Source Jouranl of CSCD
Source Journal of Chinese Scientific and Technical Papers
Included as T2 Level in the High-Quality Science and Technology Journals in the Field of Environmental Science
Core Journal of RCCSE
Included in the CAS Content Collection
Included in the JST China
Indexed in World Journal Clout Index (WJCI) Report
Volume 39 Issue 3
Jul.  2021
Turn off MathJax
Article Contents
Abstract
References
Article Navigation >  ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING  > 2021  >  39(3): 214-219
YE Shu-fan, GUO Yong-sheng, PAN Xia, WANG Qiang-qiang, TANG Qing-chan, XUE She, SONG Yue-qun. INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATION OF HEAVY METALS IN AN INFORMAL LANDFILL SITE[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2021, 39(3): 214-219. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202103031
Citation: YE Shu-fan, GUO Yong-sheng, PAN Xia, WANG Qiang-qiang, TANG Qing-chan, XUE She, SONG Yue-qun. INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATION OF HEAVY METALS IN AN INFORMAL LANDFILL SITE[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2021, 39(3): 214-219. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202103031
shu

INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATION OF HEAVY METALS IN AN INFORMAL LANDFILL SITE

doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202103031

  • 1. Zhejiang Zhonglan Environmental Technology Co., Ltd, Wenzhou 325000, China;

  • 2. Zhejiang Wenzhou Eco-environment Monitoring Center, Wenzhou 325000, China

  • Received Date: 2020-04-05
    Available Online: 2021-07-19
    Abstract
  • The main objective of the paper was to comprehensively assess pollution level of an informal landfill in Zhejiang. The landfill gas, leachate and humus of this landfill were investigated and analyzed in terms of common parameters including methane, H2S, COD, etc.. Standard index, Nemero pollution index and index of geoaccumulation were also used to evaluate heavy metal pollution in the humus of the studied landfill. The obtained results showed that the methane content of the landfill gas ranged from 2.59% to 53.62%. Moreover, the concentration of several parameters including H2S, NH3, odor and non methane total hydrocarbon was significantly higher than the standard. In terms of the landfill leachate, the content of 11 kinds of common pollutants exceeded the standard of GB 16889-2008, among which the concentration of chroma, suspended matters, COD, BOD5, total nitrogen and ammonia nitrogen of all samples were found to exceed the standard. The concentration of heavy metals, including Ni and Pb was slightly higher than the risk screening values of the first type of land in the Soil Environment Quality Risk Control Standard for Soil Contamination of Development Land (China National Standard, GB 36600-2018). The results obtained from the index of geoaccumulation evaluation demonstrated that part of humus were slightly polluted by Ni and Pb. Nemero pollution evaluation result further indicated that the pollution level of heavy metals in humus soil was mild. Overall, there was potential safety risk from this informal landfill. More attention should be paid to pollution from landfill in the future studies.
    • FullText(HTML)
    • References(10)
  • [1]
    胡馨然, 杨斌, 韩智勇, 等. 中国正规、非正规生活垃圾填埋场地下水中典型污染指标特性比较分析[J]. 环境科学学报, 2019, 39(9):3025-3038.
    [2]
    陈安, 陈晶睿, 崔晶, 等. 中国31个直辖市和省会城市"垃圾围城"风险与对策研究:基于DllS方法的实证研究[J]. 中国科学院院刊, 2019, 34(7):797-806.
    [3]
    缪周伟. 土壤污染防治背景下的非正规垃圾填埋场治理:市场、技术发展趋势及典型案例分析[J]. 环境卫生工程, 2019, 27(2):41-45

    ,49.
    [4]
    浙江省人民政府办公厅. 浙江省人民政府关于印发浙江省土壤污染防治工作方案的通知:浙政发(2016)47号[A/OL].(2016-12-26)[2019-10-11]. http://www.zj.gov.cn/art/2017/1/3/art_12460_289835.html.
    [5]
    李亚静, 黄庭, 谢哲宇, 等. 非正规垃圾填埋场土壤和地下水重金属污染特征与评价[J]. 地球与环境, 2019, 47(3):361-369.
    [6]
    赵小健. 基于Hakanson潜在生态风险指数的某垃圾填埋场土壤重金属污染评价[J]. 环境监控与预警, 2013, 5(4):43-44

    ,49.
    [7]
    张维, 岳波, 张志彬. 陈腐垃圾的重金属污染特征及其潜在风险评价[J]. 陕西师范大学学报(自然科学版), 2013, 41(3):89-92,97.
    [8]
    徐燕, 李淑芹, 郭书海, 等. 土壤重金属污染评价方法的比较[J].安徽农业科学, 2008, 36(11):4615-4617.
    [9]
    郭笑笑, 刘丛强, 朱兆洲, 等. 土壤重金属污染评价方法[J]. 生态学杂志,2011, 30(5):889-896.
    [10]
    MULLER G. Index of geoaccumulation in sediments of the Rhine River[J]. Journal of Geology, 1979, 2(3):108-118.
    • Relative Articles

  • Relative Articles

    [1]LIANG Lichen, YAN Xiaofei, WANG Lili, JIANG Hao, XU Yuanshun. SOIL HEAVY METAL POLLUTION CHARACTERISTICS AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF A SIMPLE DOMESTIC GARBAGE LANDFILL[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2024, 42(10): 177-187. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202410021
    [2]ZHANG Yibing, LIANG Yiqun, ZHANG Yuan, FANG Yinxiang, NIU Hongya, FAN Jingsen. SOURCE APPORTIONMENT AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN PM2.5 IN THE FENGFENG MINING AREA IN 2017—2019[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2023, 41(8): 242-250. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202308031
    [3]LI Ganyu, CUI Xingtao. CHARACTERISTICS OF HEAVY METAL ELEMENTS POLLUTION AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF ATMOSPHERIC DUST-FALL IN TANGSHAN[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2023, 41(12): 278-287. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202312035
    [4]GAO Mengfei, ZHENG Shun'an, LIU Changhua, GAO Yunbing, GAO Ge, ZHAO Ya'nan. RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METAL POLLUTION IN FARMLAND SOIL BASED ON MULTI-FACTORS[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2023, 41(8): 233-241. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202308030
    [5]GUO Yake, GAO Yanyan, QIAN Hui, TANG Shunqi, WANG Haike, SHI Xiaoxin. SPATIAL AND TEMPORAL DISTRIBUTION CHARACTERISTICS AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN THE CHU RIVER BASIN[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2023, 41(1): 112-119. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202301014
    [6]LI Mei, WEN Bing, YING Rongrong, ZHANG Shengtian, LONG Tao, XIA Bing, WANG Lei, CAO Shaohua, WU Xiaofen. DISCUSSION ON KEY TECHNICAL PARAMETERS AND PROCESS METHODS OF GROUNDWATER ENVIRONMENTAL INVESTIGATION[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2023, 41(12): 227-235. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202312028
    [7]YOU Yangyang, LIANG Zengqiang, HUO Ning. GROUNDWATER EVALUATION OF INFORMAL LANDFILLS BASED ON WATER QUALITY IDENTIFICATION INDEX METHOD[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2023, 41(12): 264-269,311. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202312033
    [8]DU Xiaoli, CHI Zhongwen, YIN Zijie, ZHAO Meng. ATTENUATION ON CONTROL EFFECT OF HEAVY METALS IN RUNOFF BY PERMEABLE BRICK DURING THE WHOLE PROCESS OF BLOCKAGE[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2022, 40(7): 1-8. doi: DOI:10.13205/j.hjgc.202207001
    [9]LU Yifan, LU Yin, CAI Hui, SUN Shoujun, SHI Weilin. POLLUTION ANALYSIS AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN FIELD LEFT BY A LEAD-ACID BATTERY FACTORY[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2022, 40(1): 135-140,189. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202201020
    [10]ZHANG Yuchen, CHEN Xiaoduo, GUI Si, SU Hua, ZHANG Weifang, LIU Changqing, WU Chunshan, ZHENG Yuyi. MINERAL COMPONENTS AND HEAVY METAL POLLUTION CHARACTERISTICS IN WASTE INCINERATION FLY ASH IN FUZHOU[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2022, 40(8): 102-109. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202208014
    [11]TU Degang, FENG Tao, YANG Guodong, LUO Weiwei, NIE Beili. POLLUTION ANALYSIS AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN AN ABANDONED MACHINERY PLANT[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2022, 40(4): 217-223. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202204031
    [12]LIANG Yu, YAN Haihong, YIN Qin, NIAN Yuegang, ZHANG Xianqi, WANG Xingzhi. RESEARCH ON GROUNDWATER POLLUTION SITUATION IN CHIFENG LANDFILL AND CAUSE ANALYSIS[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2022, 40(4): 188-195,223. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202204027
    [13]NI Haifeng, DAN Zeng, ZHOU Wenwu, ZHOU Peng, XU Fei, YANG Tao, MENG Dean, CHEN Guanyi. CHARACTERISTICS ANALYSIS AND RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS OF WASTE INCINERATION FLY ASH IN LHASA[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2022, 40(3): 89-93,131. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202203014
    [14]ZHENG Ying-yi, LIU Jie, JIANG Ping-ping, YOU Shao-hong, ZHOU Shu-lin, YU Guo. POLLUTION ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN FARMLAND SOILS AROUND AN ABANDONED SMELTER IN HECHI, CHINA[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2021, 39(5): 238-245. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202105033
    [15]MA Tao, SONG Jiang-min, LIU Qun-qun, SHENG Yan-qing. COMPARISON OF ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN DREDGED SEDIMENT TREATED BY DIFFERENT METHODS[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2021, 39(2): 141-146,152. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202102023
    [16]LIU Zhao, ZHOU Hong, LIU Wei, CAO Wen-jia, LAN Sheng-tao. HEAVY METAL CONCENTRATION PROPERTIES ANALYSIS AND PRIMARY HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT IN GROUNDWATER IN THE QINGJIANG RIVER[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2021, 39(5): 196-203. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202105028
    [17]DOU Wei-qiang, AN Yi, QIN Li, LIN Da-song, DONG Ming-ming. CHARACTERISTICS OF VERTICAL DISTRIBUTION AND MIGRATION OF HEAVY METALS IN FARMLAND SOILS AND ECOLOGICAL RISK ASSESSMENT[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2021, 39(2): 166-172. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202102027
    [18]LIU Chun-yue, WANG Hui, BAI Ming-yue, ZHAO Yue-ming, WU Hao, WANG Xiao-xu, ZHAO Si-cong. RISK ASSESSMENT AND CHARACTERISTICS OF HEAVY METALS IN SURFACE SOIL OF OLD TOWN OF SHENYANG[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2020, 38(1): 167-171. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202001027
    [19]ZHANG Fu-xiang, CUI Song, ZHU Qian-de, GAO Shang, LI Kun-yang. POLLUTION CHARACTERISTIC AND RISK ASSESSMENT OF HEAVY METALS IN AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT OF QIXING RIVER WETLAND[J]. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING , 2020, 38(10): 68-75. doi: 10.13205/j.hjgc.202010011
    • Supplements(0)
    • Cited By

  • Cited by

    Periodical cited type(17)

