2018 3rd International Conference on Architectural Engineering and New Materials (ICAENM 2018) ISBN: 978-1-60595-609-1

Evaluation of Soil Environmental Quality in

Changle, Shandong Province

Yifan Li and Hongkui Li

ABSTRACT

In Changle County collected 315 topsoil samples, analyzed the content of As, Pb, Zn, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg and Ni eight kinds of heavy metals, using single factor index and Nemerow index to evaluate the soil environmental quality. The evaluation results of single factor soil environmental quality showed that the overall condition of soil environmental quality in Changle County in good condition, elements other than nickel, other seven heavy metals indicators are clean, which reached grade Ⅰ soil environmental quality standards of soil area are accounted for 99.46% . Soil environment of nickel content in high-risk, primarily related to geological background, contaminated areas are concentrated in the Neogene basalts distribution area in Changle County central area, mainly basalt lithology clip conglomerate, claystone and diatomite. Nemerow pollution index evaluation showed that the quality of the soil environment in Changle County mainly to grade Ⅰ of soil environmental quality standards, ratio of 53.83%, followed by grade Ⅱ, Ⅲ level, accounting for 22.62% and 19.04 % of throughout the domain area; Ⅳ and Ⅴ grade followed, accounting for 3.91% and 0.60 % of throughout the domain area. Among them, the nickel content is high, belong to the most polluted factor, for Nemerow index evaluation results affect more prominent, while the remaining seven indicators of heavy metals are clean. 1

1Yifan Li, College of Architecture and Civil Engineering, Weifang University, Shandong, China Hongkui Li, Shandong Geological Sciences Institute; Key Laboratory of Gold Mineralization Processes and Resources Utilization, the Ministry of Land and Resources; Shandong China Correspondence author: Hongkui Li (1962-), Male, Ph.D., researcher, mainly engaged in geological surveys, mineral resources exploration and mineral research work. Address: 52 Lishan Road, Jinan City. Email:[email protected].

211 KEYWORDS

Changle, Shandong Province; Soil; heavy metal; Environmental Quality Evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Soil environmental quality is mainly controlled by natural environment and human environment. Natural environment refers to the sum of natural conditions and natural resources, such as geology, geomorphology, climate, hydrology, biology, etc. Artificial environment refers to the living environment that is gradually established by long-term planned and purposeful economic activities and social activities in order to continuously improve the material and spiritual living standards on the basis of the natural environment. Long-term human activities in the transformation of the natural environment, but also have a certain negative impact on the quality of the environment, such as the use of a large number of fertilizers, pesticides and production of domestic waste emissions will lead to soil pollution, and so on. At present, soil pollution has become an important factor to restrain the sustainable development of agriculture, which has aroused the great attention of governments at all levels and the widespread concern of scholars such as agriculture, environment, geology, society and so on[1-4]. Based on the regional soil element analysis and testing data obtained from ecological geochemical investigation in Changle County, the present situation of soil environmental quality and the pollution degree were evaluated according to the national soil environmental quality standard and the regional soil element background value. The research and prediction of changing trend will be carried out for regional agricultural production and development planning, adjustment of rural industrial structure, soil fertilization and improvement, rational planting layout, development of pollution-free, green food, and protection of agricultural ecological environment. Land use planning, pollution control and restoration provide scientific basis.

WORKING METHODS

Sample Collection

The surface soil samples were collected by grid sampling method. The sampling density was 1 point / km2 and the sampling depth was 0 ~ 20cm. The soil sampling points are uniformly distributed, and the sampling sites are arranged in the middle of the grid except for individual points. The sample number is 1:50000 map as the unit serial number, the surface soil is 4km2 as the unit lattice, and the unit lattice is numbered according to the 2km×2km. The numbering sequence is from top to

