May 28, 2010 at 1:55 pm #169320
Can anyone direct me to completed, valid research on how bio swales and rain gardens remove contaminants from storm water? I need to convince myself and a permitting agency that a combination of rain gardens and bio swales will adequately filter gray water from a splash pad before it reaches the river downstream. Specific data on pre and post treatment contaminant levels necessary.May 28, 2010 at 1:56 pm #169358May 28, 2010 at 2:51 pm #169357
The EPA citations should be convincing enough….http://www.epa.gov/safewater/sourcewater/pubs/fs_swpp_stormwater.pdf
There are contaminant removal rate citations in the swales section.May 28, 2010 at 3:24 pm #169356
João Bicho e Joana Carneiro, LDAParticipant
Try some podcast in iTunes from ISA, they have one on that topicMay 28, 2010 at 3:26 pm #169355
João Bicho e Joana Carneiro, LDAParticipant
here is the link:
http://www.isa-arbor.com/podcast/PodcastDetail.aspx?ID=7May 28, 2010 at 5:13 pm #169354
You have got to be kidding, Alec. I hope you are….Good grief!May 29, 2010 at 7:59 am #169353
Alec, cjeck out the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act in either Virginia or Maryland. I was invloved in amny wetlands mitigation and restoratin projects and this Act focuses on exactly what you are looking for.
Cheers!May 29, 2010 at 9:20 am #169352
FICTION! ITS ALL LIES!!!..DON’T BELIEV…
“gets dragged away by EPA”May 29, 2010 at 9:46 am #169351
that’s right, Tim Zhang, the government can’t be trusted with healthcare, but has the organization to know when you posted on Land8, and to ‘drag you away’, and to perpetuate a scam involving engineering calculations for sediment flow..
And god forbid we let ‘the gummint” regulate oil platforms..May 29, 2010 at 4:12 pm #169350
The black helicopters have been following me for years trying to get at my native plant knowledge….on the run, always on the run.May 29, 2010 at 7:32 pm #169349
Hey thanks everybody.
I always question common knowledge.
It often breeds innovation.June 1, 2010 at 3:05 pm #169348
For those of you who were incensed that I question the effectiveness of rain gardens and bioswales in the treatment of grey water I challenge you to show me data quantifying removal of bacteriological pollutants. I am finding the opposite. These BMP’s do not effectively treat grey water. There is hard date showing removal of nitrogen, phosphorous, and metals, but not the bacteria associated with grey water.
Please prove me wrong Trace One….good grief. 😉June 1, 2010 at 5:17 pm #169347
Pat S. RosendParticipant
I think it is a good idea to see the data behind the structure. LID is all the rage right now, but we are not certain how effective it is in all cases. Numbers data is especially important.June 2, 2010 at 10:03 am #169346
I am glad, Alec, that you took the trouble to specify your question, after doing a bit of research..As you know from your cursory reading, bacteria is treated by other bacteria in the topsoil layer, and is one of the trickier aspects of greywater. .
I am offended by your labeling of ‘fiction’ something that is based on established engineering calculations, that are widely available, and upon which the Hoover Dam was built decades ago..I think our society has a general anti-science attitude, and perhaps eroneously associate your wording (‘fiction”?) with this attitude.
You can question established truth. You can base your questions on a few seconds of research, as well..But to jump all the way, without doing any reading at all, into calling science ‘fiction’ is something that really grates on me..
I associate that attide with our inability to work towards preventing climate change, as well as with the Texas Textbooks Massacre..Your attitude may have nothing to do with these larger issues. I hope not..Good grief!
I think we must deal with bacteria levels in all water screening devices, but I think the serious problem we have right now is pollution from drugs. This is a very serious issue that is not being addressed at all.
Bacteria levels is a ‘known unknown’ as Donald Rumsfeld might say, or a quantifiable problem, that has been addressed. .June 2, 2010 at 11:14 am #169345
Andrew Garulay, RLAParticipant
This is an important issue because lots of municipalities are requiring rain gardens and bioswales in applications where they have negative impacts to other values in site design such as safety and maintenance, not to mention real estate. Qualitatively, there is no doubt that some excess nutrients and contaminants are removed, but there seems to be an assumption that there is a difference that is as clear as night and day.
One community has us making every blessed tree island in every parking lot a “rain garden” while we can clearly see that these are safety, maintenance, and aesthetic burdens. No one seems to know any quantifiable data in order to use sound reasoning on when these are worth the trade offs or not. The assumption seems to be that if you have them in every last possible place all the water will be pure and without them everywhere we are all going to die.
There are public service announcements here sometimes about making sure you don’t have any puddles because we are all going to die from Eastern Equine Encephalitis and West Nile Virus, yet we have the municipalities mandating these everywhere.
I like rain gardens and bioswales, but there is taking it to the extreme when they appear to make no sense at all. Quantifying the results in a broad spectrum of applications would be a wonderful thing. Right now these rules seem to be made by bloggers rather than research.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.