reading

Cover
Series Foreword - Challenges in Water Management
List of Contributors
Preface
Acknowledgements
Introduction to Constructed Wetland Technology
1. 1 From Natural to Constructed Wetlands
2. 2 The Need for Sustainable Solutions
3. 3 Constructed Wetlands or Conventional Systems – Pros and Cons
4. 4 Classification of Constructed Wetlands
5. 5 Design Considerations of Constructed Wetlands
6. 6 Constructed Wetlands as a Sustainable Solution for the Industrial Sector
7. 7 Scope of this Book
8. References
Part I: Petrochemical and Chemical Industry
1. Chapter 1: Integrated Produced Water Management in a Desert Oilfield Using Wetland Technology and Innovative Reuse Practices
  1. 1.1 Introduction
  2. 1.2 Constructed Wetland for Produced Water Treatment
  3. 1.3 Results and Discussion
  4. 1.4 Treated Effluent Reuse for Saline Irrigation
  5. 1.5 Conclusions
  6. References
2. Chapter 2: Constructed Wetlands Treating Water Contaminated with Organic Hydrocarbons
  1. 2.1 Introduction
  2. 2.2 MTBE Removal in Constructed Wetlands
  3. 2.3 Phenol Removal in Constructed Wetlands
  4. 2.4 Combined Treatment of Different Compounds
  5. References
Part II: Food and Beverage Industry
1. Chapter 3: Aerated Constructed Wetlands for Treatment of Municipal and Food Industry Wastewater
  1. 3.1 Introduction
  2. 3.2 Aerated Constructed Wetlands
  3. 3.3 HIGHWET Project
  4. 3.4 Conclusions
  5. Acknowledgements
  6. References
2. Chapter 4: Treatment of Wineries and Breweries Effluents using Constructed Wetlands
  1. 4.1 Introduction
  2. 4.2 Wastewater Production and Characterization
  3. 4.3 Applications and Configurations
  4. 4.4 Discussion and Conclusions
  5. References
3. Chapter 5: Treatment of Effluents from Fish and Shrimp Aquaculture in Constructed Wetlands
  1. 5.1 Introduction
  2. 5.2 Overview of Aquaculture and Effluent Treatment
  3. 5.3 Use of Constructed Wetlands for Treatment of Fish and Shrimp Aquaculture Effluents
  4. 5.4 Conclusions
  5. References
4. Chapter 6: Evaluation of Treatment Wetlands of Different Configuration for the Sugarcane-Mill Effluent under Tropical Conditions
  1. 6.1 Introduction
  2. 6.2 Modeling Water Consumption Minimization
  3. 6.3 Type of Effluent and Pretreatment
  4. 6.4 Constructed Wetlands (CWs)
  5. 6.5 Research Needs
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. References
5. Chapter 7: Treatment of Effluents from Meat, Vegetable and Soft Drinks Processing using Constructed Wetlands
  1. 7.1 Treatment of Slaughterhouse and Meat Processing Wastewater
  2. 7.2 Treatment of Potato Washing Wastewater
  3. 7.3 Treatment of Molasses Wastewater
  4. 7.4 Treatment of Effluents from Coffee Processing
  5. References
Part III: Agro‐Industrial Wastewater
1. Chapter 8: Olive Mill Wastewater Treatment in Constructed Wetlands
  1. 8.1 Introduction
  2. 8.2 Wastewater Production and Characterization
  3. 8.3 Applications and Configurations
  4. 8.4 Evaporation Plus Constructed Wetlands: An Italian Innovative Approach
  5. 8.5 Discussion and Conclusions
  6. References
2. Chapter 9: Dairy Wastewater Treatment with Constructed Wetlands: Experiences from Belgium, the Netherlands and Greece
  1. 9.1 Introduction
  2. 9.2 Brief Literature Review on Wetland Systems for Dairy Wastewater Treatment
  3. 9.3 Experiences from the Netherlands and Belgium
  4. 9.4 Experiences from Greece
  5. 9.5 Conclusions
  6. References
3. Chapter 10: The Performance of Constructed Wetlands for Treating Swine Wastewater under Different Operating Conditions
  1. 10.1 Introduction
  2. 10.2 Removal of Nutrients by Constructed Wetlands
  3. 10.3 Removal of Nutrients by Constructed Wetlands using Biological Pretreatments
  4. Acknowledgements
  5. References
Part IV: Mine Drainage and Leachate Treatment
1. Chapter 11: Constructed Wetlands for Metals: Removal Mechanism and Analytical Challenges
  1. 11.1 Sources of Metal Pollution and Rationale for Using Constructed Wetlands to Treat Metal-Laden Wastewater
  2. 11.2 Removal Mechanisms
  3. 11.3 Analytical Challenges
  4. References
2. Chapter 12: A Review on the Use of Constructed Wetlands for the Treatment of Acid Mine Drainage
  1. 12.1 What is Acid Mine Drainage?
  2. 12.2 Sources of AMD
  3. 12.3 Environmental and Social Impacts of AMD
  4. 12.4 Remediation of AMD
  5. 12.5 Summary
  6. References
3. Chapter 13: Solid Waste (SW) Leachate Treatment using Constructed Wetland Systems
  1. 13.1 The Nature of Solid Waste (SW) and SW Leachate
  2. 13.2 Characteristics of SW Leachate in Tropical Developing Countries
  3. 13.3 Treatment Methods for SW Leachate
  4. 13.4 Experimental Methodology for Plant Species and CW Performance Evaluation
  5. 13.5 Effect of Plant Species on Leachate Components
  6. 13.6 Summary
  7. References
Part V: Wood and Leather Processing Industry
1. Chapter 14: Cork Boiling Wastewater Treatment in Pilot Constructed Wetlands
  1. 14.1 Introduction
  2. 14.2 Cork Boiling Wastewater Treatment
  3. 14.3 Constructed Wetland Technology
  4. 14.4 Conclusions
  5. Acknowledgements
  6. References
2. Chapter 15: Constructed Wetland Technology for Pulp and Paper Mill Wastewater Treatment
  1. 15.1 Introduction
  2. 15.2 Pulp and Paper Mill Wastewater Characteristics
  3. 15.3 Remediation of Pulp and Paper Mill Wastewater Pollution
  4. 15.4 Constructed Wetlands
  5. 15.5 Conclusions
  6. References
3. Chapter 16: Treatment of Wastewater from Tanneries and the Textile Industry using Constructed Wetland Systems
  1. 16.1 Introduction
  2. 16.2 Discussion
  3. 16.3 Constructed Wetlands for Cr(VI) Removal: A Case Study
  4. 16.4 Conclusions
  5. References
Part VI: Pharmaceuticals and Cosmetics Industry
1. Chapter 17: Removal Processes of Pharmaceuticals in Constructed Wetlands
  1. 17.1 Introduction
  2. 17.2 Pharmaceutical Compounds in the Environment: Sources, Fate and Environmental Effects
  3. 17.3 Pharmaceuticals Removal in Constructed Wetlands
  4. 17.4 Final Remarks
  5. References
2. Chapter 18: Role of Bacterial Diversity on PPCPs Removal in Constructed Wetlands
  1. 18.1 Introduction
  2. 18.2 Mesocosm-Scale Experiences
  3. 18.3 Pollutant Concentrations and Removal Efficiencies in Mesocosms CWs
  4. 18.4 Microbiological Characterization
  5. 18.5 Link between Microbiological Richness and Pollutant Removal in CWs
  6. 18.6 Mechanisms and Design Parameters Involved in PPCPs Removal
  7. 18.7 Conclusions
  8. Acknowledgements
  9. References
Part VII: Novel Industrial Applications
1. Chapter 19: Dewatering of Industrial Sludge in Sludge Treatment Reed Bed Systems
  1. 19.1 Introduction
  2. 19.2 Methodology
  3. 19.3 Treatment of Industrial Sludge in STRB Systems
  4. 19.4 Case Studies – Treatment of Industrial Sludge in Full-Scale and Test STRB Systems
  5. 19.5 Discussion and Conclusions
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. References
2. Chapter 20: Constructed Wetlands for Water Quality Improvement and Temperature Reduction at a Power-Generating Facility
  1. 20.1 Introduction
  2. 20.2 Basis of Design
  3. 20.3 Construction
  4. 20.4 Operational Performance Summary
  5. 20.5 Discussion
  6. References
3. Chapter 21: Recycling of Carwash Effluents Treated with Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetlands
  1. 21.1 Introduction
  2. 21.2 Case Study: Description
  3. 21.3 Case Study: Results and Discussion
  4. 21.4 Design and Operation Recommendations
  5. 21.5 Conclusions
  6. References
4. Chapter 22: Constructed Wetland-Microbial Fuel Cell: An Emerging Integrated Technology for Potential Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Bio-Electricity Generation
  1. 22.1 Introduction
  2. 22.2 The Fundamentals of MFC and Microbial Electron Transfer to Electrode
  3. 22.3 State of the Art of CW-MFCs
  4. 22.4 Potential Industrial Wastewater Treatment in CW-MFCs
  5. 22.5 Challenges in Generating Bio-Electricity in CW-MFCs During Industrial Wastewater Treatment
  6. 22.6 Future Directions
  7. Acknowledgements
  8. References
5. Chapter 23: Constructed Wetlands for Stormwater Treatment from Specific (Dutch) Industrial Surfaces
  1. 23.1 Introduction
  2. 23.2 Stormwater Characteristics
  3. 23.3 Best Management Practices of (Dutch) Wetlands at Industrial Sites
  4. 23.4 Innovation in Monitoring Wetlands
  5. 23.5 Conclusions and Recommendations
  6. References
Part VIII: Managerial and Construction Aspects
1. Chapter 24: A Novel Response of Industry to Wastewater Treatment with Constructed Wetlands: A Managerial View through System Dynamic Techniques
  1. 24.1 Introduction
  2. 24.2 Theoretical Underpinning
  3. 24.3 Methodology
  4. 24.4 Test of Scenarios and a Typology Construction for Decision Making
  5. 24.5 Conclusion and Discussion
  6. References
2. Chapter 25: A Construction Manager's Perception of a Successful Industrial Constructed Wetland Project
  1. 25.1 Key Performance Indicators for Construction Projects
  2. 25.2 Function and Values of Constructed Wetlands
  3. 25.3 Clear Deliverables of Project
  4. 25.4 Critical Points in Constructing Wetlands
  5. 25.5 Summary
  6. References
Index
End User License Agreement

List of Tables

Chapter 0
1. Table 1 Main characteristics and comparison of conventional treatment methods and Constructed Wetlands [5, 8–11]
Chapter 1
1. Table 1.1 Laboratory analyses and respective analytical method for samples taken in the NWTP during regular monitoring campaigns.
