Cause and control strategy of total phosphorus pollution in the Minjiang River Basin based on pollution load analysis

doi:10.13745/j.esf.sf.2020.5.29

Abstract

Abstract:

Total phosphorus (TP) is the main water environmental pollutant in the Yangtze River Basin. Serious TP pollution in the Minjiang River, the largest tributary of the upper reaches of the Yangtze River, contributes greatly to the TP flux in the Yangtze River. In order to understand the TP pollution in the Minjiang River Basin, we used the discharge coefficient method to calculate the TP inflow of pollution sources in the basin in 2016, which turned out to be 1154 ton. The results also revealed that the main source of TP in the basin was rural life (51.3%), followed by urban life (28.7%), industrial (9.57%) and agricultural (8.24%) sources, livestock (1.12%), and urban runoff (0.99%). The pollution load order was middle reaches (64.2%)>lower reaches (32.6%)>upper reaches (3.1%), consistent with TP concentration change in the main stream of the Minjiang River. The highest load was found in Chengdu (51.2%), related to its high population density, intensive production and living activities. Based on collected data and field investigation, we consider the main causes of TP pollution in the Minjiang River are insufficient treatment for rural living waste, lack of infrastructure for urban waste treatment, dense industrial enterprise, serious TP pollution in some tributaries, and lack of guidance for water pollution control. In consideration of the characteristics and causes of TP pollution in the Minjiang River Basin, we concluded that in order to improve the level of environmental protection and control in the river basin, we need to develop different strategies for the upstream, midstream and downstream of the Minjiang River Basin, as well as an overall strategy for the entire river basin.

Key words: Minjiang River Basin, total phosphorus (TP), pollution load, pollution causes, control strategy

CLC Number:

X522

WEN Quan, MA Yingqun, SHI Yao, CHI Minghui, QIN Yanwen, LIU Zhichao, YANG Chenchen. Cause and control strategy of total phosphorus pollution in the Minjiang River Basin based on pollution load analysis[J]. Earth Science Frontiers, 2020, 27(4): 332-339.

