See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/232888366

Design Considerations for Waste Water Treatment with Water Hyacinth E.

crassipes

Article  in  Environmental Technology · July 1990

DOI: 10.1080/09593339009384910

CITATIONS READS

8 97

2 authors, including:

Oscar Monroy
Metropolitan Autonomous University
165 PUBLICATIONS   2,102 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Anaerobic digestion at the core of sustainable processes View project

Biological reactors View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Oscar Monroy on 29 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana]
On: 21 January 2014, At: 09:51
Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Environmental Technology
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tent20

Design considerations for waste water treatment with

water hyacinth E. Crassipes
a a
Oscar Monroy Hermosillo & Sofia Sarquis
a
Department of Biotechnology , Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana , Apartado Postal
55–535, Iztapalapa, D.F., 09340, Mexico
Published online: 17 Dec 2008.

To cite this article: Oscar Monroy Hermosillo & Sofia Sarquis (1990) Design considerations for waste water treatment with
water hyacinth E. Crassipes , Environmental Technology, 11:7, 669-674, DOI: 10.1080/09593339009384910

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593339009384910

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the
publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations
or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the
views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be
independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses,
actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever
caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Environmental Technology, Vol. 11, pp. .669-674
© Publications Division Sclpcr Ltd., 1990

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS FOR WASTE WATER TREATMENT

WITH WATER HYACINTH E. CRASSIPES
Oscar Monroy Hermosillo, Sofia Sarquis

Department of Biotechnology,
Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana,
Apartado Postal 55-535,
Iztapalapa, 09340, D.F., Mexico

(Received 22 August 1989; in final form 1 March 1990)

Downloaded by [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana] at 09:51 21 January 2014

ABSTRACT
An attempt to provide a design methodology for wastewater treatment in water
hyacinth ponds Is tried in the following lines. Literature data is complemented with
growth rate and yield measurements to develop a performance equation with two
dimensioniess groups indicating the system capacity for nutrient removal. It is
concluded that organic loads up to 10 Kg BOD Ha-1 d-1 are critical to
obtain nitrogen removal efficencies greater than 80%. Nutrient removal can be
increased if water hyacinth ponds are operated as maturation ponds.

INTRODUCTION
Some researchers have tried to establish physiological characteristics of the UH
In relation to their nutrient uptake under several conditions of relative
concentrations (1-5). Reddy L Tucker (2,3) found a correlation between the rates of
absorption of N and P. Sato Si Kondo (4,5) found that the N and P content in the
plant as well as the dry weight are related to the N concentration in the solution.
Baruah (6) found that when P limits growth It can be described by an exponential
equation. According to some authors (2,3,4,5,7,11) the optimum N concentration la
between 20 and 30 mg/1 and P Is between 5 and 9 mg/1. Under these conditions, the
specific rate of growth Is around 0.06 and 0.12 d*' depending on the other
environmental characteristics such as temperature and sunlight.
The use of UH for the removal of nutrients, biochemical oxygen demand (BOO) and
toxic substances has been practiced at pilot and full scale levels by many
researchers (3-19). Their experience Is summarized In Table 1 along with operating
variables. The difference in their results can be explained by the different
climatic conditions, pond systems used and load rates of nutrients and pollutants.
Nevertheless they follow trends which must be analyzed in order to obtain full
experience from them.

B_P_p_ and. TSS. removal

Figure 1, shows the inlet load and the removal efficiency of BOD and TSS of the
fifthteen experiments. The maximum and minimum organic loads were 162 and 26.1 Kg
BOD/Ha.d respectively. Removal efficiency was 56X at the higher loading rate and 95
X at the lower value. If the BOD removal rate is plotted as a function of the inlet
loading rate (Figure 2), a correlation is found (XLr=6.14+0.6Lo. rsO.885). The slope
represents the mean removal efficiency. The removal of total suspended solids is
less well correlated with the input load (R=3.129+0.666TSS0, r=0.77) probably
because It Is also related to the surface velocity, particle sise, concentration and
tendency to flocculate. The main objective of using WH is for nutrient removal and
the BOD and TSS removals are achieved in addition because of the settling of solids
in the quiescent conditions enhanced by the hyacinths.

