基于修复效果的污染土壤修复工程环境足迹分析
Environmental Footprint Analysis of Contaminated Soil Remediation Projects based on Remediation Effects
-
摘要: 为定量评估污染土壤修复工程的环境影响,基于北方某焦化厂有机污染场地土壤原位热脱附和阻隔通风的实际修复效果,计算了不同修复工程各阶段的环境足迹、相对贡献和主要来源,分析了原位热脱附和阻隔通风的环境足迹强度。结果表明:修复工程施工准备阶段时间短、能源和材料消耗较少,在整个工程中的环境足迹占比仅1%左右;高风险区原位热脱附施工能源消耗、水资源消耗、GHG排放量、空气污染物排放量占比分别为93.02%、72.82%、63.39%和71.08%;低风险区阻隔通风能源消耗、水资源消耗、GHG排放量、空气污染物排放量占比分别为6.77%、26.26%、35.40%和27.74%。综合看来,原位热脱附环节带来较大的能源投入,其中天然气使用、电能消耗以及现场机械设备燃油是该场地修复过程环境足迹的主要来源;高风险区热脱附修复工程苯的环境足迹强度高于苯并(a)芘;从不同修复技术分析,原位热脱附的能源强度较高;基于浓度降低的环境足迹强度对量化热脱附技术的环境足迹适用性较好,而基于风险削减的环境足迹强度适用于原位阻隔技术。该研究基于实际修复效果的环境足迹分析可以为掌握修复工程实施的环境影响、推动绿色可持续修复提供支撑。Abstract: In order to quantitatively assess the environmental impact of contaminated soil remediation projects, the environmental footprint, relative contribution and main sources of each stage of different remediation projects were calculated based on the actual remediation effect of in-situ thermal desorption and barrier ventilation of organic contaminated soil at a northern coking plant, and the environmental footprint intensity of in-situ thermal desorption and barrier ventilation were analyzed. The results showed that the environmental footprint of the remediation project was only about 1% due to the short construction preparation stage and low energy and material consumption; the percentages of energy consumption, water consumption, GHG emission and air pollutant emission for in-situ thermal desorption construction in the high-risk area were 93.02%, 72.82%, 63.39% and 71.08%, respectively; the percentages of energy consumption, water consumption, GHG emission and air pollutant emission for barrier ventilation in the low-risk area were The percentages of energy consumption, water consumption, GHG emissions, and air pollutant emissions in the low-risk area were 6.77%, 26.26%, 35.40%, and 27.74%, respectively. Comprehensively, it seems that the in-situ thermal desorption link brings a larger energy input, among which natural gas use, electrical energy consumption, and fuel for on-site mechanical equipment are the main sources of the environmental footprint of the remediation process at this site; the environmental footprint intensity of benzene is higher than that of benzo(a)pyrene for the thermal desorption remediation project in the high-risk area; the energy intensity of in-situ thermal desorption is higher when analyzed from different remediation technologies; the environmental footprint intensity based on concentration reduction is important for quantifying The environmental footprint intensity based on concentration reduction is better for quantifying the environmental footprint of thermal desorption technology, while the environmental footprint intensity based on risk reduction is applicable to in situ barrier technology. This study's environmental footprint analysis based on actual restoration effects can provide support for mastering the environmental impacts of restoration project implementation and promoting green and sustainable restoration.
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 207
- HTML全文浏览量: 32
- PDF下载量: 104
- 被引次数: 0