IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute

ivl.se
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Removal of rubber, bitumen and other microplastic particles from stormwater by a gross pollutant trap - bioretention treatment train
2021 (English)In: Water Research, ISSN 0043-1354, E-ISSN 1879-2448, Vol. 202, p. 117457-117457, article id 117457Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Microplastic particles in stormwater pose significant threats to the environment. This study investigated howeffective a stormwater treatment train was at removing rubber, bitumen and other microplastics (incl. fibers,fragments, and paint particles) in the 100–300 μm and >300 μm size fractions from highway runoff. The twotreatment trains comprise a gross pollutant trap (GPT) followed by either a vegetated bioretention cell or nonvegetatedsand filter. Flow-proportional composite samples were taken from the highway runoff, GPT outflowand the outflow from the two parallel filters during nine rain events to determine overall treatment performance,as well as the performance of individual system components.

The identified rubber, bitumen and other microplasticparticles mainly represented the 100–300 μm fraction and included high ratios of rubber (30%) andbitumen (60%). Overall, the treatment train efficiently removed rubber, bitumen and other microplastic particlesin the 100–300 μm size fraction from the stormwater. The filter cells accounted for a major share of this removal,as the GPT did not reduce microplastic particle concentrations. This observation is likely explained by the factthat the rubber, bitumen and other microplastic particles have a density close to the density of water and thusremoval by sedimentation is decreased. This identified an inherent weakness of the system; more specifically, thehigh microplastic concentrations in the surface water of the GPT means there can be a risk of microplastic releasethrough overflow pits when inflows surpass the system capacity. Despite some differences, both the vegetatedbioretention cell and the non-vegetated sand filter removed rubber, bitumen and other microplastic particles tosimilar extent.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Elsevier, 2021. Vol. 202, p. 117457-117457, article id 117457
Keywords [en]
Pollution, Waste Management and Disposal, Water Science and Technology, Ecological Modelling, Environmental Engineering, Civil and Structural Engineering
National Category
Water Engineering
Research subject
Water
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ivl:diva-3860DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2021.117457OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ivl-3860DiVA, id: diva2:1617211
Note

A2566

Available from: 2021-12-06 Created: 2021-12-06 Last updated: 2021-12-06

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Magnusson, Kerstin
In the same journal
Water Research
Water Engineering

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 15 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf