Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

Environmental and Engineering Geoscience

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by BOVING, T. B. Articles by NEARY, K. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Testing the Efficiency of a Stormwater Runoff Treatment Structure with Anthropogenic Tracers

¹ University of Rhode Island, Department of Geosciences, Woodward Hall 315, Kingston, RI 02881
² State of Connecticut, Department of Environmental Protection, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106-5127

The <--?1-->stormwater treatment efficiency of a swirl reactor—a common best management practice—was determined by evaluating the fate and transport of two classes of primarily anthropogenic contaminants: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) and heavy metals (copper, zinc). In addition, total dissolved and total suspended solid (TDS and TSS, respectively) treatment was evaluated. For this study, treatment efficiency was defined as the percent difference between the swirl reactor influent and effluent concentration measured during one particular storm event. The results of this study indicate that TSS was removed efficiently (between 64.7 percent and 85 percent). However, possible resuspension of sediments during high flow conditions was observed. The swirl reactor did not remove TDS. Treatment of copper was 13 percent efficient, whereas zinc was not attenuated. The maximum dissolved PAH (= total of 10 PAH compounds) treatment efficiency was 16.8 percent initially, but decreased to 8.4 percent by the end of the storm (average: 13.1 percent). Significant differences in removal effectiveness existed between dissolved low–molecular weight (LMW) and high–molecular weight (HMW) PAHs. While LMW PAH removal was moderately effective, HMW PAH concentration was not affected by the swirl reactor. About 19.9 percent of PAHs associated with sediments that settle were removed. Similar to dissolved PAH removal, LMW PAH-loaded sediment effectively settled out of the wastewater stream, whereas HMW PAHs were found to migrate through the reactor unhindered.

Key Words: Urban Hydrogeology • Pollution • Pollution Remediation • Hydrogeology