Comprehensive evaluation method for slope restoration effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved sludge

Abstract

A comprehensive evaluation method for the slope restoration effect and the ecological carbon sink potential of improved sludge comprises the steps that S1, the weights of a stability index and an ecological carbon sink potential index are determined to be A1 and B1 respectively, and A1 + B1 = 1; s2, the weights of the anti-scouring property and the adhesion property are determined and are a1 and a2 respectively, and a1 + a2 = 1; s3, assigning Aa1 to the anti-scouring property in the step S2, and assigning Aa2 to the adhesion property; s4, the weights of the vegetation growth condition and the microbial conversion efficiency are determined to be b1 and b2 respectively, and b1 + b2 = 1; s5, assigning Bb1 to the growth condition of the vegetation on the surface layer of the side slope in the step S4, and assigning Bb2 to the microbial conversion efficiency of the improved sludge; and S6, performing comprehensive evaluation according to the evaluation elements, the weights A1, B1, a1, a2, b1 and b2 and the assigned values Aa1, Aa2, Bb1 and Bb2 of the evaluation indexes. According to the method, a basis can be provided for evaluating the longevity and stability of exposed side slope alien soil ecological restoration, later maintenance of exposed side slope ecological restoration is guided, and whether repeated restoration needs to be carried out or not is evaluated.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The invention relates to the technical field of resource utilization of dredged sludge, and in particular to a method for comprehensively evaluating the slope restoration effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved sludge. Background Art

[0002] A large amount of dredged silt will be generated during the dredging of rivers. If it is not disposed of or utilized, it will not only increase the construction cost and cause a huge waste of land resources, but also the accumulated silt will lead to a series of environmental and geological disasters such as soil erosion and slope instability. Therefore, how to effectively improve and utilize the dredged silt has always been a technical problem that needs to be solved urgently in the field of engineering geology. In the process of highway, railway construction and mining, a large number of exposed slopes will be caused, which will seriously affect the ecological environment. In the process of greening the exposed slopes by spraying imported soil, the imported soil substrate often slides and the vegetation grows difficultly. Therefore, improving the dredged silt and applying it to the ecological restoration of exposed slopes can not only improve the resource utilization efficiency of dredged silt but also achieve the greening of the slopes.

[0003] The ecological effect evaluation of the application of modified dredged sludge to slope restoration mainly includes the stability of slope sludge and its ecological carbon sink potential. The anti-scouring property of the modified sludge and its adhesion characteristics to the slope will affect the long-term stability of the slope sludge. The growth of the surface vegetation on the slope and the efficiency of microbial conversion also have an important impact on the ecological carbon sink potential of the modified sludge, including vegetation density, root length, number of vegetation leaves, and accumulation efficiency of microbial residues (such as amino sugars). At present, there are relatively few evaluations of the ecological effects of the application of modified sludge in slope restoration, and there is a lack of a comprehensive evaluation method that combines the stability of slope sludge and its ecological carbon sink potential. Summary of the invention

[0004] In response to the technical problem that the above-mentioned existing technologies cannot comprehensively evaluate the ecological effects of improved silt applied to slope restoration, the present technical solution provides a comprehensive evaluation method for the slope restoration effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt, which can comprehensively evaluate the ecological effects of silt slope restoration by comprehensively considering the stability of slope silt and the ecological carbon sink potential of vegetation and soil; open up new areas for silt resource utilization, and provide a reference basis for the application prospects and ecological value evaluation of improved silt applied to slope restoration; and effectively solve the above-mentioned problems.

[0005] The present invention is achieved through the following technical solutions:

[0006] A comprehensive evaluation method for slope restoration effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt includes the following steps:

[0007] S1: According to the evaluation factors and evaluation indicators, determine the weights of the stability index and the ecological carbon sequestration potential index of the slope-improved silt as A1 and B1 respectively, where A1 + B1 = 1;

[0008] S2: Based on the evaluation factors and their evaluation indicators, determine the weights of the anti-erosion property of the slope-improved silt and its adhesion property with the slope as a1 and a2 respectively, where a1 + a2 = 1;

[0009] S3: By testing the anti-erosion property of the slope-improved silt and its adhesion property with the slope, artificially simulate rainfall, collect the erosion amount of the slope soil layer to evaluate the anti-erosion property, and conduct tests through interface shear tests to evaluate the adhesion property. Assign a score of Aa1 to the anti-erosion property of the slope-improved silt described in S2, and assign a score of Aa2 to the adhesion property of the slope-improved silt described in S2;

