Environmental benchmarks vs. ecological benchmarks for assessment and monitoring in Canada: Is there a difference?

Environmental benchmarks are widely used in Canadian environmental assessment as a standard against which to monitor air or water quality in response to human activities in the environment. Recent work in Canada has developed the concept of ecological benchmarks as a complement to environmental benchmarks. However, implementation of ecological benchmarks may be challenging. This paper presents an analogy between ecological benchmarks and the more commonly used environmental benchmarks, as an attempt to increase understanding and use of ecological benchmarks in resource management, assessment, and monitoring. Ecological benchmarks, and their corresponding indicators, will be challenging to identify and use. However, through the use of the principles of adaptive management, effective ecological indicators and benchmarks can be established. Although it is essential that ecological benchmarks are site-specific, the analogy and general principles outlined here are applicable to assessment and monitoring in any part of the world.     

Can health feasibly be considered as part of the planning process in Scotland?

The planning system is significant because of its capacity to determine the quality of the built environment as well as the health, well-being and quality of life of the individuals and communities therein. Development planning is especially important because of the long-term impact of the decisions. This paper was developed in response to increasing recognition amongst HIA practitioners in Scotland of the importance of planning for health. It focuses on the relationship between the planning system in Scotland, specifically the Development Planning element of it, and population health and considers how the health impact assessment (HIA) approach can facilitate and support joint working with planners. In particular, consideration is given to the potential impact of the introduction of Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) on the linkages between health, HIA and planning.     

汉江水质评价的化学计量学研究

运用因子分析法对汉江各主要水质断面进行水质因子分析及综合评价,通过各主因子的方差贡献及因子得分得出各水质因子的赋权值,从而对所取断面进行水质污染程度的综合评价、分析与排序。同时运用聚类分析法对汉江17个断面的水质污染相似性进行分析,给出分类处理结果。     

南水北调东平湖水质变化趋势分析研究

采用了季节性肯达尔法水质趋势分析方法,分析了1984～2000年东平湖水质的变化情况,目前东平湖水质一般为Ⅴ类、Ⅵ类,个别年份为超Ⅴ类,氨氮平均值历年变化不大,一般均符合Ⅰ Ⅲ类水质,挥发酚和砷含量甚小,各年均符合Ⅰ类水。     

平顶山市湛河水污染现状及防治对策

以“九五”期间平顶山市湛河水质例行监测结果为依据，分析了湛河水污染现状、特征及原因，并提出综合性湛河污染防治对策。     

城市空气质量日报自动发布系统的研究与开发

详细介绍了“城市空气质量日报自动发布系统”的开发背景和开发过程 ,并对系统整体的架构和所用到的技术作了针对性的说明 ,阐明了作者对此类系统的前景和发展方向的看法。     

Cu、Pb、Zn火焰原子吸收多谱线分析在环境监测中的应用

对铜的 3条谱线 (2 49.2 nm、2 61 .4nm,3 2 4.8nm ) ,铅的 2条谱线 (2 83 .3 nm、2 1 7.0 1 nm )以及锌的 2条谱线(3 0 7.6nm、2 1 3 .9nm ) ,共 7条谱线的灵敏度、检测限、线性范围进行了归纳性总结 ,并对多种共存元素可能存在的干扰情况进行了研究 ,认为利用元素不同分析谱线的分析灵敏度差异 ,根据被测元素在样品消解液中含量 ,选择合适的谱线进行分析 ,既降低工作强度 ,又能获得满意结果     

B-P网络应用于地下水水质监测点优选

以地下水水质评价分级标准作为训练样本,构造B-P网络模型对其进行训练,用训练好的B-P网络对某地的地下水水质监测点进行评判、优选。并与其它方法的结果进行比较,结果表明,B-P网络用于环境测点优选不仅原理直观,而且具有较好的客观性和实用性。     

测定电镀废水中铬(Ⅵ)的新光度法

在硝酸介质中,二甲基黄先显色而后在加热条件下褪色,铬( )能显著阻抑此褪色反应,且阻抑程度与铬( )含量相关,据此建立了测定痕量铬( )的新方法。方法检出限是1.55×10-10g/ml,线性范围0.1～1.2μg/10ml,用于电镀废水中铬( )的测定,结果满意。     

A ten year summary of concurrent ambient water column and sediment toxicity tests in the Chesapeake Bay watershed: 1990-1999

The goal of this study was to identify the relative toxicity ofambient areas in the Chesapeake Bay watershed by using a suiteof concurrent water column and sediment toxicity tests at seventy-five ambient stations in 20 Chesapeake Bay rivers from1990 through 1999. Spatial and temporal variability was examinedat selected locations throughout the 10 yr study. Inorganicand organic contaminants were evaluated in ambient water andsediment concurrently with water column and sediment tests toassess possible causes of toxicity although absolute causalitycan not be established. Multivariate statistical analysis wasused to develop a multiple endpoint toxicity index (TOX-INDEX) at each station for both water column and sediment toxicity data. Water column tests from the 10 yr testing period showed that49% of the time, some degree of toxicity was reported. The mosttoxic sites based on water column results were located inurbanized areas such as the Anacostia River, Elizabeth River andthe Middle River. Water quality criteria for copper, lead,mercury, nickel and zinc were exceeded at one or more of thesesites. Water column toxicity was also reported in localizedareas of the South and Chester Rivers. Both spatial and temporalvariability was reported from the suite of water column toxicitytests. Some degree of sediment toxicity was reported from 62% of the tests conducted during the ten year period. The ElizabethRiver and Baltimore Harbor stations were reported as the most toxic areas based on sediment results.Sediment toxicity guidelines were exceeded for one or more of thefollowing metals at these two locations: arsenic, cadmium,chromium, copper, lead, nickel and zinc. At the Elizabeth Riverstations nine of sixteen semi-volatile organics and two of sevenpesticides measured exceeded the ER-M values in 1990. Ambientsediment toxicity tests in the Elizabeth River in 1996 showedreduced toxicity. Various semi-volatile organics exceeded the ER-M values at a number of Baltimore Harbor sites; pyrene anddibenzo(a,h)anthracene were particularly high at one of thestations (Northwest Harbor). Localized sediment toxicity was alsoreported in the Chester, James, Magothy, Rappahannock, andPotomac Rivers but the link with contaminants was not determined.Both spatial and temporal variability was less for sedimenttoxicity data when compared with water column toxicity data. Acomparison of water column and sediment toxicity data for thevarious stations over the 10 yr study showed that approximatelyhalf the time agreement occurred (either both suite of testsshowed toxicity or neither suite of tests showed toxicity).