2014
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.07.075
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Long term treatment performance of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment in mountain areas: Four case studies from the Czech Republic

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
18
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
2
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In some cases, the treated effluents from CWs were put to reuse for the irrigation and rejuvenation of lakes ; refer also to Chapter 8 of this Handbook). Vymazal and Brezinová (2014) also reported similar observations from Czech Republic. The CWs were also found to be favoured in situations wherein evaporation of treated effluents needed to be achieved.…”
Section: The Potential Of Constructed Wetlands For Treatment Of Wastesupporting
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In some cases, the treated effluents from CWs were put to reuse for the irrigation and rejuvenation of lakes ; refer also to Chapter 8 of this Handbook). Vymazal and Brezinová (2014) also reported similar observations from Czech Republic. The CWs were also found to be favoured in situations wherein evaporation of treated effluents needed to be achieved.…”
Section: The Potential Of Constructed Wetlands For Treatment Of Wastesupporting
confidence: 77%
“…The CWs were also found to be favoured in situations wherein evaporation of treated effluents needed to be achieved. Several researchers, too, have reported the preference for CWs in several communities in the world (Burken & Schnoor, 1998;Mara & Pearson, 1998;Metcalf & Eddy Inc., 2003;Kamath et al, 2004;Mara, 2004;Vymazal, & Brezinová, 2014;.…”
Section: The Potential Of Constructed Wetlands For Treatment Of Wastementioning
confidence: 99%
“…This type of constructed wetland is the most commonly used system in the Czech Republic (Vymazal, 2011b) but so far, CWs have been monitored only for removal of organics (BOD 5 , COD), suspended solids, nutrients and heavy metals (e.g., Kröpfelová et al, 2009;Vymazal, 2014;Vymazal & Březinová, 2014). All systems had been in operation for more than ten years and exhibited very high treatment efficiency for organics (BOD 5 , COD) and suspended solids, while removal of ammonia and phosphorus is much lower (Table 3).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Vymazal and Brezinova (2014) showed about 50% total N was removed mainly by denitrification and about 50% of total P was mainly adsorbed by soil with partly additional plant uptake.…”
Section: Wetlands For Nutrient Removalmentioning
confidence: 99%