基于水足迹的粘胶短纤维生产水环境负荷评价
|
摘要
为量化和评价粘胶短纤维生产废水排放造成的水环境影响,分别基于灰水足迹和水劣化足迹理论核算与评价了粘胶短纤维生产过程的水环境负荷。结果表明:制浆阶段的黑液废水和纺练阶段的精练废水的灰水足迹较大,分别为3 375.35m~3/t和4 331.84m~3/t,特征污染物分别为COD和Zn离子;制浆阶段黑液废水的水体富营养化足迹最大,为9.05kg PO_4~(3-)eq/t,约占生产工序水体富营养化足迹的75%;纺练阶段精练废水的水体生态毒性足迹最大,为3.38×10~6 m~3 H_2O eq/t,约占生产工序水体生态毒性足迹的73%;水酸化足迹主要集中于二浴废水和精练废水,分别为34.01kg SO_2eq/t和46.86kg SO_2eq/t。
In order to quantify and evaluate the water environment impact caused by wastewater discharge from viscose staple fiber production,the water environmental load of viscose staple fiber production process was calculated and assessed according to grey water footprint method and water degradation footprint method.The results showed that grey water footprints of the black liquor wastewater from the pulping stage and the refined wastewater from the spinning stage were larger than other processes, which were 3 375.35 m~3/t and 4 331.84 m~3/t respectively.The characteristic pollutants in these two processes were COD and Zn ions respectively.The water eutrophication footprint of the black liquor in the pulping stage was maximum,9.05 kg PO_4~(3-)eq/t,accounting for 75% of water eutrophication footprint in the production process.The refined wastewater in the spinning stage had the largest water ecotoxicity footprint,3.38×10~6 m~3 H_2O eq/t,accounting for 73% of water ecotoxicity footprint in the production process.The water acidification footprint mainly concentrated in the two-bath wastewater and the refined wastewater,which were 34.01 kg SO_2 eq/t and 46.86 kg SO_2 eq/t,respectively.
In order to quantify and evaluate the water environment impact caused by wastewater discharge from viscose staple fiber production,the water environmental load of viscose staple fiber production process was calculated and assessed according to grey water footprint method and water degradation footprint method.The results showed that grey water footprints of the black liquor wastewater from the pulping stage and the refined wastewater from the spinning stage were larger than other processes, which were 3 375.35 m~3/t and 4 331.84 m~3/t respectively.The characteristic pollutants in these two processes were COD and Zn ions respectively.The water eutrophication footprint of the black liquor in the pulping stage was maximum,9.05 kg PO_4~(3-)eq/t,accounting for 75% of water eutrophication footprint in the production process.The refined wastewater in the spinning stage had the largest water ecotoxicity footprint,3.38×10~6 m~3 H_2O eq/t,accounting for 73% of water ecotoxicity footprint in the production process.The water acidification footprint mainly concentrated in the two-bath wastewater and the refined wastewater,which were 34.01 kg SO_2 eq/t and 46.86 kg SO_2 eq/t,respectively.
引文
[1]HOEKSTRA A Y,CHAPAGAIN A K,ALDAYA MM,et al.The Water Footprint Assessment Manual:Setting the Global Standard[R].UK:London,2011.
[2]王来力,丁雪梅,吴雄英.纺织产品的灰水碳足迹核算[J].印染,2013,39(9):41-43.
[3]许璐璐,吴雄英,陈丽竹,等.分阶段链式灰水足迹核算及实例分析[J].印染,2015,41(16):38-41.
[4]许璐璐,吴雄英,陈丽竹,等.纺织服装灰水足迹核算中相关参数的选择[J].印染,2015,41(13):38-42.
[5]白雪,胡梦婷,朱春雁.ISO14046:2014《环境管理水足迹原则、要求与指南》国际标准解读[J].标准科学,2015(9):56-60.
[6]白雪,胡梦婷,朱春雁,等.基于ISO14046的工业产品水足迹评价研究---以电缆为例[J].生态学报,2016,36(22):7260-7266.
[7]BAI X,REN X J,NINA Z K,et al.Comprehensive water footprint assessment of the dairy industry chain based on ISO 14046:A case study in China[J].Resources,Conservation&Recycling,2018,132:369-375.
[8]BAI X,REN X J,NINA Z K,et al.A comparative study of a full value-chain water footprint assessment using two international standards at a large-scale hog farm in China[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2018,176:557-565.
[9]何琬文,李一,王来力.基于ISO 14046的纺织服装产品水足迹核算与评价[J].印染,2017,43(17):52-55.
