移动通信基站电磁辐射环境保护与评价浅析

通过对移动通信基站天线的电磁辐射分析和探讨,归纳了移动通信基站建设在施工期、营运期环境保护工作的重点与措施,对电磁环境影响评价制度与方法进行了系统的描述,并指出了今后的工作方向。     

浸没式双轴旋转厌氧膜生物反应器处理啤酒废水试验

研究了新型浸没式双轴旋转厌氧膜生物反应器(SDRAnMBR)处理模拟啤酒废水的运行性能.研究结果表明,SDRAnMBR对啤酒废水有较好的处理效果,处理过程负荷提高快,有机物去除率高,系统耐冲击负荷的能力强,而且运行非常稳定.正常运行期间,进水COD在2900～5200mg·L-1,容积负荷为4.97～12.48kg·m-·3d-1(以COD计)时,COD的平均去除率为95.15%.膜截留和三相旋转流的共同作用,加强了在高污泥浓度(MLSS)和高负荷条件下运行时的混合和传质,从而强化了SDRAnMBR在高MLSS和高容积负荷下运行的稳定性和出水水质.     

类比法在圆明园防渗工程环评中的应用

生态系统以其复杂性、需长期监测的特点成为环境影响评价中的难点。文章采用了类比法,以圆明园防渗铺膜工程的生态影响评价为例,选取了铺膜1年的圆明园26#湖,铺膜3年的北京植物园湖,铺膜10年的中央党校湖,清淤未铺膜的颐和园昆明湖和未清淤未铺膜的密云水库作为类比对象,对水生生态系统中的底栖动物、浮游藻类、浮游动物和水生维管植物进行了类比,为圆明园防渗工程的生态影响评价和预测提供了有力的依据。实践证明,合理的类比法应用可以快速有效地对工程项目的生态影响进行评价。     

武器装备验证环境因素确定模型及其应用研究

从系统的角度,分析了与武器装备环境紧密相联的4个因素,从武器装备的产品分解结构、环境分解结构、功能分解结构、状态集构建了武器装备系统、分系统、部件的试验验证环境因素确定模型,分析了模型的应用,给出了模型的工作流程。描述了基于上述模型的信息管理系统的构建思路与功能。     

一般工业固废填埋场建设项目环境监理探析

介绍了一般工业固废填埋场工程的特点和环境监理的现状;结合填埋场项目环境监理工作的实践,分析并总结了填埋场建设项目环境监理要点,即制订切实的监理方案,对工程的关键部位、关键工序做好巡视、旁站监理工作,在实施过程中做好水土保持、生态保护的监理工作。     

泗河水环境容量及最大允许排污量计算

规范了水环境容量的定义和分类,建立了符合泗河水文、水资源特征和水环境状况的河流水环境容量模型,与GIS技术结合构建了适合北方地区的河流水环境容量计算程序和方法;摸清了水功能区-入河排污口-点源排放口的一一对应关系,提出了将水域环境容量转换为陆域点源最大允许排污量的估算方法。计算了泗河在满足水功能区划条件下的水环境容量及最大允许排污量,从而为制定该河流水污染物容量总量控制方案提供了科学依据。     

空气阴极微生物燃料电池的构型优化及其快速测定BOD的性能评价

设计了一种新型双室空气阴极微生物燃料电池(MFC)并将其作为生物传感器,与传统双室空气阴极MFC进行对比,考察其电化学性能及用于快速检测BOD的性能。结果表明：新型空气阴极MFC可有效提高功率密度并降低内阻,其功率密度最高为897 mW·m⁻²,而内阻最低为92 Ω;该MFC可用于直接快速检测高浓度有机物的BOD,对醋酸钠底物的线性检测限为1 280 mg·L⁻¹,在此底物浓度下MFC的检测时间为31.2~66 h,线性可决系数R²为0.97~0.99;对于GGA底物的线性检测限为1 250 mg·L⁻¹,在此底物浓度下MFC的检测时间为33~67 h,线性可决系数R²为0.98。本研究可为MFC型BOD检测传感器的性能优化提供参考。     

北京市家具生产企业职业危害抽样调查

本文从北京市家具生产企业最多的区县中,有针对性地选择其中的18家企业进行现场抽样调查,并对其中的11家进行现场检测,研究北京市家具生产企业职业危害现状,通过现场调查和检测结果表明:北京市家具生产企业的管理者对职业危害的重视程度有所提高,但是从业者的自我保护意识仍然淡漠;生产环境不令人满意,作业场所粉尘超标严重;毒物浓度得到较好控制,主要毒物为苯及苯的同系物。该研究可为有关管理部门制定管理政策提供依据。     

What happens when you trust your supervisor? Mediators of individual performance in trust relationships

To understand how trust in supervisor translates into individual job performance, we hypothesize that trust in supervisor facilitates positive psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety, and availability, which in turn predict individual job performance. We assert that each of the three mediating paths in our model represents a distinct mechanism by which trust in supervisor contributes to individual job performance. We test our hypotheses with 206 supervisor–subordinate dyads and find that trust in supervisor contributes to job performance through psychological availability and psychological safety but not psychological meaningfulness. By examining three different psychological mechanisms within the same frame, we provide a test that compares and contrasts the uniqueness of the three pathways. Our findings suggest practical ways for managers to build trust with subordinates and guidance for the design of productive work conditions. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

When does centrality matter? Scientific productivity and the moderating role of research specialization and cross‐community ties

The present study addresses the ongoing debate concerning academic scientific productivity. Specifically, given the increasing number of collaborations in academia and the crucial role networks play in knowledge creation, we investigate the extent to which building social capital within the academic community represents a valuable resource for a scientist's knowledge‐creation process. We measure the social capital in terms of structural position within the academic collaborative network. Furthermore, we analyse the extent to which an academic scientist's research specialization and ties that cross‐community boundaries act as moderators of the aforementioned relationship. Empirical results derived from an analysis of an Italian academic community from 2001 to 2008 suggest academic scientists that build social capital by occupying central positions in the community outperform their more isolated colleagues. However, scientific productivity declines beyond a certain threshold value of centrality, hence revealing the existence of an inverted U‐shaped relationship. This relationship is negatively moderated by the extent to which an academic focuses research activities in few scientific knowledge domains, whereas it is positively moderated by the number of cross‐community ties established. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.