| Title: |
Adsorption Media for the Removal of Soluble Phosphorus from Subsurface Drainage Water |
| Authors: |
Jessica K. Hauda; Steven I. Safferman; Ehsan Ghane |
| Source: |
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol 17, Iss 7693, p 7693 (2020) |
| Publisher Information: |
MDPI AG |
| Publication Year: |
2020 |
| Collection: |
Directory of Open Access Journals: DOAJ Articles |
| Subject Terms: |
agriculture; dissolved phosphorus; eutrophication; nano-engineered media; nonpoint-source pollution; orthophosphate; Medicine |
| Description: |
Phosphorus (P) is a valuable, nonrenewable resource in agriculture promoting crop growth. P losses through surface runoff and subsurface drainage discharge beneath the root zone is a loss of investment. P entering surface water contributes to eutrophication of freshwater environments, impacting tourism, human health, environmental safety, and property values. Soluble P (SP) from subsurface drainage is nearly all bioavailable and is a significant contributor to freshwater eutrophication. The research objective was to select phosphorus sorbing media (PSM) best suited for removing SP from subsurface drainage discharge. From the preliminary research and literature, PSM with this potential were steel furnace slag (SFS) and a nano-engineered media (NEM). The PSM were evaluated using typical subsurface drainage P concentrations in column experiments, then with an economic analysis for a study site in Michigan. Both the SFS and generalized NEM (GNEM) removed soluble reactive phosphorus from 0.50 to below 0.05 mg/L in laboratory column experiments. The most cost-effective option from the study site was the use of the SFS, then disposing it each year, costing $906/hectare/year for the case study. GNEM that was regenerated onsite had a very similar cost. The most expensive option was the use of GNEM to remove P, including regeneration at the manufacturer, costing $1641/hectare/year. This study suggests that both SFS and NEM are both suited for treating drainage discharge. The use of SFS was more economical for the study site, but each site needs to be individually considered. |
| Document Type: |
article in journal/newspaper |
| Language: |
English |
| Relation: |
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/20/7693; https://doaj.org/toc/1661-7827; https://doaj.org/toc/1660-4601; https://doaj.org/article/5c3b2479334b499dbf46f2f25b57b776 |
| DOI: |
10.3390/ijerph17207693 |
| Availability: |
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17207693; https://doaj.org/article/5c3b2479334b499dbf46f2f25b57b776 |
| Accession Number: |
edsbas.FA9348C5 |
| Database: |
BASE |