    1. 李彬，陈佳亮，张路路，叶脉，宋烺，杨泽涛，范彬，王林. 感应电磁法在固废非法填埋环境损害鉴定评估案例中的应用. 环境生态学. 2024(08): 117-124 .
    2. 代先锋，袁玥. 非正规垃圾填埋场污染治理技术及二次污染防控探讨. 节能与环保. 2024(09): 31-37 .
    3. 梁丽琛，严小飞，王莉莉，蒋浩，许元顺. 简易生活垃圾填埋场土壤重金属污染特征及健康风险评价. 环境工程. 2024(10): 177-187 . 本站查看
    4. 李燕妮，厉昌余. 老旧填埋场陈腐垃圾治理和土地综合开发再利用探究. 环境卫生工程. 2024(S1): 151-157 .
    5. 陈华，陈嘉臣，何耀忠，刘畅，闫海虎，陈禧. ERT技术在生活垃圾填埋场堆填量分析应用研究. 四川环境. 2024(06): 39-45 .
    6. 郑吉，王丽晓，陈胤再，傅瑜. 非正规垃圾填埋场土壤重金属分布特征与污染评价. 四川环境. 2023(04): 239-243 .
    7. 刘爽，李沛烨，陈恺，宋慧敏，田立斌. 原位生物强化好氧稳定化技术在温州市某垃圾填埋场治理工程中的应用. 环境工程学报. 2023(07): 2334-2341 .
    8. 李超，许欢欢，高芳莹. 再生资源回收企业土壤重金属污染状况调查研究. 环境工程. 2023(S2): 1190-1195 . 本站查看
    9. 龙於洋，庞梦嫒，郭淑丽，李相杭，沈东升，朱敏. 填埋场腐殖土粒径分级特征及重金属污染程度评价. 环境污染与防治. 2023(12): 1677-1683 .
    10. 周睿，吴玲，簿丝，李婷婷，刘方圆，任何军. 深圳简易垃圾填埋场水土环境污染指标识别. 中国环境科学. 2022(03): 1287-1294 .
    11. 付高平，徐斌，张弛. 某非正规垃圾填埋场地下水风险管控技术研究. 绿色科技. 2022(04): 69-71 .
    12. 许文君，黄丹丹，梁铭珅，徐期勇. 硫化氢对填埋场生物炭改性覆土的甲烷氧化的影响. 环境工程. 2022(02): 120-126 . 本站查看
    13. 王英达，李洵，吴小雯，罗淋，王丰，王维明. 城镇生活垃圾填埋场开采的可行性评估体系. 环境工程. 2022(03): 181-187+202 . 本站查看
    14. 韩华，陈国华，周宏磊，赵红亮. 非正规垃圾堆放点场地污染状况初步调查工作方法研究——以北京垃圾堆放点为例. 环境卫生工程. 2022(02): 95-100 .
    15. 李怡佳，马俊伟，李玉倩，肖琛，沈心怡，牛云，陈家军. 氮素对苜蓿植物修复垃圾堆场镉-多环芳烃复合污染土壤及土壤细菌群落结构的影响. 环境科学. 2022(10): 4779-4788 .
    16. 汪薇，吴超，吴晓东，林贵英，杨久芸，罗璐. 常熟市主要城市湖泊水质及水体富营养化现状评价. 湖北农业科学. 2022(19): 47-54 .
    17. 谢文刚，龙思杰，罗继武，姚远，梁爽，李德安. 城市高强度开发区大型垃圾填埋场生态修复方案探讨——以武汉市某填埋场为例. 环境卫生工程. 2021(04): 86-92 .

    Other cited types(11)

