Substance flow analysis for an urban drainage system of a representative hypothetical city in China

doi:10.1007/s11783-013-0551-y

Front Envir Sci Eng

2013, Vol. 7

Issue (5) : 746-755 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-013-0551-y

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Substance flow analysis for an urban drainage system of a representative hypothetical city in China

Hua BAI, Siyu ZENG, Xin DONG, Jining CHEN(

)

School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Download: PDF(257 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

This paper discusses the use of substance flow analysis (SFA) as a tool to support quantified research on urban drainage systems. Based on the principle of mass balance, a static substance flow model is established to describe and examine the routes and intensities of water, chemical oxygen demand (COD), total nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) for a representative hypothetical city (RH city) in China, which is a devised and scaled city using statistical characteristics of urban circumstances at the national level. It is estimated that the annual flux of water, COD, TN and TP through the urban drainage system in 2010 was 55.1 million m³, 16037.3 t, 1649.5 t and 209.7 t, respectively. The effluent of wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) was identified as the most important pathway for pollutant emissions, which contributed approximately 60% of COD, 65% of TN and 50% of TP to receiving water. During the wastewater treatment process, 1.0 million m³, 7042.5 t, 584.2 t and 161.4 t of the four studied substances had been transmitted into sludge, meanwhile 3813.0 t of COD and 394.0 t of TN were converted and emitted to the atmosphere. Compared with the representative hypothetical city of 2000, urban population and the area of urban built districts had expanded by approximately 90% and 80% respectively during the decade, resulting in a more than threefold increase in the input of substances into the urban drainage system. Thanks to the development of urban drainage systems, the total loads of the city were maintained at a similar level.

Keywords substance flow analysis (SFA) urban drainage system representative hypothetical city (RH city) water pollution control

Corresponding Author(s): CHEN Jining,Email:jchen1@tsinghua.edu.cn

Issue Date: 01 October 2013

Cite this article:

Hua BAI,Siyu ZENG,Xin DONG, et al. Substance flow analysis for an urban drainage system of a representative hypothetical city in China[J]. Front Envir Sci Eng, 2013, 7(5): 746-755.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-013-0551-y
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2013/V7/I5/746

Tab.1 Characteristics of the representative hypothetical city in 2000 and 2010

Fig.1 Conceptual framework of UDS-SFA model

Fig.2 Analytic process of wastewater treatment in WWTPs

Tab.2 Percentages of capacity for selected treatment processes

flow	substance (i)	equation	coefficient description	coefficient value
2010	2000
WW_1,_i	W, C, N, P	WW_1,W = Pop × WC/10000 × 80% ×K₁WW_1,C = Pop × K_2,C×365/10⁶×K₁WW_1,N = Pop × K_2,N×365/10⁶×K₁WW_1,P = Pop × K_2,P×365/10⁶×K₁	pop: population of the cityWC: water consumption per capita /( m³? y^-1)K₁: wastewater treat rate /%K_2,C (K_2,N / K_2,P): daily COD (TN / TP) discharge per capita/( g? p.d^-1)	pop=600000WC= 62.6 K₁=82.31%K_2,C = 56.11K_2,N = 8.23K_2,P= 1.08	pop=316000WC= 80.4 K₁=35.24%K_2,C = 56.11K_2,N = 8.23K_2,P= 1.08
RW_1,_i	W, C, N, P	RW_1,W = Pop × WC/10000 × 80% ×(1-K₁)RW_1,C = Pop × K_2,C×365/10⁶× (1-K₁)RW_1,N = Pop × K_2,N×365/10⁶× (1-K₁)RW_1,P = Pop × K_2,P×365/10⁶× (1-K₁)
SW_1,_i	W, C, N, P	SW_{1, W} = AP × UA× K₃/10×(K₄×K₅)SW_1,C = AP × UA× K₃/10×K₄×K₅×K_7,C/100SW_{1, N} = AP × UA× K₃/10×K₄×K₅×K_7,N/100SW_1,P = AP × UA× K₃/10×K₄×K₅×K_7,P/100	AP: average precipitation /mmUA: urban areas/km²K₃: percentage of built district in the city/%K₄: percentage of permeable area of built district/%K₅:runoff coefficient of permeable areaK₆:runoff coefficient of impermeable areaK_{7, C}(K_7,N/K_{7, P}): COD (TN / TP) emission coefficient of permeable area/( mg? L^-1)K_8,C(K_{8, N}/K_{8, P}): COD (TN / TP) emission coefficient of impermeable area/( mg? L^-1)	AP= 979UA= 271.98K₃= 22.42%K₄= 38.62%K₅=0.25K₆=0.85K_7,C= 115.30K_7,N = 4.55K_{7, P} = 0.38K_8,C= 209.71K_{8, N}= 7.39K_{8, P}= 0.52	AP= 848UA= 225.55K₃=15.01%K₄= 28.15%K₅=0.25K₆=0.85K_7,C= 115.30K_7,N = 4.55K_{7, P} = 0.38K_8,C= 209.71K_{8, N}= 7.39K_{8, P}= 0.52
SW_2,i	W, C, N, P	SW_{2, W} = AP × UA× K₃/10×(1-K₄) ×K₆SW_2,C = AP × UA× K₃/10×(1-K₄) ×K₆×K_8,C/100SW_2,N = AP × UA× K₃/10×(1-K₄) ×K₆×K_8,N/100SW_2,P = AP × UA× K₃/10×(1-K₄) ×K₆×K_8,P/100
WW_2,_i	W, C, N, P	WW_{2, W} = (SW_{1, W} + SW_{2, W}) ×K₁WW_{2, C} = (SW_{1, C} + SW_{2, C}) ×K₁WW_{2, N} = (SW_{1, N} + SW_{2, N}) ×K₁WW_{2, P} = (SW_{1, P} + SW_{2, P}) ×K₁
RW_3,_i	W, C, N, P	RW_{3, W} = (SW_{1, W} + SW_{2, W}) ×(1-K₁)RW_{3, C} = (SW_{1, C} + SW_{2, C}) ×(1-K₁)RW_{3, N} = (SW_{1, N} + SW_{2, N}) ×(1-K₁)RW_{3, P} = (SW_{1, P} + SW_{2, P}) ×(1-K₁)
WW_3,_i	W, C, N, P	WW_{3, W} = WW_{1, W}+ WW_{2, W}WW_{3, C} = WW_{1, C}+ WW_{2, C}WW_{3, N} = WW_{1, N}+ WW_{2, N}WW_{3, P} = WW_{1, P}+ WW_{2, P}	K₉: percentage of wastewater that was recycled/%K_10,C,K_10,N,K_10,P: concentration of COD(TN/TP) in recycled wastewater/( mg? L^-1)	K₉=10.83%K_10,C=41.9K_10,N= 15K_10,P= 1	K₉=0K_10,C=41.9K_10,N= 15K_10,P= 1
R _i	W, C, N, P	R_W = WW_{1, W}×(1-K₁₃)× K₉R_C = R_W ×K_10,C/100R_N = R_W ×K_10,N/100R_P = R_W ×K_10,P/100
S_i	W, C, N, P	S_W = WW_{1, W} ×K₁₀× K₁₁S_C = WW_{1, C}×K_13,C×K_12,C + WW_{2, C}×K_14,CS_N = WW_{1, N}×K_13,N×K_12,N + WW_{2, N}×K_14,NS_P = WW_{1, P}×K_13,P+ WW_{2, P}×K_14,P	K₁₁: the amount of water included in sludge per 10000m³ wastewater treated/%K_12,C,K_12,N: percentage of COD / TN removed through second biological treatment processes, and preserved in sludge	K₁₁=0.04%K_12,C= 0.58K_12,N=0.3	K₁₁=0.04%K_12,C= 0.58K_12,N=0.3
A_i	C, N	A_C = WW_{1, C}×K_15,C×(1-K_14,C)A_N = WW_{1, N}×K_15,N×(1- K_14,N)
RW_2,_i	W, C, N, P	RW_{2, W} = WW_{3, W}-[S_W + R_W]RW_{2, C} = WW_{3, C}-[S_C + A_C + R_C]RW_{2, N} = WW_{3, N}-[S_N + A_N + R_N]RW_{2, P} = WW_{3, P}-[S_P + R_C]	K_13,C,K_13,N,K_13,P: COD (TN / TP) remove coefficients of second biological treatmentK_14,C,K_14,N,K_14,P: COD (TN / TP) remove coefficients of pre-treatment	K_13,C=0.89K_13,N=0.64K_13,P= 0.80K_14,C=0.3K_14,N=0.1K_14,P=0.25	K_13,C=0.75K_13,N=0.56K_13,P= 0.66K_14,C=0.3K_14,N=0.1K_14,P=0.25
Coefficient sources: CSYB(2009), CUCSYB(2009), Dong et al. [25]; Che et al. [29]; Huang et al. [30]; CUWA [31].

Tab.3 Data and coefficients in UDS-SFA model

Fig.3 Substance flows through the urban drainage system in the RH city of 2010

Fig.4 Components of COD, TN and TP loads into the urban drainage system

Fig.5 Components of COD, TN and TP emission load to receiving water

Fig.6 Substance flows through the urban drainage system in the RH city of 2000

Tab.4 Emission load comparison between RH city of 2000 and 2010

1	Bhatta B. Analysis of urban growth and sprawl form remote sensing data. Berlin: Springer 2010
2	González A, Donnelly A, Jones M, Chrysoulakis N, Lopes M. A decision-support system for sustainable urban metabolism in Europe. Environmental Impact Assessment Review , 2013, 38: 109–119 doi: 10.1016/j.eiar.2012.06.007
3	Forkes J. Nitrogen balance for the urban food metabolism of Toronto. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2007, 52(1): 74–94 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.02.003
4	Kennedy C, Pincetl S, Bunje P. The study of urban metabolism and its applications to urban planning and design. Environmental pollution , 2011, 159(8-9): 1965–1973 doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2010.10.022 pmid:21084139
5	Li S S, Yuan Z W, Bi J, Wu H J. Anthropogenic phosphorus flow analysis of Hefei City, China. The Science of the total environment , 2010, 408(23): 5715–5722 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.08.052 pmid:20863550
6	Yuan Z W, Liu X, Wu H J, Zhang L, Bi J. Anthropogenic phosphorus flow analysis of Lujiang County, Anhui Province, Central China. Ecological Modelling , 2011, 222(8): 1534–1543 doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2011.01.016
7	Liu J, Wang R, Yang J. Metabolism and driving forces of Chinese urban household consumption. Population and Environment , 2005, 26(4): 325–341 doi: 10.1007/s11111-005-3345-8
8	Lindqvist A, von Malmborg F. What can we learn from local substance flow analyses? The review of cadmium flows in Swedish municipalities. Journal of Cleaner Production , 2004, 12(8-10): 909–918 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.02.012
9	Liu H, Zhang Y. Ecological network analysis of urban metabolism based on input-output table. Procedia Environmental Sciences , 2012, 13: 1611–1623
10	Paul B, Helmut R. Practical handbook of material flow analysis. CRC Press, New York, USA.2004
11	Daigo I, Matsuno Y, Adachi Y. Substance flow analysis of chromium and nickel in the material flow of stainless steel in Japan. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2010, 54(11): 851–863 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2010.01.004
12	Reck B K, Müller D B, Rostkowski K, Graedel T E. Anthropogenic nickel cycle: insights into use, trade, and recycling. Environmental Science & Technology , 2008, 42(9): 3394–3400 doi: 10.1021/es072108l pmid:18522124
13	Rostkowski K, Rauch J, Drakonakis K, Reck B, Gordon R B, Graedel T E. “Bottom-up” study of in-use nickel stocks in New Haven, CT. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2007, 50(1): 58–70 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.05.009
14	Guo X, Zhong J, Song Y, Tian Q. Substance flow analysis of zinc in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2010, 54(3): 171–177 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.07.013
15	Ma H, Matsubae K, Nakajima K, Tsai M S, Shao K H, Chen P C, Lee C H, Nagasaka T. Substance flow analysis of zinc cycle and current status of electric arc furnace dust management for zinc recovery in Taiwan. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2011, 56(1): 134–140 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.08.005
16	Guo X Y, Song Y. Substance flow analysis of copper in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2008, 52(6): 874–882 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2007.10.003
17	Jeong Y, Matsubae-Yokoyama K, Kubo H, Pak J, Nagasaka T. Substance flow analysis of phosphorus and manganese correlated with South Korean steel industry. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2009, 53(9): 479–489 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.04.002
18	Chen W, Shi L, Qian Y. Substance flow analysis of aluminum in mainland China for 2001, 2004 and 2007: Exploring its initial sources, eventual sinks and the pathways linking them. Resources, Conservation and Recycling , 2010, 54(9): 557–570 doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.10.013
19	Timmermans V, van Holderbeke V. Practical experiences on applying substance flow analysis in Flanders: bookkeeping and static modeling of chromium. Journal of Cleaner Production , 2004, 12(8-10): 935–945 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2004.02.035
20	Chen P C, Su H J, Ma H W. Trace anthropogenic arsenic in Taiwan-substance flow analysis as a tool for environmental risk management. Journal of Cleaner Production (in press)
21	Saikku L, Antikainen R, Kauppi P E. Nitrogen and phosphorus in the Finnish energy system, 1900-2003. Journal of Industrial Ecology , 2007, 11(1): 103–119 doi: 10.1162/jiec.2007.1116
22	Rechberger H, Brunner P H. A new, entropy based method to support waste and resource management decisions. Environmental Science & Technology , 2002, 36(4): 809–816 doi: 10.1021/es010030h pmid:11878401
23	Chèvre N, Guignard C, Rossi L, Pfeifer H R, Bader H P, Scheidegger R. Substance flow analysis as a tool for urban water management. Water Sci Technol , 2011, 63(7): 1341–1348 doi: 10.2166/wst.2011.132 pmid:21508535
24	Benedetti L, Dirckx G, Bixio D, Thoeye C, Vanrolleghem P A. Substance flow analysis of the wastewater collection and treatment system. Urban Water Journal , 2006, 3(1): 33–42 doi: 10.1080/15730620600578694
25	Dong X, Chen J N, Zeng S Y, Du P F. Comparison of urban wastewater system based on substance flow analysis. Water & Wastewater Engineering , 2011, 37(1): 137–142 (in Chinese)
26	Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development. P.R. China. China Urban Construction Statistical Yearbook 2010. Beijing: China Planning Press, 2010 (in Chinese)
27	Zeeman G, Kujawa-Roeleveld K. Resource recovery from source separated domestic waste(water) streams; full scale results. Water Sci Technol , 2011, 64(10): 1987–1992 doi: 10.2166/wst.2011.562 pmid:22105119
28	Udert K M, W?chter M. Complete nutrient recovery from source-separated urine by nitrification and distillation. Water Research , 2012, 46(2): 453–464 doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.11.020 pmid:22119369
29	Che W, Ou L, Wang H, Li J. The quality and major influential factors of runoff in Beijing urban area. Techniques and Equipment for Environmental Pollution Control , 2002, 3(1): 33–37 (in Chinese)
30	Huang G R, Nie T F. Characteristics and load of non-point source pollution of urban rainfall runoff in Guangzhou, China. Journal of South China University of Technology , 2012, 40(2): 142–148
31	China Association of Water & Wastewater Professional Committee of Urban Drainage. China Wastewater Treatment Plants Compilation 2006 (in Chinese)

[1]	Xin Dong, Senchen Huang, Siyu Zeng. Design and evaluation of control strategies in urban drainage systems in Kunming city[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2017, 11(4): 13-.
[2]	Hua GUO,Tianzhu ZHANG. Sinks of steel in China–addition to in-use stock, export and loss[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2016, 10(1): 141-149.
[3]	Lin ZENG,Xin DONG,Siyu ZENG,Tianzhu ZHANG,Jing LI,Jining CHEN. Post-evaluation of a water pollution control plan: methodology and case study[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(4): 712-724.
[4]	Wei MENG, . System engineering for water pollution control at the watershed level in China[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2009, 3(4): 443-452.
[5]	DONG Xin, ZENG Siyu, CHEN Jining, ZHAO Dongquan. An integrated assessment method of urban drainage system: A case study in Shenzhen City, China[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2008, 2(2): 150-156.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed