International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-2124-x

ORIGINAL PAPER

Impacts of landfill leachate on groundwater quality in desert climate

regions
A. T. Ahmed1,2   · A. E. Alluqmani2 · Md. Shafiquzzaman3

Received: 23 July 2018 / Revised: 6 October 2018 / Accepted: 15 November 2018 / Published online: 21 November 2018
© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Abstract
Control and management of landfill leachate are the most important concerns to protect the surrounding environment, espe-
cially the groundwater. In this study, an attempt was carried out to design an approximate tool for finding the safe ground-
water withdrawal away from the pollution sources. A case study was applied to a landfill site in a desert climate region, at
Mufrihat, the south western region of the Madinah City, KSA. Three boreholes were adopted to monitor the groundwater
quality close to leachate collection lake of the landfill site. A 3D simulation model, combining modular finite-difference
flow model and the modular three-dimensional transport model, was applied to the leachate collection site to understand the
fate and migration of the leachate from collection site bed into the groundwater. The focus of this work was to predict the
distribution of heavy metal concentration with both time and distance and to determine the safe location for water extraction
from this aquifer. Results showed a good match between numerical model results and experimental measurements. Based
on this math and sensitivity analyses performed by the computer model, an empirical mobility model was generated to sup-
port the decision makers of this area and similar regions to estimate the safe location for water withdrawal according to the
initial concentration of the element, pumping rate and contact time. The mobility model showed that the well located at a
minimum of 113 m away from the leachate collection lake would be safe from all studied pollutants.

Keywords  Contamination migration · Groundwater · Modelling · Municipal solid waste · Landfill · Leaching

Introduction amounts of the waste generated daily. However, the disposal

Population growth and rapid urbanization worldwide led
to significantly increase in municipal solid waste (MSW)
generation. Most urbanized cities are now struggling with
the problem of huge amount of waste and its proper man-
agement and the impact to the local and global environment
(Naveen et al. 2017). There are many options for solid waste
management. Landfilling solid waste in dumpsites is the
easiest and the most practiced option for handling the huge
Editorial responsibility: M. Abbaspour.
* A. T. Ahmed
dratahmed@yahoo.com
1
Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering,
Aswan University, Aswan, Egypt
2
Civil Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering,
Islamic University, Madinah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
3
Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering,
Qassim University, Qassim, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
of waste in the dumpsites is the most dangerous management
option as the accumulation of solid waste generates a squash
of very concentrated leachate, especially when exposed to
water. Even with using the engineering sanitary landfill hav-
ing a lining system, the risk of infiltration of this harmful
leachate is still high (Smith et al. 1996).
The product of the landfill leaching process is the lea-
chate. It is defined as attainted fluid originating from the
bottom of the solid waste disposal facilities that contains
both soluble organic and inorganic compounds as well as
suspended particles (Naveen et al. 2017). Depending upon
the nature of solid waste buried, chemical and biochemi-
cal processes responsible for the decomposition of waste
materials and total water content in waste, the composition
of landfill leachate is wide-ranging (Fatta et al. 1999). This
leachate composition contains many harmful chemicals such
as heavy metals and salts. Many dangerous materials were
also recognized in landfill leachate, such as halogenated
compounds, phenols, aromatics and pesticides (Devare and
Bahadir 1994). These chemicals find their ways into surface

