Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
2011
Mitigating Eutrophication:
A Manual for Municipalities
Mitigating Eutrophication
A Manual for Municipalities
Craig Baxter
MA (Hons), MSc
Published by:
Kommunenes Internasjonale Miljorganisasjon (KIMO),
c/o Shetland Islands Council, Infrastructure Services, Grantfield, Lerwick, Shetland ZE1 0NT
ii
Aims
Objectives
iii
Contents
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARYI
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1
2.0 EUTROPHICATION
2
2.1 What is eutrophication? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1.1 An Increase in primary production. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1.2 Algal blooms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1.3 Increased turbidity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.4 Oxygen depletion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1.5 A complex process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2 How does eutrophication aect the environment?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.1 Ecological impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2.2 Social impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2.3 Economic impacts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3 Nutrient sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.1 Agriculture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.2 Municipal Wastewater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.3 Industrial land-based sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.3.4 Transport. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.4 Case Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.1 Case Study: The Gulf of Mexico. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.2 Case Study: The Gulf of Riga. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.0 POLICY CONTEXT
11
3.1 International agreements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.1.1 The Nitrogen Oxide Protocol (1979). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.1.2 The Gothenburg Protocol (1999). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.1.3 The OSPAR Convention (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.1.4 The Helsinki Convention (1992). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.1.5 The IMO and MARPOL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2 EU Directives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.1 The Nitrates Directive (1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.2 The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (1991). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.3 The Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (1998). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.4 The Water Framework Directive (2000). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.5 The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.6 The Common Agricultural Policy (since 1962). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.2.7 The EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (2009). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
3.3 National eorts to tackle eutrophication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3.1 Denmark. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
3.3.2 Sweden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.0 WHAT CAN A MUNICIPALITY DO TO TACKLE EUTROPHICATION?
16
5.0 WHAT A MUNICIPALITY CAN DO: SMALL-SCALE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
17
5.1 Wastewater treatment principles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2 TREATMENT SYSTEMS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
5.2.1 Infiltration systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.2 Package Plants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.2.3 Sorting systems. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
5.2.4 Constructed wetlands . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22
iv
Contents
Page
List of Figures
Figure 1: Eutrophication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Figure 2: The nitrogen cycle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 3: The phosphorus cycle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Figure 4: Large-scale wastewater treatment processes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
List of Panels
Algal bloom in surface waters (WWF- Paivi Rosqvist). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii
Red tides (California Department of Public Health volunteer Kai Schuman) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
Eutrophic Beach (NOAA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Satellite image of eutrophication (Sea WiFS Project) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Mortality in eutrophic water (Greenpeace) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Industrial pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Shipping pollution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Gulf of Mexico map (Gulf of Mexico Foundation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Mississippi River drainage basin (USGS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Gulf of Riga map (Wassman) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Gulf of Riga drainage basin (Wassman) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Gulf of Riga cross section diagram (Wassman) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Septic system (USEPA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Mound system (Converse et al) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Sand filter (University of Minnesota Extension) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Attached growth filter (Bord Na Mona environmental products US) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Aerobic treatment (NESC West Virginia University) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Sequencing batch reactor (USEPA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Sorting system (Swedenviro- Mats Johansson) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Wetland processes (Natural Resources Canada) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Subsurface flow wetland (Natural Systems International) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Free water surface wetland (Natural Systems International) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Sand filter installation (Swedenviro) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Raita Environment PA 0.8 SBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Raita system in operation (Raita Environment) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Plant maintenance (MINWA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Pumping station installation (MINWA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Septic tank (Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Trickling filter (Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
EcoSan system (Coalition Clean Baltic). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Filtralite synthetic bed and spray filter system (Filtralite). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Riparian diagram (Chris Hoag). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
vi
A loss of higher species (e.g. fish and crustaceans) that depend on stable oxygen levels, established
habitats and reliable food sources.
Shifts in other species, in search of higher oxygen levels, and total mortality of other species.
A shift under hypoxia from large slow growth species to small fast growth species.
There are related impacts to the human environment; algal blooms make areas undesirable, impacting
various human uses of marine and aquatic environments.
Area affected
(km2)
Benthic response
Benthic recovery
Fisheries
response
Louisiana Shelf
15,000
Mortality
Annual
Kattegat, SwedenDenmark
2,000
Mass mortality
Slow
20,000
Mass mortality
Annual
Baltic Sea
100,000
Eliminated
None
Sedimentation
Secondary
Tertiary
Method
Settling tanks,
separation machinery,
filters and skimmers
Lagooning;
constructed wetlands,
N and P removal;
disinfection e.g.
chlorination
Purpose
Removal of separable
materials (fats, oils and
greases, solids etc) that
could block or damage
a system
Final stage of
treatment to raise
water quality to
acceptable standard
for discharge, by
removing nutrients
and remaining
pollutants and harmful
content
Process
Settling, skimming,
scraping and filtering
Aeration (stimulating
biological breakdown of organic matter by providing an
oxygen source for bacteria)
Filtration (providing a media
for bacteria to grow on that
wastewater can be passed
through)Settling to remove
suspended solids
Chemical precipitation
(trickling wastewater
through chemicals to
bind contaminants
e.g. P)Chemical dosing
(adding chemicals
to wastewater to
bind nutrients for
later removal as solids)
Natural processes to
remove contaminants
like denitrification by
plants and
animalsDosing
wastewater with
chemicals to kill
harmful organisms
10
11
(SPEU, 2009). Eutrophication was addressed by aiming to achieve N and P reductions. The plan requires
signatories to develop national programmes to achieve set reductions.
The HELCOM ministerial meeting in 2010 reported that recent assessments indicate that eutrophication still
remains a major threat to Baltic Sea ecosystems (HELCOM, 2010).
HELCOM outline that there is still vast potential to achieve significant reductions through sharing knowledge
and information about best available techniques (BAT) and supporting projects like PURE. They also identify
municipal WWTPs, single dwellings, small settlements and small business wastewater discharges as potential
areas for improved reductions (HELCOM, 2010).
3.1.5 The IMO and MARPOL
The UN set up the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to develop a regulatory framework for the
shipping industry for safety, security and environmental protection.
The International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) was established by the
IMO to reduce and prevent pollution from shipping operations.
Six annexes outline pollution sources from shipping and measures to reduce them. Annex four
addresses sewage and requires any vessel over 400 gross tonnes or carrying more than 15 people travelling on
international voyages to have adequate facilities for treating and discharging sewage. Annex 6 addresses air
pollution and sets out similar controls with a technical code on nitrogen oxide emissions.
3.2 EU Directives
International cooperation to tackle the problems caused by pollution is extensive and involves a number of
parties. The examples given are a snapshot into some of the action taken at the intergovernmental level to
tackle eutrophication problems, through cooperation and setting international standards.
At the European level there are a number of policies and directives that target eutrophication. The main
policies are described but the list is not exhaustive (for a full list and explanation of the various relevant
European directives the reader is directed to the European Commission website:
www.ec.europa.eu/maritimeaairs/).
3.2.1 The Nitrates Directive (1991)
Aiming to ensure good water quality, the EU developed a directive for reducing the input of nitrates into the
aquatic environment from agriculture. The directive requires member states to develop action programmes
to minimise the use of nitrate fertilisers and move towards using less damaging practices. The directive came
into eect in 2003 and over 300 action programmes have been developed in member states.
3.2.2 The Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive (1991)
The directive seeks to manage the flow of urban wastewater from domestic and industrial sources. It requires
member states to have adequate wastewater treatment facilities for the dierent sensitivities of receiving
waters and an up to date and detailed list of catchment areas to ensure eective management. Member
states are responsible for monitoring the discharges and quality of receiving waters.
It is one of the most comprehensive directives in terms of protecting surface waters from urban and
municipal wastewater pollution (Conley et al, 2002).
12
13
APAE I
APAE II
APAE III
P reductions achieved,
Establish wetlands on
agricultural land. Control manure
storage and spreading
1987
1998
14
The three key sources of pollution identified by APAE have been mitigated to varying extents:
Industrial point sources: regulated through the Environmental Protection Act, which translates the
requirements of the IPPC directive, with 80% of industries connected to municipal treatment plants (EEA,
2005).
