Conference PaperPDF Available

Treating runoff in the construction and operational phases of a greenfield development using floating wetland treatment systems

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Floating wetland treatment systems (FWTS) are an innovative stormwater treatment technology currently being trialled on a larger scale in Australia. FWTS provide support for selected plant species to remove pollutants from stormwater discharged into a water body. The plant roots provide large surface areas for biofilm growth, which serves to trap suspended particles and enable the biological uptake of nutrients by the plants. As FWTS can be installed at the start of the construction phase, they can start treating construction runoff almost immediately. FWTS therefore have the potential to provide the full range of stormwater treatment (e.g. sediment and nutrient removal) from the construction phase onwards. A 2,100m 2 FWTS has been installed within a greenfield development site on the Sunshine Coast, Queensland. A four-year research study is currently underway which will target the following three objectives; (1) characterise the water quality of runoff from a greenfield development in the construction and operational phases; (2) verify the stormwater pollution removal performance of a FWTS during the construction and operational phases of a greenfield development; and (3) characterise the ability of FWTS to manage urban lake health. This extended abstract presents the proposed research methodology and anticipated outcomes of the study.
No caption available
… 
Content may be subject to copyright.
NOVATECH 2016
1
Treating runoff in the construction and operational
phases of a greenfield development using floating
wetland treatment systems
Traiter les eaux de ruissellement dans les phases de
construction et d'exploitation d'un aménagement à l'aide de
marais flottants
Dr Christopher Walker
*,**
, Dr Terry Lucke
**
, Dr Floris
Boogaard*** and Mr Peter Schwammberger
**
* Covey Associates Pty Ltd, Sunshine Coast, Australia
(chrisw@covey.com.au)
** Stormwater Research Group, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia
*** Water Management, Delft University of Technology
RÉSUMÉ
Les systèmes flottants de traitement des zones humides (FWTS) sont une technologie innovante pour
le traitement des eaux pluviales, qui est actuellement à l'essai en Australie. Les FWTS apportent un
soutien aux espèces de plantes sélectionnées pour éliminer les polluants provenant des eaux
pluviales déversées dans un plan d'eau. Les racines des plantes fournissent de grandes surfaces pour
la croissance du biofilm, qui sert à piéger les particules en suspension et à permettre l'absorption des
nutriments biologiques. Les FWTS peuvent être installés au début de la phase de construction et
peuvent donc commencer à traiter les eaux de ruissellement de construction presque immédiatement.
Les FWTS ont le potentiel de fournir une gamme complète de traitements des eaux pluviales (par
exemple, les sédiments et l'élimination des nutriments) à partir de la phase de construction. Un
système FWTS de 2 100m2 a été installé dans un nouveau site de veloppement sur la Sunshine
Coast, dans la région du Queensland. Une étude de quatre ans est en cours pour cibler les trois
objectifs suivants : (1) caractériser la qualité des eaux de ruissellement à partir d'un développement
Greenfield dans la phase de construction et la phase opérationnelle; (2) vérifier les performances
d’élimination de la pollution des eaux pluviales d'un système FWTS pendant la phase de construction
et d'exploitation d'un développement Greenfield; et (3) caractériser la capacité du FWTS à gérer la
santé du plan d’eau urbain. Ce document présente la méthodologie appliquée à la recherche.
ABSTRACT
Floating wetland treatment systems (FWTS) are an innovative stormwater treatment technology
currently being trialled on a larger scale in Australia. FWTS provide support for selected plant species
to remove pollutants from stormwater discharged into a water body. The plant roots provide large
surface areas for biofilm growth, which serves to trap suspended particles and enable the biological
uptake of nutrients by the plants. As FWTS can be installed at the start of the construction phase, they
can start treating construction runoff almost immediately. FWTS therefore have the potential to provide
the full range of stormwater treatment (e.g. sediment and nutrient removal) from the construction
phase onwards. A 2,100m
2
FWTS has been installed within a greenfield development site on the
Sunshine Coast, Queensland. A four-year research study is currently underway which will target the
following three objectives; (1) characterise the water quality of runoff from a greenfield development in
the construction and operational phases; (2) verify the stormwater pollution removal performance of a
FWTS during the construction and operational phases of a greenfield development; and (3)
characterise the ability of FWTS to manage urban lake health. This extended abstract presents the
proposed research methodology and anticipated outcomes of the study.
KEYWORDS
Construction runoff, floating wetlands, greenfield development, stormwater treatment, urban runoff
SESSION
2
1 BACKGROUND
Floating Wetland Treatment Systems (FWTS) have been used in aquatic enhancement projects for
over 20 years internationally to treat effluent and to provide and/or improve water habitats (Burgess
and Hirons, 1992; Kerr-Upal et al., 2000; Headley and Tanner, 2008; Sukias et al., 2011). The
purpose of several early FWTS projects was to provide habitat for aquatic waterfowl (Kerr-Upal et al.,
2000), while other projects focused on the removal of total suspended solids (TSS) pollutants from
mine tailings (Burgess and Hirons, 1992; Smith and Kalin, 2000; Walker et al., 2015a). These are
designed to simulate naturally occuring floating wetlands with the aim of maximising root exposure to
the water column, therefore providing a significant surface area for biofilm growth.
Manufactured FWTS are supported by a floating medium, typically comprised of woven plastic,
matting, or fibreglass, where plant roots grow directly into the water column, similar to a hydroponic
system. As the plant roots grow through the floating medium and into the water below, they provide an
extensive surface area for biofilm to grow on the root hairs (Figure 1). Biofilm coverage is an essential
requirement for the sequestration of nutrients from stormwater (Borne et al., 2013; Winston et al.,
2013), as it helps remove nutrients (particularly nitrogen) from the water through
nitrification/denitrification processes, and is ultimately taken up by the macrophytes. Phosphorus can
be retained through binding processes that occur within the biofilm (e.g. adsorption) and uptake of
orthophosphates is achieved by vascular macrophyte species.
Figure 1 - Floating Wetland Schematic
Research in the United States (Stewart et al., 2008) and New Zealand (Sukias et al., 2011) has found
that FWTS can provide an effective, low cost and low maintenance means of treating domestic and
agricultural wastewater. Sukias et al. (2011) found that FWTS were capable of reducing TSS by up to
81%, total nitrogen (TN) by up to 34%, and total phosphorus (TP) by up to 19%. However, the number
of studies on the performance of FWTS in treating urban stormwater runoff is limited.
2 PURPOSE
To quantify the ability of FWTS to remove sediment and nutrients from runoff, a total 2100m
2
FWTS is
being installed within a new greenfield development, Parklakes 2, on the Sunshine Coast, in
Southeast Queensland, Australia. This will be the largest installation of FWTS into a greenfield
development in the world and is subject to a four-year research project. This research project will
address the following objectives:
(1) characterise the water quality of runoff from a greenfield development in the
construction and operational phases;
(2) verify the stormwater pollution removal performance of a FWTS during the
construction and operational phases of a greenfield development; and
(3) characterise the ability of FWTS to manage urban lake health. This paper
will present the research methodology.
NOVATECH 2016
3
3 APPROACH
In order to achieve the above objectives, field and laboratory monitoring will take place. The field
monitoring will be event-based, with samples collected at the inlets and outlets of two floating wetland
areas (Figure 2). Lab verification testing will take place to verify the results of the field study in
controlled circumstances, using real and artificial stormwater. Pollutant removal performance will be
investigated in both the construction and operational (e.g. build form) phases of the development.
Low-intensity storm events will be replicated using a recirculation pump that has been installed in the
development. As part of the event replication, analysis will be conducted on the ability of the FWTS to
remove algal cells and reduce cholophyll-a concentrations. The purpose of this assessment is to
determine if FWTS are an adequate management strategy for algal growth in constructed water
bodies.
Figure 2 - Parklakes 2 FWTS
4 ANTICIPATED OUTCOMES
Many WSUD stormwater treatment systems, such as bioretention basins and constructed wetlands,
function best when ‘offline’, with extended detention depths minimised and events greater than four
Exceedances per Year (EY) bypassing such systems (Water by Design, 2012a, 2012b). This often
requires detention/retention basins to be separate from treatment systems. In contrast, FWTS have
the potential to substantially reduce the footprint required for stormwater treatment compared with
other systems for two main reasons. Firstly, the hydroponic nature of root development allows for a
great surface area for biofilm growth and inherently more contact between biofilm coated roots and
polluted stormwater. It is anticipated that the results of this study will clearly show that FWTS have the
potential to provide significantly greater rates of stormwater pollution removal per unit area compared
with constructed wetlands, as biofilm growth is limited to plant stalks in constructed wetlands (Walker
et al., 2014a; Walker et al., 2014b).
Secondly, FWTS are not affected by variations in extended detention depths, as the floating matrix
rises with the water level during storm events. In contrast, prolonged extended detention in
constructed wetlands and bioretention basins can lead to plant mortality. These factors allow detention
and treatment systems to be combined on a large scale with minimal impact to treatment efficacy.
Subject to appropriate system design, there is virtually no impact on flood storage capacity. It is also
theerfore anticipated that the results of this study will demonstarte how FWTS can substantially reduce
the stormwater treatment footprint on residential development, thereby providing greater areas of
passive / active open space or increasing lot yields per hectare.
SESSION
4
In addition to the above, given that the FWTS are not impacted by extended detention and can be
incorporated into detention systems, these systems are able to be installed during the construction
phase of a development, rather than at its completion. In Australia, WSUD systems are not typically
established (e.g. planted) until 80% of the dwellings within the contributing catchment are completed,
as the impacts from sediment laden runoff can significantly reduce the lifespan of traditional systems
(e.g. constructed wetlands and bioretention basins). In contrast, FWTS are not impacted by
construction runoff and may in fact benefit from it, as fine particles within construction runoff are often
bound by nutrients, due to the greater surface area and greater binding capacity provided by fine
sediment particles. The results of this study are expected to demonstrate the benefits of implementing
FWTS at the start of the construction phase.
LIST OF REFERENCES
Borne, K.E., Fassman, E.A., and Tanner, C.C. (2013), Floating treatment wetland retrofit to improve
stormwater pond performance for suspended solids, copper and zinc, J. Ecological Engineering
54, 173-182.
Burgess, N.D. and Hirons, G.J.M. (1992), Creation and management of artificial nesting sites for
wetland birds, Journal of Environmental Management, 34(4), 285-295.
Headley, T.R. and Tanner, C.C. (2008), Floating Treatment Wetlands: An Innovative Option for
Stormwater Quality Applications, 11th Int. Conf. on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control,
Nov. 1-7, Indore, India.
Kerr-Upal, M., Seasons, M., and Mulamoottil, G. (2000), Retrofitting a stormwater management facility
with a wetland component, Journal of Environment Science and Health, 35(8), 1289 – 1307.
Smith, M.P. and Kalin, M. (2000), Floating wetland vegetation covers for suspended solids removal,
Treatment Wetlands for Water Quality Improvement Conference, Quebec, Canada.
Stewart, F.M., Mulholland, T., Cunningham, A.B., Kania, B.G., and Osterlund, M.T. (2008). Floating
islands as an alternative to constructed wetlands for treatment of excess nutrients from
agricultural and municipal wastes – results of laboratory-scale tests, Land Contamination &
Reclamation, 16(1), 25-33.
Sukias, J., Yates, C., and Tanner, C.C. (2011), Floating islands for upgrading sewage treatment
ponds. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Walker, C., Nichols, P., Reeves, K., Lucke, T., Nielsen, M., Sullivan, D. (2014a) Use of Floating
Wetlands to Treat Stormwater Runoff from Urban Catchments in Australia, 13
th
International
Conference on Urban Drainage, 7-12 September, 2014, Sarawak, Malaysia.
Walker, C., Drapper, D., Nichols, P., Reeves, K., Lucke, T. (2014b). Treating Urban Runoff in Australia
using Floating Wetlands, Stormwater Australia National Conference, 13 – 17 October, 2014,
Adelaide, Australia.
Water by Design (2012a), Bioretention Technical Design Guidelines (Version 1), Healthy Waterways
Ltd, Brisbane.
Water by Design (2012b), Maintaining Vegetated Stormwater Assets (Version 1), Healthy Waterways
Ltd, Brisbane.
