基于腔衰减相移光谱法的二氧化氮分析仪的设计与应用

基于腔衰减相移光谱法设计了一套二氧化氮在线分析仪,通过优化测量参数,该仪器可长期稳定运行,其时间分辨率为60 s,检出限为0.191 ppb,在0~300 ppb范围内,NO₂气体浓度与相位正切信号值具有较好的二次拟合关系,R²为0.9995.另外,该仪器在泰安站进行了长期外场观测,并与改装后的进口商品化仪器PKU-Thermo 42i-TL进行比对实验,结果表明,两者的测量结果一致性较好,R²=0.9811,表明其具有良好的运行稳定性和测定结果准确性,适用于环境大气二氧化氮浓度的在线监测.外场观测结果表明,春季泰安站二氧化氮浓度均值为12.39 ppb,有明显日变化规律.     

环境空气自动监测车仪器路况试验分析

利用环境空气自动监测车对辖区内空气自动站进行巡检及应急监测中,越来越显示其灵活、可移动的优势,但在长距离行驶后是否因路况影响仪器的正常运行,对监测车仪器能否达到监测质量控制对仪器性能指标的要求,成为最为关心的问题,作者在各级路况开展了系统试验。通过试验得出,路况对监测车仪器影响不大,性能指标可以满足要求。     

减排温室气体的经济手段：许可证交易和税收政策

温室气体的减排是当前国际社会关心的热点环境问题。本文首先从分析采用经济手段减排温室气体的潜在利弊出发，对温室气体排放交易和国际碳税进行了深入的分析比较。最后，提出了我国响应减排温室气体经济政策的若干建议。     

环境信息公开作为有效环境管理模式的探讨

环境信息公开是继指令性控制手段和经济手段之后,一种新的环境管理模式和发展方向。环境信息公开能加强环境管理的公众参与和监督,使社会各群体和个人改善其环境行为,从而达到环境保护的目的。通过对环境信息的含义、来源的阐释,介绍环境信息公开的应用理论;结合国外实践,将环境信息公开与环境管制手段、经济手段进行了比较;分析公众参与起到的传递、交流信息与监督作用。     

Significant developments in sustainable development law and governance: A proposal

This article develops a practical proposal for progress on sustainable development law. It examines the prospects for an international sustainable development law to provide a framework for more effective, coherent governance. Sustainable development law is briefly defined and an analytical framework is provided. Different degrees of integration between economic, social and environmental law are described. Certain principles of international law related to sustainable development are also highlighted. It is argued that these principles may serve to guide law‐makers and jurists where social, economic and environmental law and policy conflict or overlap. Continuing, underlying questions of sustainable development governance are addressed and its global frameworks analysed. The article also focuses on the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development, held in Johannesburg in August‐September 2002, and its specific mandate for the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (UNCSD) to take related legal developments into account. The article advances a proposal: that governments, economic, social and environmental intergovernmental organizations and other actors establish a ‘network of inquiry’ with members from relevant groups, including legal and academic organizations, and other expert groups, in order to follow, research, analyse and debate legal developments in a balanced way.     

A new economic instrument for financing accelerated landfill aftercare

The key aspects of landfill operation that remain unresolved are the extended timescale and uncertain funding of the post-closure period. This paper reviews the topic and proposes an economic instrument to resolve the unsustainable nature of the current situation. Unsustainability arises from the sluggish degradation of organic material and also the slow flushing of potential pollutants that is exacerbated by low-permeability capping. A landfill tax or aftercare provision rebate is proposed as an economic instrument to encourage operators to actively advance the stabilization of landfilled waste. The rebate could be accommodated within existing regulatory and tax regimes and would be paid for: (i) every tonne of nitrogen (or other agreed leachate marker) whose removal is advanced via the accelerated production and extraction of leachate; (ii) every tonne of non-commercially viable carbon removed via landfill gas collection and treatment. The rebates would be set at a level that would make it financially attractive to operators and would encourage measures such as leachate recirculation, in situ aeration, and enhanced flushing. Illustrative calculations suggest that a maximum rebate of up to ～€50/tonne MSW would provide an adequate incentive.     

