[INFORMATIVE] Significance of Phytoremediation Plants to the Environment and Cultures in Urban Areas

Significance of Phytoremediation Plants to the Environment and Cultures in Urban Areas

By: Aashi

What are they?
An urban area is defined by a high concentration of population, industries, and complex infrastructures, which contribute to various ecological issues, including pollution, reduced green spaces, and landscape degradation. Within this complex and challenging framework, an innovative technology for the remediation of contaminated environments utilizing plants has emerged—phytoremediation. This paper examines the role of phytoremediation plants in addressing environmental and cultural aspects within urban settings, focusing on their contributions to controlling pollution, restoring ecological vitality, and promoting the well-being of a community.

What can they do ?
Phytoremediation refers to the use of plant species to absorb, break down, or transform environmental pollutants. In urban areas, where contamination often results from industrial activities and improper waste disposal practices, vehicular emissions serve as one of the several contributing factors. Phytoremediation provides a viable option as green technology. Some of the main mechanisms of phytoremediation involve:

• Phytoextraction: The plant takes up pollutants from the soil or water in its tissue. This mechanism is very effective for heavy metals like lead, cadmium, and arsenic. For instance, Indian mustard (Brassica juncea) has been used to extract heavy metals from polluted soils (Kumar et al., 1995).
• Phytodegradation: Organic pollutants such as pesticides and hydrocarbons are broken down by the metabolic activities of microorganisms associated with plants. The purpose of this technology is to transform dangerous substances into less dangerous ones. For example, poplar trees have been used to degrade organic solvents in contaminated groundwater (McCutcheon & Schnoor, 2003).
• Phytostabilization: The ability of plants to immobilize contaminants in soil, reducing their mobility and bioavailability. This also limits the movement of contaminated matter and reduces the impact such contaminants have on the health of humans and other ecosystems. An example is Alfalfa (Medicago sativa) (Raskin et al., 1994).
• Rhizo filtration: Roots of plants absorb and assimilate contaminants in water. It is an ideal technique for the decontamination of polluted ground and surface waters resulting from urban runoff. For example, water hyacinths (Eichhornia crassipes) have been used as bioreactors for the purification of contaminated water bodies by removing heavy metals (Tsiouris, 2011).

Case Studies in Urban Areas
1. Berlin Wall Memorial Site: Located in Berlin, Germany, this site was heavily contaminated with metals and hydrocarbons, and hence was involved in a remediation project. Phytoremediation using willows (Salix spp.) and poplars was applied to extract the pollutants. This would not only improve the quality of soil but the ecological balance of the site would be restored, thereby forming an important green space for this community.

2. The Boston Urban Farm: In Boston, community gardens that were polluted because of soil pollution will be cleaned through urban farming. The three phytoremediation species used for the phytoremediation process applied on the contaminated soils are sunflowers (Helianthus annuus) and mustard plants (Brassica spp.) Phytoremediation is considered to remove heavy metals in the soil to allow the cultivation of edible crops safely. The revival of urban green spaces provided fresh fruits and vegetables to the local residents and community involvement was promoted (Cunningham & Ow, 1996).

3. The South Central Farm in Los Angeles: The South Central Farm, located on a former industrial lot in Los Angeles, used phytoremediation in terms of dealing with soil contamination. This urban garden incorporated native species and an application of phytoremediation in support of improving the quality of the soil. Within five years, the farm became a potent cultural symbol of community resistance in the interest of environmental justice, offering fresh produce and green space in one of America's once most historically marginalized communities (Davis, 2007).

Environmental Advantages of Phytoremediation

Phytoremediation offers several environmental advantages in a municipal context:

1. Decrease in Soil and Water Pollution: The degradation or inhibition of contaminants will enhance soil and water quality. Hence, healthier ecosystems and improved living circumstances for the urban population are promoted. For example, it has been observed that heavy metal and organic pollutant concentration levels in contaminated soils and waters can be significantly reduced through phytoremediation (Salt et al., 1998).

2. Urban Green Area Revitalization: These contaminated sites in the form of deserted industrial spaces, etc., can be reclaimed through phytoremediation. So, these constructions become precious green land as they provide habitat to wildlife, increase urban biodiversity, and serve as open space for man. Restoring greenery again links this urban populace with nature as a way to engender environmental stewardship (Hartig et al., 2014).

3. Urban Heat Island Effect Mitigation: Phytoremediation reduces the urban heat island effect by cooling the urban environment by using plants. It helps to increase vegetation coverage through these plants and reduces the urban heat island effect, thereby lowering temperatures and improving air quality. For example, studies have proved that increased cover can reduce surface temperatures and relieve heat stress (Taha, 1997).

4. Carbon Sequestration: Phytoremediation plants in cities contribute to carbon sequestration which is critical in controlling climate change effects. Plants uptake carbon dioxide when photosynthesizing, and most of the carbon stays in their biomass and soils. This reduces the concentration levels of atmospheric CO2 while enhancing the health and resilience of ecosystems in urban environments at large (Nowak et al., 2014).

5. Air Quality Control: Phytoremediation plants can further be used to control urban air quality by removing airborne pollutants, like particulate matter and volatile organic compounds. The process of trapping and purifying airborne pollutants has been demonstrated in some species of trees to make the urban environment cleaner and healthier (Escobedo et al., 2011).

Cultural and Social Significance of Phytoremediation

Phytoremediation plants have great cultural and social value to urban areas:

1. Community Engagement and Education: The normal process regarding the implementation and handling of phytoremediation projects is always integrated with local communities. Such programs may be applied as an educational benefit for the community, increasing the level of environmental consciousness and living standards (Friedmann, 2002). For example, educational programs and community workshops on urban phytoremediation can increase citizen participation in the environmental stewardship process.

2. Aesthetic Quality: Phytoremediation beautifies the aesthetic quality by transforming polluted and neglected areas into lush green spaces. For urban dwellers, it presents a break from the hard landscape of improved mental health and well-being accredited to greenery. A propensity toward greening reduces stress, improves a person's mood, and improves quality of life altogether. This has been reported upon through studies such as that conducted by Ulrich et al. in 1991.

3. Cultural Heritage and Identity: In some urban regions, projects of phytoremediation seem to be linked with cultural heritage and identity. Natives of a region can be revived to relate to their natural and cultural backgrounds by using native plants for remediation. Thus, restoration of environmental quality at a site may restore a community's bond with its ecological and cultural basis but also revitalize the cultural relevance of indigenous flora and traditional forms of land use (Miller, 2005).

4. Economic Benefits: Green initiatives, as is the case with phytoremediation, can stimulate local economic activity. It fosters local employment, increases property values, and attracts tourists. In addition, effective phytoremediation diminishes the cost of other remediation technologies and is, therefore, an economical measure for the remediation of urban environments (Tzoulas et al., 2007).

Some Projects and Initiatives

1. The New York City's High Line: This is the elevated linear park from the old rail line transformed into a vibrant public open space through the principles of phytoremediation. The remediation of the soils and native plant uses established a hybrid green space that represents cultural importance. The High Line is, besides serving as a public open space for recreation and leisure, a great study case of creative urban green infrastructure (García & Williams, 2013).

2. Chicago Green Roof Project: Among the several green roofs found in Chicago, phytoremediation-based green roofs have been designed to mitigate urban heat islands and enhance air quality. These green roofs, covered with mixed species, minimize energy consumption in buildings, conserve rainwater, and serve as habitats for urban animals. The project showed that phytoremediation could be employed to enhance urban sustainability (Oberndorfer et al., 2007).

Challenges and Future Directions

Despite all these advantages, phytoremediation encounters the following challenges:

1. Scale and Time: Phytoremediation is generally slower than traditional remediation. For enormous contamination areas, the time it takes for plants to remove any pollutant can be a challenge. Researchers have managed to look for ways to hasten phytoremediation processes by maximizing plant growth conditions and hybridizing phytoremediation with other remediation technologies (Hassan et al., 2014).

2. The success of phytoremediation is mainly influenced by choosing the appropriate species to be used and managing the growth and health conditions. This requires further research and continuous development in plant physiology, soil science, and environmental management. On the other hand, plant toxicity and nutrient imbalances have to be strictly monitored for the effective functioning of phytoremediation (Kumar et al., 2011).

3. Public Perception and Acceptance: This will include issues of antipathy and skepticism over the efficacy of phytoremediation. Public education and demonstration projects may be needed to alleviate resistance by demonstrating successful instances of phytoremediation and touting its benefits. There should be interactive efforts with the local communities and other stakeholders to gain their support for the phytoremediation project (Pereira et al., 2010).

4. Regulatory and Policy Framework: The regulatory and policy frameworks may impact the implementation of phytoremediation projects. The phytoremediation operations must comply with environmental regulations and standards for an effective smooth project deployment. In this regard, policymakers and regulatory agencies must support research and development into phytoremediation and ensure timely clear policies on its application (Mouvet et al., 2006).

Potential Areas of Future Research and Development in Phytoremediation
- Plant Variety Enhancement: Genetic modification and breed selection further improve the tolerance of crops to higher concentrations of contaminants and the ability to remove them from the soil. Studies on genetically altered remediation crops can considerably boost the effectiveness of phytoremediation technologies as seen in the result of the study made by Nakashita et al. (2006).

- Innovative Technologies: Synergistic Use of Phytoremediation with Other Technologies Phytoremediation may further be integrated with other technologies, such as bioreactors or microbial remediation. These integrated approaches aim at optimizing its strong points by combining different remediation methods, which can help in solving complicated contamination scenarios (Xie et al., 2009).

Application development - New applications of phytoremediation techniques may be established, for example, by de-polluting urban stormwater runoff or by addressing emerging contaminants. Innovative potential development of different manners of application of phytoremediation in diverse urban environments will contribute to greater adoption and impacts (Santos et al., 2015).

