Pilot-scale studies of domestic wastewater treatment by typical constructed wetlands and their greenhouse gas emissions

  • Chaoxiang LiuEmail author
  • Kaiqin Xu
  • Ryuhei Inamori
  • Yoshitaka Ebie
  • Jie Liao
  • Yuhei Inamori
Research Article


Three typical constructed wetlands (CWs) including Vertical Flow (VF), Free Water Surface (FWS), and Subsurface Flow (SF), and combined VF-SF-FWS constructed wetlands were investigated for the treatment of domestic wastewater with low C/N ratio. The performance of nutrient removal and the characteristics of greenhouse gas emissions, such as CH4 and N2O, from these CWs were compared. The results indicated that the four types of CWs had high removal efficiencies for organic matter and suspended solid (SS). The combined wetland also showed a comparatively good performance for nitrogen and phosphorus removal, and the removal efficiencies for total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) were 81.3% and 84.5%, respectively. The combined CWs had a comparative lower global warming potential. The FWS CW had the highest tendency to emit CH4 and led to a higher global warming potential among the four types of CWs, which was about 586 mg CO2/m2·h.


global warming potential methane nitrous oxide low C/N ratio nitrogen phosphorus 


  1. 1.
    Kadlec R H, Knight R L. Treatment Wetlands. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press Inc., 1996Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    IWA. Constructed Wetlands for Pollution Control—Processes, Performance, Design and Operation. Scientific and Technical Report No. 8. London: IWA Publishing, 2001Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhao Q, Wang B. Evaluation on a pilot-scale attached growth pond system treating domestic wastewater. Water Res, 1996, 30: 242–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    IPCC. Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994, 337Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fey A, Benckiser G, Ottow J C G. Emissions of nitrous oxide from a constructed wetland using a ground filter and plants in waste-water purification of a dairy farm. Biol Fertil Soils, 1999, 29, 354–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nakano M, Miyazaki T, Shiozawa S, Nishimura T. Physical and Environmental Analysis of Soils. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1995Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Design manual: Constructed wetlands and aquatic plant systems for municipal wastewater treatment. EPA 625/11-88/022. Cincinnati, 1988Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Subsurface flow constructed wetlands for waste treatment. EPA 832-R-93-008, 1993Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Reed S C, Crites R W, Middlebrooks E J. Natural Systems for Wastewater Management and Treatment. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1995Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    USEPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). Design manual: constructed wetlands and aquatic plant systems for municipal wastewater treatment. EPA 625/11-88/022. Cincinnati, 1988Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bendix M, Tornbjerg T, Brix H. Internal gas transport in Typha latifolia L. and Typha angustifolia L. Humidity-induced pressurization and convective through-flow. Aquat Bot, 1994, 49: 75–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wang Y, Inamori R, Kong H, Xu K Q, Inamori Y, Kondo T, Zhang J. Influence of plant species and wastewater strength on constructed wetland methane emissions and associated microbial populations. Ecol Eng, 2008, 32: 22–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Inamori R, Gui P, Dassa P, Matsumura M, Xu K Q, Kondo T, Ebie Y, Inamori Y. Investigating CH4 and N2O emissions from ecoengineering wastewater treatment processes using constructed wetland microcosms. Process Biochem, 2007, 42(3): 363–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gui P, Inamori R, Matsumura M, Inamori Y. Evaluation of constructed wetlands by wastewater purification ability and greenhouse gas emissions. In: the 10th International Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. Portugal: in CD, 2006, 23–27Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kralova M, Masscheleyn P H, Lindau C W, Patrick W H. Production of dinitrogen and nitrous oxide in soil suspensions as affected by redox potential. Water Air Soil Pollut, 1992, 61(1/2): 37–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Søvik A K, Kløve B. Emission of N2O and CH4 from a constructed wetland in southeastern Norway. Sci Total Environ, 2007, 380: 28–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Teiter S. Emission of N2O, N2, CH4 and CO2 from constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment and from riparian buffer zones. Ecol Eng, 2005, 25: 528–541CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mander Ü, Löhmus K, Teiter S, Mauring T, Nurk K, Augustin J. Gaseous fluxes in the nitrogen and carbon budgets of subsurface flow constructed wetlands. Sci Total Environ, 2008, 404(2–3): 343–353Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chaoxiang Liu
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Kaiqin Xu
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ryuhei Inamori
    • 4
  • Yoshitaka Ebie
    • 1
  • Jie Liao
    • 2
  • Yuhei Inamori
    • 4
  1. 1.Research Center for Material Cycles and Waste ManagementNational Institute for Environmental StudiesTsukubaJapan
  2. 2.Institute of Urban EnvironmentChinese Academy of SciencesXiamenChina
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering ScienceWuhan UniversityWuhanChina
  4. 4.Faculty of Symbiotic Systems ScienceFukushima UniversityFukushimaJapan

Personalised recommendations