Risk Analysis of Mercury Content in Seawater, Sediment, and Fish in the Sinabar Mining Coastal Area, Huamual District, West Seram Regency
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: There is increasing recognition that cinnabar (HgS) mining, particularly in coastal settings, constitutes a major source of environmental mercury (Hg) pollution. Objectives: This research was conducted to examine mercury (Hg) concentrations in seawater, sediment, and fish in the coastal area of the cinnabar mine in Huamual District, West Seram Regency, and the associated health risks to coastal populations. Methodology: The present work is an observational, analytical investigation using a spatial approach with Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to map the distribution of mercury concentrations as a function of distance from the mine site. Results: The results showed that mercury concentrations in all saltwater samples exceeded the quality limit of 0.001 mg/L, ranging from 0.0023 to 0.0663 mg/L. The mercury concentrations in the sediments were well above the threshold limit of 0.15 µg/L, ranging from 14.3173 to 1951.7 µg/L. Mercury levels in fish ranged from 0.2129 to 1.3227 mg/kg, and 70% of samples were above the allowable limit for seafood intake (0.5 mg/kg). The spatial study shows a diminishing dispersion pattern with increasing distance from the mine, and the highest concentration is observed within a radius of 0 - 3 km. The health risk study (Risk Quotient) of mercury exposure from fish intake showed an RQ > 1, indicating a considerable potential health risk with chronic exposure to methylmercury, specifically harm to the nervous system, kidneys, and cardiovascular function. Conclusion: The results highlight the necessity for comprehensive pollution control programs and coastal environmental management strategies to preserve public health and marine ecosystems in the Huamual cinnabar mining area.
Article Details
Section
How to Cite
References
1. United Nations Environment Programme. Global mercury assessment 2023. Geneva: United Nations Environment Programme; 2023.
2. World Health Organization. Mercury and health. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2021.
3. Esdaile LJ, Chalker JM. The mercury problem in artisanal and small-scale gold mining. Chem Eur J. 2018;24(27):6905–6916. doi:10.1002/chem.201704840
4. Sunderland EM, Li M, Bullard K. Decadal changes in the edible supply of seafood and methylmercury exposure in the United States. Environ Health Perspect. 2018;126(1):017006. doi:10.1289/EHP2644
5. Obrist D, Kirk JL, Zhang L, Sunderland EM, Jiskra M, Selin NE. A review of global environmental mercury processes in response to human and natural perturbations. Environ Sci Technol. 2022;56(9):5735–5749. doi:10.1021/acs.est.1c06590
6. Karimi R, Fitzgerald TP, Fisher NS. A quantitative synthesis of mercury in commercial seafood and implications for exposure. Environ Health Perspect. 2020;128(9):097001. doi:10.1289/EHP4565
7. Bjørklund G, Dadar M, Mutter J, Aaseth J. Mercury exposure and its effects on health. J Trace Elem Med Biol. 2020;62:126620. doi:10.1016/j.jtemb.2020.126620
8. Kementerian Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan Republik Indonesia. Status lingkungan hidup Indonesia 2022. Jakarta: KLHK; 2022.
9. Liu J, Liu Y, Liu Y, Zhang A, Li R, Wang Y, et al. Transport and transformation of mercury in aquatic systems. Sci Total Environ. 2021;755:142543. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142543
10. Thalib I, Kurniawan A, Rahman A, Putra R, Hasanuddin B, Malik F, et al. Mercury and arsenic levels in seawater and fish in Kao Bay, Indonesia. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2023;30:11245–11256. doi:10.1007/s11356-022-23456-1
11. Silalahi J, Simanjuntak M, Siregar A, Ginting R, Sihotang H, Napitupulu R, et al. Mercury contamination in marine fish and shrimp in Indonesia. Mar Pollut Bull. 2021;170:112662. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2021.112662
12. Wang Y, Shi Y, Wang D, Zhang C, Li Y, Wang C, et al. Mercury cycling in marine sediments: Sources, transformations, and risks. Sci Total Environ. 2022;806:150540. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150540
13. Zhang Y, Liu X, Wang M, Li Y, Chen L, Wang J, et al. Biomagnification of methylmercury in marine food webs. Environ Pollut. 2021;268:115845. doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2020.115845
14. Liu Y, Chen L, Feng C, Zhang S. Spatial distribution and source identification of heavy metals in coastal sediments influenced by human activities. Sci Total Environ. 2021;779:146430. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146430
15. Zhao S, Feng C, Quan W, Chen X, Niu J, Shen Z. Role of sediments in heavy metal accumulation and ecological risk in coastal systems. Mar Pollut Bull. 2020;160:111689. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111689
16. He Z, Shentu J, Yang X, Baligar VC, Zhang T, Stoffella PJ. Heavy metal contamination of soils: sources, indicators, and assessment. J Environ Indic. 2020;9:100094. doi:10.1016/j.indic.2020.100094
17. Wang Z, Chen J, Li H. Mercury uptake and transformation in aquatic microorganisms: implications for food webs. Environ Res. 2022;204:112345. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2021.112345
18. Huang J, Liu Y, Wang X. Bioaccumulation and trophic transfer of mercury in marine ecosystems: a review. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2021;208:111654. doi:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2020.111654
19. Genchi G, Sinicropi MS, Carocci A, Lauria G, Catalano A. Mercury exposure and heart diseases: a systematic review. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(22):8310. doi:10.3390/ijerph17228310
20. Lavoie RA, Jardine TD, Chumchal MM, Kidd KA, Campbell LM. Biomagnification of mercury in aquatic food webs: a global meta-analysis. Environ Sci Technol. 2021;55(2):873–882. doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c06494
21. Trasande L, Liu Y. Reducing the global burden of mercury exposure: policy and economic implications. Lancet Planet Health. 2021;5(12):e859–e866. doi:10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00252-1