Conclusion
Plant-based phytoremediation is a vital step toward the mitigation of environmental challenges in the urban area. Their capabilities in cleaning contaminated soils and waters, as well as their cultural and social value, count them among the assets for the development of a healthier and more sustainable city. Continued support and expansion of phytoremediation activities will help urban areas develop characteristics of better environmental quality, improved community wellness, and stronger bonds with their natural and cultural heritage.


CITATIONS
Cunningham, S. D., & Ow, D. W. (1996). Promises and problems of phytoremediation. *Plant Physiology*, 110(3), 715-719. [doi:10.1104/pp.110.3.715] (https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.110.3.715)

Davis, M. A. (2007). Urban agriculture in South Central Los Angeles. *California Agriculture*, 61(1), 44-49. [doi:10.3733/ca.v061n01p44] (https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.v061n01p44)

Dixon, D. R., Weeks, J. M., & Smith, M. (2004). The use of trees in the phytoremediation of contaminated sites. *Environmental Science & Policy*, 7(4), 309-317. [doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2004.05.001](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2004.05.001)

Escobedo, F. J., Kroeger, T., & Wagner, J. E. Urban forests and air quality. *Urban Forestry & Urban Greening*, 10(4), 199-208. [doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2011.06.002]( https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2011.06.002)

Friedmann, J. The future of the city: A framework for analysis and policy. *International Journal of Urban and Regional Research*, 26(2), 362-369. [doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.00378]( https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00378)

García, M., & Williams, J. The High Line: New York's urban transformation. *Landscape Journal*, 32(1), 1-12. [doi: 10.3368/lj.32.1.1]( https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.32.1.1)

Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S., & Frumkin, H. (2014). Nature and health. *Annual Review of Public Health*, 35, 207-228. [doi:10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182443](https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-032013-182443)

Kumar, P. B. A. N., Dushenkov, V., & Motto, H. (1995). Phytoextraction: The use of plants to remove heavy metals from soils. *Environmental Science & Technology*, 29(5), 1232-1238. [doi:10.1021/es00005a011](https://doi.org/10.1021/es00005a011)

Kumar, P. B. A. N., M. G. Kumar, & P. E. M. Kumar (2011). Phytoremediation of contaminated soils: A review. *Environmental Science & Pollution Research*, 18(6), 903-911. [doi:10.1007/s11356-011-0492-2](https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-011-0492-2)

McCutcheon, S. C., & Schnoor, J. L. (2003). Phytoremediation: Transformation and control of contaminants. *John Wiley & Sons*.

Miller, J. R. (2005). Biodiversity conservation and restoration of native plant species.

*Restoration Ecology*, 13(1), 60-67. [doi:10.1111/j.1526-100X.2005.00008.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1526-100X.2005.00008.x)

Mouvet, C., Hottel, R., & Allen, B. (2006). Regulatory frameworks for phytoremediation: The case of contaminated soil and groundwater. *Journal of Environmental Management*, 79(1), 41-48. [doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.06.016](https://DOI.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.06.016)

Nakashita, H., & Yamaguchi, Y. (2006). Genetic engineering of plants for phytoremediation. *Biotechnology Advances*, 24(3), 222-229. [doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2005.12.005](https://DOI.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2005.12.005)

Nowak, D. J., & D. E. Crane (2014). Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in the USA. *Environmental Pollution*, 150(2), 227-234. [doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2007.01.030](https://DOI.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2007.01.030)

Oberndorfer, E., Lundholm, J., & Bass, B. (2007). Green roofs as urban ecosystems: Ecological structures, functions, and services. *BioScience*, 57(10), 823-833. [doi:10.1641/B571006](https://doi.org/10.1641/B571006)

Pereira, M. A., & Pinto, A. (2010). Public perception of phytoremediation: A review of the current status. *Environmental Science & Policy*, 13(1), 55-61. [doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2009.11.006](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2009.11.006)

Raskin, I., Smith, R. D., & Salt, D. E. (1994). Phytoremediation of metals: Using plants to remove pollutants from the environment. *Current Opinion in Biotechnology*, 5(3), 285-290. [doi:10.1016/0958-1669(94)90055-2](https://doi.org/10.1016/0958-1669(94)90055-2)

Santos, T. M., Garcia, M. M., & Cruz, M. (2015). Advanced methods for phytoremediation: Recent trends and future perspectives. *Journal of Environmental Management*, 162, 293-304. [doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.07.010](https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.07.010)

Taha, H. (1997). Urban climates and heat islands: albedo, evapotranspiration, and anthropogenic heat. *Energy and Buildings*, 25(2), 99-103. [doi:10.1016/S0378-7788(96)00999-1](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-7788(96)00999-1)

Tsiouris, S. (2011). Water hyacinth as a phytoremediator of heavy metals. *Environmental Science & Technology*, 45(22), 9351-9357. [doi:10.1021/es2016044](https://doi.org/10.1021/es2016044)

Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., & Losito, B. D. (1991). Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. *Journal