Advertisement

Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment

  • Jan Vymazal
  • Margaret Greenway
  • Karin Tonderski
  • Hans Brix
  • Ülo Mander
Part of the Ecological Studies book series (ECOLSTUD, volume 190)

5.7 Conclusion

Constructed wetlands have been used for wastewater treatment for nearly 40 years and have become a widely accepted technology available to deal with both point and non-point sources of water pollution. They offer a land-intensive, low-energy, and low-operational-requirements alternative to conventional treatment systems, especially for small communities and remote locations. Constructed wetlands also prove to be affordable tools for wastewater reclamation, especially in arid and semi-arid areas. Although the emission of N2O and CH4 from constructed wetlands was found to be relatively high, their global influence is probably not significant.

Keywords

Wastewater Treatment Nitrogen Removal Phosphorus Removal Vertical Flow Construct Wetland 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen RG, Pereira LS, Raes D, Smith M (1998) Crop evapotranspiration. Guidelines for computing crop water requirements. (FAO irrigation and drainage paper 56) FAO, RomeGoogle Scholar
  2. Andersson JL, Wittgren HB, Kallner S, Ridderstolpe P, Hägermark I (2000) Wetland Oxelösund, Sweden — the first five years of operation. In: Jenssen P, Mander U (eds) Natural wetlands for wastewater treatment in cold climate. (Advances in ecological sciences) WIT, Southampton, pp 9–27Google Scholar
  3. Andersson JL, Kallner Bastviken S, Tonderski KS (2004) Free water surface wetlands for wastewater treatment in Sweden — nitrogen and phosphorus removal. Proc Int Conf Wetland Syst Water Pollut Control 9:39–46Google Scholar
  4. Arias CA, Brix H, Johansen NH (2002) Phosphorus removal from municipal wastewater in an experimental two-stage vertical flow constructed wetland system equipped with a calcite filter. Proc Int Conf Wetland Syst Water Pollut Control 8:952–960Google Scholar
  5. Arias CA, Brix H, Johansen NH (2003a) Phosphorus removal from municipal wastewater in an experimental two-stage vertical flow constructed wetland system equipped with a calcite filter. Water Sci Technol 48:51–58Google Scholar
  6. Arias CA, Cabello A, Brix H, Johansen NH (2003b) Removal of indicator bacteria from municipal wastewater in an experimental two-stage vertical flow constructed wetland system. Water Sci Technol 48:35–41Google Scholar
  7. Bartlett KB, Harris RC (1992) Review and assessment of methane emissions from wetlands. Chemosphere 26:261–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bolton KGE, Greenway M (1999) Pollutant removal capacity of a constructed Melaleuca wetland receiving primary settled effluent. Water Sci Technol 39:199–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Boutin C (1987) Domestic wastewater treatment in tanks planted with rooted macrophytes: case study, description of the system, design criteria, and efficiency. Water SciTechnol 19:29–40Google Scholar
  10. Brix H (1987a) The applicability of the wastewater treatment plant in Othfresen as scientific documentation of the root-zone method. Water SciTechnol 19:19–24Google Scholar
  11. Brix H (1987b) Treatment of wastewater in the rhizosphere of wetland plants — the rootzone method. Water SciTechnol 19:107–118Google Scholar
  12. Brix H (1990) Gas exchange through the soil-atmosphere interphase and through dead culms of Phragmites australis in a constructed reed bed receiving domestic sewage. Water Res 24:259–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brix H (1994) Constructed wetlands for municipal wastewater treatment in Europe. In: Mitsch WJ (ed) Global wetlands: old world and new. Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 325–333Google Scholar
  14. Brix H (1998) Denmark. In: Vymazal J, Brix H, Cooper PF, Green MB, Haberl R (eds) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in Europe. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 123–152Google Scholar