[0010] S4: Based on the evaluation factors and their evaluation indicators, determine the weights of the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope and the microbial transformation efficiency as b1 and b2 respectively, where b1 + b2 = 1;

[0011] S5: According to the vegetation density, root length, number of vegetation leaves, and microbial residue accumulation efficiency for testing, select sample plots in the investigation area, count the data in the sample plots, assign a score of Bb1 to the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope described in S4, and assign a score of Bb2 to the microbial transformation efficiency of the improved silt described in S4;

[0012] S6: According to the evaluation factors and weights A1, B1, a1, a2, b1, b2, and the assigned scores Aa1, Aa2, Bb1, Bb2 of the evaluation indicators, conduct a comprehensive evaluation. The evaluation formula is as shown in Equation (1):

[0013] G = A1×(a1×Aa1 + a2×Aa2) + B1×(b1×Bb1 + b2×Bb2) (1);

[0014] According to the magnitude of the quantification index G, comprehensively evaluate the slope ecological effect of the improved silt, and then implement corresponding improvement and optimization measures.

[0015] Further, the evaluation factors described in step S1 include primary factors and secondary factors. The primary factors include stability and ecological carbon sequestration potential. The secondary factors of the stability include anti-erosion property and adhesion property; the secondary factors of the ecological carbon sequestration potential include vegetation growth and microbial transformation efficiency.

[0016] Furthermore, the evaluation indexes of the anti-erosion property include the anti-erosion coefficient, erosion rate, and water holding capacity; the evaluation indexes of the adhesion property include adhesion force, peeling area, and interface friction angle; the evaluation indexes of vegetation growth include vegetation density, root length, and leaf number; the evaluation indexes of microbial conversion efficiency include amino sugar accumulation rate, organic carbon content, and microbial activity.

[0017] Furthermore, in the step S1, the weight A1 of the stability index and the weight B1 of the ecological carbon sequestration potential index of the slope-improved silt are determined according to the slope of the slope, specifically as follows:

[0018] When the slope ≤ 10°, A1 is 0.2 and B1 is 0.8;

[0019] When the slope > 10° and ≤ 20°, A1 = 0.3 and B1 is 0.7;

[0020] When the slope > 20° and ≤ 35°, A1 = 0.5 and B1 is 0.5;

[0021] When the slope > 35° and ≤ 50°, A1 = 0.6 and B1 is 0.4;

[0022] When the slope > 50°, A1 = 0.7 and B1 is 0.3.

[0023] Furthermore, in the step S2, the weight a1 of the anti-erosion index of the slope-improved silt and the weight a2 of its adhesion property index with the slope are determined according to the slope of the slope, specifically as follows:

[0024] When the slope ≤ 10°, a1 is 0.6 and a2 is 0.4;

[0025] When the slope > 10° and ≤ 20°, a1 = 0.7 and a2 is 0.3;

[0026] When the slope > 20° and ≤ 35°, a1 = 0.5 and a2 is 0.5;

[0027] When the slope > 35° and ≤ 50°, a1 = 0.4 and a2 is 0.6;

[0028] When the slope > 50°, a1 = 0.3 and a2 is 0.6.

[0029] Furthermore, in the step S3, the score Aa1 of the anti-erosion property of the slope-improved silt is assigned according to the slope erosion amount, and the specific assignment is as follows:

[0030] When the erosion amount per square meter ≤ 1 kg, the score of Aa1 is 90;

[0031] When the erosion amount per square meter > 1 kg and ≤ 10 kg, the score of Aa1 is 80;

[0032] When the scouring amount per square meter > 10 kg and ≤ 20 kg, the score of Aa1 is 70;

[0033] When the scouring amount per square meter > 20 kg and ≤ 30 kg, the score of Aa1 is 60;

[0034] When the scouring amount per square meter > 30 kg, the score of Aa1 is 50;

[0035] The adhesion property score Aa2 between the improved silt slopes is assigned according to the interface strength, and the specific scoring is as follows:

[0036] When the interface shear strength ≤ 10 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 50;

[0037] When the interface shear strength > 10 kPa and ≤ 50 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 60;

[0038] When the interface shear strength > 50 kPa and ≤ 100 kPa, the score of Aa1 is 70;

[0039] When the interface shear strength > 100 kPa and ≤ 200 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 80;

[0040] When the interface shear strength > 200 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 90.

[0041] Furthermore, in step S4, the ecological carbon sequestration potential of the improved silt on the slope surface is tested, and according to the growth situation G of the slope surface vegetation and the microbial conversion efficiency E, the weights of the two are determined as b1 = 0.5 and b2 = 0.5 respectively.

[0042] Furthermore, in step S5, the growth situation score Bb1 of the vegetation, the evaluation indexes include vegetation density D, the number of vegetation leaves N and root length L; the evaluation formula of Bb1 is as formula (2):

[0043] Bb1 = 0.4×D + 0.3×N + 0.3×L (2);

[0044] The score D of the slope vegetation density is determined according to the number of plants d per unit area, and the specific scoring is as follows:

[0045] When the number of plants per square meter d ≤ 20 plants, the score of D is 30;

[0046] When the number of plants per square meter d > 20 plants and ≤ 50 plants, the score of D is 50;

[0047] When the number of plants per square meter d > 50 plants and ≤ 100 plants, the score of D is 60;

[0048] When the number of vegetation plants per square meter \(d>100\) and \(\leq200\), the score of \(D\) is 80;

[0049] When the number of vegetation plants per square meter \(d > 200\), the score of \(D\) is 90;

[0050] The score of the vegetation leaf number \(N\) is determined according to the measured value of the average number of leaves per single plant \(z\) per unit area, specifically as follows:

[0051] When the average number of leaves per single plant \(z\) per unit area \(\leq2\), the score of \(N\) is 50;

[0052] When the average number of leaves per single plant \(z\) per unit area \(>2\) and \(\leq5\), the score of \(N\) is 70;

[0053] When the average number of leaves per single plant \(z\) per unit area \(>5\), the score of \(N\) is 90;

[0054] The vegetation root length \(L\) is determined according to the average length \((l)\) of the roots per unit area, specifically as follows:

[0055] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(\leq10cm\), the score of \(D\) is 60;

[0056] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(>10cm\) and \(\leq20cm\), the score of \(L\) is 70;

[0057] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(>20cm\) and \(\leq30cm\), the score of \(L\) is 80;

[0058] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(>30cm\), the score of \(L\) is 90.

[0059] Furthermore, in the step S5, the score of the microbial conversion efficiency \(Bb2\), and the evaluation index evaluates the microbial conversion efficiency of the improved sludge according to the total amino sugar content \(T\), chitin derivative content \(S\), ergosterol content \(U\) and organic matter carbonization efficiency \(K\) per unit mass; the evaluation formula of \(Bb2\) is as formula (3):

[0060] \(Bb2 = 0.2\times T + 0.2\times S + 0.2\times U - 0.4\times K\) (3);

[0061] The total amino sugar content \(T\) is determined according to the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved sludge per unit mass, specifically as follows:

[0062] When the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved sludge per kilogram \(<500mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 30;

[0063] When the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved sludge per kilogram \(\geq500mg / kg\) and \(<1000mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 70;

[0064] When the amino sugar content j in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies 1000 mg / kg ≤ j < 1500 mg / kg, the T score is 80;

[0065] When the amino sugar content j in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies j > 2000 mg / kg, the T score is 90;

[0066] The chitin derivative content S is determined according to the chitin derivative content y in the improved sludge per unit mass, specifically as follows:

[0067] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies y < 10 mg / kg, the T score is 30;

[0068] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies 10 mg / kg ≤ y < 100 mg / kg, the T score is 70;

[0069] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies 100 mg / kg ≤ y < 400 mg / kg, the T score is 80;

[0070] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies y > 400 mg / kg, the T score is 90;

[0071] The ergosterol content U is determined according to the ergosterol content m in the improved sludge per unit mass, specifically as follows:

[0072] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies m < 1 mg / kg, the U score is 30;

[0073] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies 1 mg / kg ≤ m < 10 mg / kg, the T score is 70;

[0074] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies 10 mg / kg ≤ m < 40 mg / kg, the T score is 80;

[0075] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of improved sludge satisfies m > 40 mg / kg, the T score is 90;

[0076] The organic matter carbonization efficiency is the rate (k) of the conversion of organic carbon in the improved sludge per unit time into CO2, which reflects the decomposition efficiency of microorganisms on organic matter. The specific score is as follows:

[0077] When k ≤ 0.5 mg, the D score is 50;

[0078] When 0.5 mg < k ≤ 2 mg, the K score is 60;

[0079] When 2 mg < k ≤ 5 mg, the K score is 70;

[0080] When k > 5 mg and ≤ 10 mg, the K score is 80;

[0081] When k > 10 mg, the K score is 90.

