Hollander A, Scheringer M, Shatalov V, Mantseva E, Sweetman A, Roemer M, Baart A, Suzuki N, Wegmann F, van de Meent D
National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Laboratory for Ecological Risk Assessment, P.O. Box 1, 3720 BA Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
J Environ Monit. 2008 Oct;10(10):1139-47. doi: 10.1039/b803760d.
Two different approaches to modeling the environmental fate of organic chemicals have been developed in recent years. The first approach is applied in multimedia box models, calculating average concentrations in homogeneous boxes which represent the different environmental media, based on intermedia partitioning, transport, and degradation processes. In the second approach, used in atmospheric transport models, the spatially and temporally variable atmospheric dynamics form the basis for calculating the environmental distribution of chemicals, from which also exchange processes to other environmental media are modeled. The main goal of the present study was to investigate if the multimedia mass balance models CliMoChem, SimpleBox, EVn-BETR, G-CIEMS, OECD Tool and the atmospheric transport models MSCE-POP and ADEPT predict the same rankings of the overall persistence (P(ov)) and long-range transport potential (LRTP) of POPs, and to explain differences and similarities between the rankings by the mass distributions and inter-compartment mass flows. The study was performed for a group of 14 reference chemicals. For P(ov), the models yield consistent results, owing to the large influence of phase partitioning parameters and degradation rate constants, which are used similarly by all models. Concerning LRTP, there are larger differences between the models than for P(ov), due to different LRTP calculation methods and spatial model resolutions. Between atmospheric transport models and multimedia fate models, no large differences in mass distributions and inter-compartment flows can be recognized. Deviations in mass flows are mainly caused by the geometrical design of the models.
近年来,已开发出两种不同的方法来模拟有机化学品在环境中的归宿。第一种方法应用于多介质箱模型,基于介质间的分配、传输和降解过程,计算代表不同环境介质的均匀箱中的平均浓度。第二种方法用于大气传输模型,时空变化的大气动力学构成了计算化学品环境分布的基础,据此还对与其他环境介质的交换过程进行建模。本研究的主要目的是调查多介质质量平衡模型CliMoChem、SimpleBox、EVn-BETR、G-CIEMS、经合组织工具以及大气传输模型MSCE-POP和ADEPT是否能预测持久性有机污染物的总体持久性(P(ov))和长距离传输潜力(LRTP)的相同排名,并通过质量分布和隔室间质量流来解释排名之间的差异和相似性。该研究针对一组14种参考化学品进行。对于P(ov),由于相分配参数和降解速率常数的影响较大,且所有模型使用方式相似,因此模型得出了一致的结果。关于LRTP,由于LRTP计算方法和空间模型分辨率不同,模型之间的差异比P(ov)更大。在大气传输模型和多介质归宿模型之间,质量分布和隔室间流量没有明显差异。质量流的偏差主要由模型的几何设计引起。