论文部分内容阅读
目的建立洪涝灾区分散投药、专职投药和集中过滤处理3种生活饮用水应急消毒处理模式,比较3种模式对生活饮用水消毒处理的效果。方法于2008年10月～12月选择湖北仙桃杨林尾镇18个村庄作为现场,分为分散投药组、专职投药组和集中过滤组,每2周对生活饮用水源水、设备出口水、居民缸水采样并检测菌落总数、总大肠菌群、耐热大肠菌群、大肠埃希菌4项微生物指标。结果 3组水源水微生物污染严重,全部不合格;饮用水应急集中处理设备的菌落总数消除率为99.95%;分散投药组、专职投药组和集中过滤组菌落总数消除率分别为81.93%、99.67%和98.28%;居民缸水微生物指标合格率分别为13.33%、70.00%和43.33%,差异有统计学意义。结论集中过滤模式和专职投药模式在洪涝灾区对生活饮用水的消毒处理效果优于分散投药模式。
Objective To establish three kinds of emergency drinking water disinfection and treatment modes of decentralized administration, full-time administration and centralized filtration in flood-affected areas and compare the effects of three modes on disinfection of domestic drinking water. Methods From October to December, 2008, 18 villages in Linwei Town, Xiantao, Hubei Province were chosen as the site, which were divided into three groups: distributed medicine group, full-time medicine group and centralized filtering group. Every two weeks, drinking water source, Residents of the cylinder sampling and testing the total number of colony, total coliform bacteria, heat-resistant coliform bacteria, Escherichia coli 4 microbial indicators. Results The total number of colonies in drinking water emergency centralized treatment equipment was 99.95%. The total number of colonies in dispersive group, full-time group and centralized group were 81.93% and 99.67%, respectively. And 98.28%, respectively. The passing rate of resident water microbial indicators were 13.33%, 70.00% and 43.33% respectively, with significant differences. Conclusion The centralized filtration mode and the full-time dosage mode are better than the decentralized dosage mode in the disinfection of drinking water in flood-affected areas.