2. Table 1.2 Mean monthly weather data (air temperature, relative humidity, wind velocity, solar radiation and total rainfall) collected at the project location between 2013 and 2017.
3. Table 1.3 Inflow produced water quality at the TOP (Turn-Over-Point).
4. Table 1.4 Energy consumed and respective carbon emissions by the Constructed Wetland system and other produced water management options, i.e., deep wells and mechanical wastewater treatment methods.
5. Table 1.5 Perennial, annual plant species and grasses investigated in the saline agriculture research project at NWTP [53, 54].
6. Table 1.6 Monitoring schedule for the different tasks during the project period [53].
Chapter 2
1. Table 2.1 Basic information of studies on Constructed Wetland systems treating waters containing benzene and the observed removal efficiencies.
Chapter 3
1. Table 3.1 Planned exploitation parameters for each of the sampling campaigns.
2. Table 3.2 In-situ monitored parameters during Campaign 1.
3. Table 3.3 Average TSS, COD and BOD₅ in the system during Campaign 1.
4. Table 3.4 Average nutrient concentrations and performance along the system during Campaign 1.
5. Table 3.5 In-situ measured parameters during Campaign 2.
6. Table 3.6 Average TSS, COD and BOD₅ in the system during Campaign 2.
7. Table 3.7 Average nutrient concentrations (mg/L) and performance along the system during Campaign 2.
8. Table 3.8 In-situ monitored parameters during Campaign 3.
9. Table 3.9 Average TSS, COD and BOD₅ concentrations in the system during Campaign 3.
10. Table 3.10 Average nutrient concentrations and performance along the system during Campaign 3.
11. Table 3.11 In-situ monitored parameters during Campaign 4.
12. Table 3.12 Average TSS, COD and BOD₅ in the system during Campaign 4.
13. Table 3.13 Nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations in the different points during Campaign 4.
14. Table 3.14 In-situ monitored parameters during Campaign 5.
15. Table 3.15 Average TSS, COD and BOD₅ in the system during Campaign 5.
16. Table 3.16 Average nutrient concentrations and performance along the system during Campaign 5.
Chapter 4
1. Table 4.1 Winery wastewater characterization from the literature (adapted from Masi et al. [1]).
2. Table 4.2 Brewery wastewater characterization from literature (adapted from Vymazal [7]).
3. Table 4.3 Data used for area, energy, and carbon footprint from [1, 3, 16, 17].
4. Table 4.4 Results from the area, energy, and carbon footprint analysis of proposed multistage CW solutions.
Chapter 5
1. Table 5.1 Performance of biological treatment technologies for fish and shrimp farm effluents.
2. Table 5.2 List of chemical/electrochemical treatment systems for fish and shrimp farm effluents.
3. Table 5.3 A summary of CWs studies for fish and shrimp farm effluents treatment.
Chapter 6
1. Table 6.1 Physical–chemical characteristics of sugar cane molasses [7–11].
2. Table 6.2 Performance of various anaerobic reactors for molasses distillery wastewater.
3. Table 6.3 Evaluation of constructed wetland efficiency to remove suspended solids and organic matter from sugar cane effluents.
4. Table 6.4 Constructed wetland to treat nutrients from sugar cane wastewater effluents.
Chapter 7
1. Table 7.1 General characteristics of slaughterhouse wastewater [3].
2. Table 7.2 General information and hydraulic and loading rates of the ten presented CW case studies.
3. Table 7.3 Influent concentrations (mg/L) and treatment efficiency (%) of the ten presented CW case studies.
4. Table 7.4 General characteristics of potato processing wastewater (adapted from Hung et al. [18]).
5. Table 7.5 Treatment efficiencies (combined winter and spring/summer seasons) for each year of investigation [19].
6. Table 7.6 Characteristics of the used molasses wastewater in Thailand [23].
7. Table 7.7 Average removal of pollutants with increased OLR [23].
8. Table 7.8 Removal reduction of pollutants [26].
Chapter 8
1. Table 8.1 Olive mill wastewater characterization from the literature (adapted from Vymazal [3]).
2. Table 8.2 CWs applications for OMW and TOWW in Greece.
Chapter 9
1. Table 9.1 Applications of different Constructed Wetland systems for dairy wastewater treatment and related information (FWS: free water surface, HSF: horizontal subsurface flow).
2. Table 9.2 Some sample analyses of pure milk and first cycle wastewater at three dairy farms in Belgium (data courtesy of VLM/Lisec).
3. Table 9.3 Treatment results from 13 VFCWs treating wastewater from dairy farms in the Netherlands.
4. Table 9.4 Phosphorus concentrations in the effluent of 5 CWs at dairy farms, only with CaCO₃ addition.
5. Table 9.5 Phosphorus concentrations in the effluent of six CWs at dairy farms, with CaCO₃ and iron addition (steel slag).
6. Table 9.6 Monitoring data (influent, effluent) from the Geert Poppe wetland facility in Belgium.
7. Table 9.7 Monitoring data (influent, effluent) from the Jan De Paep wetland facility in Belgium (n = 22, period 2007–2016).
8. Table 9.8 Monitoring data (influent, effluent) from the PDLT wetland facility in Belgium (n = 21, period 1999–2000).
9. Table 9.9 First results of the aerated wetland at PDLT on 15/12/2015.
10. Table 9.10 Physico-chemical characteristics of co-treated wastewaters (mixed) cheese whey and Cr(VI) solution [48–50].
Chapter 10
1. Table 10.1 Physico-chemical characterization of pig slurry (n: number of studies evaluated by parameter) (modified from [2]).
2. Table 10.2 Anaerobic settings applied in the treatment of pig manure.
3. Table 10.3 Operational characteristics for different systems of artificial wetlands.
4. Table 10.4 Elimination of TN systems via denitrification in surface flow constructed wetlands for the treatment of pig manure.
5. Table 10.5 Operational characteristics of constructed wetlands used in the pig sector.
Chapter 11
1. Table 11.1 Solubility products of selected metal sulfides, hydroxides and carbonates (adapted from [17]).
Chapter 12
1. Table 12.1 Mineral sources of sulfide which can contribute to acidic mine water
2. Table 12.2 Physical, chemical and biological mechanisms of AMD treatment (modified from [20])
Chapter 13
1. Table 13.1 Typical MSW gross composition [1].
2. Table 13.2 Composition of MSW at Punjab site, India [2].
3. Table 13.3 Chemical Composition of MSW at a Punjab site, India [2].
4. Table 13.4 Leachate composition at Sri Lankan solid waste dumpsites [12].
5. Table 13.5 Leachate characteristics at sites in Ludhiana City, Punjab, India [2].
6. Table 13.6 Leachate characteristics at various landfill ages [13].
7. Table 13.7 Organic loading rates of synthetic leachate applied to CWs.
8. Table 13.8 BOD₅ Removal efficiency (%).
9. Table 13.9 Organic loading rates (OLR) and hydraulic loading rates (HLR) of different leachate-fed CW systems.
10. Table 13.10 COD concentration profile in the leachate-fed CW systems.
11. Table 13.11 Organic loading rates (OLR) with 5% and 25% real leachate.
12. Table 13.12 Biogeochemical transformation of nitrogen in wetlands [31, 33].
13. Table 13.13 TN removal efficiency for laboratory-scale CW batch experiment.
14. Table 13.14 Nitrate profile at various synthetic leachate dilutions applied to the CW.
Chapter 14
1. Table 14.1 Main characteristics of cork boiling wastewater from recent published literature.
2. Table 14.2 Literature review results for treatment of CBW with physico-chemical processes.
3. Table 14.3 Literature review results for treatment of CBW with membrane separation technology.
4. Table 14.4 Literature review results for treatment of CBW with biological processes.
5. Table 14.5 Literature review results for treatment of CBW with sequential processes.
Chapter 15
1. Table 15.1 Characteristics of pulp and paper mill wastewater after primary treatment [6–11].
2. Table 15.2 Plant species used in CWs for pulp and paper mill wastewater treatment.
3. Table 15.3 Characteristics of wastewater at the inlet of the HSSF-CW (for a HRT of 5.9 d).
4. Table 15.4 Removal of chlorophenolics by HSSF-CW (for a HRT of 5.9 d).
5. Table 15.5 Removal of cRFAs by HSSF-CW (for a HRT of 5.9 d).
6. Table 15.6 Efficiencies of constructed wetland and activated sludge processes [7, 51, 52].
Chapter 16
1. Table 16.1 Experiments and applications of Constructed Wetlands treating tannery wastewaters.
2. Table 16.2 Experiments and applications of Constructed Wetlands treating textile wastewaters.
3. Table 16.3 Physico-chemical characteristics of the Cr(VI) solution [44].
Chapter 17
1. Table 17.1 Pharmaceuticals removal in different types of CWS.
2. Table 17.2 Abiotic and biotic processes involved in organic xenobiotics removal in SSF-CWS [162, 200, 201].
3. Table 17.3 Removal of selected pharmaceuticals by plants in hydroponic conditions (adapted from Carvalho et al., 2014 [89]).
4. Table 17.4 Studies of pharmaceuticals sorption by several natural, modified and synthetic materials and agricultural wastes and by-products.
Chapter 18
1. Table 18.1 Vegetal biomass measured at the end of the experiment (October 2010).
2. Table 18.2 Average values and 0.95 confidence intervals for some pollutants and physico-chemical parameters in the urban wastewater used to feed the CWs in summer 2010. Data adapted from Hijosa-Valsero et al. [23]; Reyes-Contreras et al. [24].
