Everstekoog, Texel · food chains Grou Everstekoog Empuriabrava Clear water through nature. 4...
Transcript of Everstekoog, Texel · food chains Grou Everstekoog Empuriabrava Clear water through nature. 4...
1
Ruud Kampf
Rob van den Boomen
With Theo Claassen and Lluis Sala
Everstekoog, Texel
discharge ditch
presettling basin
9 parallel ditches with reed/cattail
and aquatic plants
sewage
treatment plant
• constructed in 1994
• research project 1995 –1999
• extended in 2012
Contents
1. Concept development and applicationRuud Kampf
2. Overview researchRob van den Boomen
3. What role can wetland ecologists play?Ruud Kampf
2
Contents
1. Concept development and applicationRuud Kampf
2. Overview researchRob van den Boomen
3. What role can wetland ecologists play?Ruud Kampf
Natural processes are not new
in the Watercycle
Natural processes in drinking
water production AmsterdamArtificial recharge in dunes
t = 100 days
Loenderveen basin
t = 100 days
The source for sewage
• That drinking water:
– is used to transport wastes
– is mixed with rain and groundwater
• This mixture:
– is called waste water
– is a problem and costs a lot of money
+ rain…..
Waterharmonica as a connection
Emissie
aanpak
Water
kwaliteits
aanpak
Water
keten
Water
systeem
Distance from discharge
Biological controled self- purification
Based on McKinney,
1962. Microbiology for sanitary engineers.
3
Based on Hynes, 1960 The biology of polluted waters
Influence of a wastewater discharge
A physical – chemical
B nutrients
C micro-organisms
D macro-organisms
The Waterharmonica:
Waterharmonica
Based on Hynes, 1960 The biology of polluted waters
Bridge between sewage treatment
and surface water
Waste waterSewerage
STP A constructed natural system
to upgrade treated waste water
into a “usable surface water”
Waterharmonica“Providing soft
landing in
nature”Mixing zone European Union
• Discharge of treated waste water to receiving surface water
• Mixing zone allows discharge does not meet quality of receiving water
• Waterharmonica takes the EU-mixing zone out of the EU-water body
• Efffective means to meet the EU-standards
Daphnia food chains
Grou
Everstekoog
Empuriabrava
www.waterharmonica.nl
Clear water through nature
4
Little Crake, Porzana parva, Empuriabrava
Some reports2010 - 2012
Stowa 2013Waterharmonica’s
In The Netherlands
2014
Stowa 2013-08:
Waterharmonica's in Nederland (1996-2012
realised
soon ready
or in
preparation
not in use
Waterharmonica Aqualân Grou- first design -
1,1 ha1,1 ha
5
Texelse kennis toegepast bij zuiveringsmoeras en paaibiotoop bij rwzi Grou
H2O, 2007 (24): 41-43
Aqualân Grou
Three Daphnia ponds
Spawning area for fishFour reed ditches
effluent
Waterharmonica Soerendonk
Fish spawning area, like in Grou
Reed ditches
Daphnia ponds
The Buulder Aa
Kristalbad
Land reformation plan ca. 40 ha
Project cost € 5.055.772
Innovation subsidy € 2.527.886
In operation 20135 functions integrated in one area
1. Water buffer: 187.000 m3
2. Ecological zone between cities of Enschede and Hengelo
3. Convert effluent into an “ecological sound water”
4. Spacial planning
5. Recreation and nature close to the two citiesbronnen:Senter-Novem KRW-innovatie programmahttp://www.berflotribune.nl/images/stories/kristalbad-flyer.pdf
6
Kristalbad
Reasons for Waterharmonicas – until 2001No. Name Primary reason/reasons for construction
0 Elburg 1978: to lower the nutrient level in STP effluent, taken out
of operation. Has not been put back into operation
because of the ‘high natural values’
1 Everstekoog, Texel
1994: as a source of fresh water for agriculture on the
island, disinfection because it crosses a residential area.
Has been expanded and renovated in 2012 – 2013
2 Empuriabrava, Spain
1995: to supply water for a nature reserve/to create local
natural value
3 Klaterwater in Kaatsheuvel
1997: to produce water with a low level of nutrients and
pathogens for the Efteling
4 Tilburg-Noord 1997: to buffer effluent during rainwater discharge so as
not to exceed the maximum permissible effluent rate
because of the limited capacity of the stream de Zandleij,
ecologisation at basic discharge
5 Land van Cuijk 1999: to supply water to agriculture/nature and to reduce
discharge to national waters
6 Sint Maartensdijk 2000: to reduce nutrients and obtain insight in the
functioning of the helophyte filter, recreation
7 Waterpark Groote Beerze
2001: river restoration Groote Beerze, to promote wet
habitats
- Nutrient removal
- Buffering water
- Supply water for
agriculture, nature
Reasons for Waterharmonicas – until 2001No. Name Primary reason/reasons for
construction
8 Aqualân Grou 2006: to develop nature and a
spawning pond, demonstration project
and Urban Water Cycle Project
9 Ootmarsum 2010: ’ecologisation’ of the effluent for
discharge into a small stream and
Urban Water Cycle Project
10 Sint-Oedenrode 2011: ecological corridor, ‘natural
water’, incorporated in a trail, bird
sanctuary with watchtower
11 Kristalbad 2012: regional buffering water,
recreational green buffer zone,
ecologisation, improvement of water
quality and Dutch WFD subsidy
12 Soerendonk 2012: water buffer, recreation, to
develop natural habitats, spawning
pond/fish migration and Dutch WFD
subsidy
13 Tilburg Moerenburg 2011-2012: to buffer ‘influent’,
improving natural values, recreation, to
prevent overflow
14 Vollenhove 2012 ‘purifying riverbank
- Buffering water
- River restoration
- Surface water quality
- Fish spawning
- Making ”natural habitats”
- Recreation
- Customers relations:
“making friends”
No. Name Primary reason/reasons for
construction1a Everstekoog, Texel 2013: extension existing
Waterharmonica
15 Biest-Houtakker 2013: ’ecologisation’ of the effluent for
discharge into a small stream,
landscaping16 Dinxperloo 2014: water garden and green zone.
First Waterharmonica after a Nereda
plant17 Berkenwoude 2014 / 2015: to remove nutrients, to
make ‘living’ water, buffering
18 Amstelveen 2015?: to supply water to the urban
area, in preparation
Groote Lucht Quick-scan in 2014, multi-functional
Waterharmonica of around 100 ha
… ……
Trends:
- Sand filtration of effluent STP
- Really needed when Waterharmonica?
- Benficial to make water for providing
high-quality water fror use in cities or
nature
- Dinxperlo first Waterharmonica to
upgrade effluent of a Nereda plant
Waterharmonica’s – 2013 and beyond
Dutch Waterharmonicas - practical
Surface area: 1.2 – 40 ha
Net load: 0.02 – 1.4 m/day
Retention time 2: – 105 days
Percentage effluent: 10 – 100 %
Some characteristics:
7,500Euro per hectare per year
Range 3,000 - 25,000
higher cost for small size
175,000
Euro per hectare
Range 75,000 - 250,000
extra cost for more natural values,
recreation, water buffering
Dutch Waterharmonicas - cost
Investment Management including basic monitoring
Euro 0.05 per m3
Range 0.02 – 0.12
7
Contents
1. Concept development and applicationRuud Kampf
2. Overview researchRob van den Boomen
3. What role can wetland ecologists play?Ruud Kampf
How does effluent change?
1. Suspended particles/solids
2. Pathogens
3. Organic pollution and oxygen
4. Nutrients
5. Buffering peak loads
6. Ecotoxicology
7. Ecology
1 Suspended particle/solids
What is suspended solids: different definitions :
• organic / inorganic
• living / death
• big / small
• micro-organism versus virus
• does/or not have effect op environment: pathogen
• origin: in influent or shaped in WWTP
Suspended particle/solids
Different
determination
techniques:
Often only as
“dry matter”
Part
icle
siz
e
dis
trib
utio
n
Chem
ical
part
icle
com
positi
on
Bio
logic
al
part
icle
com
positi
on
Spatia
l part
icle
str
uctu
re
Path
ogen
dete
ctio
n
Chemical analyzers X
Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (ESEM-EDX) X
Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) X
Laser diffraction X
Laser back scattering X
Spatial f ilter velocimetry X
Acoustic spectrometry X
Electroresistance counting X
Flow cytometry X X
Particle video microscopy X X
Manual microscopy X
Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH) X X
Environmental scanning electron microscopy (ESEM) X X
Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) X
Indicator species culturing X
Real time quantitative Polymerase Chain Reaction (QPCR) X
Multiplex QPCR X
Denaturing Gel Electrophoresis (DGE) X
DNA restriction analysis X
DNA microarrays X
Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI-TOF MS) X
Coli is a
good
indicator
Suspended particles/solids
Several Dutch studies:
• Monitoring data of 8 Waterharmonica’s
• several years, monthly data, normal operation WWTP, mainly only analysed as “dry matter”
Results:
• Elburg (1978) and Everstekoog (1995): [SS]OUT ≈ [SS]IN, or even a small increase !
• Recent six constructed wetlands: same
• Low content (5 a 10 mg/l), clear water
Suspended particles/solids
Paradox! No gain? (in theory)
8
Suspended particle/solids
Paradox based on monitoring !
Suspended p
art
icle
s (
mg/l)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
afloop
nabezinktank
zandfilter vlooienvijver helofyten eindvijver/bos
Zw
even
desto
f m
ed
iaan
(m
g/l)
Land van Cuijk 2005-2006 Land van Cuijk 2007-2008 Land van Cuijk 2009-2010
Hapert Noord Hapert Zuid Sint Maartensdijk 2000-2002
Sint Maartensdijk 2005-2007 effluent Sint Maartensdijk 2008-2010 Kaatsheuvel
Grou Ootmarsum
1)
End WWTPAfter vertical
sand filterDaphnia Pond Reed ditches End WHH
Suspended particle/solids
No big change in amount but a big change in composition!
From “activated sludge (bacteria)” to “natural suspended solids”
2. Pathogens
Pathogens are (micro)-organisms that can provoke diseases as a result of exposure
• Different types (viruses, bacteria, parasite, fungi)
• Different sizes (0.002-100µm)
• Many present in waste water
• Monitoring using indicator-organisms
• Bacteria
• Fecale contamination
• Facultative anaeroob
• 2.0-0.5 µm
• Bacteria
• Fecale contamination
• Facultative anaeroob
• 0.8-1.3µm
• Bacteria
• Anaerobe
• 5.0-0.5µm
E.Coli Enterococci
• Virus
• Fecale contamination
• 0.026µm
Bacteriodes-fagen
Clostridium perfringens
Pathogen reduction
Reduction of pathogens in STP and Waterharmonica
• 1 to 3 log (E.coli, Enterococci)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
E. coli Enterococci C. perfringens Bacteroides-fagen (PFU)
Log 1
0K
VE
10
0m
L-1
RWZI in RWZI uit / Moeras in Moeras uit
Bathing
water
WWTP in WWTP out Waterharmonica Out
Pathogen reduction Pathogen reduction
Differences in summer - winter?
• Mainly in summer and winter
Best hygienic quality?
• Spring and autumn
Enterococci
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ponds in Ponds out Reed beds out
Winter Lente Zomer Herfst
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ponds in Ponds out Reed beds out
Winter Lente Zomer Herfst
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ponds in Ponds out Reed beds out
Winter Lente Zomer Herfst
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ponds in Ponds out Reed beds out
Winter Lente Zomer Herfst
E.coli
Bath
ing w
ate
r sta
ndard
Winter Spring Summer Autumn
9
Pathogen reductionWhat are the driving forces for removal?• Not sedimentation
• Natural mortality and irradiaton (but only 5-10 cm)
• Biofilm in reed is positive
• Mainly predation by zooplankton
0
100
200
300
400
0 24 48 72
E.co
li(K
VE
mL-1
)
Tijd (uur)
Met zooplankton Zonder zooplankton
0
100
200
300
400
0 24 48 72
E.co
li(K
VE
mL-1
)
Tijd (uur)
Met zooplankton Zonder zooplanktonWith Zooplankton Without Zooplankton
Empuriabrava Grou
E-Coli – how to improve
performanceLog nr/100 ml
Log removal
Wetland system Emp = 2.4 Grou = 1.5
Mesocosm Emp = 2.9 Grou = 2.3
3. Organic pollution and oxygen
The Waterharmonica:
• Convert of 10-15% of BOD to “other” BOD (see SS)
• Longer retention time: more reduction of BOD
• More natural oxygen situation
• Creates a powerfull day-night
rhythm in the oxygen level Everstekoog
4. Nutrients (P and N)
Main focuss in monitoring was on:
• Nitrogen: NH4,NO3
• Phosphorus: ortho-P (PO4-P) and P-total
Reduction expressed in change of:
• Concentration (P: -40% to +40%, N: +10 to 25%)
• Load
Relation between reduction in concentration and in load!
Waterharmonica's P-removal:
P-load (kg/ha.year) vs P-removal (%)
South - Korea
Swedish source: Flyckt, 2010Swedish source: Flyckt, 2010
Waterharmonica's P-removal:
P-load (kg/ha.year) vs P-removal (%)
P concentrations:
Sweden much lower
than Netherlands
Klaterwater in
De Efteling
10
1
Load Kg N/ha.year
N
Natural deposition
30 - 75
Fertilizer application agriculture 400 - 800
Uptake by grassN-yield
140 - 600
N-t
ota
l re
mo
val (
%)
EverstekoogHRT 1,3 – 11,3 days
ENG - N_with names STPes
South - Korea
N-removal at different loads
5. Buffering peak loads
The Waterharmonica is very effective in reducing peak pollutions of eg. a sludge overflow:
• Both Suspended Solids (90%) as P (90%) and N (60-70%)
6. EcotoxicologyThe Waterharmonica:
• Effluent from STP can have an inhibiting effect on algae development
• WFD innovation project WIPE showed: • Waterharmonica has a favourable effect on the toxicological
quality of the water in the outlet (possible by adsorption, degradation or smoothing peaks)
• No indications of risks of acute toxicity
Ecotoxicology
WIPE research on:
• Xenobiotic substances (passive sampling)
• In-vivo bioassays– Bacteria (30 min)
– Algae (72 h)
– Zooplankton (48 h)
• Fish
7. Ecology
The Waterharmonica:
• Increase natural diversity eg. by increase of Daphnia and decrease of monoculture bacteria of activated sludge, increase of vegetation and increase of number and variation of birds and fish
11
Contents
1. Concept development and applicationRuud Kampf
2. Overview researchRob van den Boomen
3. What role can wetland ecologists play?Ruud Kampf
Daphnia reactor
Biological filtration
Algae reactor
for nutrient
storage
Free flow wetland
as phototrophic
biofilm reactor
Fish spawning
area to meet EU
biodiversity criteria
Or is a Waterharmonica
“Nature” ??
Is a Waterharmonica a process??
Or is a Waterharmonica a “natural process”?
Biodiversity in Waterharmonica
- Not much systematic research
- General impression:- increase of biodiversity
- for interesting biodiverity large areas with a low load
---- >>> Interesting system: - clear water, with relative high nutrients levels
- surprisingly stable, also because of rather low retention times
Daphnia food chains
Grou
Everstekoog
Empuriabrava
www.waterharmonica.nl
12
Particles
“Daphnia”
algae
Treated waste water
Nutrients
suspended
“Snails”
settled
suspendedattached to the wall
filamentous
Daphnia faeces
Storage
of
nutrients
Snail faeces
nutrients
nutrients
Esp. in mesocosms,
4 m3 wall/m3 plus 1 m2 bottom
“Daphnia”= filtering organisms
“Snails” = “underwater pigs”
Simplified scheme
Mesocosms for biological filtration
of treated waste water
Result of many discussions within the project team,
mainly in Girona
Ruud Kampf, April 2009
Biological filtration by Daphnia
Focus on ponds fed by
well treated effluent
from activated sludge plants
www.waterharmonica.nl
Everstekoog
Ponds and Mesocosmsfrom 1998 - 2006
Plus Garmerwolde
2011 and 2012
Mesocosms Horstermeer, autumn 2007
Not only Daphnia:
www.waterharmonica.nl
Suspended material and benthic algae:
• biological filtration by Daphnia
• mainly Daphnia magna, but also other Cladocera
Attached algae and settled sludge:
• grazing by snails• Holland: mainly Great pond snail Lymnaea stagnalis
What do the Daphnia eat?
Algae or/and Sludge ??
www.waterharmonica.nl
13
juni 2006.
Relative occurance of the Annelida at each sample sites
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1. Start Daphnia pond (n=452)
2. End daphnia Pond (n=11)
3. Division ditch (n=96)
4. Start reed ditches (n=55)
5. End reed ditches (n=7)
6.Spaw ning pond (n=19)
7. Flow ing surface w ater (n=7)
Lumbriculidae
(n=366)
Helobdella stagnalis
(n=233)
Erpobdella octoculata
(n=31)
Erpodbella rood (n=4)
Theromyzon
tessulatum (n=3)
Haementeria costata
(n=6)
Annelida:
The oligochaeta (lumbriculidae) are an indicator for dirty water. They occur at the beginning and not at the end of the Waterharmonica
Fish in spawning area Aqualan Grou 2008 – 2012
Birds on www.waarneming.nl
Interesting to bring the
experiences together
…..
Your opinion please, or first a drink?