Lessons learnt from a pilot study on residual dye removal by an aerated treatment wetland.

Treatment wetlands (TWs) have shown good capacity in dye removal from textile wastewater. However, the high hydraulic retention times (HRTs) required by these solutions and the connected high area requirements, remain a big drawback towards the application of TWs for dye treatment at full scale. Aerated TWs are interesting intensified solutions that attempt to reduce the TW required area. Therefore, an aerated CW pilot plant, composed of a 20 m2 horizontal subsurface flow TW (HF) and a 21 m2 Free Water System (FWS), equipped with aeration pipelines, was built and monitored to investigate the potential reduction of required area for dye removal from the effluent wastewater of a centralized wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). During a 8 months long study, experimenting with different hydraulic retention times (HRTs - 1.2, 2.6 and 3.5 days) and aeration modes (intermittent and continuous), the pilot plant has shown a normal biological degradation for organic matter and nutrients, while the residual dye removal has been very low, as demonstrated by the absorbance measure at three wavelengths: at 426 nm (blue) the removal varies from -55% at influent absorbance of 0.010 to 41% at 0.060; at 558 nm (yellow) the removal is negative at 0.005 (-58%) and high at higher influent concentrations (72% at 0.035 of absorbance for the inlet); at 660 nm (red) -82% of removal efficiency was obtained at influent absorbance of 0.002 and 74% at 0.010. These results are a consequence of the biological oxidation processes taking place in the WWTP, so that the residual dye seems to be resistant to further aerobic degradation. Therefore, TWs enhanced by aeration can provide only a buffer effect on peak dye concentrations.

Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket and aerated constructed wetlands for swine wastewater treatment: a pilot study.

Swine wastewater management is often affected by two main issues: a too high volume for optimal reuse as a fertilizer and a too high strength for an economically sustainable treatment by classical solutions. Hence, an innovative scheme has been tested to treat swine wastewater, combining a low cost anaerobic reactor, upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB), with intensified constructed wetlands (aerated CWs) in a pilot scale experimental study. The swine wastewater described in this paper is produced by a swine production facility situated in North Italy. The scheme of the pilot plant consisted of: (i) canvas-based thickener; (ii) UASB; (iii) two intensified aerated vertical subsurface flow CWs in series; (iv) a horizontal flow subsurface CW. The influent wastewater quality has been defined for total suspended solids (TSS 25,025 ± 9,323 mg/l), organic carbon (chemical oxygen demand (COD) 29,350 ± 16,983 mg/l), total reduced nitrogen and ammonium (total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) 1,783 ± 498 mg/l and N-NH4+ 735 ± 251 mg/l) and total phosphorus (1,285 ± 270 mg/l), with nitrates almost absent. The overall system has shown excellent performances in terms of TSS, COD, N-NH4+ and TKN removal efficiencies (99.9%, 99.6%, 99.5%, and 99.0%, respectively). Denitrification (N-NO3- effluent concentration equal to 614 ± 268 mg/l) did not meet the Italian quality standards for discharging in water bodies, mainly because the organic carbon was almost completely removed in the intensified CW beds.

Hydrolytic anaerobic reactor and aerated constructed wetland systems for municipal wastewater treatment - HIGHWET project.

The HIGHWET project combines the hydrolytic up-flow sludge bed (HUSB) anaerobic digester and constructed wetlands (CWs) with forced aeration for decreasing the footprint and improving effluent quality. The HIGHWET plant in A Coruña (NW of Spain) treating municipal wastewater consists of a HUSB and four parallel subsurface horizontal flow (HF) CWs. HF1, HF2 and HF3 units are fitted with forced aeration, while the control HF4 is not aerated. All the HF units are provided with effluent recirculation, but different heights of gravel bed (0.8 m in HF1 and HF2, and 0.5 m in HF3 and HF4) are implemented. Besides, a tobermorite-enriched material was added in the HF2 unit in order to improve phosphorus removal. The HUSB 76-89% of total suspended solids (TSS) and about 40% of chemical oxygen demand (COD) and biological oxygen demand (BOD). Aerated HF units reached above 96% of TSS, COD and BOD at a surface loading rate of 29-47 g BOD5/m2·d. An aeration regime ranging from 5 h on/3 h off to 3 h on/5 h off was found to be adequate to optimize nitrogen removal, which ranged from 53% to 81%. Average removal rates of 3.4 ± 0.4 g total nitrogen (TN)/m2·d and 12.8 ± 3.7 g TN/m3·d were found in the aerated units, being 5.5 and 4.1 times higher than those of the non-aerated system. The tobermorite-enriched HF2 unit showed a distinct higher phosphate (60-67%) and total phosphorus (54%) removal.

Wastewater treatment in a compact intensified wetland system at the Badboot: a floating swimming pool in Belgium.

The Badboot (Dutch for swimming pool boat) is a floating swimming pool located in the city center of Antwerp in Belgium. The overall design consists of a recycled ferry boat that serves as a restaurant and next to that a newly built ship that harbours an Olympic size swimming pool, sun decks, locker rooms with showers, and a party space. A major design goal of the project was to make the ship as environmentally friendly as possible. To avoid discharge of contaminated waste water in the Antwerp docks, the ship includes onsite treatment of wastewater in a compact constructed wetland. The treatment wetland system was designed to treat wastewater from visitor locker rooms, showers, toilets, two bars, and the wastewater from the restaurant kitchen. Due to the limited space on board the ship, only 188 m(2) could be allocated to a wetland treatment system. As a result, part of the design included intensification of the wetland treatment process through the use of Forced Bed Aeration, which injects small quantities of air in a very uniform grid pattern throughout the wetland with a mechanical air compressor. The system was monitored between August 2012 and March 2013 (with additional sampling in the autumn of 2014). Flows and loads to the wetland were highly variable, but removal efficiency was extremely high; 99.5 % for chemical oxygen demand (COD), 88.6 % for total nitrogen and 97.2 % for ammonia. The treatment performance was assessed using a first-order, tanks-in-series model (the P-k-C* model) and found to be roughly equivalent to similar intensified wetlands operating in Germany. However, treatment performance was substantially better than data reported on passive wetlands, likely as a result of intensification. Even with mechanically assisted aeration, the total oxygen delivered to the treatment wetlands was insufficient to support conventional nitrification and denitrification, so it is likely that alternate nitrogen removal pathways, such as anammox, are operating in the wetland.