基于能值生态足迹模型的榆林市水资源可持续利用研究

doi:10.13866/j.azr.2022.04.08

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为研究半干旱气候区水资源的开发利用情况,以榆林市为例,根据水资源统计数据,运用能值生态足迹模型对榆林市2000—2019年水生态足迹、水生态承载力等进行综合评价,得出榆林市水资源开发利用变化特征,并与传统水生态足迹模型进行对比。结果表明：（1） 2000—2019年,榆林市水资源能值生态足迹年均值1.17 hm²·人^-1,水资源能值生态承载力年均值0.49 hm²·人^-1,生态赤字明显,且呈增加趋势;（2）榆林市水资源生态压力指数年均值2.43,处于亚安全状态;（3）水资源生态经济协调指数年均值1.31,相对比较稳定;传统水资源生态足迹中万元GDP水足迹年均值从0.97 hm²·（10⁴元）^-1下降到为0.04 hm²·（10⁴元）^-1,表明水资源利用效率在逐步提高。总体上看,榆林市水资源生态安全形势依然严峻,加大农业、工业节水力度,创新污水处理技术,倡导生活节水,提高水资源利用综合效率是促进榆林市水资源可持续发展的主要途径。

关键词: 能值分析, 水资源生态足迹, 水资源生态承载力, 可持续利用, 榆林市

Abstract:

Yulin City was selected as the research area to study the development and utilization of water resources in a semi-arid climate area based on water resource statistics. This paper aimed to comprehensively evaluate the water ecological footprint and water ecological carrying capacity of Yulin City from 2000 to 2019 by using the emergy ecological footprint model, to obtain the change characteristics of water resource development and utilization in Yulin City, and to compare such characteristics with those of the traditional water ecological footprint model. Results show that (1) From 2000 to 2019, the annual average value of water resource emergy ecological footprint is 1.17 hm²·cap^-1; the annual average value of water resource emergy ecological carrying capacity is 0.49 hm²·cap^-1, and the ecological deficit of water resources in Yulin is evident and increasing. (2) In addition, the annual average value of Yulin’s water resource ecological pressure is 2.43, and it is in a semi-safe state all year round. (3) The annual average value of the water resource economic coordination index is 1.31, and the socio-economic coordination of the water resource ecosystem is relatively stable. In the traditional ecological footprint of water resources, the annual average of water footprint per 10000 yuan GDP decreased from 0.97 hm² per 10000 yuan to 0.04 hm² per 10000 yuan, indicating that the utilization efficiency of water resources is gradually improving. The state of water resource ecological security in Yulin City is relatively severe. Therefore, strengthening water conservation in agriculture and industry, innovating sewage treatment technology, advocating domestic water saving, and comprehensively improving the utilization efficiency of water resources are necessary to promote the sustainable development of water resources in Yulin City

Key words: emergy analysis, water resources ecological footprint, water resources ecological carrying capacity, sustainable utilization, Yulin City

李晓格,张颖,单永娟. 基于能值生态足迹模型的榆林市水资源可持续利用研究[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(4): 1066-1075.

LI Xiaoge,ZHANG Ying,SHAN Yongjuan. Sustainable utilization of water resources in Yulin City based on an emergy ecological footprint model[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(4): 1066-1075.

图/表 11

表1

表2

表3

2000—2019年榆林市水资源能值生态足迹"

