基于SVR的长江经济带水环境承载力评价

基于DPSIRM模型构建区域水环境承载力评价指标体系,并基于SVR模型构建了区域水环境承载力评价模型,利用交叉验证法对SVR模型参数进行优化选择,进一步提高模型预测精度.运用该模型研究了长江经济带2009~2018年的水环境承载力演变趋势及空间差异,结果表明：长江经济带水环境承载力等级整体呈现升高趋势,其中上游城市群承载等级由II级（超载）提升到了IV级（弱可承载）;中游城市群承载等级由II级（超载）提升到了IV级（弱可承载）;下游长三角区域承载等级由I级（重超载）提升到了IV级（弱可承载）.将评价结果与熵权-TOPSIS法的评价结果相比较,相同率达到91.7%,说明SVR模型评价区域水环境承载力可行,评价结果可靠.以下游区域为例,分别对其6个子系统的承载力进行剖析,并运用单因素轮换OAT法对各子系统内的评价指标进行敏感性分析,便于决策者识别指标敏感性.     

长江经济带水质目标管理平台总体设计

为强化长江经济带资源整合与共享,集成统一规范的大数据平台,基于“十一五”“十二五”国家水体污染控制与治理科技重大专项数据和模型库资源,以面向服务的架构(SOA)和模块化设计为支撑,遵循“五横两纵四统一”的平台架构设计思路,应用大数据挖掘、云计算等现代信息技术,构建长江经济带水质目标管理平台.平台基于长江经济带水生态环境功能分区,兼顾不同类别水质目标管理技术的协调性、衔接性和适应性,对水质目标管理相关信息进行跟踪、模拟、分析和三维可视化表达,在水生态环境功能分区管理、数据汇交与信息共享、容量总量管理、风险评估与预警等方面实现业务化运行,实现全景式水质达标形势研判、一体化风险联防联控.平台已在国家长江生态环境保护修复联合研究中心进行业务化运行,将有效提升长江经济带水环境综合管理能力,同时可为其他重要流域水质目标管理提供信息化工作参考.      

矿物材料吸附去除污水中磷的试验研究

采用粉煤灰、高岭土、泥渣(取电厂澄清池排泥作脱水干燥处理)作为吸附剂深度处理污水中的磷,对比分析了3种吸附剂的吸附速度、吸附性能及除磷效果。结果表明:粉煤灰和高岭土用时20 min完成对磷的有效吸附,沉降泥渣用时5 min即可实现同等吸附效果;沉降泥渣对污水中磷的吸附能力较好,投加量为0.2 g/L的泥渣对磷的去除率可达98.1%,而投加量为0.2 g/L粉煤灰或高岭土对磷的去除率仅达到77.2%。     

土地承载力研究范式的变迁、分化及其综论

基于Kuhn范式理论,将现有土地承载力研究成果显化、梳理为4种主要研究范式,即基于限制因子的研究范式、基于多因素综合的研究范式、基于参照区的研究范式、基于生态足迹的研究范式。以范式应用的时代背景、空间尺度为着眼点,对各类范式进行综合比较,结果显示：基于限制因子的土地承载力研究范式起源最早、发展最为成熟,基于多因素综合、基于参照区、基于生态足迹的3种研究范式,均是以前者为基础,按照不同的方向分化而成;范式分化的原因在于时空条件的变化所引致的亟需解释、解决的现实问题的变化。范式本身并无优劣之分,但有其独特的适应性：基于限制因子、基于生态足迹的两种研究范式适用于全球及国家等大尺度土地承载力问题,且发展较为成熟,其成果具有较强的理论和实践指导意义;基于多因素综合及基于参照区的两种研究范式适用于市县等中小尺度,但其研究较为薄弱,所得的承载力分值、承载力相对值对区域土地管理实践的指导价值有限。当前,市县等中小尺度土地承载力研究亟需加强,其指导实践的有效性与可操作性亟待大幅度提高。     

基于空间适宜性评价和人口承载力的贵溪市中心城区城市开发边界的划定

城市开发边界的划定能够合理引导城市空间的有序发展,控制其无序蔓延。论文以典型的资源型城市贵溪市为研究区,从空间适宜性评价、人口承载力、城市规模以及城市总体规划和土地利用总体规划（简称“两规”）衔接等方面探索有效的城市开发边界划定方法。空间适宜性评价综合考虑自然、空间可达性和生态条件,运用聚类分析法确定区域内不宜作为开发建设的生态底线区域和适宜建设开发区域的高低等级,以此确定城市开发边界的发展方向。通过灰色预测GM(1,1)模型预测研究区2020年人口总量,并基于土地资源和水资源承载力验证当地所能容纳的最大人口总量,同时确定城市规模和划定城市开发边界。以空间适宜性评价、人口承载力、城市规模预测、两规衔接和空间形态控制等方法倒逼缩减建设用地,从而划定城市发展的刚性和弹性增长边界。     

