Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426

Comparison of aerobic and anaerobic degradation of municipal solid waste

in bioreactor landfills
*
A. Suna Erses, Turgut T. Onay, Orhan Yenigun
Bogazici University, Institute of Environmental Sciences, Bebek, 34342 Istanbul, Turkey

Received 25 August 2007; received in revised form 2 November 2007; accepted 6 November 2007
Available online 21 December 2007

Abstract

Two landfill bioreactors were operated under aerobic and anaerobic conditions in a thermo-insulated room at a constant temperature of 32
LC. Reactors were filled with 19.5 kg of shredded synthetic solid waste prepared according to the average municipal solid waste compositions
determined in Istanbul and operated under wet-tomb management strategy by using leachate recirculation. Aerobic con-ditions in the reactor
were developed by using an air compressor. The results of experiments indicated that aerobic reactor had higher organic, nitrogen, phosphorus
and alkali metal removal efficiencies than the anaerobic one. Furthermore, stabilization time considerably decreased when using aerobic
processes with leachate recirculation compared to the anaerobic system with the same recirculation scheme.
2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Aerobic; Anaerobic; Bioreactor; Landfill; Leachate recirculation

1. Introduction tal impacts. In order to achieve these goals, the Landfill

Municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills are generally
operated by conventional landfilling techniques, where
anaerobic conditions are created within the landfill waste.
However, decomposition of solid waste may cause environ-
mental problems if emission of landfill gas is not controlled
and landfill leachate seeps down to groundwaters. Under
anaerobic conditions within a landfill site, stabilization
process is slow and may increase the potential risks to human
health and the environment (Hudgins and March, 1998).
According to Kruempelbeck and Ehrig (1999), the long term
environmental impact caused by municipal solid waste
(MSW) landfills may last for centuries. As a result of this,
more stringent regulations for monitoring landfills, in addition
to their design and operation, are needed. Recent European
regulations on waste management are primarily intended to
reduce the use of landfilling, mainly because of problems
generated by the above-mentioned environmen-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +90 212 3596946; fax: +90 212 2575033.
E-mail address: yeniguno@boun.edu.tr (O. Yenigun).
0960-8524/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2007.11.008
Directive adopted by the EU requires that the amount of
biodegradable MSW going to the landfill should be reduced
by 25% until 2002, 50% by 2005 and 75% by 2010 (Council
of the European Union, 1999). In spite of extensive laws and
regulations to reduce the waste quan-tity, landfilling is
expected to be the most commonly employed disposal method
worldwide since it is a compar-atively simple and economic
way for solid waste disposal. Moreover, landfilling is the
ultimate disposal method for wastes that cannot be recovered.
Conventional sanitary landfills consist of cells and lifts with
liners, drains, gas vents, leak detection systems with
intermediate and final covers. On the other hand, due to
inadequacies of conventional waste management practices,
extensive lab-scale and full-scale investigations were carried
out to answer the essential questions of low-emission land-
filling. Increasing attention is being given to the enhance-
ment of waste stabilization by leachate recirculation to
reduce the time required for waste degradation, improve
leachate quality and enhance the rate of gas produc-tion.
Bioreactor landfill systems as a modification of
 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426
conventional landfill with the addition of leachate recircu-
lation were developed to minimize environmental impacts
through optimizing waste degradation. Here, leachate is
collected, stored and reinjected back into the landfill to
promote in situ anaerobic biological degradation. The
advantages of leachate recirculation have been demon-strated
by many researchers that performed numerous lysimeters and
field tests (Pohland, 1980; Tittlebaum, 1982; Kinman et al.,
1987; Doedens and Cord-Landwehr, 1989; Otieno, 1994;
Townsend et al., 1996; Chugh et al., 1998; El-Fadel, 1999;
Pohland and Kim, 1999, 2000; Onay and Pohland, 1998; San
and Onay, 2001; Erses and Onay, 2003).
On the other hand, as a new perspective on landfilling solid
waste, aerobic landfill technology has been evalu-ated over
the last few years to rapidly stabilize and detoxify the waste,
reduce methane gas, volatile organic compounds and odor
emissions as well as eliminate off site leachate treatment
needs (Purcell, 2000a,b; Read
et al., 2001; Jacobs et al., 2003; Kim, 2005; Cossu et al.,
2003). The results of these studies are summarized in Table 1.
In spite of the recent practices on aerobic landfilling, the
effect of in situ aeration has not been understood from the
view point of the attenuation mech-anism of contaminants
during the stabilization period. Until today all field research
has taken place using exist-ing landfill sites, so that many of
the sites that are run as full-scale aerobic landfills have used
waste that has been anaerobic for some time. There are
questions yet to be answered about the behaviour of waste that
has never been anaerobic (Read et al., 2001; Rich et al.,
2007).
The purpose of this study was to compare the opera-tional
parameters and attenuation mechanisms of carbon, nitrogen,
phosphorus and alkali metal and their removal in conventional
anaerobic and aerobic bioreactor landfills monitored under
laboratory conditions.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Reactor configurations
The process of landfill stabilization is strongly depended
on temperature. Two laboratory scale PVC reactors were
constructed in a thermo-insulated room kept at a constant
mesophilic temperature of 32 LC to establish a favorable
growth environment for the microorganisms in the reactors.
Each reactor had a diameter of 0.35 m and a length of 1 m
(about 96 L). The reactors were equipped with three ports; one
port was used for drainage and sampling while the other two
ports were used to collect gas samples and add liquid.
Leachate was stored in 18 L plexi-glass bottles at the bottom
of reactor for leachate recirculation. Aerobic conditions in the
reactor were maintained by using an air compressor. Leachate
recycle was used to provide transport mechanism for
microorganisms and stabilization products for further
conversion. To determine daily temperature changes in the
bioreactors, thermocouples were installed.
5419
Precipitation was simulated by feeding the reactors with dis-
tilled water periodically. Daily gas production was mea-sured
by using wet gasmeters (Shinagawa Corporation).
2.2. Reactor loadings
Simulated landfill reactors were loaded with 19.5 kg of
shredded and compacted solid waste mixture. The syn-thetic
solid waste mixture representing typical solid waste
composition of Istanbul consisted of 45% organic material
(food + garden), 14.5% paper, 9.5% plastic, 5.6% textile,
3.8% glass, 2.2% metal, 4.4% ceramic, 15% other materials
(dust, wood, brick, miscellaneous) by weight.
2.3. Reactor operations
In this study, one reactor was operated as aerobic to bet-ter
understand the effect of aeration on solid waste degra-dation.
The other one was operated as an anaerobic bioreactor which
represented conventional sanitary landfill conditions. The
reactors were constructed under wet-tomb management
strategy. Throughout the study period, 1 L of collected
leachate in storage bottles was recycled to reac-tors once per
week. Moreover, 500 mL/week distilled water, corresponding
to an equivalent of 20 cm/year rain-fall, was added to the
reactors. In the aerobic reactor, the air inlet at the bottom of
the reactor was connected to an air pump operating at 2.2
L/min for 5 h in a day to main-tain aerobic conditions from
start to end.
2.4. Experimental analysis
Leachate and gas samples were monitored on a regular
basis to understand and compare the degree of waste stabil-
ization in each reactor. Leachate samples were analyzed for
chemical oxygen demand (COD), total organic carbon (TOC),
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), pH, alkalin-ity,
conductivity, total kjhedal nitrogen (TKN), ammo-nia-
nitrogen, orthophosphate, chloride and alkali metals (Na, K,
Ca, Mg). All these analyses were performed according to
Standard Methods (APHA AWWA, 1992). Gas production and
its composition were measured daily. The gas composition in
the headspace (O2, N2, CO2 and CH4) was analyzed using an
HP 6850 gas chromatograph (Carboxen 1010 plot column 30
m 0.53 mm) equipped with a thermal conductivity detector
(TCD).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. The impact on bioreactor landfill emissions: leachate and
gas
3.1.1. pH and alkalinity
The change in leachate pH in both the reactors is given in
Fig. 1. Initially, pH values of both reactors were the same (pH
5.83). Both aerobic and anaerobic reactors started off in acidic
conditions in the beginning of the
5420 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426