3. Table 18.3 Removal efficiencies (%) and 0.95 confidence intervals for the studied PPCPs and organic pollutants in the CWs (summer 2010). Data adapted from Hijosa-Valsero et al. [23]; Reyes-Contreras et al. [24].
4. Table 18.4 Average values and 0.95 confidence intervals for water physico-chemical parameters in every CW in summer 2010. All the values were measured in situ at two different depths: SUP, superior (5 cm below water surface), and INF, inferior (5 cm above the bottom of the tank). Data adapted from Hijosa-Valsero et al. [23].
5. Table 18.5 Richness of the microbial community of every environment in CWs. Richness is expressed as number of bands in the DGGE analysis.
6. Table 18.6 Accepted removal mechanisms for the substances considered in this chapter.
Chapter 19
1. Table 19.1 The Danish and European Union (EU) legal limits for heavy metals and hazard organic compounds in sludge residue for agricultural use.
2. Table 19.2 Dewatering efficiency in relation to the sludge – and sludge residue quality [21]. All examples below has feed sludge with high levels of fat.
3. Table 19.3 The result of nickel analyses of reeds (Phragmites australis), and sludge residue sampled at different depth intervals.
4. Table 19.4 Treatment of water works sludge in STRB systems in England.
5. Table 19.5 Feed sludge quality parameters for Whitacre (Test) and Hanningfield (Test and Full-scale) WWs. Both works use ferric sulphate for the coagulation process.
6. Table 19.6 Filtrate water quality parameters after treatment in a STRB at Whitacre and Hanningfield WW.
Chapter 20
1. Table 20.1 Historical flow and effluent water quality data (January 2006–June 2010).
2. Table 20.2 Parameter selection for the P-k-C* design method.
3. Table 20.3 Estimated monthly balance temperatures and differential between air and balance temperatures.
4. Table 20.4 Final design criteria.
Chapter 21
1. Table 21.1 Water consumption average according to the type of car wash.
2. Table 21.2 Summary of the pilot VFCW characteristics.
3. Table 21.3 Summary of the pilot HFCW characteristics.
4. Table 21.4 Influent wastewater characterization.
5. Table 21.5 Urban and car wash wastewater characteristics (adapted from [5]).
6. Table 21.6 Quality required according to RD 1620/2007 for urban use quality 1.2. Services.
7. Table 21.7 HFCW effluent quality.
8. Table 21.8 Comparison of HFCW pilot effluent quality with the limits established in RD 1620/2007.
9. Table 21.9 Deposit characterization.
10. Table 21.10 Deposit characterization (metals).
11. Table 21.11 VFCW effluent quality.
12. Table 21.12 VFCW % removal for the first and second year of operation (SS, VSS, Turbidity and organic matter parameters).
13. Table 21.13 Turbidity changes based on time of sampling (HL = 36 cm/day, 4 batches/day, first year of operation).
14. Table 21.14 Comparison of the VFCW outlet quality with that of RD 1620/2007.
15. Table 21.15 Comparison of performance of the pilots for physicochemical parameters (% removal).
16. Table 21.16 Comparison of performances of the pilot plants for the microbiological parameters (Ulog).
Chapter 22
1. Table 22.1 Reported performance of CW-MFCs.
2. Table 22.2 An overview of treatment performance of MFCs and CWs at individual level for various industrial wastewaters.
Chapter 23
1. Table 23.1 (Inter-)national stormwater quality data from residential areas [2].
2. Table 23.2 Characteristics of the constructed wetland in Oostzaan.
3. Table 23.3 Monitoring results of influent and effluent Hoogeveen 2011–2016.
Chapter 25
1. Table 25.1 Performance indicators for industry measures [3].
2. Table 25.2 Summary of duties under CDM Regulations 2015 (adapted from [18], with permission).
3. Table 25.3 Hazard identification and risk screening processes considered during the a constructed wetland project.

List of Illustrations

Chapter 0
1. Figure 11 Individual type of values and respective criteria and value units for the determination of the Total Value of Wetlands [4, 5].
2. Figure 2 Classification of Constructed Wetlands [5, 13].
3. Figure 3 Schematic representation of a typical cross‐section of a Free Water Surface Constructed Wetland.
4. Figure 4 Schematic representation of a typical cross‐section of a Horizontal Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetland.
5. Figure 5 Schematic representation of a typical cross‐section of a Vertical Flow Constructed Wetland [5, 30, 31].
6. Figure 6 Schematic representation of a typical cross‐section of a Floating Treatment Wetland [5].
7. Figure 7 Typical view of a Constructed Wetland implemented in the industrial sector (courtesy of Bauer Resources GmbH).
Chapter 1
1. Figure 1.1 Location of the Constructed Wetland treatment plant in the desert of the south eastern Arabian peninsula in Oman (left) and aerial picture of the Constructed Wetland system and the surrounding desert (right).
2. Figure 1.2 General schematic overview of the NWTP, showing each stage and all current activities in the system.
3. Figure 1.3 Installation of the HDPE liner in the buffer pond (left) and of the mineral sealing layer in the wetland cells (right).