年份	农业用水能值/sej	工业用水能值/sej	城镇公共服务用水能值/sej	居民生活用水能值/sej	生态用水能值/sej	污染用水能值/sej	总能值 /sej	总能值生态足迹/hm²	人均能值生态足迹/(hm²·人^-1)
2000	7.49E+20	1.18E+20	1.06E+19	4.05E+19	0	1.14E+20	1.03E+21	3.33E+06	0.97
2001	7.57E+20	1.21E+20	1.14E+19	4.05E+19	0	1.19E+20	1.05E+21	3.38E+06	0.98
2002	7.76E+20	1.23E+20	1.23E+19	4.05E+19	0	1.23E+20	1.08E+21	3.46E+06	1.00
2003	7.94E+20	1.23E+20	1.76E+18	4.31E+19	0	1.28E+20	1.09E+21	3.51E+06	1.01
2004	7.92E+20	1.23E+20	2.64E+18	4.31E+19	2.52E+18	1.33E+20	1.1E+21	3.53E+06	1.01
2005	8.18E+20	1.51E+20	2.64E+18	4.58E+19	2.52E+18	1.39E+20	1.16E+21	3.73E+06	1.06
2006	8.48E+20	2.00E+20	4.4E+18	4.66E+19	2.52E+18	1.44E+20	1.25E+21	4.01E+06	1.13
2007	8.26E+20	2.53E+20	6.16E+18	4.84E+19	3.78E+18	1.5E+20	1.29E+21	4.14E+06	1.17
2008	8.56E+20	2.46E+20	7.04E+18	4.93E+19	5.04E+18	1.56E+20	1.32E+21	4.25E+06	1.19
2009	7.78E+20	3.13E+20	7.04E+18	5.1E+19	3.78E+18	1.62E+20	1.31E+21	4.23E+06	1.18
2010	7.87E+20	3.02E+20	7.04E+18	5.19E+19	3.78E+18	1.68E+20	1.32E+21	4.25E+06	1.17
2011	7.86E+20	3.83E+20	7.92E+18	5.54E+19	5.04E+18	1.7E+20	1.41E+21	4.53E+06	1.22
2012	7.89E+20	4.08E+20	9.68E+18	5.98E+19	6.3E+18	1.88E+20	1.46E+21	4.71E+06	1.26
2013	8.48E+20	4.18E+20	1.32E+19	6.6E+19	1.01E+19	1.91E+20	1.55E+21	4.98E+06	1.32
2014	7.7E+20	3.85E+20	1.41E+19	7.13E+19	1.89E+19	1.95E+20	1.45E+21	4.68E+06	1.25
2015	7.79E+20	3.71E+20	1.76E+19	7.74E+19	2.14E+19	2.03E+20	1.47E+21	4.73E+06	1.25
2016	7.97E+20	3.83E+20	1.76E+19	8.18E+19	2.02E+19	1.73E+20	1.47E+21	4.74E+06	1.24
2017	7.97E+20	4.71E+20	1.94E+19	8.8E+19	2.02E+19	1.27E+20	1.52E+21	4.91E+06	1.27
2018	7.73E+20	5.31E+20	1.94E+19	8.89E+19	2.02E+19	9.29E+19	1.53E+21	4.91E+06	1.28
2019	7.81E+20	5.73E+20	1.94E+19	9.59E+19	2.14E+19	8.06E+19	1.57E+21	5.06E+06	1.48
均值	7.95E+20	3.00E+20	1.06E+19	5.93E+19	8.38E+18	1.48E+20	1.32E+20	4.25E+06	1.17

