Multistage Horizontal Subsurface Flow vs. Hybrid Constructed Wetlands for the Treatment of Raw Urban Wastewater

In this study, pilot-scale hybrid constructed wetlands (CWs) and multistage horizontal subsurface flow CWs (HF CWs) have been studied and compared for the treatment of raw urban wastewater. In the hybrid CWs, the first stage was a mulch-based horizontal subsurface flow CW and the second stage was a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSustainability Vol. 12; no. 12; p. 5102
Main Authors Herrera-Melián, José Alberto, Mendoza-Aguiar, Mónica, Guedes-Alonso, Rayco, García-Jiménez, Pilar, Carrasco-Acosta, Marina, Ranieri, Ezio
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Basel MDPI AG 23.06.2020
Subjects
Artificial wetlands
Chemical oxygen demand
Coliforms
Efficiency
Flow
Gravel
Load distribution
Loading rate
Molybdate
Pollutant removal
Pollutants
Sand
Storm seepage
Sustainability
Sustainable development
Sustainable materials
Turbidity
Vertical flow
Wastewater
Water pollution
Water treatment
Wetlands
Spain
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:In this study, pilot-scale hybrid constructed wetlands (CWs) and multistage horizontal subsurface flow CWs (HF CWs) have been studied and compared for the treatment of raw urban wastewater. In the hybrid CWs, the first stage was a mulch-based horizontal subsurface flow CW and the second stage was a vertical subsurface flow CW (VF CW). The VF CWs were used to determine if sand could improve the performance of the hybrid CW with respect to the mulch. In the multistage HFs, mulch, gravel and sand were used as substrates. The effect of water height (HF10: 10 cm vs. HF40: 40 cm) and surface loading rate (SLR: 12 vs. 24 g Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)/m2d) has been studied. The results show that the use of sand in the vertical flow stage of the hybrid CW did not improve the average performance. Additionally, the sand became clogged, while the mulch did not. The effect of water height on average pollutant removal was not determined but HF10 performed better regarding compliance with legal regulations. With a SLR of 12 g COD/m2d, removals of HF10 were: 79% for COD, 75% for NH4+-N, 53% for dissolved molybdate-reactive phosphate-P (DRP), 99% for turbidity and 99.998% for E. coli and total coliforms. When SLR was doubled, removals decreased for NH4+-N: 49%, DRP: −20%, E coli and total coliforms: 99.5–99.9%, but not for COD (85%) and turbidity (99%). Considering the obtained results and the simplicity of the construction and operation of HFs, HF10 would be the most suitable choice for the treatment of raw urban wastewater without clogging problems.
ISSN:2071-1050
2071-1050
DOI:10.3390/su12125102