See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/369977094

Satellite Data Potentialities in Solid Waste Landfill Monitoring: Review and

Case Studies

Article  in  Sensors · April 2023

DOI: 10.3390/s23083917

CITATIONS READS

0 62

5 authors, including:

Lorenzo Giuliano Papale Giorgia Guerrisi

University of Rome Tor Vergata University of Rome Tor Vergata
2 PUBLICATIONS   0 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Davide De Santis
University of Rome Tor Vergata
18 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Coastal and Inland Water Surface Temperature Characterization Using Satellite Data View project

Air Quality monitoring using Satellite Data View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Giorgia Guerrisi on 14 April 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 sensors
Review
Satellite Data Potentialities in Solid Waste Landfill Monitoring:
Review and Case Studies
Lorenzo Giuliano Papale 1,2, * , Giorgia Guerrisi 1,2 , Davide De Santis 1,2 , Giovanni Schiavon 1
and Fabio Del Frate 1,2
Citation: Papale, L.G.; Guerrisi, G.;
De Santis, D.; Schiavon, G.; Del Frate,
F. Satellite Data Potentialities in Solid
Waste Landfill Monitoring: Review
and Case Studies. Sensors 2023, 23,
3917. https://doi.org/
10.3390/s23083917
Academic Editor: Fernando
José Aguilar
Received: 6 March 2023
Revised: 30 March 2023
Accepted: 6 April 2023
Published: 12 April 2023
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23083917
1 Department of Civil Engineering and Computer Science Engineering, Tor Vergata University of Rome,
00133 Rome, Italy
2 GEO-K s.r.l., 00133 Rome, Italy
* Correspondence: lorenzo.giuliano.papale@uniroma2.it
Abstract: Remote sensing can represent an important instrument for monitoring landfills and their
evolution over time. In general, remote sensing can offer a global and rapid view of the Earth’s surface.
Thanks to a wide variety of heterogeneous sensors, it can provide high-level information, making it a
useful technology for many applications. The main purpose of this paper is to provide a review of
relevant methods based on remote sensing for landfill identification and monitoring. The methods
found in the literature make use of measurements acquired from both multi-spectral and radar
sensors and exploit vegetation indexes, land surface temperature, and backscatter information, either
separately or in combination. Moreover, additional information can be provided by atmospheric
sounders able to detect gas emissions (e.g., methane) and hyperspectral sensors. In order to provide
a comprehensive overview of the full potential of Earth observation data for landfill monitoring,
this article also provides applications of the main procedures presented to selected test sites. These
applications highlight the potentialities of satellite-borne sensors for improving the detection and
delimitation of landfills and enhancing the evaluation of waste disposal effects on environmental
health. The results revealed that a single-sensor-based analysis can provide significant information
on the landfill evolution. However, a data fusion approach that incorporates data acquired from
heterogeneous sensors, including visible/near infrared, thermal infrared, and synthetic aperture
radar (SAR), can result in a more effective instrument to fully support the monitoring of landfills
and their effect on the surrounding area. In particular, the results show that a synergistic use of
multispectral indexes, land surface temperature, and the backscatter coefficient retrieved from SAR
sensors can improve the sensitivity to changes in the spatial geometry of the considered site.
Keywords: remote sensors; satellite landfill monitoring; waste disposal; waste management
1. Introduction and Literature Review
Over the last decades, the ever-growing world population and industrial production,
human activities, and urbanization have led to an increase in waste production [1]. Im-
proper waste management has a negative impact on human health and the environment.
In particular, poor waste management practices can lead to serious contamination of the
soil, water, and atmosphere [2,3]. Primarily due to economic advantages, landfills and/or
open dump sites are still a common method for the disposal of municipal solid waste
(MSW). In certain countries, such as those in the European Union, specific targets exist
that aim to decrease the volume of waste sent to landfills in favor of more sustainable
disposal methods [4]. However, in many developing countries, waste management is often
a low-priority issue, and improper and unsustainable disposal practices are used. As a
result, landfills are often not engineered, and the waste is indiscriminately disposed of in
an unsanitary manner [5]. The potential impacts of landfills on the environment comprise
soil, water, and air pollution, which mean impacts on human health, agriculture, and
https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 2 of 25

