URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

INCINERATION AND
COMPOSTING PROCESSES IN
LANDFILL

MAE GERLYNN C. REGALA

BSCE-V
Incineration is a method of waste treatment involving the burning organic materials
found in waste. Incineration and other high-temperature waste management
processes are called “thermal treatment”. Particularly, it involves converting waste
materials into ash, flue gas, and heat. The ash mostly consists of inorganic components
of waste and can be in the shape of solid lumps or particulates carried by the flue gas.
The flue gases are supposed to be cleaned of particulate and gaseous contaminants
before being released into the air. Sometimes, the heat generated is used in useful
ways like in producing electricity.

Incineration plants are able to reduce the mass of waste to 95% to 96%. The decrease
in waste is determined by the recovery level and decomposition of substances. Even
though incineration does not substitute the need for landfills, it has been able to reduce
the quantity of waste in landfills.

Incineration has numerous benefits especially in terms of destroying contaminant

medical wastes and other life-risking garbage. Also, incineration largely utilizes waste-
to-energy technology. In Japan, for example, thermal treatment is very popular since
they have a shortage of land. Plus, the energy produced by incineration plants is in high
demand in nations such as Sweden and Denmark. However, incinerators also have their
downside. Let’s have a look at the advantages and disadvantages of incineration.

Advantages of Waste Incineration

1. Decreases quantity of waste

Incinerators are able to decrease the quantity of waste by 95% and reduce the solid
quantity of the original waste by 80-85% depending on the components that were
in solid waste. Hence, even though incinerators do not completely get rid of dumping
ground, they definitely decrease the quantity of land needed. For nations that are small
in size and with a shortage of land like Japan, this is noteworthy since landfills take up
big amounts of land required for other productive uses.

2. Production of heat and power

During the 1950s, energy costs increased considerably. So a lot of countries

incorporated the heat and energy produced from waste incinerators for the generation of
power by using steam turbines. Moreover, Europe and Japan have now integrated
incinerators into modern heating systems. For example, Sweden generates 8% of its
heating needs from waste incinerators. Furthermore, other countries that have cold
weather utilize the heat from the incinerators for warming their homes and places of
work in areas near the plant.

3. Reduction of Pollution

Research has shown that solid waste incinerators are less likely to pollute the
environment than landfills do. One particular study done during a 1994 lawsuit in the US
showed that a waste incinerator location was more environment-friendly compared to a
landfill. The research discovered that the landfill was releasing higher quantities
of greenhouse gases, nitrogen oxides, dioxin, hydrocarbons, and non-methane organic
compounds. Landfills also leach poisonous chemicals into the water below thus
contaminating underground water systems.

4. Incinerators have filters for trapping pollutants

The main problem concerning the incineration of solid waste was the release of
hazardous compounds, particularly dioxin. Nonetheless, up to date incinerator plants
use filters to trap hazardous gases and particulate dioxin. The current incineration plants
operate within the required pollution limits recommended by the Environmental
Protection Agency and international protocols.

5. Saves on Transportation of Waste

Incineration plants can be near cities or towns. This is advantageous since it means
waste does not have to be driven for long distances for dumping. It significantly reduces
the cost of transport; the money can then be spent on the wellbeing of the community
and sustaining the growth of a city or district. Additionally, it reduces the harmful gases
released by vehicles during transportation, thus drastically reducing the overall carbon
footprint.

6. Provides better control over odor and noise

Incineration plants are able to provide less bad smells because waste gets burnt, unlike
landfills where waste is allowed to decay thereby emitting unpleasant smells,
which cause air pollution. The production of methane in landfills may also lead to
explosions that cause noise pollution, which is unheard-of when it comes to the use of
incineration plants.

7. Prevent the production of methane gas

In landfills, when the waste is decaying methane gas is generated which if not
controlled, may explode causing further global warming. Unlike landfills, incineration
plants do not produce methane, therefore making them safer.

8. Eliminates harmful germs and chemicals

Incineration plants function at very high temperatures that can destroy germs and
chemicals that are harmful. Thus, it is a very effective method when it comes to
eliminating clinical waste.

9.  Incinerators operate in any weather

Another advantage of incinerators is that they can function in any type of weather. For
instance, during a rainy season, waste cannot be dumped in a landfill because the rain
will possibly wash down poisonous chemicals into the ground and consequently create
leachate thus contaminating the underground water as well as the neighboring land.

Waste can also not be dumped when it is windy since it will get blown into the
surroundings. On the other hand, incinerators are not limited to weather changes since
they burn waste without leakages. Incineration plants also function 24 hours a day and
are more efficient in managing waste compared to landfills.

10. Effective Metal Recycling

When incinerators are burning waste, the metals still remain whole because they have a
high melting point. After the process of burning waste is done, the workers remove the
remaining metal and recycle it. This removes the need for separating out any metal
before waste disposal.

When garbage is taken to a landfill, it is usually not organized which results in wasting of
resources that could have been recycled. Therefore, using an incinerator makes it
easier to remove and reuse metals.

11. It has a computerized monitoring system

Governments, cities, institutions, or private waste management companies can

purchase an incinerator that comes with a computer device to allow for the
troubleshooting of most problems. This will enable operators to discover a problem
before it becomes more serious and much more expensive to repair. A computer will
also make operators work easily as they will be able to track the operational efficiency of
the incinerator plant.

12. Uses of ash

The ash that comes from the combustion of waste can be used in construction, get
shipped or even landfilled. Shipping of ash is cheaper than transporting of unburned
trash, it will also reduce liability issues. 

Disadvantages of Waste Incineration

1. It is expensive

The installation of an incineration plant is an expensive process. Particularly, the costs

of constructing the infrastructure to the costs of operating the incineration plants are
very high. Besides, an incineration plant requires trained personnel and devoted staff to
man its operation. Incinerator plants also need regular maintenance, which adds to the
already high costs of operating it.

2. Pollutes the environment

Incinerators produce smoke during the burning process. The smoke produced includes
acid gases, carcinogen dioxin, particulates, heavy metals, and nitrogen oxide. These
gases are poisonous to the environment. Research has shown that dioxin produced in
the plant is a cancer forming chemical.

3. The possibility of long-term problems

Incineration does not encourage recycling and waste reduction. This is not a calculated
strategy for any society. The point of focus should be on reducing waste and recycling
most of it. Merely burning most of the waste without recycling some of it will only
further environmental damage because it may encourage more waste production.

4. Ash waste can potentially harm people and the environment

Even though the ash that remains from the process can be comparatively small in
quantity, it contains a number of poisons and heavy metals which requires further
treatment. If not disposed correctly, it can cause serious harm to the public and the
environment.

Composting is an aerobic method (meaning that it requires the presence of air) of

decomposing organic solid wastes. It can therefore be used to recycle organic material.
The process involves decomposition of organic material into a humus-like material,
known as compost, which is a good fertilizer for plants. Composting requires the
following three components: human management, aerobic conditions, and development
of internal biological heat.

Composting organisms require four equally important ingredients to work effectively

Carbon — for energy; the microbial oxidation of carbon produces the heat, if included at
suggested levels.[2] High carbon materials tend to be brown and dry.

Nitrogen — to grow and reproduce more organisms to oxidize the carbon. High nitrogen
materials tend to be green (or colorful, such as fruits and vegetables) and wet.

Oxygen — for oxidizing the carbon, the decomposition process.

Water — in the right amounts to maintain activity without causing anaerobic conditions.

Certain ratios of these materials will provide microorganisms to work at a rate that will
heat up the pile. Active management of the pile (e.g. turning) is needed to maintain
sufficient supply of oxygen and the right moisture level. The air/water balance is critical
to maintaining high temperatures 130–160 °F (54–71 °C) until the materials are broken
down.The most efficient composting occurs with an optimal carbon:nitrogen ratio of
about 25:1 Hot container composting focuses on retaining the heat to increase
decomposition rate and produce compost more quickly. Rapid composting is favored by
having a C/N ratio of ~30 or less. Above 30 the substrate is nitrogen starved, below 15 it
is likely to out gas a portion of nitrogen as ammonia.

Nearly all plant and animal materials have both carbon and nitrogen, but amounts vary
widely, with characteristics noted above (dry/wet, brown/green). Fresh grass clippings
have an average ratio of about 15:1 and dry autumn leaves about 50:1 depending on
species. Mixing equal parts by volume approximates the ideal C:N range. Few individual
situations will provide the ideal mix of materials at any point. Observation of amounts,
and consideration of different materials as a pile is built over time, can quickly achieve a
workable technique for the individual situation.

Phases of Composting

Under ideal conditions, composting proceeds through three major phases:

 Mesophilic phase: An initial, mesophilic phase, in which the decomposition is

carried out under moderate temperatures by mesophilic microorganisms.
 Thermophilic phase: As the temperature rises, a second, thermophilic phase
starts, in which the decomposition is carried out by various thermophilic bacteria
under high temperatures.
 Maturation phase: As the supply of high-energy compounds dwindles, the
temperature starts to decrease, and the mesophiles once again predominate in the
maturation phase.