Municipal sources: largely mitigated through wastewater treatment improvements by the translation of
the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive in the APAE and through county regional plans and municipal
wastewater plans. 90% of households are connected to municipal wastewater treatment plants, 86% of
which carryout advanced treatments (EEA, 2005).
Agriculture: still a problem area, the current APAE concentrates on nutrient discharges from agriculture,
improving research into better techniques and technologies and developing better crop and livestock
practices.
Denmark has made considerable progress in areducing nutrients to surface waters. Successes are largely
due to eective policy-making and promotion of self-governance and this is underpinned by a thorough
understanding of the problem. A Nation-wide Monitoring Programme set up in the 1990s provided data
on nutrient levels from which reduction targets were set (rtebjerg et al, 2003). Continuous monitoring
has provided a good baseline for developing eective targets and programmes (Svendsen et al, 2005) and
is also a good indicator of the eectiveness of measures taken.
The APAE in Denmark has been periodically revised and updated to deliver the most eective reductions
and is complemented by a host of other policies and legislation at national, regional and local levels. Since
developing and implementing the plan Denmark has exceeded the targets set by the Urban Wastewater
Treatment Directive.
15
3.3.2 Sweden
Swedish environmental policy has a history of innovation; driven by a collective approach that actively
engages stakeholders for eective protection and mitigation (Bouveng, 1978).
This spirit of comprehensiveness has steered national policy towards addressing environmental issues
through one main initiative. The Environmental Policy Objectives lists sixteen key areas to protect and
enhance the environment.
The hierarchy of Swedish environmental policy is similar to that of Denmark. The parliament adopts the
environmental objectives; the government oversee the implementation; the Environmental Objectives
Council (via the Swedish EPA) coordinate agencies to achieve objectives, and County Boards and
Municipalities deliver them on the ground. One of the sixteen objectives is Zero Eutrophication by
2020 to achieve good environmental status in line with the Water Framework Directive. A set of interim
targets has been drawn up to ensure success by 2020 (Swedish EPA, 2009b), which have indicated that the
target of zero eutrophication will be unlikely to have been achieved by 2020 because of the slow pace of
ecosystems to recover and the eects of transboundary pollution. Additional measures have been implemented,
including an outright ban on the use of phosphates in detergents to reduce discharges from domestic
wastewater flows (Swedish MoE, 2009).
Mitigation measures are set out under three broad headings: Ecient Energy and Land Use, Non-toxic,
Resource-saving Environmental Life Cycles and, Management of Land, Water and the Built Environment
(Swedish EPA, 2009c).
Through these strategies various agencies are involved in addressing eutrophication. Similar to other Nordic
countries Sweden tends towards self-governance with water managed by municipalities (Katko, 2004). A
number of initiatives have been established to address the problems of inadequate wastewater treatment
with collaborative eorts between various agencies.
16
17
Primary
Screening
Sedimentation
Secondary
Tertiary
Method
Settling tanks,
separation machinery, filters and skimmers
Purpose
Removal of separable
materials (fats, oils and
greases, solids etc) that
could block or damage
a system
Sludge settling,
removal of remaining
solids, fats, oils and
greases and,
separation of sludge
from liquid content
Degradation of the
biological content of
sewage by the
attached and
suspended growth of
bacteria
Process
Settling, skimming,
scraping and filtering
Settling, skimming
and scraping and
filtering
Aeration (stimulating
biological breakdown of
organic matter by
providing an oxygen
source for bacteria)
Filtration (providing a
media for bacteria to
grow on that
wastewater can be
passed through)
Settling to remove
suspended solids
18
Mound Systems
An advanced septic system that
compensates poor soil capacity by
constructing an infiltration mound,
using dierent layers of filter material
to attempt to treat euent more
eectively.
Sand Filters
Following similar principles to septic systems, sand
provides a filtration surface before discharging.
Wastewater is passed through a sand medium where
bacteria can grow to consume organic matter. Some
advanced systems use additional layers of chemicals
to remove P and others recirculate euent through
the system several times before discharging.
19
Aerobic treatment
Wastewater is dosed into an aeration chamber
where pumps force through air to provide oxygen
for bacterial decomposition of organic matter
and to mix wastewater. Settling removes biomass
formed by bacteria in aerated wastewater.
