土壤重金属污染空间分布及生态风险评价——以西安市主城区为例
Spatial Distribution and Risk Assessment of Soil Heavy Metals in Main Urban Area of Xi’an—A Case Study of Main Urban Area of Xi’an
DOI: 10.12677/AEP.2020.101002, PDF,    国家自然科学基金支持
作者: 孙佳佳, 奥 勇*, 赵永华, 付 泉：长安大学地球科学与资源学院/土地工程学院，陕西 西安；陕西省土地污染整治重点实验室，陕西 西安；刘思琪：陕西省土地工程建设集团有限责任公司，陕西 西安
关键词: 土壤；重金属；空间分布；风险评价；西安市主城区；Soil； Heavy Metals； Spatial Distribution； Risk Assessment； Main Urban Area of Xi’an
摘要: 土壤中重金属污染的评价对食品安全、人类健康、城市土壤质量保户、城市土壤修复以及城市人地关系具有至关重要的意义。本文选择西安市主城区作为研究区，在区内采集180个表层土壤样品，采用反距离权重插值法，分析研究区土壤重金属的空间分布特征，在此基础上，利用单因子污染指数法、内梅罗综合污染指数法、潜在生态风险评价以及地质累积指数法对研究区域土壤中重金属污染状况及潜在风险进行评价。结果表明：研究区土壤中Zn、Ni、Pb、Cu、Cd和Cr重金属的平均含量均未超过国家风险筛选值；空间分布特征表明西安市主城区南部受重金属污染的程度要大于北部。研究区Ni基本处于清洁状态，Zn、Pb、Cu、Cd和Cr出现不同程度的污染；内梅罗综合污染指数平均值为1.43，研究区整体属于轻污染水平；综合生态风险指数平均值为21.3，研究区土壤重金属污染整体上处于轻微生态风险；从生态风险程度的区域差异来看，各城区生态风险指数从大到小依次为：灞桥区、新城区、雁塔区、碑林区、莲湖区、未央区。
Abstract: Evaluation of heavy metal pollution in soil is of great significance for food safety, human health, urban soil quality guarantee, urban soil remediation, and urban human-land relations. This paper selects Xi’an main city as a research area and collects 180 surface soil samples in the area. Soil samples were analyzed by inverse distance weight interpolation method to analyze the spatial distribution characteristics of soil heavy metals in the study area. Based on this, the pollution status and ecological risk of heavy metals in the study area were evaluated by the single factor pollution index method, Nemero comprehensive pollution index method, potential ecological risk assessment and geological accumulation index method. The results showed that the average concentrations of Zn, Ni, Pb, Cu, Cd and Cr in the soil of the Xi’an main urban area were lower than the national risk screening value; the spatial distribution characteristics showed that the southern part of the main urban area of Xi’an was more polluted by heavy metals than the northern part. The Ni in the study area is basically in a clean state, and Zn, Pb, Cu, Cd, and Cr have different degrees of pollution; the average value of the Nemero comprehensive pollution index is 1.43, and the entire study area is at a light pollution level; the average value of the comprehensive ecological risk index is 21.3. The heavy metal pollution of the soil in the study area is at a slight ecological risk as a whole. From the perspective of regional differences in ecological risk, the ecological risk index of each urban area in order is Baqiao District, Xincheng District, Yanta District, Beilin District, Lianhu District, Weiyang District.
文章引用：孙佳佳, 奥勇, 赵永华, 刘思琪, 付泉. 土壤重金属污染空间分布及生态风险评价——以西安市主城区为例[J]. 环境保护前沿, 2020, 10(1): 8-19. https://doi.org/10.12677/AEP.2020.101002

参考文献

[1] Sun, C., Liu, J., Wang, Y., Sun, L. and Yu, H.W. (2013) Multivariate and Geostatistical Analyses of the Spatial Distri-bution and Sources of Heavy Metals in Agricultural Soil in Dehui, Northeast China. Chemosphere, 92, 517-523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[2] 李一蒙, 马建华, 刘德新, 等. 开封城市土壤重金属污染及潜在生态风险评价[J]. 环境科学, 2015(3): 1037-1044.
[3] Kosheleva, N.E., Vlasov, D.V., Korlyakov, I.D. and Kasimov, N.S. (2018) Contamination of Urban Soils with Heavy Metals in Moscow as Affected by Building Development. Science of the Total Environment, 636, 854-863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Nezat, C.A., Hatch, S.A. and Uecker, T. (2017) Heavy Metal Content in Urban Residential and Park Soils: A Case Study in Spokane, Washington, USA. Applied Geochemistry, 78, 186-193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[5] 陈能场, 郑煜基, 何晓峰, 等. “全国土壤污染状况调查公报”探析[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2017, 36(9): 1689-1692.
[6] 陈秀端, 卢新卫, 杨光, 等. 西安市二环内表层土壤重金属污染评价[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2012, 26(11): 81-86.
[7] 陈秀端, 卢新卫, 杨光, 等. 西安市区表层土壤重金属风险评价[J]. 城市环境与城市生态, 2012, 25(2): 41-46.
[8] 张文娟, 王利军, 王丽, 等. 西安市地表灰尘中重金属污染水平与健康风险评价[J]. 土壤通报, 2017, 48(2): 481-487.
[9] 王丽, 王利军, 史兴民, 等. 西安城区地表灰尘中重金属分布、来源及潜在生态风险[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2017, 40(7): 180-187.
[10] 徐雪, 王利军, 卢新卫, 等. 西安市护城河沉积物重金属形态、污染及潜在生态风险[J]. 干旱区研究, 2015, 32(6): 1255-1262.
[11] 姜凤成, 李义连, 杨森, 等. 秦王川盆地土壤重金属来源、分布及污染评价[J]. 中国环境科学, 2018, 38(6): 2243-2252.
[12] 高瑞忠, 张阿龙, 张生, 等. 西北内陆盐湖盆地土壤重金属Cr、Hg、As空间分布特征及潜在生态风险评价[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 39(7): 2532-2544.
[13] GB 15618-2018土壤环境质量标准[S]. 2018.
[14] 姚世厅, 李玉倩, 王德利, 等. 北京万庄金矿区土壤重金属分布特征及污染评价[J]. 中国矿业, 2018, 27(S2): 66-72.
[15] Nemerow, N.L. (1974) Scientific Stream Pollution Analysis.
[16] Muller, G. (1969) Index of Geoaccumulation in sediments of the Rhine River. GeoJournal, 2, 108-118.
[17] Hu, Y., Liu, X., Bai, J., et al. (2013) Assessing Heavy Metal Pollution in the Surface Soils of a Region that Had Undergone Three Decades of Intense Industrialization and Urbanization. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 20, 6150-6159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Hakanson, L. (1980) An Ecological Risk Index for Aquatic Pollution Control. A Sedimentological Approach. Water Research, 14, 975-1001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[19] 何博, 赵慧, 王铁宇, 等. 典型城市化区域土壤重金属污染的空间特征与风险评价[J]. 环境科学, 2019, 40(6): 2869-2876.
[20] 徐争启, 倪师军, 庹先国, 等. 潜在生态危害指数法评价中重金属毒性系数计算[J]. 环境科学与技术, 2008, 31(2): 112-115.
[21] 马建华, 王晓云, 侯千, 等. 某城市幼儿园地表灰尘重金属污染及潜在生态风险[J]. 地理研究, 2011, 30(3): 486-495.
[22] 陈小敏, 朱保虎, 杨文, 等. 密云水库上游金矿区土壤重金属空间分布、来源及污染评价[J]. 环境化学, 2015, 34(12): 2248-2256.
[23] 吕建树, 张祖陆, 刘洋, 等. 日照市土壤重金属来源解析及环境风险评价[J]. 地理学报, 2012, 67(7): 109-122.
[24] Bai, Y. and Wang, Y. (2011) Spatial Variability of Soil Chemical Properties in a Jujube Slope on the Loess Plateau of China. Soil Science, 176, 550-558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] 
[25] 王学松, 秦勇. 利用对数正态分布图解析徐州城市土壤中重金属元素来源和确定地球化学背景值[J]. 地球化学, 2007, 36(1): 98-102.
[26] 张杰, 郭西亚, 曾野, 等. 太湖流域河流沉积物重金属分布及污染评估[J]. 环境科学, 2019, 40(5): 2202-2210.
[27] Lu, A., Wang, J., Qin, X., et al. (2012) Multivariate and Geostatistical Analyses of the Spatial Distribution and Origin of Heavy Metals in the Agricultural Soils in Shunyi, Beijing, China. Science of the Total Environment, 425, 66-74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[28] Xiao, Q., Zong, Y.T. and Lu, S.G. (2015) Assessment of Heavy Metal Pollution and Human Health Risk in Urban Soils of Steel Industrial City (Anshan), Liaoning, Northeast China. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 120, 377-385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]