Cited by 272Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentWastewater Treatment and ReuseUrban Stormwater Management Solutions

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Recycled vertical flow constructed wetland (RVFCW)—a novel method of recycling greywater for irrigation in small communities and households

Abstract

The use of greywater for irrigation is becoming increasingly common. However, raw greywater is often contaminated and can cause environmental harm and pose health risks. Nevertheless, it is often used without any significant pretreatment, a practice mistakenly considered safe. The aim of this study was to develop an economically sound, low-tech and easily maintainable treatment system that would allow safe and sustainable use of greywater for landscape irrigation in small communities and households. The system is based on a combination of vertical flow constructed wetland with water recycling and trickling filter, and is termed recycled vertical flow constructed wetland (RVFCW). The RVFCW's properties, removal efficiency, hydraulic parameters and feasibility were studied, as well as the environmental effects of the treated greywater, as reflected by soil and plant parameters over time. The RVFCW was efficient at removing virtually all of the suspended solids and biological oxygen demand, and about 80% of the chemical oxygen demand after 8h. Fecal coliforms dropped by three to four orders of magnitude from their initial concentration after 8h, but this was not always enough to meet current regulations for unlimited irrigation. The treated greywater had no significant negative impact on plants or soil during the study period. The feasibility analysis indicated a return over investment after approximately three years. We concluded that the RVFCW is a sustainable and promising treatment system for greywater use that can be run and maintained by unskilled operators.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2006.06.006

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 10

  1. Del-Campo, C.M., Oron, G., 2002. Boron removal from water and accumulation by duckweed, Lemna gibba. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Wetland Systems for Water Pollution Control. Arusha, Tanzania, pp. 627–633.
  2. Dixon, 1999, Guidelines for graywater re-use: health issues, J. Chartered Inst. Water Environ. Manag., 13, 322, 10.1111/j.1747-6593.1999.tb01056.x · DOI
  3. Garland, 2000, Graywater processing in recirculating hydroponic systems: Phytotoxicity, surfactant degradation, and bacterial dynamics, Water Res., 34, 3075, 10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00085-3 · DOI
  4. Gross, 2005, Environmental impact and health risks associated with greywater irrigation—a case study, Water Sci. Technol., 52, 161, 10.2166/wst.2005.0251 · DOI
  5. Gross, 2003, Reuse of greywater for landscape irrigation in small communities and households, Water and Irrigation, 437, 29
  6. Lindstrom, C.R., 2000. Graywater: facts about graywater—what it is, how to treat it, when and where to use it. Cambridge, MA.Electronic manuscript. Available from: <www.graywater.com>.
  7. Meaguer, 2000, Phytoremediation of toxic elemental and organic pollutants, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol., 3, 153, 10.1016/S1369-5266(99)00054-0 · DOI
  8. Raskyn, 1997, Phytoremediation of metals: Using plants to remove pollutants from the environment, Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 8, 222
  9. Spackman, 2003, Polyacrylamide for coliform bacteria removal from agricultural wastewater, J. Soil Water Conserv., 58, 276
  10. Wiel-Shafran, A., Ronen, Z., Weisbrod, N., Adar, E., Gross, A., 2006. Changes in soil properties following irrigation with surfactant-rich greywater. Ecol. Eng. (in press). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 272

Metadata

Authors
Gross, A., Shmueli, O., Ronen, Z., & Raveh, E.
Affiliations
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL)
Corresponding author
Gross, A.
Venue
Chemosphere
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-01
Volume
66
Issue
5
Pages
916-923
ISSN
0045-6535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104919452
Cited by
272
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 22 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
FWCI
25.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Chemosphere (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Texas Department of Agriculture
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Constructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Engineering › Urban Stormwater Management Solutions
Keywords
greywater recycling, greywater irrigation, vertical flow constructed wetlands, biotrickling filter, fecal coliform removal, COD and BOD removal, landscape irrigation, domestic wastewater, small communities, treatment feasibility
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Conservation of Natural Resources, Enterobacteriaceae, Residence Characteristics, Waste Disposal, Fluid, Water Pollutants, Wetlands

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review