Winston, R.J., Hunt, W.F., Kennedy, S.G., Merriman, L.S., Chandler, J., and Brown, D. (2013),
Evaluation of floating treatment wetlands as retrofits to existing stormwater retention ponds,
Ecological Engineering, 54, 254-265.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Floating Wetland Treatments have the potential to provide significantly greater stormwater pollution removal rates per unit area compared to constructed wetlands or other treatment systems. As FWTs do not require additional earthworks or land uptake, they can also offer this increased pollution removal performance at significantly lower costs. In addition, the use of floating wetlands in stormwater retention ponds does not affect their hydrological processes or performances. This paper describes an innovative research study currently underway in Australia to evaluate the performance of a floating wetland system used to treat the stormwater runoff from a 10-ha urban catchment in Australia. The experimental design of the study is unique on a number of levels. Firstly, the experimental design of the study allows the performance of the new floating wetland system to be monitored and analysed during storm events. The experimental design also incorporates an array of impermeable baffles, which directs all of the stormwater runoff through the floating wetlands, eliminating the short-circuiting problems experienced in previous studies. This approach effectively makes the floating wetland an on-line treatment system. This setup enables real-time water sampling to be accurately undertaken to evaluate the pollution removal performance of the system.
Article
A field trial study with side-by-side monitoring of two parallel stormwater treatment ponds, one of which contained a floating treatment wetland (FTW), has been carried out to assess the benefit of retrofitting a conventional retention pond with a FTW. Inflow and outflow event mean concentrations (EMCs) were quantified and used to assess the overall pollutant removal efficiency of each system. Findings show that a FTW can significantly improve the runoff water quality and thus reduce the impact on the receiving environment. The present study reveals that a pond retrofit with a FTW would be more efficient than a conventional retention pond, exhibiting a 41% (for total suspended solids – TSS), 40% (for particulate zinc – PZn), 39% (for particulate copper – PCu) and 16% (for dissolved copper – DCu) lower effluent EMC. Physical entrapment of the particulate pollutants into the roots’ biofilm seems be a significant removal pathway, which could be impacted by the inflow volume. Due to higher humic content, lower dissolved oxygen and more neutral water column pH induced by the FTW, there was increased potential for adsorption processes and/or precipitation as insoluble copper sulphides, in addition to the direct Cu uptake by the plants. The dissolved zinc (DZn) inlet EMCs, which already met the Australian and New Zealand Environment Conservation Council (ANZECC) water quality guidelines and could correspond to an irreducible concentration of the system, were too low to differentiate the performance of either pond.
Article
Thousands of existing wet retention ponds have been built across the United States, primarily for the mitigation of peak flow and removal of sediment. These systems struggle to mitigate soluble nutrient loads from urban watersheds. A simple retrofit for improvement of pond performance for nitrogen and phosphorus removal could become popular. Floating treatment wetlands (FTWs), one such retrofit, are a hydroponic system that provides a growing medium for hydrophytic vegetation, which obtain nutrients from the stormwater pond. Installation of FTWs does not require earth moving, eliminates the need for additional land to be dedicated to treatment, and does not detract from the required storage volume for wet ponds (because they float). To test whether FTWs reduce nutrients and sediment, two ponds in Durham, NC, were monitored pre- and post-FTW installation. At least 16 events were collected from each pond during both monitoring periods. The distinguishing characteristic between the two ponds post-retrofit was the fraction of pond surface covered by FTWs; the DOT pond and Museum ponds had 9% and 18%, respectively, of their surface area covered by FTWs. A very small fraction of N and P was taken up by wetland plants, with less than 2% and 0.2%, respectively, of plant biomass as N and P. Temperature measurements at three depths below FTWs and at the same depths in open water showed no significant difference in mean daily temperatures, suggesting little shading benefit from FTWs. The two ponds produced effluent temperatures that exceeded trout health thresholds. Both the pre- and post-FTW retrofit ponds performed well from a pollutant removal perspective. One pond had extremely low total nitrogen (TN) effluent concentrations (0.41 mg/L and 0.43 mg/L) during both pre- and post-FTW retrofit periods, respectively. Floating treatment wetlands tended to improve pollutant capture within both ponds, but not always significantly. Mean effluent concentrations of TN were reduced at the DOT pond from 1.05 mg/L to 0.61 mg/L from pre- to post-retrofit. Mean total phosphorus (TP) effluent concentrations were reduced at both wet ponds from pre- to post-retrofit [0.17 mg/L to 0.12 mg/L (DOT pond) and 0.11 mg/L to 0.05 mg/L (Museum pond)]. The post-retrofit effluent concentrations were similar to those observed for bioretention cells and constructed stormwater wetlands in North Carolina. The DOT pond showed no significant differences between pre- and post-retrofit effluent concentrations for all nine analytes. The Museum pond had a statistically significant improvement post-retrofit (when compared to the pre-retrofit period) for both TP and total suspended solids (TSS). Wetland plant root length was measured to be approximately 0.75 m, which had the benefit of stilling water flow, thereby increasing sedimentation. Results suggested that greater percent coverage of FTWs produced improved pollutant removal.
Article
Since 1963 about 270 islands and 40 rafts have been constructed and managed in Britain by the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, mainly at its wetland reserves. These structures are primarily aimed at providing secure breeding sites for terns, waders, gulls, wildfowl and divers, including nine species of particular conservation importance in Britain. Use of islands and rafts by different breeding species is dependent upon their vegetation cover and geographical location. Bare shingle, or sparsely vegetated islands and rafts, attract the most breeding species in southern coastal locations (up to 20 species), including five species of conservation importance, namely Sandwich tern (Sterna sandvicensis), little tern (Sterna albifrons), avocet (Recurvirostra avosetta) and, occasionally, Mediterranean gull (Larus melaocephalus) and roseate tern (Sterna dougallii). Similar unvegetated or sparsely vegetated islands on the coast in the north, or inland in the north or south of Britain, support few breeding species, and none of conservation importance. The composition of the bird assemblage breeding on well-vegetated islands and rafts in Britain (up to 20 species) is less influenced by geographical location, but species of conservation importance such as pochard (Aytha ferina) are found mainly in the south, and common scoter (Melanitta nigra), red-throated diver (Gavia stellata) and black-throated diver (Gavia arctica) exclusively in Scotland.
Article
Constructed wetlands are recognized as effective mechanisms of water treatment and are employed in a variety of applications. Wetlands comprise diverse and complex systems of interacting plants and animals that remove contaminants from the water column by mechanical filtration and biochemical conversion, A major component of the wetland environment is microbial, with bacteria and other microorganisms proliferating upon all available submerged surfaces (i.e. substrate). In these wetland environments, microbial activity is limited by substrate surface area and nutrient flux. Consequently, the microbial contribution to wetland efficacy can be improved by increasing a wetland's substrate surface area and increasing water circulation rates through that substrate. Various studies have investigated the use of floating wetland platforms to enhance wetland capacity; however, none of those studies has determined the specific contributions of microbes. In our study, we quantified the microbial component of BioHaven® Floating Islands for aerobic removal of ammonium, anoxic removal of nitrate, and simultaneous aerobic/anoxic removal of ammonium, nitrate and phosphate. This study establishes tank-scale standards to which other microbial data can be compared. In doing this, it has been determined that the microbes growing within a unit volume of BioHaven® Floating Island material are capable of removing 10 600 mg of nitrate per day, 273 mg of ammonium per day, and 428 mg of phosphate per day, where the unit island volume is defined as having a top surface area of 1.0 ft 2 and a thickness of 0.6 ft.
Article
The City of Toronto has built a stormwater management system, the Etobicoke Stormwater Management Facility (ESWMF), along the Lake Ontario shoreline. The Facility represents an innovative stormwater management solution that integrates two previously separate water quality improvement technologies ‐stormwater wetlands and flow balancing systems. The facility, besides improving water quality, will provide aesthetic, recreational and educational benefits. A conceptual plan to retrofit a wetland component within the ESWMF using three wetland design options is presented. The application of this ecotechnology at other stormwater discharges along the Toronto waterfront is discussed. The paper concludes with a review of the policy implications.
Floating wetland vegetation covers for suspended solids removal
  • M P Smith
  • M Kalin
Smith, M.P. and Kalin, M. (2000), Floating wetland vegetation covers for suspended solids removal, Treatment Wetlands for Water Quality Improvement Conference, Quebec, Canada.
Floating islands for upgrading sewage treatment ponds
  • J Sukias
  • C Yates
  • C C Tanner
Sukias, J., Yates, C., and Tanner, C.C. (2011), Floating islands for upgrading sewage treatment ponds. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research Ltd, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Bioretention Technical Design Guidelines (Version 1), Healthy Waterways Ltd
Water by Design (2012a), Bioretention Technical Design Guidelines (Version 1), Healthy Waterways Ltd, Brisbane. Water by Design (2012b), Maintaining Vegetated Stormwater Assets (Version 1), Healthy Waterways Ltd, Brisbane.