669
 TABLE 1. EFFICIENCY QF WATER HYACINTH IN UASTE WATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS.

REF BOD TSS TN TP RT FLOW AREA H

Id 1 0 1 0 1 0 F A
ng/1 d m3/d ha m

8 110 5 97 10 12 3.4 3.7 1.6 54 475 2 1.2

7b 39 15 49 15 - - - - 7 3790 2.5 1
9 U2 4 8 13 15 2.1 1.5 0.38 20 95 .22 .8
7 5Û 15 49 14 6 2 6 5.4 15 437 .28 1.8
7 24 6 35 9 3 1.1 5.5 4.3 10 522 .28 1.8
10 161 23 12S 6 30 14 8.5 - 7.9 66 935 3.6 1.7
10 121 25 85 57 26 15 7.8 8.2 16 1240 1.2 1.7
7 - 4 43 4 30 1.5 1.1 0.9
9 35 15 155 14 - - - 22 49 0.07 1.5
H 5.3 0.5 6.3 5.6 0.53 692 0.23 0.8
11 14 0.6 7.6 7 0.53 692 0.23 0.8
12 3.7 1.1 0.5 0.1 3.6 342 0.12 1
Downloaded by [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana] at 09:51 21 January 2014

9 135 87 278 233 35 23 4.8 3.2 7 2252 2.27 0.7

2 10 5 11 13. 13 9 3.9 3.1 0.96 0.14 0.32» 0.42
2 37 16 45 26 3.5 2.7 24.6 12 0.96 0.14 0.32» 0.42

I=lnput RT=retentlon time ' TSS=total suspended solids

û=output H =depth d = day
TN=total nitrogen TP=total phosphorus » in »2

Figure 1. Efficiency of BOD

and TSS related to the
influent loads of the waste
water treatment systems of
table 2 (• BOD, x TSS).

0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300

Load (Kg/Ha.d)

100

Figure 2. BOD and TSS removal

a3 a function of the influent
load. Lines indicate
correlations '
XLr=10.3+0.5Lo, r=0.8S¡
g/Ha.d) XTSSr=23.74+0.2TSSo, r=0.52
0 30 60 90 120 150 ISO 210 240 270 300
Load ( K g / H a . d)

670
 ti and P_ rénovai
Figure 3 ähows the efficiency of N and P removal as a function of the input
loads. In general, P removal is less efficient than N removal. This is probably due
to the fact that the latter element limits growth. Data in Table 2 show that the N/P
ratio Is lower at the effluent than in the plant and than at the Influent,
suggesting that P Is not fully utilized and that N is limiting growth (except in
system 1 1 ) . A relationship between initial loads and removal of N and P is shown In
Figure A. Average removal efficiencies are 46.5 and 40 X as shown by the slopes of
*.he regression lines. P is not limiting growth therefore its uptake is not directly
.elated to its concentration In the water.
These simple correlations suggest that, in the ponds systems under study, the
removal of the organic load is greatly dependant on the organic load input.
Downloaded by [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana] at 09:51 21 January 2014

Figure 3. Nutrient removal

related to the influent loads
of the waste water treatment
systems of table 2 (•
nitrogen, x phosphorus).

10 20 30 40 50 60 7 0 80 9 0 100 110
Load (Kg/Ha.d )

TABLE 2 NITROGEN TO PHOSPHORUS RATIOS (N/P) IN WATER HYACINTH AND WASTE WATERS.
REF N/P
lnfluent water hyacinth** effluent
9 3.2A 6.01 2.12
10 10 6.3 5.52
a 1 6.33 0.37
a .545 6.62 0.255
H 3.53 S.14 1.77
il 3.33 5.1 1.83
a 27.27 6.48 1.66
12 0.84 6.86 0.089
12 1.84 6.82 0.085
13 7.4 6.62 11
10 7.2 4.93 7.18
2 3.33 5.38 2.9
2 0.14 6.15 0.225

*» Values calculated according to Sato & Kondo (5).

671
 Figure 4. Nitrogen and
phosphorus removal as a
function of their Influent
loads. Lines Indicate
correlations
%Nr = 1.68+0.'i65No, r=0.74
%Pr=1.72+0.4Po, r=0.32

(Kg/Ha.d)
O 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110
L O A D (Kg/Ha.d)

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Downloaded by [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana] at 09:51 21 January 2014

To find a design criteria for UH ponds It is necessary to explain the

interrelation among the removal of pollutants and the operating variables of the
dlscused results so a series of experiments were done trying to relate the UH growth
rate to the N and P concentration in the water.
Water hyacinth was grown in twelve 40 1 containers (0.21 m 2 ) with a
nutrient solution (4) at several N and P concentrations as shown in Table 3 which
also contains the values of the specific growth rates for each of the combinations
of N and P concentrations. A constant difference was maintained between each value
(130 mg 1" for N and 20 for P) in order to codify the results for statistical
analysis. The experiments were run for three months. The nutrient solution was
renewed each week and the remaining N and P concentrations and the live weight and
leaf number of the plants were measured. Nitrogen was analysed using the KJeldhal
test and UV. Phosphorus was measured using the ascorbic acid method (14).

RESULTS
The removal of limiting nutrients can be described by a simple equation:
dC Mu
V —=---- x X x A (1)
dt Yc

Integrating Equation 1 between the limits Cf and Ci and dividing by Cl

dinenstonless equation 2 is obtained:

Ci-Cf Mu X A t Mu X
(2)
Cl Yc Cl V Yc

Equation 2 Indicates that the efficiency of the nutrient removal is a function

of the system's nutrient removal capacity (MuX/Yc) and the nutrient load to the
system (Co).

Growth rate
The growth rate of UH was calculated as
1 dX
Mu = - -- where X Is the total weigth of the UH in the tray.
X dt
The resulting growth rates are shown in table 3. The correlation coefficient of
equation 3 is rather poor probably because of the negative effect of the Increasing
total ion concentration (I) which is shown by equation 4.

Mu= 0.048-0.0000265*N-0.00025*P <3)

r=0.328

672
 Mu=-O.363-0.0141»N-0.0072»P+0.0018»I (4)
r=0.6S
TABLE 3 SPECIFIC GROWTH RATE AND N U P YIELDS OF UATER HYACINTH
AS A FUNCTION OF PHOSPHORUS AND NITROGEN CONCENTRATIONS
N1P1 N1P2 N1P3 N2P1 N2P2 N2P3 N3P1 N3P2 N3P3
Mu (dlj 0.054 0.0S1 0.034 0.046 .042 0.036 0.04 0.04 0.04
Yn (gwH/mg N) 0.94 0.7 0.86 0.1 0.01 0.08 0.06 0.05 0.05
Yp lgUH/mg P) 2.1 0.75 0.35 4.86 0.56 0.3 1.42 0.57 0.4

Nitrogen concentrations are: Nl=20, N2=150, N3=280 rag N/l

Phosphorus concentrations are: Pl = 5t- P2=25, P3=45 mg P/1

Crowth yields
The amount of N and P that was removed by a certain weight of UH is expressed as
a yield in table 3.
In order to obtain a metabolic coefficient for nutrient absortion (Mu/Yn and
Mu/Yp) the Mu obtained was divided by the mean of the yields obtained each week. The
Downloaded by [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana] at 09:51 21 January 2014

results are shown in equations 5 and 6.

Mu/Yn= 0.011 +2.5E-03»N +2.81E-04*P (5)

r=0.98
Mu/Yp= 0.0111 +6E-06*N +2.146E-03»P (6)
r=0.96

tnfluencs of BOD 1 pads on nutrient remova 1

Equation 5 and the values reported In Table 1 were used to find a correlation
between N and P concentrations and the BOD Input load employing a commercial
software package (15) The following equation was obtained:

Mu X
X Nr= 55.17 (7)
Yn No
r = 0.789

This equation shows the inverse effect of the organic load In the removal of
nitrogen as limiting nutrient. It is arranged In two dlmensionless groups, the first
can tell the ratio of nitrogen removed by the system (MuX/Yn) compared with the
nitrogen load Input to the system (No). It can be called nutrient removal capacity
number (NRC). The second group (50/Lo) will tell about the Organic Load
Interference ( O L D . Figure 5 is a plot of equation 7 showing the effect of several
NRC and organic loads on nitrogen removal. It can be seen that in order to obtain at
least 80% of N removal, a set of NRC and OLI must be chosen. That Is, either a high
HW harvest rate (MuX), a low N input rate or a low BOD load to the system.

100 i

90
1 _ _ — J. _ u —
80 1
N _ _1
70 _3,0~
¡
r 60 — 1—
.7.5" Figure 5. Performance of
e _t>.75 water hyacinth ponds as a
50 -1 —
m
•- . -X
function of organic toad
0 40 (Lo) at several nitrogen
V i
— — ^ — • - 1
r—r 0.17 removal capacities (NRC)
e 30 I t i
of the system.
20 l

10 i i i
i
_ J : ,
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Lo (Kg 800/Ho.d)

673
 CONCLUSIONS
In order to efficiently use water haycinth ponds for nutrient removal they must
be designed as maturation ponds according to the existing local conditions, which
implies that secondary treatment is needed prior to the UH pond. Figure S can help
to indicate which will be the maximum organic load according to the NRC to be
expected. Satisfactory removal efficiencies can be obtained by decreasing No which
requires a larger pond area therefore causing increased blomass harvesting and
disposal problems.
The UH density plays an important role. The plant must be harvested periodically
at the rate it grows to keep the population between 80 and 120 T Ha-'d"'
which glve3 the fastest growth rate (S). Otherwise they would not be able to
significant reduce the nutrient concentrations at retention times of less than 10
days.
Equation 7 can be rearranged to calculate the maximum organic load permited to a
certain pond to yield a particular N removal efficiency (eq 8 ) .
Lo = 190»10*»NRC»XNr-:!-7' (8)

NOMENCLATURE
Downloaded by [Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana] at 09:51 21 January 2014

A stands for water area in Ha

C stands for either N or P concentrations in mg I"1
Lo is the organic load in Kg BUD Ha* ' d* '
Mu is the specific rate of growth in dl
No and Po (or Co) are the N and P loads'in Kg Ha*'d-'
X Nr and X Pr are the efficiencies of N and P removal respectively.
t is the space time in days. V stands for volume in m3
X is the UH density in T of fresh weight per Ha.
Yn, Yp are the N and P yields in g fresh UH per mg of removed nutrient.

REFERENCES
1. O. Monroy-H, Water hyacinth as an alternative method for nutrient removal, MSc
Thesis Strathclyde University, Glasgow, Scotland (1976)
2. K.R. Reddy and J.C. Tucker, Economic Botany 37, 2, 237(1983)
3. K.R. Reddy and W.F. De Burk, Economic Botany 8(2): 229-239 (1984)
4. H. Sato and T. Kondo T, Jap. J. Eco 131, 257 (1981)
5. H. Sato H and T. Kondo, Jap. J. Ecol 33, 37 (1983)
6. J.N., Baruah, Regional rural programme management of WH, Commonwealth
secretariat CSC, Bombay, India(81)RT-23:25-92 (1981)
7. B.C. Wolverton, I, NASA TM-X-72-729, Washington (1975)
7b. II, NASA TM-X-72-730, Washington (1976)
8. B.C. Wolverton and R.C. McDonald, J. Water Pollution Control Federation 5l, 2,
305(1979)
9. B.C. Wolverton, at Aquaculture Systems or wastewater Treatment Seminar UC
Davis, California, Sept (1979).
10. R. Mc Donald and B.C. Wolverton Economic Botany 34, 2:101-110(1980)
11. J. Wooten and J.D. Dodd J D, Economic Botany 30, 1, 29 (1976)
12. K.R. Reddy, K.L. Campbell, D.A. Graetz and K.M. Portier, Journal of
Environmental Quality, 11, 4, 591 (1982)
13. C. Lee and T. McKim T. (Walt Disney World, Orlando, Florida) (1980)
14. APHA Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater 15th
edition, American Public Health Association, Washington D.C. (1980)
15. K.C. Killion, Rainbow computing Inc. 9719 Reseda Blvd, Northridge CA 91324
USA1981)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This reaearh haa been conducted with funds provided by the National
Council for Science and Technology (CONACYT) and the Economic European Community.

674

View publication stats