4.7 Review

Comprehensive evaluation of substrate materials for contaminants removal in constructed wetlands

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 701, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.134736

Keywords

Constructed wetlands; Substrates; Water contaminants; Removal capacity; Scoring model

Funding

  1. POWERCHINA HUADONG Science and Technology Project [KY2018-01-05, KY2016-02-04]
  2. National Water Pollution Control and Treatment Science and Technology Major Project [2017ZX07602-002]
  3. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M641927]
  4. Shanghai Pujiang Program [17PJ1400900]
  5. National Natural Science Foundation of China [41701541, 91851110]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Considerable number of studies have been carried out to develop and apply various substrate materials for constructed wetlands (CWs), however, there is a lack of method and model for comprehensive evaluation of different types of CWs substrates. To this end, this article summarized nearly all the substrate materials of CWs available in the literatures, including natural materials, agricultural/industrial wastes and artificial materials. The sources and physicochemical properties of various substrate materials, as well as their removal capacities for main water contaminants including nutrients, heavy metals, surfactants, pesticides/herbicides, emerging contaminants and fecal indicator bacteria (FIB) were comprehensively described. Further, a scoring model for the substrate evaluation was constructed based on likely cost, availability, permeability, reuse and contaminant removal capacities, which can be used to select the most suitable substrate material for different considerations. The provided information and constructed model contribute to better understanding of CWs substrate for readers, and help solve practical problems on substrates selection and CWs construction. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available