  15. Brix H (2003) Danish experiences with wastewater treatment in constructed wetlands. In: Dias V, Vymazal J (eds) The use of aquatic macrophytes for wastewater treatment in constructed wetlands. ICN/INAG, Lisbon, pp 327–361Google Scholar
  16. Brix H, Gregersen P (2002) Water balance of willow dominated constructed wetlands. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 8:669–670Google Scholar
  17. Brix H, Schierup H-H (1989) The use of macrophytes in water pollution control. Ambio 18:100–107Google Scholar
  18. Brix H, Schierup H-H (1990) Soil oxygenation in constructed reed beds: the role of macrophyte and soil-atmosphere interface oxygen transport. In: Cooper PF, Findlater BC (eds) Constructed wetlands in water pollution control. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 53–66Google Scholar
  19. Brix H, Arias CA, Del Bubba M (2000) How can phosphorus removal be sustained in subsurface-flow constructed wetlands? Proc Int Conf Wetland Syst Water Pollut Control 7:65–74Google Scholar
  20. Brix H, Sorrell BK, Lorenzen B (2001) Are Phragmites-dominated wetlands a net source or net sink of greenhouse gasses? Aquat Bot 69:313–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Brix H, Arias CA, Johansen NH (2002) BOD and nitrogen removal from municipal wastewater in an experimental two-stage vertical flow constructed wetland system with recycling. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 8:400–410Google Scholar
  22. Brix H, Arias C, Johansen NH (2003) Experiments in a two-stage constructed wetland system: nitrification capacity and effects of recycling on nitrogen removal. In: Vymazal J (ed) Wetlands: nutrients, metals and mass cycling. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 237–258Google Scholar
  23. Burka U, Lawrence P (1990) A new community approach to waste treatment with higher water plants. In: Cooper PF, Findlater BC (eds) Constructed wetlands in water pollution control. Pergamon, Oxford, pp 359–371Google Scholar
  24. Butijn GD, Greiner RW (1985) Afwalwaterzuivering met behulp van begroeide infiltratievelden (Wastewater treatment with vegetated percolation fields). In: Aart PJM van der (ed) Wetlands for the purification of wastewater. University of Utrecht, Utrecht, pp 64–89Google Scholar
  25. Ciupa R (1996) The experience in the operation of constructed wetlands in north-eastern Poland. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 5:6Google Scholar
  26. Cooper PF (ed) (1990) European design and operations guidelines for reed bed treatment systems. (WRc Report UI 17) European Community/European Water Pollution Control Association Emergent Hydrophyte Treatment System Expert Contact Group, SwindonGoogle Scholar
  27. Cooper PF (1999) A review of the design and performance of vertical flow and hybrid reed bed treatment systems. Water SciTechnol 40:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cooper PF (2001) Nitrification and denitrification in hybrid constructed wetlands systems. In: Vymazal J (ed) Transformations on nutrients in natural and constructed wetlands. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 257–270Google Scholar
  29. Cooper PF, Boon AG (1987) The use of Phragmites for wastewater treatment by the root zone method: the UK approach. In: Reddy KR, Smith WH (eds) Aquatic plants for water treatment and resource recovery. Magnolia, Orlando, pp 153–174Google Scholar
  30. Cooper PF, Findlater BC (eds) (1990) Constructed wetlands in water pollution control. Pergamon, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  31. Cooper PF, Job GD, Green MB, Shutes RBE (1996) Reed beds and constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. WRc Publications, MarlowGoogle Scholar
  32. Crites RW, Tchobanoglous G (1998) Small and decentralized wastewater management systems. McGraw Hill, BostonGoogle Scholar
  33. De Jong J (1976) The purification of wastewater with the aid of rush or reed ponds. In: Tourbier J, Pierson RW (eds) Biological control of water pollution. Pennsylvania University Press, Philadelphia, pp 133–139Google Scholar
