Water, Air, & Soil Pollution

, 230:245 | Cite as

Laboratory-Scale Evaluation of the Effects of Water-Filled Pore Space on Emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and N2 from Soil-Based Wastewater Treatment

  • Faith L. Anderson
  • Jennifer A. Cooper
  • Jose A. AmadorEmail author


Microbial removal of C and N in soil-based wastewater treatment involves emission of CO2, CH4, N2O, and N2 to the atmosphere. Water-filled pore space (WFPS) can exert an important control on microbial production and consumption of these gases. We examined the impact of WFPS on emissions of CO2, CH4, N2O, and N2 in soil microcosms receiving septic tank effluent (STE) or effluent from a single-pass sand filter (SFE), with deionized-distilled (DW) water as a control. Incubation of B and C horizon soil for 1 h (the residence time of wastewater in 1 cm of soil) with DW produced the lowest greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which varied little with WFPS. In B and C horizon soil amended with SFE emissions of N2O increased linearly with increasing WFPS. Emissions of CO2 from soil amended with STE peaked at WFPS of 0.5–0.8, depending on the soil horizon, whereas in soil amended with SFE, the CO2 flux was detectable only in B horizon soil, where it increased with increasing WFPS. Methane emissions were detectable only for STE, with flux increasing linearly with WFPS in C horizon soil, but no clear pattern was observed with WFPS for B horizon soil. Emissions of GHG from soil were not constrained by the lack of organic C availability in SFE, or by the absence of NO3 availability in STE, and addition of acetate or NO3 resulted in lower emissions in a number of instances. Emission of 15N2 and 15N2O from 15NH4 took place within an hour of contact with soil, and production of 15N2 was much higher than 15N2O. 15N2 emissions were greatest at the lowest WFPS value and diminished markedly as WFPS increased, regardless of water type and soil texture. Our results suggest that the fluxes of CO2, CH4, N2O, and N2 respond differently to WFPS, depending on water type and soil texture.


Greenhouse gases Wastewater Soil-based treatment Septic systems Water-filled pore space 


Funding Information

This research was funded by a grant from the Rhode Island Agricultural Experiment Station, by funds from the University of Rhode Island’s Honors Program, and by the University of Rhode Island’s Coastal Fellows Program.

Supplementary material

11270_2019_4294_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 16 kb)