212 bottom, from left to right. Each unit lattice is divided into four 1km2, and the label order is A,B,C and D from left to right. The sample number list is made before the grid number, each 50 numbers is a batch. One of the numbers is a large number of repeat sampling and indicated on the table. Then 4 numbers were taken as the standard control sample analysis number. Sample numbering and standard control samples within the same batch of basic uniform distribution. Sampling using GPS precise location, combined with topographic map fixed point, a total of 315 sampling points (Figure 1). Sampling sites are arranged in farmland, vegetable land, forest (fruit) land, grassland and so on. The main soil types in the cell are selected for field collection, so as to keep the four single-point soil types in each sample as consistent as possible, avoid contaminated soil and artificial transported accumulated soil. Sampling by multi-pit method, 3-5 0-20 cm topsoil mixtures were selected for each sampling point in the 10 m diameter range, and the original quality of the samples were all greater than 1000g by quartile method[5]. In order to ensure that the sampling meets the requirements of relevant technical specifications, sampling in areas with thick overburden should be selected in front of mountain alluvium area, and sampling depth should be deepened when collecting samples in urban areas, so as to ensure that the sampling meets the requirements of relevant technical specifications.

Figure 1. Distribution chart of samples sites on Changle topsoil.

213 Test Elements And Indicators

According to the National Technical Regulations for Soil Pollution Assessment and the relevant national standards and industrial standards, the main farmland pollutants affecting the quality of agricultural products were selected as soil environmental quality evaluation indicators. In this work, PH,Cd,Hg,Cu,As,Pb,Cr,Zn,Ni and other indicators were selected to evaluate the soil environmental quality of Changle County. The surface soil samples were tested and analyzed with a total of 54 items of Ag,As,Au,B,Ba,Be,Bi,Br,C,Cd,Ce,Cl,Co,Cr,Cu,F,Ga,Ge,Hg,I,La,Li,Mn,Mo,N,Nb, Ni,P,Pb,Rb,S,Sb,Sc,Se,Sn,Sr,Th,Ti,Tl,U,V,W,Y,Zn,Zr,K2O,Al2O3,Fe2O3,MgO,Ca O,Na2O,K2O,OrgC,PH et al. The soil sample test and analysis is completed by Wuhan synthetic Rock Mine Test Center. The main analytical methods used are plasma emission spectrometry, atomic fluorescence spectrometry, ion selective electrode and so on[6]. Standard sample, password sample, monitoring sample and other monitoring methods are used to ensure the reliability of the analysis quality. The accuracy and precision of the analytical method are tested by the method of (GBW). The matching scheme is to calculate the logarithmic difference (lgC) and relative standard deviation (RSD) between the average value and the standard value of each item after 12 times analysis of the national standard material (GSS-1~GSS-8) series samples. The precision and accuracy of the laboratory analysis method are in accordance with the specifications.

TABLE 1. MULTI-OBJECTIVE INVESTIGATION ELEMENT CLASSIFICATION LIST. Element types (not Element classification Element type (analysis) analysed) life component C、N、Ca、P、K、S、Cl、Na、 H、O element Mg、Si bioelement Fe、Cu、Zn、Mn、Co、Mo、Se、 essential element F、Cr、V、Ni、I、Br Cd、Ge、Sn、Sb、Hg、Pb、Ga、 Toxic elements Te、In 、 Toxic As Li elements Potential and radioactive toxic Be、Tl、Th、U、Sr、Ba Po、Ra elements Nontoxic Hf、Ta、Ru、Os stable Ti、Zr、Sc、Y、Nb、Rb、Ag、Au 、 、 、 element Ir Pd Pt neutral B、Al element other Bi、La、W、Ce、Ph、OrgC

214 SOIL ENVIRONMENT QUALITY ASSESSMENT

Evaluation Criterion

The evaluation of soil environmental quality was carried out on the basis of the results of geochemistry investigation of surface soil in Changle County. Based on the quality standards of class Ⅱ soil environmental pollution, PH,Cd,Hg,Cu,As,Pb,Cr,Zn,Ni was used to evaluate the soil environmental quality. The ecological functions of the indicators are shown in table 1[7]。 The evaluation criteria are based on the National Standards of the people's Republic of China (GB15618-1995) and soil Environmental quality Standards (Table 2)[8]。 1）Soil environmental quality classification [9] According to the purpose of soil application and protection, the function of soil environmental quality is divided into Ⅰ ~ Ⅲ classes. Class Ⅰ soil is mainly suitable for the nature reserves prescribed by the state (except for those with high background heavy metals) and the centralized drinking water source. The soil quality of tea plantations, pastures and other protected areas basically maintains the natural background level. Class II soils are mainly suitable for general farmland, vegetable fields, tea plantations, orchards, pastures, etc. The soil quality basically does not cause harm and pollution to plants and environment. Class Ⅲ soil is mainly suitable for woodland soil and high-background soil with large pollutant capacity and farmland soil (except vegetable land) in the vicinity of mineral resources. Soil quality basically does not cause harm and pollution to plants and the environment. 2）Standard grading and implementation criteria for soil environmental quality [9] Class I soil environmental pollution quality implements the first class standard, which is the limit value of soil environmental quality to protect regional natural ecology and maintain natural background value. Class Ⅱ soil environmental pollution quality implements the second class standard, which is to protect agricultural production and maintain human health soil limit value. Class Ⅲ soil environmental pollution quality implements the third grade standard, which is the critical value of soil to guarantee the agricultural and forestry production and the normal growth of plants.

215

TABLE 2. SOIL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARD VALUE TABLE UNIT: 10-6 . project one-level two -level three-level Soil pH value Natural background ＜6.5 6.5～7.5 ＞7.5 ＞6.5 Cd ≤0.20 ≤0.30 ≤0.30 ≤0.60 ≤1.0 Hg ≤0.15 ≤0.30 ≤0.50 ≤1.0 ≤1.5 paddy field ≤15 ≤30 ≤25 ≤20 ≤30 As dry farm ≤15 ≤40 ≤30 ≤25 ≤40 Farmland, ≤35 ≤50 ≤100 ≤100 ≤400 Cu etc. orchard — ≤150 ≤200 ≤200 ≤400 Pb ≤35 ≤250 ≤300 ≤350 ≤500 paddy field ≤90 ≤250 ≤300 ≤350 ≤400 Cr dry farm ≤90 ≤150 ≤200 ≤250 ≤300 Zr ≤100 ≤200 ≤250 ≤300 ≤500 Ni ≤40 ≤40 ≤50 ≤60 ≤200 666 ≤0.05 ≤0.5 ≤1.0 DDT ≤0.05 ≤0.5 ≤1.0 Note: 1 heavy metals (chromium is mainly trivalent) and arsenic are measured by element and are suitable for cationic exchange capacity > 5cmol / kg. If ≤ 5cmol / kg, the standard value is half of the total number of isomers of the four isomers, DDT is the standard of soil environmental quality of four kinds of derivatives, I. e., paddy field value and chromium value.

Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation of soil environmental quality is based on the geochemistry data of surface soil, referring to GB15618-1995, and according to the measured data of PH,Cd,Hg,Cu,As,Pb,Cr,Zn,Ni and other evaluation indexes in soil, the classification of single factor environmental quality is determined. Then, on the basis of single factor index, the comprehensive evaluation result is calculated by using Nemero comprehensive index method, and the soil environmental quality grade and its application function of each evaluation unit are determined[10-12]. Single factor evaluation uses the following formula[13]:

퐶푖/퐶l 0＜퐶푖 ≤ 퐶1 Pi={1 + (퐶푖 − 퐶1)/(퐶2 − 퐶1) 퐶 1 < C푖 ≤ 퐶2 (1) 2 + (C푖 − 퐶2)/(퐶3 − 퐶2)퐶2 < C푖 ≤ 퐶3

In the formula: Pi is the single factor exponent of the pollutant in i; Ci is the determination value of pollutants in i; C1, C2 and C3 are the first, two and three standard values of national soil environmental quality standards, respectively. Comprehensive soil environmental quality assessment using nemero comprehensive index method [13]：

（푝̅̅̅）2+(푝 )2 P=√ 푖 푖max (2) 2

216 In the formula:P is the comprehensive evaluation index of environmental quality; pi is the single factor index of pollutants in I; pimax single factor index for the most serious pollutants.

