Life-cycle cost analysis and effectiveness comparison between catch basin inlet screens and a floating trash trap for municipal solid removal from stormwater

1Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The impetus behind this research project was to investigate the effectiveness of trash removal devices with respect to the "Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) of Trash for the Anacostia River Watershed, Montgomery and Prince Georges counties, Maryland and the District of Columbia". Trash is a relatively new pollutant of concern in the world of stormwater best management practices, and this is the first trash TMDL that will be applied to an interstate watershed. The three trash removal techniques evaluated were: a Banda long trash trap installed by Stormwater Systems, an inlet screen manufactured by Trident Solutions, and a simple inlet screen designed by Dr Charles Glass. The Trident screens collected 408 lbs of trash at a material cost of $1,109. Over the course of this project the Bandalong collected 6,405 lbs of trash with an installation cost of $56,170. The screen designed by Dr Glass had a materials cost of $644 and collected 1,109 lbs of trash. The cost of trash removed during the project life by the three devices were $0.58/lb, $8.77/lb, and $17.06/lb for the Glass design, Bandalong, and Trident screen, respectively. Trident screens designed to cover the entire throat would have been as effective as the Glass design, however they would remain more expensive. The Bandalong had the lowest cost per pound per catch basin when considering that it was effectively removing trash from approximately 759 catch basins in the District and an undetermined number of catch basins in Prince Georges County, MD. © 2012 WIT Press.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Glass, C. C., & Holloway, E. (2011). Life-cycle cost analysis and effectiveness comparison between catch basin inlet screens and a floating trash trap for municipal solid removal from stormwater. In WIT Transactions on the Built Environment (Vol. 122, pp. 137–148). https://doi.org/10.2495/UW120131

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free