China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Landfilling of Wastes
Published in Charles R. Rhyner, Leander J. Schwartz, Robert B. Wenger, Mary G. Kohrell, Waste Management and Resource Recovery, 2017
Charles R. Rhyner, Leander J. Schwartz, Robert B. Wenger, Mary G. Kohrell
Waste compaction is accomplished by repeated trips over a waste layer with a heavy compactor vehicle. Figure 9.9 depicts the increase in density resulting from multiple trips over deposited wastes with a compactor vehicle.
Combination of electrocoagulation with solar photo Fenton process for treatment of landfill leachate
Published in Environmental Technology, 2022
Christiarani Jegadeesan, Adishkumar Somanathan, Rajesh Banu Jeyakumar, V. Godvin Sharmila
The composition of leachate depends on type of waste, amount of precipitation, site hydrology, waste compaction, cover design, interaction of leachate with environment, and landfill age, design and operation. The landfill leachate is collected in an impermeable tank. The existing dumping ground has been reportedly used by Madurai Corporation for over 15 years. The lining system protects the surrounding environment, including soil, groundwater, and surface water, by containing leachate generated within the landfill, controlling the ingress of ground water and assisting in the control of the migration of landfill gas. It can be observed that approximately 68.42% of waste comprises organic waste, while the rest is non-degradable (silt, paper, plastic, glass, etc.). Silt accounts for approximately 30% of total waste. As per the CPHEEO manual, the quantity of leachate generated is 23m3/day [21]. The leachate collecting systems contain an impermeable liner, granular material, collection piping, and a leachate storage tank, from which leachate is trucked to a wastewater treatment facility. The leachate collection quantity of collection tank is 161 m3, and assuming that the leachate was collected for 7 days, the depth of the collection tank is 1.5 m. So the plan area of the leachate tank is 107 m2.
Modeling methane oxidation in landfill cover soils as indicator of functional stability with respect to gas management
Published in Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 2019
Jeremy W.F. Morris, Michael D. Caldwell, James M. Obereiner, Sean T. O’Donnell, Terry R. Johnson, Tarek Abichou
The case study site is a large active MSW landfill located in central Washington, USA. The total permitted liner footprint is 55 ha, which includes some legacy unlined units as well as modern composite-lined units. The maximum thickness of waste at completion of the landfill operation will be approximately 115 m based on the permitted base and final cover grades, with total permitted airspace capacity of about 28 × 106 m3, which roughly equates to 38 × 106 Mg at predicted waste compaction rates. Annual precipitation at the facility is low at approximately 230 mm. Given the favorable climatic conditions and availability of suitable soils, the facility obtained approval for an all-soil ET final cover system. The ET cover design comprises 90 cm of soil with maximum hydraulic conductivity 7 × 10−4 cm/sec installed over 30 cm of interim soil cover. The existing LFG system, which will be continually expanded as the landfill is developed, currently consists of an active total of about 40 vertical extraction wells and 15 horizontal collection trenches. The system is designed to easily allow for expansion as the landfill continues to receive waste. Each collection structure is fitted with a wellhead control assembly and connected to the LFG conveyance system to deliver LFG to the flare station for thermal destruction.
Evaluation of depth-dependent properties of municipal solid waste using a large diameter-borehole sampling method
Published in Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 2021
John Hartwell, M. Sina Mousavi, Jongwan Eun, Shannon Bartelt-Hunt
Table 3 shows the specific gravity, void ratio, and degree of saturation of MSW layers within each segment. Specific gravity for segment 6 was considered outlier due to the disproportionate amount of wood in the drum sample. The aggregated specific gravity, wet and dry sample weights of each segment allows us to compute the dry unit weight of each drum segment sample. Bareither, Benson, and Edil (2012) reported that specific gravity increased linearly with higher levels of decomposition (i.e., higher methane yield), corresponding to the loss of organic materials (e.g., paper) that have high volume and low mass. The range in MSW specific gravity reported was from 1.65 to 1.90. Duraisamy, Huat, and Aziz (2007) also reported data and a series of equations formulated by other researchers that show a linear correlation of increasing specific gravity with decreasing organic content. A lack of a downward trend in Gs with increasing depth and a corresponding increase in age of waste is a useful observation in that it may indicate that the waste column is of similar age from a degradation standpoint. Hanson et al. (2010) evaluated the range in specific gravity () for the waste compaction study and estimated that ranged from 1.4 to 1.6 and concluded it was likely closer to 1.55 using a line of optimums analysis to estimate the appropriate position of the zero air voids curve. The computed average Gs for the MSW encountered in borehole was 1.63, which is consistent with the back-calculated value (Hanson et al. 2010).