中国土壤铅环境标准的国际定位与启示——基于15个典型国家与地区的对比分析

doi:10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2025.09.029

湖北农业科学 ›› 2025, Vol. 64 ›› Issue (9): 179-184.doi: 10.14088/j.cnki.issn0439-8114.2025.09.029

中国土壤铅环境标准的国际定位与启示——基于15个典型国家与地区的对比分析

叶晶¹, 赵亚荣², 钱波¹, 叶晴³, 彭立军⁴

1.广东省农业标准化协会,广州 510640;
2.广东省农业科学院农业质量标准与监测技术研究所,广州 510640;
3.广东海洋大学化学与环境学院,广东湛江 524088;
4.湖北省农业科学院农业质量标准与检测技术研究所/农产品营养品质与安全湖北省重点实验室,武汉 430064

收稿日期:2025-05-28 出版日期:2025-09-25 发布日期:2025-10-28
通讯作者: 彭立军（1969-）,男,湖北天门人,研究员,主要从事农产品质量安全监测技术及风险评估工作,（电子信箱）765571726@qq.com。
作者简介:叶晶（1987-）,女,广西河池人,助理农艺师,硕士,主要从事农业标准化研究,（电话）18680470807（电子信箱）354755767@qq.com。
基金资助:
资助项目：农产品营养品质与安全湖北省重点实验室开放课题项目（2022HBKF03）

International positioning and implications of China’s environmental standards for lead in soil based on comparative analysis of 15 typical countries and regions

YE Jing¹, ZHAO Ya-rong², QIAN Bo¹, YE Qing³, PENG Li-jun⁴

1. Guangdong Association of Agricultural Standardization, Guangzhou 510640, China;
2. Institute of Quality Standard and Monitoring Technology for Agro-products, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China;
3. College of Chemistry and Environment, Guangdong Ocean University, Zhanjiang 524088, Guangdong, China;
4. Institute of Agricultural Quality Standards and Testing Technology/ Hubei Provincial Key Laboratory of Nutrition Quality and Safety of Agricultural Products, Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Wuhan 430064, China

Received:2025-05-28 Published:2025-09-25 Online:2025-10-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 通过系统调研与对比分析全球15个典型国家与地区（涵盖欧洲、北美、亚太）的土壤铅环境标准,揭示其在标准限值、土地利用分类及风险评估方法上的差异。结果表明,中国农用地土壤铅环境标准值较国际同类标准更为严格;住宅用地、工业/商业用地铅的土壤污染风险筛选值均与国际中位水平持平,但其风险管制值处于75%~95%分位区间,管控较宽松。不同国家和地区土壤铅标准值存在明显差异,主要归因于四方面因素：敏感受体选择、土地利用分类体系、暴露模型参数设置及可接受风险水平。

关键词: 中国, 土壤, 铅, 环境标准, 土壤污染, 国际定位, 启示, 国家与地区

Abstract: Through systematic investigation and comparative analysis of environmental standards for lead in soil from 15 typical countries and regions (covering Europe, North America, and Asia-Pacific), differences in standard limits, land use classification, and risk assessment methods were revealed.The results indicated that China’s environmental standard values for lead in agricultural soil were stricter than international counterparts; the risk screening values for lead in residential and industrial/commercial soil were consistent with the international median level, but the risk control values fell within the 75%~95% percentile range, indicating relatively lenient control. Significant differences in standard values for lead in soil among different countries and regions were attributed to four main factors: sensitive receptor selection, land use classification systems, exposure model parameter settings, and acceptable risk levels.

Key words: China, soil, lead, environmental standards, soil pollution, international positioning, implications, countries and regions

中图分类号:

叶晶, 赵亚荣, 钱波, 叶晴, 彭立军. 中国土壤铅环境标准的国际定位与启示——基于15个典型国家与地区的对比分析[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(9): 179-184.

YE Jing, ZHAO Ya-rong, QIAN Bo, YE Qing, PENG Li-jun. International positioning and implications of China’s environmental standards for lead in soil based on comparative analysis of 15 typical countries and regions[J]. HUBEI AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, 2025, 64(9): 179-184.