Figures/Tables 7

References 41

[1]	MUELLER B, BERG M, YAO Z P, et al. How polluted is the Yangtze River? Water quality downstream from the Three Gorges Dam[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2008, 402(2/3):232-247. DOI URL
[2]	杨芳, 裴中平, 周琴. 长江经济带沿江排污口布局与整治规划研究[J]. 三峡生态环境监测, 2018, 3(2):21-26.
[3]	尹炜. 长江经济带水生态环境保护现状与对策研究[J]. 三峡生态环境监测, 2018, 3(3):2-7, 95.
[4]	环境保护部, 发展改革委, 水利部. 长江经济带生态环境保护规划[R]. 北京: 环境保护部、发展改革委、水利部, 2016: 5-6.
[5]	周琴, 辛小康, 尹炜, 等. 三峡水库磷污染特性及变化趋势研究[J]. 三峡生态环境监测, 2019, 4(1):16-21.
[6]	杨钢, 李庆. 三峡库区水体中磷的特征分析[J]. 人民长江, 2007, 38(2):14-15.
[7]	张恩仁, 张经. 三峡水库对长江N、 P营养盐截留效应的模型分析[J]. 湖泊科学, 2003, 15(1):929-936.
[8]	秦延文, 马迎群, 王丽婧, 等. 长江流域总磷污染: 分布特征·来源解析·控制对策[J]. 环境科学研究, 2018, 31(1):9-14.
[9]	袁旭音, 李兵, 许薇薇, 等. 太湖入湖河道沉积物中生物利用磷和营养水平分析[J]. 地学前缘, 2008, 15(5):212-218.
[10]	WANG X, HAO F H, CHENG H G, et al. Estimating non-point source pollutant loads for the large-scale basin of the Yangtze River in China[J]. Environmental Earth Sciences, 2011, 63(5):1079-1092. DOI URL
[11]	TONG Y D, BU X G, CHEN J Y, et al. Estimation of nutrient discharge from the Yangtze River to the East China Sea and the identification of nutrient sources[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2017, 321:728-736. DOI URL
[12]	续衍雪, 吴熙, 路瑞, 等. 长江经济带总磷污染状况与对策建议[J]. 中国环境管理, 2018, 10(1):70-74.
[13]	杜明, 柳强, 罗彬, 等. 岷、沱江流域水环境质量现状评价及分析[J]. 四川环境, 2016, 35(5):20-25.
[14]	茅昌平, 季峻峰, 罗郧, 等. 长江干流颗粒有机碳及其同位素组成的季节性输送特征[J]. 地学前缘, 2011, 18(6):161-168.
[15]	王超. 岷江(乐山河段)水环境承载能力分析与研究[J]. 四川水力发电, 2012, 31(6):80-82.
[16]	陈雨艳, 杨坪, 向秋实, 等. 岷江流域水质状况评价及变化趋势分析[J]. 中国环境监测, 2015(6):53-57.
[17]	冷荣艾. 岷江干流水污染趋势分析及其防治措施探讨[J]. 四川水利, 2014, 35(1):58-62.
[18]	杨耿, 秦延文, 韩超南, 等. 岷江干流表层沉积物中磷形态空间分布特征[J]. 环境科学, 2018(5):2165-2173.
[19]	NIRAULA R, KALIN L, SRIVASTAVA P, et al. Identifying critical source areas of nonpoint source pollution with SWAT and GWLF[J]. Ecological Modelling, 2013, 268:123-133. DOI URL
[20]	MOCKLER E M, DEAKIN J, ARCHBOLD M, et al. Sources of nitrogen and phosphorus emissions to Irish rivers and coastal waters: estimates from a nutrient load apportionment framework[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2017, 601/602:326-339. DOI URL
[21]	ZHANG Z, TAO F T, DU J, et al. Surface water quality and its control in a river with intensive human impacts: a case study of the Xiangjiang River, China[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2010, 91(12):2483-2490. DOI URL
[22]	严婷婷, 王红华, 孙治旭, 等. 滇池流域农村生活污水产排污系数研究[J]. 环境科学导刊, 2010, 29(4):46-48.
[23]	JOHNES P J. Evaluation and management of the impact of land use change on the nitrogen and phosphorus load delivered to surface waters: the export coefficient modelling approach[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 1996, 183(3):323-349. DOI URL
[24]	WORRALL F, BURT T P. The impact of land-use change on water quality at the catchment scale: the use of export coefficient and structural models[J]. Journal of Hydrology, 1999, 221(1):75-90. DOI URL
[25]	IERODIACONOU D, LAURENSON L, LEBLANC M, et al. The consequences of land use change on nutrient exports: a regional scale assessment in south-west Victoria, Australia[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2004, 74(4):305-316. DOI URL
[26]	MA X, LI Y, ZHANG M, et al. Assessment and analysis of non-point source nitrogen and phosphorus loads in the Three Gorges Reservoir Area of Hubei Province, China[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2011, 412:154-161.
[27]	RICHARDS R P, HOLLOWAY J. Monte Carlo studies of sampling strategies for estimating tributary loads[J]. Water Resources Research, 1987, 23(10):1939-1948. DOI URL
[28]	SNELDER T H, MCDOWELL R W, FRASER C E. Estimation of catchment nutrient loads in New Zealand using monthly water quality monitoring data[J]. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 2017, 53(1):158-178. DOI URL
[29]	GAO M F, QIU J J, LI C S, et al. Modeling nitrogen loading from a watershed consisting of cropland and livestock farms in China using Manure-DNDC[J]. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2014, 185:88-98.
[30]	ARNOLD J G, SRINIVASAN R, MUTTIAH R S, et al. Large area hydrologic modeling and assessment part I: model development[J]. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 1998, 34(1):73-89. DOI URL
[31]	BEASLEY D B, HUGGINS L F, MONKE E J. Answers: a model for watershed planning[J]. Transactions of the ASAE, 1980, 23(4):938-944. DOI URL
[32]	胡芸芸, 王永东, 李廷轩, 等. 沱江流域农业面源污染排放特征解析[J]. 中国农业科学, 2015, 48(18):3654-3665.
[33]	王兰生, 王小群, 许向宁, 等. 岷江上游近两万年前发生了什么事件?[J]. 地学前缘, 2007, 14(4):189-196.
[34]	国务院第一次全国污染源普查领导小组办公室. 第一次全国污染源普查城镇生活源产排污系数手册[M]. 北京: 中国环境科学出版社, 2008: 16-18.
[35]	中国环境规划院. 全国水环境容量核定技术指南[R]. 北京: 中国环境规划院, 2003.
[36]	刘瑞民, 沈珍瑶, 丁晓雯, 等. 应用输出系数模型估算长江上游非点源污染负荷[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2008, 27(2):677-682.
[37]	马广文, 王业耀, 香宝, 等. 长江上游流域土地利用对面源污染影响及其差异[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2012, 31(4):791-797.
[38]	刘佳. 我省拟安排1.1亿元专项资金支持建制镇污水管网配套建设[N]. 四川日报, 2017-06-01(2).
[39]	全国和四川省人大代表乐山第一小组. 乐山市盐磷化工产业转型升级专题调研报告[R/OL]. 乐山: 乐山市人民代表大会常务委员会. 2017-03-17 [2019-05-14]. http://www.sclsrd.gov.cn/view/62773D3E4D7D2026.html .
[40]	四川省环境保护厅. 2016年四川省环境状况公报[R]. 成都: 四川省环境保护厅, 2017: 5-7.
[41]	中国轻工业成都设计工程有限公司. 眉山有禾科技有限公司12万吨年硫酸钾项目环境影响报告书[R/OL]. 成都: 中国轻工业成都设计工程有限公司, 2014: 9-10 [2019-05-17]. http://jz.docin.com/p-1782375072.html .