365 days
21 months

120 days
Results Operation day
12 10000

)
11

3
CaCO
10

as
9 1000

15% biodegradation over 2 years

Odour have been reported to be less pungent

More than 90% of COD, BOD and TOC concentration decreased within 100 days
45% VS destruction, 2-year degradation timescales

Rapid and marked oxidation of organics and nitrogen

settlement over the trial period of 9–18 months was also noted to increase by an additional 9–10%
50%, reduced leachate organic strength by up to 70% and leachate volumes by greater than 80%. Waste
8

pH

(mg/L
7

Alkalinity
6 100

5
4
3 10

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Time (Days)
Anaerobic Bioreactor pH Aerobic Bioreactor pH
Anaerobic Bioreactor Alkalinity Aerobic Bioreactor Alkalinity
Fig. 1. Leachate pH values and alkalinity concentrations for the

anaerobic and aerobic bioreactors.

experiment. However, the acidic pH in aerobic reactor

increased to neutral values in a few days and was measured
between 7.5 and 8.0 after day 35 until the very end. Two
phases (acidic and methanogenic or alkaline) of pH in the
anaerobic reactor were observed during the test period. Initial
acidic pH values in the anaerobic bioreactor increased sharply
and reached to 7.0 on day 446 after the onset of methanogenic
activity and stayed between 7.0 and 7.5 during this phase. As
it can be seen from this figure, the pH of the aerobic reactor
was more alkaline than the pH from anaerobic reactor due to
CO2 stripping by air; a decrease in CO 2 leads to a decrease in
carbonic acid (H2CO3) and bicarbonate ion concentrations
+
(HCO3 ) con-suming H ions (Kim, 2005). This observation is
also con-firmed with other studies in literature. The range of
pH of aerobic reactors has been reported as 7.0–9.0 (Stessel
Converted form anaerobic
to aerobic

70–120 mL/min
Air flow

100 nL/h continuously

and Murphy, 1992; O’Keefe and Chynoweth, 2000; Agdag

and Sponza, 2004; Kim, 2005).

Adequate alkalinity, or buffer capacity, is necessary to

maintain a stable pH in the digester for optimal biological
activity. An alkalinity level ranging from 1000 to 5000 mg/ L
as CaCO3 was recommended by Tchobanoglous and Burton
(1979). The measured leachate alkalinity for the aerobic and
anaerobic reactors are also provided in Fig. 1. Initial alkalinity
Landfill area

Landfill area
related studies in literature

(theoretical site) 4 ha
Landfill area 6.5 ha

Bioreactor, 12.8 kg waste

Characteristic

Bioreactor, 8.14 kg waste

of aerobic and anaerobic reactors were 3219 and 5768 mg/L

as CaCO3. In the aerobic reac-tor, alkalinity first increased to
its highest value of 4500 mg/L as CaCO 3 and then began to
decrease on day 77 and reached to 660 mg/L as CaCO3 at the
end of exper-iment. Theoretical calculations revealed that
there was no requirement for excess alkalinity. On the other
hand, in the anaerobic reactor, leachate alkalinity changed
between 5500 and 7500 mg/L as CaCO3 and remained
relatively constant during the acid formation phase. After
Table 1Theresults of

(2003)Kim(2005)

Cossu et al.(2003)
(2001)
Purcell
(2000a,b)
Reference

Read et al.

Jacobs et al.

transition to methanogenic conditions, pH values increased

and total alkalinity concentrations tended to decrease
because meth-anogens utilized the available VFA as substrate.
Total alkalinity of the anaerobic reactor decreased to 3800
mg/
 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426
L as CaCO3 at end of the experiment. This was also con-
firmed by theoretical alkalinity computations.
3.1.2. COD, TOC and BOD5
Chemical oxygen demand (COD) and total organic car-bon
(TOC) were measured as indicators of leachate organic
strength. Leachate COD and TOC concentrations for aer-obic
and anaerobic reactors are presented in Fig. 2. The ini-tial
leachate COD concentrations of aerobic and anaerobic
reactors were 17,900 and 38,000 mg/L, respectively. The
COD concentrations in the aerobic reactor increased to 19,237
mg/L and decreased rapidly after pH was stabilized. The COD
concentrations on days 77 and 374 were deter-mined as 1596
and 678 mg/L, respectively. On the other hand, COD
concentration in the anaerobic reactor increased to 61,973
mg/L from 38,022 mg/L due to rapid release and hydrolysis of
complex organics from solid waste to the leachate and then
remained at the same high concentrations due to the
accumulation organic acids until day 290. After the onset of
methanogenic conditions that was confirmed by gas
composition, first, COD concentra-tions began to decrease
slowly to 30,400 mg/L until day 433 and then declined rapidly
to below 900 mg/L at the end of experiment. COD and TOC
concentrations showed similarity (Fig. 2). Initial TOC
concentrations for the reactors are given as follows; aerobic
reactor, 1438 mg/L; anaerobic reactor, 17,990 mg/L. TOC
concentrations decreased to 218 mg/L in the aerobic reactor
on day 374 and to 290 mg/L in the anaerobic reactor on day
630. TOC concentration in the anaerobic reactor declined in
accordance with the progression of microbially mediated
stabilization processes also confirmed the increase in gas
production and high methane content of the biogas.
Landfilled wastes are dominated by organic material
comprising (typically) 50% cellulose, 15% lignin, 10% hemi-
cellulose, 5% protein as well as starch, pectin, and other
soluble sugars (Barlaz, 1992). Cellulose is the most impor-
100000
10000
COD (mg/L)
1000
100
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (Days)
Anaerobic Bioreactor COD Aerobic Bioreactor COD
Anaerobic Bioreactor TOC Aerobic Bioreactor TOC
Fig. 2. Leachate COD and TOC concentrations for the anaerobic and aerobic
bioreactors.
5421
tant carbon source for methanogenesis in landfills, however it
is not an easily biodegradable material under anaerobic
conditions. In fact, cellulose and hemicellulose, whose half-
lives are about 15 years, contribute to 90% of total methane
produced (Swarbrick, 2001). Hydrolysis of these complex
organics in the presence of oxygen enhance bio-degradation
rate and convert to organic carbon in the waste mass to mostly
carbon dioxide and water, with stabi-lized humic material
remaining. Waste decomposition takes place within a few
years under aerobic and controlled conditions instead of
several decades (Hudgins and Harper, 1999). The results of
the present study confirmed those of previous studies and
indicated that approximately 90% of COD removal was
complete by days 72 and 462 for aerobic and anaerobic
reactors, respectively.
It is important to note that aeration enables significantly
faster biodegradation of organic matter. The results of the
present study are similar to the findings of Cossu et al. (2003),
who reported high COD values in the anaerobic reactor
(20,000 mg/L) compared to the aerobic reactor (800 mg/L)
after 120 days of operation. Carbon conversion as a means of
measuring the success of the aeration of the waste mass has
been investigated by Ritzkowski et al. (2006). They observed
a considerable reduction of leachate COD and TOC
concentrations after approximately 20 days of aeration.
BOD5 indicated similar trend with COD and TOC removal
(Fig. 3). The BOD5 concentrations of the aerobic reactor
decreased rapidly while BOD5 concentrations of the anaerobic
reactor decreased slowly and then followed rapid reduction
after onset of methanogenic conditions. BOD 5 to COD ratio is
often used to assess the biodegrad-ability of the organic matter
in leachate, and thus to under-stand the degree of landfill
stabilization (Alvarez-Vazquez et al., 2004). In old stabilized
landfills, the BOD5/COD ratio is below 0.10 (Kjeldsen et al.,
2002). A low BOD5/ COD suggests that leachate is low in
biodegradable organic carbon and relatively high in hard-to-
biodegrade organic compounds such as humic compounds. In
this research, initial high BOD5/COD ratio decreased from
100000
0.57 to 0.03
100000
10000 10000
TOC (mg/L)
(mg/L)
1000
5
1000
100
BOD
100
10
700 Anaerobic Bioreactor
Aerobic Bioreactor
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Time (Days)
Fig. 3. Leachate BOD5 concentrations for the anaerobic and aerobic
bioreactors.
5422 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426

at the end of experiment in the aerobic reactor (Fig. 4). On the 25000 1600

Cumulative Gas Production (L)

Daily Gas Production (mL)
20000
other hand, relatively high BOD5/COD ratios were obtained
from the anaerobic reactors. Initial BOD 5/COD ratio was
about 0.7, and release of organics increased this ratio to 0.8– 1200
0.9 after day 200 after which it decreased to 0.45 at around 15000
day 460, finally reaching 0.05 at the end of experiments. The
values proposed by Kjeldsen et al. (2002) were 0.58 and 0.06 800
for the acid phase and the meth-anogenic phase, respectively.
10000
Borglin et al. (2004) found that BOD5/COD ratio of aerobic
and anaerobic reactors were 0.03 and 0.45, respectively, after 5000 400

365 days.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0

3.1.3. Biogas
Cumulative and daily gas production of the anaerobic 0 700
reactor have been given in Fig. 5. The changes in gas con- Time (Days)
centrations of the anaerobic reactors is presented in Fig. 6. In
Fig. 5. Daily and cumulative gas production from the anaerobic bioreactor.
the start-up period, organic matter in the reactors are
hydrolyzed and the produced organic acids cease gas pro-
duction. During the intermediate anaerobic degradation stage,
methanogenic bacteria slowly start to appear and gas
production rate increases (Murphy et al., 1995). In this study, 100
90
the anaerobic reactor exhibited some retardation in terms of O2

gas production, because the acidogenesis period lasted a long 80 N2

(%)

CO2
time, confirmed by high COD concentrations and low pH 70 CH4
Composition

values in the reactor. Increase in gas pro-duction was observed 60

around day 330 and reached to 20 L/day on day 445 which 50
was the highest value of gas production. Also methane content 40
of biogas was about 48% during these days (Fig. 6). Methane
Gas

30
and carbon diox-ide are the principal gases produced during 20
the decomposi-tion of organic fraction of waste under 10
anaerobic conditions. In the anaerobic reactor, methane, at 0
first, was not observed due to the acidogenic conditions until 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
day 165 (Fig. 6). After this day, methane began to appear and Time (Days)
increased to 50% by composition. Gas composition of the Fig. 6. Gas composition of the anaerobic bioreactor.
anaerobic reactor during methanogenic phase was 49% CH 4,
43% CO2, 0.5% O2 and 7.5% N2, respectively. Maximum 9 L
of methane was generated on day of highest gas production
by summing the observed daily gas production values within
while 80% of COD had been removed. This result is in good
the experimental period. The cumulative gas pro-duction in
agreement with the findings of San and Onay (2001).
the reactor was recorded as 1497 L. Cumulative methane and
Cumulative gas production was calculated
carbon dioxide productions were 690 and 609 L, respectively.
Methane yield was determined as 158 L/kg dry solid waste.
Other studies have found that the methane yield from landfills
1 is in the range 60–170 L/kg of dry refuse (El-Fadel et al.,
Anaerobic Bioreactor 1996). Barlaz and Ham (1989) calculated theoretical
Aerobic Bioreactor
maximum yield of meth-ane as 373 L CH4/kg wet solid waste.
0.8

As can be seen in Fig. 5, after conversion of easily

5 /COD

0.6
degradable organic substances, gas production decreased and
gas utilization was no longer possible. In conventional
BOD