  34. De Szalay FA, Resh VH (2000) Factors influencing macro-invertebrate colonisation of seasonal wetlands: responses to emergent plant cover. Freshwater Biol 45:295–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Dias V, Vymazal J (eds) (2003) The use of aquatic macrophytes for wastewater treatment in constructed wetlands. Instituto da Conservação da Naturreza/Instituto Nacional da água, LisbonGoogle Scholar
  36. Fey A, Benckiser G, Ottow JCG (1999) Emissions of nitrous oxide from a constructed wetland using a groundfilter and macrophytes in waste-water purification of a dairy farm. Biol Fertil Soils 29:354–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Gregersen P, Brix H (2001) Zero-discharge of nutrients and water in a willow dominated constructed wetland. Water SciTechnol 44:407–412Google Scholar
  38. Greenway M, Simpson JS (1996) Artificial wetlands for wastewater treatment, water reuse and wildlife in Queensland, Australia. Water SciTechnol 33:221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Greenway M, Woolley A (1999) Constructed wetlands in Queensland: performance efficiency and nutrient bioaccumulation. Ecol Eng 12:39–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Greenway M, Woolley A (2001) Changes in plant biomass and nutrient removal in a constructed wetland, Cairns, Australia. Water SciTechnol 44:303–310Google Scholar
  41. Greenway M, Dale P, Chapman H (2003) An assessment of mosquito breeding and control in 4 surface flow wetlands in tropical-subtropical Australia. Water SciTechnol 48:249–256Google Scholar
  42. Greiner RW, Jong J de (1984) The use of marsh plants for the treatment of waste water in areas designated for recreation and tourism. (RIJP Report 225) RIJP, LelystadGoogle Scholar
  43. Hammer DA (ed) (1989) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Lewis, Chelsea, Mich.Google Scholar
  44. Hanson GC, Groffman PM, Gold AJ (1994) Denitrification in riparian wetlands receiving high and low groundwater nitrate inputs. J Environ Qual 23:917–922Google Scholar
  45. IPCC (2001) Atmospheric chemistry and greenhouse gases, chapter 4. In: Houghton JT, et al. (eds) Climate change: the scientific basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 239–287Google Scholar
  46. Johansen NH, Brix H (1996) Design criteria for a two-stage constructed wetland. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 5:IX/3Google Scholar
  47. Johansen NH, Brix H, Arias CA (2002) Design and characterization of a compact constructed wetland system removing BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus from single household sewage. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 8:47–61Google Scholar
  48. Kadlec RH (1999) Chemical, physical and biological cycles in treatment wetlands. Water Sci Technol 40:37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Kadlec RH, Knight RL (1996) Treatment wetlands. CRC/Lewis, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  50. Kadlec RH, Knight RH, Vymazal J, Brix H, Cooper PF, Haberl R (2000) Constructed wetlands for pollution control. Processes, performance, design and operation. (IWA Scientific and Technical Report 8) IWA, LondonGoogle Scholar
  51. Kallner S, Wittgren HB (2001) Modeling nitrogen transformations in surface flow wastewater treatment wetlands in Sweden. Water SciTechnol 44:237–244Google Scholar
  52. Kickuth R (1969) Höhere Wasserpflanzen und Gawässerreinhaltung. Schiftenreihe der Vereinigung. Dtsch Gewaessersch EV-VDG 19:3–1Google Scholar
  53. Kickuth R (1977) Degradation and incorporation of nutrients from rural wastewaters by plant rhizosphere under limnic conditions. In: Utilization of manure by land spreading. Comm Eur Commun EUR 5672e:335–343Google Scholar
  54. Kickuth R (1978) Elimination gelöster Laststoffe durch Röhrichtbestände. Arb Dtsch Fischereiverbandes 25:57–70Google Scholar
  55. Kickuth R (1981) Abwasserreinigung in Mosaikmatritzen aus aeroben und anaeroben Teilbezirken. In: Moser F (ed) Grundlagen der Abwasserreinigung. Verlag Oldenburg, Munich, pp 630–650Google Scholar
  56. Knight RL, Clarke RA, Bastian RK (2001) Surface flow (SF) treatment wetlands as a habitat for wildlife and humans. Water SciTechnol 44:27–37Google Scholar
  57. Knowles R (1982) Denitrification. Microbiol Rev 46:43–70Google Scholar
  58. Lakatos G (1998) Hungary. In: Vymazal J, Brix H, Cooper PF, Green MB, Haberl R (eds) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in Europe. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 191–206Google Scholar
  59. Lakatos G, Kiss MK, Kiss M, Juhász J (1996) Application of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in Hungary. Proc Int Conf Wetland Syst Water Pollut Control 5:IX/9Google Scholar
  60. Linde L, Alsbro R (2000) Ekeby wetland — the largest constructed SF wetland in Sweden. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 7:1101–1110Google Scholar
  61. Mæhlum T, Jenssen P (1998) Norway. In: Vymazal J, Brix H, Cooper PF, Green MB, Haberl R (eds) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in Europe. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 207–216Google Scholar
  62. Mæhlum T, Stålnacke P (1999) Removal efficiency of three cold-climate constructed wetlands treating domestic wastewater: effects of temperature, seasons, loading rates and input concentrations. Water SciTechnol 40:273–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mander Ü, Jenssen P (eds) (2003) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment on cold climates. WIT Press, SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  64. Mander Ü, Kuusemets V, LÕhmus K, Mauring T, Teiter S, Augustin J (2003) Nitrous oxide, dinitrogen, and methane emission in a subsurface flow constructed wetland. Water Sci Technol 48:135–142Google Scholar
  65. Marti E, Arias CA, Brix, H, Johansen NH (2003) Recycling of treated effluents enhances reduction of total nitrogen in vertical flow constructed wetlands. Publ Inst Geogr Univer Tartuensis 94:150–155Google Scholar
  66. Martikainen PJ, Nykänen H, Crill P, Silvola J (1993) Effect of a lowered water table on nitrous oxide fluxes from northern peatlands. Nature 366:51–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Masi F, Conte G, Martinuzzi N, Pucci B (2002) Winery high organic content wastewaters treated by constructed wetlands in Mediterranean climate. Proc Int Conf Wetland Syst Water Pollut Control 8:274–282Google Scholar
  68. Ministry of Environment and Energy (2003a) Guidelines for willow systems up to 30 PE (in Danish). Økologisk Byfornyelse og Spildevandsrensning 25Google Scholar
  69. Ministry of Environment and Energy (2003b) Guidelines for willow systems with soil infiltration up to 30 PE (in Danish). Økologisk Byfornyelse og Spildevandsrensning 26Google Scholar
  70. Mitsch WJ, Gosselink JG (1993) Wetlands. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  71. Mitterer-Reichmann GM (2002) Data evaluation of constructed wetlands for treatment of domestic wastewater. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 8:40–46Google Scholar
  72. Mokany A, Shine R (2002) Competition between tadpoles and mosquitoes: the effects of larval density and tadpole size. Aust J Zool 40:549–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Mosier AR (1998) Soil processes and global changes. Biol Fertil Soils 27:221–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Nehring KW, Brauning SE (eds) (2002) Wetlands and remediation II. Battelle Memorial Institute, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  75. NHMRC (1999) Draft guidelines for sewage systems: reclaimed water (Australia). NHMRC, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  76. O’Hogain S (2003) The design, operation and performance of a municipal hybrid reed bed treatment system. Water Sci Technol 48:119–126Google Scholar
  77. QDNR (2000) Guidelines for using freewater surface constructed wetlands to treat municipal sewage. Queensland Department of Natural Resources, BrisbaneGoogle Scholar
  78. Richardson CJ, Qian SS, Craft BC, Qualls RG (1997) Predictive models for phosphorus retention in wetlands. Wetlands Ecol Manage 4:159–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Rosenberg NJ (1969) Advective contribution of energy utilised in evapotranspiration by alfalfa in the East Central Great Plains. Agric Meteorol 6:179–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Seidel K (1955) Die Flechtbinse Scirpus lacustris. In: Oekologie, Morphologie und Entwicklung, ihre Stellung bei den Volkern und ihre wirtschaftliche Bedeutung. Schweizerbartsche Verlagsbuchnadlung, Stuttgart, pp. 37–52Google Scholar