行政区	工业		城镇生活		畜禽养殖		农村生活		农业非点源		城市径流		合计
行政区	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%
阿坝州	1.65	4.61	2.77	7.74	7.99	22.3	18.2	50.9	3.83	10.7	1.35	3.77	35.8	3.10
成都市	34.9	5.90	274	46.4	5.3	0.90	248	42.0	24.3	4.10	4.54	0.77	591	51.2
眉山市	30.7	20.4	15.6	10.4	0.65	0.43	79.7	53.0	23.0	15.3	0.90	0.60	150	13.0
乐山市	40.2	15.0	37.8	14.1	0.01	0.00	159	59.4	27.5	10.3	3.36	1.25	268	23.2
宜宾市	3.04	2.80	0.84	0.77	0	0.00	86.9	80.0	16.6	15.3	1.30	1.20	109	9.42
总计	110	9.57	331	28.7	14.0	1.21	592	51.3	95.2	8.25	11.4	0.99	1 154	100

行政区	工业		城镇生活		畜禽养殖		农村生活		农业非点源		城市径流		合计
行政区	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%	入河量/t	占比/%
阿坝州	1.65	4.61	2.77	7.74	7.99	22.3	18.2	50.9	3.83	10.7	1.35	3.77	35.8	3.10
成都市	34.9	5.90	274	46.4	5.3	0.90	248	42.0	24.3	4.10	4.54	0.77	591	51.2
眉山市	30.7	20.4	15.6	10.4	0.65	0.43	79.7	53.0	23.0	15.3	0.90	0.60	150	13.0
乐山市	40.2	15.0	37.8	14.1	0.01	0.00	159	59.4	27.5	10.3	3.36	1.25	268	23.2
宜宾市	3.04	2.80	0.84	0.77	0	0.00	86.9	80.0	16.6	15.3	1.30	1.20	109	9.42
总计	110	9.57	331	28.7	14.0	1.21	592	51.3	95.2	8.25	11.4	0.99	1 154	100

行政区	人口/万人				常住人口城镇化率/%
行政区	户籍人口	非农业人口	农业人口	常住人口	常住人口城镇化率/%
成都市	1 398.9	784.6	614.3	1 591.8	70.6
眉山市	350.25	111.01	239.24	300.09	43.38
乐山市	354.72	122.1	232.62	326.5	48.73
宜宾市	555.91	210.3	345.61	451	46.63
阿坝州	91.95	35.38	56.57	93.46	37.86

行政区	人口/万人				常住人口城镇化率/%
行政区	户籍人口	非农业人口	农业人口	常住人口	常住人口城镇化率/%
成都市	1 398.9	784.6	614.3	1 591.8	70.6
眉山市	350.25	111.01	239.24	300.09	43.38
乐山市	354.72	122.1	232.62	326.5	48.73
宜宾市	555.91	210.3	345.61	451	46.63
阿坝州	91.95	35.38	56.57	93.46	37.86

行政区	城镇人口/ 万人	生活用水总量/ 万t	生活污水排放量/ 万t	生活污水处理量/ 万t	生活污水处理率/ %
阿坝州	16.6	1 310	1 140	426	37.37
成都市	811.8	109 123	92 438	84 395	91.30
眉山市	130.2	7 771	6 605	4 463	67.57
乐山市	159.1	11 614	9 872	8 318	84.26
宜宾市	98.6	5 903	4 824	2 872	59.54
总计	1 216.3	135 721	114 879	100 474	87.5