断面污染物分布均匀度及影响因素研究

水质监测在跨行政区、跨水域功能区、排污总量控制区的水质控制与管理方面有着非常重要的作用,而断面污染物分布均匀与否是水环境监测断面采样是否具备可靠性、合理性和代表性的关键。本文根据监测采样要求提出了断面污染物分布均匀度的概念,即断面污染物分布均匀度是指在污染带内任一垂直于水流方向断面上某一污染物最小浓度值与最大浓度值之比。并就污染物排放量、河流环境水文特征、河流背景浓度、排污方式等断面污染物分布均匀度影响因素进行了分析研究,借助水质模拟技术,反演在上游有排污口情况下如何布置排污方式以满足下游监测采样的要求。这对跨界河流的水质交接、流域水环境质量管理、排污总量控制、水环境监测断面设置等方面的应用具有重要指导和借鉴意义。     

四川省重点流域水质生态补偿机制的研究——以岷江、沱江为例

2011年9月起,四川省在岷江、沱江干流及其重要支流执行跨界断面水质超标扣缴制度,该项制度在增强政府改善水质的内在动力、提升水质监测和预警能力建设等方面取得了一定成效,在监测方式和试行流域范围等方面仍存在一些不足。对岷江、沱江跨界断面水质超标扣缴制度进行分析,得出其中有待优化的部分,提出了下一步构建"四川省重点流域水环境生态补偿"机制的几点看法,建议在岷江、沱江和嘉陵江流域的断面上采用上下游联合监测的方式开展水质生态补偿工作。     

各省

正河北:加强跨界水质生态补偿近日,河北省政府办公厅印发《河北省人民政府办公厅关于进一步加强河流跨界断面水质生态补偿的通知》,要求河北省进一步提高生态补偿金扣缴数额,细化考核项目的不同扣缴项,并增加年终考核奖励措施。另外,《通知》对跨界断面水质的考核又加入了"总磷"的项目,从而使考核因子更新为化学需氧量、氨氮和总磷。     

河长制在促进完善流域生态补偿机制中的作用研究

河长制平台在促进完善流域生态补偿机制方面具有非常重要的作用,是实现流域水环境可持续管理的关键突破口。本研究梳理了完善流域生态补偿机制的必要性,分析了利用河长制平台完善流域生态补偿机制的可行性,并以跨界断面监测为技术衔接点,以完善跨界断面的设置、考核指标和考核目标作为突破点,利用河长制的高位推动、组织体系和部门联动,从技术方法、监测体系和补偿方式三个方面提出了完善流域生态补偿机制的建议:一是发挥河长制科技支撑作用,完善流域生态补偿技术方法;二是发挥河长制部门协同作用,完善流域生态补偿监测体系;三是发挥河长制统筹兼顾作用,完善流域生态补偿方式。     

四川省岷江沱江流域跨界断面水质超标资金扣缴监测浅析

本文通过对2011～2012年间四川省岷、沱江流域实施生态补偿跨界断面水质超标资金扣缴以及水质变化情况进行简要分析,提出了为保护长江水质资源、恢复长江的生态功能而完善流域跨界断面水质监测的建议。     

河北省子牙河流域水质变化趋势及影响因子分析

对子牙河流域近年来的水质变化趋势及影响因子进行了分析,结果表明:自实施跨界断面生态补偿机制以来,该流域水质明显好转,河流污染正在从有机污染为主向多因子共同影响的混合型污染过渡。子牙河流域污染的主要原因有水资源量少、产业结构偏重、城镇污水管网建设滞后等。进一步提出了提升环境监管能力、促进产业结构调整、强化污水处理厂升级改造、开展河道综合整治、优化跨界断面生态补偿机制等改善水质的对策。     

新安江流域生态补偿,迟来的盛宴

忽如一夜春风来,千树万树梨花开。终于,我们迎来了新安江流域生态补偿正式启动的元年。新安江流域生态补偿是我国第一个跨流域生态补偿试点。根据奖优罚劣的渐进式补偿机制,由环保部每年负责组织皖浙两省对跨界水质开展监测,明确以两省省界断面全年稳定达到考核的标准水质为基本标准。安徽提供水质优于基本标准的,由浙江对安徽给予补偿;劣于基本标准的,由安徽对浙江给予补偿;达到基本标准的,双方都不补偿。同时,明确补偿基金专项用于新安江流域水环境保护和水污染治理。抚昔追今,新安江流域生态补偿破冰成行。从此,这条河流不但流淌着文化,滋润着流域两岸,作为试验田,同时她还寄托了人们更多的希冀。     

构建流域水质综合监测体系的初探

流域水质监测是流域水环境改善与污染防治的重要前提,为流域水环境管理提供了必要的技术支撑。目前环保、水利、流域管理等众多部门均承担了一定范围内的流域水质监测工作,但由于监测方法、取样断面等方面的差异,各监测机构的数据往往存在较大差异,不利于流域水质现状评价、预警预报和水环境的综合管理。本文以长江流域的跨省界断面为研究对象,对构建流域水质综合监测体系进行初探研究,对于确保流域水质安全具有重要意义。     

持之以恒做好水污染防治工作，保障饮用水源地环境质量

中国环境监测总站数据汇总分析结果显示：2008年我国环境质量状况呈现改善趋势。2008年，全国地表水环境质量总体为中度污染；746个地表水国控监测断面中，Ⅰ～Ⅲ类水质比例为427％，较2007年提高了4．2个百允点；劣Ⅴ类水质断面比例为23．1％，较2007年下降了3,0个百分点，整体呈好转趋势。207个“十一五”总量削减目标责任书确定的水质目标考核断面中，148个达到2010年要求，占71．5％；59个未达到2010年要求，占28．5％。从目前全国环境质量状况变化趋势看，全国地表水劣Ⅴ类水质断面比例与“十一五”规划目标要求尚差1．1个百分点。七大水系国控监测断面Ⅰ～Ⅲ类水质断面比例已达到“十一五”规划目标要求。     

多级模糊模式识别模型及在长江水质评价中的应用

利用多级模糊模式识别方法的基本理论,通过多目标优选,计算指标综合权重,给出了长江水质的评价模型;利用该模型对长江干流四川境内的5个观测断面的水质监测结果做出了评价:攀枝花、重庆朱沱和宜宾凉姜沟的水质属Ⅱ级,乐山岷江大桥和泸州沱江二桥的水质属Ⅲ级.评价结果不仅体现了水质级别,更体现了同级别水质中不同的污染程度,因而结果更为合理可靠.     

基于大数据的水环境风险业务化评估与预警研究

随着生态环境大数据的不断建设,国家级、流域级和行政区级别的大数据中心相继产生。快速、高效地分析和利用实时产生、类型多样的环境大数据,提取环境大数据在风险评估与预警的价值,具有重要的意义,也充满挑战。本文基于环境大数据的数据特点和不同层次的组织管理特征以及环境风险评估预警的业务化需求,构建基于大数据的流域环境风险评估与预警技术及其业务化系统的体系、分析环境风险智能识别模式、研究环境风险高效模拟预测和评估的方法,并提出一套满足各级管理部门需求,高效利用环境大数据的多中心业务化系统。     

基于流域视角的水环境综合治理规划研究——以江苏省淀山湖为例

以流域为单元进行水资源综合规划和管理是实现水环境改善的重要途径。本文以太湖流域第二大省界湖泊—淀山湖为例,在综合分析流域水环境质量基础上,利用GIS 分析工具划分流域治理片区并制定分区管控策略。根据流域所含骨干河流流向、骨干河流与淀山湖交汇特点、上中下游不同河段及镇域行政边界,将淀山湖流域分为吴淞江流域、千灯浦- 淀山湖流域、昆南湖荡流域、元荡湖荡流域、太浦河流域五大片区138 个子评价单元。通过水环境容量与压力两类空间叠加分析,构建形成污染重点减排区、污染综合治理区、产业绿色化提升区、生态环境保育区等四个类型区域,并提出差异化的产业准入和环境治理措施。本研究不仅为以流域为治理单元的水环境治理规划提供了较为可行的技术体系,而且为太湖流域水环境综合整治思路创新提供了可借鉴的案例。     

