Difference between revisions of "Additives"

From LID SWM Planning and Design Guide
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 17: Line 17:
|Proven phosphorus retention||May harm plants<ref>Logsdon SD, Sauer PA. Iron Filings Cement Engineered Soil Mix. Agron J. 2016;108(4):1753. doi:10.2134/agronj2015.0427.</ref>
|Proven phosphorus retention||May harm plants<ref>Logsdon SD, Sauer PA. Iron Filings Cement Engineered Soil Mix. Agron J. 2016;108(4):1753. doi:10.2134/agronj2015.0427.</ref>
|?
|?
|-
![[Red sand]]
![[Red sand]]
|Proven phosphorus retention||?
|Proven phosphorus retention||?
Line 24: Line 25:
![[Water treatment residuals]]
![[Water treatment residuals]]
|Waste product reuse||Quality control
|Waste product reuse||Quality control
 
|}
==References==
==References==
<em><references/></em>
<em><references/></em>
[[category: materials]]
[[category: materials]]

Revision as of 02:44, 15 August 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 ? Currently expensive
Energy intensive to produce
Bold and GoldTM Proprietary]
Iron filings (ZVI) Proven phosphorus retention May harm plants[2] ?
Red sand Proven phosphorus retention ?
Sorptive mediaTM Documented phosphorus retention Proprietary]
Water treatment residuals Waste product reuse Quality control

References[edit]

  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.