Cover
Dedication
List of Contributors
1 Insights and Issues into the Impacts of Urban Pollution
1. 1.1 Introduction
2. 1.2 Examples of Urban Pollution
3. 1.3 Structure of This Book
4. 1.4 Conclusions
5. References
2 Historical Urban Pollution
1. 2.1 Introduction
2. 2.2 Historical Pollution Monitoring using Environmental Archives
3. 2.3 Ancient Air Pollution
4. 2.4 Industrial Revolution
5. 2.5 Twentieth‐Century Urban Pollution
6. 2.6 Industrial Emissions
7. 2.7 Transport
8. 2.8 Conclusions
9. References
3 Evolution of Air Quality Policy and Management in Urban Areas
1. 3.1 Introduction
2. 3.2 Sources of Urban Air Pollution
3. 3.3 Health Implications of Urban Air Pollution
4. 3.4 Historical Context of Air Quality Policy and Management
5. 3.5 Future Urban Challenges
6. 3.6 Conclusions
7. References
4 UK and EU Water Policy as an Instrument of Urban Pollution
1. Acronyms used in This Chapter
2. 4.1 Introduction
3. 4.2 Determining Water Quality
4. 4.3 UK Water Policy
5. 4.4 Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)
6. 4.5 European Policy
7. 4.6 The Future
8. 4.7 Conclusions
9. References
5 Soil Quality and Policy
1. 5.1 Introduction
2. 5.2 Soil Pollutants and Their Sources
3. 5.3 Consequences of Urban Soil Pollution
4. 5.4 Soils Legislation
5. 5.5 Conclusions
6. References
6 Ground Gases in Urban Environments – Sources and Solutions
1. 6.1 Introduction
2. 6.2 The Biochemistry of Ground Gas Production
3. 6.3 Ground Gas Monitoring and Risk Assessment
4. 6.5 Other Approaches
5. 6.6 Passive Barriers and Subfloor Ventilation
6. 6.7 Practical Examples of Gas Protection Details
7. 6.8 Pathway Interception Systems for Receptor Protection and Control of Historic Sources
8. 6.9 Examples of Other Techniques and Solutions: Biodegradation of Gaseous Pollutants
9. 6.10 Conclusion
10. References
7 Insights and Issues of Trace Elements Found in Street and Road Dusts
1. 7.1 Introduction
2. 7.2 Sources of Street and Road Dusts
3. 7.3 House Dust
4. 7.4 Urban Soil
5. 7.5 Urban Geochemical Cycles
6. 7.6 Conclusions
7. References
8 Bioaccessibility of Trace Elements in Urban Environments
1. 8.1 Introduction
2. 8.2 Analytical Protocols
3. 8.3 Bioaccessibility and Urban Environments
4. 8.4 Bioaccessibility and Human Health Risk Assessment
5. 8.5 Conclusions
6. References
9 The Necessity for Urban Wastewater Collection, Treatment, and Disposal
1. 9.1 Introduction
2. 9.2 Wastewater Collection in Developed Countries
3. 9.3 Wastewater Treatment and Disposal in Developed Countries
4. 9.4 Sludge Treatment and Disposal in Developed Countries
5. 9.5 WASH in Developing Countries
6. 9.6 Conclusions
7. References
10 Living Green Roofs
1. 10.1 Introduction
2. 10.2 Increasing Urbanisation: Urban Growth
3. 10.3 Increasing Urbanisation: Soil, Water, and Air Pollution
4. 10.4 Urban Heat Islands and Human Health
5. 10.5 Green Roof Options
6. 10.6 Case Study: University of Technology, Sydney, Food‐Producing Roof and Urban Pollution
7. 10.7 Conclusions and Next Steps
8. References
11 Light Pollution
1. 11.1 Introduction
2. 11.2 Environmental and Health Effects of Light Pollution
3. 11.3 How to Reduce Light Pollution
4. 11.4 The example of the Italian Regional Laws
5. 11.5 Conclusions
6. References
12 The Role of Forensic Science in the Investigation and Control of Urban Pollution
1. 12.1 Introduction
2. 12.2 Types of Urban Pollutants
3. 12.3 Stages in the Forensic Investigation of Urban Pollution
4. 12.4 Methods Used to Identify Sources of Pollutants
5. 12.5 Conclusions
6. References
13 River Ecology and Urban Pollution
1. 13.1 Introduction
2. 13.2 History of River Ecology Monitoring
3. 13.3 Success Stories
4. 13.4 Conclusions
5. References
14 Urban Meadows on Brownfield Land
1. 14.1 Introduction
2. 14.2 Creating Flower‐Rich Meadows
3. 14.3 Brownfield Soils for Meadow Creation
4. 14.4 Management of Created Meadows
5. 14.5 Opportunities for Urban Meadow Creation
6. 14.6 Conclusions
7. References
15 Urban Pollution and Ecosystem Services
1. 15.1 Introduction
2. 15.2 Ecosystem Services (ES), the Ecosystem Approach, and Ecosystem Service Valuation
3. 15.3 Urban Impacts on ES
4. 15.4 ES and Urban Pollution in the UK Legislative Context
5. 15.5 Enhancing Urban ES to Mitigate Urban Pollution
6. 15.6 Conclusions
7. References
16 Greywater Recycling and Reuse
1. 16.1 Introduction
2. 16.2 The Ubiquitous Nature of Pollutants in Wastewater from Baths, Showers, and Handbasins
3. 16.3 The Quality of Untreated Greywater and Its Water Resource Value
4. 16.4 Greywater Terminologies Used in this Chapter
5. 16.5 Pollutants in Untreated Greywater
6. 16.6 Standardising Greywater Treatment Systems: Removing and Minimising Pollutant Concentrations
7. 16.7 Managing the Environmental Characteristics, Applications, and Urban Uses of Treated Greywater
8. 16.8 University of Reading's 2016 Experimental Irrigation of Sedum using Treated Greywater
9. 16.9 Soil Results Evaluated during Irrigation using Greywater Constituents
10. 16.10 Applying the Principles of Controlled Waters to Greywater Discharges for Sustaining Green Infrastructure
11. 16.11 Concluding Comments and Review
12. Acknowledgements
13. References