  81. Seidel K (1961) Zur Problematik der Keim-und Pflanzengewasser. Verh Int Verein Limnol 14:1035–1039Google Scholar
  82. Seidel K (1965a) Phenol-Abbau in Wasser durch Scirpus lacustris L. wehrend einer versuchsdauer von 31 Monaten. Naturwissenschaften 52:398–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Seidel K (1965b) Neue Wege zur Grundwasseranreicherung in Krefeld, Vol II: Hydrobotanische Reinigungsmehode. GWF Wasser/Abwasser 30:831–833Google Scholar
  84. Seidel K (1976) Macrophytes and water purification. In: Tourbier J, Pierson RW (eds) Biological control of water pollution. Pennsylvania University Press, Philadelphia, pp 109–122Google Scholar
  85. Seidel K (1978) Gewässerreinigung durch höhere Pflanzen. Z Garten Landschaft H1:9–17Google Scholar
  86. Spieles DJ, Mitsch WJ (2000) The effects of season and hydrologic and chemical loading on nitrate retention in constructed wetlands: a comparison of low-and high-nutrient riverine systems. Ecol Eng 14:77–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Tanner CC, Adams DD, Downes MT (1997) Methane emissions from constructed wetlands treating agricultural wastewaters. J Environ Qual 26:1056–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Tanner CC, Kadlec RH, Gibbs MM, Sukias JPS, Nguyen ML (2002) Nitrogen processing gradients in subsurface-flow wetlands — influence of wastewater characteristics. Ecol Eng 18:499–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Urbanc-Bercic O, Bulc T (1994) Integrated constructed wetland for small communities. Proc Int ConfWetland Syst Water Pollut Control 4:138–146Google Scholar
  90. Veenstra S (1998) The Netherlands. In: Vymazal J, Brix H, Cooper PF, Green MB, Haberl R (eds) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in Europe. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 289–314Google Scholar
  91. Vuillot M, Boutin C (1987) Les systèmes rustiques d’épuration: aspects de l’expérience française; possibilités d’application aux pays en voie de dévelopment. Trib CEBEDEAU 518:21–3Google Scholar
  92. Vymazal J (1999) Nitrogen removal in constructed wetlands with horizontal sub-surface flow-can we determine the key process? In: Vymazal J (ed) Nutrient cycling and retention in natural and constructed wetlands. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 1–17Google Scholar
  93. Vymazal J (2001) Types of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment: their potential for nutrient removal. In: Vymazal J (ed) Transformations on nutrients in natural and constructed wetlands. Backhuys, Leiden, pp 1–93Google Scholar
  94. Vymazal J, Brix H, Cooper PF, Green M, Haberl R (eds) (1998) Constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in Europe. Backhuys, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  95. Wetzel RG (2001) Fundamental processes within natural and constructed wetland ecosystems: short-term versus long-term objectives. Water SciTechnol 44:1–8Google Scholar
  96. Whiting GJ, Chanton JP (2001) Greenhouse carbon balance of wetlands: methane emission versus carbon sequestration. Tellus B53:521–525Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jan Vymazal
    • 1
  • Margaret Greenway
    • 2
  • Karin Tonderski
    • 3
  • Hans Brix
    • 4
  • Ülo Mander
    • 5
  1. 1.ENKI, o.p.s., Řícýanova 40, 169 00 Praha 6, Czech Republic and Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth SciencesDuke University Wetland CenterDurhamUSA
  2. 2.School of Environmental Engineering and Cooperative Research Centre for Catchment HydrologyGriffith UniversityNathanAustralia
  3. 3.Department of Physics, Measurement Technology, Chemistry and BiologyLinkÖping UniversityLinkÖpingSweden
  4. 4.Department of Biological SciencesUniversity of ÅrhusÅrhus CDenmark
  5. 5.Institute of GeographyUniversity of TartuTartuEstonia

Personalised recommendations