drinking water. Leachate is indeed one of the products of landfills. Leachate is caused
by the infiltration of precipitations through the waste deposited on the ground, and it
leads to the contamination of soil and groundwater. Additionally, gases produced by the
decomposition of biological organic matter are released and contaminate the atmosphere if
they are not properly collected. Landfill fires also contribute to the sources of pollution and
can significantly harm the environment due to the emission of toxins into the atmosphere,
soil, and water [4]. All these aspects are considered and monitored in a regular engineered
landfill; however, this does not happen with an illegal dumping site, and the consequences
for humans and environment can be disastrous. In this context, landfill monitoring rep-
resents a crucial activity, but in situ investigations are often time-consuming and require
high costs. Indeed, they are often characterized by several difficulties such as access to the
sites, the transportation and positioning of the instruments, analyses, and time scales [6].
Furthermore, landfill monitoring becomes even more complex for illegal dump sites, which
usually arise at unknown sites and within a short timeframe [7].
Remote sensing (RS) can provide feasible and economic solutions for the acquisition
of valuable data for the detection and monitoring of dumps and landfill sites and to assess
their effect on the environment. For this purpose, various RS satellite sensors and data
can be utilized together with different analysis techniques. The earliest works introducing
spatial technologies for landfill monitoring adopted geographic information systems (GISs)
for solid waste management by combining multi-source data, including RS acquisitions.
Notably, RS data progressively changed this type of environmental monitoring procedure,
first with aerial surveys photos and then with satellite acquisitions or by combining both
data sources.
In the past, MSW monitoring was conducted by employing aerial acquisitions to
perform visual inspections (e.g., [8]). Concurrently, satellite data have been adopted for the
same purposes due to their data coverage. Moreover, despite the higher spatial resolution
achievable with aerial acquisitions, satellite data avoids the surveys’ set-up and logistic
costs and makes recurrent acquisitions over the same area available.
In 1973, a study [9] highlighted the potential of satellite RS, specifically the Earth
Resources Technology Satellite (ERTS-1), with a multi-spectral scanner sensor on board, for
monitoring large scale events such as dumping. In this particular case, the authors used
spacecraft data to observe a large ocean dump area adjacent to the New York Metropolitan
area. A subsequent work [10] also demonstrated the utility of GIS and RS data for the
identification of suitable sites for the storage of industrial waste. In the procedure suggested
for performing the selection, they considered the use of aerial photography and the Landsat
multi-spectral scanner and thematic mapper to obtain land cover and land use information.
Additionally, the approach of combining aerial survey acquisitions and optical images
collected by satellites was adopted by Oluić et al. [11] by performing a structural–geologic
analysis of an MSW site through a visual inspection of Landsat ETM/aerial imagery and
geophysical data integration. Furthermore, in 2009, Biotto et al. [12] employed Ikonos data
to correct and update the infrastructure plan obtained from the official regional map in
order to detect illegal landfills. In 2015, Lucendo-Monedero et al. [13] developed a model
for the detection of areas with illegal landfills using logistic regression. Notably, a set
of potential areas with illegal waste disposals in Andalusia were analyzed using logistic
regression to predict the occurrence of these areas by jointly involving geographical and
behavioral variables. In particular, the uncontrolled landfills used for this study were
chosen from sites previously detected by RS and aerial photography.
Several methods for dump detection and analysis involve images acquired by means
of multispectral sensors onboard satellites. As discussed below, multispectral images can be
analyzed directly by studying the spectral signature trends or used to retrieve multispectral
indexes, and they are often integrated with GIS or ground-based information. Authors
have pointed out [14] three main aspects utilized to sense dumps from RS images: thermal
anomalies, injurious effects on vegetation, and spectral signatures.
 identification and monitoring of waste dumping sites using satellite RS technologies.
Section 1 introduces the review and presents its outcomes, which are classified according
to the measurement typology. In particular, the research works are categorized according
to the classification reported in Figure 1. This includes two main classes: the single-
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 parameter-based analysis and the multiple-parameter-based analysis. The former, 3 of 25
described in Section 1.1, includes studies that distinctly used information from a specific
portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, while the latter includes studies that combined
such information.
The aim ofThese and are
this article is todescribed in collect
review and Sectionthe
1.2. Thesignificant
most single-parameter-based
works on the iden-
analysis includes the following sub-classes:
tification and monitoring of waste dumping sites using satellite RS technologies. Section 1
• Vegetation-indexes-based
introduces the review and presentsanalysisits (presented in Section
outcomes, which 1.1.1): works
are classified that mainly
according use
to the measure-
vegetation
ment typology.indexes for thethe
In particular, identification
research works andaremonitoring
categorized of the landfill
according to the sites are
classification
reported
discussedin Figure
in this 1. This includes
section. two main
In more classes:
detail, the the single-parameter-based
considered indexes include analysis
the and
the multiple-parameter-based
normalized difference vegetationanalysis. The(NDVI),
index former, described
normalized in Section
difference1.1,water
includes studies
index
that distinctly
(NDWI), andused
otherinformation from a that
specific indexes specific
can portion of the through
be obtained electromagnetic spectrum,
multispectral
while the latter includes studies that combined such information. These and are described in
sensors.
• Section 1.2. The single-parameter-based
Land-surface-temperature-based analysis
analysis includesin
(presented theSection
following sub-classes:
1.1.2): this section
•reviews the papers that use land surface temperature (LST)
Vegetation-indexes-based analysis (presented in Section 1.1.1): works for analyses related
that to a
mainly
landfill
use site. LST is derived
vegetation indexesfromfor thethermal infrared and
identification channel of the sensors
monitoring of the on boardsites
landfill the are
Landsat satellites.
discussed in this section. In more detail, the considered indexes include the normalized
• SAR-based
differenceanalysis (presented
vegetation in Section
index (NDVI), 1.1.3): this difference
normalized section includes the papers
water index that and
(NDWI),
use other
synthetic aperture
specific radar
indexes that(SAR)
can be data.
obtained through multispectral sensors.
•The Land-surface-temperature-based
multiple parameter-based analysis, analysis
instead,(presented
includes thein following
Section 1.1.2): this section
sub-classes:
reviews the papers that use land surface temperature (LST) for analyses related to a
• Multiple-optical-parameters-based analysis (presented in Section 1.2.1): works that
landfill site. LST is derived from thermal infrared channel of the sensors on board the
use the LST in conjunction with vegetation indexes are included in this section.
Landsat satellites.
• SAR- and Multiple-optical-Parameters-based analysis (presented in Section 1.2.2):
• SAR-based analysis (presented in Section 1.1.3): this section includes the papers that
this section includes the papers that use SAR data combined with multispectral
use synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data.
optical sensors and vegetation indexes or LST measurements.