A river water quality management model for optimising regional wastewater treatment using a genetic algorithm

To achieve water quality goals and wastewater treatment cost optimisation in a river basin, a water quality management model has been developed through the integration of a genetic algorithm (GA) and a mathematical water quality model. The developed model has been applied to the Youngsan River, where water quality has decreased due to heavy pollutant loads from Kwangju City and surrounding areas. Pollution source, land use, geographic features and measured water quality data of the river basin were incorporated into the Arc/View geographic information system database. With the database, the management model calculated treatment type and treatment cost for each wastewater treatment plant in the river basin. Until now, wastewater treatment policy for polluted rivers in Korea has been, first of all, to construct secondary treatment plants for untreated areas, and secondarily, to construct advanced treatment plants for the river sections whose water quality is impaired and for which the water quality goal of the Ministry of Environment is not met. Four scenarios that do not use the GA were proposed and they were compared with the results of the management model using the GA. It became clear that the results based on the GA were much better than those for the other four scenarios from the viewpoint of the achievement of water quality goals and cost optimisation.     

Nonpoint source pollution risk assessment in a watershed context

Nonpoint source pollution control requires assessment of the influence of dispersed runoff-contributing areas on downstream water quality. This evaluation must consider two separate phases: site-to-stream loading and downstream fluvial transport. Any model, combination of models, or procedure for making this assessment can be generalized to a simple spatial model or framework, which considers runoff or pollutant loading per unit area and down-stream attenuation, with drainage area as a scaling factor. This spatial model has a probabilistic interpretation and can be used in conjunction with a standard dilution model to give a probabilistic estimate of the impacts at the basin mouth of runoff from a specific upstream contributing area. It is illustrated by applying it to an assessment of the probability that various copper concentrations at the mouth of the urbanized South Platte River basin in Denver, Colorado, USA, will be exceeded as a result of runoff from a subbasin within the city. Determining the probability that a concentration of a pollutant at the basin mouth can be attributed to runoff from a discrete area within the basin is useful for targeting and risk assessment because it enables quantitative risk-based comparisons. The spatial framework is also useful for evaluating management and control options, since actions within the basin can be directly linked to water quality at a downstream point.     

Sustainable Water Quality Management Framework and a Strategy Planning System for a River Basin

In Taiwan, the authorities have spent years working on remedying polluted rivers. Generally, the remediation planning works are divided into two phases. During the first phase, the allowed pollution discharge quantity and abatement quantity of each drainage zone, including the assimilative capacity, are generated based on the total river basin. In the second phase, the abatement action plans for each pollution source in each drainage zone are respectively devised by the related organizations based on the strategies generated during the first phase. However, the effectiveness of linking the two phases is usually poor. Highly integrated performances are not always achieved because the separate two-phase method does not take system and management thinking into consideration in the planning stage. This study pioneers the use of the Managing for Results (MFR) method in planning strategies and action plans for river water quality management. A sustainable management framework is proposed based on the concept and method of MFR, Management Thinking, and System Analysis. The framework, consisting of planning, implementation, and controlling stages, systematically considers the relationships and interactions among four factors: environment, society, economy, and institution, based on the principles of sustainable development. Based on the framework, the Modified Bounded Implicit Enumeration algorithm, which is used as a solving method, is combined with Visual Basic software and MS Excel to develop a computer system for strategy planning. The Shetzu River, located in northern Taiwan, is applied as a case study. According to the theoretical, practical, and regulatory considerations, the result-oriented objectives are defined to first improve the pollution length of the Shetzu River in specific remediation periods to finally meet regulated water quality standards. The objectives are then addressed as some of the constraints for the strategy planning model. The model objective is to pursue the maximum assimilative capacity (environmental phase) subjected to the constraints of water quality standards (institutional phase), social equity (social phase), and proper available technology (economic phase). The pollution quantity abatement and allocation, which are named the top strategies, of each drainage zone for different scenarios can be obtained based on each water quality standard. The middle as well as lower strategies and action plans, which consist of pollution quantity abatement and allocation of each class (domestic, industrial, livestock, and non-point pollution sources) and their individual pollution sources in each drainage zone, are then generated based on the top strategies. The performance indicators and measure plans are proposed based on the action plans to promote the comprehensive effectiveness of river water quality management. The authorities have begun to develop a budget based on the strategies and action plans developed in this study. The analytical results indicate that the objectives, strategies, and action plans developed based on the sustainable management framework and strategy planning system can effectively help the related authorities to fulfill the tasks of water quality management for a river basin.     

基于“三生共赢”的小流域水环境综合治理对策研究

小流域是实现重点流域精准化治理的基本单元,"三生共赢"是指要把解决环境问题的目标定位于生活、生产与生态的协调发展,是实现小流域环境改善和可持续发展的根本路径。本研究立足于流域水环境质量改善,以"三生共赢"和可持续发展理念为指导,提出了基于"三生共赢"的小流域水环境综合治理理论架构,即立足于水环境质量改善和水资源的优化配置,强化流域水环境约束,以尽可能小的环境代价支撑流域经济结构优化、新型城镇化发展,以资源高效和循环利用为核心,大力发展循环经济体系和循环社会体系,并通过创新流域治理体制机制构建成本共担利益共享格局,最终实现小流域社会经济可持续发展。本研究基于以上理论架构设计了生态环境、绿色经济、优质宜居三大类指标体系24项具体指标,并重点从优化流域空间开发格局、构建产业绿色发展体系、改善城乡居民生活环境、提升流域生态系统功能、健全流域治理体制机制等方面分析了小流域水环境综合治理对策。本研究可为各级政府创新流域治理模式、制定小流域水环境综合治理规划提供较为可行的理论支撑和技术体系。     

WATER BUDGET ANALYSIS FOR THE EVERGLADES AGRICULTURAL AREA DRAINAGE BASIN1

ABSTRACT: Water budget studies are essential for water resources and environmental management. In this study, a water budget analysis is presented for the Everglades Agricultural Area (EAA) in South Florida for the period from 1973 to 1991. The EAA is a highly productive irrigation/drainage basin that has a high water table and organic soils. Water quality problems are associated with the drainage discharge from the basin. During dry periods, supplemental water is used for irrigation and in rainy periods excess water with relatively higher phosphorus content is pumped out of the basin to Lake Okeechobee and the Everglades ecosystem. Elevated concentrations of phosphorus in the runoff/drainage that is discharged from the EAA basin have created water quality problems. The mean surface water inflow to the basin was 63,990 ha-m, and the outflow was 131,447 ha-m per year. On the average, supplemental surface water use was 47,411 ha-m, and runoff/drainage was 114,816 ha-m per year. The mean annual basin rainfall was 120.9 cm. A general trend in the decline of the wet season rainfall is observed.     

A COST‐BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF WATER QUALITY PROTECTION IN THE CATAWBA BASIN1

ABSTRACT: The primary objective of this study was to perform a cost‐benefit analysis of maintaining the current level of water quality in the Catawba River basin. Economic benefits were estimated using a stated preference survey method designed to value respondents' willingness to pay for a management plan to protect water quality in the Catawba basin over time. From the surveys conducted with 1,085 area residents, we calculated an annual mean willingness to pay of $139 for the management plan, or more than $75.4 million for all taxpayers in the area. Over the five‐year time horizon in which respondents were asked to pay for the management plan, this resulted in a total economic benefit of $340.1 million. The Watershed Analysis Risk Management Framework model was used to estimate the amount of management activities needed to protect the current level of water quality in the basin over time. Based on the model results, the total cost of the management plan was calculated to be $244.8 million over a ten‐year period. The resulting cost‐benefit analysis indicated that the potential benefits of this management plan would outweigh the costs by more than $95 million.