【作者】 周佳；

【导师】 王金南； 毕军；

【作者基本信息】 南京大学 ， 环境科学与工程， 2020， 博士

【摘要】 当前,我国大气污染防治形势依然十分严峻。2018年全国338个地级及以上城市中,只有121个城市环境空气质量达标（即六项污染物浓度均达标,达标比例为36%）,依然有190个城市PM_2.5浓度超标（超标率为56%）,治理PM_2.5污染依然任重道远。《全国环境统计公报》显示,2015年全国83.73%SO₂、63.77%NO_x和80.14%烟粉尘排放量是由固定点源中的工业部门排放。现在我国主要通过以排污许可制为核心的固定源环境管理制度体系来科学合理地管理固定源的污染物排放量。排污许可制度通过核定企业污染物许可排放量、监管污染物实际排放量来挂钩污染物浓度,进而直接关联生态环境质量改善效果。然而,排污许可制度改革至今,依然无法实现与生态环境质量改善的挂钩,无法定量评估当前的企业污染物许可排放量分配方法在效果、效率、公平等方面的真实价值,无法较好地支撑排污许可制度的进一步改革和总量控制制度的改革。基于上述背景和管理需求,本研究梳理总结了分配领域与评估领域的研究进展和不足,从而确定了科学问题,即如何构建点源尺度大气污染物许可排放量分配及综合评估体系。第一,针对科学问题中的分配问题,本研究创新性地构建了基于排放标准法（M1）、排放标准+城市传输法（M2）、环境容量法（M3）的点源尺度（企业排放口）大气污染物许可排放量分配模型。本研究基于城市大气污染物排放清单（M0）的企业（排放口）大气污染物排放现状,结合当前排污许可制度分配方法实践和城市大气污染物传输矩阵、城市大气污染物环境容量等最新研究成果,以及结合通过工业行业《排污许可证申请与核发技术规范》筛选出来的工业锅炉、水泥、玻璃、焦化、钢铁等5个工业行业,构建了3种企业（排放口）大气污染物许可排放量分配模型。第二,针对科学问题中的评估问题,本研究创新地整合构建了包括效果评估（环境质量贡献度评估）、效率评估（费用效益评估）、公平评估（公平性评估）、3E综合评估在内的分配结果综合评估体系。在这一部分,首先,以基础排放清单为底部清单,分别加上了基于M0与M1、M2、M3分配结果的点源排放清单,以北京及周边城市为核心模拟区域,本研究构建了三层嵌套网格WRF-CMAQ模型,来开展分配结果效果评估。其次,基于效果评估中的M1、M2、M3与M0的污染物模拟浓度差值,以及基于M1、M2、M3与M0的污染物排放量差值,结合健康终端、暴露人口、反应系数、货币化参数,本研究分别构建了基于环境风险评估和货币化评估的健康效益评估模型,以及污染物减排量货币化评估模型,来开展分配结果效率评估。然后,基于M0、M1、M2、M3的城市5工业行业的污染物排放量,分别加上M0城市其他工业行业的污染物排放量,并结合北京及周边城市的工业GDP、工业利润、工业增加值、工业就业人口等经济社会数据,本研究构建了基于环境基尼系数（EGC）法和绿色贡献系数（GCC）法的公平性评估模型,来开展分配结果公平评估。最后,基于上述的效果、效率、公平评估结果,按照由专家建议构建了污染物浓度、净效益、EGC、GCC等评估结果对应的分数表,并根据专家建议的效果、效率、公平等维度的权重系数,创新性地构建了基于环境质量贡献度（AQA）、费用效益（CA）、公平性（EA）的单项评估评分模型以及基于3E综合评估的综合评估评分模型,来开展分配结果综合评估。本研究有5个主要结果:（a）在许可排放量分配结果方面,M1、M2、M3的北京及周边城市SO₂许可排放量分别是7.90、4.92、22.27万t/a,其NO₂许可排放量分别是21.91、13.56、15.34万t/a,其一次PM_2.5许可排放量分别是3.54、2.22、7.82万t/a。（b）在效果评估结果方面,M1、M2、M3的北京及周边城市SO₂模拟浓度分别是30.53、29.83、34.902)/8)³,其NO₂模拟浓度分别是49.98、49.43、49.502)/8)³,其PM_2.5模拟浓度分别是62.15、61.44、63.912)/8)³。（c）在效率评估结果方面,M1、M2、M3的北京及周边城市健康效益分别为196.05、220.41、102.24亿元,其成本分别为4.85、8.17、5.09亿元,其净效益分别为191.20、212.23、97.15亿元。（d）在公平评估结果方面,M1、M2、M3的基于经济社会数据与SO₂排放量的EGC分别为0.4530、0.4573、0.4783,其与NO_x排放量的EGC分别为0.4598、0.4696、0.4642,其与一次PM_2.5排放量的EGC分别为0.3861、0.4319、0.4479;M1、M2、M3的基于经济社会数据与SO₂、NO_x、一次PM_2.5的GCC中,北京的均高于1.5,唐山的均低于0.5,其他城市的高于或低于1.0。（e）在综合评估结果方面,M1、M2、M3的3E综合评估分数分别是56.91、57.94、55.74。其中,M1、M2、M3的AQA评估分数分别是47.54、47.97、45.97,其CA评估分数分别是76.66、76.91、68.68,其EA评估分数分别是49.66、52.27、55.82。本研究有4个主要结论:（1）城市大气污染物传输矩阵、城市大气污染物环境容量能被引入点源尺度分配方法,使分配方法能够与生态环境质量改善挂钩。（2）分配结果的效果评估、效率评估、公平评估能很好地集成为分配结果3E综合评估,从而使多种分配方法能在单项维度和综合维度分别进行比较。（3）包含效果评估、效率评估、公平评估、3E综合评估在内的综合评估体系能够定量评估分配方法在效果（环境质量贡献度）、效率（费用效益）、公平（公平性）、3E综合等不同维度的表现。（4）从不同分配方法3E综合评估分数（M2>M1>M3）分析,说明在当前大气污染物排放量下,标准+传输法>排放标准法>环境容量法。其中,在不同分配方法AQA评估分数比较方面,M2>M1>M3。在不同分配方法的CA评估分数比较方面,M2>M1>M3。在不同分配方法EA评估分数比较方面,M3>M2>M1。本研究的成果表明,本研究构建的分配及综合评估体系推动我国污染物许可排放量分配方法及其评估技术的发展,为排污许可、总量控制等研究领域提供研究思路、技术、方法方面的参考。此外,本研究为我国总量控制和排污许可的点源污染物许可排放量的科学合理分配提供技术支撑,支撑排污许可制度的进一步改革和总量控制制度的改革。更多还原

【Abstract】 At present,the situation of prevention and control of air pollution in China is still very serious.In 2018,among 338 cities in China,only 121 cities met the air quality standard（i.e.the concentration of six pollutants met the standard,accounting for 36%）,190 cities still exceeded the air quality standard of PM_2.5（the excess rate is 56%）,and there is still a long way to go to prevent and control the PM_2.5 pollution.According to China Environmental Statistics Bulletin,the industrial department of the fixed point source were discharged 83.73%SO₂,63.77%NO_x and 80.14%smoke dust emissions in 2015.Now,China mainly through emission permit system to manage the emissions of fixed point source scientifically and reasonably.The pollutant concentration is effected to emission permit system by allocating the pollutant emission permit to enterprises and supervising the actual emission of pollutant,and then related to the improvement of ecological environment quality.Since the reform in 2016,emission permit system cannot be linked with the improvement of the ecological