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

6754 International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762
and groundwaters, especially due to precipitation and runoff
or variation in groundwater table level (Ahmed et al. 2010).
Groundwater is a worldwide significant and valuable
renewable resource for human life and economic growth. It
is the only natural resource of water in many arid regions.
Contamination of groundwater by dumpsites has awakened
highly concern as a serious environmental issue, due to its
impact on groundwater quality and drinking water resources
(Bashir et al. 2009; Lalehzari et al. 2013; Oişte 2014). The
most important potential environmental influences associ-
ated with landfill leachate are contamination of groundwa-
ter with heavy metals (Kjeldsen et al. 2002). The process
of industrial development, which has gradually developed
over time without any regard for environmental impacts,
has caused significantly water pollution with heavy metals
for groundwater and other water resources. These activities
generate tonnes of solid waste, which consequently produce
huge amount of landfill leachate that has overwhelming
environmental significance. Leachate migrates from land-
fills, if it is not satisfactorily managed; it introduces a high
risk to groundwater resource (Patil et al. 2013).
Previous studies had concerned about modelling the
contamination transport in groundwater aquifers by using
the numerical and software packages (Andersen and Dorn-
bush 1972; Babu et al. 1997; Pinder 2002; Papadopoulou
et al. 2007). The purpose of modelling work is to predict
the spreading of contaminant concentrations by inputting
the initial conditions of the hydraulic head, groundwa-
ter flow and concentration of contaminants (Peeters et al.
2004; Wang and Zheng 2005; Don et al. 2005; Lautz and
Siegel 2006; Wang et al. 2008). In authors’ knowledge, all
these previous studies focussed on simulation of contami-
nation migrations without trying to introduce a simple tool
helping in predicating this migration. Specialized computer
Map of Medina, KSA
Recycling Site
Landfill Area Location
Eng. Landfill
Fig. 1  Map for the studied area of the landfill in Madinah KSA (Google maps and MRM 2017)
13
software packages have been recently created and used to
solve contaminant transport problems in groundwater sys-
tem. However, Groundwater Modelling System (GMS) is the
most powerful software package using the modular finite-
difference flow model (MODFLOW) and the modular three-
dimensional transport model (MT3DMS) (Chen et al. 2016).
In Madinah City, Saudi Arabia, MSW is landfilled in an
engineering sanitary landfill that consists of liner and leach-
ing collection system. The collected leachate is stored in
an artificial lake. Groundwater in this area is close to the
ground surface. In this paper, a modelling work by GMS
models was adopted to simulate the potential migration of
the heavy metal contamination from this artificial lake into
groundwater. The main objective of this modelling work was
to predict the spreading of the contaminant concentrations
in both time and location under arid region conditions and
to find an approximate tool for helping the decision makers
for expecting the safe location for water withdrawal from this
aquifer and other similar reigns.
Materials and methods
Study area
The study area of this modelling work is located in Madi-
nah City in the western part of the kingdom of Saudi Ara-
bia (KSA). The landfill area is located at Mufrihat region,
the southwestern region of the Madinah City as shown in
Fig. 1. Total area of Madinah is 151,990 km2, and popula-
tion density according to 2010 census is 12/km2. The landfill
receives daily around 1000 tons of solid waste from all of
the regions within Madinah as detailed elsewhere (Ahmed
and Alluqmani 2017). Figure 1 shows a detailed map of
Details of Landfill Area
Dumpsite
Leachate Collection Lake
(Modelling Area)
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762 6755