专家笔谈：资源环境热点问题

重大的资源开发利用工程建设设想或实施往往容易引起社会各界的广泛关注。如何正确认识和科学评价各种资源环境热点问题是大家讨论的重点。文章认为任何重大资源开发工程必须遵循自然规律、生态规律、资源规律和经济规律,必须结合国家战略需求和地缘政治关系,开展前期深入的系统性综合调查,进行生态安全与资源工程安全评价和交叉学科论证,并对其科学价值、社会价值和经济价值等做出正确的判断。建议：未来的资源环境工程建设要谨防“大跃进”,要科学认识自然资源系统规律,守护好美丽的地球家园;要切实履行资源科学家的社会责任,提倡基于科学研究和科学态度的学术争鸣,科学问题最好还是由科学家去讨论;一些争议大的科研课题慎用公益性研发经费来支持。     

发展我国环境监测技术产业的探讨

本文从发展我国环境监测技术产业的角度论述了环境监测技术产业的主要内容，分析了我国环境监测技术产业的发展和存在的问题，对发展我国环境监测技术产业提出了建议。     

Economic development and environmental protection: an ecological economics perspective

This paper argues on both theoretical and empirical grounds that, beyond a certain point, there is an unavoidable conflictbetween economic development (generally taken to mean 'materialeconomic growth') and environmental protection. Think for a moment of natural forests, grasslands, marine estuaries, salt marshes, and coral reefs; and of arable soils, aquifers, mineraldeposits, petroleum, and coal. These are all forms of 'natural capital' that represent highly-ordered self-producing ecosystemsor rich accumulations of energy/matter with high use potential (low entropy). Now contemplate despoiled landscapes, eroding farmlands, depleted fisheries, anthropogenic greenhouse gases,acid rain, poisonous mine tailings and toxic synthetic compounds.These all represent disordered systems or degraded forms of energy and matter with little use potential (high entropy). The main thing connecting these two states is human economic activity. Ecological economics interprets the environment-economyrelationship in terms of the second law of thermodynamics. The second law sees economic activity as a dissipative process. Fromthis perspective, the production of economic goods andservices invariably requires the consumption of available energy and matter. To grow and develop, the economynecessarily 'feeds' on sources of high-quality energy/matter first produced by nature. This tends to disorder and homogenizethe ecosphere, The ascendance of humankind has consistently been accompanied by an accelerating rate of ecological degradation, particularly biodiversity loss, the simplificationof natural systems and pollution. In short, contemporary political rhetoric to the contrary, the prevailing growth-oriented global development paradigm is fundamentally incompatible with long-term ecological and social sustainability. Unsustainability is not a technical nor economic problem as usually conceived, but rather a state of systemic incompatibilitybetween a economy that is a fully-contained, growing, dependent sub-system of a non-growing ecosphere. Potential solutions fly inthe face of contemporary development trends and cultural values.     

Cumulative effect assessment in Canada: a regional framework for aquatic ecosystems

Sustainable development of the aquatic environment depends upon routine and defensible cumulative effects assessment (CEA). CEA is the process of predicting the consequences of development relative to an assessment of existing environmental quality. Theoretically, it provides an on-going mechanism to evaluate if levels of development exceed the environment's assimilative capacity; i.e., its ability to sustain itself. In practice, the link between CEA and sustainable development has not been realized because CEA concepts and methods have developed along two dichotomous tracks. One track views CEA as an extension of the environmental assessment (EA) process for project developments. Under this track, stressor-based (S-B) methods have been developed where the emphasis is on local, project-related stressors, their link with aquatic indicators, and the potential for environmental effects through stressor-indicator interactions. S-B methods focus on the proposed development and prediction of project-related effects. They lack a mechanism to quantify existing aquatic quality especially at scales broader than an isolated development. This limitation results in the prediction of potential effects relative to a poorly defined baseline state. The other track views CEA as a broader, regional assessment tool where effects-based (E-B) methods specialize in quantification of existing aquatic effects over broad spatial scales. However, the predictive capabilities of E-B methods are limited because they are retrospective, i.e., the stressor causing the effect is identified after the effect has been measured. When used in isolation, S-B and E-B methods do not address CEA in the context necessary for sustainable development. However, if the strengths of these approaches were integrated into a holistic framework for CEA, an operational mechanism would exist to better monitor and assess sustainable development of our aquatic resources. This paper reviews the existing conceptual basis of CEA in Canada including existing methodologies, limitations and strengths. A conceptual framework for integrating project-based and regional-based CEA is presented.     

区域生态系统适应性管理概念、理论框架及其应用研究

论述了生态系统适应性管理基本概念与生态系统适应循环,着重分析了生态系统恢复力范围、抗性、不稳定性与跨尺度影响。生态系统适应循环通常经历入侵、保持、破坏、调整四个阶段,前两个阶段的生态系统演替是可以预测的,而后两个阶段是复杂、难以预测的。文章提出了适应性区域生态系统管理的基本概念,并构建了其理论框架,并以三峡库区小江流域为例,对小江流域景观生态特征、区域生态胁迫进行了详细分析。在此基础上,提出要以水生生态安全为总目标,并围绕这一目标,进行流域各生态系统的恢复力辨识、生态系统适应性循环过程研究,从各系统恢复力属性特征出发,提出了具体的适应性管理方法与模式。