Figure 1. Summary
Figure 1. Summary diagram of the
diagram methodology
of the methodologyfor presenting the the
for presenting review results.
review Revised
results. Revised
manuscripts are categorized into two main blocks: the “single-parameter-based analysis”
manuscripts are categorized into two main blocks: the “single-parameter-based analysis” and and
the the
“multiple-parameter-based analysis”. Each block consists of different sub-classifications.
“multiple-parameter-based analysis”. Each block consists of different sub-classifications.

The multiple parameter-based analysis, instead, includes the following sub-classes:

• Multiple-optical-parameters-based analysis (presented in Section 1.2.1): works that
use the LST in conjunction with vegetation indexes are included in this section.
• SAR- and Multiple-optical-Parameters-based analysis (presented in Section 1.2.2): this
section includes the papers that use SAR data combined with multispectral optical
sensors and vegetation indexes or LST measurements.
Thereafter, Section 2 presents the application case studies. We applied the most common
state-of-the-art techniques to known landfill sites in order to test the capabilities of the specific
procedures and to provide a comprehensive overview of attainable results from sensor-based
satellite measurements. This section includes a description of the sensor-based indexes used
for the analysis and the obtained results. Finally, Section 3 provides the conclusion.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 4 of 25

It must be noted that in this review, we focused on the use of satellite RS data that
represent the most widely applied category of data due to their wide distribution, avail-
ability, global coverage, and ease of access. Nevertheless, a few methods based on aerial
platforms also exist [15], and monitoring by means of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is
increasingly being adopted [16,17]. It is also worth mentioning that RS of the atmosphere
can also represent a valid instrument for landfill studies by exploiting the gas emissions
from dumping sites. Thus far, methane (CH4 ) emissions were used by [18] to locate landfills
using data acquired by an aircraft.

1.1. Single-Parameter-Based Analysis

This section describes the works that separately exploit satellite-sensor-derived infor-
mation acquired at the visible–near infrared–short wave infrared (VIS-NIR-SWIR), thermal
infrared (TIR), and microwave parts of the electromagnetic spectrum, respectively. It
consists of the following subsections: the vegetation-indexes-based analysis, land-surface-
temperature-based analysis, and SAR-based analysis.

1.1.1. Vegetation-Indexes-Based Analysis

A method was proposed by [19] for landfill monitoring by exploiting both satellite
and ground-based data. Multispectral satellite data acquired by means of very high
resolutions (between approximately 2 and 0.5 m), Pleiades and WorldView2 sensors,
and aerial orthophotos were used to identify points of interest for monitoring the area.
Two spectral indexes were analyzed: the NDVI and the global environmental monitoring
index (GEMI), which equally depends on reflectance in the visible–near infrared range
but is less affected by atmospheric effects and the type of sensor used, although it is more
sensitive to bare soil variation than the NDVI. These indexes were used for a multi-temporal
change detection analysis of the area. The obtained information was applied to enhance in
situ geomatic surveys. Results obtained for a study site in Calabria, Italy, demonstrated that
satellite data can effectively support land surveys, detecting critical points and highlighting
most important changes.
Additionally, Ref. [20] utilized the relationship between dump-induced contamination
and vegetation stress to identify uncontrolled landfills and validated their technique on
the watershed area of the Venice lagoon, Italy. They integrated GIS and RS information
acquired by the multispectral, pan-sharpened IKONOS sensor with a spatial resolution of
1 m. RS imagery was used to identify stressed vegetated areas associated with the dump.
Specifically, information available from local authorities was used to identify known illegal
landfills and as training and calibration information for a machine learning algorithm for
the classification of stressed vegetated areas. The automatic classification method was
integrated with a visual interpretation of aerial photographs and GIS information, such
as road networks and population density. As a result, vegetation stress proved to be a
good indicator for illegal landfill detection, and RS proved to be a successful technique for
landfill identification.
Vegetation stress induced by the presence of dump sites is also an element of study
in [21], in which several multispectral vegetation indexes were compared to identify the
most suitable index for assessing environmental risks caused by MSW open dumps. The
authors analyzed NDVI, SAVI, and MSAVI (modified soil-adjusted vegetation index, a
modification of SAVI) obtained from Landsat 8 acquisitions over dump areas in Pakistan
and compared them with three different criteria. The indexes’ variation was studied in
comparison to the distance from the source of contamination, finding that before the start of
the dumping, no variation in vegetation health was observed in the dumps’ surroundings.
On the contrary, after MSW dumping, it was found that vegetation stress increased as the
distance from the landfill decreased. They found that the MSAVI is the most suitable index
for this purpose.
The combination of GIS and RS is also presented in [22] and for risk assessment.
The former developed an algorithmic criterion to compare the hazardous effects induced
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 5 of 25