the landfill area layouts. Leachate collection lake (LCL) is as shown in Fig. 2. The depth of the domain (30 m) covered
the modelling area, at the eastern part of the landfill site, the groundwater table variations, reported by authorities that
whereas the landfill leachate is stored. Three existing 8” it ranges between 15 and 25 m underground.
diameter boreholes named well #1, well #2 and well #3
with average depth of 40 metres in basement formation are Governing equations
located at distances 10, 50 and 100 m, respectively, from
the LCL. In the flow model (MODFLOW), the three-dimensional
movement of groundwater of constant density through
Experimental measurements porous earth material may be described by the following
partial differential equation:
Three leachate samples were collected from the LCL. Nine ( ) ( )
water samples from three boreholes (well #1, well #2 and 𝜕 𝜕h 𝜕 𝜕h 𝜕 𝜕h 𝜕h
( )
K + Kyy + Kzz + W = Ss
well #3) were also collected. The collection and analysis of 𝜕x xx 𝜕x 𝜕y 𝜕y 𝜕z 𝜕z 𝜕t
samples were conducted by the administration of the landfill, (1)
Madinah Regional Municipality (MRM 2017). Four heavy where Kxx, Kyy and Kzz are values of hydraulic conductivity
metals were chosen for this study, namely, Pb, Cr, Cu and Ni, along the x, y and z coordinate axes, which are assumed to
because they showed high content in the leachate as shown be parallel to the major axes of hydraulic conductivity (L/T);
in Table 1. Heavy metal concentrations were determined by h is the potentiometric head (L); W is a volumetric flux per
inductively coupled plasma optical emission spectrometry unit volume representing sources and/or sinks of water, with
(ICP-OES) (Optima 4300 DV, PerkinElmer) following the W < 0.0 for flow out of the groundwater system and W > 0.0
method of 200.7 described by US EPA (EPA 1994). for flow into the system (­ T−1); Ss is the specific storage of
the porous material ­(L−1); and t is time (T).
Numerical modelling Zheng (1990) originally developed the modular three-
dimensional transport model (MT3D). Its partial differential
In this study, GMS version 10.2 including the modular equation describing the fate and transport of contaminants of
finite-difference flow model (MODFLOW) and the modular species k in three-dimensional, transient groundwater flow
three-dimensional transport model (MT3DMS) codes were systems can be written as follows:
adopted. The models were used to simulate the results from
the experiments and to make numerical sensitivity analysis 𝜕(𝜃Ck )
( )
𝜕 𝜕Ck 𝜕 ∑
= 𝜃Dij − (𝜃vi Ck ) + qs Csk + Rn
for contaminant migration variables in order to predict the 𝜕t 𝜕xi 𝜕xj 𝜕xi
distribution of contaminant concentration with both time (2)
and location and to determine the safe location for water where Ck is the dissolved concentration of species k ­(ML−3);
withdrawal from this aquifer. The numerical model consists θ is the porosity of the subsurface medium, dimensionless;
of a domain of 220 m length, 220 m width and 30 m depth, t is time (T); xi is the distance along the respective Carte-
which covered the artificial lake, LCL and wells locations sian coordinate axis (L); Dij is the hydrodynamic dispersion

Table 1  Chemical analysis of Parameter Unit EPA guidelines Leachate Well # 1 Well # 2 Well # 3
water samples from landfill ­USAa 10 m 50 m 100 m
leachate and three boreholes
pH value 7.200 7.970 7.230 3.890 6.950
Arsenic mg/L 0.05 ND 0.010 0.010 0.010
Barium mg/L NA ND 0.400 0.300 0.300
Chromium mg/L 0.005 1.840 0.005 0.005 0.005
Copper mg/L 0.050 0.602 0.010 0.0100 0.020
Lead mg/L 0.050 0.305 0.010 0.0100 0.100
Mercury mg/L 0.001 ND 0.0001 0.0001 0.0017
Molybdenum mg/L NA ND 0.010 0.010 0.010
Nickel mg/L 0.050 1.225 0.010 0.010 0.020
Selenium mg/L 0.050 ND 0.010 0.010 0.010
Zinc mg/L 0.100 ND 0.020 0.030 0.060

ND not detected, NA not applicable

a
 (EPA 2017)