参考文献 37

[1]	BONTEN L T C,RMKENS P F A M,BRUS D J. Contribution of heavy metal leaching from agricultural soils to surface water loads[J]. Environmental forensics, 2008, 9(2-3): 252-257.
[2]	BAYRAKTAR S,YILMAZ T.Measures to diminish leaching of heavy metals to surface waters from agricultural soils[J]. Desalination, 2008, 226(1):89-96.
[3]	吴琳, 林秋月, 刘思,等. 铅中毒者T细胞受体-CD3分子复合物基因表达模式[J]. 中华劳动卫生职业病杂志, 2013 (3): 201-204.
[4]	王红梅, 于云江, 赵秀阁,等. 铅神经毒性的分子生物学研究回顾与展望[J]. 现代预防医学, 2007, 34(20): 3856-3857.
[5]	WEBSTER R, OLIVER M A.Sample adequately to estimate variograms of soil properties[J]. Journal of soil science, 1992, 43(1): 177-192.
[6]	中国有1/5的耕地,遭到了重金属污染[EB/OL]. (2018-04-03) [2024-10-09]. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s?__biz=MzUzOTAwMjU1Mg==&mid=2247487989&idx=1&sn=bfb90838309338bce1aba 9ef3777ec34&chksm=face4222cdb9cb34f37ed9825308d7148136d e54191f72995fa7fa22a368d60556ad994c8b06&scene=27.
[7]	周广柱, 曹译允, 王翠珍,等. 城市土壤中铅分布特征及环境风险[J]. 山东科技大学学报(自然科学版), 2019, 38(1): 49-57.
[8]	王小庆, 马义兵, 黄占斌. 痕量金属元素土壤环境质量基准研究进展[J]. 土壤通报, 2013, 44(2): 505-512.
[9]	王国庆, 邓绍坡, 冯艳红,等. 国内外重金属土壤环境标准值比较: 镉[J]. 生态与农村环境学报, 2015, 31(6): 808-821.
[10]	戈子轩,吴同亮,王霞,等. 国内外土壤砷的环境标准比较[J]. 农业环境科学学报, 2024, 43(11): 2455-2471.
[11]	Federal ministry for the environment. Federal soil protection and contaminated sites ordinance (BBodSchV)[R]. Germany: The federal government, 1999.
[12]	Liywodraeth cymru welsh government. SP1010: Development of category 4 screening levels for assessment of land affected by contamination—Policy companion document[EB/OL]. [2024-10-08]. https://cn.bing.com/search?q=Development+of+Category+4+Scre‑ ening+Levels+for+Assessment+of+Land+Affected+by+Contamination&cvid=430cbbec331f4d6994a8ce8ea4f26ba2&gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOdIBCDE0MTRqMGo0qAIEsAIB&FORM=ANAB01&adppc=EdgeStart&PC=DCTS.
[13]	Netherlands ministry of infrastructure and the environment soil remediation circular [EB/OL]. (2013-07-01)[2024-10-08]. https://enviroeng.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/LISTA-HOLANDESA-2013.pdf.
[14]	Finland ministry of the environment. Government decree on the assessment of soil contamination and remediation needs[EB/OL]. (2007-03-01)[2024-10-09]. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/fin113198.pdf.
[15]	The czech republic. Decree on the determination of details of the protection of the quality of agricultural land and on the amendment[EB/OL]. (2016-05-17)[2024-10-08]. https://faolex.fao.org/docs/pdf/cze174732.pdf.
[16]	OSWER9355.4-24,Supplemental guidance for developing soil screening levels for superfund sites[S].
[17]	OSWER9285.7-55,Guidance for developing ecological soil screening levels[S].
[18]	USEPA (United States environmental protection agency). Regional screening levels (RSLs)-Generic tables[EB/OL]. [2024-09-30]. https://www.epa.gov/risk/regional-screening-levels-rsls-generic-tables.
[19]	National guidelines and standards office, Water policy and coordination directorate. Canadian soil quality guidelines for the protection of environmental and human health:Toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes (TEX)[R].Ottawa-Ontario: Environment Canada, 2005.
[20]	GB 15618—2018,土壤环境质量农用地土壤污染风险管控标准[S].
[21]	GB 36600—2018,土壤环境质量建设用地土壤污染风险管控标准(试行)[S].
[22]	Hong Kong environmental protection department. Guidance manual for use of risk-based remediation goals for contaminated land management[EB/OL].[2024-10-09]. https://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/sites/default/files/epd/english/environmentinhk/waste/guide_ref/files/gme.pdf.
[23]	王滢, 张晓岚, 王冉. 中国台湾地区土壤污染调查和管理情况综述[J]. 土壤, 2018, 50(1): 7-15.
[24]	Republic of Korea ministry of environment. The 3rd national standards master plan2013 ministry of environment implementation plan[EB/OL].(2013-07-10)[2024-10-09].https://www.me.go.kr/home/web/board/read.do?menuId=10557&boardMasterId=827 &boardCategoryId=&boardId=184988.
[25]	Ministry of the environment government of Japan. Soil contamination countermeasures[EB/OL].[2024-10-09]. https://www.env.go.jp/en/water/soil/contami_cm.pdf.
[26]	The department of climate change, energy, the environment and water (DCCEEW).Guideline on the investigation levels for soil and groundwater[EB/OL]. (2022-07-01)[2024-10-09].https://www.nepc.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-09/schedule-b1-guideline-investigation-levels-soil-and-groundwater-sep10.pdf.
[27]	New Zealand ministry of the environment. Proposed national environmental standard for assessing and managing contaminants in soil[EB/OL].[2024-10-09]. https://environment.govt.nz/assets/Publications/Files/proposed-nes-soil-contamination.pdf#:~:text=The%20proposed%20NES%2C%20applied%20within%20a%20framework%20for,control%20the%20use%20of%20land%20affected%20by%20contaminants.
[28]	李勖之, 姜瑢, 王国庆,等. 不同国家农用地土壤环境标准比较与启示[J]. 环境科学, 2022, 43(2): 577-585.
[29]	李勖之, 郑丽萍, 张亚,等. 应用物种敏感分布法建立铅的生态安全土壤环境基准研究[J]. 生态毒理学报,2021,16(1): 107-118.
[30]	徐猛, 颜增光, 贺萌萌,等. 不同国家基于健康风险的土壤环境基准比较研究与启示[J]. 环境科学, 2013, 34(5): 1667-1678.
[31]	USEPA.Exposure factors handbook[R].Washington:Nationalcenter for environmental assessment,2011.
[32]	段小丽, 黄楠, 王贝贝, 等. 国内外环境健康风险评价中的暴露参数比较[J]. 环境与健康杂志, 2012, 29(2): 99-104.
[33]	National institute of advanced industrial science and technology. Japanese exposure factors handbook[EB/OL].(2007-03-30)[2024-10-09].http://unit.aist.go.jp/riss/crm/exposurefactors/english_summary.html.
[34]	HJ 25. 3—2014,污染场地风险评估技术导则[S].
[35]	Indiana department of environmental management. RISC technical guide, RISC default closure tables[EB/OL].(2006-01-31)[2024-10-09]. https://www.troyrisk.com/Free-Documents/RISC-Cleanup-Levels-Appx-1-2006.pdf.
[36]	National institute of public health and the environment of the netherlands. CSOIL 2000: An exposure model for human risk assessment of soil contamination[R]. The Netherlands: The Ministry of housing, spatial planning and the environment, 2007.
[37]	EA. Contaminants in soil: Updated collation of toxicological data and intake values for humans cadmium[R]. Bristol, UK:Environment agency, Rio house, 2009.

中国土壤铅环境标准的国际定位与启示——基于15个典型国家与地区的对比分析

International positioning and implications of China’s environmental standards for lead in soil based on comparative analysis of 15 typical countries and regions

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献 37

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	陈晓文, 荀佳常, 刘昌永, 张鹤缤, 王晓娅. 地貌敏感区土壤保持的长期演变及其气候时空响应机制——以山西省为例[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(9): 27-35.
[2]	顾僖鸿, 刘江龙, 胡桂清, 张文太. 准噶尔西部山区地形序列土壤水力性质及其影响因素[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(9): 36-43.
[3]	周奕恺, 姚怡彩, 高源, 张警予, 张斌, 满振团, 王明道, 崔光周. 植物促生菌：从作用机制到绿色农业[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(9): 56-65.
[4]	孙全胜. 中国式现代化乡村绿色发展的三重路径[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(9): 246-251.
[5]	魏静, 左丽君, 汪潇, 胡顺光, 张增祥, 刘晏君, 全洛平. 2000—2020年中国主要作物氮、磷肥施用时空变化[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(8): 62-72.
[6]	贺瀅霖, 李文龙, 池汝安, 时珺玮, 李建芬, 秦振华. 磷石膏、水稻秸秆和鸡粪联合堆肥及其改良土壤的效果[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(8): 73-78.
[7]	陈花, 常宇航, 张佳怡, 李强. 平菇菌渣生物炭的制备及对水中铅、镉离子的吸附效果[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(8): 97-103.
[8]	杨立荣, 胡桂清, 张文太. 伊犁河谷土壤储水量及其影响因素[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(8): 104-109.
[9]	聂奇, 杨雅茹, 马文洁, 李烨彤, 罗敏, 韦杰, 门媛媛. 中国式现代化背景下和美乡村建设影响要素评价[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(6): 11-16.
[10]	叶灵, 相殿国, 苗锋, 纪明妹, 刘珊, 王胜蕊. 不同栽培模式下小麦养分生产效率及土壤环境风险[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(6): 28-32.
[11]	任泉静, 卢宗琪, 李宇航, 顾海萍, 杨毅, 任伟征. 不同植物驯化的土壤微生物对小麦生长的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(6): 33-38.
[12]	赵希梅, 裴霄敏, 李奥明洋, 刘天雅, 张政, 李梦蝶, 李继福. 模拟水旱轮作条件下土壤磷素含量对秸秆还田的响应及变化规律[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(6): 39-44.
[13]	莫明浩, 刘昭, 石芬芬, 严志伟, 王嘉. 基于土柱模拟的红壤坡耕地耕作土体构型对土壤水运移特征的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(6): 45-52.
[14]	杜菲, 黄润生, 杨永花, 杨波. 克拉玛依市石油出口处土壤细菌的鉴定及耐药性[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(6): 59-64.
[15]	张慧, 王谊, 杭晓宁, 张健, 廖敦秀, 唐荣莉. 受旱对水稻和土壤镉含量及镉抗性相关微生物的影响[J]. 湖北农业科学, 2025, 64(5): 10-16.