二十大代表风采丨青海林业专家张锦梅：一“梅”苦寒三十载 高原见绿满城香******
中新网西宁10月10日电 题：青海林业专家张锦梅：一“梅”苦寒三十载 高原见绿满城香
作者 潘雨洁
深秋时节，高原小城青海省西宁市的丁香花朵早已开败。
“现在只剩叶子，你看不出它们的区别，”西宁市林业科学研究所党委书记、所长张锦梅指向山路旁高低错落的灌丛，对中新网记者说：“但到了明年四五月，这些不同品种的丁香又会竞相盛放，香气散遍山野，一路都能闻到。”
图为张锦梅在实验室工作。马铭言 摄说着，她从包里掏出剪刀，钻进树坑，边修剪枝条，边指点一旁的同事。
“这剪子她用了十几年，”西宁市林业科学研究所副所长满丽婷笑着说，“在田间地头，摆穴盘、播种、修剪……每次都跟所里的年轻人一起，手把手地教。”
起风了，山上冷飕飕，张锦梅却出了一头汗。“这株是暴马丁香，街面上很常见，”她说，“还有一些适应高寒的品种，比如四川丁香、辽东丁香，种在高海拔的三江源地区，可提高城镇绿化率。”
丁香是西宁市市花，种植历史已久。但传统品种多年未经选优慢慢退化，良种率降低，影响景观效果。
图为张锦梅(中)与同事在西宁北山查看丁香树。马铭言 摄自2013年成立以来，西宁市林业科学研究所开展丁香资源调查、品种收集、适生筛选等工作，先后从国内外引进收集各类丁香品种103个，建立全国首个丁香国家林木种质资源库，并通过播种、扦插、嫁接、组培等方式扩繁，培育良种。
“建立资源库后，可以长期、系统保存种质资源，为日后丁香的深入研究、杂交选育奠定种质基础。”张锦梅说。
站在西宁北山远眺，虽已深秋，周边群山绿意依旧，林丛掩映下的街区华灯初上，眼前的城市已与三十年前全然不同。
对此，张锦梅深有体会。
西宁地处黄土高原向青藏高原的过渡带，海拔2300米以上，干旱缺水、适宜树种少、春旱持续久。
图为张锦梅修剪丁香枝干。马铭言 摄“春天干风卷沙，地上升温，苗木枝干开始活动，”张锦梅介绍，“而根系地下的土壤还未化冻，营养水分无法输送，造成‘生理干旱’，存活率低。”
除了自然条件限制，上世纪九十年代，立地条件差、树种单一、造林技术落后，都直接影响苗木成活率。“那时候只能有啥种啥，年年栽树老地方，年年栽树不见树。”张锦梅回忆。
什么树能在干燥、风大、高寒条件下长期存活？张锦梅和同事们从选育树种开始探索。“选树就像选人，要选优培养。”她说，通过自然选育和人工干预，利用变异杂交出抗逆性更强的品种，还要经得住多年野外环境的检验，才算成功。
图为西宁北山上的丁香树。马铭言 摄“适地适树”培育的同时，他们也在不断改进旱作造林综合技术，根据不同梯度、立地条件，开挖水平沟、鱼鳞坑，整地节流、蓄水保墒；并采取株间、行间、带状混交模式，造“乔灌草”复层生态林，既可避免大面积病虫害，又能较好地发挥生态功能。
近三十年间，西宁市区南北两山森林覆盖率从7.2%上升到79%，在张锦梅看来，数字背后是坚持换来的“逆袭”：集生态景观、防风固沙、涵养水源等功能于一体的山林环抱城市，湟水两岸绿树成荫，气候变得湿润，“晴天一头土，雨天一腿泥”的记忆已经远去。
如今，张锦梅带着她的团队，致力将绿意播向更广阔的天地。为了在严重干旱的柴达木盆地建起防风固沙的“绿色长城”，他们选择杨树“家族”中耐旱性强的小叶杨作为骨架树种，选育采穗圃，已收集近300个杨树品种，为大规模推广种植打下基础。
图为张锦梅查看丁香生长情况。马铭言 摄林木生长周期长，从播种到开花需要多年守候，选育过程更是跋山涉水，艰苦异常。很多人耐不住、等不及，但张锦梅却坚持走了三十多年，而且越走越不想放慢脚步。
“只有真正投入大自然中，才感到‘大美青海’所言非虚。”张锦梅感慨，青藏高原是独特的地理单元和天然种质基因库，丰富的植物资源尚未被充分发掘、利用，“比起成就感，更意识到自身认知的浅薄，常常觉得时间不够。”
在她引导下，青年后辈们继续着对国土绿化和乡土树种的研究、保护和利用。
“功成有我，不必在我，”张锦梅说，这篇写在青藏高原山川大地上的“论文”，正在几代林业人的接续奋斗中未完待续。(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. 
|
