• Title/Summary/Keyword: Urban runoff monitoring

Search Result 51, Processing Time 0.016 seconds

Comparison of nutrient removal efficiency of an infiltration planter and an infiltration trench (침투도랑(IT)과 침투화분(IP)의 영양염류 저감효율 비교분석)

  • Yano, K.A.V.;Geronimo, F.K.F.;Reyes, N.J.D.G.;Jeon, Minsu;Kim, Leehyung
    • Journal of Wetlands Research
    • /
    • v.21 no.4
    • /
    • pp.384-391
    • /
    • 2019
  • Nutrients in stormwater runoff have raised concerns regarding water quality degradation in the recent years. Low impact development (LID) technologies are types of nature-based solutions developed to address water quality problems and restore the predevelopment hydrology of a catchment area. Two LID facilities, infiltration trench (IT) and infiltration planter (IP), are known for their high removal rate of nutrients through sedimentation and vegetation. Long-term monitoring was conducted to assess the performance and cite the advantages and disadvantages of utilizing the facilities in nutrient removal. Since a strong ionic bond exists between phosphorus compounds and sediments, reduction of total phosphorus (TP) (more than 76%), in both facilities was associated to the removal of total suspended solids (TSS) (more than 84%). The efficiency of nitrogen in IP is 28% higher than IT. Effective nitrification occurred in IT and particulate forms of nitrogen were removed through sedimentation and media filters. Decrease in ammonium- nitrogen (NH4-N) and nitrite-nitrogen (NO2-N), and increase in nitrate-nitrogen (NO3-N) fraction forms indicated that effective nitrification and denitrification occurred in IP. Hydrologic factors such as rainfall depth and rainfall intensity affected nutrient treatment capabilities of urban stormwater LID facilities The greatest monitored rainfall intensity of 11 mm/hr for IT yielded to 34% and 55% removal efficiencies for TN and TP, respectively, whereas, low rainfall intensities below 5 mm resulted to 100 % removal efficiency. The greatest monitored rainfall intensity for IP was 27 mm/hr, which still resulted to high removal efficiencies of 98% and 97% for TN and TP, respectively. Water quality assessment showed that both facilities were effective in reducing the amount of nutrients; however, IP was found to be more efficient than IT due to its additional provisions for plant uptake and larger storage volume.