4. Figure 1.4 Aerial view of the inlet buffer pond and the SFCW cells. [4]
5. Figure 1.5 Weather station close to the SFCW cells. [5]
6. Figure 1.6 Mean OiW concentration along the different treatment stages of the NWTP.
7. Figure 1.7 Aerial view of the agriculture research project area at NWTP.
Chapter 3
1. Figure 3.1 Conceptual design of the system installed at KT Food. Empty circle and numbers indicate the sampling points along the treatment trains 1) inlet; 2) after the HUSB; 3) after the aerated VF; 4) after the aerated HF bed; 5) after the P removal filtered filled with Tobermorite; 6) after the non-aerated bed; 7) after the aerated bed; 8) after the P removal filter filled with Polonite; 9) final effluent. Treatment trains: aerated line (1–2–3–4–5) and non-aerated line (1–2–6–7–8).
2. Figure 3.2 Satellite image showing the location of the treatment plant (a); a general view of the plant once it was established (b); details of HF bed (c); detail of P removal unit (d); state of the system during Campaign 1 at winter 2015 (e); state of the non-aerated VF bed during Campaign 2 (f); the two VF beds during Campaign 3 (aerated VF bed: g; passively aerated VF bed: h).
Chapter 4
1. Figure 4.1 Schematization of the multistage CW treatment plant of the Italian case study, in which nature-based composting as pre-treatment with FRB is adopted.
2. Figure 4.2 Schematization of the multistage CW treatment plant of the Spanish case study.
3. Figure 4.3 Schematization of the multistage CW treatment plant of the Spanish case study, in which a technological composting as pretreatment with FRB is adopted.
Chapter 5
1. Figure 5.1 Different aquaculture farms through the world (raceways, cages, ponds). (Image source: Google Earth).
2. Figure 5.2 Schematic representation of Free Water Surface Constructed Wetland.
3. Figure 5.3 Presentation of Vertical Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetland.
4. Figure 5.4 Presentations of Hybrit Systems: (a) FWSCWs-HSFCWs, (b) HSFCWs-VSFCWs.
Chapter 6
1. Figure 6.1 Temporal trend in the sugarcane production worldwide according with the production area and its productivity reprinted (permission pending) from Bhatnagar and Kesari [2].
2. Figure 6.2 Water management of the spentwash effluents in the sugarcane industry. Reprinted (permission pending) from Satyawali and Balakrishnan, 2016 [14].
3. Figure 6.3 Outline of the mesocosms used to treat an effluent of Atencingo a sugarcane factory in Mexico. Mesocosm configurations: A – Horizontal subsurface flow; B – Shallow vertical flow. Notes: c – coarse, ϕ= 5 cm; m – medium, ϕ= 2.5 cm; f – fine, ϕ= 1 cm; ufvG –ultrafine volcanic gravel, ϕ = 2–3 mm; W – water.
4. Figure 6.4 ORP of a FWS CW at different organic loading rates reprinted from Sohsalam and Sirianuntapiboon [9].
Chapter 8
1. Figure 8.1 Schematization of the reviewed CWs schemes on the treatment of OMW: (a) Herouvim et al. [7]; (b) Grafias et al. [8]; (c) Gikas et al. [9]; (d) Kapellakis et al. [5]; (e) Michailides et al. [10]; (f) Tatoulis et al. [6]: (g) Masi et al. [4].
Chapter 9
1. Figure 9.1 Cross-section with the various substrate layers in a VFCW used for dairy wastewater treatment by Rietland.
2. Figure 9.2 Two-stage FBA® system. Blue arrows indicate the water flow and the red arrows the air flow.
3. Figure 9.3 Pilot-scale HSF CWs for the treatment of Cr(VI) and SCW (upper two photos); perforated inflow pipes (diffuser) (bottom left photo); outlet tube of the CWs (bottom right photo).
4. Figure 9.4 Photo of the HDPE substrate material in the pilot wetland units.
Chapter 10
1. Figure 10.1 Treatment systems applied in the integrated management of pig slurry (modified from [12] and [13]).
2. Figure 10.2 Nitrogen cycle in constructed wetlands (modified from [63]).
Chapter 11
1. Figure 11.1 As K-edge XANES spectra recorded for Arsenite (As^III), Arsenate (As^V) and Arsenic-sulfide species.
2. Figure 11.2 An elemental map of a sediment grain showing co-existence of Arsenic (light gray) and Manganese (dark gray) obtained using μ-XRF imaging at a synchrotron beamline.
Chapter 12
1. Figure 12.1 The physical, chemical, biological and ecological impacts of AMD.
Chapter 13
1. Figure 13.1 Organic matter conversion in the absence of oxygen [1].
2. Figure 13.2 Constructed Wetlands classification [31].
3. Figure 13.3 Plate 1: Pilot scale hybrid constructed wetland units planted with Typha angustifolia.
4. Figure 13.4 Layer arrangement of the pilot-scale VSSF CWs.
5. Figure 13.5 Layer arrangement of the pilot-scale HSSF CWs.
6. Figure 13.6 Plate 2: Gohagoda dumpsite, Kandy, Sri Lanka.
7. Figure 13.7 (a) Plate 3: Typha angustifolia; (b) Plate 4: Scirpus atrovirens and (c) Plate 5: Cyperus alternifolius.
8. Figure 13.8 BOD₅ profiles with respect to time for hybrid CWs planted with four different plant species.
9. Figure 13.9 COD profiles with respect to time for hybrid CWs planted with with four different plant species.
Chapter 14
1. Figure 14.1 Plan view and cross-section of the lab-scale Horizontal Subsurface Flow Constructed Wetlands.
Chapter 15
1. Figure 15.1 View of the experimental HSSF-CW. (a) CW planted with Canna indica, (b) CW planted with Colocasia esculenta.
