2007
DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.08.013
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Heavy metal fates in laboratory bioretention systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

7
52
0
2

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 142 publications
(61 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
7
52
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In summary, the inflow heavy metal concentration had a relatively minor (not significant) influence on the removal efficiency of the four bioretention media mixes in study. Similar results were reported from other studies on bioretention media mixes [20,24]. …”
Section: Influent Heavy Metal Concentrationsupporting
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In summary, the inflow heavy metal concentration had a relatively minor (not significant) influence on the removal efficiency of the four bioretention media mixes in study. Similar results were reported from other studies on bioretention media mixes [20,24]. …”
Section: Influent Heavy Metal Concentrationsupporting
confidence: 81%
“…These include mechanical filtration, sedimentation, adsorption, and plant and microbial uptake [22]. Laboratory studies have shown that bioretention technology can effectively remove particulate and dissolved heavy metals from urban stormwater runoff and more than 80% of the heavy metals retained in bioretention systems [23][24][25]. Li and Davis [26] showed that the vast majority of heavy metals from urban stormwater runoff were intercepted on the surface layer of the bioretention system.…”
Section: Sourcesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For this reason, the study followed the direction of a number of published studies in omitting SS from their versions of synthetic stormwater [25,[27][28][29][30].…”
Section: Synthetic Stormwatermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The concentration of each pollutant in the synthetic stormwater was based on the median value that was reported for laboratory simulations elsewhere, averaged with the median value for six grab samples for first flush events at Sydney sites where field units were to be constructed [25][26][27][28][29][30]. It is important to note, that on this basis, synthetic stormwater formulation would vary for each City catchment and that some standardization is ultimately needed [31].…”
Section: Synthetic Stormwatermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonpoint source pollution from stormwater runoff contributes pollutants altering the water quality in receiving water (Pitt et al, 2004). NPS pollution originates from soil erosion, accumulation and atmospheric dust, street dirt, fertilizers and pesticides wash-off (Sun and Davis, 2006). NPS pollution includes constituents such as particulates, organics, nutrients and heavy metals were being carried by sediments from these areas.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%