生态系统服务市场化工具:概念、类型与适用

生态系统服务市场化工具作为一种与命令控制型进路相对的环境政策工具,最初与污染问题相联系而出现,之后扩展至生物多样性和生态系统服务的保护,被认为能够更有效地应对市场失灵,为自然资源管理提供正向激励,有助于优化资源配置以及填补生态保护资金缺口。通过对生态系统服务市场化工具概念、类型和适用的考察,可以发现生态系统服务市场化工具的概念虽频繁出现,但界定过于宽泛模糊,几乎泛指所有带有价格成分的工具;生态系统服务市场化工具的类型划分并不一致,基于归纳的类型划分将现行市场化工具归纳为基于价格的机制、基于数量的机制和市场摩擦机制三类,而基于演绎的类型划分,则将市场化工具分为直接市场交易、许可证交易、反向拍卖、科斯类型协议、调控价格变化和自愿性价格信号六类;生态系统服务市场化工具的适用需要以生态系统服务的货币化为前提,受制于制度背景,并且应当针对市场的弊端予以法律规制,确保交易能够真正提供环境效益;市场化工具的选择不仅有赖于数字运算,还应当考虑多种因素并予以权衡,同时综合运用各种市场化或非市场化工具。中国在建立健全生态保护市场体系的过程中,应当把握生态系统服务市场化工具通过生态系统服务货币化和商品化解决环境外部性问题这一实质,理解缓解银行、生态系统服务付费、反向拍卖、生态标签和生态认证等典型市场化工具的运行机理,明确生态系统服务市场化工具适用的前提和规则,更好地发挥市场化工具的积极功效,从而实现特定的环境政策目标。     

National policies for biosphere greenhouse gas management: issues and opportunities

Biosphere greenhouse gas (GHG) management consists of preserving and enhancing terrestrial carbon pools and producing biomass as a fossil fuel substitute. The discussion of this topic has focused primarily on carbon-accounting and project-level issues, particularly relating to carbon sequestration as a source of emissions credits under the Kyoto Protocol. While international consensus on these matters is needed, this paper argues that an important domestic policy agenda also deserves attention. National policies for biosphere GHG management are necessary to bring about large-scale changes in land-use, forestry, and agricultural practices and can address some of the technical and policy issues that have proven to be particularly problematic from carbon-accounting and project-level perspectives. These policies should minimize land-use and resource-management conflicts, account for collateral benefits, and ensure institutional compatibility with existing resource-management regimes. Issues relating to project permanence, leakage, and transaction costs should also be addressed. A range of policy instruments should be used and biosphere GHG management should be one component of an integrated approach to environmental and resource management. Countries promoting biosphere GHG management as an important element of their climate change strategies should be developing these domestic policies to complement international negotiations and to demonstrate that carbon sequestration and biomass production can make an effective contribution to the stabilization of atmospheric GHG concentrations.     

Monitoring, enforcement, and the choice of environmental policy instruments

How to choose among the dozen policy instruments available to environmental management agencies has been a matter of concern and debate among environmental economists for the entire life of the profession – nearly four decades. The ability, or lack of it, to measure the quantities or observe the actions made "enforceable" by particular policy instruments ought clearly to be central to this choice. However, all too often the monitoring problem has been assumed away. When it is reintroduced in realistic forms, we find, not surprisingly, that some favorite policy instruments, such as pollution charges, are not applicable to some important problems, such as runoff pollution from farms; that marginal subsidies, by changing the burden of proof, may no longer be symmetric with charges; and that the apparent freedom from monitoring requirements of the newly fashionable instrument involving the public provision of information about firms or products is "paid for" by our inability to say anything about its performance on other dimensions that are also of interest. Electronic Publication