Comparison of wastewater treatment performance: traditional vs. baffled horizontal flow constructed wetlands.

IF 3.4 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Zorai Ameur, Ait Mechedal Mouloud, Salhi Imane, Tibourtine Hadil
{"title":"Comparison of wastewater treatment performance: traditional vs. baffled horizontal flow constructed wetlands.","authors":"Zorai Ameur, Ait Mechedal Mouloud, Salhi Imane, Tibourtine Hadil","doi":"10.1080/15226514.2025.2486480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated two lab-scale CW systems, traditional horizontal flow (HFCW) and baffled horizontal flow (BHFCW), as a treatment process in CWs filled with porous gravel and planted with <i>Typha latifolia</i>. BHFCW achieved average removal efficiencies of 88.65, 86.00, and 84.17% for TSS, BOD<sub>5</sub>, and, COD, respectively. Meanwhile, in HFCW, the removal efficiencies for these pollutants were 88.48, 81.07, and 77.89%, respectively. The results demonstrated that BHFCW is a reliable alternative to enhance the treatment performance of nitrogen in CWs compared to HFCW. The BHFCW removals were the best among all units: 76.59, 86.39, and 92.22% for NH<sub>4</sub><sup>+</sup>, NO<sub>3</sub><sup>-</sup>, and NO<sub>2</sub><sup>-</sup>, respectively. Statistical differences were observed when comparing removal effects between HFCW and BHFCW (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Nevertheless, 84.15% of orthophosphate was successfully removed in HFCW. The introduction of baffles augmented the flow path of wastewater. 14% and one-day reduction in the area and HRT of BHFCW was noted relative to the HFCW respectively. The two types of flow used are suitable for wastewater treatment. This investigation of flow type showed a role in the absorption and retention of pollutants. In addition, the BHFCW could generate interest in a treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":14235,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Phytoremediation","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Phytoremediation","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15226514.2025.2486480","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigated two lab-scale CW systems, traditional horizontal flow (HFCW) and baffled horizontal flow (BHFCW), as a treatment process in CWs filled with porous gravel and planted with Typha latifolia. BHFCW achieved average removal efficiencies of 88.65, 86.00, and 84.17% for TSS, BOD5, and, COD, respectively. Meanwhile, in HFCW, the removal efficiencies for these pollutants were 88.48, 81.07, and 77.89%, respectively. The results demonstrated that BHFCW is a reliable alternative to enhance the treatment performance of nitrogen in CWs compared to HFCW. The BHFCW removals were the best among all units: 76.59, 86.39, and 92.22% for NH4+, NO3-, and NO2-, respectively. Statistical differences were observed when comparing removal effects between HFCW and BHFCW (p < 0.05). Nevertheless, 84.15% of orthophosphate was successfully removed in HFCW. The introduction of baffles augmented the flow path of wastewater. 14% and one-day reduction in the area and HRT of BHFCW was noted relative to the HFCW respectively. The two types of flow used are suitable for wastewater treatment. This investigation of flow type showed a role in the absorption and retention of pollutants. In addition, the BHFCW could generate interest in a treatment option.

污水处理性能的比较:传统与挡板水平流人工湿地。
本研究采用传统水平流(HFCW)和折流水平流(BHFCW)两种实验室规模的连续流系统,对填充多孔砾石并种植风叶的连续流进行处理。BHFCW对TSS、BOD5和COD的平均去除率分别为88.65%、86.00%和84.17%。同时,在HFCW中,对这些污染物的去除率分别为88.48%、81.07和77.89%。结果表明,与HFCW相比,BHFCW是提高化粪池中氮处理性能的可靠选择。BHFCW对NH4+、NO3-和NO2-的去除率分别为76.59%、86.39%和92.22%。在比较HFCW和BHFCW的去除效果时,观察到统计学差异(p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Phytoremediation
International Journal of Phytoremediation 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
5.40%
发文量
145
审稿时长
3.4 months
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Phytoremediation (IJP) is the first journal devoted to the publication of laboratory and field research describing the use of plant systems to solve environmental problems by enabling the remediation of soil, water, and air quality and by restoring ecosystem services in managed landscapes. Traditional phytoremediation has largely focused on soil and groundwater clean-up of hazardous contaminants. Phytotechnology expands this umbrella to include many of the natural resource management challenges we face in cities, on farms, and other landscapes more integrated with daily public activities. Wetlands that treat wastewater, rain gardens that treat stormwater, poplar tree plantings that contain pollutants, urban tree canopies that treat air pollution, and specialized plants that treat decommissioned mine sites are just a few examples of phytotechnologies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信