Draft
Doctoral
Research Proposal
Ascertaining
the factors influencing the acceptance or rejection of
Constructed
Wetlands as an alternative form of wastewater treatment
Introduction
The
ability to alter ecosystems to serve human needs has allowed homo sapiens to
adapt far more rapidly to Earth's diversity than any of his living
counterparts. One such adaptation is
the use of constructed or artificial wetlands to assimilate anthropogenic
wastes. While used for century's by
eastern cultures to grow rice and other agricultural products, constructed
wetlands have only recently been elevated to the status of an engineered
technology in the west. Constructed
wetlands (CWs) offer on-site handling and stabilization of biosolids, require
minimal operations and maintenance (O&M) when compared to conventional
brick and mortar treatment systems, and provide substantial improvement in the
quality of effluents discharged. The
use of CWs to treat domestic sewage has gained popularity in recent years as an
alternative to centralized wastewater treatment systems. Industrial applications, such as the
treatment of acid mine drainage, have implemented CWs as a cost-effective,
efficient means of enhancing effluent quality.
Rationale
In
November, 2000 researchers and scientists attending the International Water
Quality Associations Conference on Wetland Treatment of Polluted Waters. The conference, held in Orlando, Florida
offers insight into the most recent research developments in CWs. Of the nearly 200 papers presented during
the 5 day meeting, only a handful addressed the policy and public decision
factors associated with the selection of CWs as an alternative form of
wastewater treatment. One only needs to
look at the proceedings Table of Contents to assess the areas of current
research emphasis. Papers addressing
parameter performance [phosphorous (27), nitrogen (22), and pathogen (17)],
modeling (24), and ecological considerations (32) comprised the majority of
papers. Application specific papers
including sub-surface flow (26), free surface flow (27), industrial (33),
agricultural (16), and storm water (14) comprise the balance of
presentations. While a number of
authors addressed policy and public decision-making factors associated with
their specific project, only a handful of authors addressed the relation of
these factors to overall policy development.
Thus, it would appear that a gap in the state of knowledge currently
exists regarding the CWs from a policy perspective.
This
research endeavor seeks to quantify and qualify the factors influencing the
acceptance or rejection of CWs as an alternative form of wastewater
treatment. Considering the importance
of this innovative technology, an awareness of the weight and influence that
various factors play in decision making is an important component relative to
the implementation of CWs.
Consider,
for example, that land acquisition and land costs have historically been cited
as the primary deterrent to selecting a CW for treatment. Recent requirements in public notification
by publicly-owned treatment works regarding chlorine use has necessitated the
development of emergency evacuation plans.
In some cases, additional buffer zones have been suggested as a means to
ameliorate or minimize evacuation areas.
Such action increases the foot print of the facility and by default,
increases the land acquisition of the facility. This introduced effect may have direct costs (land acquisition
for buffers) or indirect costs (compensation for reduced neighboring home values)
that asserts an externality on the true cost of wastewater treatment
services. Thus, comparisons of CWs to
conventional and alternative treatment systems at the public policy level, may
not be reflecting the true costs and benefits associated with this 'new'
adaptation of ecological engineering.
Research that highlights the key factors involved in the decision-making
process could prove invaluable in promoting CWs as an alternative treatment
technology.
Methods
A
survey form will be developed to ascertain the factors involved in the
acceptance or rejection of CWs for wastewater treatment. Results from the survey will be entered into
a relational database (Microsoft Access or similar) for analysis. An extensive review of published and gray
literature sources will be conducted to develop the survey. The survey instrument will be further
refined through the use of information interviews with appropriate personnel
representing various perspectives (regulatory, utility, consultant) in the
decision-making process. Finally, the
capture of timely pertinent information by the survey will be reviewed through
a peer-review process to ensure proper consideration of all factors involved in
decision-making and policy development.
The
survey will be distributed in three manners.
First, a web-based survey form that will permit online, instant database
entry of the information requested. The
web-based survey form and database will be securely located at
CoastalZone.org. Second, a letter
distributed by email and incorporating links to the aforementioned secure web
page. Third, a printed version of the
survey will be distributed, as needed, to contacts within the water quality
community.
Typically
response rates of 5% to 8% for surveys is considered a good outcome. However, web-based survey instruments
targeted to a specific audience have frequently generated high levels of
response. For example, a recent remote
sensing study in Australia received a response rate of greater than 75%. The key factor to high response rates and
quality information is a qualified list of online recipients. Correspondingly, requests for participation
will be emailed to contacts qualified through list-serves, authors from
relevant proceedings, appropriate IAWQ and SWS members, and participants in
online forums such as Water Online.
Furthermore, all State and Federal (EPA, DOA, DOI) and public utility
contacts will be gleaned from agency web sites and contact information,
including a current database of contacts for eastern US-based utilities.
Analysis
Surveys
will be proofed for accuracy of information and duplicative entrees. Survey information will then be entered into
a relational database. The relational
objects will then be analyzed using multivariate statistical methods. First, a principal component analysis will
be conducted to highlight latent relationships. Second, a correlation cluster analysis will be performed to
determine the relative weight of relational objects to acceptance or rejection
of CWs as a treatment technology.
Third, a two-way multivariate discriminate analysis will be conducted to
determine the influence of individual and grouped factors relative to
acceptance or rejection of CWs as discriminated from other forms of treatment
technology.
Once
completed, if sufficient factors exist relative to the decision-making process,
a model will be developed as a tool for decision makers and the water quality
community. The intended model would
query the user for pertinent information and return an estimation of acceptance
or rejection of a CW for a given situation.
Furthermore, the model would present a weighted list of factors that the
user should consider in evaluating CWs as a treatment method. Finally, the model would produce a list of
key contacts and locations that reflected similar circumstances to assist the
user in networking and communications to ensure an adequate outcome.
Products
A
formal publication, interactive web-site, relational database, and
decision-making model will be made available for as tools for participants in
the study. All participants will have
an opportunity to request copies of the formal publication at the conclusion of
their survey-entry submission.
Dissemination of the products, information, and services available will
be promoted through the Internet and authored papers and presentations at
symposia and conferences both domestically and internationally.
Summary
It
is anticipated that the written publication will be of sufficient quality to
serve as a Doctoral Thesis.
Intellectual property rights, royalties, and dissemination of products
produced from this research may be offered through negotiation or as good will
for water quality improvements at the sole discretion of the researcher and author.
Your comments
and insight regarding this proposal are highly appreciated!