不同熄焦方式的焦化废水对水环境影响分析何玉芹

346200912　　()　(ScienceandTechnology)Vol.34　No.6　Dec.2009:2009-05-25.:(1955-),,,.:.E-mail:[e-mail]:10.3969/j.issn.1007-855x.2009.06.017何玉芹1,易玉敏2(1.,650032;2.,650032):近几年焦化产业在云南省得到飞速的发展,同时也带来了较为突出的环境问题.生产中熄焦方式的不同对水环境影响不尽一致,本文以某焦化项目为例对湿熄焦和干熄焦两种熄焦方式的焦化废水对水环境的影响进行了对比分析,发现干熄焦时排放的焦化废水,将使水体中COD、挥发酚、氰化物、氨氮、石油类和硫化物的占标率提高3.7、8、4.5、70.2、5.4和39倍,干熄焦排放的焦化废水对水环境影响较大.:焦化;湿熄焦;干熄焦;水环境影响:X824:A:1007-855X(2009)06-0082-04ComparisonofDifferentCokeQuenchingMethodsonWaterEnvironmentHEYu-qing1,YIYu-min2(1.YunnanEnvironmentalMonitoringCenter,Kunming650032,China;2.EnvironmentalInvestigationandExaminationCenterforConstrutionProjectsofYunnanProvince,Kunming650032,China)Abstract:ThecokingindustryhasdeveloppedremarkablyinYunanprovinceinrecentyears,however,italsobroughtrelativelyseriousevironmentproblem.Inproduction,theinfluencesofdifferentcokequenchingmethodsonenvironmentaredifferent.Asforitsinfluenceonwater,wetquenchingcoulddecreasethedischargeofwaterpollutantgreatly.Inthemeanwhile,ithaslessinfluenceonwaterenvironment.TakeacokingenterprisesinYun-nanprovinceforexample,thepullutantdischargedbydryquenchingwouldchangethefunctionoftherecipitentwaterfromthecaseⅢwatertotheⅣ,andtheCOD、volativephenol、cyanide、ammonianitrogen、petroleum、sulfidewillincrease3.7、8、4.5、70.2、5.4、39timesrespectively.Therefore,dryquenchingisnotavailableinthisproject.Keywords:coking;wetquenching;dryquenching;waterenvironmentimpact0、、、、、,、..,,20042008,1.,.,.,,,[1,2].、[3,4],,80%[5],M40M10[6].,2005《》[7].,.,.,.98t/a,、,.11.1　　、、、、.,..,.,,、、.,1.1　Tab.1　Theamountandqualityofwastewaterunderdifferentsituation/(m3·h-1)/(mg·L-1)COD144.875.380.040.044.141.570.17157.373.420.040.043.811.440.1665.550-----78.050-----1.2,《》(GB3838-2002)Ⅲ.2,,Ⅲ,25%.2　Tab.2　ThewatermonitoringresultsoftherecipientwaterCOD/(mg·L-1)50.0010.0020.010.0050.01Ⅲ/(mg·L-1)200.0050.210.050.2/%252011105,0.2m3/s,0.3m/s;0.7m3/s,0.35m/s.1000m.22.1　　,COD、、,-(Streetr-Phelps,S-P),1[8].COD、、0.05d-1、0.06d-1、0.06d-10.01d-1.C=C0exp(-K1x86400u)(1)836　　　　　　　　　,:,,2.C=(Cp·Qp+ch·Qh)/(Qp+Qh)(2):C———,mg/L;C0———,mg/L;K1———,d-1;x———,m;u———,m/s;Cp———,mg/L;Qp———,m3/s;Ch———,mg/L;Qh———,m3/s.2.2,,3.,COD2.3,、、、.3　Tab.3　ThepollutantemissionunderdifferentsituationCOD/(kg·h-1)/(kg·h-1)/(kg·h-1)/(kg·h-1)/(kg·h-1)/(kg·h-1)7.8420.0060.0060.5990.2270.0258.4720.0060.0060.5990.2270.0253.275-----3.900-----2.3,,.,8:1;2;3;4;5;6;7;8.COD、、、、.1-6,,《》(GB3838-2002)Ⅲ.26,,Ⅲ,Ⅲ1.61.95,43.9.,,,.COD、、84　　　　　()　　　　　　　　　　34,,,COD、、1.7、6.5、11.735.75.,.,,,.,,,,[2],.3、、,.,COD、、、、,,Ⅲ,ⅢⅣ.,.(下转第91页)856　　　　　　　　　,:[2],.[J].,2004,25(6):163-166.[3],.[J].,2008(1):7-11.[4],.[J].,2008,31(6):150-153.[5],,.[M].:,2004.[6]PartidárioMR.ElementsofStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment[J].EnvironmentalImpactAssessmentReview,2000,20:647-663.[7]OECD.ApplyingStrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentGoodPracticeGuidanceforDevelopmentCo-Operation.DACGuide-linesandReferenceSeries[R].2006.[8]BinaO.Re-conceptualisingStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment:TheoreticalOverrviewandCaseStudyfromChile[R].Phdthesis,UniveristyofCambridge,UK,2003.[9]RikiTherivel.StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentinAction[M].EarthscanPubns.Ltd,2004.[10]IAIA.StrategicEnvironmentalAssessment:PerformanceCriteria[J/OL].SpecialPublicationSeriesNo.1,InternationalAs-sociationforImpactAssessment(),2002.[11].[J].,2008,(10):181-185.[12].[M].,,2006.[13],.[J].,2005(4):50-54.[14],.[J].,2007(10):3-7.[15]RikiTherivel.StrategicEnvironmentalAssessmentinAction[M].EarthscanPubns.Ltd,2004.[16].[M].:,1990.[17].[J].,2007(4):12-15.[18].[J].,2007(6):36-41.[19].[J].,2007(4):9-15.[20].　[J].,2008,32(1):9-16.[21],,.[J].·,2003,13(2):96-100.[22].[J].,2004,28(2):52-56.[23],,,.[J].,2006(4):29-34.[24],.[J].,2006(6):63-66.[25],.[J].(),2008,33(3):87-91.[26].[J].,2008(4):19-24.[27],,.[J].,2008,28(6):1249-1255.[28].[J].(),2008,42(3):477-450.(上接第85页):[1],.[J].,2004,35(6):41-43.[2],.[J].,2004,22(1):61-62.[3],.[J].,2002,48(1):3-4,12.[4].———[J].,2004(3):43-46.[5],,.[J].,2005,27():124-125.[6].(2005)[Z].2005.12.2.[7]HJ/T2.3-93,[S].916　　　　　　　　　,,　:———