城市历史水系修复规划思路与策略研究——以长春市为例

随着近年来城市水系治理和旧城更新、历史文化复兴的开展,城市历史水系的修复越来越受到各界的关注,如何使历史水系修复与规划设计体系相结合已然成为重要议题。借助于文献综述、历史地图分析、案例的实际应用等方法展开研究,并提出了城市历史水系修复的规划目标、指标和实施途径,以及水系修复项目的工作流程。在此基础上,以长春市老城区为例,对"一纵五横"历史水系的演变过程和现状进行了调研与评估,通过基于水系留存率、内涝黑臭、遗产保留状况等方面情况来确定水系的修复工程时序,提出了治理内涝黑臭、强化水系格局、盘活滨水空间及加强公众参与的修复策略。论文研究成果可为中国其他地区及历史文化名城的水系修复提供一定的参考。     

水库生态调度现状与展望

生态调度是在兼顾水库调度的社会、经济效益的基础上重点考虑生态因素的水库调度新模式。简要介绍了生态流量、生态调度等概念,同时对世界各地生态调度实践的过去(2000年以前)和现在(2000～2019年)的研究情况进行了综述,并对未来的研究进行了展望。生态调度研究最早于20世纪40年代从研究河流最小生态流量开始,期间提出水文学方法、水力学方法、生境模拟法等200多种生态流量计算方法。现阶段有关生态调度的探索强调将生态因子纳入传统的水库调度过程,由早期的单目标生态调度发展成多目标生态调度,包括生态水量调度、水质调度、泥沙调度和水生生物资源调度。联合调度、梯级调度、分层取水调度等方式被应用于水库调度实践中并取得了显著的成效。此外,大量研究显示,通过工程措施、生物措施和管理措施可以很好地解决生态调度过程中的一些难题。然而,对生态调度机制的研究仍旧匮乏,大量基于经验统计的生态调度工作难以从本质上解决经济发展与生态效益之间的矛盾。因此,从机理层面构建生态调度模型是目前亟待解决的问题,也将成为生态调度领域的新热点。此外,如何对生态调度的效果特别是其对水生态系统健康的效果进行量化,也是当今亟待解决的现实问题。     

长江生态航道技术研究进展与展望

建设生态文明是中华民族永续发展的千年大计,流域经济发展要将生态保护摆在压倒性位置。系统分析了生态航道的发展历程和研究现状,重点阐述了长江生态航道技术在理论框架与评价体系、生态航道建设技术、生态监测与修复补偿方法3方面取得的重要进展和突破,并对长江生态航道技术在几个大型航道整治工程中的应用实践进行了概述,最后结合长江生态航道技术研究进展与实践,指出了未来长江生态航道技术的发展方向。     

博斯腾湖流域水资源管理决策支持系统设计与实现

为了提高博斯腾湖流域水资源管理水平,设计开发了针对该流域的水资源管理决策支持系统。系统基于Microsoft.NET平台,采用Visual Studio、SQL Server、ArcGIS工具集开发,在流域“地-云-空”一体化监测体系和系统架构的基础上,构建了地图要素管理、基本水文信息、流域生态流量等主要模块,实现了流域空间可视化查询、实时流量动态模拟、流域生态基流计算以及水资源管理配置等功能。结合博斯腾湖流域1956—2019年水文资料及目前数据获取情况,系统可为不同发展模式下水资源管理提供多方面参考信息和技术支撑,能有效提高水资源管理部门决策效率。     

乡村振兴战略指导下的生态灌区建设与管理

针对生态灌区建设与管理存在的产业与资源低效、灌溉水质恶化、生态多样性降低等问题,以乡村振兴战略为理论指导,从乡村振兴战略20字总要求出发,探讨乡村振兴战略思想下的生态灌区建设与管理,提出了农业质量产量底线、生态与环境底线和资源开发利用上限的生态灌区建设与管理三条红线,指出生态灌区应向粮食增产提质和其他产品有效供给、生态环境优美宜居、资源保护与高效利用方向发展,为实现生态灌区可持续型绿色发展提供科学参考。     

Biomic river restoration: A new focus for river management

River management based solely on physical science has proven to be unsustainable and unsuccessful, evidenced by the fact that the problems this approach intended to solve (e.g., flood hazards, water scarcity, and channel instability) have not been solved and long‐term deterioration in river environments has reduced the capacity of rivers to continue meeting the needs of society. In response, there has been a paradigm shift in management over the past few decades, towards river restoration. But the ecological, morphological, and societal benefits of river restoration have, on the whole, been disappointing. We believe that this stems from the fact that restoration overrelies on the same physical analyses and approaches, with flowing water still regarded as the universally predominant driver of channel form and structural intervention seen as essential to influencing fluvial processes. We argue that if river restoration is to reverse long‐standing declines in river functions, it is necessary to recognize the influence of biology on river forms and processes and re‐envisage what it means to restore a river. This entails shifting the focus of river restoration from designing and constructing stable channels that mimic natural forms to reconnecting streams within balanced and healthy biomes, and so levering the power of biology to influence river processes. We define this new approach as biomic river restoration.     

Restoring Murray River floodplain wetlands: Does the sediment record inform on watering regime?

The floodplain wetlands of the southern Murray Darling Basin (MDB) have been subject to the impacts of catchment and water resource development for more than a century. Their current degraded state is attributed to the regulation of the rivers and abstraction of water volume for irrigation. The MDB Plan is to return at least 2,750 Gl of mean annual flow to the system to restore the condition of waterways. Considerable recent investment in infrastructure enables water to be released into the basin's floodplain wetlands. The proposed watering regime is underpinned by modelling that suggests that, before regulation, overbank flows would have occurred regularly as discharge peaked in winter and spring. Sediment cores have been extracted from over 50 floodplain wetlands of the southern Murray Basin. Those from several, large meander wavelength billabongs extend for 1,000–5,000 years suggesting that these sites were permanently inundated over that time. Others extend to ~200 years and are presumed not to have accumulated sediment until more recently. The records of most wetlands, however, only extend to the onset of river regulation in the 1920s, suggesting that before then they were not inundated for sufficient duration for net accumulation to occur. Preserved diatoms suggest that the shallow, plant‐dominated wetlands of the past have transitioned to deep, turbid water systems today. As rivers are identified as a source of sediment to wetlands, less regular inundation, rather than more, is a viable option in restoring the ecological function of these floodplain wetlands and in slowing sediment infill.     

格宾网箱覆绿功能反滤层优化设计研究

格宾网箱应用于边坡工程时具备护坡、覆绿及材料就地利用等多种特点。为了保证格宾网箱中的植被能够稳定存活,并且防止强降雨条件下植被土颗粒的流失,需对格宾网箱填充物进行反滤层的优化设计,从而实现绿色生态护坡的目的。依托北京冬奥会张家口赛区正在实施的“科技冬奥”项目,在模拟当地最大降雨强度条件下,采用自行设计的试验装置开展了反滤层的防冲刷试验,探究反滤层层数、厚度和反滤料粒径对反滤层防冲刷效果的影响,最终确定了格宾网箱覆绿功能反滤层的优化设计。试验结果表明：反滤层层数设置为两层,上下层厚度均为100 mm且上层碎石粒径小于20 mm、下层碎石粒径为20~100 mm时,反滤层的防冲刷效果最佳。     

基于1960-2018年实测径流与水文学方法的开都河生态流量分析

为科学地确定河流生态流量,保障流域水安全与生态环境健康,基于开都河大山口水文站1960-2018年的实测径流数据,采用Tennant法、典型水文频率年法、最枯月平均流量法和Q_p法等4种水文学方法计算了河流的生态流量,通过对比分析确定基于Tennant法的计算结果最为适宜。计算结果表明：开都河大山口水文站10-翌年3月的平均生态流量应不小于15.60 m³/s,对应最小生态环境需水量为 2.47×10⁸ m³;4-9月的平均生态流量应不小于46.15 m³/s,对应最小生态环境需水量为7.30×10⁸ 　m³,全年生态流量平均不小于30.88 m³/s,对应最小生态环境需水量为9.77×10⁸ 　m³。该生态流量目标可满足开都河大山口至博斯腾湖河段的河道径流损失,保证河流基本生态功能与水生态安全。计算分析结果可为开都河河流生态流量管理提供支撑。     

大宁调蓄水库蓄水后生态环境效益分析

南水北调工程的建成通水,改变了北京城市供水格局,给北京带来了巨大的效益,生态环境效益就是其中重要一环。分析北京市南水北调配套工程生态环境效益的组成,科学地计算和评估生态效益,对于未来北京市南水北调配套工程效益的发挥、工程的运行管理、首都水务事业的发展有着重要意义,大宁调蓄水库是北京市南水北调配套工程之一,经计算,大宁调蓄水库蓄水后生态环境总效益为34176.29万元。计算方法也可为类似工程生态环境效益的估算提供参考。