Case study:Segura's River Bioremediation: Difference between revisions

From RESTORE
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 18: Line 18:
Over the years, river mud has been accumulated causing problems both in wildlife’s habitat and in surrounding population because of the river flow reduction and the bad odor generated by the river mud, respectively.
Over the years, river mud has been accumulated causing problems both in wildlife’s habitat and in surrounding population because of the river flow reduction and the bad odor generated by the river mud, respectively.
This project has used bioremediation in order to reduce organic component of the river mud and, therefore to reduce the mud odor. Due to bioremediation, the dredging of the river has not caused odor problems to the population
This project has used bioremediation in order to reduce organic component of the river mud and, therefore to reduce the mud odor. Due to bioremediation, the dredging of the river has not caused odor problems to the population
}}
}}
{{Image gallery}}
{{Image gallery}}
Line 36: Line 35:
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle button}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Toggle content start}}
{{Case study subcatchment
{{Case study subcatchment}}
|Subcatchment=segura
{{Site}}
}}
{{Project background}}
{{Site
|Name=Murcia
|Heavily modified water body=No
|Protected species present=No
|Invasive species present=No
}}
{{Project background
|Works and supervision Lead organisation=BIOPULCHER S.L.
}}
{{Motivations}}
{{Motivations}}
{{Measures}}
{{Measures}}

Revision as of 14:25, 11 November 2015

This case study is pending approval by a RiverWiki administrator.

Approve case study

 

0.00
(0 votes)


To discuss or comment on this case study, please use the discussion page.


Location: 37° 58' 43.88" N, 1° 8' 14.00" W
Loading map...
Left click to look around in the map, and use the wheel of your mouse to zoom in and out.


Project overview

Edit project overview
Status Complete
Project web site
Themes Environmental flows and water resources, Hydromorphology, Social benefits
Country Spain
Main contact forename Cristina
Main contact surname Oliveras
Main contact user ID User:coliveras
Contact organisation BIOPULCHER S.L.
Contact organisation web site http://www.biopulcher.com
Partner organisations
Parent multi-site project
This is a parent project
encompassing the following
projects
No
This case study hasn’t got a picture, you can add one by editing the project overview.

Project summary

Edit project overview to modify the project summary.


The goal of the project was de environmental recovery of Segura River in Murcia, Spain. Over the years, river mud has been accumulated causing problems both in wildlife’s habitat and in surrounding population because of the river flow reduction and the bad odor generated by the river mud, respectively. This project has used bioremediation in order to reduce organic component of the river mud and, therefore to reduce the mud odor. Due to bioremediation, the dredging of the river has not caused odor problems to the population

Monitoring surveys and results

This case study hasn’t got any Monitoring survey and results, you can add some by editing the project overview.

Lessons learnt

This case study hasn’t got any lessons learnt, you can add some by editing the project overview.


Image gallery


Brick application system into the river mud
Once into the river, bacteria released from the brick will start their bioremediation action
Bioremediation bricks where bacterial inocula is retained since its disposal into the river
ShowHideAdditionalImage.png


Catchment and subcatchment



Site

Name
WFD water body codes
WFD (national) typology
WFD water body name
Pre-project morphology
Reference morphology
Desired post project morphology
Heavily modified water body
National/international site designation
Local/regional site designations
Protected species present
Invasive species present
Species of interest
Dominant hydrology
Dominant substrate
River corridor land use
Average bankfull channel width category
Average bankfull channel width (m)
Average bankfull channel depth category
Average bankfull channel depth (m)
Mean discharge category
Mean annual discharge (m3/s)
Average channel gradient category
Average channel gradient
Average unit stream power (W/m2)


Project background

Reach length directly affected (m)
Project started
Works started
Works completed
Project completed
Total cost category
Total cost (k€)
Benefit to cost ratio
Funding sources

Cost for project phases

Phase cost category cost exact (k€) Lead organisation Contact forename Contact surname
Investigation and design
Stakeholder engagement and communication
Works and works supervision
Post-project management and maintenance
Monitoring



Reasons for river restoration

Mitigation of a pressure
Hydromorphology
Biology
Physico-chemical
Other reasons for the project


Measures

Structural measures
Bank/bed modifications
Floodplain / River corridor
Planform / Channel pattern
Other
Non-structural measures
Management interventions
Social measures (incl. engagement)
Other


Monitoring

Hydromorphological quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Biological quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Physico-chemical quality elements

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative

Any other monitoring, e.g. social, economic

Element When monitored Type of monitoring Control site used Result
Before measures After measures Qualitative Quantitative


Monitoring documents



Additional documents and videos


Additional links and references

Link Description

Supplementary Information

Edit Supplementary Information