Difference between revisions of "Additives"

From LID SWM Planning and Design Guide
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 9: Line 9:
|-
|-
![[Biochar]]
![[Biochar]]
|?||Currently expensive <br> Energy intensive to produce
|Renewable||Currently expensive <br> Energy intensive to produce
|-
|-
![[Bold and Gold]]<sup>TM</sup>
![[Bold and Gold]]<sup>TM</sup>

Revision as of 16:00, 20 September 2017

A number of granular amendments have been demonstrated to improve nutrient removal from discharge water in BMPs such as bioretention cells, absorbent landscapes, sand filters or green roofs. There are two primary processes involved, precipitation and adsorption. Both mechanisms are ultimately finite, but have been shown in come cases to make significant improvements on the discharged water quality over several years.

Soil Additives
Material Benefits Potential concerns
Biochar Renewable Currently expensive
Energy intensive to produce
Bold and GoldTM Documented Phosphorus removal upto 71%[1] Proprietary
Iron filings (ZVI) Proven phosphorus retention May harm plants[2]
PhoslockTM ? ?
Red sand Proven phosphorus retention ?
Smart SpongeTM
Sorptive mediaTM Documented phosphorus retention Proprietary
Water treatment residuals Waste product reuse Quality control
  1. Hood A, Chopra M, Wanielista M. Assessment of Biosorption Activated Media Under Roadside Swales for the Removal of Phosphorus from Stormwater. Water. 2013;5(1):53-66. doi:10.3390/w5010053.
  2. Logsdon SD, Sauer PA. Iron Filings Cement Engineered Soil Mix. Agron J. 2016;108(4):1753. doi:10.2134/agronj2015.0427.