Nowadays, use of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment especially in rural areas has become increasingly preferable. The most important reason behind this fact is its relatively low investment cost over other treatment options depending on economical conditions of the country. Nonetheless, due to lower operational costs of constructed wetlands than other conventional wastewater treatment systems, investment costs could be regarded secondary as of importance. Investment costs could show differences even at regional scale in a country. Choosing a constructed wetland system among “Subsurface Horizontal Flow”, “Subsurface Vertical Flow” or “Free Water Surface Flow”; or designing a hybrid system using concurrent systems plays important role when defining costs of the constructed wetland systems. Due to increasing interest for constructed wetlands since 2003, so many constructed wetland systems have been built in rural parts of Turkey and most of these systems have been designed as horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland system. As a fact, the cost of horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlands is comparatively higher than other wetland systems. When different applications in the world are examined, it is observed that mostly horizontal subsurface flow constructed wetland systems are preferred in rural areas. According to the studies within the extent of this work, different constructed wetland types which are built in different regions of Turkey and their expected and realized costs are analyzed and compared with other countries. Moreover, operational costs have been calculated. Consequently, a work to be taken as reference for further scientific studies has been prepared with presented wetland analyses which could be used by especially decision makers and researchers.
Construction and maintenance cost analyzing of constructed wetland systems
K. Gunes, B. Tuncsiper, F. Masi, S. Ayaz, D. Leszczynska, N. Findik Hecan, H. Ahmad; Construction and maintenance cost analyzing of constructed wetland systems. Water Practice and Technology 1 September 2011; 6 (3): wpt2011043. doi: https://doi.org/10.2166/wpt.2011.043
Download citation file: