油气作业场所职业健康风险评估方法的比较研究

发布时间：2018-03-07 15:04

本文选题：风险评估　切入点：暴露评估　出处：《中国疾病预防控制中心》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：1目的以风险类型、主要参数、暴露浓度计算、危险分级、风险评估原理及优缺点为参数,对国内外已经普遍使用的六种职业健康风险评估方法进行对比研究,优选出在油气作业场所更适用的新加坡化学毒物职业暴露半定量风险评估方法(简称新加坡模型)和罗马尼亚职业事故和职业病风险评估方法(简称罗马尼亚模型);分别利用新加坡模型、罗马尼亚模型以及拟采取的综合评估方法(简称综合评估模型)对油气作业场所岗位员工在生产过程中可能接触到的化学有害因素、物理因素和针对不同危害因素而采取的不同防护措施等三方面进行职业健康风险评估,通过三种评估模型在油气生产过程中的不同作业场所的岗位员工的评估结果进行比较分析,为油气作业场所不同岗位进行职业健康风险评估提供基础数据资料。2方法采用流行病学现况调查方法对油气作业场所现场调研,搜集作业场所的相关机构设置、组织管理、工艺流程、生产设施设备布局、总体布局、防护设施、应急救援、职业健康检查等资料,现场调查不同岗位员工工作写实、结合对职业病危害因素现场采样检测,明确作业现场不同岗位员工可能接触到的危害因素种类、接触途径、接触水平等,确定油气作业场所不同危害因素(化学有害因素、物理因素)的暴露风险水平及危害水平,针对作业现场不同岗位员工进行职业健康风险评估。使用新加坡模型、罗马尼亚模型和综合评估模型,与我国职业病防治法律、法规、标准的要求相结合,兼顾油气作业场所特有的危害特征,遵从危害等级和暴露等级,增加对防护措施等级的评估,建立简单、全面、适用于油气作业场所不同岗位员工的职业健康风险评估方法。3结果利用新加坡模型对成品油管道工程不同作业场所的操作岗、维修岗进行职业健康风险评估,结论为操作岗接触的硫化氢判定为可忽略风险、汽油和苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)判定为中等风险;维修岗接触的一氧化碳、氮氧化物、二氧化硫等判定为低风险、汽油和苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)判定为中等风险;因此成品油管道工程油气作业场所操作岗所接触的化学物质职业健康风险存在可忽略风险和中等风险,维修岗所接触的化学物质职业健康风险存在低风险和中等风险,综合判定维修岗所接触的化学物质职业健康风险高于操作岗。对天然气管道工程净化厂油气作业场所操作岗、硫磺包装岗进行职业健康风险评估,结论为操作岗所接触的甲烷、硫化氢、一氧化碳、氮氧化物、二氧化硫、硫化氢等为可忽略风险;硫磺包装岗所接触的硫化氢、二氧化硫等化学毒物均判定为可忽略风险,硫磺粉尘判定为中等风险;净化厂油气作业场操作岗所接触的化学物质职业健康风险均为可忽略风险,硫磺包装岗所接触的化学物质的职业健康风险中硫磺粉尘判定为中等风险;硫磺包装岗接触的化学物质种类少于操作岗,但因为存在硫磺粉尘,硫磺粉尘的职业健康风险判定为中等风险,综合判定硫磺包装岗所接触的化学物质职业健康风险高于操作岗。利用罗马尼亚模型对成品油管道工程油气作业场所操作岗、维修岗进行职业健康风险评估,结论为操作岗所接触的一氧化碳、硫化氢最严重后果为死亡,严重性等级为7级,可能性等级为1级,风险水平为3低;苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)严重性等级为4级,可能性等级为3级,风险水平为4低;噪声最严重后果为噪声聋,严重性等级为3级,可能性等级为4级,风险水平为3低;故操作岗岗位总风险水平为3级,低风险作业。维修岗所接触的一氧化碳、硫化氢最严重后果为死亡,严重性等级为7级,可能性等级为1级,风险水平为3低;苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)严重性等级为4级,可能性等级为3级,风险水平为4低;噪声最严重后果为噪声聋,严重性等级为3级,可能性等级为4级,风险水平为3低;电焊烟尘可导致电工尘肺,严重性等级为5级,可能性等级为3级,风险水平为4低;汽油引起中毒,严重性等级为2级,可能性等级为4级,风险水平为2级非常低,故维修岗岗位总风险水平为4级,中等风险作业。以危险等级判定预防的先后次序,一氧化碳和硫化氢风险等级最高(7级)是首要预防的风险因子;噪声的风险等级中等(3级),由于噪声可以对人体听觉等多系统造成影响,甚至引起职业性噪声聋,是重点防护的险因子,故维修岗是职业危害风险控制的关键岗位。利用罗马尼亚模型对天然气管道工程净化厂油气作业场所操作岗、硫磺包装岗进行职业健康风险评估,结论为操作岗接触的一氧化碳、硫化氢、甲硫醇最严重后果为死亡,严重性等级为7级,可能性等级为1级,风险水平为3低;苯系物(苯、甲苯、二甲苯)严重性等级为4级,可能性等级为3级,风险水平为4低;噪声最严重后果为噪声聋,严重性等级为3级,可能性等级为4级,风险水平为3低;汽油引起中毒,严重性等级为2级,可能性等级为4级,风险水平为2非常低;操作岗岗位总风险水平为3级低风险。硫磺包装岗接触的硫化氢、二氧化硫、硫磺粉尘、噪声等职业健康风险水平均为3低,硫磺包装岗岗位总风险水平为3级低风险。一氧化碳和硫化氢、甲硫醇风险等级最高(7级)是首要预防的风险因子;噪声的风险等级中等(3级),是重点防护的险因子,硫磺包装岗是职业危害风险控制的关键岗位。利用综合评估模型对成品油管道工程油气作业场所操作岗、维修岗进行职业健康风险风险评估,结论为操作岗职业健康风险值为2.49,维修岗职业健康风险值为1.81;操作岗职业健康风险等级为2级,属于低风险,维修岗职业健康风险等级为1级,属于可忽略风险;操作岗员工职业健康风险等级高于维修岗员工职业健康风险,对操作岗员工继续目前已正常运行职业危害防护措施控制水平,同时加强生产场所定期检测、加强作业员工培训与职业健康监护。对天然气管道工程操作岗、硫磺包装岗进行职业健康风险评估,结论为操作岗职业健康风险值为2.07,硫磺包装岗职业健康风险值为2.62;操作岗员工职业风险等级为2级,属于低度风险,硫磺包装岗员工职业风险等级为3级,属于中度风险;硫磺包装岗员工职业健康风险高于操作岗员工。操作岗继续目前已正常运行的职业危害防护措施控制水平,加强生产场所定期检测、加强作业员工培训与职业健康监护。硫磺包装岗继续目前已正常运行的职业危害防护措施控制水平,加强生产场所定期检测、强化职业卫生管理措施执行和加强应急救援的演练,加强作业员工培训与职业健康监护。综合评估模型将化学有害因素、物理因素、防护措施等三方面风险水平进行综合评估,职业健康风险评估更全面、具体、有针对性,对油气作业场所的不同岗位职业健康风险评估适用性更强。4结论本研究采用的三种评估模型均能够适用于油气生产过程中不同岗位员工的职业健康风险评估。新加坡模型结合现场检测数据,对生产场所中化学物的风险评估更有效和精确,可以根据现场化学物的检测浓度的变化实时追踪职业健康风险的变化;罗马尼亚模型结合物理因素的综合判定,更全面,但是缺乏对风险变化的实时追踪;综合评估模型结合新加坡模型、罗马尼亚模型的优势,既结合现场检测数据,根据化学物的浓度变化调整风险水平,又增加物理因素的判定,对不同作业场所的防护措施加以评估,这三方面的结合则更全面评估生产场所不同岗位的职业健康风险,根据评估结果,优先采取有更针对性的控制措施,在保护作业员工健康方面起到一定的作用。