2. Figure 15.2 Category wise removal of chlorophenolics by HSSF-CW (for a HRT of 5.9 days).
3. Figure 15.3 Removal chlorophenolics by HSSF-CW (for a HRT of 5.9 days).
4. Figure 15.4 Plot of mass removal rate and mass loadings for (a) Canna indica and (b) Colocasia esculenta.
Chapter 16
1. Figure 16.1 Pictures of the pilot-scale constructed wetland units.
2. Figure 16.2 Time series charts for Cr(VI) removal rate in (a) Cr-P and (b) Cr-U pilot-scale units. [44].
Chapter 17
1. Figure 17.1 Sources, pathways and impacts of pharmaceuticals in the environment
2. Figure 17.2 Summary of the major physical, chemical and biological processes controlling pollutant removal in a SSF-CWS (adapted from Dordio et al. [224]).
3. Figure 17.3 Overview of the pharmaceutical removal processes occurring within the domain of each SSF-CWS component and of the interactions and inter-dependences established between the components.
4. Figure 17.4 Major removal processes and transformation pathways of organic xenobiotics (including pharmaceuticals) in plants (adapted from Kvesitadze et al. [228] and Abhilash et al. [229]).
Chapter 18
1. Figure 18.1 Schematic design characteristics of the CWs. Notes: FM: floating macrophytes and soilless, FW: free-water layer, SF: surface flow, SSF: subsurface flow. Systems CW1 and CW5 had a water layer of 30 cm and plant growth was supported by 20 cm long and 10 cm diameter garden-net cylinders (4 cm pore size) (see more details in Hijosa-Valsero et al. [4]). Systems CW2, CW3 and CW4 had a 25 cm layer of free-water (FW) over a 25 cm layer of siliceous gravel (d10 = 4 mm). Systems CW6 and CW7 consisted of a 45 cm siliceous gravel (d10 = 4 mm) layer, with an operational water depth of 40 cm.
2. Figure 18.2 Interstitial liquid sampling: (a) general diagram showing the sampling points (A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H) inside a CW. Points A, B, C and D were located 5 cm below the surface (regardless of gravel or water surface) and points E, F, G and H were 5 cm above the bottom of the tank. (b) Top view of a CW indicating the distances at which samples were taken.
3. Figure 18.3 Significant (p < 0.10) correlations between microbial community richness in the studied environment (roots) and nutrient removal in CWs. Richness is expressed as number of bands in the DGGE analysis.
4. Figure 18.4 Significant (p < 0.10) correlations between microbial community richness in each studied environment and general PPCP removal in CWs. Richness is expressed as number of bands in the DGGE analysis.
5. Figure 18.5 Significant (p < 0.10) correlations between microbial community richness in each studied environment and physico-chemical parameters inside CWs. Richness is expressed as number of bands in the DGGE analysis. Note: SUP, superior (5 cm below water surface), and INF, inferior (5 cm above the bottom of the tank).
Chapter 19
1. Figure 19.1 Cross-section of a STRB showing the sludge layer, filter and loading and drainage system (Copyright Orbicon, reproduced with permission).
2. Figure 19.2 Correlation between organic content (loss on ignition) in the feed sludge and the dry solid in the sludge residue in the STRB [21]. Experience has shown that a LOI above 65% significantly reduces the dewatering of the sludge [21].
3. Figure 19.3 Correlation between content of fat in the feed sludge and the dry solid content in the sludge residue [21].
4. Figure 19.4 (A) Dewatering curve from Helsinge STRB and (B) Tinglev STRB. Helsinge STRB has a good dewatering of the sludge, while Tinglev STRB has a very low dewatering [21]. With permission of Obricon.
5. Figure 19.5 Basin containing Nickel polluted sludge. Note the yellow color and poor reed coverage (06-06-2011) (Photo: Orbicon).
6. Figure 19.6 Nickel concentrations (mg Ni/kg DS) measured in the feed sludge during the period from 2006–2012. The Danish national legal limits for Nickel in sludge applied to agricultural lands is 30 mg Ni/kg DS (Gray line).
7. Figure 19.7 Hanningfield STRB system treating sludge from Hanningfield Water Works situated 3 km from the STRB (Photo: Orbicon September, 2012).
8. Figure 19.8 Hanningfield test STRB (Photo: Orbicon 28.05.2011).
9. Figure 19.9 Total solid (%) in feed sludge at Hanningfield WW in the period from 2008–June 2013.
10. Figure 19.10 Sedimentation of Hanningfield WW sludge performed on sludge sampled 28.07.2009 (Photo: Orbicon).
11. Figure 19.11 Capillary suction time (CST): measurement of surplus activated sludge and water works sludge. Red dots indicate Hanningfield WW and blue dots Whitacre WW.
