Wang Hong-na, He Jiang-tao, Ma Wen-jie, Xu Zhen
Huan Jing Ke Xue. 2015 Jan;36(1):186-93.
Groundwater contamination risk assessment has important meaning to groundwater contamination prevention planning and groundwater exploitation potentiality. Recently, UN assessment system and WP assessment system have become the focuses of international research. In both systems, the assessment framework and indices were drawn from five aspects: intrinsic vulnerability, aquifer storage, groundwater quality, groundwater resource protection zone and contamination load. But, the five factors were built up in different ways. In order to expound the difference between the UN and WP assessment systems, and explain the main reasons, the UN and WP assessment systems were applied to Beijing Plain, China. The maps constructed from the UN and WP risk assessment systems were compared. The results showed that both kinds of groundwater contamination risk assessment maps were in accordance with the actual conditions and were similar in spatial distribution trends. However, there was quite significant different in the coverage area at the same level. It also revealed that during the system construction process, the structural hierarchy, relevant overlaying principles and classification method might have effects on the groundwater contamination risk assessment map. UN assessment system and WP assessment system were both suitable for groundwater contamination risk assessment of the plain, however, their emphasis was different.
地下水污染风险评估对于地下水污染防治规划和地下水开采潜力具有重要意义。近年来，联合国评估系统和WP评估系统已成为国际研究的焦点。在这两个系统中，评估框架和指标均从五个方面得出：固有脆弱性、含水层储存、地下水质量、地下水资源保护区和污染负荷。但是，这五个因素的构建方式有所不同。为了阐述联合国评估系统和WP评估系统之间的差异，并解释主要原因，将联合国评估系统和WP评估系统应用于中国北京平原。对由联合国和WP风险评估系统构建的地图进行了比较。结果表明，两种地下水污染风险评估地图均符合实际情况，且空间分布趋势相似。然而，在相同级别上，覆盖区域存在相当显著的差异。这也表明，在系统构建过程中，结构层次、相关叠加原则和分类方法可能会对地下水污染风险评估地图产生影响。联合国评估系统和WP评估系统均适用于平原地区的地下水污染风险评估，然而，它们的侧重点有所不同。
