Sewage Treatment in Campus for Recycling Purpose: A Review
235
unfiltered) effluent from the Richmond sewage treatment plant (STP) for irrigation.
Currently, lawns, sports fields, fruit orchards, vegetable beds and pasture for horses,
deer, sheep, and dairy cattle are irrigated with this valuable resource (Attwater et al.
2006). While this long-term usage of recycle water has been without recorded health
incident, in late 2002, analytical laboratory reports from the STP suggested deterioration in microbial quality of the effluent being supplied to the campus (Derry et al.
2006).
Furthermore, the irrigation of marigold plants using treated sewage from VIT
college have shown that the growth parameters of all marigold plants were better as
compared to the control plant, but chlorinated water irrigated plant was having an
adverse effect on leaf surface area and chlorophyll content and also did not show
much difference in their growth patterns with the control sample (Kumar et al. 2008).
A study conducted by Shakir et al. (2017) also indicated a slight to moderate degree
of restriction on the use of this treated wastewater in irrigation due to the chloride
hazard. Also, residual sodium carbonate (RSC) value is more than 1.25 at all seasons,
indicating that samples in summer and autumn are doubtful for irrigation purposes,
while the samples in spring and winter are unsuitable for irrigation.
Although pathogen transfer is generally considered the most pressing concern,
it is nonetheless important to ensure that the lack of information regarding chemical pollutant dynamics of greywater does not lead to the prevalence of suboptimal
treatment trains or inappropriate reuse practices (Revitt et al. 2011). This is currently
being brought into focus with the development of national standards and codes of
practice for both greywater treatment and specific reuse applications (e.g., in the UK
and Australia). There are a few knowledge gaps related to the potential effects of
reusing wastewater such as degradation mechanisms and transformation products of
the contaminants, possibilities of pharmaceutical residues reaching humans through
biomagnification in the food chain and better detection as well as source tracking for
resistant pathogens (Fatta-Kassinos et al. 2011).
Nevertheless, the risk of using recycled water from sewage or municipal wastewater to environmental and health aspects can be reduced by using tertiary treatment.
The LCA done by Licciardello et al. (2018) proven that the cost of treating the municipal wastewater using two extensive tertiary treatment is just the same and can be
compensated by recycling the wastewater for vegetable crop irrigation, especially
for rural areas in developing countries.
6 Conclusion and Future Remarks
Sewage characteristics, ways to treat sewage, acceptable criteria for sewage recycle,
and ways to reuse the treated sewage in campus have been reviewed in this paper.
The process will not require high cost and complications since the level of contaminants in campus sewage is rather low and safe for reuse purposes. Low-cost methods
such as bioaugmentation, phytoremediation, and wetland should be introduced to the
university authorities to treat sewage. Based on the review, bioaugmentation method
235
unfiltered) effluent from the Richmond sewage treatment plant (STP) for irrigation.
Currently, lawns, sports fields, fruit orchards, vegetable beds and pasture for horses,
deer, sheep, and dairy cattle are irrigated with this valuable resource (Attwater et al.
2006). While this long-term usage of recycle water has been without recorded health
incident, in late 2002, analytical laboratory reports from the STP suggested deterioration in microbial quality of the effluent being supplied to the campus (Derry et al.
2006).
Furthermore, the irrigation of marigold plants using treated sewage from VIT
college have shown that the growth parameters of all marigold plants were better as
compared to the control plant, but chlorinated water irrigated plant was having an
adverse effect on leaf surface area and chlorophyll content and also did not show
much difference in their growth patterns with the control sample (Kumar et al. 2008).
A study conducted by Shakir et al. (2017) also indicated a slight to moderate degree
of restriction on the use of this treated wastewater in irrigation due to the chloride
hazard. Also, residual sodium carbonate (RSC) value is more than 1.25 at all seasons,
indicating that samples in summer and autumn are doubtful for irrigation purposes,
while the samples in spring and winter are unsuitable for irrigation.
Although pathogen transfer is generally considered the most pressing concern,
it is nonetheless important to ensure that the lack of information regarding chemical pollutant dynamics of greywater does not lead to the prevalence of suboptimal
treatment trains or inappropriate reuse practices (Revitt et al. 2011). This is currently
being brought into focus with the development of national standards and codes of
practice for both greywater treatment and specific reuse applications (e.g., in the UK
and Australia). There are a few knowledge gaps related to the potential effects of
reusing wastewater such as degradation mechanisms and transformation products of
the contaminants, possibilities of pharmaceutical residues reaching humans through
biomagnification in the food chain and better detection as well as source tracking for
resistant pathogens (Fatta-Kassinos et al. 2011).
Nevertheless, the risk of using recycled water from sewage or municipal wastewater to environmental and health aspects can be reduced by using tertiary treatment.
The LCA done by Licciardello et al. (2018) proven that the cost of treating the municipal wastewater using two extensive tertiary treatment is just the same and can be
compensated by recycling the wastewater for vegetable crop irrigation, especially
for rural areas in developing countries.
6 Conclusion and Future Remarks
Sewage characteristics, ways to treat sewage, acceptable criteria for sewage recycle,
and ways to reuse the treated sewage in campus have been reviewed in this paper.
The process will not require high cost and complications since the level of contaminants in campus sewage is rather low and safe for reuse purposes. Low-cost methods
such as bioaugmentation, phytoremediation, and wetland should be introduced to the
university authorities to treat sewage. Based on the review, bioaugmentation method