[Abstract]:1 with the purpose of risk types, main parameters, concentration calculation, risk classification, risk assessment principle and the advantages and disadvantages for the parameters, six kinds of occupation health risk assessment methods at home and abroad has been widely used in the comparative study, selected evaluation methods of semi quantitative risk Singapore chemical poisons occupation is most suitable for oil and gas in workplace exposure (referred to as the Singapore model) and the Romania occupation accidents and occupation disease risk assessment method (Romania model) respectively; using Singapore model, Romania model and comprehensive evaluation method intends to take (comprehensive evaluation model) of harmful chemical factors of oil and gas in workplace staff may be exposed to in the process of production, three according to different physical factors and hazard factors and adopt different protective measures such as occupation health risk assessment, through three kinds of evaluation model of oil and gas Evaluation of the production process in different workplaces of staff positions to compare the results of the analysis, carried out occupation health risk assessment provides the basis data of.2 method for oil and gas in workplaces in different positions based on epidemiological investigation method of oil and gas in workplace investigation, relevant agencies to collect workplace settings, organization management, process flow, production the facilities and equipment layout, overall layout, protective facilities, emergency rescue, occupation health examination data, field investigation of different staff work realistic, based on occupation hazards on-site sampling inspection, clear operation field employees of different positions may be exposed to the risk factors, the route of exposure, exposure level, determine the different risk factors of oil gas (workplace harmful chemical factors, physical factors) exposure level and risk level, according to the working site employees of different positions Occupation health risk assessment. Using the Singapore model, Romania model and comprehensive evaluation model, and legal regulations, occupation disease prevention and control in our country, the requirements of the combination of both oil and gas hazard characteristics of workplace specific compliance, hazard rating and exposure levels, increase the level of assessment, protection measures to establish a simple, comprehensive. Occupation health risks for employees of different positions of oil and gas in workplace assessment methods using the.3 Singapore model of oil pipeline project in different workplaces operating posts, maintenance post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is the operation of hydrogen sulfide determination for gang contact negligible risk, gasoline and BTEX (benzene, toluene, xylene) belongs to medium risk; maintenance gang contact with carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and other judged to be low risk, gasoline and BTEX (benzene, toluene, xylene) is determined in The risk of chemical substances; therefore occupation health risks of oil pipeline project of oil and gas in workplace contact exists post negligible risk and medium risk, low risk and moderate risk chemicals occupation health risk maintenance gang contact, determine the chemical occupation health risk maintenance gang contact than gang. Natural gas purification plant oil and gas pipeline engineering workplace operation posts, sulfur packing post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is the operation of contact Gang methane, hydrogen sulfide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, two oxygen sulfur, hydrogen sulfide and other risks can be ignored; hydrogen sulfide sulfur packing contact Gang sulfur dioxide, chemical poisons were determined the risk is negligible, sulfur dust belongs