  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-052024-062024-072024-082024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-032025-04010203040
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 7.2 %FULLTEXT: 7.2 %META: 86.9 %META: 86.9 %PDF: 5.9 %PDF: 5.9 %FULLTEXTMETAPDF
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 7.5 %其他: 7.5 %China: 1.5 %China: 1.5 %Seattle: 0.3 %Seattle: 0.3 %United States: 0.3 %United States: 0.3 %[]: 0.3 %[]: 0.3 %三亚: 0.3 %三亚: 0.3 %上海: 9.3 %上海: 9.3 %东京: 0.3 %东京: 0.3 %东莞: 2.1 %东莞: 2.1 %中山: 0.8 %中山: 0.8 %临汾: 0.3 %临汾: 0.3 %乌鲁木齐: 0.3 %乌鲁木齐: 0.3 %保定: 0.8 %保定: 0.8 %兰州: 0.5 %兰州: 0.5 %北京: 4.6 %北京: 4.6 %十堰: 1.0 %十堰: 1.0 %南京: 1.0 %南京: 1.0 %南昌: 0.5 %南昌: 0.5 %南通: 0.3 %南通: 0.3 %南阳: 0.3 %南阳: 0.3 %台州: 1.3 %台州: 1.3 %嘉兴: 0.5 %嘉兴: 0.5 %四平: 0.3 %四平: 0.3 %天津: 4.6 %天津: 4.6 %太原: 0.3 %太原: 0.3 %威海: 0.8 %威海: 0.8 %娄底: 0.3 %娄底: 0.3 %宁德: 0.3 %宁德: 0.3 %宜昌: 0.8 %宜昌: 0.8 %宣城: 0.3 %宣城: 0.3 %常州: 1.0 %常州: 1.0 %常德: 0.3 %常德: 0.3 %广州: 2.6 %广州: 2.6 %张家口: 0.5 %张家口: 0.5 %徐州: 0.3 %徐州: 0.3 %德阳: 0.3 %德阳: 0.3 %成都: 1.3 %成都: 1.3 %扬州: 1.8 %扬州: 1.8 %昆明: 0.8 %昆明: 0.8 %晋城: 0.8 %晋城: 0.8 %朝阳: 0.3 %朝阳: 0.3 %杭州: 2.6 %杭州: 2.6 %武汉: 2.1 %武汉: 2.1 %沈阳: 0.3 %沈阳: 0.3 %沧州: 1.0 %沧州: 1.0 %济源: 0.5 %济源: 0.5 %海口: 0.3 %海口: 0.3 %淄博: 0.5 %淄博: 0.5 %淮南: 0.3 %淮南: 0.3 %深圳: 0.5 %深圳: 0.5 %温州: 1.0 %温州: 1.0 %湖州: 1.8 %湖州: 1.8 %漯河: 3.1 %漯河: 3.1 %潍坊: 0.3 %潍坊: 0.3 %烟台: 0.5 %烟台: 0.5 %珠海: 0.3 %珠海: 0.3 %盐城: 0.3 %盐城: 0.3 %石家庄: 0.5 %石家庄: 0.5 %福州: 0.3 %福州: 0.3 %聊城: 0.3 %聊城: 0.3 %芒廷维尤: 19.3 %芒廷维尤: 19.3 %芝加哥: 1.3 %芝加哥: 1.3 %苏州: 0.3 %苏州: 0.3 %西宁: 2.8 %西宁: 2.8 %西安: 0.3 %西安: 0.3 %贵阳: 0.8 %贵阳: 0.8 %运城: 2.6 %运城: 2.6 %遵义: 0.3 %遵义: 0.3 %邯郸: 1.3 %邯郸: 1.3 %郑州: 1.0 %郑州: 1.0 %重庆: 0.8 %重庆: 0.8 %锦州: 0.3 %锦州: 0.3 %长沙: 0.5 %长沙: 0.5 %长治: 0.3 %长治: 0.3 %阳泉: 0.3 %阳泉: 0.3 %青岛: 0.5 %青岛: 0.5 %黔东南: 0.3 %黔东南: 0.3 %其他ChinaSeattleUnited States[]三亚上海东京东莞中山临汾乌鲁木齐保定兰州北京十堰南京南昌南通南阳台州嘉兴四平天津太原威海娄底宁德宜昌宣城常州常德广州张家口徐州德阳成都扬州昆明晋城朝阳杭州武汉沈阳沧州济源海口淄博淮南深圳温州湖州漯河潍坊烟台珠海盐城石家庄福州聊城芒廷维尤芝加哥苏州西宁西安贵阳运城遵义邯郸郑州重庆锦州长沙长治阳泉青岛黔东南

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索
    Get Citation
    PDF
    XML

    Article Metrics

    Article views (335) PDF downloads(23) Cited by(28)
    Proportional views
    Related

    Journal Online

    Authors' Center

    Links

    Copyright © 《工业建筑》杂志社有限公司 京ICP备11033253号-1

    Supported by: Beijing Renhe Information Technology Co. Ltd     百度统计

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return