Treatment Wetlands - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

Treatment Wetlands

Description:

US researchers in the 1970s examined use of natural wetlands to treat wastewater ... www.sandec.ch/FaecalSludge/ pages/FSM-construc... In Arizona ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:414
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 36
Provided by: King134
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Treatment Wetlands


1
Treatment Wetlands Constructed Wetlands
  • Chapter 20

2
History
  • German scientists used constructed basins with
    macrophytes to purify wastewater
  • US researchers in the 1970s examined use of
    natural wetlands to treat wastewater
  • EPA provides strong support for treatment wetlands

3
Approaches
  • Natural wetlands dump wastewater into existing
    wetlands natures kidneys
  • Before legal protection of wetlands
  • Constructed wetlands built to mimic natural
    wetlands, not part of natural systems
  • Surface-flow standing water most of the year
  • Subsurface-flow water flows through porous
    substrate supporting one or two macrophytes

4
(No Transcript)
5
(No Transcript)
6
(No Transcript)
7
Classification by Vegetation
  • 1. Free-floating macrophyte systems water
    hyacinth, duckweed
  • 2. Emergent macrophyte Phragmites, Typha
  • 3. Submerged macrophyte
  • 4. Forested
  • 5. Multispecies algal systems

8
(No Transcript)
9
Early Studies
  • Max-Planck Institute, Germany 1950s created
    gravel bed macrophyte system, reduced bacteria,
    inorganic and organic chemicals, led to
    subsurface constructed wetlands across Europe
  • University of Florida early 1970s secondarily
    treated wastewater added to cypress domes at 2.5
    cm/week. Lowered nutrients, heavy metals,
    microbes and viruses. Productivity increased.
  • University of Michigan mid-1970s dumped up
    to 5,000 m3/d of secondarily treated wastewater
    into a fen. Lowered ammonia N and total
    dissolved P, Cl didnt change

10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
Wetland Types by Source
  • Municipal wastewater
  • Mine drainage low pH, high iron, sulfate,
    aluminum, and trace metals
  • Stormwater and nonpoint source seasonal,
    sporadic, variable flows.
  • Landfill leachate collect and treat runoff from
    lined landfills, to reduce ammonium and COD
  • Agricultural wastewater wastewater from
    concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs),

13
(No Transcript)
14
(No Transcript)
15
Ohio State Wetland Research Center
16
(No Transcript)
17
Treatment for Arizona CAFO (Feedlot)
18
Wetland Design
  • to integrate natural processes as much as
    possible
  • Hydrology basis for biological and chemical
    conditions response
  • Hydroperiod and depth
  • Seasonal pulses
  • Hydraulic loading and detention rate
  • Optimum detention time from 5-14 days for
    municipal water

19
(No Transcript)
20
Basin morphology
  • slopes of 61 to 101
  • Variety of depths allows multiple treatments
  • Deep denitrification, increase sediment
    retention
  • Shallow - allows for more soil/water
    interaction and emergent vegetation
  • Series of cells can be used to enhance treatment

21
Other Wetland Design Factors
  • Chemical loading
  • Important for nutrients and other chemicals Fe,
    Selenium
  • Substrate/Soils
  • Organic matter important due to cation exchange
    capacity
  • Texture important in determining if it will be
    subsurface or overflow
  • Vegetation few plants thrive in high nutrient
    conditions
  • Typha, Scipus, Phragmites, Lemna, Eichhornia
    crassipes

22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
(No Transcript)
25
(No Transcript)
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
(No Transcript)
30
Management
  • Plant removal several times a year increases
    nutrient/chemical removal, stimulates growth
  • Mosquito control use of mosquito fish (Gambusia
    affinis) and bacterial insecticides (Bacillus
    thuringensis (Bt), Bacillus sphaericus and
    Lagenidium giganteum)
  • Pathogen transmission chlorination of municipal
    water, sampling

31
Other benefits
  • Surface flow increases wildlife, may help in land
    building
  • Costs
  • Cost/ha decreases as size of wetland increases
    (200,000/ha for 1-ha, 60,000/ha for 10-ha,
    19,000/ha for 100-ha)
  • Generally cheaper than chemical treatments
  • Release much less CO2 than chemical treatment
    (Table 20-10)

32
(No Transcript)
33
Developing country model
34
Wetlands in Arizona
35
Links
  • For treatment of manure waste
  • www.epa.gov/seahome/ manure/src/wetlands.htm
  • Constructed wetland CADD drawings
  • www.sc.nrcs.usda.gov/ technical/constwet.html
  • Images from Purdue
  • www.ces.purdue.edu/ onsite/alternatives.htm
  • Wetlands for farm waste
  • msa.ars.usda.gov/.../ nsl/wqe_unit/wetlands.html 
  • For fecal sludge treatment in Thailand
  • www.sandec.ch/FaecalSludge/ pages/FSM-construc...
  • In Arizona
  • http//ag.arizona.edu/OALS/ALN/aln45/wetlands.html
    wetlands6anchor
  • Remediation of mine tailings
  • www.uc.edu/news/ wetlands.htm
  • www.enviromine.com/ wetlands/Welcome.htm
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com