Anaerobic treatment
Wastewater is dosed into a tank where it is retained
to allow biological processes to occur. The tank is
made up of solid filter material that wastewater
is dosed into under anaerobic conditions, with
extensive bacterial growth on the water surface.
Dosing systems circulate wastewater in dierent
ways to achieve biological treatment. Anaerobic
conditions favour N consuming bacteria, thus
anaerobic treatment is useful for reducing N.
Attached growth filters
Filter material provides a surface for bacteria to grow on that consume organic matter in wastewater.
Submerged filters use aeration to provide aerobic conditions for bacteria; other filters use motion to
ensure oxygen for bacterial decomposition, for example, rotating filters.
Chemical Treatment
Various chemicals can be used to raise euent quality either as an additional polishing stage, or as a pretreatment. Chlorine and other disinfectant chemicals are added to kill harmful bacteria that remain in
euents as a final process. Chemical like iron ochre can be added to bind P for later removal through settling.
It can also be added as a layer in some filter systems.
20
21
Wetlands have a capacity to absorb pollutants from water and raise its quality. Natural processes can
reduce contaminants and benefit water quality, habitats and biodiversity. Constructed wetlands replicate
these natural processes to treat wastewaters. Under controlled conditions, these systems oer potential for
secondary and tertiary treatments. Some systems are used for total treatment and others as a final polishing
stage. Two main systems are used.
Subsurface flow wetlands
The subsurface method uses a gravel medium and vegetation (usually reeds) to treat wastewater. The water
level is kept below the surface of the gravel to ensure minimal exposure to humans and to limit the risk of
increasing insect populations (USEPA, 2000). Aerobic conditions around roots and water surfaces allow some
removal of N, but anoxic conditions are limiting. Tertiary treatment can be achieved with longer retention
of wastewater, aeration devices and vertical-flow systems, which raise oxygen levels for eective treatment.
P, metals and persistent organic pollutants are bound in sediments, and accumulate over time; their levels
are reduced from euent discharges but remain in the wetland system.
22
Description
Biovac 5pe
Upoclean 5pe
Biotrap
Storage tank for black water and treatment of grey water in small sand filter.
Urine separating toilet and storage tank for urine. Septic tank and large sand filter
for remaining sewage.
EkoTreatKemira
Table 5: Innovative small-scale wastewater treatment systems (after Hellstrom and Jonsson, 2006)
23
Table 6: Eectiveness of innovative wastewater treatment systems (Hellstrom and Jonsson, 2006)
The study concluded that all systems could remove significant levels of P; the most eective being a sorting
system with sand filter and in-house chemical precipitation and it concluded that sand filters were eective
for removing organic matter (Hellstrom and Jonsson, 2006). It highlighted that package plants require
professional maintenance and technical support for eective long-term P removal and that N removal was
most eective in sorting systems.
Some package plants use passive processes that are less energy-intensive and may therefore be better suited
for use in areas where low running costs are essential. A number of plants assessed in the study use chemical
precipitation to achieve eective nutrient reductions so cost, availability and practicality of replenishing
chemicals may be an important consideration for a project.
The study is a helpful tool for deciding what system can be used for a site to achieve particular nutrient
reductions. Sorting systems often require in-house components and complex set-ups and therefore may not
be suited for retrofitting, there is research in this area beyond the scope of the manual, readers are directed
to Menzinger et al, 2010.
Other initiatives have been set up to increase the knowledge of on-site and small-scale treatments. The
MINWA project is comprised of various organisations in Finland from both the private and public sectors that
aim to promote knowledge of on-site systems.
Their work has examined existing systems and their eectiveness and involves gathering regular data on
system discharges for COD, BOD, N, P and suspended solids. This information is publicly available and intended
to provide impartial information to those considering installing a system.
One outcome of MINWAs work is the results of two studies that evaluated the eectiveness of dierent
systems, examining the quality of discharges from dierent plants (MINWA, 2009a). Table 7 summarises
these results.
Removal capacity
Organic Matter
Sequencing Batch Reactors 90%
97-98%
Sand filters
70-80%
Trickling filters
Table 7: Eectiveness of dierent onsite
Phosphorus
Nitrogen
60-90%
20-40%
60-70%
60%
0-32%
0-26%
The findings of the studies are interesting because they indicate the eectiveness of dierent treatment
techniques. They provide a snapshot of wider on-going research that is bringing a wealth of information to
understanding the eectiveness of on-site systems (for further information on MINWAs research, readers
are directed to: http://www.minwa.info/en/research---development).
24
25
The Raita system is suitable for an individual household and uses electronic sensors to measure appropriate
times for aeration, dosing and sludge removal/ euent discharging. It requires a power supply for these
components and also requires maintenance for sludge removal for composting (the full demonstration can
be viewed here: www.minwa.info/en/installing---maintenance/work-demontrations).
A video was also made of the installation available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4YTk15TPw
Q&feature=player_embedded.
5.4.1.3 A village wastewater plant
MINWA demonstrated a larger treatment system. Clusters
(villages) of houses can use a single larger plant, spreading
costs, maintenance and responsibility. MINWA produced
a demonstration of what an individual house requires
to channel wastewater to a central system, and what
maintenance is required for a plant serving 10 households
with biochemical treatment (available here: www.minwa.
info/en/installing---maintenance/work-demontrations).
Pumping Station:
In a cluster system, dwellings that cannot rely on
gravity-fed sewers use pumping stations. A Valonia-led
project demonstrated how a pumping station is installed to
link up an individual dwelling to a village system. It showed the
technical requirements and construction methods required.
Village Plant Maintenance:
Treatment is carried out through three tanks: the first for
settling out solids, the second for activating sludge and
chemical precipitation and the third for denitrification
of treated euent. The demonstration highlighted the
maintenance requirements of the Goodwell system.
26
27
28
Irrigation
Chemical
precipitation
Trickling filter
and bioditch
Sand filter
Sequencing
batch reactor
Processes
Primary;
chemical
precipitation;
evaporation and
percolation
Primary;
Recirculating
Trickling filter;
evaporation and
percolation
Primary;
Trickling filter;
Rotating
distribution to
crop land
Primary; sand
filter; Pond/
Biofilter for N
removal
Primary;
sequencing
batch reactor;
discharge
Over 95%
reduction
Over 50%
reduction
Over 50%
reduction
Over 90%
reduction
Over 50%
reduction
Undefined
Over 95%
reduction
Over 90%
reduction
Over 90%
reduction
Over 90%
reduction
Over 90%
reduction
Undefined
29
The monitoring indicated that the average N reductions were approximately 50% and P reductions
approximately 99% (Follesdal, 2005). It highlighted that filter material required replacing at some point in the
lifetime of the plant and that trials were ongoing for the recycling of nutrients removed from the wastewater.
The overall eectiveness of the system depended on the motivation of users. It is a useful example to
illustrate that innovative solutions that close the loop on nutrient flows from wastewater can be successful.
5.4.5 A growing body of knowledge
The MINWA demonstrations highlight various aspects of on-site systems to encourage homeowners to
improve their facilities and to develop an information resource for technologies and practice.
The Global Dry Toilet Association of Finland use a pilot study to demonstrate methods of good practice.
Coalition Clean Baltic have commissioned studies for specific settlements and have reviewed best available
technologies in Sweden, as well as providing other resources on their website. The Nordic Innovation Centre
has conducted a study into a specific technology and its eectiveness at reducing nutrients.
These examples highlight a handful of projects tackling the problem of eutrophication from small-scale wastewater
discharges. They provide detailed information on their work and the products and systems being used and they
try to promote best practice by sharing knowledge and experience. They all feature some form of collaboration,
working in partnership with environmental agencies, the private sector, municipalities and system users.
30
31
In the toe zone where land and water intersect, the flow is usually constant through out the seasons
and vegetation reflects this, with emerging (semi-submerged) species and wetland species common.
The bank zone is an area exposed to weather extremities and is vegetated by colonizing and
herbaceous species and shrubs (Hoag, 1999).
The over bank zone is the area of land beyond the watercourse and is vegetated by established
upland shrubs.
The transitional zone is beyond this and has infrequent established shrubs and some tree species.
