Comparison of pros and cons of bioretention soil mixes
Link to this table.
Mix | Current composition | Proposed updated composition1 | Pros | Cons |
---|---|---|---|---|
A |
|
|
Likely to sorb more dissolved P and metals than mix B because it contains some fines; best for growth of most plants | Likely to leach P; if topsoil exceeds maximum allowed clay content, higher fines content could result in poor hydraulic performanceand long drawdown times |
B |
|
|
Easy to mix; least likely to clog | Likely to leach P, lack of fines in mix results in less dissolved pollutant removal; harder on most plants than mix A because it dries out very quickly |
C | Not currently in MN Stormwater Manual |
|
Likely to sorb more dissolved P and metals than mix B because it contains some fines; less likely to leach P than mix B because oflow P content | Harder on most plants than mix A because it dries out very quickly. Research in Wisconsin indicates that in cold climates, excess ofsodium ions can promote displacement of Mg and Ca in the soil, which breaks down soil structure and decreases infiltration rate, and can also cause nutrient imbalances2 |
D | Not currently in MN Stormwater Manual |
|
Best for pollutant removal, moisture retention, and growth of most plants; less likely to leach P than mix B because of low P content | Harder to find. Research in Wisconsin indicates that in cold climates, excess of sodium ions can promote displacement of Mg and Ca in the soil, which breaks down soil structure and decreases infiltration rate, and can also cause nutrient imbalances |
1See soil guidelines for important specifics about soil components and other important parameters
2This problem can be avoided by minimizing salt use. Sodium absorption ratio can be tested, if sodium adsorption ratio becomes too high, additions of gypsum (calcium sulfate) can be added to the soil to free the sodium and allow it to be leached from the soil (Pitt et al in press).