表3

图1

表4

图2

图3

图4

图5

图6

图7

参考文献 24

[1]	刘珂伶, 杨柳. 基于能值理论的水资源生态足迹变化特征——以北京市为例[J]. 水土保持研究, 2021, 28(3): 406-414.
	[Liu Keling, Yang Liu. Characteristics of water resources ecological footprint based on emergy theory: Taking Beijig as an example[J]. Research of Soil and Water Conservation, 2021, 28(3): 406-414.]
[2]	Hoekstra A. Virtual Water Trade: Proceedings of the International Expert Meeting on Virtual Water Trade[R]. Ihe Delft: Value of Water Research Report, 2003.
[3]	Hoekstra A Y. Human appropriation of natural capital: A comparison of ecological footprint and water footprint analysis[J]. Ecological Economics, 2009, 68(7): 1963-1974. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.021
[4]	张丽丽, 邓晓雅, 龙爱华, 等. 基于农业水足迹的水资源安全时空变化分析——以新疆和田地区为例[J]. 干旱区研究, 2022, 39(2): 436-447.
	[Zhang Lili, Deng Xiaoya, Long Aihua, et al. Spatial-temporal assessment of water resource security based on the agricultural water footprint: A case in the Hotan Prefecture of Xinjiang[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2022, 39(2): 436-447.]
[5]	徐中民, 张志强, 程国栋. 甘肃省1998年生态足迹计算与分析[J]. 地理学报, 2000, 55(5): 607-616. doi: 10.11821/xb200005010
	[Xu Zhongmin, Zhang Zhiqiang, Cheng Guodong, et al. The calculation and analysis of ecological footprints of Gansu Province[J]. Acta Geographica Sinica, 2000, 55(5): 607-616.] doi: 10.11821/xb200005010
[6]	于兴丽, 陈兴鹏, 蒋莉. 甘肃省1990—2002年生态足迹的计算与分析[J]. 干旱区资源与环境, 2007, 21(2): 100-103.
	[Yu Xingli, Chen Xingpeng, Jiang Li. The ecological footprint dynamic of Gansu Province from 1990 to 2002[J]. Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 2007, 21(2): 100-103.]
[7]	黄林楠, 张伟新, 姜翠玲, 等. 水资源生态足迹计算方法[J]. 生态学报, 2008, 28(3): 1279-1286.
	[Huang Linnan, Zhang Weixin, Jiang Cuiling, et al. Ecological footprint method in water resources assessment[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2008, 28(3): 1279-1286.]
[8]	李允洁, 吕惠进, 卜鹏. 基于生态足迹法的浙江省水资源可持续利用分析[J]. 长江科学院院报, 2016, 33(12): 22-26, 32.
	[Li Yunjie, Lyu Huijin, Bu Peng. Sustainable utilization of water resources in Zhejiang Province based on ecological footprint analysis[J]. Journal of Yangta River Scientific Research Institute, 2016, 33(12): 22-26, 32.]
[9]	张义, 张合平, 李丰生, 等. 基于改进模型的广西水资源生态足迹动态分析[J]. 资源科学, 2013, 35(8): 1601-1610.
	[Zhang Yi, Zhang Heping, Li Fengsheng, et al. Dynamic analysis of the water resource ecological footprint of Guangxi based on improved mode[J]. Resource Science, 2013, 35(8): 1601-1610.]
[10]	洪思扬, 王红瑞, 朱中凡, 等. 辽宁省水资源生态足迹与生态承载力分析[J]. 水利经济, 2016, 34(3): 46-52, 81.
	[Hong Siyang, Wang Hongrui, Zhu Zhongfan, et al. Ecological footprint and carring capacity of water resources in Liaoning Province[J]. Journal of Economics of Water Recources, 2016, 34(3): 46-52, 81.]
[11]	朱光磊, 赵春子, 朱卫红, 等. 基于生态足迹模型的吉林省水资源可持续利用评价[J]. 中国农业大学学报, 2020, 25(9): 131-143.
	[Zhu Guanglei, Zhao Chunzi, Zhu Weihong, et al. Evaluation of sustainable water resources utilization in Jilin Province based on the ecological footprint model[J]. Journal of China Agricultural University, 2020, 25(9): 131-143.]
[12]	张勇, 张治国, 董晓辉, 等. 基于ARIMA模型的山西省水资源生态足迹时间序列分析[J]. 安徽农业科学, 2016, 44(22): 53-55, 59.
	[Zhang Yong, Zhang Zhiguo, Dong Xiaohui, et al. Time series analysis of water resource ecological footprint in Shanxi Province based on ARIMA model[J]. Journal of Anhui Agricultural Sciences, 2016, 44(22): 53-55, 59.]
[13]	张淑兰, 张海军, 张盉儆, 等. 陕西省水资源生态足迹及其可持续利用分析[J]. 人民长江, 2021, 52(4): 130-136.
