Frank R, Sirons G J, Ripley B D
Pestic Monit J. 1979 Dec;13(3):120-7.
OVER THE 10-YEAR period 1969-78, the waters of 237 wells were analyzed because of contamination from herbicide spillage in or near the well, complaints of impaired water flavor, or injury to seedling plants moistened with the well water. Herbicides were identified in 159 wells: 98 had a single herbicide, 46 had two, 12 had three, one had four, and another had five separate herbicides contributing to the contamination. Wells were grouped according to the mode of entry of the contaminant. Entry occurred most commonly as an aerial spray fdrift or in runoff. Serious contaminations were caused by spillage of herbicide concentrates and spray solutions in or around the well. Twenty-four of the contaminated wells were further investigated to determine the persistence of the contaminant and how to remove it. Some wells were decontaminated adequately to allow reuse within nine weeks, others required three years, and yet others had to be abandoned. Particularly persistent contaminants were amitrole, dinoseb, and picloram.
在1969年至1978年的10年期间,对237口水井的水质进行了分析,原因是水井内部或附近的除草剂泄漏造成污染、有人投诉井水味道变差,或者用井水浇灌的幼苗受到损害。在159口井中检测出了除草剂:98口井含有一种除草剂,46口井含有两种,12口井含有三种,一口井含有四种,另一口井含有五种不同的除草剂造成了污染。水井根据污染物的进入方式进行了分组。污染物最常见的进入方式是空中喷洒(漂移)或径流。除草剂浓缩液和喷洒溶液在水井内部或周围泄漏造成了严重污染。对24口受污染的水井进行了进一步调查,以确定污染物的持久性以及如何去除它。一些水井得到了充分的净化,可以在九周内重新使用,另一些则需要三年时间,还有一些不得不被废弃。特别持久的污染物是杀草强、地乐酚和毒莠定。