17 Containment of Pollution from Urban Waste Disposal Sites
1. 17.1 Introduction
2. 17.2 Generation of Waste Worldwide
3. 17.3 Waste Management Issues
4. 17.4 Landfill Liners
5. 17.5 Conclusions
6. References
18 Mitigating Urban Pollution through Innovative Use of Construction Materials
1. 18.1 Introduction
2. 18.2 Recycled Materials
3. 18.3 Cement Replacement and Geopolymer‐Based Materials
4. 18.4 Innovative Ways of Using Waste Clay
5. 18.5 Treatment and Stabilisation of Contaminated Sites
6. 18.6 Incineration of Municipal Solid Waste
7. 18.7 Flue Gas Desulphurisation (FGD) Wastes
8. 18.8 Paper Industry Waste
9. 18.9 Shelled Compressed Earth
10. 18.10 Innovative Green Construction Materials
11. 18.11 Innovative Chemical Admixtures for Construction Materials
12. 18.12 Conclusions
13. References
19 Application of Zeolites to Environmental Remediation
1. 19.1 Introduction
2. 19.2 Heavy Metal Removal
3. 19.3 Pesticide Removal
4. 19.4 Zeolites Used in Transport
5. 19.5 Zeolites Used in Wastewater Treatment
6. 19.6 Zeolites Used in Nuclear Clean‐Up
7. 19.7 Zeolites in Organic Clean‐Up
8. 19.8 Zeolites used in Agriculture
9. 19.9 Zeolites as Slow Release Agents
10. 19.10 Zeolite Safety
11. 19.11 Conclusions
12. References
20 Bioremediation in Urban Pollution Mitigation: Theoretical Background and Applications to Groundwaters
1. 20.1 Introduction
2. 20.2 Essentials for Bioremediation
3. 20.3 Bioremediation of Groundwater
4. 20.4 In Situ Plume Treatment
5. 20.5 Electron Acceptor Management in Groundwater Bioremediation
6. 20.6 Oxygen Releasing Compounds
7. 20.7 Anaerobic Bioremediation of Groundwater
8. 20.8 Reductive Anaerobic Degradation
9. 20.9 PRBs and Bioremediation
10. 20.10 Reductive Biodegradation in Permeable Reactive Barriers (PRBs)
11. 20.11 Conclusion
12. References
21 Bioremediation in Urban Pollution Mitigation: Applications to Solid Media
1. 21.1 Introduction
2. 21.2 In Situ Treatment above the Water Table
3. 21.3 Enhanced In Situ Bioremediation
4. 21.4 Ex Situ Bioremediation in Unsaturated Strata
5. 21.5 Conclusion
6. References
22 Use of Environmental Management Systems to Mitigate Urban Pollution
1. 22.1 Introduction
2. 22.2 Why Is Environmental Management Important?
3. 22.3 Organisational Benefits and Barriers of Implementing an Environmental Management System (EMS)
4. 22.4 What can Companies do in Relation to their Environmental Impacts?
5. 22.5 What Happens when Things Go Wrong?
6. 22.6 Conclusions
7. References
23 Role of Citizen Science in Air Quality Monitoring
1. 23.1 Introduction
2. 23.2 Air Pollution in Urban Environments
3. 23.3 Citizen Science and New Advances in Air Quality Monitoring
4. 23.4 Citizen Science, Biomonitoring, and Plants
5. 23.5 Social Dimensions of Citizen Science Air Quality Monitoring
6. 23.6 Conclusions
7. References
24 Unique Environmental Regulatory Framework Streamlines Clean‐Up and Encourages Urban Redevelopment in Massachusetts, United States
1. 24.1 Introduction
2. 24.2 LSPs and the Privatised System
3. 24.3 The Risk‐Based Clean‐Up Programme
4. 24.4 Brownfield Redevelopment Incentives
5. 24.5 Case Studies
6. 24.6 Conclusions
7. References
25 Urban Pollution in China
1. 25.1 Introduction
2. 25.2 Urban Air Pollution in China
3. 25.3 Urban Land/Soil Pollution
4. 25.4 Municipal Waste Contamination in Urban China
5. 25.5 A Case Study of Urban Pollution in Beijing
6. 25.6 Conclusions
7. References
26 Urban Pollution in India
1. 26.1 Introduction
2. 26.2 Issues Related to Urban Pollution in India
3. 26.3 Pollution from Solid Waste and Wastewater in Indian Urban Areas
4. 26.4 Air Pollution in Urban Areas of India
5. 26.5 Water Pollution in Urban Areas of India
6. 26.7 Noise Pollution in Urban Areas of India
7. 26.8 Ways to Reduce Urban Pollution in India
8. 26.9 Conclusions
9. References
27 Urban Aquatic Pollution in Brazil
1. 27.1 Introduction
2. 27.2 Current Brazilian Environmental Regulations
3. 27.3 Ecological Risk Assessment Approaches in Brazil
4. 27.4 Environmental Studies in Brazil
5. 27.5 A Case Study of Curitiba, Paraná
6. 27.6 Conclusions
7. References
28 Potentially Toxic Metal‐Bearing Phases in Urban Dust and Suspended Particulate Matter: The Case of Budapest, Hungary
1. 28.1 Introduction
2. 28.2 Materials and Methods
3. 28.3 Results and Discussion
4. 28.4 Conclusions
5. References
29 The Role of Urban Planning in Sub‐Saharan Africa Urban Pollution Management
1. 29.1 Introduction
2. 29.2 Overview of Urban Pollution in Sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA)
3. 29.3 Urban Planning as a Panacea
4. 29.4 Lessons for SSA Urban Planning
5. References
30 Water Pollution and Urbanisation Trends in Lebanon: Litani River Basin Case Study
1. 30.1 Introduction
2. 30.2 Water Resources in Lebanon
3. 30.3 Urbanisation Trends
4. 30.4 Wastewater Management
5. 30.5 Water Quality
6. 30.6 The Case of the Litani River Basin
7. 30.7 Urbanisation and Water Pollution Trends
8. 30.8 Pollution Impact
9. 30.9 Current Management Efforts and Strategies
10. 30.10 Conclusions and Recommendations
11. References
31 Closing Comments on Urban Pollution
1. 31.1 Introduction
2. 31.2 The Future for Towns and Cities
3. Reference
Index
End User License Agreement