  1. Amador, J. A., & Loomis, G. W. (2018). Soil-based wastewater treatment. Madison, WI: ASA-SSSA-CSA.Google Scholar
  2. Angel, R., Claus, P., & Conrad, R. (2012). Methanogenic Archaea are globally ubiquitous in aerated soils and become active under wet anoxic conditions. ISME Journal, 6(4), 847.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bateman, E. J., & Baggs, E. M. (2005). Contributions of nitrification and denitrification to N2O emissions from soils at different water-filled pore space. Biology and Fertility of Soils, 41, 379–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bédard, C., & Knowles, R. (1989). Physiology, biochemistry, and specific inhibitors of CH4, NH4 +, and CO oxidation by methanotrophs and nitrifiers. Microbiological Reviews, 53, 68–84.Google Scholar
  5. Beggs, R. A., Hills, D. J., Tchobanoglous, G., & Hopmans, J. W. (2011). Fate of nitrogen for subsurface drip dispersal of effluent from small wastewater systems. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 126, 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conn, K. E., Siegrist, R. L., Barber, L. B., & Meyer, M. T. (2010). Fate of trace organic compounds during vadose zone soil treatment in an onsite wastewater system. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, 29(2), 285–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Conthe, M., Lycus, P., Arntzen, M. Ø., da Silva, A. R., Frostegård, Å., Bakken, L. R., Kleerebezem, R., & van Loosdrecht, M. C. (2019). Denitrification as an N2O sink. Water Research, 151, 381–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cooper, J. A., Loomis, G. W., Kalen, D. V., & Amador, J. A. (2015). Evaluation of water quality functions of conventional and advanced soil-based onsite wastewater treatment systems. Journal of Environmental Quality, 44, 953–962.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cooper, J. A., Loomis, G. W., & Amador, J. A. (2016a). Hell and high water: diminished septic system performance in coastal regions due to climate change. PLoS One, 11, e0162104. Scholar
  10. Cooper, J. A., Morales, I., & Amador, J. A. (2016b). Nitrogen transformations in different types of soil treatment areas receiving domestic wastewater. Ecological Engineering, 94, 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diaz-Valbuena, L. R., Leverenz, H. L., Cappa, C. D., Tchobanoglous, G., Horwath, W. R., & Darby, J. L. (2011). Methane, carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emission from septic tank systems. Environmental Science and Technology, 45, 2741–2747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fernández-Baca, C. P., Truhlar, A. M., Omar, A. E. H., Rahm, B. G., Walter, M. T., & Richardson, R. E. (2018). Methane and nitrous oxide cycling microbial communities in soils above septic leach fields: abundances with depth and correlations with net surface emissions. Science of the Total Environment, 640, 429–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fierer, N., & Schimel, J. P. (2003). A proposed mechanism for the pulse in carbon dioxide production commonly observed following the rapid rewetting of a dry soil. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 67, 798–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. He, J., Dougherty, M., & AbdelGadir, A. (2013). Numerical assisted assessment of vadose-zone nitrogen transport under a soil moisture controlled wastewater SDI dispersal system in a vertisol. Ecological Engineering, 53, 228–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Khalil, M. I., & Baggs, E. M. (2005). CH4 oxidation and N2O emissions at varied soil water-filled pore spaces and headspace CH4 concentrations. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 37, 1785–1894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Klüber, H. D., & Conrad, R. (1998). Effects of nitrate, nitrite, NO and N2O on methanogenesis and other redox processes in anoxic rice field soil. FEMS Microbiology Ecology, 25, 301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Li, Q., Li, P., Zhu, P., Wu, J., & Liang, S. (2008). Effects of exogenous organic carbon substrates on nitrous oxide emissions during the denitrification process of sequence batch reactors. Environmental Engineering Science, 25, 1221–1228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Linn, D. M., & Doran, J. W. (1984). Effect of water-filled pore space on carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide production in tilled and nontilled soils. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 48, 1267–1272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Loomis, G. W., Dow, D., Stolt, M. H., Sykes, A. D., & Gold, A. J. (2001). Performance evaluation of innovative treatment technologies used to remediate failed septic systems (pp. 52–61). Proceedings of the 9th International Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems. St. Joseph: The American Society of Agricultural Engineers.Google Scholar
  20. McCray J. E., et al. (2011). Quantitative tools to determine the expected performance of wastewater soil treatment units-guidance manual, toolkit user’s guide and visual-graphic tools. Water Intelligence Online, 1476-1777.Google Scholar
  21. Morales, I., Cooper, J.A., Amador, J. A., & Boving, T. (2016). Modeling nitrogen losses in conventional and advanced soil-based onsite wastewater treatment systems under current and changing climate conditions. PLoS One, 11, e0158292. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mosier, A. R., & Schimel, D. S. (1993). Nitrification and denitrification. In R. Knowles & T. H. Blackburn (Eds.), Nitrogen isotope techniques. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Ramirez, K. S., Craine, J. M., & Fierer, N. (2010). Nitrogen fertilization inhibits soil microbial respiration regardless of the form of nitrogen applied. Soil Biology and Biochemistry, 42, 2336–2338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. RIDEM. Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (2013). Guidelines for the design, use, and maintenance of pressurized drainfields. Available at: Accessed 10 Sep 2019.
  25. Skopp, J., Jawson, M. D., & Doran, J. W. (1990). Steady-state aerobic microbial activity as a function of soil water content. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 54, 1619–1625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Somlai, C., Knappe, J., & Gill, L. (2019). Spatial and temporal variation of CO2 and CH4 emissions from a septic tank soakaway. Science of the Total Environment, 679(20), 185–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Somlai-Haase, C., Knappe, J., & Gill, L. (2017). Carbon dioxide emissions from a septic tank soakaway in a northern maritime climate. Science of the Total Environment, 586, 485–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Truhlar, A. M., Rahm, B. G., Brooks, R. A., Nadeau, S. A., Makarsky, E. T., & Walter, M. T. (2016). Greenhouse gas emissions from septic systems in New York state. Journal of Environmental Quality, 45(4), 1153–1160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Truhlar, A. M., Ortega, K. L., & Walter, M. T. (2019). Seasonal and diel variation in greenhouse gas emissions from septic system leach fields. International journal of Environmental Science and Technology. Scholar
  30. Tyler, E.J., Laak, R., McCoy, E., & Sandhu, S. S. (1977). The soil as a treatment system (pp. 22–37) Proceedings of the 2nd National Home Sewage Treatment Symposium. St. Joseph: The American Society of Agricultural Engineers.Google Scholar
  31. U. S. Census Bureau. (2011). Current Housing Reports, Series H150/09, American Housing Survey for the United States: 2009. US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  32. Weier, K. L., Doran, J. W., Power, J. F., & Walters, D. T. (1993). Denitrification and the dinitrogen/nitrous oxide ratio as affected by soil water, available carbon, and nitrate. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 57, 66–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zausig, J., Stepniewski, W., & Horn, R. (1993). Oxygen concentration and redox potential gradients in unsaturated model soil aggregates. Soil Science Society of America Journal, 57, 908–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhao, Y., Xia, Y., Li, B., & Yan, X. (2014). Influence of environmental factors on N2 and N2O production in sediment of freshwater rivers. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 21, 9973–9982.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Faith L. Anderson
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jennifer A. Cooper
    • 1
    • 3
  • Jose A. Amador
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Laboratory of Soil Ecology and MicrobiologyUniversity of Rhode IslandKingstonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Molecular and Systems BiologyDartmouth CollegeHanoverUSA
  3. 3.Department of Agronomy and HorticultureUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA

Personalised recommendations