Comparative Air Quality Study of Petroleum Depots and Refuelling Stations in Nigeria

1. COMPARATIVE AIR QUALITY OF PETROLEUM COMPARATIVE AIR QUALITY OF PETROLEUM DEPOTS AND REFUELLING STATIONS DEPOTS AND REFUELLING STATIONS ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENTS IN NIGERIA ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENTS IN NIGERIA PRESENTED BY PRESENTED BY UDUAK ONOFIOK LUKE UDUAK ONOFIOK LUKE BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT BIOCHEMISTRY DEPARTMENT FACULTY OF BASIC MEDICAL SCIENCES FACULTY OF BASIC MEDICAL SCIENCES UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR CALABAR CALABAR - - NIGERIA NIGERIA E E- -mail: mail: uduakluke@gmail.com& uduakluke@gmail.com& mericlywill@yahoo.com mericlywill@yahoo.com

2. INTRODUCTION: INTRODUCTION: Petroleum and petroleum products (including diesel, gasoline and kerosene) are known to be very useful in domestic activities. and industrial Gasoline and kerosene are known to be very volatile, and release some toxic chemical substances into the environment. These chemical substances constitute chemical contaminants in the atmospheric air.

3. Introduction cont’d of petroleum The products that contaminate the air on their release are mainly the hydrocarbons. chemical constituents Most of these hydrocarbons, including benzene, are known to pose adverse effects to the environments Hence, the use of petroleum products, either in automobiles and industrial domestic activities has been reported adverse effects to (Guarieiro,2013) operations, or to pose the quality of air

4. Introduction cont’d Particularly, a high level of benzene in the breathing zone of fuel service station during refueling of automobiles has been reported (Tatrai et al, 1981). Exposure to toxic substances, which constitute pollutants in the environment, has been a major concern in recent times. Exposures to toxic environmental pollutants are known to cause several hazardous conditions and health challenges to both animals and humans (Briggs, 2003; Ajugwo,2013)

5. Introduction Cont Introduction Cont’ ’d d Duarte-Davidson et al, 2001 reported that during refueling, the content of benzene in petrol (about 2%) is dependent exposure, time spent at the petrol station and availability of vapour control devices. on petrol station According to Tatrai et al, 1981, levels of benzene around the breathing zone are on significant increase in refueling stations, petroleum product depot and flaring sites which apparently humans inhale in the process of refuelling.

6. Introduction Cont Introduction Cont’ ’d d Modifications consequential consequences conditions environmental pollutants (Grether, 2005). genetic environmental are among associated of compositions and the with exposure with health hazardous to Hence this study assessed the comparative air quality of petroleum depots and petroleum products refueling stations and gas flaring sites in Nigeria.

7. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MATERIALS AND METHODS: Air quality measurement assay was carried out at ten NNPC depots, twenty refuelling stations, storage facilities and gas flaring sites via the Gaussian approach across the Niger- Delta regions of Nigeria using instrumental methods -aeroqual air quality kit (aeroqual environmental monitor series 300) by Aeroqual limited.

8. Introduction Cont Introduction Cont’ ’d d The meteorological levels, relative humidity, wind speed, wind direction (south-westerly temperature using pre- calibrated Envirotech meters. determination of the such prevailing as noise • parameters wind),and

9. Materials and Methods Cont Materials and Methods Cont’ ’d d After the initialization of the equipment, the following parameters were measured with time, prevailing wind (south weather conditions (a cloudy and partially sunny day) such as: Noise level, Temperature, Relative humidity, Wind speed. westerly wind) and The noise level was measured using Extech instrument (407730) sound Extech meteorological meter (45170, CPILU China) was used to measure wind-speed, temperature and humidity. level meter. The

10. Nigerian Ambient Air Quality Pollutants Time of Average Limit Particulates Daily average of hourly values Hourly value 250g/m3 600*g/m3 SOxas SO2 Daily average of hourly values Hourly value 0.01ppm (26g/m3) 0.1ppm (260g/m3) NOxas NO2 Daily average of hourly values (range) 0.04 – 0.06ppm (75-113g/m3) Carbon Monoxide Daily average of hourly values 8 - hourly range 10ppm (11.4mg/m3) 20ppm (22.8mg/m3) Petrochemical Oxidants Hourly value 0.66ppm Non-Methane Hydrocarbon Daily average of 3-hourly values 160g/m3

11. WHO Air Quality Guidelines Pollutants Time- Weighted Averagea Averaging time SO2 500 10min 300 1h 100 - 150b 24h 40 - 60b 1yr CO 30 1h 10 8h NO2 400 1h 150 24h O3 150 - 200 1h 100 – 120 8h Black smoke 100 - 150 24hr 40 - 60b 1yr Total suspended particulates 150 - 230b 24hr 60 - 90b 1yr Thoracic particles (PM10) 70b 24hr Pb 0.5 – 1 1yr aAll concentrations in µgm-3except CO in mgm-3 bGuideline values for combined exposure to SO2and suspended particulate matter (they may not apply to situations where only one of the components is present)