	[Zhang Shulan, Zhang Haijun, Zhang Hejing, et al. Analysis on ecological footprint of water resources in Shaanxi Province and its sustainable utilization[J]. Yangtze River, 2021, 52(4): 130-136.]
[14]	邢清枝, 任志远, 王丽霞, 等. 基于生态足迹法的陕北地区水资源可持续利用评价[J]. 干旱区研究, 2009, 26(6): 793-798. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1148.2009.00793
	[Xing Qingzhi, Ren Zhiyuan, Wang Lixia, et al. Evaluation on sustainable utilization of water resource in North Shaanxi Province based on ecological footprint model[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2009, 26(6): 793-798.] doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1148.2009.00793
[15]	范月华, 陈涟, 唐文雯, 等. 基于改进水生态足迹模型的深圳市水资源可持续利用分析[J]. 水电能源科学, 2021, 39(4): 36-39, 35.
	[Fan Yuehua, Chen Lian, Tang Wenwen, et al. Sustainble utilization of water resources in Shenzhen City based on improved water ecological footprint model[J]. Water Resource and Power, 2021, 39(4): 36-39, 35.]
[16]	孙才志, 张智雄. 中国水生态足迹广度、深度评价及空间格局[J]. 生态学报, 2017, 37(21): 7048-7060.
	[Sun Caizhi, Zhang Zhixiong. Assement of water ecological footprint size, depth, and spatial pattern in China[J]. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 2017, 37(21): 7048-7060.]
[17]	李鹏辉, 徐丽萍, 刘笑, 等. 基于三维生态足迹模型的天山北麓绿洲生态安全评价[J]. 干旱区研究, 2020, 37(5): 1337-1345.
	[Li Penghui, Xu Liping, Liu Xiao, et al. Ecological security evaluation of an oasis in the North of the Tianshan Mountains based on three-dimensional ecological footprint model[J]. Arid Zone Research, 2020, 37(5): 1337-1345.]
[18]	王刚毅, 刘杰. 基于改进水生态足迹的水资源环境与经济发展协调性评价——以中原城市群为例[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2019, 28(1): 80-90.
	[Wang Gangyi, Liu Jie. Coordinating evaluation of water resource environment and economic development based on improved water ecological footprint: A case study of central Plains Urban Agglomeration[J]. Resource and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2019, 28(1): 80-90.]
[19]	黄显峰, 周祎, 阎玮, 等. 基于能值分析的生态供水效益量化方法[J]. 水利水电科技进展, 2019, 39(2): 12-15, 36.
	[Huang Xianfeng, Zhou Yi, Yan Wei, et al. Quantifying benefits of ecological water supply based on emergy analysis[J]. Advances in Science and Technology of Water Resources, 2019, 39(2): 12-15, 36.]
[20]	吕翠美, 周海生, 凌敏华, 等. 基于能值理论的水资源对农业生产贡献量化分析[J]. 科学技术与工程, 2019, 19(4): 249-253.
	[Lyu Cuimei, Zhou Haisheng, Ling Minhua, et al. Quantitative analysis of water resources contribution to agricultural production based on energy theory[J]. Science Technology and Engineering, 2019, 19(4): 249-253.]
[21]	黄晓荣, 秦长海, 郭碧莹, 等. 基于能值分析的价值型水资源资产负债表编制[J]. 长江流域资源与环境, 2020, 29(4): 869-878.
	[Huang Xiaorong, Qin Changhai, Guo Biying, et al. Compilation of water resources value balance sheet based on emergy theory[J]. Resource and Environment in the Yangtze Basin, 2020, 29(4): 869-878.]
[22]	王慧亮, 申言霞, 李卓成, 等. 基于能值理论的黄河流域水资源生态经济系统可持续性评价[J]. 水资源保护, 2020, 36(6): 12-17.
	[Wang Huiliang, Shen Yanxia, Li Zhuocheng, et al. Sustainability assessment of water resources ecological-economic system in the Yellow River Basin based on emergy theory[J]. Water Resources Protection, 2020, 36(6): 12-17.]
[23]	惠波, 苏佳园, 惠露, 等. 榆林市水资源现状与发展对策探讨[J]. 中国水利, 2020(1): 33-35.
	[Hui Bo, Su Jiayuan, Hui Lu, et al. Current status of water resources in Yulin City and solutions for development[J]. China Water Resources, 2020(1): 33-35.]
[24]	蓝盛芳, 钦佩, 陆宏芳. 生态经济系统能值分析[M]. 北京: 化学工业出版社, 2002: 75-76, 405.
	[Lan Shengfang, Qin Pei, Lu Hongfang. Emergy Analysis of Ecological Economics System[M]. Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2002: 75-76, 405.]