13

6756 International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762
Fig. 2  Snapshots for GMS software and modelling area
coefficient tensor (­ L2T−1); vi is the seepage or linear pore
water velocity (­ LT−1); it is related to the specific discharge or
Darcy flux through the relationship, vi= qi/θ; qs is the volu-
metric flow rate per unit volume of aquifer representing fluid
sources (positive) and sinks (negative) (­ T−1); Csk is the con-
centration of the source or sink flux for species k ­(ML−3);
Rn is the chemical reaction term ­(ML−3T−1).
∑
All details of the governing equations are described else-
where (Harbaugh 2005; Zheng and Wang 1999).
To investigate the impacts of pumping rates on contami-
nant transportation, three rates, 10, 100 and 200 m3/day,
were chosen for all wells. A recharge rate of 4 m/day was
allocated to the leachate collection lake as estimated from
authorities’ report, whereas 6500 m3/month was discharged
into the lake, LCL. Moreover, a drain rate of 1 m/day was
assumed for the lake area. A trial-and-error process esti-
mated the longitudinal dispersivity. The transverse dispersiv-
ity was 1/10 of the longitudinal dispersivity that was taken
as 0.05 m. Porosity and molecular diffusivity were 0.30 and
0.006 m2/day, respectively.
Simulation model was run with extreme conditions of
the landfill site to get the worst scenario of the surrounding
environment. The conditions were based on the assumption
of a high rate of leachate drain or infiltration through soil
layers, a shallow groundwater level of 15 m and no absorp-
tion between soil and pollutant during percolation.
Results and discussion
Chemical properties of the samples
Chemical analysis of the collected samples was conducted in
laboratory of Madinah Regional Municipality (MRM 2017),
and the average results are presented in Table 1. Four heavy
13
Well 3
Well 2
Side view 220x30 m
Well 1
LCL
Plan 202x220 m
metals, namely, Pb, Cr, Cu and Ni, were chosen for the simu-
lation study because they showed high content in the landfill
leachate.
Heavy metal elements
A good match was obtained between the experimental
results for concentrations of the four heavy metals with
those computed by the GMS models as shown in Fig. 3.
The numerical results were computed after a contact time
of 1 day for leachate infiltration into groundwater and with
a highest pumping rate of 200 m3/day. The concentrations
of Pb, Cr, Cu and Ni were high in the well located at 10 m
from the LCL and decreased as the well distance increases
to 100 m.
Pumping Rates
Three pumping rates, namely, 10, 100 and 200  m3/day,
were applied for the three wells on the same time. Figure 4
presents the numerical predication of Pb for different well
locations at different pumping rate. The result shows that
increasing pumping rate from 10 to 200 m3/day causes a
significant increase in Pb at the closet well. However, pump-
ing rates had no effect on Pb concentration when the well
distance increases to 50 m or more. Results indicate the
considerable impact of water pumping rate on the transport
of contaminant at the closer area of LCL. Similar results
(data not shown) were also observed for the other heavy
metals such as Cr, Cu and Ni. The results obtained in this
study were well supported by a previous study, reported that
increasing the pumping rate led to increase the contamina-
tion in groundwater (Mustafa et al. 2016).
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762 6757

0.35 2
Pb Num. Cr Num.
0.3
Exp. Exp.
1.5
Concentraons (mg/l)
0.25

0.2
1
0.15

0.1
0.5
0.05

0 0
Leachate (0) 10 50 100 Leachate (0) 10 50 100

0.7 1.4
0.6 Cu Num.
1.2 Ni Num.
Concentraons (mg/l)

Exp. Exp.
0.5 1

0.4 0.8

0.3 0.6

0.2 0.4

0.1 0.2

0 0
Leachate (0) 10 50 100 Leachate (0) 10 50 100
Well distance (m) Well distance (m)

Fig. 3  Experimental measurement of heavy metals against numerical predications for well discharging of 200 m3/day

Fig. 4  Numerical predication of 0.08

Pb for well locations at different
0.07
Pb Well 10 m3/d.
discharging rates Well 100 m3/d
Concentraons (mg/l)

0.06 Well 200 m3/d

0.05
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.01
0
10 50 100
Well distance (m)

Contact time the period of 7–30 days. Figure 6 presents graphical results

Contact time or age expresses how long the contamina-
tions were in contact with groundwater. In this work, three
different contact time intervals, namely, 1, 7 and 30 days,
were examined by the numerical modelling. Results showed
significant increase in Pb concentrations with increase in
the contact time as presented in Fig. 5. The pattern of the
increase rate was rapid from 1 to 7 days and became slow in
of numerical modelling of Pb for different well locations at
different times that confirmed the same relationship between
time and pollution progress shown in Fig. 5.
For longer ages like 1 year or more, it would be difficult
to run GMS models because it needs great running time
and data storage facilities. Therefore, based on the current
results, a regression method was adopted to obtain relation
between time and element concentrations to predict heavy

13

6758 International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762

Fig. 5  Numerical predication of 0.35

Pb against time at different well Well 10 m
Well 50 m
locations 0.3 y = 0.0601ln(x) + 0.0829
Well 100 m
R² = 0.9386

Pb Concentra
ons (mg/l)
Log. (Well 10 m)
0.25 Power (Well 50 m)

0.2

0.15
y = 0.0083x0.89
0.1 R² = 0.9395
y = 0.0114x0.3362
0.05 R² = 0.8182

0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Time (days)

Fig. 6  Snapshots of graphical results of numerical modelling of Pb for different well locations at different times

metal concentrations for the longer periods. Three differ-
ent regression equations were found for 10, 50 and 100 m
well with R2 value 0.82, 0.94 and 0.94, respectively. The
predicated concentrations of Pb element after a year are
presented in Fig. 7.
Well locations
The pollution in groundwater decreases with increasing the
well distance as shown clearly in Fig. 8. The figure presents
numerical predication of heavy metals at well discharging

13
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762 6759

Fig. 7  Numerical predication of 3
Pb for different well locations at Pb Well 200 m3/d-1 day
different times Well 200 m3/d-7 days
2.5 Well 200 m3/d-30days
Well 200 m3/d-365 days

Concentraons (mg/l)
2

1.5

0.5

0
10 50 100
Well distance (m)

0.3 1.8
Pb Pb Cr Cr
Linear (Pb) 1.6 Linear (Cr)
0.25
1.4

0.2 1.2
Concentraons (mg/l)

1
0.15
0.8
y = -0.0027x + 0.2992 y = -0.0176x + 1.8066
0.1 0.6
R² = 0.999 R² = 0.9816
0.4
0.05
0.2

0 0
0 50 100 150 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

0.45 0.25
Cu Cu Ni Ni
0.4 Power (Cu) Power (Ni)
0.2
0.35
Concentraons (mg/l)

0.3
0.15
0.25
y = 0.8263x-0.607
0.2 y = 2.4811x-0.826
0.1 R² = 0.9139
R² = 0.9139
0.15
0.1 0.05
0.05
0 0
0 50 100 150 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Well distance Well distance

Fig. 8  Numerical predication of heavy metals at pumping rate of 200 m3/day after 30 days

13

6760 International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762

of 200 m3/day after 30 days. A relatively long contact time Table 2  Empirical mobility model parameters
or age was adopted to make sure that there is a stability Element Empirical mobility model parameters
between groundwater and contaminations. A regression
a b c K R2
analysis was implemented to find the best relationship
between well distance and heavy metal concentrations. In Pb − 0.758 0.834 0.821 0.00452692 0.96
this regression analysis, linear and nonlinear models were Cr − 0.830 0.378 3.007 0.00000023 0.89
examined to find the best correlation between the param- Cu − 0.945 1.898 0.718 0.00021000 0.98
eters. Regression results produced the equations presented Ni − 0.702 0.828 1.095 0.00016298 0.99
in Fig. 8 having a coefficient of determination, R2, ranged All − 0.760 0.910 0.356 0.03312316 0.79
between 0.91 and 0.99. The importance of these equations
is to find the minimum safe distance of well from the pol-
lution source (LCL), which will be safe for water pumping D = distance away from leachate location (m); T = time
from this aquifer. The safety factor will be decided based (days); P = pumping rate ­(m3/day); a, b and c are regression
on the guideline of allowable limit of these heavy metals constants; and K = regression coefficient used to balance
in the groundwater set by EPA (2017). According to the equation dimensions.
regression equations, the safe distance for Pb, Cr, Cu and Table 2 presents the empirical model results. From the
Ni is 92, 102, 113 and 101 m, respectively. Thus, based on regression results, the general empirical mobility model
these results, the well located a minimum of 113 m away appears to have depicted the numerical modelling data very
from LCL will be safe from all studied pollutants. These well with high values of coefficient of determination (R2)
results are in agreement with the results reported elsewhere for the elements ranging from 0.89 to 0.99. From Table 2, it
who studied different ions of heavy metal transportation into is notable that the regression constant, a, always comes in
groundwater (Igbinosa and Okoh,2009; Akinbile and Yusoff negative which indicates that the distance parameter should
2011). be in the denominator of the equation. By using the empiri-
cal mobility equation developed in this study, it would be a
useful tool for the decision maker of this area to find the safe
Empirical mobility model location for water extraction from this aquifer after a cer-
tain time and with a certain pumping rate. The safe location
A pollution migration process into groundwater generally herein means the location, whereas the final concentration
depends on several parameters. The reviewed literature has of heavy metals should not exceed the allowable values for
revealed that the initial concentration of pollutants, contact water quality standards. However, further study is necessary
time between pollution source and groundwater, distances to modify the developed numerical model by considering the
between source and withdrawal points, and water pumping more insight of soil characteristics data, percolation rate, etc.
rate are the most predominant parameters (Mustafa et al.
2016). In the present study, an attempt was made to predict
the gradual accumulation of pollutant concentrations over Conclusion
different time intervals and distances away from pollution
source. The statistical software SPSS was used to perform a • Results of the laboratory work showed that four heavy
comprehensive regression analysis on the numerical results metals, namely, Pb, Cr, Cu and Ni, have a high content
to establish the best empirical relationship between the com- in the landfill leachate; therefore, they were chosen for
puted concentrations and the parameters. In this regression the simulation study.
analysis, linear and nonlinear models were examined to find • The adopted model generated by MODFLOW and
the best correlation between the parameters using the least MT3DMS for the fate and transport of heavy metals from
square error models, coefficient of determination, R2, and the surface into groundwater was fitted well with the
standard error. The following equation (Eq. 3) was derived experimental measurements. Sensitivity analysis results
from the regression analysis. based on this match showed also clearly the influence
of the studied parameters such as contact time and loca-
C = C0 Da T b Pc K (3) tions.
where C = final concentration of the element (mg/l); C0 = ini-
tial concentration of the element in the leachate (mg/l);

