بررسی تأثیر عوامل محیطی و گوگرد بازیافتی از پالایشگاه گاز شهید هاشمی‌نژاد بر کیفیت خاک‌های کشاورزی

نوع مقاله : مقالات پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه فردوسی مشهد

2 شرکت پالایش گاز شهید هاشمی نژاد (خانگیران)، سرخس

چکیده

به منظور بررسی کیفیت خاک موجود در منطقه پالایشگاه گاز شهید هاشمی نژاد، واقع در 165 کیلومتری شمال شرق مشهد و 35 کیلومتری جنوب شهرستان سرخس، تعداد 22 نمونه خاک از داخل محوطه و هم‌چنین زمین‌های کشاورزی اطراف پالایشگاه برداشت شد. pH عصاره‌های خاک در تعادل با آب مقطر و هم‌چنین در تعادل با محلول کلرید پتاسیم، هر دو با نسبت 5/1:2 خاک به آب اندازه‌گیری شد. پارامترهای دیگری نیز مانند محتوای سولفات کل به روش هضم کامل، غلظت کاتیون‌های کلسیم و منیزیم به روش تیتراسیون کمپلکسومتری و هم‌چنین سدیم و پتاسیم به روش طیف سنجی جذب اتمی اندازه‌گیری شدند. بررسی میزان شوری خاک با استفاده ازهدایت الکتریکی نشان داد اکثر نمونه‌های خاک خارج از محوطه پالایشگاه در رده خاک‌های غیر شور، دو نمونه داخل محوطه و دو نمونه خارج از محوطه در رده خاک‌هایی با شوری کم و یک نمونه داخل محوطه در گروه خاک‌هایی با شوری زیاد قرار داشتند. تغییرات شاخص ΔpH با تغییرات EC روندی معکوس را نشان داد و نتایج بررسی شوری خاک با استفاده از EC را تأیید کرد. با استفاده از دو شاخص SAR و EC غیر شور و غیر سدیمی بودن اکثر نمونه‌‌های خاک و هم‌چنین مناسب بودن آن‌ها برای کشاورزی از نظر حفظ وضعیت در برابر تنش‌های مختلف مشخص شد و فقط یکی از نمونه‌های برداشت شده از داخل محوطه پالایشگاه با داشتن EC بالاتر و قرار گرفتن در رده خاک‌های شور و غیر سدیمی، جهت تولید محصول محدودیت نشان داد. شاخص ESP با داشتن مقادیر کم‌تر از 15 درصد در تمام نمونه‌های خاک نشان داد تمرکز سدیم در این نمونه‌ها خطری برای محصولات کشاورزی ندارد. رابطه تمرکز سولفات کل با pH و EC به ترتیب روابطی با ضرایب همبستگی معکوس و مستقیم نسبتاً بالا بود که نشان‌دهنده تأثیر کم گوگرد بازیافتی از پالایشگاه بر ایجاد شرایط اسیدی در خاک و افزایش محتوای نمک‌های محلول خاک بود که اینگونه تأثیرات درمورد نمونه‌های خاک داخل محوطه بیشتر بود.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Effects of Environmental Factors and Recovered Sulfur in Shahid Hashemi Nezhad Gas Refinery on the Soils Quality for Irrigation

نویسندگان [English]

  • maryam tajbakhshian 1
  • Mohamad Hosien Mahmudy Gharaie 1
  • Asadollah Mahboubi 1
  • Reza Moussavi Harami 1
  • Iraj Ejlali 2
1 Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
2 Shahid Hashemi Nezhad gas refining incorporation, Sarakhs
چکیده [English]