environment quality,and cannot quantitatively estimate the real value of the current allocation method of emission permit in terms of effectiveness assessment,efficiency assessment,and equity assessment,and cannot support the further reform of emission permit system and the reform of total emission control system.Based on the above background and management needs,this study summarizes the research progress and shortcomings in the field of allocation and assessment,and then determines the scientific question,that is,how to construct the allocation and integrated assessment system of air pollutant emission at point source scale.Firstly,aiming at the allocation problem in scientific question,this study creatively constructs air pollutant emission allocation model at enterprises（discharge outlets）scale based on Emission Standard Method（M1）,Emission Standard+Urban Transmission Method（M2）,Environmental Capacity Method（M3）.Based on the current situation of air pollutant emission of enterprises（discharge outlets）in Urban Emission Inventory（M0）,combined with the current practice of emission permit system and allocation method,the transmission matrix and the environmental capacity of urban air pollutant,and combined with"technical specification for application and issuance of emission permit"of the industry of the industrial boiler,cement,glass,coking,steel,this study constructs the allocation model of air pollutant emission permit at enterprises（discharge outlets）scale based on M1,M2 and M3,respectively.Secondly,in view of the assessment problem of scientific question,this study innovatively constructs an integrated assessment system of allocation results,including Effectiveness Assessment（Air Quality Assessment,AQA）,Efficiency Assessment（Cost-benefit Assessment,CA）,Equity Assessment（EA）,and 3E Integrated Assessment.In this part,First of all,based on regional emission inventory as the bottom inventory,the point source emission inventories based on M0 and M1,M2 and M3 are added respectively.Taking Beijing and its surrounding cities as the core simulation area,this study constructs a three-layer nested grid WRF-CMAQ to assess the allocation results.The next,based on the simulated concentration difference of PM_2.5 between M1,M2,M3 and M0,and based on the emission difference of SO₂,NO_x,primary PM_2.5between M1,M2,M3 and M0,combined with the health endpoint,exposed population,response coefficient and monetization parameter,this study constructs the health benefit assessment model based on environmental risk assessment and monetization assessment,and the cost assessment model of pollutant emission reduction to carry out the efficiency assessment of allocation results.And then,based on the SO₂,NO_x,primary PM_2.5 emissions of M0,M1,M2 and M3,add the emissions of other industries in M0 except for the 5 industries respectively,combined with the industrial GDP,industrial profits,industrial added value,industrial employment population of Beijing and its surrounding cities,this study constructs the equity assessment model based on Environmental Gini Coefficient（EGC）and Green Contribution Coefficient（GCC）to carry out the equity assessment of allocation results.Finally,based on the above assessment results of effectiveness,efficiency and equity,according to corresponding score of pollutant concentration,net benefit,EGC and GCC,and the weight coefficient by the experts,this study innovatively constructs a single assessment model based on AQA,CA and EA,and an integrated assessment model based on 3E integrated assessment to carry out the integrated assessment of allocation results.There are five main results in this study:（a）in terms of allowable emission allocation results,the allowable emissions of SO₂ of M1,M2,M3 in Beijing and its surrounding cities are 7.90,4.92 and 22.27 ten thousand t/a,respectively.The allowable emissions of NO_x are 21.91,13.56 and 15.34 ten thousand t/a,respectively.The allowable emissions of primary PM_2.5 are 3.54,2.22 and 7.82 ten thousand t/a,respectively.