Test Result Analysis of the Drinking Water in Shizhong District Zaozhuang City from 2019 to 2022
-
摘要:
目的 探讨枣庄市市中区2019年至2022年生活饮用水检测结果。 方法 选择2019年至2022年枣庄市市中区生活饮用水标本859份为对象，根据《生活饮用水标准检测方法》对收集标本中常见的微生物进行测定，并对测定结果参考有关标准判定。 结果 859份生活饮用水标本中检测合格802份，总体合格率为93.36%。微生物指标中菌落总数合格率为96.04%（微生物大肠菌落合格率最低，为95.11%）；硝酸盐、亚硝酸盐、氨氮、硫酸盐、氯化物、溶解性总固体、砷、镉、铜、锌、汞、硒、铅检测合格率均为100.0%；2019年与2022年水样合格率差异有统计学意义（χ2 = 7.781，P = 0.005）；出厂水样合格率、末梢水样合格率、水源水样合格率差异有统计学意义；即末梢水样合格率最低，出厂水样合格率最高；市级水厂合格率与镇级水厂合格率差异有统计学意义（χ2 = 35.437，P = 0.000），即市级水厂合格率高于镇级水厂。 结论 枣庄市市中区2019年至2022年生活饮用水卫生状况存在问题较多，且以微生物指标超标为主，相关部门应采取干预措施，强化饮水工程管理以时改善水质，保证居民安全饮水。 Abstract:Objective To analyse the drinking water testing results in Shizhong district, Zaozhuang City from 2019 to 2022. Method 859 standard samples of drinking water in Shizhong District of Zaozhuang City from 2019 to 2022 were selected as the subjects. According to the “Standard Testing Method for Drinking Water”, common microorganisms in the collected samples were determined, and the determination results were judged based on relevant standards. Result Among the 859 samples of drinking water, 802 were found to be qualified, with an overall qualification rate of 93.36%. The qualification rate of total bacterial count in microbial indicators was 96.04% （with the lowest qualification rate of microbial coliform colonies was 95.11%）; The qualification rate for nitrate, nitrite, ammonia nitrogen, sulfate, chloride, soluble total solid, arsenic, cadmium, copper, zinc, mercury, selenium, and lead detection was 100.0%; There was a statistical difference in the qualified rate of water samples between 2019 and 2022 （χ2 = 7.781, P = 0.005）; There was statistical significance in the qualification rate of factory water samples, peripheral water samples, and source water samples; The qualification rate of peripheral water samples was the lowest, and the qualification rate of factory water samples was the highest; There was a statistical difference in the qualification rate between municipal water plants and town level water plants （χ2 = 35.437, P = 0.000）, indicating that the qualification rate of municipal water plants was higher than that of township water plants. Conclusion There are many problems with the hygiene status of drinking water in Shizhong District of Zaozhuang City from 2019 to 2022, with microbiological indicators exceeding the standard. Relevant departments should take intervention measures, strengthen water engineering management, and improve water quality in a timely manner to ensure safe drinking water for residents. -
Key words:
- Shizhong district /
- Zaozhuang city /
- Drinking water /
- Test result
-
表 1 枣庄市市中区2019年至2022年生活饮用水卫生检测结果
Table 1. Sanitary test results of drinking water in Shizhong district of Zaozhuang city from 2019 to 2022
指标类型 合格份数 合格率（%） 检测值 微生物指标 菌落总数 825 96.04 < 100～1780 大肠菌群 817 95.11 0～540 理化指标 pH值 832 96.86 6.16～9.9 总硬度 828 96.39 − 色度 845 98.37 < 5～30 浑浊度 831 96.74 0～11.7 阴离子合
成洗涤剂837 97.44 − 硝酸盐 859 100.00 0.20～10.0 亚硝酸盐 859 100.00 0.20～10.0 氯化物 859 100.00 3.6～250 硫酸盐 859 100.00 3.13～250 氨氮 859 100.00 < 0.06 溶解性
总固体859 100.00 22～185.8 耗氧量 831 96.74 0.03～3.9 砷 859 100.00 < 0.01 铬 841 97.90 < 0.01 镉 859 100.00 < 0.005 铁 841 97.90 < 0.05～0.53 铜 859 100.00 < 0.001 锌 859 100.00 < 0.001 汞 859 100.00 < 0.001 硒 859 100.00 < 0.001 铅 859 100.00 < 0.0020～0.01 锰 837 98.14 < 0.05～0.11 铝 843 98.14 < 0.008～0.22 
下载: 导出CSV
表 2 枣庄市市中区不同年份生活饮用水检出合格率比较
Table 2. Comparison of qualified rate of domestic drinking water in different years in Shizhong district of Zaozhuang city
年份 标本份数 合格标本数（n） 合格率（%） 2019年 215 190 88.37 2020年 225 213 94.67 2021年 209 198 94.74 2022年 210 201 95.17* χ2 − 11.772 P − 0.008 两两比较，调整检验水准：α = 0.05/6 = 0.0083；与2019年比较，*P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
表 3 不同类型水质、级别水厂检出合格率比较
Table 3. Comparison of qualified rate of different types of water quality and grade water plants
不同类型水质、级别水厂 标本份数（n） 合格标本数（n） 合格率（%） 水质类型 出厂水样 364 356 97.80*# 末梢水水样 244 211 86.48 水源水水样 251 235 93.63* χ2 − 30.290 P − 0.000* 水厂级别 市级水厂 476 466 97.90& 镇级水厂 383 336 87.83 χ2 − 35.437 P − 0.000* 与末梢水水样比较，*P < 0.017；与水源水水样比较，#P < 0.017；与镇级水厂级别比较，&P < 0.05。
下载: 导出CSV
-
[1] 任虹云,睢振江,杨利军,等. 滦州市农村学校生活饮用水氟化物检测结果分析[J]. 医学动物防制,2022,38(4):387-389. doi: 10.7629/yxdwfz202204019 [2] 陈蕾,陈宇鸿,林海江. 2017年-2020年温岭市生活饮用水卫生监测结果分析[J]. 中国卫生检验杂志,2022,32(10):1271-1274. [3] 梁坤,杨明飞. 余庆县2011-2020年生活饮用水卫生监测结果分析[J]. 贵州医药,2022,46(7):1150-1152. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-744X.2022.07.080 [4] 王舒,崔仲明,李继芳. 2014-2019年辽宁省农村生活饮用水微生物监测结果分析[J]. 职业与健康,2021,37(10):1388-1391. [5] 王玲,刘文艳,幸薇洁,等. 2015-2019年成都市龙泉驿区生活饮用水监测结果分析[J]. 预防医学情报杂志,2021,37(9):1251-1255. [6] SO Tümay,Enocak A,Mermer A. A "turn-on" small molecule fluorescent sensor for the determination of Al3+ ion in real samples: Theoretical calculations,and photophysical and electrochemical properties[J]. New Journal of Chemistry,2021,45(39):18400-18411. doi: 10.1039/D1NJ03462F [7] 黄小琴,龙英,潘媛,等. 黔东南苗族侗族自治州农村地区生活饮用水水碘及8~10岁儿童碘营养调查分析[J]. 疾病监测,2022,37(9):1-4. [8] 王静,鲍兴敏,孙璐,等. 城市生活饮用水水质污染物检测方法研究[J]. 环境科学与管理,2022,47(5):108-112. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-1212.2022.05.025 [9] 聂宏骞,赖宣丞,易长文,等. 海南省农村生活饮用水三氯甲烷,四氯化碳含量调查及健康风险评价[J]. 中国热带医学,2022,22(6):555-559. [10] Watkins T,Askarinejad H,Yeo J. Investigation into effect of sonic drilling methodology on standard penetration test results in dense sand[J]. Geotechnical Testing Journal,2021,44(3):20190249. doi: 10.1520/GTJ20190249 [11] 黄金明,马玉琴,任颖,等. 2019年山东省饮水型地方性氟中毒病区监测结果分析[J]. 中华地方病学杂志,2021,40(2):114-117. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn231583-20200330-00064 [12] 张润松,陈雨萍. 2016-2020年嵊州市学校直饮水消毒及监测结果分析[J]. 中国消毒学杂志,2022,39(2):143-144. [13] 潘璐,王炳玲,王寅,等. 2014~2019年青岛市生活饮用水健康风险评估[J]. 山东大学学报(医学版),2021,59(12):42-49,57. [14] Li M,Cheng J,Zou F,et al. Effects of pre-oxidation on residual dissolved aluminum in coagulated water: A pilot-scale study[J]. Water Research,2021,190(12):116682. [15] 朱良琪,邬晶晶,马雯爽,等. 离子色谱法测定饮用水中丙烯酸测定法及不确定度分析[J]. 净水技术,2022,41(4):155-163. [16] 田道明,沈静萍,吴明月,等. 某部2013~2017年生活饮用水水质监测资料的回顾性分析[J]. 解放军预防医学杂志,2021,39(1):13-15. doi: 10.13704/j.cnki.jyyx.2021.01.004 -