TABLE 3. CLASSIFICATION STANDARDS OF SOIL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY.

The calculation results of this method not only take into account the average pollution level of various pollutants, but also reflect the harm to the environment caused by the most seriously polluted pollutants[14]. Classification criteria for assessment of soil environmental quality are shown in Table 3[5][15].

Data Handling

The statistical analysis of all the data was carried out by SPSS19.0 and Excel2010, and the classification map of each element of soil environmental quality was made by ArcGIS 9.2.

EVALUATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Summary of Evaluation Results

The results of environmental quality assessment of heavy metal elements in surface soil of Changle County are shown in Table 4. The results of evaluation on soil environmental quality of arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, nickel, lead, zinc and other single factors showed that the overall condition of soil environmental quality in Changle County was good. Except nickel, the other 7 heavy metal indexes were clean. In other words, more than 99.46% of soil area reached grade I soil environmental quality standard. Among them, arsenic, lead, zinc up to grade I soil environmental quality standards soil area up to 100. The proportion of nickel in grade I soil environmental quality standards was 62.26, followed by Ⅱ grade and Ⅲ grade, accounting for 16.36% and 17.63% of the boundary area, respectively. The high risk content of nickel in the soil environment of Changle County is mainly related to the geological background. The contaminated area is concentrated in the Neogene basalt distribution area in the

217 central part of Changle County. The lithology is mainly composed of basalt with sandy gravel, clay and diatomite[16].

TABLE 4. CHANGLE COUNTY TOPSOIL ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ASSESSMENT TABLES OF SINGLE FACTOR.

To sum up, the overall situation of soil environmental quality in Changle County is good. The soil quality of grade Ⅰ was 53.83%, that of grade Ⅱ was 22.62%, and that of grade Ⅲ was 19.04, which could fully meet the environmental quality requirements of agricultural soil.

218 Characteristics of Single Factor Regional Distribution of Soil Environmental Function Types

1）As,Pb,Zn The contents of arsenic, lead and zinc in the topsoil of Changle County were generally low, the maximum value of single pollutant index was less than 0.7, and the soil quality standard of grade Ⅰ was reached in the whole area. The characteristic parameters of single pollutant index in Changle County are shown in Table 5. 2）Cd The content of cadmium in the topsoil of Changle County is generally low, the maximum value of single pollutant index is only 1.23, the proportion of soil reaching Grade I soil environmental quality standard is 99.73, the second grade soil is 0.27%, only partially distributed in the eastern part of Gaoya Reservoir area, see Figure 2. 3）Cr The content of chromium in the topsoil of Changle County is generally low, the maximum value of single pollutant index is only 0.92in the topsoil of Changle County, 99.58% of the soils in the whole region meet the grade I soil environmental quality standard, and 0.42% of the second-grade soil is scattered in the southern part of Azure Dragon-Beizhang, see figure 3. 4）Cu The content of Cu in the topsoil of Changle County is generally low, the maximum value of single pollutant index is only 1.04, the proportion of soil reaching Grade I environmental quality standard is 99.49, the proportion of Grade Ⅱ soil is 0.51cm, only scattered distributed in the area of Beijian-Beizhoubu, see figure 4.

TABLE 5. CHANGLE COUNTY TOPSOIL SINGLE POLLUTANT INDEX CHARACTERISTIC PARAMETER TABLE. characteristic As Cd Cr Cu Hg Ni Pb Zn pH parameter crest value 0.53 1.23 0.92 1.04 4.98 4.06 0.53 0.47 8.64 average 0.25 0.31 0.27 0.28 0.07 0.78 0.07 0.23 7.30 value

219

Figure 2. Changle topsoil cadmium (Cd) elements Figure 3. Changle topsoil chrome (Cr) elements of Environmental Quality Grading Chart. of Environmental Quality Grading Chart.