List of Tables

Chapter 01
1. Table 1.1 The world’s ten most polluted cities.
Chapter 02
1. Table 2.1 Atmospheric pollutants found in environmental archives.
2. Table 2.2 Description of persistent organic pollutants.
3. Table 2.3 Distances (billion passenger km) travelled by people in the United Kingdom in 1952 and 2007 by mode of transport, showing percentage of total (Office for National Statistics, 2010).
Chapter 03
1. Table 3.1 UK air quality objectives and EU limit and target values.
Chapter 04
1. Table 4.1 Definitions for different frameworks to regulate water policies.
2. Table 4.2 WFD status of UK waterbodies (Priestley, 2015).
3. Table 4.3 Regulation, regulators, and latest reported status of waterbodies in the United Kingdom.
4. Table 4.4 Examples of UK requirements for chemical parameters where the point of compliance is at consumers' taps.
5. Table 4.5 List I and List II substances as classified under the Groundwater Directive.
6. Table 4.6 Run‐off specific thresholds (RSTs) for short‐term exposure.
7. Table 4.7 Criteria for identifying the types of river to which the dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, and ammonia standards for rivers apply.
8. Table 4.8 Level of hazard (Defra, 2011).
9. Table 4.9 Minimum number of treatment stages for infiltration of drainage into groundwater (Defra, 2011).
10. Table 4.10 Minimum number of treatment stages of surface water (Defra, 2011).
11. Table 4.11 Guideline values for bacteriological monitoring (EA, 2010).
12. Table 4.12 Interpretation of results from bacteriological monitoring (EA, 2010).
13. Table 4.13 Guideline values for general system monitoring (EA, 2010).
14. Table 4.14 Interpretation of results from general system monitoring.^a)
15. Table 4.15 Environmental quality standards for Priority Substances and certain other pollutants (heavy metals used as examples).
16. Table 4.16 Examples of chemical parameters and their concentrations for the Drinking Water Directive.
17. Table 4.17 Groundwater Quality Standards according to the Groundwater Directive (2006/118/EC).
18. Table 4.18 Requirements for discharges from urban wastewater treatment plants subject to Articles 4 and 5 of the directive and sensitive areas subject to eutrophication. Concentration or % reduction.
Chapter 06
1. Table 6.1 Phases in landfill gas generation (after Crowhurst and Manchester, 1993).
Chapter 07
1. Table 7.1 Examples of enrichment of trace metals in street dusts reported worldwide.
Chapter 08
1. Table 8.1 Bioaccessibility values (%) reported for soil in urban playgrounds and urban gardens/orchards.
Chapter 09
1. Table 9.1 Typical biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) levels of various waterbodies.
2. Table 9.2 Typical water quality characteristics of wastewater before, during, and after treatment (after Weiner and Matthews, 2003).
Chapter 10
1. Table 10.1 Pollution types, sources, and impacts attenuated by green roofs and infrastructure.
Chapter 12
1. Table 12.1 Bulk sediment and individual particle properties used frequently in forensic comparison.
2. Table 12.2 Stages in a typical forensic soil investigation.
Chapter 13
1. Table 13.1 List of ecological monitoring undertaken to assess pressures in rivers for Water Framework Directive.
2. Table 13.2 Numbers of fish caught per minute within the three sections boom boat electric fished on the River Severn in Shrewsbury 2013.
Chapter 15
1. Table 15.1 Example of the multiple values that can be attributed to urban ecosystem services (ES) (adapted from URBES, 2013) ^a) .
Chapter 16
1. Table 16.1 Greywater and tap water quality used in irrigation and growth trials (Pinto et al., 2010).
2. Table 16.2 Constituents in greywater tests (Sawadogo et al., 2014).
3. Table 16.3 Treated greywater and tap water quality monitored from 02 September 2015 to 02 March 2016.
Chapter 17
1. Table 17.1 Available options for waste disposal on land.
2. Table 17.2 Mineral liners versus synthetic liners.
Chapter 19
1. Table 19.1 Tests on zeolite A for human safety purposes.
Chapter 22
1. Table 22.1 Identified organisational benefits of implementing an EMS.
2. Table 22.2 Identified organisational barriers of implementing an EMS.
Chapter 26
1. Table 26.1 Sustainability of Indian cities in comparison to global cities.
2. Table 26.2 Some of the important urban pollution case studies in India.
3. Table 26.3 Elemental carbon, organic carbon, and total carbon emissions in some Indian cities.
4. Table 26.4 Major heavy‐metal‐contaminated sites in India (CPCB, 2009). Where TN = Tamil Nadu; UP = Uttar Pradesh; MP = Madhya Pradesh; AP = Andhra Pradesh; WB = West Bengal.
5. Table 26.5 National standards for different air pollutants.
6. Table 26.6 Concentration of pollutants through gasoline‐powered vehicles in metropolitan cities in India (in µg/m³).
7. Table 26.7 Persistent organic pesticide residues (DDTs, HCHs, and Endosulfan) in water from various cities across India. NCR = National Capital Region.
8. Table 26.8 Marine debris pollution in the seashore of different coastal cities. Where NR = not reported.
Chapter 27
1. Table 27.1 Quality reference values (QRVs) for trace elements of Brazil and regional background values for Pernambuco, São Paulo, and Minas Gerais states.
2. Table 27.2 Quality reference values (QRVs) for dredged materials (µg g^–1) established by Resolution No. 344/2004, CONAMA.
Chapter 29
1. Table 29.1 Sources and pathways for urban groundwater contamination in Sub‐Saharan Africa (SSA).
2. Table 29.2 Air quality targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and proposed actions for achieving the targets.
Chapter 30
1. Table 30.1 Urban area in (km²) of major urban cities and the whole country, 1963–2005.
2. Table 30.2 Quality parameters for selected rivers (dry season).
3. Table 30.3 State of municipal wastewater treatment and discharge at the Upper Litani Basin.
4. Table 30.4 Upper Litani Basin water quality.
Chapter 31
1. Table 31.1 Global urbanisation statistics, 2014 (UN, 2014).

List of Illustrations

Chapter 02
1. Figure 2.1 Atmospheric contaminants and environmental proxies (Table 2.1) used for reconstructing air pollution histories from ice sheets, peat bogs and lakes.Permanent ice sheets: Falling snow scavenges aerosols (including metal and radioactive isotopes) from the atmosphere. Snow deposits on ice sheets and freezes to produce a stratified annual record of atmospheric deposition.Ombrotrophic peat bogs: The surface layers of ‘rain‐fed’ (ombrotrophic) bogs exclusively receive atmospheric contaminants, with no catchment interference or groundwater flow. Peat accumulates over time from the decomposition of plant material, capturing a history of atmospheric pollution deposition. Peat bog stratigraphies include the upper sphagnum peat layers, older sedge peat and underlying lake sediments from which the peat bog originally formed.Lake sediments: Lakes receive inputs from the atmosphere, groundwater, and catchment (surrounding terrestrial environment), as well as contributions within the lake. An overriding atmospheric signal can be recorded if the catchment disturbance and input are minimal. Particulates deposit over lakes and settle through the water column, onto the lake basin. Particles and associated pollution proxies are stored within the naturally accumulating sedimentary matrix.
2. Figure 2.2 The urban landscape of a chemical town during the late nineteenth century. Industrial and domestic smoke emissions in Widnes, NW England, that experienced significant expansion in the chemical industry with 22 Leblanc works constructed between 1847 and 1884 showing the combined visible impact of industrial and domestic coal emissions on the urban environment (Hardie, 1950).
3. Figure 2.3 A history of coal consumption and air pollution in the United Kingdom.A: Total coal consumption and coal used for electricity production (http://uk–air.defra.gov.uk (1) and http://www.carbonbrief.org (2)) with key industrial and legislative events superimposed.B: Historical national averages of sulphur dioxide and black smoke measurements for the United Kingdom recorded post 1961 as part of the National Survey (3) are presented with spheroidal carbonaceous particle (SCP) concentrations recorded in an urban pond from NW England (authors’ data). The start of the SCP record occurs during the nineteenth century, followed by rapid increases during the twentieth century, mid‐twentieth century peaks and subsequent decline to present day.
Chapter 06
1. Figure 6.1 The influence of construction methods on preferential gas pathways.
2. Figure 6.2 The principle of passive ventilation using subfloor voids.
3. Figure 6.3 Examples of proprietary ventilation systems.
4. Figure 6.4 Isolated pile cap detail showing reinforcing steel bars.
5. Figure 6.5 Details of gas membrane protection to the pile cap.
6. Figure 6.6 Source, Pathway, Receptor model.
7. Figure 6.7 Vertical vent trench installation in 1997.
8. Figure 6.8 Section through typical ‘cut‐off’ trench.
9. Figure 6.9 The principle of the Virtual Curtain™.
10. Figure 6.10 Insertion of void‐forming vent nodes to construct the Virtual Curtain™.
11. Figure 6.11 Section through typical Virtual Curtain™ installation.
12. Figure 6.12 Schematic of a simple supported bed system suitable for odour control in an urban animal housing situation. Modified from Oliver (2017)
Chapter 07
1. Figure 7.1 Increased concentrations of trace elements over time in a city in NW Spain (after Ordoñez et al., 2015) (Note: Zn concentration × 10).
2. Figure 7.2 Sources from inside and outside of the urban environment associated with the production of house and street dusts.
Chapter 08
1. Figure 8.1 Example of a complete gastrointestinal extraction protocol (adapted from Oomen et al., 2003).
2. Plate 8.1 An example of an urban garden in Madrid (Spain).
3. Plate 8.2 An example of an urban playground (Madrid, Spain).
Chapter 09
1. Figure 9.1 Processes undertaken in an urban sewage treatment plant.
2. Figure 9.2 Wastewater treatment stages (for an explanation of 9a–g, see Section 9.3).
Chapter 10
1. Plate 10.1 Typical roof designs in Melbourne CBD .
2. Plate 10.2 The Melbourne CBD.
3. Plate 10.3 The Grounds Alexandria Sydney in 2014.
4. Plate 10.4 The pitched green roof at The Grounds Alexandria Sydney August 2016.
5. Plate 10.5 Pitched green roofs on residential property Newtown Sydney.
Chapter 11
1. Figure 11.1 In G20 countries, percentages of population living under a sky of a given artificial brightness, listed from left to right in order of pollution. Saudi Arabia has more than 80% of its population living under the white level, with a light pollution so high that it prevents human eyes from adapting to darkness, maintaining the cones active. Levels in µcd m⁻². Adapted from Falchi et al., 2016. (key given below figure).
2. Figure 11.2 In G20 countries, percentages of territory under a sky of a given artificial brightness, listed from left to right in order of pollution. Italy and South Korea have 90% of their territories at the highest levels of pollution (key given below figure). Levels in µcd m⁻². Adapted from Falchi et al., 2016.
3. Figure 11.3 Las Vegas lights pollutes the sky well over 100 miles away. Adapted from Falchi et al., 2016. (See colour plate section for the colour representation of this figure.)
4. Figure 11.4 Italian regional laws with year of enforcement. The letter ‘S’ indicates the position of the Osservatorio Astronomico di San Benedetto Po, where sky brightness has been monitored since 1998.
Chapter 12
1. Figure 12.1 Aspects of urban pollution and examples of major pollutant types.
2. Figure 12.2 Number of fly‐tipping incidents in England during the period 2007–2016. Data.
3. Figure 12.3 Small‐scale fly tipping adjacent to an urban road.
4. Figure 12.4 Deterioration of stonework due to atmospheric pollution, Pembroke College, Cambridge.
5. Figure 12.5 Stages in the forensic investigation of urban pollution, their impacts, and potential liability.
6. Figure 12.6 An example of the use of sulphur isotope analysis to determine the origin of sulphur compounds in degraded urban construction materials: δ³⁴S values for: A, Cheshire de‐icing salt; B, other UK and overseas de‐icing salt; C, un‐hydrated Ordinary Portland Cement (OPC); D, Pristine concrete, Peterborough; E, Carbonated concrete pillar, Huntingdon; F, Sewer concrete affected by sulphates and sulphuric acid; G, Deteriorated concrete and render affected by atmospheric sulphate; H, Gypsum crusts on limestone buildings; I, Industrial ash fill beneath concrete floor slabs, Birmingham; J, Render attached by sulphates from brickwork, Cambridge; K, Concrete floor slab attacked by sulphate from underlying clay soil, Birmingham; L, Oxford Clay containing pyrite; M, Fletton bricks, Bedfordshire; N, Edale Shale, Derbyshire.
Chapter 13
1. Figure 13.1 The impact of an organic discharge into a river showing the self‐purification process (adapted from Hynes 1960).
2. Figure 13.2 BMWP, ASPT, and No. of Taxa for Mill Road Bridge Stourport, River Stour.
3. Figure 13.3 An example of an HEV plot for Falling Sands of River Stour. Both water quality and habitat/toxic chemicals impact the macroinvertebrate community most as can be seen through ASPT and NTAXA (BMWP) graphs.
4. Figure 13.4 Diagram illustrating changes in DQI (eutrophication) and percentage motile valves caused by a sewage treatment works (STW).
5. Figure 13.5 Hard bank reinforcements on the River Severn in Shrewsbury, Shropshire. Environment Agency staff undertaking boom boat electric fishing survey to assess fish population within town centre.
6. Figure 13.6 Sections surveyed by boom boat electric fishing on the River Severn in Shrewsbury. Grey area is main urban conurbation of Shrewsbury.
Chapter 14
1. Figure 14.1 Pictorial meadow in the centre of Coventry.
2. Figure 14.2 Green‐winged orchids Anacamptis morio on a landfill site, Kitchen Lane, Wolverhampton. Photo credit: Alison Wilkes.
3. Figure 14.3 Cowslips Primula veris in vegetation created in an old aircraft factory site, Castle Vale, Birmingham. Photo credit: Alison Wilkes.
4. Figure 14.4 Created meadow vegetation detail showing yellow rattle Rhinanthus minor. Photo credit: Alison Wilkes.
Chapter 15
1. Figure 15.1 Trianon Park, central São Paulo, Brazil. The park occupies two city blocks, it is surrounded by the concrete streets and skyscrapers (concrete forest) of Brazils' largest city. However, inside the park the air temperature is lower, the traffic fumes disappear, and even the traffic noise subsides. Trianon Park was created in 1892 and is now the only remaining piece of native Atlantic Forest (Mata Atlântica) in the area. (Photo credit: Rebecca Wade, 2015).
2. Figure 15.2 Princes Street Gardens, a public park in the centre of Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom, in the shadow of Edinburgh Castle. The Gardens were created in the 1770s and 1820s. The prominent central location, and large size of the gardens in this busy tourist‐destination capital city have ensured that the gardens are Edinburghs' best known parks with the highest visitor figures for both residents and visitors. Photo credit: Rebecca Wade, 2017.
3. Figure 15.3 Green roof on a school building in Xativa, Valencia region, Spain. The green roof provides insulation to the building, and additional ecosystem service benefits are realised through air pollution mitigation (augmenting the effect of the adjacent street trees), habitat provision, aesthetic values (neighbouring residents prefer the view of green, rather than a grey roof from their apartments). Photo credit: Rebecca Wade, 2013.
4. Figure 15.4 SuDS pond in Ardler, Dundee, Scotland. The pond provides regulating ES (flood reduction and water quality improvement) by slowing the flow of surface run‐off from the surrounding residential development and by retaining the sediments and pollutants which are carried by the run‐off. Additional ES are being provided by the pond; the water and vegetation are providing a habitat for nesting and visiting birds and for insects and pollinators. In addition, aesthetic and recreational ecosystem benefits are provided, as the local residents enjoy looking at and walking to the pond to view the birds (Jose et al., 2015). Preferred views such as this can increase house prices adjacent to SuDS features. Photo credit: Rebecca Wade, 2016.
Chapter 16
1. Figure 16.1 Longitudinal changes in plant leaf sodium concentrations for differing watering regimes; ‘50:50’ refers to a plant substrate of 50 parts growing medium to 50 parts compost; ‘80:20’ refers to a plant substrate of 80 parts growing medium to 20 parts compost; and ‘20:80’ to a plant substrate of 20 parts growing medium to 80 parts compost. (See colour plate section for the colour representation of this figure)
Chapter 17
1. Figure 17.1 Regions of the world and their kilogram per capita per day of waste generated (Source: Adapted from Hoornweg and Bhada‐Tata (2012)).
2. Figure 17.2 Waste disposed beside the median crash barrier of a dual carriageway. Photo: Isaac I. Akinwumi.
3. Figure 17.3 Heap of waste within an area at the Olusosun dumpsite in Lagos, Nigeria. Photo: Isaac I. Akinwumi.
Chapter 20
1. Figure 20.1 Typical plant used for vacuum‐enhanced recovery. Image: Geo2 Ltd.
2. Figure 20.2 Whey powder and lactate injected into aquifer for TCE biodegradation. Image: https://www.flickr.com/photos/departmentofenergy/7609886626/, public domain.
3. Figure 20.3 PRB arrangements: (a) continuous wall, (b) funnel and gate, and (c) trench and gate
Chapter 21
1. Figure 21.1 Schematic of Virtual Curtain system showing driven nodes, ventilation duct, and wind‐powered extraction bollards.
2. Figure 21.2 Various arrangements for soil bioventing installations.
3. Figure 21.3 Use of load bearing void formers and capillary liquid fed to create an infiltration gallery for nutrient provision (SEL Environmental Ltd image used with permission).
4. Figure 21.4 Schematics of the ex situ landfarming approach.
5. Figure 21.5 Turned windrows in an enclosed situation.
6. Figure 21.6 Use of turned windrows in an un‐enclosed situation requires flexible covers to maintain required humidity levels. Photograph used with permission REMDEX Ltd., Chesterfield.
7. Figure 21.7 Operation of aerated biopiles.
8. Figure 21.8 Cross‐sectional diagram of an overlap weld showing test channel created in the weld for pressure testing.
9. Figure 21.9 Schematic of a slurry phase bioreactor system.
Chapter 22
1. Figure 22.1 Lewin's force field analysis applied to environmental management.
Chapter 24
1. Figure 24.1 East End Veteran's Memorial Park in Peabody, Massachusetts, after brownfields redevelopment. Mesh grass cap shown in background, porous pavement cap shown in foreground.
2. Figure 24.2 Cross sections of cap designs at East End Veteran's Memorial Park in Peabody, Massachusetts.
3. Figure 24.3 The completed Charlesview Residences after transformation from vacant, underutilised brownfields parcel.
4. Figure 24.4 Typical configuration of vapour barrier with taped seams and pipe boots to seal utility and other penetrations; and venting system beneath a townhome at the Charlesview Residences (during construction).
5. Figure 24.5 Site plan of the Charlesview Residences showing the three areas where three different regulatory approaches were taken to take advantage of regulations and maximise Brownfields tax credits.
6. Figure 24.6 Site plan showing the Former Coastal Oil property and the layout of the Freight Corridor and Memorial Park.
7. Figure 24.7 In situ solidification (ISS) being performed on a portion of the Former Coastal Oil property during Dedicated Freight Corridor construction.
Chapter 25
1. Figure 25.1 Slopes (trends) of linear regression relationships between 2005 and 2015 in OMI (10¹⁵ molec cm^–2), retrieved monthly. (a) Mean SO₂ planetary boundary‐layer column density (DU) and (b) NO_x tropospheric column density. The black dots indicate the locations where the trend is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level.
2. Figure 25.2 Contributions of major sources to PM₂ _.5 in six key Chinese megacities.
3. Figure 25.3 Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) on NASA's Terra satellite acquired natural‐colour images of northeastern China on January 14, 2013. (http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=80152)
Chapter 26
1. Figure 26.1 Air quality index for million plus cities during 2015. (Source: CPCB, 2016.)
Chapter 27
1. Figure 27.1 A map of Brazil, with the states focused on in this chapter shaded in grey.
2. Figure 27.2 Curitiba street (public domain).
Chapter 28
1. Figure 28.1 Comparison of the enrichment of selected metals in urban dust (n = 64) and TSP (n = 11) materials from Budapest, Hungary. Geoaccumulation index values were calculated after Ji et al. (2008). Values below zero refer to uncontaminated, those between zero and three to moderately contaminated, between three and five to heavily contaminated, and values over five extremely contaminated materials.
2. Figure 28.2 Transmission electron microscopy micrograph (1) and electron diffraction patterns (2) of mineral particles observed in the urban dust (a, b, and c) and suspended particulate matter (d, e, and f) materials by TEM‐EDS analyses: (a) an aggregate consisting of nano‐sized magnetite single crystals with 2.49 wt% Zn content; (b) a polycrystalline association of hematite and magnetite making up a large Fe oxide particle with 2.88 wt% Pb; (c) relatively large smectite plates containing 4.89 wt% Zn; (d) smectite particle with 4.04 wt% Zn and 0.41 wt% Pb associated with soot aggregates composed of nano‐spheres; (e) magnetite spheres with 1.84 wt% Zn and 2.38 wt% Pb; (d) dense aggregates of magnetite, hematite (3.7 A) and poorly crystalline ferrihydrite with 2.55 wt% Zn, 2.5 wt% Pb, and 0.47 wt% Mn. Cu on the EDS spectra comes from the instrument.
3. Figure 28.3 Backscattered electron images of PTE‐bearing particles observed in the TSP material as studied by SEM‐EDS: (a) an Fe oxide spherule with detectable Cu and Zn content (1) and a silicate aggregate containing Cr (2); (b) a silicate spherule with detectable Pb and Zn content; (c) an aggregate composing of silicates (grey particles), Fe oxides (bright particles), and probably of organic matter (as suggested by the large amount of P and S) containing Zn and Cu; (d) a particle composing of Pb and S (probably lead sulphate) (1) and a silicate particle containing Zn; (e) a particle composing of Cu and S (probably copper sulphate) (1) surrounded by silicates (grey particles) and Fe oxide spherules (2).
Chapter 30
1. Figure 30.1 Lebanon map.