by different MSWs and utilized GIS to organize input data and very high-resolution
data from QuickBird to obtain land cover maps of around the study area. The latter
generated a risk assessment map of illegal waste-dumping areas by combining GIS and RS
information. They used multispectral images acquired by the FORMOSAT-2 satellite to
analyze the spectral characteristics of dumping areas, known from field surveys and EPA
(Environmental Protection Administration) archives. They integrated this information in
a risk assessment model composed of other geospatial factors related to waste dumping.
The integration of spectral features greatly improves the risk assessment mapping results,
although higher spectral resolution imagery may be useful in avoiding the misclassification
of waste materials with bare soil.
Additionally, Ref. [14] applied spectral features to investigate the possibility of iden-
tifying landfill areas using Landsat 5 satellite images, digital orthophotos, and a Corine
1990 land cover map. They analyzed the spectral signature in all seven bands of the the-
matic mapper sensor for eight classes of interest (including the “dump” class) individuated
using the ISODATA (iterative self-organizing data analysis) automatic pre-classification
technique. A multitemporal comparison of the images allowed the authors to discriminate
the dump spectral signature from the others, including those related to classes with similar
behavior, such as urban area class. The digital orthophotos and land cover map were used
as an aid for the elaboration, validation, and interpretation of the Landsat 5 data.
A change detection procedure was developed by [23] that aimed to distinguish waste
burial sites. Two acquisitions from Landsat 7 and Landsat 8 were processed by means of the
GRASS (geographic resources analysis support system) GIS, according to two methodolo-
gies. Similar to [14], the first procedure made use of an unsupervised classification method
to group pixels with a similar spectral signature and then classified them with a maximum
likelihood classifier. The second method was based on the tasseled cap transformation and
discriminated the most changed areas by means of a “Greenness empirically normalization
index” obtained from the greenness vegetation index. To validate the method, ground truth
maps were realized through a comparison and visual analysis of available archive images
with a high spatial resolution (from 1 m to 0.18 m). This second method led to significant
and applicable results.
A method to detect micro-dumps and greenhouse gases through the use of satellite RS
data was developed by [24]. In particular, the suggested procedure was applied to Pleiades
multispectral data with a spatial resolution of 2 m in the RGB and near infrared bands.
The authors exploited both the spatial and spectral features extracted from the images
through the scattering transform algorithm. The spatial characterization was achieved by
extracting textural features from the images, while the spectral features were based on the
brightness information. The obtained results showed good performance in greenhouse gas
detection; on the contrary, the results of the micro-dump recognition, characterized by a
small dimension and spectral and spatial inhomogeneity, reported a high false alarm rate.
Finally, Ref. [25] proposed a method for identifying and ranking landfill sites using the
city of Faisalabad as a case study. Indeed, the city is one of the largest industrial centers in
Pakistan, and solid waste derived from its huge production is often dumped randomly near
populated areas. RS data and GIS were used to rank the areas for developing or expanding
an existing landfill site from the most suitable sites to the worst sites. As ranking criteria,
three indexes derived from Landsat 8 acquisitions were used in addition to physical factors,
including water bodies, roads, and the population. The indexes were the NDVI, NDWI,
and the normalized difference built-up index (NDBI). The latter was used to assess the
urban built-up size, the geographical distribution of the study area, and a comprehensive
picture of the urban land cover. Additionally, Ref. [26] utilized the NDVI and land use
(LU)/land cover (LC) maps for the identification and ranking of possible dumping sites in
Saudi Arabia, using Sentinel-2 data. The obtained maps and NDVI were integrated with
other geophysical and spatial information to obtain a set of information for selecting the
most appropriate site for waste disposal.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 6 of 25

1.1.2. Land-Surface-Temperature-Based Analysis

The effectiveness of a multitemporal analysis of the LST, obtained by Landsat satellites
monitoring landfill sites, was proven by [27]. In this work, the study area, data, and methodol-
ogy proposed were used with the aim of determining the waste-dumping regions in a landfill
using Landsat Thematic Mapper and Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus images. Images
that covered a temporal range of 10 years were collected during the summer and winter
seasons. The results demonstrated the effectiveness of the LST for determining waste location,
especially considering the summer acquisition when the heat flux is more pronounced.
Landsat data were also used in [28]: they successfully developed a methodology
for identifying landfill fires by correlating them with landfill temperature anomalies.
From Landsat 5 and Landsat 8 images, they obtained LST maps over a 17-year period.
Also, Ref. [29] estimated LST using Landsat data acquired from 2000 to 2016 to demon-
strate the correlation between this parameter and the amount of solid waste buried in
the landfill. Subsequently, they used landfill-site-specific information in addition to other
meteorological parameters to estimate the LST with a neural network algorithm.
In [30], the authors assessed the LST distribution for two large landfill sites in Vietnam
using Landsat 8 satellite images. They derived the LST from two images, acquired in 2019
and 2020, that showed the two different test sites. They proved that the landfill surface
temperature is often higher than 40 ◦ C and is much higher than the surrounding area, even
compared to built-up areas. Additionally, the results show that the difference between the
highest LST (at the landfill) and the lowest LST (at the area covered by vegetation) in both
test areas was about 20 degrees.

1.1.3. SAR-Based Analysis

Ali et al. [31] used a single Radarsat-1 C-band SAR acquisition to monitor multiple
MSW sites in the city of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. In particular, they processed one Radarsat-1
backscattering image (in F2 mode), and a digital elevation model (DEM) was obtained
using stereo-SAR techniques to orthorectify the image. Eventually, image segmentation
was performed to map waste disposals by applying a supervised classification algorithm
in PCI software version 10, using ground-truth samples as input. The results confirmed
that satellite SAR imagery and digital image processing techniques could be valuable for
MSW site monitoring.
This study used the SAR backscatter to monitor waste disposal areas; the employment
of SAR interferometry for the same purpose is also found in literature. Indeed, since several
factors related to the observed surface affect the SAR backscatter signal, the combination of
multiple images can provide more robust information on the characteristics of a landfill. For
example, Ref. [32] monitored the change in waste disposal volume in a landfill located in
Athens by using two pairs of ENVISAT ASAR images and applied the SAR interferometry
technique to generate two DEMs. The two DEMs, referring to the first and (assumed as
reference product) second dates, respectively, were subtracted to derive variations of the
elevations. In particular, changes in the waste volume were examined using elevation
profiles obtained with the two DEMs.
The interferometric SAR (InSAR) technique was also applied in [33] in combination
with unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) photogrammetry and ground measurement in order
to obtain information on landfill deformation and evaluate the risks related to the waste dis-
posal site. The authors considered one of the largest engineered sanitary landfills in China,
the Tianziling landfill, as a study case. In particular, Sentinel-1 data were used to assess de-
formation during the monitoring period, supported and integrated with ground-based and
UAV data. The multi-source information was then used to identify the potential subsidence
area of the landfill for the risk assessment analysis. The results showed that the approach
permitted the detection of deformation in the range of millimeters to meters, allowing for
the identification of unstable areas for risk estimation. In [34], the authors used a differ-
ential InSAR technique for monitoring landfill settlements in the Montegrosso-Pallareta
landfill in Italy. They used multi-temporal COSMO-SkyMed interferometric data to mon-
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 7 of 25

itor a low-magnitude landfill settlement with millimetric accuracy. In [35], the authors
used the multitemporal InSAR technique for the time-series monitoring of deformation
at the Xingfeng landfill in China. Multitemporal InSAR allows for the elimination of the
influences of temporal and spatial decorrelation and atmospheric noise. The authors used
images from Sentinel-1A, Radarsat-2, ALOS-2, and TerraSAR-X/TanDEM-X to measure the
settlement and thickness of the landfill. The results showed that the coherence of the landfill
during the initial stage of closure is primarily affected by temporal decorrelation, caused
by considerable gradient deformation rather than by spatial decorrelation. Moreover, the
results revealed the correlation between the time of settlement and thickness, with the
settlement of younger areas usually found to be greater than that of older areas.

1.2. Multiple-Parameter-Based Analysis

This section describes works that combine satellite-sensor-derived information ac-
quired at the VIS-NIR-SWIR, TIR, and microwave parts of the electromagnetic spectrum,
respectively. It consists of the following subsections: multiple-optical-parameters based
analysis and the combination of SAR and multiple-optical-parameters based analysis.

1.2.1. Multiple-Optical-Parameters-Based Analysis

Several authors proposed an approach that makes use of both temperature information
and multispectral indexes. The methodology proposed in [36] follows the method already
examined in [27] except for the use of different study sites and the introduction of an
NDVI visual analysis. From Landsat Thematic Mapper data, they derived LST and NDVI
images for a total of 81 acquisitions in different seasons throughout the year. The results
confirmed that the LST of the landfill is higher than the surrounding vegetation and air
temperature, and that this difference is more pronounced during the spring and summer
seasons. In particular, they found that the LST is generally higher for an active landfill
compared to a closed one, and it is higher for open landfill stages than capped landfill
stages. Nevertheless, the LST was found to be affected by moisture caused by rain or snow.
In fact, precipitation provides a suitable environment for bacteria to proliferate, inducing a
high rate of gas production and heat generation. Finally, the NDVI was used to analyze
vegetation conditions in and around the landfill.
Additionally, Ref. [21], following their previous work [21], integrated the LST into the
analysis of vegetation indexes with the aim of evaluating the bio-thermal influence of two
dumping sites in Pakistan on the surrounding areas. The results previously obtained for
the vegetation indexes were confirmed; moreover, they used Landsat 8 data to demonstrate
that the LST decreases moving away from the sites.
In 2008, Yang et al. [37] combined RS data in a GIS environment to analyze the
leachate and gas emissions from landfills in a metropolitan area of Jiangsu Province, China.
Particularly, the LST, the NDVI, and the CMI (clay minerals index) were considered in the
study. According to the authors, these choices were motivated by the fact that differences
in the LST between actual landfill sites and the surrounding areas are correlated with the
speed and significance of the biodegradation processes occurring in the landfill and the
release of the related gases. The NDVI, due to its correlation with the water content in the
soil, acts as an indicator of the presence of leachates; the CMI allows for an assessment
of the clay concentration in the surface since this material is commonly used to prevent
the release of contaminated water and other liquids by confining landfills. Concerning the
employment of RS data, a Landsat-7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+) image was
retrieved and processed to compute the LST and the multispectral indexes. Eventually, the
obtained results were combined with available digital maps and regional data to perform
a spatial analysis of the landfill areas by examining their environmental conditions and
distance from water bodies and infrastructures.
In 2018, Sarp et al. [38] analyzed the impact of an abandoned aggregate quarry used
for uncontrolled waste disposal on groundwater, the LST, land surface moisture, and vege-
tation cover using GIS and RS technologies. In particular, for each of these domains, an
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 8 of 25

index derived from the Landsat 8 imagery was selected for the years 2014 and 2017. In
detail, the Landsat 8 sensor TIRS was employed to compute the LST and assess the changes
that occurred during the specified time interval as an indicator of the influence of solid
waste deposition on thermal absorption and emissions. Moreover, the multispectral indexes
NDMI and SAVI were used to assess the impact of solid waste disposal on surface moisture
and surrounding vegetation, respectively. Furthermore, Pearson’s correlation coefficient
was utilized to evaluate the degree of correlation between the variables mentioned above,
i.e., LST, NDMI and SAVI, for both the time periods: 2014 and 2017. Eventually, groundwa-
ter contamination was assessed in the study area, with samples taken from four wells close
to the site. According to the obtained results, solid waste disposal caused groundwater
pollution, increased surface temperature, and reduced soil moisture.
In 2021, Ganci et al. [39] proposed the employment of multispectral satellite images to
characterize the state of activity of landfills since, according to the authors, when active,
waste disposal sites show differences in surface conditions compared to neighboring areas.
Indeed, regarding the usage of RS data, Landsat (4,5,7,8), EOS-Aster, Sentinel-2, and Doves-
Planetscope acquisitions were used to derive the LST, NDVI and NDWI as indicators of
the surface temperature, state of vegetation, and soil moisture, respectively. In particular,
the employment of the NDWI allowed for an analysis of the soil moisture to identify the
leachate contamination of the aquifers. Preliminary results, obtained by combining the
indexes computed for the site and the surrounding areas, show how this approach can
identify known the areas and levels of activity of known landfill sites.
The LST was also used in combination with other parameters in [40]. In this work,
the authors presented a characterization of the largest uncontrolled dump site in Egypt.
They used RS data and other geological and geophysical data. They used Landsat 5 and
Landsat 8 images to derive the LST, soil moisture maps, and LU/LCmaps. The LU/LC
maps were used to derive the population settlement increment and to correlate the LST
and soil moisture maps with the propagation of the municipal waste dump sites. The
soil moisture map was used to characterize the leachate flow, while the LST was used to
manifest the dump site surface temperature and to correlate the temperature to the quantity
of waste.
In the region of Saskatoon, Canada, Ref. [41] used satellite imagery and vector data to
produce a probability map of illegal dump sites. The authors used the night-time light data
from the visible infrared imaging radiometer suite (VIIRS) sensor, which is on board the
joint NASA/NOAA Suomi National Polar orbiting Partnership (Suomi NPP) satellite, and
the data obtained from the Landsat 8 satellite. The former were used to identify low-light
regions with lower anthropogenic activities to identify suitable sites for landfill expansion,
and the latter were used to derive the LST and the MSAVI index. Satellite data were
combined with vector data that included highways, railways, and the locations of regular
disposal sites to produce a probability map by means of the simple additive weighting
(SAW) method. Related to the Landsat 8 satellite data, they found that the MSAVI is a
significant factor for the detection of illegal dump sites, while the LST is less effective for the
identification of smaller-scale landfills. Similarly, in [42], the authors considered the same
study area to detect illegal dump sites using vector parameters and satellite images. The
vector parameters were active, regular landfills and highways. Additionally, they used the
LST, the enhanced vegetation index (EVI), derived from MODIS data, and the formaldehyde
total column (HCHO), derived from the Aura ozone monitoring instrument (OMI). The
EVI is an alternative to the NDVI that minimizes errors due to atmospheric conditions and
canopy background noise. The results showed that the LST and highways are important
parameters for the identification of illegal dump sites; the latter are important because road
network intensity and accessibility appear to be important for their occurrence. The EVI
is mined by the predominating uniform land cover of grassland and shrubs. Instead, the
HCHO is instead less spatially sensitive, limiting its potential as an indicator.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 9 of 25

1.2.2. SAR- and Multi-Optical-Parameters-Based Analysis

Ottavianelli et al. [43] introduced a visual assessment of hyperspectral and SAR RS
for solid waste landfill management in the UK. In detail, the ERS and Envisat SAR images
were processed to investigate the backscatter and interferometric coherence sensitivity to
structural changes due to a landfilling operation. Moreover, a hyperspectral scene acquired
by the PROBA-1 main instrument, the Compact High-Resolution Imaging Spectrometer
(CHRIS), was employed (as a red–green–blue composite) to monitor the activities car-
ried out in a landfill. According to the authors, this proved to be more adequate than
multispectral data.
Yonezawa [44] proposed the joint use of multispectral and SAR data by employing
ALOS PRISM, AVNIR-2, and PALSAR acquisitions for monitoring waste disposal sites.
In particular, through a visual inspection of pan-sharpened PRISM and AVNIR-2 images,
junkyards were identified in the target area. Moreover, PALSAR backscatter images were
also examined in HH polarization for both flight directions (ascending and descending)
to identify surface changes at waste disposal sites by visual interpretation. Eventually,
panchromatic and multispectral QuickBird data allowed for the identification of a waste-
tire disposal, leveraging its difference in the spectral signature with the surrounding land
cover types.
Cadau et al. [45] proposed an integrated system for landfill detection and monitoring
using EO data, particularly by involving multispectral and SAR data. While optical data
are used mainly for 2D monitoring purposes, SAR information is useful for detecting both
2D and 3D landfill variations. For this purpose, concerning optical data (RAPIDEYE and
SPOT-5), the DDI index was introduced and tested, combining optical-derived vegetation
indexes with image textural features. Furthermore, regarding SAR data, COSMO-Skymed
interferometric pairs were processed. In particular, the HH and VV interferometric pairs
(ascending and descending paths) were analyzed to extract the 3D surface elevation model.
The authors stated that this procedure could be applied to structures characterized by a
regular geometry (with high coherence values) such that the signal phase information
allows for the detection of height variations. Additionally, Cadau et al. proved that, in
general, the decrease in the coherence between different SAR image pairs is correlated to
a change in the landfill geometry’s scattering mechanisms. Moreover, night-time ASTER
images, particularly TIR bands, were processed to retrieve the LST trends and detect
potential thermal anomalies. Furthermore, the study analyzed the presence of new potential
landfills by analyzing the DDI map and ASTER LST map.
Moreover, Agapiou et al. [46] investigated the sensitivity of multispectral, hyperspec-
tral, and SAR data for olive mill waste disposal monitoring. Concerning multispectral
acquisitions, very high resolution (VHR) data were employed, including Pleiades (0.50 m),
SPOT 6 (1.5 m), QuickBird (0.60 m), WorldView-2 (0.40 m), and GeoEye 1 (0.40 m) images.
Particularly, the VHR images were processed by computing two indexes, combining the
bands in the visible and VNIR part of the spectrum: NDVI and OOMW (olive oil mill
waster index). Moreover, a PCA (principal component analysis) was tested to identify
the optimum linear combinations of the original bands. Then, an IHS (intensity–hue–
saturation) transformation was applied to perform the resulting image fusion. Eventually,
the ISODATA algorithm and the LSU technique were used to discriminate the olive mill
waste disposal by performing an unsupervised classification. A COSMO-SkyMed image
(2.5 m) was processed to identify the disposal areas, which were distinguished as black
targets due to low backscattering of the signal (a significant presence of water). Moreover, a
hyperspectral EO-ALI image (30 m) was employed through fusion techniques with the SAR
image. However, the olive mill waste disposal areas were not successfully distinguished
despite the improved spatial resolution.

1.3. Summary and Discussion of the Literature Review

In the first section, we reviewed the role of satellite RS in landfill monitoring. The
analyzed studies reveal that satellite data offer promising results and represent a relevant
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 10 of 25

instrument for the aforementioned task. Satellite acquisitions deliver a global view of the
area of interest at a low cost and within a short time frame, and different kind of sensors on
board provide advanced information in various portions of the electromagnetic spectrum.
The reviewed works were classified according to the information retrieved from the satellite
acquisitions, and four main categories of analysis were identified: vegetation-indexes-based
analysis, land-surface-temperature-based analysis, multiple-optical-parameters-based anal-
ysis, and SAR- and multiple-optical-parameters-based analysis.
The review revealed that satellite data are mainly used with the purpose of identify-
ing and monitoring landfill sites, both regular and illegal ones, and to also estimate the
hazardous effects of dumping sites on their surrounding areas and to assess their environ-
mental impact. Only a few studies used satellite data for more specific analyses, such as
monitoring landfill emissions, i.e., leachates and gases, estimating the amount of buried
waste, identifying landfill fires, and monitoring waste from olive mills. This suggests
that satellite data are mainly applied for the investigation of large-scale events instead
of more refined analyses. In fact, the sensors used in the analyzed literature are mostly
high-spatial-resolution sensors, e.g., those on board the Landsat missions. Fewer studies
made use of the very-high-resolution instruments carried by the Pléiades, WorldView-2,
SPOT 6, QuickBird, GeoEye 1, and COSMO-SkyMed satellites. This lower number of
research studies may be due to the limited spectral resolution and data distribution policy.
Most of the analyzed works exploited the information obtained from optical instruments
for their specific purposes, while a smaller part used SAR acquisitions. Related to the
former, the measurements and indexes calculated were almost always combined in order
to take advantage of the heterogeneity of the information. The most common parameters
used for the analysis were the NDVI, NDWI, and LST, which have proven to be effective
in the identification and characterization of landfill areas. In relation to the NDVI and
NDWI, the works also demonstrated the ability of the indexes to assess the negative effects
of landfills on the vegetation of surrounding areas. Furthermore, the LST was also shown
to be able to identify a dump site, and the correlation between an increase in this value
and the presence of a landfill was demonstrated. A lower number of articles used indexes
such as the GEMI, SAVI, MSAVI, NDBI, or CMI, which are very specific indexes mainly
used to obtain secondary information for particular tasks. For example, the NDBI was
used to discriminate buildings to define an urban area, and CMI was used to detect clay
on top of a landfill. The DDI receives a separate mention, as it is not so common but
was specifically developed for landfill identification. Multispectral images were also often
used to locate landfills by deriving their spectral signature. However, this was found to
be very similar to the case of built-up areas, and additional analyses were required for a
correct discrimination, e.g., a multitemporal analysis. Concerning SAR acquisitions, they
were often used in combination with optical images. SAR was used mainly for landfill
monitoring purposes, exploiting the radar backscatter to observe variations in the surface
scattering mechanism. Moreover, the interferometry technique was used to assess changes
in the volume of the site and to derive DEMs of the area of interest. The optical images
were used to facilitate the visual inspection and to obtain DDI or LST measures.
In general, the analyzed works provided successful results, especially those that used
the LST as an indicator and SAR-based methods, alone or in combination with other
measurements. Spectral information is, on the contrary, more susceptible to errors as waste
disposal sites are often misclassified as urban areas or bare soil. Furthermore, several
studies have shown that the dimensions of landfill sites are decisive for the analysis. As
expected, small landfill areas are more difficult to identify, and this characteristic makes the
detection of newborn waste disposal sites difficult. We can therefore assume that, generally
speaking, RS-based methods are effective and efficient for the identification and monitoring
of large and known waste disposal sites. On the contrary, the use of this technology is
more challenging in the case of smaller sites. It follows that RS techniques perform less in
tasks such as the early warning or detection of illegal dumps. Certainly, the use of very
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 11 of 25

high-resolution images can overcome these limitations, but these are often not as widely
and freely distributed as Landsat or Sentinel acquisitions.

