No problem at all! URLs provided as
usual!
Two PDF documents are included here. If you find any
info, I would appreciate copies.
By the way, we had discussed these several times when I
was on the HWAB and made, ummm, atleast 3 or 4 detailed
submissions.
Preamble: Just the way I talk with you scores of times
(inclusive of my detailed voice_mails), I do it worldwide, now and then, as
well; mostly North
So I don’t keep notes all the time and don’t forget, I
am doing it mostly for interest and not as a `paid consultant'! I just do it as
I find the energy + interest! Stormwater treatment has been literally `bugging
me’ long before I was an environmental activist, dating back to the 1970s (yes
that long)!
But I will share with you the info that comes to my mind
right now as follows and I will as usual number them, I to XIII, so that there
is no confusion of different aspects (if I think of more, I will let you know in
the future as always): ---
[I] My web page on treatment of stormwater runoff (and I
am sure you know about this as I had cited this on numerous occasions) but I
keep updating/upgrading only when/if I have received some solid info (http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html)
You can see how contradictory certain things are there
but I will not change them since those ARE THE RESULTS and published
conclusions!
Constructed wetlands are given prominence there since
there is a tremendous amount of info on them, all available to
anyone!
For a somewhat extensive bibliography on constructed
wetlands, see http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/wet-bio.PDF
and I realise I am contradicting myself by promoting them
(hahaha)!
But I am not really promoting them, just indulging in an
`open discussion’, sort of!
BUT WELL DESIGNED CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS MAY BE A
COMPROMISE (since the WWTPs below will be costly with perpetual O&M) BUT SEE
THE SIZES REQUIRED IN RELATIONSHIP TO UPSTREAM CATCHMENT AREA IN THE CASE OF
MINNESOTA (which allegedly has similar weather patterns to us); see the info on
the McCarrons Treatment Facility System:--- http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#McCarrons
(it seemed to do well when it was assessed)!
[II] The leadership shown by the City of Nepean, Ontario
(I had given some info on this to Gerry Isenor of Dillon, Inc., when he
consulted me w.r.t the HRM’s WRMS exactly on October 24,
2001!
See brief info in http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#Stormwater
and they originally designed it to remove fecal coliforms in STORMWATER. I also
read somewhere that they recently started adding alum to remove TP as well and
it appears the outflow is into a lake or so! I don’t have any more info on
this.
But this is a municipally operated WWTP that I was
alluding to, as an example! I had mentioned it to Renee as
well!
[III] Attached is an email I received from Prof. Robert
Pitt who is/was a Professor of Civil/Environmental Engineering in
I was referred to him by another well cited professor at
You can see from his email his cautions re large
treatment devices based on hydraulics and settlement
theory.
[IV] An idea of `settlement requirements’ can be
obtained from a Table of various particle sizes in another web page, http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/pollutants.html#Street
(the Table from USEPA re typical urban street pollutants) together with the
settlement times based on particle size in another Table, Welch’s famous
limnology text (http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#settling).
[V] I understand plants, by themselves, do not remove
most `urban stressors’; some are indeed taken up by root systems, but most are
removed by a combination of `ADSOPRTION TO CLAY PARTICLES’ and some may be taken
up indeed by the root system of plants, but the latter also pre-supposes that
there is sufficient DETENTION TIME, i.e., a water molecule has to be `detained’
for a long time; for clay-size particles/pollutants, it is a whopping 230 days
just to settle one (1) foot in still water!
[VI] I have numerous literature (mostly papers and
handbook types) with me; they are quite a large bundle which I read (or peeked
through) over the last decade and a half, on and
off!
[VII] Also attached here is an USEPA document on
treatment tanks which were highly touted by consultants and industry not long
ago. See the shortcomings for yourself!
[VIII] For a summary overview of the shortcomings, see
Maintenance (http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#11),
and for the Shortcomings of urban detention ponds, see
http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#Shortcomings
[IX] On Stormceptor and my correspondence, see http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/stormceptor.html
[X] On CDS and my correspondence, see http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/cds.html
[XI] On Vortechnics, see http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/vinc.html
[XII] On relative efficiency of the above 3 in-situ
devices, see http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#efficiencies
And on the Estimated Net Mass
Reduction in Stormwater Constituents, see http://lakes.chebucto.org/SWT/treatment.html#mass
(and that is assuming perpetual maintenance as recommended by the
manufacturer)!
[XIII] Re Marvin Silver, you can talk with him directly
re the failure of his constructed wetland for the Airport Authority! This ain't
a secret and I thought you knew about it when we once discussed (maybe
not).
The Airport Authority (allegedly) disconnected it and
now uses a standard WWTP with lime application or whatever but this is regarding
acid drainage (something tells me you know more about the relatively recent
events at the airport than myself)!
Between myself and Peter Shacklock (ex-NRC biologist),
we may still have two (2) TV shows (not 100% sure) that we produced with Marvin
during 1991 as our valued guest but I doubt they will be of any use to you since
at that time we did it especially to PROMOTE CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS (hahahaha, how
rapidly things change, huh)! The shows were numbered #131 and #143!!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Blouin [mailto:Blouint@region.halifax.ns.ca]
> Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 1:37 PM
> To: limnes@chebucto.ns.ca
> Subject: Re: Papermill,
> cumulative enquiries I am receiving
>
> Shalom - I was interested by your comments, particularly this section:
>
> "I myself promoted constructed (or engineered) wetlands for several years
> but
> the experience down south (especially in the colder areas) has not been
> that
> positive notwithstanding some claims to the contrary except where the
> wetlands are HUGE, like 10% or more of the total upstream catchment
> area)."
>
> Could you provide the sources for information regarding the experience in
> the (northern) US, so that I can investigate further?
>
> Thanks very much
> Tony
>