13
International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762 6761
• Study results showed that increase in the contact time
and pumping rate leads to decrease the safe distance for
water withdrawal from the aquifer.
• Based on the simulation results, simple mathematical
equations were produced to anticipate the element con-
centration after a certain location or time.
• An empirical mobility model was generated by compre-
hensive regression analyses as a good tool for decision
makers to estimate the safe location for water withdrawal
according to the initial concentration of the element,
pumping rate and contact time. Based on these results,
the well located a minimum of 113 m away from LCL
will be safe from all studied pollutants.
Acknowledgements  Thanks for all staff and technicians of Madinah
Regional Municipally in Saudi Arabia who support and help in this
work.
References
Ahmed AT, Alluqmani AE (2017) Management options and life cycle
assessment of municipal solid waste in Madinah, KSA. In: 19th
international conference on wastewater treatment and water qual-
ity, Dubai, UAE, 8–9 April 2017
Ahmed AT, Khalid H, Ahmed A, Chen D (2010) A lysimeter and
numerical characterization of the leaching of incinerator bottom
ash waste. Waste Manag J 30:1536–1543
Akinbile OC, Yusoff MS (2011) Environmental impact of leachate pol-
lution on groundwater supplies in Akure, Nigeria. Int J Environ
Sci Dev 2(1):81–86
Andersen JR, Dornbush JN (1972) Intercepting trench at landfill ren-
ders leachate into drinkable source of water. Solid Waste Manag
15(1):60–68
Babu DK, Pinder GF, Niemi A, Ahlfeld DP, Stothoff SA (1997) Chemi-
cal transport by three-dimensional groundwater flows. Princeton
University, 84-WR-3, USA
Bashir MJK, Isa MH, Kutty SRM, Awang ZB, Abdul AH, Mohajeri S
(2009) Landfill leachate treatment by electrochemical oxidation.
Waste Manag 29:2534–2541
Chen CS, Tu TH, Chen SJ, Chen CC (2016) Simulation of groundwa-
ter contaminant transport at a decommissioned landfill site—a
case study, Tainan City, Taiwan. Int J Environ Res Public Health
13(5):467
Devare M, Bahadir M (1994) Biological monitoring of landfill leachate
using plants and luminescenet bacteria. Chemosphere 28:261–271
Don NC, Araki H, Yamanishi H, Koga K (2005) Simulation of ground-
water flow and environmental effects resulting from pumping.
Environ Geol 47:361–374
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2017) Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA). https​://www.epa.gov/sdwa. Assessed Sept 2018
EPA (1994) Method 200.7: determination of metals and trace elements
in water and wastes by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emis-
sion spectrometry. Revision 4.4. Cincinnati, OH. https​://www.
epa.gov/homela​ nd-securi​ ty-resear​ ch/method​ -2007-determ ​ inati​ on-
metals​ -and-trace-​ elemen​ ts-water-​ and-wastes​ . Assessed Sept 2018
Fatta D, Papadopoulos A, Loizidou M (1999) A study on the landfill
leachate and its impact on the groundwater quality of the greater
area. Environ Geochem Health 21(2):175–190
Harbaugh AW (2005) The U.S. Geological Survey Modular Ground-
Water Model (MODFLOW). U.S. Geological Survey Techniques
and Methods 6-A16. Chapter 2: Derivation of the finite-difference
equation. https​://pubs.usgs.gov/tm/2005/tm6A1​6/PDF/TM6-
A16ch​2.pdf. Assessed Sept 2018
Igbinosa EO, Okoh AI (2009) Impact of discharge wastewater effluents
on the physic-chemical qualities of a receiving watershed in a typ-
ical rural community. Int J Environ Sci Technol 6(2):1735–1742
Kjeldsen P, Barlaz BAM, Rooker PA, Baun A, Anna L, Christensen
HT (2002) Present and long-term composition of MSW landfill
leachate: a review. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 32(4):297–336
Lalehzari R, Tabatabaei SH, Kholghi M (2013) Simulation of nitrate
transport and wastewater seepage in groundwater flow system. Int
J Environ Sci Technol 10(6):1367–1376
Lautz LK, Siegel DI (2006) Modeling surface and groundwater mix-
ing in the hyporheic zone using Modflow and MT3D. Adv Water
Resour 29(11):1618–1633
Madinah Regional Municipally (MRM) (2017) http://www.amana-​ md.
gov.sa/Main.aspx. Assessed Sept 2018
Mustafa S, Bahar A, Aziz ZA, Suratman S (2016) Modelling contami-
nant transport for pumping wells in riverbank filtration systems.
J Environ Manag 165:159–166
Naveen BP, Mahapatra DM, Sitharam TG, Sivapullaiah PV, Ramachan-
dra TV (2017) Physico-chemical and biological characterization
of urban municipal landfill leachate. Environ Pollut 220:1–12
Oişte AM (2014) Groundwater quality assessment in urban environ-
ment. Int J Environ Sci Technol 11(7):2095–2102
Papadopoulou MP, Karatzas GP, Bougioukou GG (2007) Numerical
modelling of the environmental impact of landfill leachate leak-
age on groundwater quality-a field application. Environ Model
Assess 12(1):43–54
Patil C, Narayanakar S, Virupakshi A (2013) Assessment of ground-
water quality around solid waste landfill area—a case study. Int J
Innov Res Sci Eng Technol 2:7
13