Introduction: Elemental sulfur is byproduct of natural gas refining which during this process, H2S is removed from sour gas and after changes to solid sulfur, it is stored in large block forms. Continuous precipitation of sulfur and its oxidation causes soil acidification and as a result, nutrient cations such as Ca2+, Mg2+, Na+ and K+ will leach from the soil profile. Also, sulfate accumulation led to soil acidification and accelerates the silicates weathering in upper layer of the soil profile. Accumulation of water soluble sulfate in the soil and increase the nutrient cations leaching from the soil depend on sulfate resistance rate. Also, addition of sulfur to the soil for a long time can cause calcium sulfate formation that will cause problems such as increase in soil salinity. Shahid Hashemi Nezhad gas refinery is located about 35 km south of Sarakhs city and about165 km east north of Mashhad. In addition to exploiting, refining and producing 50 × 106 m3.day-1 natural gas, recovered sulfur with %99/9 purity and 2000 tons per day production capacity is one of the byproducts of this gas complex.
Materials and Methods: 22 soil samples were collected from surface soil in Shahid Hashemi Nezhad gas refinery (3 samples) and nearby areas (19 samples) (Fig.1). Soil extracts pH was measured in equilibrium with pure water and with KCl 1M solution in 1:2.5 soil solution ratio. EC of the soil samples was measured in different soil water ratios to obtain the EC 1:1 (Fig.2). Total sulfate content was measured by gravimetry method at geochemistry laboratory of Faculty of Sciences at Ferdowsi University of Mashhad. To get the digestion extract, a mixture of 2 ml concentrated HF, 5 ml HCl and 8 ml HNO3was added to 0.5 gr soil in a teflon vessel, then heated for 60 min at 170° C. After cooling, the solution was evaporated at 130 °C to dry it. Then, the dried salt was dissolved in a mixture of 2 ml HNO3 and 2 ml HCl and diluted with deionized water up to 25 ml. Ca2+ and Mg2+contentswere measured through titration of the soil extract with EDTA 0.01 N and in EBT reagent at the first stage, and titration of the soil extract by EDTA 0.01 N and in Moroxide reagent at the second stage. Na+ and K+ contents were determined using AAS method at geochemistry laboratory at Ferdowsi university of Mashhad after extraction with CaCl2 0.01 M.
Results and Discussion: Based on EC values, 77% of the soil samples were non-saline (EC < 2 dS m-1), 18% were slightly saline (EC= 2-4 dS m-1) and 5% were highly saline (EC=8-16 dS m-1) (Fig.3). In addition, low ΔpH values in the soil samples showed high salinity and similar results to EC. SAR index had the highest value in TS5 sample, and the cations content in this index can be attributed to evaporative sediments with carbonate and sulfate salts in the area (Shurijeh and Chehel-Kaman formations). Moreover, the halite bearing formations in the study area can be regarded as a source for Na+. Based on SAR and EC, majority of the samples (except TS5 in saline and non-sodic) were non-saline and non-sodic that were suitable for agriculture. ESP index of less than 15% in all samples indicated that Na+ concentration has no danger to crops. Relation between the total sulfate content to pH and EC was inverse and direct, respectively. This indicates that recovered sulfur affect in the soil acidification within the refinery site and increase the soluble salts content. These effects are very considerable in the soils inside the refinery site.
Conclusions: Salinity is the major factor affecting decrease of the samples quality for agriculture. Exposed formations in the area with highly soluble rocks causes to increase the soluble salts in the soil. The second factor is high temperature and low precipitation that led to increase the evaporation from the soil surface and accumulation of salts on the soil. Recovered sulfur from natural gas processing can reduce the soil pH and increases the soluble salts to some extent, especially in the inside refinery samples, and then decreases the soil quality for agricultural purposes. Except for one, all studied samples were classified as non-saline and non-sodic soils. Furthermore, the samples were classified in two classes of flocculated soils and potentially dispersive soils based on SAR and EC. ESP index indicates that there is no serious problem regarding sodium concentration in the soils. The pH values indicate that the samples were almost alkaline soils except for the samples inside the site, which are slightly acidic. Acidity of those few samples are attributed to the sulfur released from gas refinery process and its effect on the soil pH.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Gas refinery
  • SAR
  • Soil quality
  • Total sulfate
  • EC
  • ΔpH
1-Afshar Harb A. 1983. 1:250000 geological map of Sarakhs. Ministry of petroleum, National Iranian oil company, Exploration and production.
2-Allan Gower D. (1989). Fate of Labelled Nitrogen Fertilizer in Limed, Elemental Sulfur- Laden Forest Soils. (Master’s thesis). The University of Alberta, Canada.
3-A & L Canada Laboratories Incorporation. 2002. Understanding Cation Exchange Capacityand % Base Saturation (Fact Sheet No. 54). A & L Canada Laboratories Incorporation, London.
4-Barzegar A. 2009. Saline and sodic soils: Detrmination and use. Shahid Chamran university of Ahvaz publication, Ahvaz.
5-Blanchar R.W., Rehm G., and Caldwell A.C. 1965. Sulfur in plant materials by digestionwith nitric and perchloric acids. Soil Science Society, 29: 71-72.
6-Bourrie G. 2014. Swelling clays and salt affected soils: demixing of Na/Ca clays as the rationale for discouraging the use of sodium adsorption ratioo (SAR). Eurasian Journal ofSoil Science, 3:245-253.
7-Carcamo H.A., and Parkinson, D. 2001. Localized Acidification Near Sour Gas Processing Plants: Are Forest Floor Macro-invertebrates Affected?.Applied Soil Ecology, 17:199-213.
8-Edwards P. 1998. Sulfur Cycling, Retention, and Mobility in Soils: A Review (NE-250). United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), United States of America.
9-Fang D., Zhao L., Yang Z.Q., Shan H.X., Gao Y., and Yang Q. 2009. Effect of sulphur concentration on bioleaching of heavy metals from contaminated dredged sediments. Environmental Technology, 30:1241-1248.
10-Fernandes T. 2011. Guidelines for Landfill Disposal of Sulphur Waste and Remediation of Sulphur Containing Soils. Alberta Environment, Alberta, Canada.
11- Flynn R., and Ulery A. 2011. An Introduction to Soil Salinity and Sodium Issues in New Mexico. (Circular 656). New Mexico State University, New Mexico.
12-Graveland D.N., and Kacsinko F. 1974. Subsurface Disposal of Elemental Sulphur. Alberta Environment, Edmonton.
13-Hadush Desta Y. 2013. Characterization of forest soils in the Morsa watershed in order to assess the background leaching of phosphorus to the eutrophic western Vansjo lake. (Master thesis). Faculty of mathemtics and natural sciences, Oslo.
14-Hazelton P., and Murphy B. 2007. Interprating Soil Test Results: What do All the Numbers Mean?. CSIRO Publishing, Australia.
15- Ivanov M.V., and Freney J.R. 1983. The Global Biogeochemical Sulfur Cycle.: John Wiley & Sons Incorporation, Chinchester.
16-Jaefari Haghighi M. 2003.Main physical and chemical sampling and analizes emphasizing theorical and applied principles. Nedaye Zohaa publication, Sari.
17-Jangjoo M., Ejtehadi, H., and Danesh, S. 2008. Introduction to suitable plant species to farm in around gas refinery of Sarakhs (Research plan). Ferdowsi university of Mashhad, Mashhad.
18-Jones J.B. 2001. Laboratory Guide for Conducting Soil Tests and Plant Analysis. CRC Press LLC, New York.
19-Kavosh-pay engineering advisor incorporation. 2010. The successive studies of water resources in Sarakhs region: Environmental report. Regional water incorporation of Khorasan Razavi, Mashhad.
20-Ketterings Q.M., Albrecht, G., & Beckman, J. 2005. Soil pH for Field Crops (Fact Sheet No.5). Cornell University Cooperative Extension,United States of America.
21-Lal R. 2015. Restoring Quality to Mitigate Soil Degradation Soil, Sustainability. 7:5875-5895.
22-Leon, J. & Osorio, N. 2014. Role of Litter Turnover in Soil Quality in Tropical Degraded Lands of Colombia. Scence of World Journal, 13:77-86.
23-Miller R.O., and Kissel, D.E. 2010. Comparison of Soil pH Methods on Soils of North America, Nutrient Management & Soil & Plant Analysis, 74:310-316.
24-Morche L. 2008. S-Flusse und raumliche Veranderungen anorganischer und organischer Schwefelfraktionen im Boden sowie deren An- und Abreicherung in der Rhizosphare landwirtschaftlicher Kulturpflanzen unter partiellem Einsatz des Radioisotops 35S. (Doctoral dissertation). Rheinischen Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat, Bonn.
25-Munns R. 2002. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environment, Vol.52:659-662.
26-Neeley F., Heguy D., and Karr J. 2010. Sulfur: At the Crossroads of Energy, the Environment, and Agriculture.Fertilizer International, 388:68-72.
27-Nevell W., and Wainwright M. 1987. Influence of soil moisture on sulphur oxidation in brown earth soilsexposed to atmospheric pollution. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 5:209-214.
28-O’Geen A. 2015. Reclaiming saline, sodic and saline sodic soils (ANR Publication 8519). Univercity of California, United States of America.
29-Parent V., and Koenig R. 2010. Solutions to Soil Problems: High Salinity (Soluble Salts) (AG/Soils/2003-01). Cooperative Extension, Utah State University, United States of America.
30-Paterson E. 2011. Geochemical Atlas for Scottish Topsoils (AB15 8QH). The Macaulay Land Use Reserach Institute, Scottland.
31-Pawels J.M., Van Ranst E., Verloo, M., and Mvondo, Z.A. 1992. Soil and Plant Analysis. Sheffield Academic Press, Bruxelles.
32-Pritzel, J., Mayer, B., and Legge, A. 2004. Cumulative impact of 40 years of industrial sulfur emissions on a forest soil in west-central Alberta (Canada). Environmental Pollution, 132:129-144.
33-Quirk J.P. 2001. The significance of the threshold and turbidity concentrations in relation to sodicity and microstructure. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 39:1185-1217.
34-Rengasamy P., Greene, R.S.B., Ford, G.W., and Mehanni, A.H. 1984. Identification ofdispersive behaviour and the management of red-brown earths. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 22:413–431.
35-Rengasamy P., and Olsson K.A. 1991. Sodicity and soil structure. Australian Journal of Soil Research, 29:935–952.
36-Rengasamy P. 2010. Soil processes affecting crop production in salt-affected soils. Functional Plant Biology, 37:613-620.
37-Severson-Baker C. 2010. Oil & Gas Processing: Environment & Energy in the North. Pembina Institute, Alberta, Canada.
38-Scherer H. W. 2001. Sulphur in crop production. European Journal of Agronomy, 14:81–111.
39-Shahid Hashemi Nezhad gas refining incorporation. 2011. The comprehensive information of Shahid Hashemi Nezhad gas refining incorporation (Khangiran). National gas incorporation of Iran, Mashhad.
40-Soil Survey Division Staff. 1993. Soil Survey Manual. United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), Washington D.C.