Slow and Rapid Composting

There are many proponents of rapid composting that attempt to correct some of the
perceived problems associated with traditional, slow composting. Many advocate that
compost can be made in 2 to 3 weeks.[11] Many such short processes involve a few
changes to traditional methods, including smaller, more homogenized pieces in the
compost, controlling carbon-to-nitrogen ratio (C:N) at 30 to 1 or less, and monitoring the
moisture level more carefully. However, none of these parameters differ significantly
from the early writings of compost researchers, suggesting that, in fact, modern
composting has not made significant advances over the traditional methods that take a
few months to work. For this reason and others, many scientists who deal with carbon
transformations are skeptical that there is a "super-charged" way to get nature to make
compost rapidly.[citation needed]

Both sides may be right to some extent. The bacterial activity in rapid high heat methods
breaks down the material to the extent that pathogens and seeds are destroyed, and the
original feedstock is unrecognizable. At this stage, the compost can be used to prepare
fields or other planting areas. However, most professionals recommend that the
compost be given time to cure before using in a nursery for starting seeds or growing
young plants. The curing time allows fungi to continue the decomposition process and
eliminating phytotoxic substances.[citation needed]

An alternative approach is anaerobic fermentation, known as bokashi. It retains carbon

bonds, is faster than decomposition, and for application to soil requires only rapid but
thorough aeration rather than curing. It depends on sufficient carbohydrates in the
treated material.

Pathogen Removal

Composting can destroy pathogens or unwanted seeds. Unwanted living plants (or
weeds) can be discouraged by covering with mulch/compost. The "microbial pesticides"
in compost may include thermophiles and mesophiles.

Thermophilic (high-temperature) composting is well known to destroy many seeds and

nearly all types of pathogens (exceptions may include prions). The sanitizing qualities of
(thermophilic) composting are desirable where there is a high likelihood of pathogens,
such as with manure.
 URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

TYPES OF LANDFILL

MAE GERLYNN C. REGALA

BSCE-V
Why are landfills important?
Landfills contain garbage and serve to prevent contamination between the waste and
the surrounding environment, especially groundwater.

What happens to the trash in a landfill?

Landfills are not designed to break down trash, merely to bury it. That’s because they
contain minimal amounts of oxygen and moisture, which prevents trash from breaking
down rapidly. So landfills are carefully filled, monitored and maintained while they are
active and for up to 30 years after they are closed.

What is the difference between a dump and a landfill?

A dump is an open hole in the ground where trash is buried and where animals often
swarm. Dumps offer no environmental protection and are not regulated.

A landfill is a carefully designed and monitored structure that isolates trash from the
surrounding environment (e.g., groundwater, air, rain). This isolation is accomplished
with the use of a bottom liner and daily covering of soil.

PARTS OF A LANDFILL
The main components of any secured, permitted landfill are:

Bottom liner — The bottom liner separates and prevents the buried waste from coming
in contact with underlying natural soils and groundwater. In Municipal Solid Waste
landfills, the bottom liners are generally constructed using some type of durable,
puncture-resistant synthetic plastic HDPE (High Density Polyethylene) ranging from 30
to 100 mils thick. The plastic liners may also be designed with a combination of
compacted clay soils, along with synthetic plastic.

Cells (old and new) — This is the area in a landfill that has been constructed and
approved for disposal of waste. These cells range in size (depending upon total tons of
waste received each day at the landfill) from a few acres to as large as 20+ acres.
Inside these larger cells are smaller cells known as the daily workface, or sometimes
referred to as cells. This is where the waste coming into the landfill for disposal that day
is prepared by placing the material in layers or lifts where the waste is then compacted
and shredded by heavy landfill compaction machinery.

Leachate collection system — The bottom of each landfill is typically designed so that
the bottom surface of the landfill is sloped to a low point, called a sump. This is where
any liquids that are trapped inside the landfill — known in the waste industry as leachate
— are collected and removed from the landfill. The leachate collection system typically
consists of a series of perforated pipes, gravel packs and a layer of sand or gravel
placed in the bottom of the landfill. Once the leachate is removed from the sump, it is
typically pumped or gravity-flowed to a holding tank or pond, where it is either treated on
site or hauled off site to a public or private wastewater treatment facility.

Storm water drainage — This is an engineered system designed to control water runoff
during rain or storm events. This is done by directing the runoff through a series of
berms or ditches to holding areas known as sed ponds. In these ponds the runoff water
flow is slowed down or held long enough to allow the suspended soil particles to settle
out before the water is discharged off site.

Methane collection system — Bacteria in the landfill break down the trash in the
absence of oxygen. This process produces landfill gas, which is approximately 50
percent methane. Since methane gas has the potential to burn or explode, it has to be
removed from the landfill. To do this, a series of pipes are embedded within the landfill
to collect the methane gas. This gas, once collected, can be either naturally vented or
control-burned.

Cover (or cap) — Waste that is placed in a cell is required to be covered daily with either
six inches of compacted soil or an alternative daily cover. Some examples of alternative
daily covers are the application of spray-on cover material, such as foam or a flame-
retardant fiber material. Another type of alternative daily cover is large panels of
tarpaulin-type material that is laid over the waste at the end of each day and removed
the next day before waste is placed. Other areas within the cells that are not to final
grade and will not receive placement of additional waste for a period of time may require
additional cover. This is known as intermediate cover — generally 12 to 18 inches of
soil. Covering (or capping) is performed in order to isolate the waste from exposure to
the air, pests (such as birds, rats and mice) and to control odors. When a section of the
landfill is finished or filled to capacity, it is permanently covered with a combination of a
layer of polyethylene plastic, compacted soil and a layer of topsoil that will support
growth of vegetation to prevent erosion.

Groundwater monitoring stations — These stations are set up to directly access and test
the groundwater around the landfill for presence of leachate chemicals. Typically a
groundwater monitoring system will have a series of wells that are located up-gradient of
the landfill disposal area and a series of wells down-gradient. The up-gradient wells test
the water quality before it moves under the disposal area in order to get a background
analysis of the water. The down-gradient wells then allow testing of the water after it has
passed under the disposal area so it can be compared to the quality of the up-gradient
wells to make sure there has been no impact or contamination of the groundwater.

What Are the Four Types of Landfills?

There are currently three standard landfill types: municipal solid waste, industrial waste
and hazardous waste. Each accepts specific types of waste and has different practices
to limit environmental impact. Additionally, there is an emerging landfill type — green
waste — that allows for controlled disposal of organic materials.

1. Municipal Solid Waste Landfills

If you throw it out in a garbage can, chances are that your trash ends up in a municipal
solid waste, or MSW, landfill. These sites are typically what come to mind when you
think about a landfill. However, just because they are the most common kind does not
mean that they are open to the public.
Since most residential waste types — everything from used tissues to a roll off dumpster
full of boxes from a basement cleanout — MSW landfills tend to have some of the
strictest safety and monitoring regulations. These rules often include restrictions on
location, landfill lining, operating practices, groundwater monitoring and closing
practices.

So how do MSW landfills work? It’s a matter of layers. Modern landfills have a four
layered system that consists of a liner, drainage system, gas collection system and the
trash itself. Each of these layers are closely monitored to ensure the landfill is safe for
the environment as well as the people who work at the site.

2. Industrial Waste Landfills

If it sounds like this landfill is self-explanatory, that’s because it is. An industrial waste
landfill is where industrial waste is disposed of. While any type of solid industrial waste
can be brought to these landfills, they are most often used for construction debris, which
is why they are commonly known as C&D landfills. Items often brought to industrial
landfills include:

 Concrete
 Lumber
 Asphalt
 Gypsum
 Metal
 Bricks
Building components (doors, countertops, cabinets, etc.)
However, rather than just hold construction debris in a hole, C&D landfills often work as
material recovery facilities — also known as an MRF — as well. To do this, the items
brought in are dumped into a pile, then sorted by the landfill workers to see what
materials are reusable and which would be best sent to the landfill. The reusable
materials are donated to or bought by local resale stores or businesses that specialize in
building with reclaimed materials. Additionally, the material recovery facility may
repurpose the materials on-site, such as taking lumber and chipping it into mulch.

3. Hazardous Waste Landfills

For important reasons, hazardous waste landfills are the most closely regulated and
structured landfills. They are specifically designed to hold hazardous wastes in a way
that virtually eliminates the chance of it being released into the environment. Some of
the design requirements for hazardous waste landfills include:

- Double liners
- Double leachate collection and removal systems
- Leak detection systems
- Run on, runoff and wind dispersal controls
- Construction quality assurance programs
In addition to these design requirements, hazardous waste landfills are often inspected
multiple times a year to make sure that the facility is up to code and the standards are
top-notch.

If you’re concerned you might be attempting to throw out a prohibited item, rest assured
that it would be quite difficult for you to do. Hazardous waste is not collected curbside
and only allowed in dumpsters with prior notification — and even then, it is very rarely
allowed.

4. Green Waste Landfills

While these are not officially sanctioned landfills by the EPA, many municipalities are
starting to offer a place for organic materials to naturally decompose. These composting
sites are on the rise because most standard landfills and transfer stations are not as
accepting of organic materials like fruits, vegetables and, in particular, yard waste.
“Some will [accept yard waste] at higher rates,” Morris said. “Some transfer stations will
accept it, but not all. This is all dependent on your local municipality.”

Common types of green waste include:

- Mulch
- Weeds
- Leaves
- Tree branches
- Biodegradable food waste
- Flowers and grass trimmings

The purpose of green waste landfills is simple enough: save space in other MSW
landfills by keeping a material out that is meant to naturally decompose on its own. A
recent EPA study found that composting landfills are achieving that goal. In 2017, there
were 24,420 tons of yard trimming composted with 8,650 tons sent to the landfill — a
stark contrast from the 1990 numbers that saw 4,200 tons composted and 25,560 tons
sent to the landfill.
 URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

GEOSYNTHETICS FOR WASTE DISPOSAL

MAE GERLYNN C. REGALA

BSCE-V
Geosynthetics used in landfills provides a technical and economic advantages over
traditional clay liners. It may create stability issue and even lead to landfill failure due to
its low interface or internal shear strength if improperly designed and/or constructed.
The most common failure mechanism in geosynthetic-lined landfills is transitional failure
involving waste and bottom liner (deep-seated failure) or only final cover system
(shallow failure). Shear strengths of geosynthetic-geosynthetic and geosynthetic-soil
have a wide range of variations. Shear strengths of interface from literature may be
used in preliminary design. For final design, site-specific interface shear strengths shall
be used. Internal shear strengths of unreinforced geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) are less
than those of reinforced GCLs. Unreinforced GCLs are not recommended for slopes
steeper than 1:10 (1 Vertical and 10 Horizontal). Peak shear strength of interface and
internal GCLs can be used in bottom liner; residual shear strength of interface and
internal GCLs shall be used for geosynthetic placed along the slopes. Site-specific
shear strengths of waste are recommended to be used in the design. Landfill failure
could be triggered by static loadings including excessive leachate, pore pressure above
the bottom liners, gas pressure, and excessive wetness of the geomembrane-GCL, and
earthquake loading. The factor of safety of 1.5 is recommended for static loading and
1.0 for earthquake loading. A higher factor of safety is recommended if a failure could
have a catastrophic effect on human health or the environment, and if large uncertainty
exists in input parameters to calculate the factors of safety. The main objective of this
review article is to provide a comprehensive knowledge of slope failure mechanisms,
causes, and probable remedies in one place.

Geosynthetics are most commonly used in solid waste landfills to protect surface water
and groundwater due to their multiple functions, excellent hydraulic properties, ease of
installation, and cost saving [1]. Geosynthetic used in landfill include non-woven
geotextile, woven geotextile, geogrid, geomembrane, geocells, geosynthetic clay liner
(GCL), geonet, geocomposite, etc, and each geosynthetic type serves as specific
functions. The functions that geosynthetic system can serve in landfill are separation,
drainage, filtration, hydraulic barrier, gas barrier, and protection [1]. Table 1 summarizes
geosynthetic types and their functions, and Figure 1 illustrates their use in landfills.
Geomembrane, GCL, geopipe, and geotextile are more commonly used geosynthetic
materials in landfill applications while geonet, geocomposite, and geogrid are used a
lesser extent [1].

Table 1:  Functions of Geosynteteic Materials in Solid Waste Landfill Design [1]
Function Description Geosynthetic Type
Separation Placed between two Non-woven geotextile;
different materials to woven geotextile; geocells;
maintain or improve the geocomposite
integrity and functioning of
both materials
Reinforcement Provides tensile strength in Woven geotextile; geogrids;
materials that lacks geocells; geocomposite
sufficient tensile capacity
Filtration Allows water or gas flow Non-woven geotextile;
across it while retaining the woven geotextile;
fine particles on its geocomposite
upstream side
Drainage Transmits flow within the Non-woven geotextile;
plane of their structure geopipe; geocomposite;
geonet
Hydraulic/ Gas Barrier Relatively impervious Non-woven geotextile;
material to contain liquids geomembrane;
or gasses geosynthetic clay liner;
geocomposite; geonet
Protection Provides a cushion above/ Non-woven
below to prevent damage geotextile;geosynthetic clay
by punctures during liner; geocomposite
placement of overlying
materials
While geosynthetic system provides huge economic and technical advantage over
traditional liners, it may create stability issue and even lead to landfill failure if improperly
designed and/or constructed. One of the most important problems associated with the
use of geosynthetics for landfill linings is their stability. This becomes a very important
issue by the fact that more and more landfills are designed and constructed with a small
footprint and require moderate to steep slopes to raise their capacity . There have been
massive failures of landfills related to geosynthetic systems. For example, Koerner and
Soong reported five failed landfill sites that contained geomembrane liners with volumes
from 60,000 to 1,200,000 m3. These landfill failures caused dramatic damage to the
environment, and resulted in litigations and fines. The five failure scenarios are
presenmted in figure 2. In this respect, evaluation of geosynthetic related stability is a
critical consideration for landfill design, construction, and operation. As such, this review
paper is concerned on failure mechanisms, shear strengths, triggering factors of
geosynthetic-lined landfill failures and design criteria.

Landfill slope failure can be classified as two major types: rotational failure and
translational failure. Translational failures are more prevalent in landfills containing
geosynthetics while rotational failure is more common in landfills without geosynthetics.
This is because geosynthetic-geosynthetic interface, internal GCLs, geosynthetic-waste
interface and geosynthetic-soil interface are weaker in shear strengths than waste
materials and foundation soils, and thus represent weaker planar failure surfaces in
landfills, at which landfill slide can occur . The landfills without geosynthetics contain
relatively uniform materials without a weaker prevalent planar surface. Translational
failures tend to occur when dissimilar materials are involved while rotational failures tend
to occur through a relatively uniform material

failure and shallow translational failure. Deep-seated translational failure occurs along
the geosynthetics placed as bottom liner or along internal slope. Shallow translational
failure occurs along the geosynthetics placed in the final cover system. All failures in
figure 3 are deep-seated failure.Case Histories
Richardson et al., reported a shallow translational slide occurred during construction of
one-six-hare final cover project. The slope on which the slide occurred is inclined at 14
degrees with an 1V:4H (1 Vertical and 4 Horizontal), and the slope is 60 feet high with
no benches. The cover system consisted of topsoil, vegetative soil, drainage sand,
polyvinyl chloride (PVC), geomembrane, GCL, and gas relief system from top to bottom.
Failure of the cover system took place when the drainage sand layer. The sand above
the geomembrane and the geomembrane moved downslope along the
geomembrane/GCL interface. The cover system failure was induced by a combination
of low interface shear strength of geomembrane-GCL interface, excess pore pressure,
and gas pressure below the GCLs

The Kettleman Hill Landfill failure is one of the most famous deep-seated translational
slide landfill failures, which has been extensively studied by various authors . The
Kettleman Hills Unit B-19, Phase 1-A landfill had an area of about 120,000 m2 and was
part of a waste treatment and storage facility at Kettleman Hills, California. The landfill
has straight-sided liner with an oval-shaped bowl, which had a nearly level base. The
solid waste placement and soil cover construction began in 1987 and progressed at an
essentially steady rate. The landfill slid on March 19, 1988, resulting in a lateral
movement of the fill of 35 feet towards the southeast. The vertical displacement was up
to 14 feet along the back of the sliding mass. Surface cracking and tears and
displacement of the geosynthetic liner were clearly visible. The sliding mass slid along
the liner system. There were no rain, earthquakes, or other triggering events during the
failure. Many studies believe that the failure occurred because the waste fill placed on
the top of landfill reached a height that created a marginal stability of landfill slope. Major
reasons that could contributed this landfill failure include that (1) the friction angle could
be as low as 8 degrees between layers of geosynthetic materials; the interface between
geomembranes and compacted clay could have only a few hundred pound per square
foot; (2) the over-wetness yielded a very ow shearing strength at geomembrane/clay
interfaces; and (3) the conditions at which the liner interface strengths were tested were
different from the field conditions, and the interface shear strengths could not represent
the site-specific shear strength

Shear strengths of interface and waste and internal shear strength of GCL

Slope failure in geosynthetic lined landfills, as discussed in the previous sections, could
occur along the following weak planes:

1. Soil-Geosynthetics Interface;

2. Geosynthetic-Geosynthetic Interface; and

3. Geosynthetic-Waste Interface.

4. Bentonite within GCL

5. Waste

Interface shear strengths

Bouazza et al. [1], summarized the ranges of interface strengths between geosynthetics
collected from the literature (Table 2). Table 2 shows a very wide range of variations in
interface shear strengths, which is due to different types of the geosynthetics materials,
different testing conditions, testing protocols and testing equipment [1]. As such,
interface shear strength from the published values are not recommended to be used in
the landfill design; however, they can be used in a preliminary design. The site-specific
testing shall be performed to obtain interface shear strength on a site-specific basis for
design. Figure 6 presents comparison of failure envelope for smooth and textured
geomembrane-geotextile interfaces, and peak shear strength and residual strength.
Textured geomembrane/geotextile has greater friction angle than smooth
geomembrane-geotextile. If a higher shear resistance is desired for the design, textured
geomembrane can be used to replace the smooth geomembrane.
 URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

DESIGN OF LEACHATE
COLLECTION SYSTEM
FOR LANDFILLS

MAE GERLYNN C. REGALA

BSCE-V
Landfills are planned and designed to sequester solid waste material by burying it in
layers of earth in an effort to decrease human health hazards. Sustainable collection
and treatment of landfill leachate is tremendously important to prevent landfill leachate
from causing serious environmental problems.

This focuses on landfill leachate collection and treatment for sustainable development of
human society, including the principles and operations of landfills; leachate production,
collection,characterization, and treatments under different operational and
environmental conditions; current status of landfill leachate treatment; and future
directions. The most commonly used methods of leachate treatment are aerobic
biological systems, including aerated lagoons, activated sludge systems, and sequential
batch reactors (SBRs). Membrane technologies are also used for leachate treatment,
including microfiltration (MF), ultrafiltration (UF), nanofiltration (NF), reverse osmosis
(RO), and forward osmosis (FO).

Leachate is liquid generated from rainfall and the natural decomposition of waste that is
filtered through the landfill to a leachate collection system. The leachate collection
system's job is to direct the leachate to collection sumps so it can be properly removed
from the landfill.

The leachate collection system is designed with a minimum 2 percent slope to drain to
collection sumps. A leachate collection sump consists of an HDPE riser and
submersible pump. Leachate drains to the leachate collection system, where it is
transferred to a central collection pump and piped to an onsite holding pond. If
necessary, the leachate is transported to an approved offsite wastewater treatment plant
for disposal.

The system is designed to automatically pump the leachate to maintain compliance with
state requirements. monthly verification measurements are taken by an independent
technician to ensure regulatory limits are met and maintained.

(Schematic flow diagram of the Green Lane leachate treatment facility.)

Landfill leachate treatment is a major engineering challenge due to the high and variable
concentrations of dissolved solids, dissolved and colloidal organics, heavy metals and
xenobiotic organics.

Specific leachate management practices, such as recirculation (bioreactor landfill) and

blending landfill gas with leachate, impact quality, resulting in characteristics that vary
greatly from site to site.
Cold temperature in winter is also a challenge to designing leachate treatment facilities
(LTF) in Canada.Traditionally, landfill leachate has been hauled or pumped to off-site
wastewater treatment facilities for disposal. Disposal to off-site facilities has generated
opposition from plant owners due to more stringent effluent discharge criteria. When
discharged to a wastewater treatment facility, leachates can interfere with ultraviolet
disinfection by strongly quenching UV light. Leachate may also contain heavy metals
and high ammonia concentration that may be inhibitory to the biological processes.

Landfill leachate treatment is a major engineering challenge due to the high and variable
concentrations of dissolved solids, dissolved and colloidal organics, heavy metals and
xenobiotic organics.

Specific leachate management practices, such as recirculation (bioreactor landfill) and

blending landfill gas with leachate, impact quality, resulting in characteristics that vary
greatly from site to site. Cold temperature in winter is also a challenge to designing
leachate treatment facilities (LTF) in Canada.

Traditionally, landfill leachate has been hauled or pumped to off-site wastewater

treatment facilities for disposal. Disposal to off-site facilities has generated opposition
from plant owners due to more stringent effluent discharge criteria. When discharged to
a wastewater treatment facility, leachates can interfere with ultraviolet disinfection by
strongly quenching UV light. Leachate may also contain heavy metals and high
ammonia concentration that may be inhibitory to the biological processes.
 URDANETA CITY UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND ARCHITECTURE

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

LANDFILL GAS COLLECTION

SYSTEM AND LEACHATE
RECIRCULATION SYSTEM
DESIGN

MAE GERLYNN C. REGALA

BSCE-V
Landfill gas (LFG) is a natural byproduct of the decomposition of organic material in
landfills. LFG is composed of roughly 50 percent methane (the primary component of
natural gas), 50 percent carbon dioxide (CO2) and a small amount of non-methane
organic compounds. Methane is a potent greenhouse gas 28 to 36 times more effective
than CO2 at trapping heat in the atmosphere over a 100-year period, per the latest

Collecting and Treating Landfill Gas

Instead of escaping into the air, LFG can be captured, converted, and used as a
renewable energy resource. Using LFG helps to reduce odors and other hazards
associated with LFG emissions, and prevents methane from migrating into the
atmosphere and contributing to local smog and global climate change. In addition, LFG
energy projects generate revenue and create jobs in the community and beyond.

The graphic illustrates the collection and processing of LFG to produce methane for
multiple uses. First, LFG is collected through vertical and horizontal piping buried in an
MSW landfill. The LFG is then processed and treated for use. The graphic shows
potential end uses of LFG including industrial/institutional uses, arts and crafts, pipeline
gas, and vehicle fuel.

This graphic shows three stages of LFG treatment. Primary Treatment removes
moisture as the gas passes through a knockout pot, filter, and blower. Secondary
Treatment involves the use of an after cooler or other additional moisture removal (as
necessary), followed by siloxane/sulfur removal and compression (as needed). After the
impurities are removed in the Secondary Treatment stage, the LFG can be used to
generate electricity or as a medium-Btu fuel for arts and crafts or boilers. Advanced
Treatment removes additional impurities (CO2, N2, O2, and VOCs) and compresses the
LFG into a high-Btu gas that can be used for vehicle fuel or injected into a gas pipeline.
Waste/tail gas is sent to a flare or thermal oxidizer.

Flowchart of a Basic LFG Collection and Processing System

LFG is extracted from landfills using a series of wells and a blower/flare (or vacuum)
system. This system directs the collected gas to a central point where it can be
processed and treated depending upon the ultimate use for the gas. From this point, the
gas can be flared or beneficially used in an LFG energy project. Click on the flowchart to
view more details, including photographs of LFG collection and processing systems.

Leachate recirculation in municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills operated as bioreactors

offers significant economical and environmental benefits. Subsurface leachate
recirculation in MSW landfills is commonly achieved by using horizontal trenches or
vertical wells. Currently, there are no design guidelines available for leachate
recirculation using a subsurface leachate recirculation system (LRS). The key objective
of this study is to prepare design guidelines for LRS consisting of horizontal trenches.
This paper presents a numerical study of LRS consisting of horizontal trenches. The
design parameters evaluated in this study include: (1) Leachate injection pressure head;
(2) hydraulic conductivity of trench backfill and MSW; (3) dimensions of trench; and (4)
spacing and geometric formation of trenches. The finite-element saturated/unsaturated
flow model HYDRUS-2D was used for the numerical study. The hydraulic performance
of the LRS was evaluated primarily using the simulated recirculated leachate flux and
distribution of flow under steady-state flow condition. The key findings of this numerical
study are: (1) Logarithm of leachate flux and leachate injection pressure head have a
curvilinear relationship and leachate flux is directly proportional to the hydraulic
conductivity of MSW; (2) if hydraulic conductivity of trench backfill is equal to or greater
than that of MSW, any further increase in the hydraulic conductivity of the trench backfill
has negligible impact on leachate flux; (3) for a given cross-sectional area, horizontal
trenches having width greater than depth can recirculate greater leachate flux and can
wet more area of the waste; and (4) reduction in the horizontal spacing between
trenches and vertically staggering the trenches reduces “dry zones” between trenches
where otherwise recirculated leachate may not reach.
In some arid regions where landfill produces minimal amount of leachate, leachate
recirculation is suggested as a cost-effective option. However, its long-term impacts to
environment remain disputed. For the purpose of revealing the environmental impacts of
leachate recirculation in landfill, four scenarios were modeled using EASEWASTE,
comparing the strategies of leachate recirculation (with or without gas management),
evaporation and discharge. In the current situation (Scenario A), a total of 280 t of waste
was generated and then transported to a conventional landfill for disposal. A number of
contaminants derived from waste can be stored in the landfill for long periods, with
11.69 person equivalent (PE) for stored ecotoxicity in water and 29.62 PE for stored
ecotoxicity in soil, considered as potential risks of releasing to the environment
someday. Meanwhile, impacts to ecotoxicity and human toxicity in surface water, and
those to groundwater, present relatively low levels. In Scenario B, leachate evaporation
in a collecting pool has minimal impacts on surface water. However, this strategy
significantly impacts groundwater (1055.16 PE) because of the potential infiltration of
leachate, with major contaminants of As, ammonia, and Cd. A number of ions, such as
Cl(-), Mg(2+), and Ca(2+), may also contaminate groundwater. In Scenario C, the direct
discharge of leachate to surface water may result in acidification (2.71 PE) and nutrient
enrichment (2.88 PE), primarily attributed to soluble ammonia in leachate and the
depositional ammonia from biogas. Moreover, the direct discharge of leachate may also
result in ecotoxicity and human toxicity via water contaminated by heavy metals in
leachate, with 3.96 PE and 11.64 PE respectively. The results also show that landfill gas
is the main contributor to global warming and photochemical ozone formation due to
methane emission. In Scenario D, landfill gas flaring was thus be modeled and proven
to be efficient for reducing impacts by approximately 90% in most categories, like global
warming, photochemical ozone formation, acidification, nutrient enrichment, ecotoxicity,
and human toxicity. Therefore, leachate recirculation is considered a cost-effective and
environmentally viable solution for the current situation, and landfill gas treatment is
urgently required. These results can provide important evidence for leachate and gas
management of landfill in arid regions.