6762 International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2019) 16:6753–6762
Peeters L, Haerens B, Van der Sluys J, Dassargues A (2004) Modeling
seasonal variations in nitrate and sulphate concentrations in a vul-
nerable alluvial aquifer. Environ Geol 46:951–961
Pinder GF (2002) Groundwater modelling using geographical informa-
tion systems. Wiley, New York
Smith CJ, Hopmans P, Cook FJ (1996) Accumulation of Cr, Pb, Cu, Ni,
Zn and Cd in soil following irrigation with treated urban effluent
in Australia. Environ Pollut 94(3):317–323
Wang PP, Zheng C (2005) Contaminant transport models under random
sources. Groundwater 43(3):423–433
Wang S, Sho J, Song X, Zhang Y, Huo Z, Zhou X (2008) Applica-
tion of MODFLOW and geographic information system to
13
groundwater flow simulation in North China Plain. China Environ
Geol 55:1449–1462
Zheng C (1990) MT3D, a modular three-dimensional transport model
for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical reactions of
contaminants in groundwater systems. Report to the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory, Ada, Oklahoma
Zheng C, Wang PP (1999) A modular three-dimensional multispe-
cies transport model dimensional multispecies transport model
(MT3D). http://www.geolog​ y.wisc.edu/course​ s/g727/mt3dma​ nual​
.pdf. Accessed Sept 2018