高级检索
    罗赟, 何玲玲, 刘颜. 2019年绵阳市生活饮用水水质监测结果分析[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2020, 10(5): 454-459. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2020.05.008
    引用本文: 罗赟, 何玲玲, 刘颜. 2019年绵阳市生活饮用水水质监测结果分析[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2020, 10(5): 454-459. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2020.05.008
    shu
    LUO Yun, HE Lingling, LIU Yan. Monitoring Results Analysis for Drinking Water Quality in Mianyang, Sichuan Province, China, 2019[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2020, 10(5): 454-459. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2020.05.008
    Citation: LUO Yun, HE Lingling, LIU Yan. Monitoring Results Analysis for Drinking Water Quality in Mianyang, Sichuan Province, China, 2019[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2020, 10(5): 454-459. DOI: 10.13421/j.cnki.hjwsxzz.2020.05.008
    shu

    2019年绵阳市生活饮用水水质监测结果分析

    Monitoring Results Analysis for Drinking Water Quality in Mianyang, Sichuan Province, China, 2019

      摘要
    • 摘要:
      目的 分析2019年绵阳市生活饮用水卫生状况，探讨影响水质卫生的关键指标，发现不合格监测指标，保障饮水安全。
      方法 对1 346份水样按《生活饮用水标准检验方法》(GB/T 5750-2006)进行微生物、毒理学、感官性状和一般化学指标等检测，结果按《生活饮用水卫生标准》(GB 5749-2006)限值进行评价。
      结果 监测水样的水源类型以江河为主，水处理方式以完全处理为主，城市消毒设施配备和使用规范性优于农村。检测的1 346份水样合格率为70.36%(947/1 346)。城市与农村生活饮用水合格率分别为96.19%(202/210)和65.58%(745/1 136)，差异有统计学意义(χ2=79.62，P < 0.05)。农村饮用水完全处理、仅沉淀过滤、仅消毒和未处理4种处理方式的水样合格率分别为73.02%(552/756)、0%(0/36)、62.37%(184/295)和18.37%(9/49)，不同处理方式水样合格率差异有统计学意义(χ2=136.84，P < 0.05)；农村供水大型工程和小型工程水样合格率分别为81.27%(217/267)和60.76%(528/869)，差异有统计学意义(χ2=38.08，P < 0.05)；农村饮水总大肠菌群、大肠埃希氏菌、游离氯和二氧化氯合格率较低。
      结论 绵阳市城市饮用水合格率明显优于农村，微生物和消毒指标是饮用水监测的关键指标，加强水源保护和消毒管理是提升水质合格率的重要措施。

       

      Abstract:
      Objective To analyze the hygienic status of domestic drinking water in Mianyang, Sichuan province, China, in 2019, to investigate the key indicators affecting the water hygiene, and to identify the unqualified indicators to ensure the safety of drinking water.
      Methods A total of 1 346 samples of drinking water were examined in terms of microbes, toxicological indicators, sensory properties, and general chemical indicators, etc., according to the Standard Examination Method for Drinking Water (GB/T 5750-2006).The result were evaluated according to the Standards for Drinking Water Quality (GB 5749-2006).
      Results The main source of the monitored water samples was river water, and the main water treatment method was complete treatment.The equipment and the standard operation for disinfection facilities in urban areas were better than those in rural areas. The qualified rate of the 1 346 water samples was 70.36%(947/1 346).The qualified rate was 96.19% (202/210) in urban areas and 65.58%(745/1 136) in rural areas, with a significant difference between them(χ2=79.62, P < 0.05). The qualified rates of water samples treated completely, treated by sedimentation filtration alone, disinfected alone, and untreated were 73.02%(552/756), 0%(0/36), 62.37%(184/295), and 18.37%(9/49), respectively, with a significant difference among different treatment method (χ2=136.84, P < 0.05).The qualified rates of water samples from large and small rural centralized water supply projects were 81.27%(217/267) and 60.76%(528/869), respectively, with a significant difference between them(χ2=38.08, P < 0.05).The qualified rates in terms of total coliform, Escherichia coli, free chlorine, and chlorine dioxide were relatively low in rural drinking water.
      Conclusion The qualified rate of drinking water in urban areas is significantly higher than that in rural areas in Mianyang. Microbes and disinfection indices were the key indicators of drinking water monitoring. Strengthening water source protection and disinfection management is an important measure to improve the qualified rate of water quality.

       

      • HTML全文
      • 参考文献(14)
      • 相关文章
      • 施引文献
    • 资源附件(0)

    /

    返回文章
    返回