to medium risk; oil and gas purification plant operation field operation Gang contact chemical occupation health risk was negligible wind Occupation health insurance, the risk of chemical substances in contact with sulfur packing gang in sulfur dust determination for medium risk; sulfur packing chemical contact Gang type less than the operating posts, but because of sulfur dust, occupation health risk determination of sulfur dust is the medium risk, comprehensive determination of chemical substances occupation health risk gang with sulfur packing the above operation post. The Romania model of oil pipeline project of oil and gas in workplaces operating posts, maintenance post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion for the operation contact gang of carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulphide, the most serious consequences for death, serious possibility of Grade 7, grade 1, the level of risk as low as 3; BTEX (benzene, toluene, xylene) serious possibility of grade 4, grade 3, the risk level of 4 low noise; the most serious consequences of noise induced deafness, severity of grade 3, the possibility of Grade 4, the level of risk as low as 3; so the operation post total risk level is 3 level, low risk operation. Maintenance gang with carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide is the most serious consequences for death, serious possibility of Grade 7, grade 1, the level of risk as low as 3; benzene (benzene toluene, xylene), severity of the possibility of grade 4, grade 3, the level of risk for the 4 most serious consequences for low noise; noise induced hearing loss, the severity of the possibility of grade 3, grade 4, the level of risk as low as 3; welding fumes can cause electrical pneumoconiosis, severity level 5 level, the possibility for the 3 class, the level of risk as low as 4; gasoline poisoning, serious possibility of grade 2, grade 4, grade 2 risk level is very low, so the maintenance post total risk level of grade 4, medium risk operations. In order to determine the risk level of prevention, carbon monoxide and the risk of hydrogen sulfide The highest level (Level 7) is a risk factor for primary prevention; noise medium risk level (Level 3), because of noise influence on human auditory system, and even cause the occupation of noise induced hearing loss, risk factor is the key protection, so the maintenance gang is the key position occupation hazard risk control of natural. Gas pipeline engineering of oil and gas purification plant workplace operation gang by Romania model, sulfur packing post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is post contact with carbon monoxide, hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan and most serious consequences for death, serious possibility of Grade 7, grade 1, the level of risk as low as 3; benzene (benzene, toluene, xylene) serious possibility of grade 4, grade 3, the level of risk for the 4 most serious consequences for low noise; noise induced hearing loss, the severity of the possibility of grade 3, grade 4, the level of risk as low as 3; gasoline caused in Poison, the severity of the possibility of grade 2, grade 4, the risk level of 2 very low post operation; the total risk level of 3 low risk. Hydrogen sulfide, sulfur packing Gang contact sulfur dioxide, sulfur dust, noise and other occupation health risk level were as low as 3, sulfur packing post total risk Level 3. Low risk of carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan highest risk grade (Grade 7) is a risk