12. US National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS Pollutants Average Time Primary Standarda SO2 3h - 24h 365 gm-3(0.14ppm) Annual average 80 gm-3 NO2 Annual average 100 gm-3(0.05ppm) NO 1h 40mgm-3(35ppm) 8h 10mgm-3(9ppm) O3 1h 235 gm-3 (0.12ppm) Black smoke 100-150 24hr 40-60b 1yr PM10 24h 150 gm-3 (d 10 m) Annual average 50 gm-3 Pb 3months 1.5 gm-3

13. RESULTS

14. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 80 * * 70 * 60 a,b,c 50 Noise level 40 30 20 10 0 Site Figure 1: Noise levels measured in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

15. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 90 80 70 * *, b, c 60 *, a 50 Relative humidity *, b 40 30 20 10 0 Site Figure 2: Relative humidity measured in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

16. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 2 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 Wind speed 1 *, a 0.8 *, a 0.6 *, a 0.4 0.2 0 Site Figure 3: Wind speed measured in control site, flaring sites and filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

17. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 40 35 a, c 30 *, a *, b * 25 20 Temperature 15 10 5 0 Site Figure 4: Temperature measured in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

18. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 1200 1000 * * * 800 Volatile organic comp. 600 400 200 *, a, b, c 0 Site Figure 5: Concentrations of Volatile organic compounds measured in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

19. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 16 *, b, c 14 12 10 * 8 Ammonia 6 *, a 4 *, a, b 2 0 Site Figure 6: Levels of ammonia measured in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

20. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 35 30 * 25 20 Methane conc. 15 *, a 10 5 *, a, b 0 *, a, b, c Site Figure 7: Comparison of methane levels in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

21. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 0.3 0.25 *, a, b 0.2 Hydrogen sulphide conc. 0.15 0.1 0.05 *, a, b, c * * 0 Site Figure 8: Comparison of hydrogen sulphide levels in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

22. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 12 *, a, b, c 10 8 Carbon monoxide conc. 6 4 2 *, a 0 *, a, b * Site Figure 9: Comparison of carbon monoxide levels in control site, flaring sites and different filling stations in Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

23. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 0.06 *, a *, a, c 0.05 0.04 0.03 *, a, b Nitrogen dioxide conc. 0.02 0.01 * 0 Site Figure 10: Comparison of Nitrogen dioxide levels in three different filling stations in Cross River State, Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

24. Control site NNPC Depot TONIMAS Total filling station Gbarain CPF flare 0.08 *, a 0.07 0.06 Sulphur oxide conc. 0.05 *, a, b, c 0.04 0.03 0.02 b 0.01 0 Site Figure 11: Comparison of sulphure oxide levels in control site and three different filling stations in Cross River State, Nigeria. Values are expressed as mean ± SEM. *significantly different from control site at p<0.05; a = significantly different from NNPC Depot at p<0.05; b = significantly different from TONIMAS at p<0.05; c = significantly different from Total filling station at p<0.05

25. The results showed a significant increase in ammonia, methane, hydrogen sulphide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide and sulphur VI oxide levels recorded at the refueling stations and storage depot, compared recorded for remote rural areas. with the levels The levels of these indices were significantly higher compared to the control sites but most of the indices were not significantly higher than the environmental standard permissible limits.

26. It may therefore be concluded that petroleum depots, flaring sites atmospheric environments substances that can contaminate the air quality, and constitute environmental pollution in these areas over an extended period of time . and refueling harbor stations chemical

27. THANK YOU

28. REFERENCES: • Briggs, D.Environmental pollution and the global burden of disease; British Medical Bulletin 2003; 68: 1–24 • Guarieiro, L.L.N & Guarieiro,A. L.N (2013) Vehicle Emissions: What Will Change with Use of Biofuel? http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/52513 • Ajugwo, Anslem O.. "Negative Effects of Gas Flaring: The Nigerian Experience." Journal of Environment Pollution and Human Health 1.1 (2013): 6-8.

29. References Cont References Cont’ ’d d Zahlsen, K., Nielson, A. M., Eide, I. and Nielson, O. G. (1993). Inhalation kinetics of C8-C10, 1- alkenes and isoalkanes in rats after repeated exposure. Pharmacology Toxicology, 73, 163-168. Nwanjo, H. U., Oze, G., Okafor, M. C., Nwosu, D. & Nwankpa, P. (2007). Phyllanthus niruri extract on serum lipids profile and oxidative stress in hepatocytes of diabetic rats. African Journal of Biotechnology, 6(12), 1744-1749. Protective role of

30. References Cont References Cont’ ’d d Fritsche, W. & Hofrichter, M. (2000). Aerobic degradation by microorganisms, Environmental Processes- Soil Decontamination. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany. Journal Klein, Education, 146–155. in ” Duarte-Davidson, R., Courage, C., Rushton, L. & Levy, L (2001). Benzene in the environment: an assessment of the potential risks to the health of the population; Occupational Environmental Medicine, 58(1), 2-13.