Changes

While few field studies of the pollutant removal capacity of bioswales are available from cold climate regions like Ontario, it can be assumed that they would perform similar to [[bioretention cells]].

While few field studies of the pollutant removal capacity of bioswales are available from cold climate regions like Ontario, it can be assumed that they would perform similar to [[bioretention cells]].

Bioretention provides effective removal for many pollutants as a result of sedimentation, filtering, plant uptake, soil adsorption, and microbial processes. It is important to note that there is a relationship between the water balance and water quality functions.

Bioretention provides effective removal for many pollutants as a result of sedimentation, filtering, plant uptake, soil adsorption, and microbial processes. It is important to note that there is a relationship between the water balance and water quality functions.

If a bioswale infiltrates and evaporates 100% of the flow from a site, then there is essentially no pollution leaving the site in surface runoff.  Furthermore, treatment of infiltrated runoff will continue to occur as it moves through the native soils. </p>

If a bioswale infiltrates and evaporates 100% of the flow from a site, then there is essentially no pollution leaving the site in surface runoff.  Furthermore, treatment of infiltrated runoff will continue to occur as it moves through the native soils.  

{|class="wikitable" style="background: none; border; 2px solid orange;"

{|class="wikitable"

|-

|-

!Design

!Design

!Runoff reduction

!Runoff reduction

|-

|-

|No underdrain||Washington||>98 %

|No underdrain||Washington<ref>Horner RR, Lim H, Burges SJ. HYDROLOGIC MONITORING OF THE SEATTLE ULTRA-URBAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PROJECTS: SUMMARY OF THE 2000-2003 WATER YEARS. Seattle; 2004. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.365.8665&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Accessed August 11, 2017.</ref>||>98 %

|-

|-

|No underdrain||United Kingdom||>94 %

|No underdrain||United Kingdom||>94 %

|-

|-

|With underdrain||Maryland||46 - 54 %

|With underdrain||Maryland<ref>https://www.pca.state.mn.us/sites/default/files/p-gen3-14g.pdf</ref>||46 - 54 %

|-  

|-  

|colspan="2"|<strong>Runoff reduction estimate</strong>||<strong>85 %</strong>

|colspan="2"|<strong>Runoff reduction estimate</strong>||<strong>85 %</strong>

|}

|}