The upland zone is the area farthest from the watercourse and is vegetated by established tree
species.
The area available to create, improve or extend a buer will vary depending on a particular project
site. The more complete it is, the greater success there will be in removing nutrients. The Scottish
EPA (2008) have produced good practice guidance on river bank erosion and provide useful
relevant examples of riparian buers and their management within their guide accessible here:
http://www.sepa.org.uk/water/idoc.ashx?docid=1464f219-036b-48a4-ada3-3f247a7b89e5&version=-1.
Buers are most eective when planted as a continuous strip along upland watercourses where diuse
nutrients are most eciently absorbed (Correll, 2005, Rassam et al, 2006, Ugochukwu and Nukpeza, 2008).
In a municipality-led project this may not always be possible since it is unlikely that a municipality will be
responsible for the management of land along an entire upland watercourse. To achieve substantial nutrient
reductions a joined up approach is necessary. Engaging with neighbouring land managers and inviting them
to voluntarily set up buers may be an option to ensure continuity of the buer, or where this is challenging,
oering to continue the scheme voluntarily for the land manager may achieve better results, although this
will require more resources.
32
33
Task
1
Identify stakeholders
2
Establish baseline and projections
3
Identify best approach
4
Implement the project
5
Monitoring
Table 10: Stages to consider in undertaking a nutrient reduction project
Role
Administration
Administration
Administration
Administration
Operation and maintenance
34
35
7.5 Monitoring
Once a project is implemented, monitoring can be carried out to inform future projects and contribute to a
better understanding of municipality-led projects.
Environmental monitoring of the concentration of nutrients in receiving environments can be compared
with data sets prior to the project being implemented to evaluate its eectiveness. Monitoring for habitat
and biodiversity improvements can be carried out (particularly for riparian and wetland projects) to assess
additional environmental benefits.
As well as carrying out measurements of specific environmental data, interviews and discussions with users
of wastewater systems and project sites can provide information on how a project functions day-to-day,
how aesthetically pleasing it is, and if there are any other issues (e.g. unpleasant odours, over abundance of
certain plant species etc) with the system.
8.0 Conclusion
The purpose of this manual is to provide a knowledge base for municipalities to understand their role in
addressing eutrophication. Section three summarises a variety of agreements, directives and policies that seek
to do just that. Municipalities have an enacting role within a growing policy arena. By implementing legislation
and delivering higher-level objectives through regulation, management and project implementation, they
are key actors on the ground.
In order for municipalities to deliver successful projects it is essential that they are aware of current best
practice; understand the scope of what they can achieve and, have a structured approach for undertaking a
project.
The aims and objectives set out at the start of the manual define the purpose of the good practice guide.
The potential for nutrient reductions to be achieved at a local level is as great as the diverse range of projects
possible. Success can be achieved with careful planning, engagement with specialists and communities and
innovative thinking.
36
37
38
39
Ugochukwu, C.N.C and Nukpeza, D. 2008. Ecotechnological methods as strategies to reduce eutrophication
and acidification in lakes. Environmentalist vol. 28 pp137-142.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) 2000. Decentralised Systems Technology Fact
Sheet: Subsurface Flow Wetlands. EPA/832/F-00/023. Washington, DC: Oce of Water.
USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) 2002. On-site Wastewater Treatment Systems
Manual. EPA/625/R-00/008. Washington, DC: Oce of Water and Oce of Research and Development.
40
41
Link
Summary
Wastewater treatment
www.switchurbanwater.eu
www.oas.org/dsd/publications/Unit/oea59e/ch25.htm
www.minwa.info
http://www.svensktvatten.se/web/english.aspx
http://www.ccb.se/ccbpubl.html
Coalition Clean Baltic lobby for the protection of the Baltic Sea
environment. They have a useful reference section of publications relating to wastewater treatment
http://www.sepa.org.uk/water/water_publications.aspx
Wetlands International is an organisation specialising in developing wetlands to improve sanitation, the environment and
human health. They have produced useful information and a
number of reports on wetlands
http://www.snh.gov.uk/
http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/restore/
http://www.soil.ncsu.edu/about/publicationsphp#BuersandWaterQuality
http://www.ubcwheel.eu/
42