factor for primary prevention; noise medium risk level (Level 3), is the key factor of insurance protection, sulfur packing Gang is the key position occupation hazard risk control. Using the comprehensive evaluation model of oil pipeline project oil and gas workplace operation maintenance Gang Gang, occupation health risk risk assessment, the conclusion is post occupation health risk value is 2.49, the maintenance gang occupation health risk value is 1.81; the level of health risk level 2 GANG occupation operation, and belongs to the low wind The level of health insurance, the risk is 1 level maintenance post occupation, negligible risk; the operating staff occupation health risk level is higher than the maintenance staff post occupation health risk, the operating staff has continued normal operation of occupation hazard protection measures to control level, and strengthen the production sites, regular inspection, to strengthen the operation of employee training and occupation health care for the natural gas pipeline project operation posts, sulfur packing post occupation health risk assessment, the conclusion is post occupation health risk value of 2.07, sulfur packing Gang occupation health risk value is 2.62; the operating staff occupation risk grade 2, belong to low risk, sulfur packing staff occupation risk grade was 3. The moderate risk; sulfur packing staff occupation health risk is higher than the operating staff. Post operation to protective measures of occupation hazards has the normal operation of the control level, and The regular detection of strong production areas to strengthen the operation of employee training and occupation health care. Sulfur packing occupation hazard protection measures to gang control level has normal operation, strengthen regular inspection of production sites, strengthen the implementation of occupation health management measures and strengthen emergency rescue exercises, strengthen the operation of employee training and occupation health care. The comprehensive evaluation model of chemical harmful factors, physical factors, comprehensive evaluation of three aspects of protective measures, risk level, occupation health risk assessment more comprehensive, specific, targeted, different post occupation health risk of oil and gas in workplace occupation health risk assessment evaluation applicability.4 conclusion three evaluation models used in this study are applicable to different staff in the production process of oil and gas. The Singapore model based on the test data, the chemicals in workplace risk assessment More effectively and accurately, according to the change of concentration field of the chemical detection of real-time tracking and occupation health risk; Romania model with comprehensive judgement, physical factors are more comprehensive, but the lack of real time tracking of the change of risk; comprehensive evaluation model combined with the Singapore model, Romania model, combined with the field test data. According to the concentration level of risk adjustment of the chemical and physical factors, increasing judgment, to evaluate the different workplace protective measures, the combination of these three aspects is more comprehensive assessment of occupation health risk production field in different positions, according to the evaluation results, give priority to more targeted prevention and control measures, to play a the role in the protection of workers health.

【学位授予单位】：中国疾病预防控制中心
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：R134

【参考文献】