[0082] Furthermore, in the step S6,

[0083] When the quantification index G ≤ 30, the comprehensive evaluation of the improvement effect of the silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is poor;

[0084] When the quantification index G > 30 and ≤ 50, the comprehensive evaluation of the improvement effect of the silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is relatively poor;

[0085] When the quantification index G > 50 and G ≤ 70, the comprehensive evaluation of the ecological restoration and carbon effect of the improved silt rock slope is medium;

[0086] When the quantification index G > 70 and G ≤ 90, the comprehensive evaluation of the improvement effect of the silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is good;

[0087] When the quantification index G > 90, the comprehensive evaluation of the slope improvement effect and the potential of ecological carbon sink is excellent.

[0088] (III) Beneficial Effects

[0089] A comprehensive evaluation method for the improvement effect of a silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink proposed by the present invention, compared with the prior art, has the following beneficial effects:

[0090] (1) The present invention comprehensively evaluates the improvement effect of the silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink, provides a reference basis for the improvement of the evaluation method of the improvement effect of the silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink, ensures the effect of ecological restoration, fills the blank of the single evaluation index that the evaluation of the ecological restoration of the rock slope mainly reflects the growth of vegetation, increases the role of microbial action in the ecological carbon sink mechanism of the improved silt, and provides guiding suggestions for the evaluation of the ecological restoration effect and the assessment of the potential of ecological carbon sink in the process of silt resource utilization.

[0091] (2) The comprehensive evaluation method for the improvement effect of the silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink proposed by the present invention can comprehensively consider the stability and the potential of ecological carbon sink of the improved silt, including the anti-scouring property and the adhesion property for the slope, as well as the vegetation growth situation and the microbial conversion efficiency.

[0092] (3) The present invention can provide a basis for the long-term and stability evaluation of the ecological restoration of the soil on the bare slope, guide the later maintenance of the ecological restoration of the bare slope and evaluate whether multiple restorations are needed. Description of the Drawings

[0093] Figure 1 It is the overall process schematic diagram of the present invention. Specific embodiments

[0094] Next, the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention will be clearly and completely described in conjunction with the accompanying drawings in the embodiments of the present invention. The described embodiments are only a part of the embodiments of the present invention, rather than all of the embodiments. Without departing from the design concept of the present invention, various modifications and improvements made by those of ordinary skill in the art to the technical solutions of the present invention shall fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

[0095] Embodiment 1:

[0096] As Figure 1 shown, a comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sequestration potential of improved silt includes the steps:

[0097] S1: According to the evaluation elements and evaluation indicators shown in Table 1, determine that the weights of the stability index and the ecological carbon sequestration potential index of the slope-improved silt are A1 and B1 respectively, where A1 + B1 = 1.

[0098] Table 1 Evaluation elements and evaluation indicators of the performance of improved silt

[0099]

[0100] The weight A1 of the stability index of the slope-improved silt and the weight B1 of the ecological carbon sequestration potential index are determined according to the slope of the slope, specifically as follows:

[0101] When the slope ≤ 10°, A1 is 0.2 and B1 is 0.8;

[0102] When the slope > 10° and ≤ 20°, A1 = 0.3 and B1 is 0.7;

[0103] When the slope > 20° and ≤ 35°, A1 = 0.5 and B1 is 0.5;

[0104] When the slope > 35° and ≤ 50°, A1 = 0.6 and B1 is 0.4;

[0105] When the slope > 50°, A1 = 0.7 and B1 is 0.3.

[0106] S2: According to the evaluation elements and their evaluation indicators, determine the weights of the anti-scouring property of the slope-improved silt and its adhesion property with the slope, which are a1 and a2 respectively, where a1 + a2 = 1.

[0107] The weight a1 of the anti-scouring property index of the slope-improved silt and the weight a2 of the adhesion property index between it and the slope are determined according to the slope of the slope, specifically as follows:

[0108] When the slope ≤ 10°, a1 is 0.6 and a2 is 0.4;

[0109] When the slope > 10° and ≤ 20°, a1 = 0.7 and a2 is 0.3;

[0110] When the slope > 20° and ≤ 35°, a1 = 0.5 and a2 is 0.5;

[0111] When the slope > 35° and ≤ 50°, a1 = 0.4 and a2 is 0.6;

[0112] When the slope > 50°, a1 = 0.3 and a2 is 0.6.

