Pollutant removal from municipal wastewater employing baffled subsurface flow and integrated surface flow-floating treatment wetlands

Saeed, Tanveer; Al-Muyeed, Abdullah; Afrin, Rumana; Rahman, Habibur; Sun, Guang–Zhen

doi:10.1016/s1001-0742(13)60476-3

Cited by 51 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding was lower than our previous study (average 11.3% of TP removal) in the aboveground biomass by Cyperus alternifolius (Cui et al, 2011). Table 6 compares the removal efficiency of nutrients from wastewaters in CWs between our study and those studies performed by Mburu et al (2013), Tee et al (2012), and Saeed et al (2014). Saeed et al(2014) study the nutrient removal efficiency of baffled subsurface flow and hybrid surface flow CWs in Bangladesh.…”

Section: N and P Removal By Plantcontrasting

confidence: 49%

“…Table 6 compares the removal efficiency of nutrients from wastewaters in CWs between our study and those studies performed by Mburu et al (2013), Tee et al (2012), and Saeed et al (2014). Saeed et al(2014) study the nutrient removal efficiency of baffled subsurface flow and hybrid surface flow CWs in Bangladesh. Their CW substrate consists of saw-dust, coal, pea gravel, small sized gravel, and sand and the CW plant species is macrophytes.…”

Section: N and P Removal By Plantmentioning

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Removal of nutrients from septic tank effluent with baffle subsurface-flow constructed wetlands

Cui

Ouyang

Yang

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: N and P Removal By Plantcontrasting

confidence: 49%

Section: N and P Removal By Plantmentioning

confidence: 93%

Removal of nutrients from septic tank effluent with baffle subsurface-flow constructed wetlands

Cui

Ouyang

Yang

et al. 2015

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The commercial application of FTWs was first seen for the remediation of eutrophic lakes in Germany and for rivers in Japan . Currently, they are being used to treat hypertrophication, sewage and domestic wastewater, combined sewer overflow, contaminated groundwater, stormwater, acid mine drainage, poultry effluent, piggery effluent, boron enriched water, polluted river water, and nutrients enriched water . Recently, plant–bacteria partnerships have been exploited in FTWs for the maximum remediation of contaminated water .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Floating Wetlands: A Sustainable Tool for Wastewater Treatment

Shahid

Arslan

Ali

et al. 2018

CLEAN Soil Air Water

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Floating treatment wetland (FTW) is an effective and sustainable technology for wastewater treatment. It has been widely adopted for treating various kinds of polluted water including agricultural runoff, stormwater, industrial effluents, etc. In FTWs, plants are vegetated on a floating mat while their roots are extended down to the contaminated water hence acting as biological filters. Nutrients and potentially toxic metal(s)/element(s) are taken up from the wastewater by plants through their roots whereas organic matter is degraded by the microorganisms forming biofilms on the roots and mat surface. Additionally, organic contaminants which are already taken up by the plants are degraded by endophytic bacteria in planta. This article provides an overview of FTWs and their application for wastewater treatment. The key factors which have an impact on the performance of FTWs are also described. Lastly, the potential role of combined use of plants and bacteria in FTWs for the maximum remediation of polluted water is emphasized.

show abstract

“…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

Pollutant removal from municipal wastewater employing baffled subsurface flow and integrated surface flow-floating treatment wetlands

Cited by 51 publications

References 40 publications

Removal of nutrients from septic tank effluent with baffle subsurface-flow constructed wetlands

Removal of nutrients from septic tank effluent with baffle subsurface-flow constructed wetlands

Floating Wetlands: A Sustainable Tool for Wastewater Treatment

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About