0.4
landfills, gas production inevitably slows down until its use as
0.2
a source of energy is no longer economically viable, but after
this point it is still produced in large enough quanti-ties to
0
require treating before it can be emitted to the atmo-sphere
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
(Rich et al., 2007). The uncontrolled CH4 emissions from
Time (Days) landfills contribute to the greenhouse effect. By short-ening
the ensuing unprofitable period, aeration of a landfill
Fig. 4. BOD5/COD ratio for the anaerobic and aerobic bioreactors.
 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426
can save on gas treatment costs. The introduction of aero-bic
conditions throughout the waste mass reduced methane level
rapidly and kept it at a minimum (Read et al., 2001;
Ritzkowski et al., 2006). In one other related work, Leikam et
al. (1997) indicated that methane concentrations in land-fill
gas could be reduced from 60% to 10–15% in 7–10 days by
air injection.
Under aerobic conditions some of the organic carbon is the
waste mass is emitted as carbon dioxide and some would be
stabilized as carbonates. The intensity of the car-bon
conversion depends greatly on ambient conditions around the
microorganisms (e.g. oxygen concentration, pH, temperature,
water content) and the availability of bio-logically degradable
organic substances in the landfilled waste. In this study, gas
composition of the aerobic reactor was 4.95% CO 2, 14.41%
O2 and 80.64% N2, at the end of the experiment.
3.1.4. Nitrogen and phosphorus
Nitrogen which has potential to pollute water and soil is
another major constituent in the leachate. The TKN and
ammonia-nitrogen concentrations for aerobic and anaero-bic
reactors are given in Fig. 7. Initial concentrations of TKN and
ammonia-nitrogen in both reactors were found to be similar,
indicating uniformity in waste composition in the reactors. As
a result of decomposition of organic matter containing
nitrogen, initial NH3-N concentration increased from 390
mg/L to a maximum of 1064 mg/L NH 3-N for the anaerobic
reactor. TKN concentrations were also observed between 840
and 1590 mg/L. Protein fraction of biodegradable wastes
release ammonia-nitrogen and they may accumulate in the
leachate to concentrations of 1000–6000 mg/L in anaerobic
systems (Burton and Wat-son-Craik, 1998, 2001; Calli et al.,
2005a). The recircula-tion practice in the anaerobic reactor
reintroduces ammonia to the system, keeping its value almost
constant throughout experiment. Several researches indicated
that
10000
1000
(mg/L)
100
TKN
10
1 1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Time (Days)
Anaerobic Bioreactor TKN AerobicBioreactor TKN
Anaerobic Bioreactor NH3 AerobicBioreactor NH3
Fig. 7. Leachate TKN and ammonia-nitrogen concentrations for the anaerobic
and aerobic bioreactors.
5423
NH3-N is a significant long-term pollution problem in
landfills (Burton and Watson-Craik, 1998; Onay and Poh-land,
1998; Price et al., 2003; He et al., 2007). The increased
ammonia concentrations intensify the toxicity of the leach-ate.
Pohland et al. (1987) stated that concentrations between 200
and 1500 mg/L have shown to have no adverse effects on
anaerobic process, concentrations rang-ing from 1500 to 3000
mg/L were shown to have inhibitory effects at higher pH
levels, and concentrations above 3000 mg/L were very toxic.
However Calli et al. (2005b) have shown that NH3-N levels
up to 6000 mg/L could be tolerated in anaerobic bioreactors.
In this study, NH3-N concentrations in the anaerobic reactor
do not reach inhib-itory or toxic levels (Fig. 7). On the other
hand, under aer-obic conditions, the ammonia-nitrogen is
oxidized to nitrite and nitrate by nitrifying bacteria
(nitrobacter and nitroso-monas). TKN and ammonia-nitrogen
concentrations in the leachate of the aerobic reactor indicated
the same decreas-ing trend. Initial TKN and ammonia-
nitrogen concentra-tions were measured as 620 and 399 mg/L,
respectively. TKN concentration decreased to 140 mg/L on
day 108 and 42 mg/L on day 178 and stayed constant
throughout the study. NH3-N concentrations, on the other
hand, decreased to 132 mg/L on day 116 and 14 mg/L on day
175 and continued to decline slightly until reaching to 5 mg/L
at the end. These results agree with the findings of Cossu et al.
(2003), in which the ammonium concentra-tion declined to 5–
6 NH3-N mg/L after 120 days of opera-tion in the aerobic
reactor.
The initial concentrations of orthophosphate in the aerobic
and anaerobic reactors (Fig. 8) were 250 and 168 mg/L,
respectively. High initial orthophosphate con-centration in the
aerobic reactor decreased to 50 mg/L on day 33. This decrease
continued until day 200 and then, orthophosphate
concentrations stayed at a constant value of about 12 mg/L.
On the other hand, orthophosphate con-centration of the
anaerobic reactor increased to 410 mg/L as a result of the
hydrolysis of organic phosphorus com-pounds and then began
to decrease to 236 mg/L on day 113, 82 mg/L on day 216, 40
10000 mg/L on day 446 and reached to 25 mg/L at the end of the
1000
experiment. The decline in
100
(mg/L)
1000
Anaerobic Bioreactor Aerobic Bioreactor
100
(mg/L)
NH 3
10
PO 4
10
1 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
0
Time (Days)
Fig. 8. Leachate orthophosphate concentrations for the anaerobic and aerobic
bioreactors.
5424 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426
orthophosphate concentration may have been the results of
orthophosphate assimilation by microorganisms and dilution.
3.1.5. Chloride, metals and conductivity
Chloride was monitored as a conservative tracer in order to
estimate the dilution and washout effects. The chloride
concentrations of aerobic and anaerobic reactor indicated
similar decreasing trend because the same amount rain water
was added and same recirculation ratio was applied to the
reactors. Decrease in chloride concentra-tions caused by the
dilution effect of water used for rainfall simulation. Initial
chloride concentrations were 2584 and 2536 for the aereobic
and anaerobic reactors, respectively. These concentrations
decreased to 1340 and 538 mg/L, respectively, at the end of
the study. Theoretical chloride calculations also exhibited the
same decreasing trend in time.
The change in alkali metals (Na, K, Ca, Mg) in the aer-obic
and anaerobic reactors was also observed. Both sodium and
potassium concentrations of the reactors showed the same
behavior. Initial Na concentrations of the aerobic and
anaerobic reactors were 1344 and 1548 mg/L, respectively. At
the end, Na concentrations decreased to 879 mg/L in the
aerobic reactor and 1050 mg/L in the anaerobic reactor. K
concentrations of aerobic and anaerobic reactors declined
from 1532 to 1305 mg/L and from 1354 to 441 mg/L,
respectively. Sig-nificant precipitation for Na and K has not
been observed and they do not participate in any considerable
way in complexation reactions and they exist in only one
oxida-tion state (+1) in the landfill systems (Pohland et al.,
1993) and thus, their behavior was expected to be that of a
conservative tracer throughout the study. Both sodium and
potassium showed evidence of dilution effects that was
confirmed by chloride concentrations in the reactors. On the
other hand, Ca and Mg concentrations of the reac-tors
indicated variability because they are only slightly more
chemically complicated than Na and K, with the pri-mary
difference being that both have available and poten-tial
precipitants. In the case of calcium, the potential precipitant is
carbonate (CaCO3) while magnesium is sub-ject to
precipitation as the hydroxide (Mg(OH) 2). Ca con-centrations
were measured as 66 mg/L for the aerobic reactor and 3190
mg/L for the anaerobic reactor, at the beginning of study. Ca
concentration of the aerobic reactor increased slightly and
stayed constant during the experi-ment and then reached to
109 mg/L at the end. On the other hand, the high initial Ca
concentration of anaerobic reactor decreased to 1069 mg/L on
day 412. After the establishment of methanogenic conditions
and thus with increase in pH values, Ca concentrations
decreased rapidly to 126 mg/L and stayed constant throughout
experiment. Initial Mg concentrations were 52 and 340 mg/L
for aero-bic and anaerobic reactors, respectively. In aerobic
reactor, like Ca concentrations, Mg increased to 143 mg/L and
later
decreased to 56 mg/L at the end. In the anaerobic reactor it
declined to 28 mg/L.
There are numerous studies in which researchers have
reported metal concentrations from full-scale landfills, test
cells and laboratory studies under anaerobic conditions
(Yenigun et al., 1996; Flyhammar et al., 1998; Kruempel- beck
and Ehrig, 1999; Revans et al., 1999; Erses and Onay, 2003).
The release of metal into leachate is generally low in
anaerobic landfills in spite of acidogenesis. This is because
metals tend to form hydroxides or undergo sulfidation in the
anaerobic phase and the majority of these compounds are not
readily soluble (Rich et al., 2007). Once aerobic conditions
are re-established in the final aerobic phase met-als are still
immobile.
The conductivity of a leachate reflects its total concen-
tration of ionic solutes and is a measure of the solution’s
ability to convey an electric current. In both the reactors, the
change in leachate conductivity with time followed a similar
trend. Along with degradation, initial conductivity values
(11.78 mS/cm) in the aerobic reactor and (16.39 mS/cm) in
the anaerobic reactor increased to 16.71 and 23.70 mS/cm as
their highest values respectively and declined slowly to 8.28
and 9.28 mS/cm throughout the experiment due to
precipitation and the washout of easily mobilized ions such as
metals, chloride and sulfate because of rainfall simulation and
sampling. For aerobic reactor theoretical dilution of
conductivity highly agreed with experimental observations.
For the anaerobic reactor theo-retical conductivity dilution
gradient was smaller than that of experimental, this is because
of the mobilization of ions under acidogenic conditions which
was not considered in theoretical computations.
3.2. The impact on bioreactor landfill stabilization
Table 2 shows the characteristics of waste in the bioreac-
tors at the end of experiment. Settlement or subsidence of
MSW is a key parameter that distinguishes between aero-bic
and anaerobic bioreactor landfills. As it is shown in Table 2,
aerobic bioreactor technology enhances the rate and extent of
subsidence. Higher degree of settlement was achieved in the
aerobic bioreactor where settlement was about 37% at 374
days. Anaerobic bioreactor exhibited set-tlement about 5%
after 630 days. Several previous studies have measured
subsidence. The Mountain View Landfill Project in California
measured 13–15% settlement with leachate recirculation over
a period of 4 years as compared with 8–12% settlement in the
control reactor (Buivid et al.,
Table 2
Waste characteristics from aerobic and anaerobic bioreactors
Anaerobic bioreactor Aerobic bioreactor
Settlement (%) 5 37
Volatile solids, VS (%) 47 38
Wet weight (kg) 15.73 15.31
Dry weight (kg) 5.66 5.19
 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426
1981). Stessel and Murphy demonstrated 18–30% settling for
aerobic bioreactor in laboratory over a 65-day experi-ment
period. Settlement during actual landfill operations will
impact the performance of the final surface grade, sur-face
drainage, roads, gas collection piping system and leachate and
air distribution piping system. Settlement impacts can be
readily accommodated by the project design. Since settlement
in aerobic landfills will be largely complete soon after landfill
closure, long-term maintenance costs and the potential for
fugitive emissions will be avoided.
For comparison, the MSW was weighed as it was removed
from the reactors. The average weight of wet waste in the
anaerobic bioreactor was 15.73 kg, corre-sponding to a dry
weight of 5.66 kg, giving a 19% loss of MSW. For the aerobic
bioreactor, the average wet weight was 15.31 kg,
corresponding to a dry weight of 5.19 kg, which is a 21% loss
in MSW mass.
The amount of initial VS in the anaerobic and aerobic
bioreactors on dry weight basis were 82% and 84%, respec-
tively. Volatile solid was analyzed by loss on ignition at 550
LC. Reduction of organic substance in the aerobic bio-reactor
was 46% while in the anaerobic bioreactor this was 35%.
These values correlate well with waste weight and set-tlement
observations.
4. Conclusions
It may not prove surprising that waste can rapidly
decompose in aerobic conditions. It could be also antici-pated
that methane concentrations decreased as a result of air
addition. However, in addition to these common
consequences, the results of this study, which could possi-bly
occur in large scale landfill, may be helpful for landfill
operators and engineers when choosing aerobic and anaer-
obic systems.
Based upon the experimental results obtained during the
experimental study, the following conclusions are provided:
The anaerobic bioreactor landfill shows the highest lev-els
of all pollutional parameters, with high concentra-tions of
COD, TOC, BOD, ammonia, phosphorus and alkali metals
in the leachate.
Aeration of the waste mass produces a rapid oxidation of
organics and nitrogen when compared to the anaero-bic
bioreactor landfill. More than 90% of COD was
decomposed within 70 days in the aerobic bioreactor
compared to 462 days in the anaerobic bioreactor.
While ammonia concentrations were increasing through-
out the methanogenic phase of the anaerobic bioreactor,
their concentrations in the aerobic reactor decreased
rapidly. Ammonia concentrations in aerobic reactor
decreased to 5 mg/L at the end of experiments, their con-
centrations in anaerobic reactor reached to about 600 mg/L.
5425
Concentrations of Ca and Mg in the anaerobic reactor were
significantly greater than those of the aerobic reactor.
The waste settlement in the aerobic reactors occurred faster
than the waste settlement in the anaerobic reac-tors. Higher
degree of settlement was achieved in the aerobic bioreactor
where settlement was about 37% at 374 days. Anaerobic
bioreactor exhibited settlement about 5% after 630 days.
Comparing the anaerobic and aerobic reactors, the aer-obic
reactor was more effective in terms of COD reduc-tion and
waste stabilization. While aerobic reactor was completed
within 374 days, anaerobic reactor was oper-ated for 630
days.
Overall, the results of this study showed that aeration in
municipal solid waste landfills is a viable management option
for the accelerated stabilization of a waste matrix. These
results can be used to compare aerobic and anaero-bic
landfills for life-cycle assessment. Aerobic landfills are
expected to reduce the cost for monitoring and leachate
treatment due to rapid waste decomposition and low organic
carbon. Further studies should be extended to investigate
aeration rates and enhancement of solid waste stabilization to
render practical solutions in sustainable landfill management.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the financial support provided by
Bogazici University Research Fund by Research Project No.
04 Y102.
References
Agdag, O.N., Sponza, D.T., 2004. Effect of aeration on the performance of a
simulated landfilling reactor stabilizing municipal solid wastes. Journal of
Environmental Science and Health Part A-Toxic/Hazard-ous Substances &
Environmental Engineering 39, 2955–2972.
Alvarez-Vazquez, H., Jefferson, B., Judd, S.J., 2004. Membrane bioreac-tors
vs. conventional biological treatment of landfill leachate: a brief review.
Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology 79, 1043– 1049.
APHA, AWWA, WPCF, 1992. Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 18th ed. APHA, Washington, DC.
Barlaz, M.A., 1992. Microbial, chemical and methane production char-
acteristics of anaerobically decomposed refuse with and without leachate
recycling. Waste Management and Research 10, 257–267.
Barlaz, M.A., Ham, R.K., 1989. Mass balance analysis of anaerobically
decomposed refuse. Journal of Environmental Engineering ASCE 115,
1088–1102.
Borglin, S.E., Hazen, T.C., Oldenburg, C.M., Zawislanski, P.T., 2004.
Comparison of aerobic and anaerobic biotreatment of municipal solid
waste. Journal of Air and Waste Management Association 54, 815– 822.
Buivid, M.G., Wise, D.L., Blanchet, M.J., 1981. Fuel gas enhancement by
controlled landfill of municipal solid waste. Resources and Conserva-tion
6, 3–20.
Burton, S.A.Q., Watson-Craik, I.A., 1998. Ammonia and nitrogen fluxes in
landfill sites: applicability to sustainable landfilling. Waste Man-agement
and Research 16, 41–53.
5426 A.S. Erses et al. / Bioresource Technology 99 (2008) 5418–5426
Burton, S.A.Q., Watson-Craik, I.A., 2001. Ammonia fluxes in landfills:
current research on the acceleration of the decomposition of landfilled
refuse. In: Proceedings Sardinia 2001, 18th International Waste
Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Calli, B., Mertoglu, B., Inanc, B., Yenigun, O., 2005a. Effects of high free
ammonia concentrations on the performances of anaerobic bioreac-tors.
Process Biochemistry 40, 1285–1292.
Calli, B., Mertoglu, B., Inanc, B., Yenigun, O., 2005b. Methanogenic
diversity in anaerobic bioreactors under extremely high ammonia levels.
Enzyme and Microbial Technology 37, 448–455.
Chugh, S., Clarke, W., Pullammanappallil, P., Rudolph, V., 1998. Effect of
recirculated leachate volume on MSW degradation. Waste Man-agement
Research 16 (6), 564–573.
Cossu, R., Raga, R., Rossetti, D., 2003. The PAF model: an integrated
approach for landfill sustainability. Waste Management 23, 37–44.
Council of the European Union, 1999. Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 of
April 1999 on the landfill of solid waste. Official Journal of the European
Communities.
Doedens, H., Cord-Landwehr, K., 1989. Leachate recirculation. In:
Christensen, T.H., Cossu, R., Stegmann, R. (Eds.), Sanitary Landfill-ing:
Process, Technology and Environmental Impact. Academic Press, pp.
231–249.
El-Fadel, M., 1999. Leachate recirculation effects on settlement and
biodegradation rates in MSW landfills. Environmental Technology 20,
121–133.
El-Fadel, M., Findikakis, A., Leckie, J., 1996. Estimating and enhancing
methane yield from municipal solid waste. Hazardous Waste & Hazardous
Materials 13, 309–331.
Erses, S., Onay, T.T., 2003. In situ heavy metal attenuation in landfills under
methanogenic conditions. Journal of Hazardous Materials 99, 159–175.
Flyhammar, P., Tamaddon, F., Bengtsson, L., 1998. Heavy metals in a
municipal solid waste decomposition cell. Waste Management and
Research 16, 403–410.
He, R., Liu, X., Zhang, Z., Shen, D., 2007. Characteristics of the bioreactor
landfill system using an anaerobic–aerobic process for nitrogen removal.
Bioresource Technology 98, 2526–2532.
Hudgins, M., Harper, S., 1999. Operational characteristics of two aerobic
landfill systems. In: Proceedings Sardinia 99, the Seventh International
Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Hudgins, M., March, J., 1998. In situ Municipal Solid Waste Composting
Using an Aerobic Landfill System. American Technologies Inc., pp. 144–
157.
Jacobs, J., Scharff, H., Van Arkel, F., de Gier, C.W., 2003. Odour reduction by
aeration of landfills: experience, operation and costs. In: Proceedings
Sardinia 2003, the Ninth International Waste Manage-ment and Landfill
Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Kim, H., 2005. Comparative Studies of Aerobic and Anaerobic Landfills
Using Simulated Landfill Lysimeters. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Florida,
USA.
Kinman, R.N., Nutini, D.L., Walsh, J.J., Vogt, W.G., Stamm, J., Rickabaugh,
J., 1987. Gas enhancement techniques in landfill simu-lators. Waste
Management and Research 5, 13–25.
Kjeldsen, P., Barlaz, M.A., Rooker, A.P., Baun, A., Ledin, A., Christen-sen,
T.H., 2002. Present and long-term composition of MSW landfill leachate:
a review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology 32,
297–336.
Kruempelbeck, I., Ehrig, H.J., 1999. Long term behaviour of municipal solid
waste landfills in Germany. In: Proceedings Sardinia 99, the Seventh
International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Leikam, K., Heyer, K.U., Stegmann, R., 1997. In situ stabilization of
completed landfills and old sites. In: Proceedings Sardinia 1997, Sixth
International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium, Cagliari, Italy.
Murphy, R.J., Jones, D.E., Stessel, R.I., 1995. Relationship of microbial mass
and activity in biodegradation of solid waste. Waste Manage-ment and
Reseach 13, 485–497.
O’Keefe, D.M., Chynoweth, D.P., 2000. Influence of phase separation,
leachate recycle and aeration on treatment of municipal solid waste in
simulated landfill cells. Bioresource Technology 72, 55–66.
Onay, T.T., Pohland, F.G., 1998. In situ nitrogen management in controlled
landfills. Water Research 32, 1383–1392.
Otieno, F.A.O., 1994. Stabilization of solid waste through leachate recycling.
Waste Management and Research 12, 93–100.
Pohland, F.G., 1980. Leachate recycle as landfill management option.
Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division 106, EE6.
Pohland, F.G., Kim, J.C., 1999. In-situ anaerobic treatment of leachate in
landfill bioreactors. Water Science and Technology 40, 203–210.
Pohland, F.G., Kim, J.C., 2000. Microbially mediated attenuation potential of
landfill bioreactor systems. Water Science and Technology 41, 247–254.
Pohland, F.G., Gould, J.P., Esteves, W.R., Spiller, B.J., 1987. Fate of heavy
metals during landfill stabilization of solid waste materials with leachate
recycle. US EPA Project No. R-806498, Cincinnati, OH.
Pohland, F.G., Cross, W.H., Gould, J.P., Reinhart, D.R., 1993. The behavior
and assimilation of organic and inorganic priority pollutants codisposed
with municipal refuse. Research Paper, University of Pittsburgh, USA.
Price, G.A., Barlaz, M.A., Hater, G.R., 2003. Nitrogen management in
bioreactor landfills. Waste Management 23, 675–688.
Purcell, B., 2000a. Aerox landfilling: the operational implications. Waste
Management, 27–28.
Purcell, B., 2000b. Aerox landfilling: a change of approach. Waste
Management, 25–27.
Read, A.D., Hudgins, M., Harper, S., Phillips, P., Morris, J., 2001. The
successful demonstration of aerobic landfilling: the potential for a more
sustainable solid waste management approach? Resources, Conservation
and Recycling 32, 115–146.
Revans, A., Ross, D., Gregory, B., Meadows, M., Harries, C., Gronow, J.,
1999. Long term fate of metals in landfill. In: Proceedings Sardinia 99, the
Seventh International Waste Management and Landfill Sympo-sium,
Cagliari, Italy.
Rich, C., Gronow, J., Voulvoulis, N., 2007. The potential for aeration of MSW
landfills to accelerate completion. Waste Management,
doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2007.03.022.
Ritzkowski, M., Heyer, K.U., Stegmann, R., 2006. Fundamental pro-cesses
and implications during in situ aeration of old landfills. Waste
Management 26, 356–372.
San, I., Onay, T.T., 2001. Impact of various leachate recirculation regimes on
municipal solid waste degradation. Journal of Hazardous Materials 87,
259–271.
Stessel, R.I., Murphy, R.J., 1992. A lysimeter study of the aerobic landfill
concept. Waste Management and Research 10, 485–503.
Swarbrick, G.E., 2001. Microbiology of landfill. In: Smith, D.W., Fityus,
S.G., Allman, M.A. (Eds.), GeoEnvironment 2001. Australian Geo-
mechanics Society, Newcastle, Australia, pp. 397–408.
Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F.L., 1979. Wastewater Engineering.
McGraw-Hill International Editions.
Tittlebaum, M.E., 1982. Organic carbon content stabilization through landfill
leachate recirculation. Journal WPCF 54, 428–433.
Townsend, T.G., Miller, W.L., Lee, H., Earle, J.K.F., 1996. Acceleration of
landfill stabilization using leachate recycle. Journal of Environmen-tal
Engineering 122, 263–268.
Yenigun, O., Kizilgun, F., Yilmazer, G., 1996. Inhibition e ffects of zinc and
copper on volatile acid production during anaerobic digestion.
Environmental Technology 17, 1269–1274.