Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Construction Simplicity and Cost as Selection Criteria Between Two Types of Constructed Wetlands Treating Highway Runoff

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Two free water surface (FWS) and two subsurface flow (SSF) pilot-size wetlands were constructed for the evaluation of their performance in treating highway runoff (HRO) in the heart of the Mediterranean region, the island of Crete, at the southernmost point of Greece. Detailed recordings of the resources involved during the construction allowed a thorough calculation of the cost of the systems and the requirements in materials, man-hours, and equipment. The two identical FWS systems had a surface area of 33 m2 each, while the two identical SSF covered 32 m2 each. One FWS and one SSF, named FWS12 and SSF12, respectively, were designed with a hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 12 h, with each one capable of treating a maximum HRO of 12.6 m3/day. The other couple, named FWS24 and SSF24, respectively, was designed with an HRT of 24 h, with each receiving a maximum HRO of 6.3 m3/days. An influent storage tank was required to hold the runoff during the common storm events and control the flow rate (and the hydraulic retention time) into the wetlands. This construction represented 25% of the total construction cost, while 5% was spent on the influent automated (and sun-powered) control and distribution system, from the storage tank to the wetlands. The respective total cost allocated to the two SSF systems (€14,676) was approximately 10% higher than that of the FWS (€13,596), mainly due to the three different-sized gravel layers used in the SSF substrate compared to the topsoil used in the FWS, which tripled the cost and placement time. The Total Annual Economic Cost (TAEC) was €1799/year and €1847/year for the FWS and SSF pair, respectively. TAEC was also used to compare the economic efficiency of the systems per cubic meter of HRO treated and kilograms of COD and TSS removed from the wetlands during their first operational year. Based on these estimations, FWS12 recorded the lowest TAECCOD and TAECTSS values (€89.09/kg and €43.69/kg, respectively) compared to the other three systems, presenting a more economically favorable option.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boutin C, Lienard A, Ramain JL, Beyeler L (1993) Experimental plants for very small communities: choice and design criteria for five different processes. Water Science and Technology 28(10):6–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Crites R, Tchobanoglous G (1998) Small and decentralised wastewater management systems. WCB and McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dialynas G, Kefalakis N, Dialynas M, Angelakis A (2002) Performance of an innovative FWS constructed wetland in Crete, Greece. Water Science and Technology 46(4–5):355–360

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kokosalis M (2007) Constructed wetlands as an option for Cretan communities and municipalities wastewater problem. Master’s Thesis. Greek Open University (in Greek)

  • Manios T, Albantakis D, Zarmakoupis A, Sabathianakis I, Karathanasis AD (2007) Constructed wetlands for highway runoff treatment in the central Mediterranean region, part I: Operating parameters. International conference on environmental management, engineering, planning and economics (CEMEPE2007), June 24–28, 2007, Skiathos, Greece

  • Reed SC (1991) Constructed wetlands for waste-water treatment. Biocycle 32:44–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Reed SC, Parten S, Matzen G, Randy P (1996) Water reuse for sludge management and wetland habitat. Water Science and Technology 33(10–11):213–219

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scholz M, Xu J, Dodson HI (2001) Comparison of filter media, plant communities and microbiology within constructed wetlands treating wastewater containing heavy metals. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 76:827–835

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Shutes RBE, Revitt DM, Mungur AS, Scholes LNL (1997) The design of wetland systems for the treatment of urban runoff. Water Science and Technology 35(5):19–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shutes RBE, Revitt DM, Lageberg IM, Barraud VCE (1999) The design of vegetated constructed wetlands for the treatment of highway runoff. The Science of the Total Environment 235:187–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soderqvist T (2002) Constructed wetlands as nitrogen sinks in southern Sweden: an empirical analysis of cost determinants. Ecological Engineering 19:161–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tchobanoglous G, Burton FL (1991) Wastewater engineering treatment disposal and reuse. McGraw–Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Terzakis S, Fountoulakis M, Georgaki I, Albantakis D, Sabathianakis I, Karathanasis D, Kalogerakis N, Manios T (2007) Constructed wetlands for highway runoff treatment in the central Mediterranean region. Chemosphere 72:141–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsagarakis KP, Mara DD, Angelakis AN (2003) Application of cost criteria for selection of municipal wastewater treatment systems. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 142:187–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tsihrintzis VA, Akratos CS, Gikas GD, Karamouz D, Angelakis AN (2007) Performance, and cost comparison of a FWS and a VSF constructed wetland system. Environmental Technology 28:621–628

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (2002) Constructed wetlands and aquatic plant systems for municipal wastewater treatment. Design manual. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss PT, Gulliver JS, Erickson AJ (2007) Cost and pollutant removal of storm-water treatment practices. ASCE: Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management 133:218–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by the Greek General Secretariat for Research and Technology and Environmental Engineering S.A. The authors would like to thank George Melabiakanis, Vaggelis Makridakis, and George Hatziemmanouil for their help and involvement in the completion of the project. Special thanks go to the Municipality of Hersonissos and Mayor Mr. Spiros Danelis for provision of the field for the construction of the wetlands, as well as for their overall contribution to the completion of the project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Agricultural Technology, Technological Educational Institute of Crete, P.O. Box 1939 IRAKLIO, 710 04, Crete, GR, Greece

    Thrassyvoulos Manios & Michalis S. Fountoulakis

  2. Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, 4056-0091, USA

    Anastasios D. Karathanasis

Authors
  1. Thrassyvoulos Manios
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michalis S. Fountoulakis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anastasios D. Karathanasis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thrassyvoulos Manios.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Manios, T., Fountoulakis, M.S. & Karathanasis, A.D. Construction Simplicity and Cost as Selection Criteria Between Two Types of Constructed Wetlands Treating Highway Runoff. Environmental Management 43, 908–920 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-008-9250-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-008-9250-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation