| Literature DB >> 25830284 |
Hua Wang1, Yiyi Zhou2, Yang Tang3, Mengan Wu4, Yanqing Deng5.
Abstract
A new method, with the non-fully mixed coefficient (NFMC) considered, was put forward to calculate the water environmental carrying capacity (WECC) for huge river-connected lakes, of which the hydrological conditions always vary widely during a year. Poyang Lake, the most typical river-connected lake and the largest freshwater lake in China, was selected as the research area. Based on field investigations and numerical simulation, the monthly pollutant degradation coefficients and non-fully mixed coefficients of different lake regions were determined to explore the WECCs of COD, TN and TP of Poyang Lake in a common water year. It was found that under the hydrological conditions of a common water year the total WECCs of COD, TN and TP in the lake were respectively 181.9 × 104 t, 33.3 × 104 t and 1.86 × 104 t. Due to the varied lake water volume and self-purification ability, an evident temporal fluctuation of WECCs in Poyang Lake was observed. The dry seasons were characterized by a higher NFMCs but lower WECCs owing to the lower water level and degradation ability. Variation coefficients of COD and TN WECC were close to each other, of which the average level was about 58.5%, a little higher than that of TP.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25830284 PMCID: PMC4410203 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120403564
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Location of the research area.
Figure 2Field investigation sites in Poyang Lake.
Pollutant degradation coefficients of Poyang Lake in a common-water year.
| Month | COD | TN | TP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Area | Middle Area | South Area | North Area | Middle Area | South Area | North Area | Middle Area | South Area | |
| Jan. | 0.028 | 0.015 | 0.025 | 0.011 | 0.010 | 0.012 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Feb. | 0.031 | 0.017 | 0.028 | 0.012 | 0.011 | 0.013 | 0.007 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Mar. | 0.063 | 0.052 | 0.066 | 0.038 | 0.029 | 0.045 | 0.018 | 0.014 | 0.020 |
| Apr. | 0.081 | 0.072 | 0.087 | 0.053 | 0.040 | 0.064 | 0.025 | 0.019 | 0.026 |
| May | 0.088 | 0.080 | 0.095 | 0.059 | 0.044 | 0.070 | 0.027 | 0.021 | 0.029 |
| Jun. | 0.096 | 0.088 | 0.105 | 0.066 | 0.048 | 0.078 | 0.030 | 0.023 | 0.032 |
| Jul. | 0.102 | 0.087 | 0.104 | 0.065 | 0.048 | 0.077 | 0.030 | 0.023 | 0.032 |
| Aug. | 0.105 | 0.097 | 0.115 | 0.072 | 0.053 | 0.086 | 0.033 | 0.025 | 0.035 |
| Sep. | 0.100 | 0.092 | 0.109 | 0.068 | 0.050 | 0.082 | 0.031 | 0.024 | 0.033 |
| Oct. | 0.102 | 0.095 | 0.112 | 0.070 | 0.052 | 0.084 | 0.032 | 0.024 | 0.034 |
| Nov. | 0.066 | 0.055 | 0.069 | 0.041 | 0.031 | 0.048 | 0.019 | 0.015 | 0.021 |
| Dec. | 0.029 | 0.016 | 0.026 | 0.012 | 0.011 | 0.013 | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
Figure 3A typical distribution of pollutant in Poyang Lake in a common-water year.
Non-fully mixed coefficients of Poyang Lake in a common-water year.
| Month | COD | TN | TP | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| North Area | Middle Area | South Area | North Area | Middle Area | South Area | North Area | Middle Area | South Area | |
| Jan. | 0.203 | 0.182 | 0.214 | 0.168 | 0.151 | 0.182 | 0.123 | 0.112 | 0.140 |
| Feb. | 0.134 | 0.120 | 0.141 | 0.111 | 0.099 | 0.120 | 0.081 | 0.074 | 0.092 |
| Mar. | 0.131 | 0.117 | 0.137 | 0.108 | 0.097 | 0.117 | 0.079 | 0.072 | 0.090 |
| Apr. | 0.133 | 0.119 | 0.140 | 0.110 | 0.099 | 0.119 | 0.080 | 0.073 | 0.092 |
| May | 0.063 | 0.057 | 0.067 | 0.052 | 0.047 | 0.057 | 0.038 | 0.035 | 0.044 |
| Jun. | 0.062 | 0.055 | 0.065 | 0.051 | 0.046 | 0.055 | 0.037 | 0.034 | 0.043 |
| Jul. | 0.059 | 0.053 | 0.062 | 0.048 | 0.043 | 0.053 | 0.035 | 0.032 | 0.040 |
| Aug. | 0.058 | 0.052 | 0.061 | 0.048 | 0.043 | 0.052 | 0.035 | 0.032 | 0.040 |
| Sep. | 0.065 | 0.058 | 0.068 | 0.054 | 0.048 | 0.058 | 0.039 | 0.036 | 0.045 |
| Oct. | 0.132 | 0.119 | 0.139 | 0.109 | 0.098 | 0.119 | 0.080 | 0.073 | 0.091 |
| Nov. | 0.140 | 0.119 | 0.140 | 0.110 | 0.099 | 0.119 | 0.080 | 0.073 | 0.092 |
| Dec. | 0.162 | 0.146 | 0.171 | 0.134 | 0.120 | 0.146 | 0.098 | 0.090 | 0.112 |
Figure 4Fluctuation of WECC in Poyang Lake in a common-water year.
Figure 5Health Index Processes in Poyang Lake.