| Resource & environmental sciences |
|
|
|
|
| Derivation methods of remediation criteria for contaminated soils under different land uses and analysis of their standard values |
| Zhou Qixing*, Teng Yong |
| (Ministry of Education Key Laboratory of Pollution Processes and Environmental Criteria & Tianjin Key Laboratory of Environmental Remediation and Pollution Control,College of Environmental Science and Engineering, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China) |
|
|
|
Abstract Many countries such as USA, Canada, Denmark and Swiss, and their states or provinces, have carried out systematic researches on the remediation criteria of contaminated soils, and their relevant remediation standards for contaminated soils have also been enacted nationwide or statewide. Especially for USA, it has so many states that there are a series of methodologies provided for references, just as “soil cleanup levels” in Alaska, “soil remediation standards” in Arizona, “soil cleanup target levels” in Florida, “soil remediation goals” in North Carolina, and so do many other countries such as “Canada soil quality guidelines” and “Canadawide standards for petroleum hydrocarbons”, “cutoff criteria” in Denmark, “action values” in Germany, “target cleanup levels” in Italy, “soil remediation intervention values” in Netherlands, and “cleanup values” in Swiss. Generally speaking, the protection of human health is the key point in most of the remediation standards among various countries or states. Meanwhile, ecosystem safety is also included as the protected objects independently, and sometimes groundwater protection is also taken into consideration directly or indirectly. At the same time, the past, current or future land uses are often discriminated in the remediation criteria for most of the countries or states. Nevertheless, the remediation standard for contaminated soils is still a gap in China and thus it is of great urgency to carry out the systematic and comprehensive research on the remediation criteria to meet the need for contaminated soil remediation under various land uses. In general, the research about “derivation methods of remediation criteria/standards for contaminated soils under different land uses and analysis of their standard values” is of great significance and necessity. Firstly, the connotation and function of remediation criteria and standards for contaminated soils are explained in brief combined with the screening values. Noticeably, the preliminary remediation goal is that remediation standards of contaminated soils intend for the protection of human health, was firstly developed at the national level in USA, while its guidance was commonly used to derive some screening levels under the similar supposed contexts and thus the screening values were used as the remediation goals for these soils. However, in 1996, the Soil Screening Guidance (SSG) was enacted by US EPA for the derivation of screening values specially, and stated that the function of soil screening levels is to screen out a contaminated site and its potential pollutants. And in most European countries, the screening values are regarded as soilenvironmental quality standards rather than remediation standards of contaminated soils. In fact, remediation standards of contaminated soils should be the guidance for the nationwide or statewide remediation projects and the protection of plow lands. Land uses should be considered in derivation and development of remediation standards for contaminated soils, and the reference methods are suggested for the development of remediation standards for contaminated soils under various land uses. Then, it is followed by deriving and enacting methods of remediation criteria for contaminated soils under different land uses and the analysis of their standard values. We set forth the variations of the methods and the standard values under various land uses as the result of various remedial requirements and exposure scenarios from three aspects, that is, human health, ecosystem safety and groundwater protection. Generally speaking, exposure scenarios are different in various land uses, and there are some discrimination on exposure population, exposure pathways, and exposure parameters based on human health, while the differences are mainly reflected on receptors, and toxic indicators for ecobased remediation criteria. As for groundwater protection based remediation criteria, water quality standards are often used for the back calculation of soil remediation criteria by the soilwater partition equation, and they are somewhat different in terms of the function of groundwater under various land uses. Otherwise, remediation standards for Cd and benzene contaminated soils in some countries and states are compared qualitatively. In conclusion, many countries have enacted the nationwide or statewide remediation standards for contaminated soils, and are expressed by different denominations. In general, four types of land uses (agricultural, residential, commercial/industrial, groundwaterprotection land uses) are considered in development of remediation standards, and there are some discrimination on the methods and the standard values under various land uses.
|
|
Published: 20 January 2015
|
|
|
不同土地利用类型污染土壤修复基准推导方法与标准值分析
不同的土地利用类型,由于修复要求、暴露情景等的不同,污染土壤修复基准推导方法有较大不同,导致确立的标准值有很大的出入。因此,开展不同土地利用类型的污染土壤修复基准方法研究,并对其标准值进行分析,具有极其重要的实践意义和先导作用。本文首先结合筛选值的初始功能,简要阐述了污染土壤修复基准和标准的内涵及其功能;接着概述了国外污染土壤修复基准/标准的主要土地利用类型及其适用范围和国内的土地利用现状,分析了国外不同土地利用类型污染土壤修复基准对我国不同土地利用类型下污染土壤修复基准推导方法上的借鉴;然后,结合基于人体健康、生态系统安全和地下水保护的污染土壤修复基准推导方法,举例分析了在不同土地利用类型条件下推导方法的一些区别,并且以国外镉（Cd）和苯污染土壤修复标准为例,比较了不同土地利用类型的污染土壤修复标准值的定性关系。最后,简要归纳了不同土地利用类型污染土壤修复基准的方法和修复标准值的差异,并对今后的研究进行了展望。
关键词：
土地利用,
污染土壤,
修复基准/标准,
推导方法,
标准值
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
| |
Shared |
|
|
|
|
| |
Discussed |
|
|
|
|