[10]何琬文,李一,王晓蓬,等.丝绸产品基准水足迹核算与评价[J].现代纺织技术,2018,26(2):41-45.
[11]徐义林.粘胶纤维手册[M].北京:纺织工业出版社,1981.
[12]杨凤祥.粘胶短纤维生产的节电途径和方法[J].现代纺织技术,2017,25(6):36-39.
[13]韩海欣.粘胶纤维工业废水的治理[J].人造纤维,1998,28(5):35-36.
[14]柯伟卿.粘胶纤维生产溶液和废液中二硫化碳和硫化氢的脱吸[J].工业水处理,1987,7(5):15-19.
[15]张庸.粘胶短纤维生产[M].北京:纺织工业出版社,1984.
[16]王来力,吴雄英,丁雪梅,等.棉针织布的工业碳足迹和水足迹实例分析初探[J].印染,2012,38(7):43-46.
[17]李一,王君涛,王来力.牛仔裤工业碳足迹核算与评价示范[J].现代纺织技术,2017,25(6):58-61.
[18]VARELA DIAZ V M,GUARNERA E A,COLTORTI EA.Life-cycle impact assessment:A conceptual framework,key issues,and summary of existing methods[R].United States,1995.
[19]严岩,贾学秀,单鹏,等.基于水劣化足迹的城市发展的水环境效应评价---以北京市为例[J].环境科学学报,2017,37(2):779-785.
[20]HEIMES R J K,HUIJBREGTS M A J,HENDERSON AD,et al.Spatially explicit fate factors of phosphorous emissions to freshwater at the global scale[J].The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,2012,17(5):646-654.
[2]王来力,丁雪梅,吴雄英.纺织产品的灰水碳足迹核算[J].印染,2013,39(9):41-43.
[3]许璐璐,吴雄英,陈丽竹,等.分阶段链式灰水足迹核算及实例分析[J].印染,2015,41(16):38-41.
[4]许璐璐,吴雄英,陈丽竹,等.纺织服装灰水足迹核算中相关参数的选择[J].印染,2015,41(13):38-42.
[5]白雪,胡梦婷,朱春雁.ISO14046:2014《环境管理水足迹原则、要求与指南》国际标准解读[J].标准科学,2015(9):56-60.
[6]白雪,胡梦婷,朱春雁,等.基于ISO14046的工业产品水足迹评价研究---以电缆为例[J].生态学报,2016,36(22):7260-7266.
[7]BAI X,REN X J,NINA Z K,et al.Comprehensive water footprint assessment of the dairy industry chain based on ISO 14046:A case study in China[J].Resources,Conservation&Recycling,2018,132:369-375.
[8]BAI X,REN X J,NINA Z K,et al.A comparative study of a full value-chain water footprint assessment using two international standards at a large-scale hog farm in China[J].Journal of Cleaner Production,2018,176:557-565.
[9]何琬文,李一,王来力.基于ISO 14046的纺织服装产品水足迹核算与评价[J].印染,2017,43(17):52-55.
[10]何琬文,李一,王晓蓬,等.丝绸产品基准水足迹核算与评价[J].现代纺织技术,2018,26(2):41-45.
[11]徐义林.粘胶纤维手册[M].北京:纺织工业出版社,1981.
[12]杨凤祥.粘胶短纤维生产的节电途径和方法[J].现代纺织技术,2017,25(6):36-39.
[13]韩海欣.粘胶纤维工业废水的治理[J].人造纤维,1998,28(5):35-36.
[14]柯伟卿.粘胶纤维生产溶液和废液中二硫化碳和硫化氢的脱吸[J].工业水处理,1987,7(5):15-19.
[15]张庸.粘胶短纤维生产[M].北京:纺织工业出版社,1984.
[16]王来力,吴雄英,丁雪梅,等.棉针织布的工业碳足迹和水足迹实例分析初探[J].印染,2012,38(7):43-46.
[17]李一,王君涛,王来力.牛仔裤工业碳足迹核算与评价示范[J].现代纺织技术,2017,25(6):58-61.
[18]VARELA DIAZ V M,GUARNERA E A,COLTORTI EA.Life-cycle impact assessment:A conceptual framework,key issues,and summary of existing methods[R].United States,1995.
[19]严岩,贾学秀,单鹏,等.基于水劣化足迹的城市发展的水环境效应评价---以北京市为例[J].环境科学学报,2017,37(2):779-785.
[20]HEIMES R J K,HUIJBREGTS M A J,HENDERSON AD,et al.Spatially explicit fate factors of phosphorous emissions to freshwater at the global scale[J].The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment,2012,17(5):646-654.