5）Hg The content of mercury in the topsoil of Changle County was generally low, the maximum value of single pollutant index was only 4.98, the average value was 0.07. The proportion of soil in the whole area that reached the grade I soil environmental quality standard was 99.466.There were sporadic distribution of Ⅱ ~ Ⅴ grade soils. Among them, Ⅱ grade soil accounted for 0.12%, Ⅲ grade soil 0.23%, Ⅳ grade soil 0.11%, Ⅴ grade soil 0.08%, only distributed in the western part of Azure Dragon, see figure 5. 6）Ni The content of nickel in the topsoil of Changle County is relatively high, which is mainly related to the geological background. In the middle of Changle County, a large area of Neogene basalt is distributed, and the lithology is mainly composed of basalt with sandy gravel, clay and diatomite. The maximum value of the single pollutant index is 4.06, the mean value is 0.78. The proportion of the soils in the whole region that reach the grade I soil environmental quality standard is 62.26, followed by the second grade and the third grade, which account for 16.36%, 17.63%, Ⅳ grade and Ⅴ grade of the field area, respectively, and the distribution of the soils of grade Ⅳ and grade Ⅴ is sporadic, respectively. The grade Ⅰ soil is mainly distributed in the north and southeast of Changle County, and the second grade soil is mainly distributed in the streets of Baocheng, the south of the city, the streets of Wutu, the reservoir area of Gao Ya, and the area of the north and north,

220 and the area of Dazhike-Plain. The grade Ⅲ ~ Ⅴ soil is consistent with the Neogene basalt distribution area, mainly distributed in Azure Dragon, northern rock, Beizhan, Qiaoguanzhen and Wutu streets, see figure 6.

Figure 5. Changle topsoil mercury (Hg) elements Figure 6. Changle topsoil nickel (Ni) elements of of Environmental Quality Grading Char.t Environmental Quality Grading Chart.

7）Nemero composite index Nemero index is a weighted multifactor environmental quality index which takes into account extreme value or prominent maximum value. The index reflects the effects of various pollutants on soil, and highlights the influence of high concentration of pollutants on soil environmental quality. The Nemero index takes into account the most serious pollution factors. The NMELO environmental quality index avoids the influence of subjective factors in the weighting process. It is a kind of environmental quality index which is still widely used at present[17-18]。 According to the single pollution index of the eight environmental quality indexes mentioned above, we can calculate the Nemero index which represents the comprehensive environmental quality. According to the comprehensive index of Nemero pollution, we can classify the soil environmental quality of Changle County into five grades, see Table 4, figure 7.

221

Figure 7. Changle topsoil Environmental Quality Grading Chart (Nemerow index).

The results of comprehensive index evaluation of Nemero pollution showed that the overall condition of land environmental quality in Changle County was good. The proportion of grade Ⅰ soil environmental quality standard was 53.83, followed by Ⅱ grade and Ⅲ grade, accounting for 22.62% and 19.04 grade, Ⅳ grade, respectively. Grade V soil accounted for 3.91% of the area, 0.60% of the area. Among them, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, mercury, lead and zinc are all clean, and the soil area up to grade I environmental quality standard is more than 99.46%, and nickel content is high and belongs to the most polluted factor. The result of single pollutant evaluation of nickel is basically consistent with that of Nemero comprehensive index, that is, the area, proportion and distribution characteristics of each soil are similar.

CONCLUSIONS

A total of 315 topsoil samples were collected from the surface soil of Changle County. The heavy metal elements As,Pb,Zn,Cd,Cr,Cu,Hg and Ni in the soil were analyzed, and the soil environmental quality was evaluated by single factor index and Nemero index. The evaluation results show that the land environmental quality of Changle County is good, except nickel, the other seven heavy metal indexes are clean, that is to say, the soil area that reaches the grade I soil environmental quality standard accounts for more than 99.46%. The high risk content of nickel in soil environment is mainly related to the geological background. The contaminated area