项目	能值转换率/（sej·m^-3）	项目	能值转换率/（sej·m^-3）
农业用水	1.60E+12^[1]	地下水	1.70E+12^[20]
工业用水	2.32E+12^[1]	雨水化学能	1.80E+04^[24]
生活用水	8.80E+11^[1]	雨水势能	1.00E+04^[24]
生态用水	1.26E+12^[19]	地表水化学能	1.54E+04^[24]
地表水	9.23E+11^[20]	地下水化学能	8.89E+03^[24]

生态安全等级	生态安全状态	生态压力范围
1	安全	0~1
2	亚安全	1~10
3	轻度不安全	10~18
4	中度不安全	18~24
5	高度不安全	24~30
6	极度不安全	≥30

年份	雨水势能值 /sej	地表水化学能值/sej	地下水化学能值/sej	总能值 /sej	总能值生态承载力/hm²	人均能值生态承载力 /(hm²·人^-1)
2000	5.52E+20	9.33E+19	5.84E+19	7.04E+20	1.20E+06	0.35
2001	7.88E+20	1.17E+20	8.66E+19	9.91E+20	1.71E+06	0.49
2002	7.95E+20	1.17E+20	1.05E+20	1.02E+21	1.74E+06	0.50
2003	8.2E+20	1.81E+20	5.19E+19	1.05E+21	1.86E+06	0.51
2004	8.2E+20	9.43E+19	6.41E+19	9.78E+20	1.65E+06	0.48
2005	8.2E+20	8.07E+19	6.23E+19	9.63E+20	1.63E+06	0.47
2006	8.2E+20	9.34E+19	5.55E+19	9.69E+20	1.60E+06	0.47
2007	8.2E+20	1.03E+20	7.56E+19	9.98E+20	1.63E+06	0.48
2008	7.43E+20	8.36E+19	5.59E+19	8.83E+20	1.45E+06	0.42
2009	7.91E+20	1.07E+20	6.99E+19	9.68E+20	1.58E+06	0.46
2010	6.84E+20	1.02E+20	6.82E+19	8.54E+20	1.39E+06	0.40
2011	8.37E+20	9.67E+19	6.63E+19	1.00E+21	1.65E+06	0.46
2012	9.87E+20	1.34E+20	8.36E+19	1.21E+21	1.98E+06	0.55
2013	1.06E+21	1.44E+20	6.41E+19	1.27E+21	2.11E+06	0.57
2014	8.69E+20	1.28E+20	7.07E+19	1.07E+21	1.77E+06	0.49
2015	7.71E+20	1.09E+20	6.73E+19	9.47E+20	1.56E+06	0.43
2016	1.1E+21	1.56E+20	7.62E+19	1.33E+21	2.21E+06	0.59
2017	1.18E+21	1.55E+20	7.91E+19	1.41E+21	2.35E+06	0.62
2018	9.74E+20	1.42E+20	6.57E+19	1.18E+21	1.97E+06	0.52
2019	8.26E+20	1.21E+20	6.19E+19	1.01E+21	1.68E+06	0.50
均值	8.52E+20	1.18E+20	6.94E+19	1.04E+21	1.74E+06	0.49