Floating constructed wetland for the treatment of polluted river water: A pilot scale study on seasonal variation and shock load

Saeed, Tanveer; Paul, Biprojit; Afrin, Rumana; Al-Muyeed, Abdullah; Sun, Guang–Zhen

doi:10.1016/j.cej.2015.10.118

Cited by 83 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, floating treatment wetland (FTW) systems, buoyant mats that suspend plant crowns above the water while allowing the roots to reside in the water column, have the potential to provide water quality treatment without impacting adjacent land use (Keizer-Vlek et al, 2014). FTWs provide water treatment for NO 3 -N, total N (TN), ammonium-N (NH 4 -N), total microcystin-LR, E. coli, and total P (TP) (Chauzat and Faucon, 2007;Jones et al, 2017;Keizer-Vlek et al, 2014;Mercado-Borrayo et al, 2015;Saeed et al, 2014Saeed et al, , 2016Tanner and Headley, 2011;Winston et al, 2013;Xian et al, 2010). Specifically, FTWs reduce the TN, TP, and total suspended solids (TSS) in influent by 4% to 88%, 8% to 53%, and 5% to 80%, respectively (Borne et al, 2013;Lane et al, 2016;Nichols et al, 2016;White and Cousins, 2013).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nitrate Removal by Floating Treatment Wetlands Amended with Spent Coffee: A Mesocosm-Scale Evaluation

Keilhauer¹,

Messer²,

Mittelstet³

et al. 2019

Transactions of the ASABE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

HighlightsA floating treatment wetland design was evaluated for water quality improvements.Nitrate-N removal rates were quantified using spent coffee grounds as a carbon source.Nitrate-N removal rates increased throughout the growing season Abstract. The Midwestern U.S. is vulnerable to eutrophic conditions from high nutrient concentrations. Floating treatment wetlands (FTWs) are an innovative wetland design for nutrient removal from nonpoint sources and provide a unique treatment. The objectives of this project were to quantify nitrate removal in traditional and carbon-amended FTWs planted with Midwestern plant species during the establishment year. Three greenhouse experiments were conducted throughout the growing season using 18 mesocosms. Two vegetation designs were evaluated: rush species ( and ) and diverse species (, , , , , and ). Spent coffee grounds were applied to 9 of the 18 mesocosms as a carbon amendment. Nitrate-N removal increased during the establishment growing season in the FTW systems (Spring: 15.0% to 17.3%, Summer 1: 82.8% to 92.6%, Summer 2: 86.4% to 94.7%). Nitrate-N removal was also impacted by carbon amendments (FTW without amendment: 82.8% to 94.7%, FTW with amendment: 88.4% to 96.1%). Carbon additions were found to enhance denitrifying conditions even in the absence of FTWs (decreased dissolved oxygen, increased available organic carbon). Significant differences in nitrate-N removal were not observed between FTW vegetation designs. This study provides new insight on the impacts of the growing season, plant species, and carbon amendments on FTW nitrate-N removal performance during the establishment year. Keywords: Best management practices, Carbon amendment, Floating treatment wetlands, Nitrogen removal, Spent coffee grounds

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nitrate Removal by Floating Treatment Wetlands Amended with Spent Coffee: A Mesocosm-Scale Evaluation

Keilhauer¹,

Messer²,

Mittelstet³

et al. 2019

Transactions of the ASABE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Constructed wetlands are considered to be a sustainable passive wastewater treatment technology, and have been used to treat a variety of wastewaters for decades, including domestic or municipal wastewater [1,2], industrial wastewater [3,4], agricultural [5][6][7], acid mine drainage [8], river and lake water [9][10][11], groundwater [12], landfill leachate [13][14][15], highway [16] and airport [17] runoff. They take advantage of many of the same processes that occur in natural wetlands, but do so in a more controlled or engineered system [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peat as Substrate for Small-Scale Constructed Wetlands Polishing Secondary Effluents from Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant

Jin

Carlos

McConnell

et al. 2017

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:With the recent development of constructed wetland technology, it has become a mainstream treatment technology for the mitigation of a variety of wastewaters. This study reports on the treatment performance and pH attenuation capacity of three different configurations of small-scale on-site surface flow constructed wetlands (SFCW): T1 (Peat + Typha latifolia), T2 (T. latifolia alone), and T3 (Peat alone) treating secondary effluent from the Amherstview Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) for two treatment periods (start-up period and operational period). The aim of this study was to compare the nutrients removal efficiencies between the different treatments, as well as to evaluate the effects of substrate and vegetation on the wetland system. For a hydraulic retention time of 2.5 days, the results showed that all treatment systems could attenuate the pH level during both the start-up and operational periods, while significant nutrient removal performance could only be observed during the operational period. Peat was noted to be a better SFCW substrate in promoting the removal of nitrate (NO 3 -N), total nitrogen (TN), and phosphorus. The addition of T. latifolia further enhanced NO 3 -N and TN removal efficiencies, but employing T. latifolia alone did not yield effluents that could meet the regulatory discharge limit (1.0 mg/L) for phosphorus.

show abstract

“…Protozoa predation and oxidation processes in this system affected positively the removal rates of Escherichia coli. This system showed greater removal of nutrients and E. coli during the dry period [26]. Furthermore, the efficacy of FTWs can be enhanced by inoculation with bacteria for wastewater applications of, for example, municipal [27] as well as domestic and industrial origins [28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Phytoremediation is a vital natural process of pollutant removals from aquatic ecosystem. Saeed et al [26] undertook an experiment where a constructed floating mat vegetated with P. australis (commonly available, cheap, deep-rooting and fast−growing) and Canna indica showed a decrease in nitrogen due to nitrification-denitrification processes, while the phosphorus removal was influenced by filtration and sedimentation actions. Protozoa predation and oxidation processes in this system affected positively the removal rates of Escherichia coli.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Phytoremediation performance of floating treatment wetlands with pelletized mine water sludge for synthetic greywater treatment

Abed

Almuktar

Scholz

2019

J Environ Health Sci Engineer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Buckets containing floating reed (Phragmites australis) simulated floating treatment wetlands (FTWs) and were used to improve the remediation performance of synthetic greywater (SGW). The aim of the study was to investigate the behaviour of FTWs for treatment of key contaminants within artificial greywater. Methods Pelletized ochre based on acid mine water sludge was introduced to selected FTWs, because of its capability in sequestration phosphorus and other trace elements. The impact of the following four operational variables were tested in the experimental set-ups of the FTWs (four replicates each): pollutant strength (high-(HC) and low-(LC) concentrations), treatment time (2-or 7-days of hydraulic retention time (HRT)), presence or absence of macrophytes (P. australis) and cement-ochre pellets.Results The results showed that 5 − day biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen demands (COD) were significantly (p < 0.05) reduced in all wetlands. Nitrate-nitrogen (NO 3 -N) concentrations were significantly (p < 0.05) higher, and those measurements for PO 4 -P were significantly (p < 0.05) lower than the corresponding ones determined for the influent. The existence of ochre pellets with P. australis significantly (p < 0.05) decreased B, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mg, Ni and Zn concentrations, but increased Al, Ca, Fe and K concentrations in the effluent, with the exception of sodium (Na). Conclusions The FTW performances can be improved by utilising ochre-cement pellets to increase the pH of greywater. The presence of P. australis acts as a buffer to neutralise the pH of SGW. Rhizomes and biofilms mitigate increases in turbidity, TSS and colour values.

show abstract

Floating constructed wetland for the treatment of polluted river water: A pilot scale study on seasonal variation and shock load

Cited by 83 publications

References 28 publications

Nitrate Removal by Floating Treatment Wetlands Amended with Spent Coffee: A Mesocosm-Scale Evaluation

Nitrate Removal by Floating Treatment Wetlands Amended with Spent Coffee: A Mesocosm-Scale Evaluation

Peat as Substrate for Small-Scale Constructed Wetlands Polishing Secondary Effluents from Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plant

Phytoremediation performance of floating treatment wetlands with pelletized mine water sludge for synthetic greywater treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About