电站建设对澜沧江-湄公河 泥沙年内分配的影响

采用澜沧江漫湾电站上游旧州站和下游允景洪、清盛站1987~2003 年逐月悬移质泥沙含量实测资料, 分析对比了三站年内泥沙分配不均匀系数、集中度和集中期、变化幅度等特性。将上述参数与澜沧江上游干流漫湾与大朝山电站建设的响应进行关联研究, 分析电站建设进程对河道输沙变化的驱动作用。结果表明: (1) 旧州水文站泥沙年内分配与区域气候变化 (降水) 趋势一致, 研究时段内不均匀性系数呈上升趋势, 维持天然河道输沙特性; 允景洪和 清盛水文站的泥沙年内分配不均匀性系数对电站建设等人类活动的响应程度不一致, 允景洪站泥沙含量不均匀系数先减小后急剧增加, 而清盛站呈微弱减小态势。(2) 旧州水文站泥沙年 内分配集中度及集中期基本无变化; 允景洪与清盛水文站的泥沙年内分配集中度变化较大, 泥沙集中期在在电站施工的高峰期(1987~1992 年、1997~2003 年) 后延, 且不同步, 允景洪在漫湾施工期后延5~6 天, 而清盛则后延将近半个月,而在大朝山施工期, 允景洪的后延响应 却明显于清盛。(3) 旧州站相对、绝对泥沙变幅逐时段递增, 允景洪站年内最大与最小月泥沙含量的相对、绝对变化幅度均减小, 清盛站泥沙含量的相对变化幅度却先增后减, 绝对变化 幅度则一直减小。三站泥沙年内极值变幅以及电站建设前后的响应差异, 说明三站泥沙变化的驱动因子有明显不同。这些关于泥沙含量年内分配特征规律的发现, 为研究澜沧江干流电站建设对上下游泥沙变化以及跨境影响的科学评价提供了新的佐证。     

Integration of geoelectric and hydrochemical approaches for delineation of groundwater potential zones in alluvial aquifer

Geoelectric and hydrochemical approaches are employed to delineate the ground-water potential zones in District Okara, a part of Bari Doab, Punjab, Pakistan. Sixty-seven VES surveys are conducted with the Electrical Resistivity Meter. The resultant resistivity verses depth model for each site is estimated using computer-based software IX1D. Aquifer thickness maps and interpreted resistivity maps were generated from interpreted VES results. Dar-Zarrouk parameters, transverse resistance (TR), longitudinal conductance (SL) and anisotropy (λ) were also calculated from resistivity data to delineate the potential zones of aquifer. 70% of SL value is ≤3S, 30% of SL value is > 3S. According to SL and TR values, the whole area is divided into three potential zones, high, medium and low potential zones. The spatial distribution maps show that north, south and central parts of study area are marked as good potential aquifer zones. Longitudinal conductance values are further utilized to determine aquifer protective capacity of area. The whole area is characterized by moderate to good and up to some extent very good aquifer protective area on the basis of SL values. The groundwater samples from sixty-seven installed tube wells are collected for hydro-chemical analysis. The electrical conductivity values are determined. Correlation is then developed between the EC (μS/cm) of groundwater samples vs. interpreted aquifer resistivity showing R2 value 0.90.