[0113] S3: By testing the anti - scouring property of the slope - improved silt and its adhesion characteristics with the slope, artificially simulating rainfall, collecting the scouring amount of the slope soil layer to evaluate the anti - scouring property, and testing through the interface shear test to evaluate the adhesion characteristics, assign scores Aa1 to the anti - scouring property of the slope - improved silt described in S2, and assign scores Aa2 to the adhesion characteristics of the slope - improved silt described in S2.

[0114] The score Aa1 for the anti - scouring property of the slope - improved silt is assigned according to the scouring amount of the slope. The specific scoring is as follows:

[0115] When the scouring amount per square meter ≤ 1 kg, the score of Aa1 is 90;

[0116] When the scouring amount per square meter > 1 kg and ≤ 10 kg, the score of Aa1 is 80;

[0117] When the scouring amount per square meter > 10 kg and ≤ 20 kg, the score of Aa1 is 70;

[0118] When the scouring amount per square meter > 20 kg and ≤ 30 kg, the score of Aa1 is 60;

[0119] When the scouring amount per square meter > 30 kg, the score of Aa1 is 50;

[0120] The score Aa2 for the adhesion characteristics between the improved silt and the slope is assigned according to the interface strength. The specific scoring is as follows:

[0121] When the interface shear strength ≤ 10 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 50;

[0122] When the interface shear strength > 10 kPa and ≤ 50 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 60;

[0123] When the interface shear strength > 50 kPa and ≤ 100 kPa, the score of Aa1 is 70;

[0124] When the interface shear strength > 100 kPa and ≤ 200 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 80;

[0125] When the interface shear strength > 200 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 90.

[0126] S4: According to the evaluation elements and their evaluation indicators, determine that the weights of the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope and the microbial transformation efficiency are b1 and b2 respectively, where b1 + b2 = 1; Test the ecological carbon sequestration potential of the improved silt on the surface of the slope, and according to the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope G and the microbial transformation efficiency E, determine that the weights of the two are b1 = 0.5 and b2 = 0.5 respectively.

[0127] S5: According to the vegetation density, root length, number of vegetation leaves, and microbial residue accumulation efficiency, select sample plots within the surveyed area, count the data within the sample plots, score Bb1 for the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope described in S4, and score Bb2 for the microbial transformation efficiency of the improved silt described in S4.

[0128] The score Bb1 for the growth of the vegetation, the evaluation indicators include vegetation density D, number of vegetation leaves N, and root length L; The evaluation formula for Bb1 is as shown in Equation (2):

[0129] Bb1 = 0.4×D + 0.3×N + 0.3×L (2);

[0130] The score D for the vegetation density of the slope is determined according to the number of plants d per unit area, and the specific scoring is as follows:

[0131] When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter ≤ 20 plants, the score of D is 30;

[0132] When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 20 plants and ≤ 50 plants, the score of D is 50;

[0133] When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 50 plants and ≤ 100 plants, the score of D is 60;

[0134] When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 100 plants and ≤ 200 plants, the score of D is 80;

[0135] When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 200 plants, the score of D is 90;

[0136] The score N for the number of vegetation leaves is determined according to the measured value of the average number of leaves z per plant per unit area, as follows:

[0137] When the average number of leaves z per plant per unit area ≤ 2 leaves, the score of N is 50;

[0138] When the average number of leaves per plant per unit area \(z\gt2\) and \(\leq5\), the score of \(N\) is 70;

[0139] When the average number of leaves per plant per unit area \(z\gt5\), the score of \(N\) is 90;

[0140] The root length \(L\) of the vegetation is determined according to the average root length \((l)\) per unit area, as follows:

[0141] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(\leq10\ cm\), the score of \(D\) is 60;

[0142] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(\gt10\ cm\) and \(\leq20\ cm\), the score of \(L\) is 70;

[0143] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(\gt20\ cm\) and \(\leq30\ cm\), the score of \(L\) is 80;

[0144] When the average root length \(l\) of the vegetation per square meter \(\gt30\ cm\), the score of \(L\) is 90.

[0145] The score of the microbial transformation efficiency \(Bb2\) is evaluated according to the total amino sugar content \(T\), chitin derivative content \(S\), ergosterol content \(U\) and organic matter carbonization efficiency \(K\) per unit mass to evaluate the microbial transformation efficiency of the improved silt; the evaluation formula of \(Bb2\) is as shown in formula (3):

[0146] \(Bb2 = 0.2\times T + 0.2\times S + 0.2\times U - 0.4\times K\ (3)\);

[0147] The total amino sugar content \(T\) is determined according to the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved silt per unit mass, as follows:

[0148] When the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved silt per kilogram \(\lt500\ mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 30;

[0149] When the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved silt per kilogram \(\geq500\ mg / kg\) and \(\lt1000\ mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 70;

[0150] When the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved silt per kilogram \(\geq1000\ mg / kg\) and \(\lt1500\ mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 80;

[0151] When the amino sugar content \(j\) in the improved silt per kilogram \(\gt2000\ mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 90;

[0152] The chitin derivative content \(S\) is determined according to the chitin derivative content \(y\) in the improved silt per unit mass, as follows:

[0153] When the chitin derivative content \(y\) in the improved silt per kilogram \(\lt10\ mg / kg\), the score of \(T\) is 30;

[0154] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies y ≥ 10 mg / kg and < 100 mg / kg, the T score is 70;

[0155] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies y ≥ 100 mg / kg and < 400 mg / kg, the T score is 80;

[0156] When the chitin derivative content y in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies y > 400 mg / kg, the T score is 90;

[0157] The ergosterol content U is determined according to the ergosterol content m in the improved sludge per unit mass, specifically as follows:

[0158] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies m < 1 mg / kg, the U score is 30;

[0159] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies m ≥ 1 mg / kg and < 10 mg / kg, the T score is 70;

[0160] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies m ≥ 10 mg / kg and < 40 mg / kg, the T score is 80;

[0161] When the ergosterol content m in each kilogram of the improved sludge satisfies m > 40 mg / kg, the T score is 90;

[0162] The organic matter carbonization efficiency is the rate (k) of the conversion of organic carbon in the improved sludge per unit time into CO2, reflecting the decomposition efficiency of microorganisms on organic matter. The specific score is as follows:

[0163] When k ≤ 0.5 mg, the D score is 50;

[0164] When k > 0.5 mg and ≤ 2 mg, the K score is 60;

[0165] When k > 2 mg and ≤ 5 mg, the K score is 70;

[0166] When k > 5 mg and ≤ 10 mg, the K score is 80;

[0167] When k > 10 mg, the K score is 90.

[0168] S6: According to the evaluation factors and weights A1, B1, a1, a2, b1, b2, and the score values Aa1, Aa2, Bb1, Bb2 of the evaluation indicators, a comprehensive evaluation is carried out. The evaluation formula is as shown in formula (1):

[0169] G = A1×(a1×Aa1 + a2×Aa2) + B1×(b1×Bb1 + b2×Bb2) (1);

[0170] According to the magnitude of the quantification index G, comprehensively evaluate the slope ecological effect of the improved silt, and then implement corresponding improvement and optimization measures.

[0171] When the quantification index G ≤ 30, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of the improved silt slope is poor;

[0172] When the quantification index G > 30 and ≤ 50, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of the improved silt slope is relatively poor;

[0173] When the quantification index G > 50 and G ≤ 70, the comprehensive evaluation of the ecological restoration and carbon effect of the improved silt rock slope is medium;

[0174] When the quantification index G > 70 and G ≤ 90, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of the improved silt slope is good;

[0175] When the quantification index G > 90, the comprehensive evaluation of the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential is excellent.

[0176] The description of the above embodiments is only used to help understand the method and its core idea of the present invention; at the same time, for those of ordinary skill in the art, according to the idea of the present invention, there will be changes in the specific implementation manner and application scope. In summary, the content of this specification should not be construed as a limitation to the present invention.

Claims

1. A comprehensive evaluation method for the slope restoration effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt, characterized in that: Including the steps: S1: According to the evaluation factors and evaluation indicators, determine that the weights of the stability index and the ecological carbon sequestration potential index of the slope-improved silt are A1 and B1 respectively, where A1 + B1 = 1; S2: Based on the evaluation factors and their evaluation indicators, determine the weights of the erosion resistance of the slope-improved silt and its adhesion characteristics to the slope, which are a1 and a2 respectively, where a1 + a2 = 1; S3: By testing the erosion resistance of the slope-improved silt and its adhesion characteristics to the slope, artificially simulate rainfall, collect the erosion amount of the slope soil layer to evaluate the erosion resistance, and conduct tests through interface shear tests to evaluate the adhesion characteristics. Assign a score Aa1 to the erosion resistance of the slope-improved silt described in S2, and assign a score Aa2 to the adhesion characteristics of the slope-improved silt described in S2; S4: Based on the evaluation factors and their evaluation indicators, determine that the weights of the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope and the microbial conversion efficiency are b1 and b2 respectively, where b1 + b2 = 1; S5: According to the vegetation density, root length, number of vegetation leaves, and microbial residue accumulation efficiency, select sample plots in the survey area, count the data in the sample plots, assign a score Bb1 to the growth of the surface vegetation of the slope described in S4, and assign a score Bb2 to the microbial conversion efficiency of the improved silt described in S4; S6: According to the evaluation factors and weights A1, B1, a1, a2, b1, b2, and the assigned scores Aa1, Aa2, Bb1, Bb2 of the evaluation indicators, conduct a comprehensive evaluation. The evaluation formula is as shown in Equation (1): G = A1×(a1×Aa1 + a2×Aa2) + B1×(b1×Bb1 + b2×Bb2) (1); According to the magnitude of the quantification index G, comprehensively evaluate the slope ecological effect of the improved silt, and then implement corresponding improvement and optimization measures.

2. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: The evaluation factors described in step S1 include primary factors and secondary factors. The primary factors include stability and ecological carbon sequestration potential. The secondary factors of the stability include erosion resistance and adhesion characteristics; the secondary factors of the ecological carbon sequestration potential include vegetation growth and microbial conversion efficiency.

3. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sequestration potential of improved silt according to claim 2, characterized in that: The evaluation indicators of the erosion resistance include erosion resistance coefficient, erosion rate, and water holding capacity; the evaluation indicators of the adhesion characteristics include adhesion force, peeling area, and interface friction angle; the evaluation indicators of the vegetation growth include vegetation density, root length, and number of leaves; the evaluation indicators of the microbial conversion efficiency include amino sugar accumulation rate, organic carbon content, and microbial activity.

4. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step S1 described above, the weight A1 of the stability index of the slope-improved silt and the weight B1 of the ecological carbon sequestration potential index are determined according to the slope of the slope, specifically as follows: When the slope ≤ 10°, A1 is 0.2 and B1 is 0.8; When the slope > 10° and ≤ 20°, A1 = 0.3 and B1 is 0.7; When the slope > 20° and ≤ 35°, A1 = 0.5 and B1 is 0.5; When the slope > 35° and ≤ 50°, A1 = 0.6 and B1 is 0.4; When the slope > 50°, A1 = 0.7 and B1 is 0.

3.

5. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the said step S2, the weight a1 of the anti-scouring index of the slope-improved silt and the weight a2 of its adhesion characteristic index with the slope are determined according to the slope of the slope, specifically as follows: When the slope ≤ 10°, a1 is 0.6 and a2 is 0.4; When the slope > 10° and ≤ 20°, a1 = 0.7 and a2 is 0.3; When the slope > 20° and ≤ 35°, a1 = 0.5 and a2 is 0.5; When the slope > 35° and ≤ 50°, a1 = 0.4 and a2 is 0.6; When the slope > 50°, a1 = 0.3 and a2 is 0.

6.

6. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the said step S3, the anti-scouring score Aa1 of the slope-improved silt is scored according to the slope scouring amount, and the specific scoring situation is as follows: When the scouring amount per square meter ≤ 1 kg, the score of Aa1 is 90; When the scouring amount per square meter > 1 kg and ≤ 10 kg, the score of Aa1 is 80; When the scouring amount per square meter > 10 kg and ≤ 20 kg, the score of Aa1 is 70; When the scouring amount per square meter > 20 kg and ≤ 30 kg, the score of Aa1 is 60; When the scouring amount per square meter > 30 kg, the score of Aa1 is 50; The adhesion characteristic score Aa2 between the improved silt slopes is scored according to the interface strength, and the specific scoring situation is as follows: When the interface shear strength ≤ 10 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 50; When the interface shear strength > 10 kPa and ≤ 50 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 60; When the interface shear strength > 50 kPa and ≤ 100 kPa, the score of Aa1 is 70; When the interface shear strength > 100 kPa and ≤ 200 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 80; When the interface shear strength > 200 kPa, the score of Aa2 is 90.

7. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sequestration potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the said step S4, the ecological carbon sequestration potential of the slope surface improved silt is tested, and according to the growth situation G of the slope surface vegetation and the microbial conversion efficiency E, the weights of the two are determined to be b1 = 0.5 and b2 = 0.5 respectively.

8. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the said step S5, the growth situation score Bb1 of the vegetation, the evaluation indexes include vegetation density D, the number of vegetation leaves N and root length L; the evaluation formula of Bb1 is as formula (2): Bb1 = 0.4×D + 0.3×N + 0.3×L (2); The score D of the slope vegetation density is determined according to the number of plants d per unit area, and the specific scoring situation is as follows: When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter ≤ 20 plants, the score of D is 30; When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 20 plants and ≤ 50 plants, the score of D is 50; When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 50 plants and ≤ 100 plants, the score of D is 60; When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 100 plants and ≤ 200 plants, the score of D is 80; When the number of vegetation plants d per square meter > 200 plants, the score of D is 90; The score N of the vegetation leaf number is determined according to the measured value of the average number of leaves z per unit area of a single plant, specifically as follows: When the average number of leaves z per unit area of a single plant ≤ 2 leaves, the score of N is 50; When the average number of leaves z per unit area of a single plant > 2 leaves and ≤ 5 leaves, the score of N is 70; When the average number of leaves per plant z per unit area > 5, N is scored 90; The vegetation root length L is determined according to the average length (l) of the roots per unit area, specifically as follows: When the average length of the vegetation roots per square meter l ≤ 10 cm, D is scored 60; When the average length of the vegetation roots per square meter l > 10 cm and ≤ 20 cm, L is scored 70; When the average length of the vegetation roots per square meter l > 20 cm and ≤ 30 cm, L is scored 80; When the average length of the vegetation roots per square meter l > 30 cm, L is scored 90.

9. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1 or 8, characterized in that: In the step S5, the microbial conversion efficiency is scored Bb2, and the evaluation index evaluates the microbial conversion efficiency of the improved silt according to the total amino sugar content T, chitin derivative content S, ergosterol content U, and organic matter carbonization efficiency K per unit mass; the evaluation formula for Bb2 is as shown in formula (3): Bb2 = 0.2×T + 0.2×S + 0.2×U - 0.4×K (3); The total amino sugar content T is determined according to the amino sugar content j in the improved silt per unit mass, specifically as follows: When the amino sugar content j per kilogram of the improved silt < 500 mg / kg, T is scored 30; When the amino sugar content j per kilogram of the improved silt ≥ 500 mg / kg and < 1000 mg / kg, T is scored 70; When the amino sugar content j per kilogram of the improved silt ≥ 1000 mg / kg and < 1500 mg / kg, T is scored 80; When the amino sugar content j per kilogram of the improved silt > 2000 mg / kg, T is scored 90; The chitin derivative content S is determined according to the chitin derivative content y in the improved silt per unit mass, specifically as follows: When the chitin derivative content y per kilogram of the improved silt < 10 mg / kg, T is scored 30; When the chitin derivative content y per kilogram of the improved silt ≥ 10 mg / kg and < 100 mg / kg, T is scored 70; When the chitin derivative content y per kilogram of the improved silt ≥ 100 mg / kg and < 400 mg / kg, T is scored 80; When the chitin derivative content y per kilogram of the improved silt > 400 mg / kg, T is scored 90; The ergosterol content U is determined according to the ergosterol content m in the improved silt per unit mass, specifically as follows: When the ergosterol content m per kilogram of the improved silt < 1 mg / kg, U is scored 30; When the ergosterol content m per kilogram of the improved silt ≥ 1 mg / kg and < 10 mg / kg, T is scored 70; When the ergosterol content m per kilogram of the improved silt ≥ 10 mg / kg and < 40 mg / kg, T is scored 80; When the ergosterol content m per kilogram of the improved silt > 40 mg / kg, T is scored 90; The organic matter carbonization efficiency is the rate (k) of the conversion of organic carbon in the improved silt per unit time to CO2, reflecting the decomposition efficiency of microorganisms on organic matter. The specific scoring is as follows: When k ≤ 0.5 mg, D is scored 50; When k > 0.5mg and ≤ 2mg, the K score is 60; When k > 2mg and ≤ 5mg, the K score is 70; When k > 5mg and ≤ 10mg, the K score is 80; When k > 10mg, the K score is 90.

10. The comprehensive evaluation method for the slope repair effect and ecological carbon sink potential of improved silt according to claim 1, characterized in that: In the step S6, When the quantification index G ≤ 30, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect of the improved silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is poor; When the quantification index G > 30 and ≤ 50, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect of the improved silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is relatively poor; When the quantification index G > 50 and G ≤ 70, the comprehensive evaluation of the ecological restoration and carbon effect of the improved silt rock slope is medium; When the quantification index G > 70 and G ≤ 90, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect of the improved silt slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is good; When the quantification index G > 90, the comprehensive evaluation of the repair effect of the slope and the potential of ecological carbon sink is excellent.

Images