List of Contributors

Isaac I. Akinwumi
Department of Civil Engineering
Covenant University
Nigeria

Rodrigo Álvarez
Mining and Exploration Department
School of Mines
University of Oviedo
Spain

Kwasi Gyau Baffour Awuah
School of the Built Environment
The University of Salford
United Kingdom

Fernando Barrio‐Parra
Laboratorio de Investigación e Ingeniería Geoquímica Ambiental (LI2GA)
Environmental Geochemistry Research & Engineering Laboratory
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Spain

Lynn Besenyei
Faculty of Science and Engineering
School of Sciences
University of Wolverhampton
United Kingdom

Ranjan Bhattacharyya
Centre for Environment Science and Climate Resilient Agriculture (CESCRA)
Indian Agricultural Research Institute
India

Colin A. Booth
Architecture and the Built Environment
University of the West of England
United Kingdom

Susanne M. Charlesworth
Centre for Agroecology
Water and Resilience
Coventry University
United Kingdom

Chung Choi
Department of Earth Sciences
University of Bristol
United Kingdom

Akinwale O. Coker
Department of Civil Engineering
Faculty of Technology
University of Ibadan
Nigeria

Natasha Constant
Sustainable Places Research Institute
Cardiff University
United Kingdom

Stephen J. Coupe
Centre for Agroecology
Water and Resilience
Coventry University
United Kingdom

