点击右上角
微信好友
朋友圈
请使用浏览器分享功能进行分享
护航春运路的“蜘蛛侠”******
(新春走基层)护航春运路的“蜘蛛侠”
中新网广州1月10日电题：护航春运路的“蜘蛛侠”
作者 郭军 陆省省
春运归途，思乡心切，一趟趟列车载着团圆的渴望抵达终点。在繁忙的京广铁路大动脉上，有这样一群铁路人，他们既是“山大王”也是“蜘蛛侠”，日常工作就是巡山巡河，攀岩爬山。
1月10日8时许，广铁集团广州工务段源潭路基车间连江口路基检查工区工长苏李力，带领3名职工前往鸡咀山进行岩石裂隙检查及碎石处理，防止落石砸到车窗，影响安全。记者跟随他们经过一个多小时的行车，来到了检查地点。
苏李力所在的工区，是个仅有10名职工的小班组，却承担了车间管内120公里的巡山巡河任务和路基设备检查工作，管辖着89个山头，是名副其实的“山大王”。
鸡咀山大概30米高，靠近线路那边就像被刀切过一样，与线路垂直。检查人员在接近山顶时，要走过大约5米长的“悬空”地段，由于岩体凹陷，钢丝网覆盖后，形成“真空”，有种高空走钢丝的感觉。
作业人员在绑好安全绳后，他们沿着超过70度的斜坡缓缓向上走，刚开始还有宽约50公分的台阶，大概5米左右，山体已被主动网(粗约1公分的钢丝结成的网)包裹，需要用两根挂钩勾住钢丝，缓慢交替爬行，就像攀岩的“蜘蛛侠”。工长苏李力一边攀爬，一边查看山体岩石情况。
图为作业人员进行岩体检查 陆省省 摄“我们还要检查一下那些地锚，看地锚是否稳固。雨水冲刷可会造成这些裂隙，裂隙有可能会造成这些地锚的松动，如果松动的话，我要及时处理加固了。”苏李力说道。
记者跟随作业人员爬到了山顶，山虽然不高，但还是攀爬的比较艰难。作业人员一边爬，一边要察看岩体状况，有没有裂隙碎石。爬上山顶，工长苏李力发现了一处碎石较多的地方，指挥大家小心处理碎石。
苏李力告诉记者，“因为石头是石灰岩，比较松软，雨水一冲刷就会造成这些碎石，碎石如果风化脱落以后打到车窗，可能会引发事故。春运期间，我们也会加强检查和处理的频次，保证列车运行平稳。”
源潭路基车间技术员李坚也在一旁说道：“这个岩体很多地方都有开裂，我们目前的工程措施是采用这个主动网对山体进行包拢，平常检查中，发现有脱离母岩倾向的岩体，也会及时进行砂浆危岩加固。”
作业人员花了将近两个多小时，一步步地仔细检查了岩体情况，对斜坡上疯涨的灌木进行清砍。俗话说，上山容易下山难，对于这段路，上下山都难。工长苏李力虽然爬过了不知多少遍，但每次都爬的小心翼翼。春运来了，为了保障京广铁路大动脉的安全，他们增加了巡查频次，也增加了更多防护措施。(完)
中新网评：处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事****** 中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称，将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对，企图将核污水“一倒了之”，把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。  资料图：日本福岛第一核电站。2011年，福岛核电站事故发生后，大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋，对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害，数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日，作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。 日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由，在2021年4月13日，正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多，日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。 日本政府辩称，这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全，甚至“可以喝”，这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。 事实上，经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质，核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收，长期来看，将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁，最终危害人类健康。 因此，核污水排海计划推出后，遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示，福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中，约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场，反对该计划。 日本政府认为，核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案，但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海，核污水会随着洋流流动，其影响势必会跨越国界，危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。 《韩国经济新闻》发文称，相关研究认为，福岛核污水如果排放入海，约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域，该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。 德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告，若日本将所有核污水排入海中，不到半年，整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁，包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。 日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国，有义务保护海洋环境。然而，在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上，日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。 国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估，但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论，并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下，日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设，这是极不负责任的行为。 太平洋不是日本的下水道，日本必须正视各方合理关切，在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后，制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远，若只顾眼前，执意将核污水排放入海，不仅其自身，周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单，其后果必将会危害数代人。  Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business By John Lee (ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year. Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business. The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster. On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year. The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public. In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run. Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public. The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution. The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community. The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses. According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan. As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment. However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact. Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad. The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies. If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence. 
|
)