222 is concentrated in the Neogene basalt distribution area in the central part of Changle County, and the lithology is mainly composed of basalt intercalated gravel, clay rock and diatomite. The result of comprehensive index evaluation of Nemero pollution shows that the soil environmental quality of Changle County is dominated by the soil of grade Ⅰ soil environmental quality standard, the proportion is 53.83, the second is grade Ⅱ, the other is grade Ⅲ, accounting for 22.62cm 19.04g, Ⅳ and Ⅴ respectively. It accounts for 3.91% of the total area of the territory, and 0.60% of the area. Among them, the nickel content is higher, which is the most serious pollution factor, which has a prominent influence on the evaluation results of Nemero comprehensive index, while the other 7 heavy metal indexes are clean.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This paper is a national fund for nature project（41572068）,Ministry of Public Welfare Industry Scientific Research Project（201511029）,National key R & D projects（2016YFC0600107）,Changle geological project（WT-CLCG2014-1432 ）and Joint funding for the construction project of scholars in Mount Tai, Shandong Province.

REFERENCES

1. Appleton J D, Ridgway J. 1993. regional geochemical mapping in developing countries and its application to environmental studies[J]. Applied Geochemistry,(2):103-110. 2. Goovaerts P. 1999. Geostatistics in soil science: State of the art and perspectives[J]. Geoderma, 89(1-2):1-45. 3. McLaughlin M J, Parker D R, Clarke J M.1999. Metals and micronutrients food issues[J]. Field Crop Research, 60:143-163. 4. Yang Q W, Shu W S, Qiu J W, et al. 2004. Lead in paddy soils and rice plants and its potential health risk around lechang Lead/Zinc Mine, Guangdong, China[J].Environment International, 30(7):883-889. 5. Han Ping, Wang Jihua, Lu Anxiang, et al. Distribution and Environmental quality Assessment of heavy Metals in soil of Shunyi District, Beijing [J]. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 31(1):106-112. 6. Yan Peng, Xu Shiliang, qu Ke Jian, et al. 1994. Shandong soil [M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 231-232. 7. Chen Huaiman, Zheng Chunrong, Zhou Dongmei, et al. 2006. Review and discussion on soil environmental quality [J]. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 25(4):821-827. 8. Gao Huaiyou, Zhao Yujie, Shi Rongguang, et al. 2005. Study on the criteria of Regional soil Environmental quality Assessment [J]. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences No. 24 (suppl.):342-345. 9. Zhou Guohua, Qin Yu-wen, Dong Yanxiang, et al. 2005. Principles and methods for establishing soil Environmental quality Standard [J]. Geological bulletin, 24 (8):721-727. 10. Du Yan, Chang Jiang, Xu Li. 2010. Progress in Evaluation methods of soil Environmental quality [J]. Soil notification,41(3):749-756.

223 11. Dei Jerry, Choi Yuan-jun, Pang Xu-gui, et al. 2011. Investigation and Evaluation of Agroecological Geochemistry in Eastern Shandong Province [J]. Shandong's land and resources, 27(5):1-7. 12. De Jerry, Pang Xue, Gong Yuxin, et al. 2010. Investigation and Evaluation of Agroecological Geochemistry in Weihai, Shandong Province [J]. Geological bulletin, 29(9):1391-1398. 13. Li Zuoxong, Ding Jing, Peng Lihong. 2004. Principles and methods of Environmental quality Assessment [M]. Beijing: chemical Industry Press, 53-65. 14. Lin Chenggu .1996. Soil pollution and control [M]. Beijing: China Agricultural Press, 127-136. 15. Li Xuemei, Deng Xiaowen, Wang Zuwei, et al. Determination of the weight of pollution Factor and the grading Standard of Regional Environmental quality Comprehensive Evaluation [J]. Resources and environment in arid areas, 24(4):97-100. 16. Li Hongkui, Zhong Jie, Qi Zhaohui, etc. Development and Utilization of Geological and Mineral Resources in Changle County [M]. Beijing: geological Publishing House, 296-351. 17. Guan Hui, Wan Hongfu, Wang Xian Min, et al. 2006. Analysis of heavy metals in Leizhou Peninsula soil and its pollution assessment [J]. Environmental pollution and prevention, 28(10):757-760,771. 18. Li Bo, Lin Yuzuo, Zhang Xiaofei, et al. 2005. Study on heavy Metal pollution in soil and Agricultural products on both sides of Ninglian Expressway [J]. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, 24(2): 266-269.

224