Environmental Monitoring and Assessment

, Volume 185, Issue 12, pp 10377–10393 | Cite as

Changes in water quality in agricultural catchments after deployment of wastewater treatment plant

  • Jakub Langhammer
  • Sylva Rödlová


Insufficient wastewater remediation in small communities and nonpoint source pollution are the key factors in determining the water quality of small streams in an agricultural landscape. Despite the current extensive construction of municipal wastewater treatment facilities in small communities, the level of organic substances and nutrients in the recipient catchments has not decreased in many areas. This paper analyzes the changes in the water quality of the small streams after the deployment of wastewater treatment plants that were designed to address sources of pollution from small municipalities. The analysis is based on the results from a water quality monitoring network in the small watersheds in the Czech Republic. Five rural catchments with one dominant municipal pollution source, where a wastewater treatment plant was deployed during the monitoring period, were selected according to a predefined set of criteria, from a series of 317 profiles. Basic water quality indicators were selected for the assessment: O2, BOD-5, COD, TOC, conductivity, NH4-N, NO2-N, NO3-N, PT, and PO4-P. Results of the analysis showed that the simple deployment of the water treatment facilities at these streams often did not lead to a reduction of contamination in the streams. The expected post-deployment changes, namely, a significant and permanent reduction of stream contamination, occurred only in one catchment, whereas in the remainder of the catchments, only marginal changes or even increased concentrations of the contaminants were detected. As the critical factors that determined the efficiency of wastewater treatment were studied, the need for the consideration of the local conditions during the design of the facility, particularly regarding the size of the catchments, initial level of contamination, proper system of operation, and process optimization of the treatment facility, emerged as the important factor.


Small catchment Water quality Pollution Wastewater treatment plant Organic pollution Nutrients 



The research presented in this paper was supported by Charles University in Prague Research Center UNCE 204003/2012 and by Research Program PRVOUK P43 with the support of Research Plan MSM 0021620831 (“Geographic Systems and Risk Processes in the context of global changes and European integration”).


  1. Alamets, K., Bicanová, M., Judová, P., Pärnamets, H., Ronczyk, L., & Rödlová, S. (2004). Water quality changes and its trends in the Czech Republic. Geografie, 109(2), 181–8.Google Scholar
  2. ARBA. (2011). Monitoring of water quality on small streams database. Prague: Agricultural River Basin Authority.Google Scholar
  3. Barjenbruch, M., & Exner, E. (2012). Comparative study of small wastewater treatment technologies under special operation conditions—COMPAS. Desalination and Water Treatment, 39(1–3), 278–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benedetti, L., Dirckx, G., Bixio, D., Thoeye, C., & Vanrolleghem, P. A. (2008). Environmental and economic performance assessment of the integrated urban wastewater system. Journal of Environmental Management, 88(4), 1262–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Behrendt, H., Kornmilch, M., Opitz, D., Schmoll, O., & Scholz, G. (2002). Estimation of the nutrient inputs into river systems—experiences from German rivers. Regional Environmental Change, 3(1–3), 107–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boller, M. (1997). Small wastewater treatment plants—a challenge to wastewater engineers. Water Science and Technology, 35(6), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bradley, B., Daigger, G., Rubin, R., & Tchobanoglous, G. (2002). Evaluation of onsite wastewater treatment technologies using sustainable development criteria. Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, 4, 87–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brion, N., Billen, G., Guézennec, L., & Ficht, A. (2000). Distribution of nitrifying activity in the Seine River (France) from Paris to the estuary. Estuaries and Coasts, 23(5), 669–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. CHMI (2012). Arrow—surface water quality monitoring database. Czech Hydrometeorological Institute. Accessed 25 Jul 2012
  10. CSO (2012). Czech Statistical Office—public database. Accessed 10 Aug 2012
  11. De Wit, M., & Behrendt, H. (1999). Nitrogen and phosphorus emissions from soil to surface water in the rhine and elbe basins. Water Science and Technology, 39(1), 109–16.Google Scholar
  12. EC (2000). Directive 2000/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for community action in the field of water policy. Official Journal of the European Communities 22(12), 2000.Google Scholar
  13. EEA. (1998). Oxygen demand at river stations by river size and catchment type. Distribution (vol. 5, pp. 1–16). EEA: Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  14. EEA (2001). Nitrogen and phosphorus in river stations by river size and catchment type. Accessed 21 Jun 2012
  15. EEA (2012). CORINE landcover database. Accessed 2 Jun 2012
  16. Finnegan, C. J., Van Egmond, R. A., Price, O. R., & Whelan, M. J. (2009). Continuous-flow laboratory simulation of stream water quality changes downstream of an untreated wastewater discharge. Water Research, 43(7), 1993–2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fučík, P., Lexa, M., & Novák, P. (2008). Assessing the stream water quality dynamics in connection with land use in agricultural catchments of different scales. Soil and Water, 2008(3), 98–112.Google Scholar
  18. Garcia, J., Mujeriego, R., Obis, J. M., & Bou, J. (2001). Wastewater treatment for small communities in Catalonia (Mediterranean region). Water Policy, 3(4), 341–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gašpariková, E., Kapusta, Š., Bodίk, I., Derco, J., & Kratochvíl, K. (2005). Evaluation of anaerobic-aerobic wastewater treatment plant operations. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 14(1), 29–34.Google Scholar
  20. Haggard, B. E., Storm, D. E., & Stanley, E. H. (2001). Effect of a point source input on stream nutrient retention. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 37(5), 1291–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hering, D., Borja, A., Carstensen, J., Carvalho, L., Elliott, M., Feld, C. K., et al. (2010). The European Water Framework Directive at the age of 10: a critical review of the achievements with recommendations for the future. Science of the Total Environment, 408(19), 4007–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Judová, P., & Janský, B. (2005). Water quality in rural areas of the Czech Republic: key study Slapanka River catchment. Limnologica, 35(3), 160–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knauer, N., & Mander, Ü. (1989). Untersuchungen über die Filterwirkung verschiedener Saumbiotope an Gewässern in Schleswig-Holstein. 1. Mitteilung: Filterung von Stickstoffund Phosphor. Zeitschrift füer Kulturtechnik und Landentwicklung, 30, 365–76.Google Scholar
  24. Langhammer, J. (2010). Water quality changes in the Elbe River basin, Czech Republic, in the context of the post-socialist economic transition. GeoJournal, 75(2), 185–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Langhammer, J., Hartvich, F., Mattas, D., Rödlová, S., & Zbořil, A. (2012). The variability of surface water quality indicators in relation to watercourse typology, Czech Republic. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 184(6), 3983–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Line, D. E. (2013). Effect of development on water quality for seven streams in North Carolina. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. doi: 10.1007/s10661-012-3024-z.Google Scholar
  27. Liu, W. B., & Chen, D. M. (2009). Spatial impact of organic matters from point sources on stream water quality. Mining Science and Technology (China), 19(2), 256–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Marti, E., Aumatell, J., Godé, L., Poch, M., & Sabater, F. (2004). Nutrient retention efficiency in streams receiving inputs from wastewater treatment plants. Journal of Environmental Quality, 33(1), 285–93.Google Scholar
  29. Massoud, M. A., Tareen, J., Tarhini, A., Nasr, J., & Jurdi, M. (2010). Effectiveness of wastewater management in rural areas of developing countries: a case of Al-Chouf Caza in Lebanon. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 161(1–4), 61–69.Google Scholar
  30. Meloun, M., & Militky, J. (2011). Statistical data analysis: a practical guide (p. 800). Sawston: Woodhead Publishing, Limited.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Merseburger, G. C., Martí, E., & Sabater, F. (2005). Net changes in nutrient concentrations below a point source input in two streams draining catchments with contrasting land uses. Science of the Total Environment, 347, 217–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Oliveira, S. C., & Von Sperling, M. (2008). Reliability analysis of wastewater treatment plants. Water Research, 42(4), 1182–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. OPE (2012). The Operational Programme “Environment”, Czech Republic. A guide to grants under the Operational Programme “Environment”. Accessed 11 May 2012
  34. Peterson, B. J., Wollheim, W. M., Mulholland, P. J., Webster, J. R., Meyer, J. L., Tank, J. L., et al. (2001). Control of nitrogen export from watersheds by head water streams. Science, 292(5514), 86–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pitter, P. (1999). Hydrochemie. VŠCHT, Praha. 568 pp. [Hydrochemistry, in Czech]Google Scholar
  36. Rödlová, S. (2006). Surface water quality in small catchment areas after the construction of wastewater treatment plants. Publicationes Instituti Geographica Universitatis Tartuensis, 101(1), 106–12.Google Scholar
  37. Sharpley, A. N., Rekolainen, S., Tunney, H., Carton, O. T., Brookes, P. C., Johnston, A. E. (1997). Phosphorus in agriculture and its environmental implications. Phosphorus loss from soil to water. Proceedings of a workshop, Wexford, Irish Republic, 29–31 September 1995. (pp. 1–53). Cab International.Google Scholar
  38. Siegl, A., Bruch, I., Mühl, M. (1997). Gestaltung von Abwasserbehandlungsanlagen im ländlichen Raum: unter besonderer Berücksichtigung landschaftsökologischer Gesichtspunkte und der Erstellung von Planungs-, Bewertungs- und Entscheidungshilfen. Länderarbeitsgemeinschaft Wasser (LAWA). Abschlußbericht Projekt A (vol. 5, p. 155). Saarbrücken: Ministerium für Umwelt, Energie und Verkehr des Saarlandes.Google Scholar
  39. Sojka, J. (2004). Malé čistírny odpadních vod. Brno: ERA. 98 pp. [Small wastewater treatment plants, in Czech]Google Scholar
  40. Soo, S. S. T., Toh, E. L., Yap, K. K. K., Ng, D. K. S., & Foo, D. C. Y. (2013). Synthesis of distributed wastewater treatment networks for one- and two-contaminant systems. Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 91, 106–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sýkora, L., & Ouředníček, M. (2007). Sprawling post-communist metropolis: commercial and residential suburbanization in Prague and Brno, the Czech Republic. In E. Razin, M. Dijst, & C. Vazquez (Eds.), Employment deconcentration in European metropolitan areas market forces versus planning regulations (Vol. 91, pp. 209–233). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Thyssen, N. (2001). Rivers in the European Union: water quality, status and trends. River restoration in Europe. In: H.J. Nijland & M.J.R. Cals (Eds.) Practical approaches, conference on river restoration—proceedings (pp. 66–71). Wageningen, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  43. Wagner, I., & Zalewski, M. (2009). Ecohydrology as a basis for the sustainable city strategic planning: focus on Lodz, Poland. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, 8(3), 209–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang, Y. P., & Smith, R. (1994). Design of distributed effluent treatment systems. Chemical Engineering Science, 49, 3127–45. doi: 10.1016/0009-2509(94)E0126-B.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. WRI (2012). HEIS—Hydroecological Information System, Water Research Institute, Prague. Accessed 18 Jun 2012

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Science, Department of Physical Geography and GeoecologyCharles University in PraguePrague 2Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations