4.4 Article

Municipal wastewater treatment in Mexico: current status and opportunities for employing ecological treatment systems

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY
卷 33, 期 10, 页码 1151-1158

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/09593330.2011.610364

关键词

municipal wastewater; Mexico; ecological treatment systems; constructed wetlands; waste stabilization ponds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this paper is to evaluate the current status of municipal wastewater (MWW) treatment in Mexico, as well as to assess opportunities for using ecological treatment systems, such as constructed wetlands. In 2008, Mexico had 2101 MWW treatment plants that treated only 84 m(3)/s of wastewater (208 m(3)/s of MWW were collected in sewer systems). Unfortunately, most treatment plants operate below capacity owing to a lack of maintenance and paucity of properly trained personnel. The main types of treatment systems applied in Mexico are activated sludge and waste stabilization ponds, which treat 44.3% and 18% of the MWW collected, respectively. As in many other developing nations around the world, there is a great need in Mexico for low-cost, low-maintenance wastewater treatment systems that are both economically and environmentally sustainable. In 2005, 24.3 million Mexicans lived in villages of less than 2500 inhabitants and 14.1 million lived in towns with 2500-15,000 inhabitants. An opportunity exists to extend the use of ecological treatment systems to these low population density areas and considerably increase the percentage of MWW that is treated in Mexico. Small-scale and medium-size constructed wetlands have been built successfully in some states, primarily during the past five years. Several barriers need to be overcome to increase the adoption and utilization of ecological wastewater technology in Mexico, including: a lack of knowledge about this technology, scarce technical information in Spanish, and the government's concentration on constructing MWW treatment plants solely in urban areas.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据