Affiliations 

  • 1 Laboratory of Energy and Environmental Science, Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam; Faculty of Environmental and Chemical Engineering, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam
  • 2 School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Environmental Pollution Control and Remediation Technology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
  • 3 Henan Province Engineering Research Center for Biomass Value-added Products, School of Forestry, Henan Agricultural University, Zhengzhou 450002, China
  • 4 Department for Management of Science and Technology Development, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam; Faculty of Applied Sciences, Ton Duc Thang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Electronic address: nguyenvanhuy@tdtu.edu.vn
  • 5 Faculty of Environmental and Food Engineering, Nguyen Tat Thanh University, 300A Nguyen Tat Thanh, District 4, Ho Chi Minh City 755414, Vietnam; Department of Environmental Energy Engineering, Kyonggi University, Suwon 16227, Republic of Korea
  • 6 Aarhus University, Department of Bioscience, Arctic Research Centre (ARC), Frederiksborgvej 399, PO Box 358, DK-4000 Roskilde, Denmark
  • 7 Higher Institution Centre of Excellence (HICoE), Institute of Tropical Aquaculture and Fisheries (AKUATROP), Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, 21030 Kuala Nerus, Terengganu, Malaysia
  • 8 Centre for Technology in Water and Wastewater, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, NWS 2007, Australia
  • 9 Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology and Aquatic Ecology, Ghent University, Jozef Plateaustraat 22, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
  • 10 Laboratory of Energy and Environmental Science, Institute of Research and Development, Duy Tan University, Da Nang 550000, Vietnam. Electronic address: levanquyet@dtu.edu.vn
J Hazard Mater, 2021 07 05;413:125426.
PMID: 33621772 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125426

Abstract

This study evaluated and compared the performance of two vertical flow constructed wetlands (VF) using expanded clay (VF1) and biochar (VF2), of which both are low-cost, eco-friendly, and exhibit potentially high adsorption as compared to conventional filter layers. Both VFs achieved relatively high removal for organic matters (i.e. Biological oxygen demand during 5 days, BOD5) and nitrogen, accounting for 9.5 - 10.5 g.BOD5.m-2.d-1 and 3.5 - 3.6 g.NH4-N.m-2.d-1, respectively. The different filter materials did not exert any significant discrepancy to effluent quality in terms of suspended solids, organic matters and NO3-N (P > 0.05), but they did influence NH4-N effluent as evidenced by the removal rate of that by VF1 and VF2 being of 82.4 ± 5.7 and 84.6 ± 6.4%, respectively (P 

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.