SWS 2015 European Chapter Meeting

Wetlands – indicators of the changing environment

Treatment wetlands for sustainablesanitation in Central and Eastern

EuropeGriessler Bulc Tjašaa, Muller Richardb, Istenič Darjaa

aUniversity of Ljubljana, Faculty for Health Sciences, SloveniabGlobal Water Partnership Central and Eastern Europe

Bled, 10. – 13. 05. 2015

The Global Water Partnership (GWP) is a dynamic, not-for-profit action network with over 3,000 Partner organisations in 172 countries around the world. The network has 85 Country Water Partnerships and 13 Regional Water Partnerships.

1. Introduction: GWP and sustainable sanitation

• GWP CEE Sustainable sanitation task force

• Increased interest in low-cost on site wastewater treatment systems

• Survey the actual situation in treatment wetlands • Political, technical and legislation aspect

• Preparation of expert book on nature based technologies

• Practical information on requirements, operation and maintenance

• Learning tool

1. Introduction: Central and Eastern Europe

• območju• 12 countries• Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania,

Moldova, Poland, Romania, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Ukraine

• 30% of population lives in settlements with less than 2000 inhabitants– This is >42 million people!

– Only 9% connected to WWTP

2. Materials and methods: TW database and monitoring

• območju• Questionnaire for sanitation experts from all CEEcountries

• 1 person per country (from NGOs, Universities, private companies)

• The questions included:• Geographical information of the country

• Wastewater management in communities with <2000 PE

• TW presence and status

• Policy and legal aspects of TW

• Obstacles and barriers for implementation

• Answers were processed and additional explanations were claimed if needed.

3. Results: TW application

• območju• Answers were received from 9 out of 12 countries

• No answers from Poland, Lithuania, Moldova

• Countries with long-term good experience• Czech Republic, Slovenia

• Countries with bad, limited or no experience• Slovakia, Ukraine, Romania and Bulgaria

• Geographical, demographical and economic conditions are suitable

• Legislation not always favourable

3. Results: TW application

Nr of small*WWTP

Nr of TW % TW Guidelines/ standards

Bulgaria 57 5 9 No

Czech Republic 1550 690 45 Yes

Estonia 826 14 2 Yes

Hungary 270 10 4 Yes

Latvia 1020 10 1 No

Romania 82 0 0 No

Slovakia 382 5 1 Yes

Slovenia 190 80 42 No

Ukraine n.a. 65 / No

Average/total 4377 897 20%

*capacity <2000 PE

3. Results: Legislation limits

BG CZ EST H LA RO SK SLO UA

mg/L

<2000 PE BOD5 / 30/60 15 50 50-70% 20 30/60 30 15

COD / 125/180 125 200 50-70% 125 135/170 150 80

SS / 40/70 25 75 <35 60 30/60 / 15

NH4-N / 20/40 / 4 / 15 / / 0.39

TP / / 1.5 4 / 2 / / /

<500 PE BOD5 / 40/80 15 80A

pp

rop

riatetreatm

ent

/ 30/60 30 15

COD / 150/220 125 300 / 135/170 150 80

SS / 50/80 25 100 / 30/60 / 15

NH4-N / / / 4 / / / 0.39

TP / / 1.5 4 / / / /

<50 PE BOD5 / / / / / / 40/70 30 15

COD / / / / / / / 150 80

SS / / / / / / / / 15

NH4-N / / / / / / / / 0.39

TP / / / / / / / / /

3. Results: Knowledge foundation

• območju

Figure: Number of scientific papers at Science Direct database published by countries according to keywords. Data from 1991 to 2012 are gathered.

3. Results: Main barriers

• območju• Unawareness• National and local authorities

• Local communities

• Deficits in legislation• discharge limits,

• lack of programmes and plans for WW treatment in small settlements

• Negative experiences• Malfunctioning TW (CZ, SK, H)

3. Results: Additional barriers

• območju• Land limitations• Competition with agricultural land

• Hilly and mountainous area

• Natural characteristics• Severe winters and cold summers in Estonia and

highlands of Romania

• High groundwater levels

• Institutional barriers

• Market barriers

3. Results: Solutions

• Promotion of TW• Low-cost on-site solutions

• Beneficial effect on economic, environmental and social wellbeing

• Special importance in rural areas

– Integration in water and nutrient needs in agriculture

• Expert book on nature based technologies• Learning tool for expert communities

• Translation to CEE languages

• Workshops for different levels of stakeholders• Ministries, local communities etc.

• Exchange of knowledge and good practices

4. Conclusions

• območju• Awareness rising at institutional and administrative level

• Transfer of knowledge from expert to practice

• Improvement of legislation

• Demonstration of good examples

• More effective systems with less surface demand (VF)

Thank you for attention!Thank you for attention!