Paulo Roberto Bairros Da Silva
Federal University of Santa Maria
Brazil

Eduardo De Miguel
Laboratorio de Investigación e Ingeniería Geoquímica Ambiental (LI2GA)
Environmental Geochemistry Research & Engineering Laboratory
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Spain

A. A. ElKordi
Faculty of Engineering
Beirut Arab University
Lebanon

Fabio Falchi
ISTIL ‐ Light Pollution Science and Technology Institute
Italy

Martin Fenn
Environment Agency
United Kingdom

Felippe Fernandes
University of Sao Paulo
Brazil

Michael A. Fullen
Faculty of Science and Engineering
School of Architecture and Built Environment
University of Wolverhampton
United Kingdom

Avijit Ghosh
Centre for Environment Science and Climate Resilient Agriculture (CESCRA)
Indian Agricultural Research Institute
India

Ileen Gladstone
GEI Consultants, Inc.
MassachusettsUnited States

Andrew Gooding
Wessex Water
Bath
United Kingdom

Enda Hayes
Geography and Environmental Management
University of the West of England
United Kingdom

Ryan S. Hoffman
GEI Consultants, Inc.
MassachusettsUnited States

Rosemary Horry
College of Life & Natural Sciences
University of Derby
United Kingdom

Katherine Hyde
School of Construction Management and Engineering
University of Reading
United Kingdom

Miguel Izquierdo‐Díaz
Laboratorio de Investigación e Ingeniería Geoquímica Ambiental (LI2GA)
Environmental Geochemistry Research & Engineering Laboratory
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Spain

Jamal M. Khatib
Faculty of Science and Engineering
School of Architecture and Built Environment
University of Wolverhampton
United Kingdom
and
Faculty of Engineering
Beirut Arab University
Lebanon

Viktória Kovács Kis
Institute of Technical Physics and Materials Science
Centre for Energy Research
Hungary

Jianmin Ma
Key Laboratory for Environmental Pollution Prediction and Control Gansu Province
College of Earth and Environmental Sciences
Lanzhou University
China

Zoltán May
Institute of Materials and Environmental ChemistryResearch Centre for Natural Sciences
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Hungary

Anne‐Marie McLaughlin
Centre for Agroecology, Water and Resilience
Coventry University
United Kingdom

Catherine M. Malagrida
GEI Consultants, Inc.Massachusetts
United States

Juan Mingot
Laboratorio de Investigación e Ingeniería Geoquímica Ambiental (LI2GA)
Environmental Geochemistry Research & Engineering Laboratory
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Spain

Tibor Németh
Institute for Geological and Geochemical Research
Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Hungary

Alan P. Newman
Centre for the Built and Natural Environment
Coventry University
United Kingdom

Ernest O. Nnadi
GITECO‐UC
University of Cantabria
Santander
Spain

Adebanji S. Ogbiye
Department of Civil Engineering
Covenant University
Nigeria

Oluwapelumi O. Ojuri
Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering
Federal University of Technology
Akure
Nigeria

David Oloke
Faculty of Science and Engineering
University of Wolverhampton
United Kingdom

Almudena Ordóñez
Mining and Exploration Department
School of Mines
University of Oviedo
Spain

Cristiano Poleto
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
Brazil

Ann Power
The BioEconomy Centre
University of Exeter
United Kingdom

Kenneth Pye
Kenneth Pye Associates Ltd
Blythe Valley Innovation Centre
United Kingdom

Jose L. Rubio
Centro de Investigaciones sobre Desertificación
Universitat de Valencia
Spain

Safaa Baydoun
Research Centre for Environment and Development
Beirut Arab University
Lebanon

Z. Abou Saleh
Faculty of Engineering
Beirut Arab University
Lebanon

Manoj Shrivastava
Centre for Environment Science and Climate Resilient Agriculture (CESCRA)
Indian Agricultural Research Institute
India

Andrew B. Shuttleworth
SEL Environmental Limited
Lancashire
United Kingdom

S.D. Singh
Centre for Environment Science and Climate Resilient Agriculture (CESCRA)
Indian Agricultural Research Institute
India

Péter Sipos
Institute for Geological and Geochemical Research
Research Centre for Astronomy and Earth Sciences
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
Hungary

Matthew Smith
School of Construction Management and Engineering
University of Reading
United Kingdom

Fraser Torpy
School of Life Sciences
University of Technology Sydney
Australia

Rebecca Wade
Urban Water Technology Centre
School of Science Engineering and Technology
Abertay University
Scotland
United Kingdom

J. Webb
Faculty of Science and Engineering
School of Architecture and Built Environment
University of Wolverhampton
United Kingdom

Sara Wilkinson
Faculty of Design Architecture and Building
University of Technology Sydney
Australia

Craig D. Williams
Faculty of Science and Engineering
University of Wolverhampton
United Kingdom

Annie Worsley
Strata Environmental
Wester Ross
Scotland
United Kingdom

Jianzhong Xu
State Key Laboratory of Cryospheric Sciences
Cold and Arid Regions Environmental and Engineering Research Institute
China

Norbert Zajzon
Institute of Mineralogy and Geology
Faculty of Earth Science and Engineering
University of Miskolc
Hungary

Urban Pollution

Science and Management

Copyright

Dedication

List of Contributors