Treatment of Stormwater Runoff and Landfill Leachates Using a Surface Flow Constructed Wetland

Snow, A.; Ghaly, A. E.; Côté, R.

doi:10.3844/ajessp.2008.164.172

Cited by 8 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The average pH value for 12.1 mmol·L −1 urea was similar to the finding that pH ranged from 7 to 7.6 in the horizontal flow reed beds, and Snow et al . found that, in 2004 and 2006, the pH of the water in the CWs had average inlet values of 6.7 and 6.3, and average outlet values of 7.3 and 6.7, respectively . It was reported that higher pH enhanced CH 4 production and lower pH inhibited CH 4 production through the direct inhibition of methanogens and indirectly through its effects on fermentation .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of external carbon source addition on methane emissions from a vertical subsurface‐flow constructed wetland

Liu¹,

et al. 2019

Greenhouse Gases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, different concentrations of urea (0, 12.1, 30, 45, 61 and 80 mmol·L−1) were added separately, as external carbon sources, to a two‐stage vertical subsurface‐flow constructed wetland (VSSF CW) where Cyperus alternifolius L. was planted, with the aim of understanding methane (CH4) emissions driven by urea. Results indicate that the average CH4 emissions from a two‐stage VSSF CW were 6.88, 7.11, 6.22, 7.45, 5.06 and 2.80 mol·m−2·day−1, corresponding to urea concentrations of 0, 12.1, 30, 45, 61 and 80 mmol·L−1 added in the VSSF CW, respectively. Urea as a carbon source had an average of 31.57% of influent total organic carbon (TOC). It was transformed into CH4‐C, of which CH4‐C/TOCinfluent may be be considered as an important component when anthropogenic methanogenesis from treatment wetlands was driven by carbon sources or carbon loading. Methane emissions were at their lowest when the C/N ratio was 5.89, at a urea concentration of 80 mmol·L−1. Principal component analysis (PCA) indicates that CH4 correlated positively with temperature and redox conditions (Eh). Methane emissions driven by urea in the two‐stage VSSF CW were found to be in accordance with the second‐rate dynamics kinetic model (kinetic constant = 22.94 mg CH4·h−1, R2 = 0.99), which can be considered as a high level of CH4 emissions. It indicates that external carbon sources can influence CH4 emissions from two‐stage VSSF CW significantly. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of external carbon source addition on methane emissions from a vertical subsurface‐flow constructed wetland

Liu¹,

et al. 2019

Greenhouse Gases

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As shown in the SEM images, the size of the particles increased with the increasing water content. The precipitation of MnCO 3 occurs with the reaction of H 2 O and CO 2 , as shown in the following equations [22].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facile synthesis of MnCO3 nanoparticles by supercritical CO2 and their conversion to manganese oxide for supercapacitor electrode materials

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spherical manganese carbonate (MnCO 3 ) nanoparticles were prepared from manganese acetate by means of supercritical carbon dioxide (scCO 2 ). The variation of morphology according to temperature, pressure, and solvent composition was studied. Quite uniformly sized MnCO 3 nanoparticles were effectively produced in a short period of time with the aid of supercritical fluid. Furthermore, porous manganese oxide (MnO x ) nanoparticles with high surface area were obtained via calcination process of MnCO 3 nanoparticles, and its performance as a supercapacitor was investigated. The porous manganese oxide nanoparticles showed a high specific capacitance of 322 Fg -1 at 1 Ag -1 with excellent rate capability and cyclic stability. This study provides a new approach for the facile and eco-friendly fabrication of MnCO 3 nanoparticles using scCO 2 and their conversion to porous MnO x for supercapacitor application.

show abstract

“…Recently, much attention has been directed to FWS-CTWs to treat wastewater and enable sustainable resource management or ecosystem restoration (Ghermandi et al 2007;Harrington et al 2007;Scholz et al 2007;Vymazal 2007;Rousseau et al 2008;Snow et al 2008;Kadlec 2009;Li et al 2009). FWS-CTWs have been applied at different stages of treatment of wastewater from different sources with varying pollution characteristics and are suitable in all climates (Kadlec and Wallace 2009).…”

Section: Applications Of Fws-ctwsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Constructed treatment wetlands (CTWs) are used to remove a wide range of pollutants such as organic compounds, suspended solids, pathogens, metals, and excess nutrients (e.g., N and P) from various wastewaters including stormwater runoff and municipal wastewater (Ghermandi et al 2007;Vymazal 2007;Snow et al 2008;Cooper 2009;Kadlec 2009). Because of high removal efficiency, low cost, water and nutrient reuse, and other ancillary benefits, CTWs have become a popular option for wastewater treatment (Ghermandi et al 2007;Rousseau et al 2008;Llorens et al 2009;Kadlec 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface-Flow Constructed Treatment Wetlands for Pollutant Removal: Applications and Perspectives

Chen

2011

Wetlands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

I review the technology and application of free-water surface flow (FWS), macrophyte-dominated constructed treatment wetlands (CTWs) for pollutant removal. FWS-CTWs are used to remove a wide range of pollutants from various wastewaters. In FWS-CTWs, hydrologic conditions have a key influence on the biotic community, biogeochemical processes, and the fate of pollutants. Therefore, understanding the interactive effects of hydrology and biotic communities is critical to pollutant removal. In the past two decades, studies and applications of FWS-CTWs have increasingly focused on four wetland technologies: 1) tertiary treatment wetlands, 2) submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) dominated systems, 3) FWS constructed wetlands for watershed management, and 4) hybrid systems. Managing FWSCTWs, including adjustment of flow and water depth is crucial to the sustainability of effective treatment. Multiple functions and services of FWS-CTWs such as biological conservation and other ancillary benefits can be added while FWS-CTWs are applied to wastewater treatment. To reduce the acreage necessary for pollutant removal, coupling FWS-CTWs with other technologies has an application perspective for water quality improvement. Using FWS-CTWs is cost effective and environmentally sound for water sanitation, reuse, and conservation and supports sustainable resource management.

show abstract

Treatment of Stormwater Runoff and Landfill Leachates Using a Surface Flow Constructed Wetland

Cited by 8 publications

References 21 publications

Impact of external carbon source addition on methane emissions from a vertical subsurface‐flow constructed wetland

Impact of external carbon source addition on methane emissions from a vertical subsurface‐flow constructed wetland

Facile synthesis of MnCO3 nanoparticles by supercritical CO2 and their conversion to manganese oxide for supercapacitor electrode materials

Surface-Flow Constructed Treatment Wetlands for Pollutant Removal: Applications and Perspectives

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About