（b）In terms of effectiveness assessment results,the simulated concentrations of SO₂ of M1,M2 and M3 in Beijing and its surrounding cities are 30.53,29.83 and 34.902)/8)³,respectively.The simulated concentrations of NO₂ are 49.98,49.43 and 49.502)/8)³,respectively.The simulated concentrations of PM_2.5 are 62.15,61.44 and 63.912)/8)³,respectively.（c）In terms of efficiency assessment results,the health benefits of M1,M2 and M3 in Beijing and its surrounding cities are 19.605,22.041 and 10.224 billion yuan,respectively.The costs are 0.485,0.817 and 0.509 billion yuan,respectively.The net benefits are 19.120,21.223 and 9.715 billion yuan,respectively.（d）In terms of equity assessment results,based on economic and social data and SO₂ emission,the EGC of M1,M2 and M3 are 0.4530,0.4573 and 0.4783,respectively.Based on economic and social data and NO_x emission,the EGC of M1,M2 and M3 are0.4598,0.4696 and 0.4642,respectively.Based on economic and social data and primary PM_2.5 emission,the EGC of M1,M2 and M3 are 0.3861,0.4319 and 0.4479,respectively.Among the GCC of M1,M2 and M3 based on the economic and social data and pollutants emission,those in Beijing are higher than 1.5,those in Tangshan are lower than 0.5,and those in other cities are higher or lower than 1.0.（e）In terms of 3E integrated assessment results,the 3E integrated assessment scores of M1,M2 and M3 were 56.91,57.94 and 55.74,respectively.The scores of AQA based on M1,M2 and M3 are 47.54,47.97 and 45.97,respectively.The scores of CA based on M1,M2 and M3 were 76.66,76.91 and 68.68,respectively.The scores of EA based on M1,M2 and M3 were 49.66,52.27 and 55.82,respectively.There are four main conclusions in this study:（1）the transmission matrix and environmental capacity of urban air pollutant can be drawn into the allocation method at the point source scale,so that the allocation method can be linked with the improvement of ecological environment quality.（2）The effectiveness assessment,efficiency assessment and equity assessment of allocation results can be well integrated into the 3E integrated assessment,so that multiple allocation methods can be compared in single aspect and integrated aspect.（3）The integrated assessment system including effectiveness assessment,efficiency assessment,equity assessment and 3E integrated assessment can quantitatively assess the performance of allocation method in different aspects such as effectiveness（environmental quality）,efficiency（cost-benefit）,and equity,integrated.（4）The comparison of scores of 3E integrated assessment（M2>M1>M3）based on different allocation methods shows that under the current air pollutant emissions,the emission standard+urban transmission method>the emission standard method>the environmental capacity method.Among them,in the comparison of scores of AQA based on different allocation methods,M2>M1>M3.In the comparison of scores of CA based on different allocation methods,M2>M1>M3.In the comparison of scores of EA based on different allocation methods,M3>M2>M1.This study shows that the system of allocation method and integrated assessment promotes the development of the allocation method and assessment technology of emission permit in China,and provides research ideas,technologies and methods in the fields of emission permit,total emission control.In addition,this study provides technical support for the scientific and reasonable allocation of point source of emission permit and total emission control in China,and supports the further reform of emission permit system and the reform of total emission control system.更多还原