黄久红, 丁震. 2010-2012年泰州市主城区生活饮用水水质检测结果分析[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2014, 4(5): 483-486.
    引用本文: 黄久红, 丁震. 2010-2012年泰州市主城区生活饮用水水质检测结果分析[J]. 环境卫生学杂志, 2014, 4(5): 483-486.
    Huang Jiuhong, Ding Zhen. Analysis on Quality of Drinking Water in Main Urban Districts of Taizhou in 2010-2012[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2014, 4(5): 483-486.
    Citation: Huang Jiuhong, Ding Zhen. Analysis on Quality of Drinking Water in Main Urban Districts of Taizhou in 2010-2012[J]. Journal of Environmental Hygiene, 2014, 4(5): 483-486.

    2010-2012年泰州市主城区生活饮用水水质检测结果分析

    Analysis on Quality of Drinking Water in Main Urban Districts of Taizhou in 2010-2012

    • 摘要:
      目的 了解泰州市生活饮用水卫生质量, 预防控制介水传染病。
      方法 依据《泰州市城市生活饮用水监测方案》设置监测点、采样频率, 依据《生活饮用水标准检验法》(GB/T 5750-2006) 对水样进行检测。出厂水、管网末梢水、二次供水均依据《生活饮用水水质卫生标准》(GB 5749-2006) 进行评价。
      结果 2010-2012年, 市政供水出厂水、管网末梢水水质合格率分别为100.00%(24/24)、95.61%(566/592);乡镇水厂供水出厂水、管网末梢水水质合格率分别为90.91%(40/44)、81.82%(36/44);二次供水水质合格率为92.50%(111/120)。市政供水出厂水、管网末梢水水质合格率差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。乡镇水厂供水出厂水、管网末梢水水质合格率差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。市政供水出厂水、乡镇水厂供水出厂水水质合格率差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。市政供水管网末梢水、乡镇水厂供水管网末梢水水质合格率差异有统计学意义(P < 0.05)。市政供水管网末梢水、二次供水水质合格率差异无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。出厂水不合格指标为游离氯、氨氮; 管网末梢水不合格指标为菌落总数、游离氯、氨氮、铁; 二次供水不合格指标为菌落总数、游离氯、铁。
      结论 泰州市主城区生活饮用水水质整体合格率较高, 部分指标仍不合格, 应进一步加强生活饮用水的卫生监督、检测和规范。

       

      Abstract:
      Objectives To analyze the quality of drinking water in main urban districts of Taizhou and to prevent and control water-borne infectious diseases.
      Methods The collection of water samples was based on the scheme of drinking water surveillance in Taizhou downtown; samples were tested according to the Standard Examination Methods for Drinking Water (GB/T 5750-2006), and the test Results were evaluated by the standards for drinking water quality (GB 5749-2006).
      Results The qualification rates of finished water from water plants and tap water in downtown were 100.00% (24/24) and 95.61% (566/592) in 2010-2012;on the contrary, those in townships were 90.91% (40/44) and 81.82% (36/44), respectively.The qualification rate in secondary water supplies was 92.50% (111/120).The qualification rates of finished water from water plants in downtown and township presented no statistical difference (P > 0.05), but the qualification rates of tap water in downtown and townships showed statistical difference (P < 0.05).Additionally, the qualification rates of tap water in downtown and from secondary water supplies showed no statistical difference (P > 0.05).The unqualified indexes for finished water were free chlorine and ammonia nitrogen, for tap water were the total counts of bacteria, free chlorine, ammonia nitrogen and iron, and for secondary water supplies were the total counts of bacteria, free chlorine and iron.
      Conclusion The quality of drinking water in downtown were high, but some indexes did not reach the corresponding criteria, further enforcement on supervision and administration is needed.

       

    /

    返回文章
    返回