【作者】 黄玉虎； 田刚； 樊守彬； 秦建平； 任立民； 李钢；

【Author】 HUANG Yu-hu, TIAN Gang, FAN Shou-bin, QIN Jian-ping, REN Li-min, LI Gang (Beijing Municipal Research Institute of Environmental Protection, Beijing 100037, China)

【机构】 北京市环境保护科学研究院；

【摘要】 本文建立了2种道路扬尘评估方法,即降尘法和粉土负荷法,分别以减去背景降尘的道路自身降尘(ΔDFr)和道路扬尘排放强度(EIr)作为评估指标。通过对2种方法评估结果的比较与分析,发现:①ΔDFr和EIr有很好的正相关关系,相关系数R2为0.708;②ΔDFr能同时反映车辆激发扬尘和路面风蚀扬尘,而EIr只反映车辆激发扬尘;③粉土负荷大小不代表评估道路扬尘污染程度,但适用于定量评价道路清扫保洁质量。降尘法相比粉土负荷法实施安全、简单易行、误差小,但不能满足快速评估要求,而且评估成本略高。2种方法都表明《奥运保障措施》控制道路扬尘的效果明显,奥运期间与2007年同期相比,快速路、主干路、次干路和支路ΔDFr分别下降65%、55%、65%和84%。更多还原

【Abstract】 In this article, we establish two evaluation methods for road fugitive dust, which are method of dust fall and method of silt loading. The two methods take road relative dust fall subtracting background dust fall (ΔDFr) and emission intensity of road fugitive dust (EIr) respectively as evaluation index. Three conclusions have been drawn through comparison and analysis of these two evaluation methods as follows. Firstly, ΔDFr and EIr are positively interrelated, and the correlation coefficient R2 is 0.708. Secondly, ΔDFr can reflect fugitive dust arisen by vehicles and fugitive dust generated by wind erosion of road surface at the same time, while, EIr can only reflect fugitive dust aroused by vehicles. Thirdly, the quantity of silt loading doesn’t reflect the pollution degree of road fugitive dust, but can be applied to quantitatively evaluate the sanitation quality of city road sweeping and cleaning. Compared with method of silt loading, method of dust fall is safer and easier to practice with little error, but it cannot satisfy the demand of quick evaluation with a little bit higher evaluation cost. The two methods indicated Guaranteeing Measures of the Olympic Games have taken obvious effect for controlling road fugitive dust. Comparing the period of the Olympic Games and the same period of the year 2007, ΔDFr on freeway, major arterial, minor arterial and collector were lowered by 65%, 55%, 65% and 84% respectively.更多还原