and POPs. Such sound scientific, riskbased information can support decision-making aiming to effectively minimize the risk level of POPs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据