12. Figure 19.12 Whitacre STRB Test. Basin nos 1–3. Sludge residue height (cm) during the test period July–December 2015. Red arrows show the increase and decrease in sludge residue height during the load and subsequent resting period.
13. Figure 19.13 Examples of the sludge surface n Whitacre Test system. Pictures are taken 21 days after the last load (left) and 1 day after the load (right). Note the evident cracks in the sludge after only 1 days' rest (Photo: Orbicon, reproduced with permission).
14. Figure 19.14 Sludge residue in the Lagoon at Whitacre WW showing that the sludge residue is cracking up. (Photo: Orbicon, 13.08.2015, reproduced with permission.)
15. Figure 19.15 Hanningfield test STRB: four loads on the same day (blue curve, m³/h) on test basin no. 1 and the resulting dewatering profile (red curve, L/sec/m²), year 2012.
Chapter 20
1. Figure 20.1 Effluent and background water temperature.
2. Figure 20.2 Partial site plan view.
3. Figure 20.3 Partial cross-section view.
4. Figure 20.4 Wetland inflow and outflow rates and water depths (September 2013 through December 2015).
5. Figure 20.5 Wetland inflow and outflow ammonia concentrations (September 2013 through December 2015).
6. Figure 20.6 Wetland inflow and outflow copper concentrations (September 2013 through December 2015).
7. Figure 20.7 Wetland inflow and outflow pH measurements (September 2013 through December 2015).
8. Figure 20.8 Wetland inflow and outflow temperature (September 2013 through December 2015).
9. Figure 20.9 Wetland inflow and outflow temperature differential (September 2013 through December 2015).
10. Figure 20.10 Wetland outflow and estimated balance temperatures (July 2013 through April 2014).
11. Figure 20.11 Wetland inflow and outflow specific conductance (September 2013 through December 2015).
Chapter 21
1. Figure 21.1 Pilot plant layout (modified from [11]).
2. Figure 21.2 Pilot VFCW distribution system.
3. Figure 21.3 View of the pilot VFCW.
4. Figure 21.4 Pilot HFCW container and outlet device.
5. Figure 21.5 View of the pilot HFCW.
6. Figure 21.6 Phragmites australis in the pilot HFCW.
7. Figure 21.7 Material settling in the inlet (HFCW).
8. Figure 21.8 Phragmites in the pilot VFCW.
Chapter 22
1. Figure 22.1 Schematic representation of Microbial Fuel Cell, Constructed Wetlands and Integrated Constructed Wetland-Microbial Fuel Cell.
2. Figure 22.2 Schematic illustration of direct and indirect electron transfer to electrode by EAB [adapted from (18)].
3. Figure 22.3 CW-MFCs and future direction.
Chapter 23
1. Figure 23.1 Stormwater quality from industrial areas [4, 9].
2. Figure 23.2 Distribution of pollutants in stormwater (90 samples from 25 locations) [3].
3. Figure 23.3 Particle size distributions observed around the world in stormwater.
4. Figure 23.4 Expected removal efficiency on wetlands for stormwater [12].
5. Figure 23.5 Mapped constructed wetlands “waterharmonicas” around the world (left) and the Netherlands (right)
6. Figure 23.6 Mapped constructed wetlands in The Netherlands for waste and stormwater
7. Figure 23.7 Example of horizontal wetland in Amsterdam in Westergasfabriekpark for closed system [11].
8. Figure 23.8 Example of horizontal wetland with extra purification with Lava and Olivine (more photos and videos on: https://www.climatescan.nl/projects/101/detail [14]).
9. Figure 23.9 Example of one of the largest horizontal flow wetlands in Hoogeveen; top view of the wetland (left), information of this wetland (right) (http://www.climatescan.nl/page?details=91).
10. Figure 23.10 Monitored construction costs of some wetlands in the Netherlands [1].
11. Figure 23.11 Removal efficiency of the Constructed wetland at Hoogeveen.
12. Figure 23.12 Top: fire at Moerdijk (the Netherlands) leading to enviromental disaster. Bottom: surface model at industrial site to calculate the outlfow of water during intensive rainfall or emission during calamities to locate the best locations for constructed wetlands.
13. Figure 23.13 Full-scale testing of horizontal constructed wetland in Purmerend [2]. Reproduced with permission.
14. Figure 23.14 Aqua drones used for water quality and ecoscans as applied in Hoogeveen wetland [16]. Reproduced with permission.
15. Figure 23.15 Unaccessible wetland in UK with warning signs (left). Augmented reality as an interactive communication tools to show the pros and cons of constructed wetlands and get more engagement from stakeholders (right) [14]. Reproduced with permission.
Chapter 24
1. Figure 24.1 The research structure.
2. Figure 24.2 CSR-CWs logic.
3. Figure 24.3 The CSR-CWs model (designed in Stella Software Version 10.0.6).
4. Figure 24.4 Proactive Industry – Business case trends.
5. Figure 24.5 Proactive Industry – Ethical approach.
6. Figure 24.6 Reactive industry – The Business Case approach.
7. Figure 24.7 Reactive Industry – The Ethical Case approach.
8. Figure 24.8 Various types of industries decision making.