2. Case Studies
Beginning from the review on the application of EO data for landfill monitoring, some
relevant techniques were selected and tested on predetermined tests sites to demonstrate
some application cases. The aim is to illustrate the behavior of the satellite-based measure-
ments related to changes in the sites. In particular, the NDVI, NDWI, DDI and LST were
selected for a multispectral data analysis, while for SAR data, the backscatter coefficient
was considered. The analyses considered the above-mentioned indexes independently and
in combination with each other.
As an approach, a multitemporal analysis was performed. Firstly, very-high-resolution
(VHR) historical images from Google Earth were visually analyzed to define the sites’
geometries. Indeed, polygons were manually delineated through a visual analysis of
these images. Moreover, the same images were inspected to observe possible changes
in the sites over the past five years. This method allows for the comparison of images
representing the same scene at different moments in time. Consequently, when changes
affecting the site (e.g., land cover modification events and spatial variations within the
sites’ perimeter) were visible, satellite data were downloaded and processed to observe the
possible correlated variations of the multispectral indexes, LST, and SAR backscatter. As a
result, to provide a complete overview of such variations, in this section it is possible to find
panels representing the above-mentioned indexes as images centered on the study sites.
In addition to this visual representation, to quantify what is observable from the images,
numerical estimates based on the aforementioned indexes are provided. Particularly, the
tables contain the mean values of indexes computed over the areas affected by change in
the sites. These areas were delineated through a visual interpretation of the Google Earth
VHR historical images.
Concerning multispectral data, Sentinel-2 acquisitions were involved. Notably, a
single image per year was considered for the comparison so that all the acquisitions are
related to the same year period to consider the seasonal effects on the surface reflectance.
Regarding the LST, Landsat 8 images close to the Sentinel-2 acquisition dates assumed for
the other optical indexes’ computations were considered and processed according to what
was mentioned in Section 2.1.4. In addition, concerning the SAR data, Sentinel-1 images
were considered to obtain the backscatter coefficient by downloading and processing the
relevant products.
Regarding the choice of the study sites, known dumping sites located in the regions
of Pakistan and Mongolia were utilized as test sites. Indeed, as stated in the Introduction,
MSW management represents a priority, especially in low- and middle-income countries,
where the volume of waste generated is increasing rapidly, and engineered waste disposal
systems are often not present. The regions of interest are reported in Figure 2, which shows
the countries of Pakistan and Mongolia and the dumping site located in Pakistan, near the
city of Faisalabad, and the three sites located in Mongolia, in the city of Ulaanbaatar.
Table 1 specified the products utilized for the analysis and the relative satellite acquisi-
tion platform. The area of acquisition is also reported.

Table 1. Identification of the considered products and related satellite platform.

Area Product ID Platform

S2B_MSIL1C_20180403T035539_N0206_R004_T48UXU_20180403T075550
S2B_MSIL2A_20190415T034539_N0211_R104_T48UXU_20190415T072335
Mongolia Sentinel-2
S2B_MSIL2A_20200402T035539_N0214_R004_T48UXU_20200402T072357
S2B_MSIL2A_20210404T034529_N0300_R104_T48UXU_20210404T055850
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 12 of 25

Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Table 1. Cont. 12 of 26

Area Product ID Platform

S2B_MSIL1C_20200405T054639_N0209_R048_T43RCQ_20200405T092247
Regarding the choice of the study sites, known dumping sites locatedSentinel-2
in the regions
S2B_MSIL2A_20210331T054639_N0300_R048_T43RCQ_20210331T083756
of Pakistan and Mongolia were utilized as test sites. Indeed, as stated in the Introduction,
MSW LC08_L2SP_150038_20200325_20200822_02_T1
management represents a priority, especially in low- and middle-income countries,
Pakistan whereLC08_L2SP_149038_20200403_20200822_02_T1
the volume of waste generated is increasing rapidly, and engineered waste disposal
Landsat-8
LC08_L2SP_150038_20210328_20210402_02_T1
systems are often not present. The regions
LC08_L2SP_150038_20210413_20210423_02_T1
of interest are reported in Figure 2, which
shows the countries of Pakistan and Mongolia and the dumping site located in Pakistan,
S1A_IW_SLC__1SDV_20200326T130416_20200326T130443_031847_03ACE3_78A8
near the city of Faisalabad, and the three sites located in Mongolia, in the city of
Sentinel-1
S1A_IW_SLC__1SDV_20210414T130422_20210414T130450_037447_046A1C_37E5
Ulaanbaatar.

Figure 2. Location of the test sites. (Left): New Faisalabad and Main Faisalabad landfill sites located
Figure 2. Location of the test sites. (Left): New Faisalabad and Main Faisalabad landfill sites located
in Pakistan; (Right): Tsagaan Davaa, Morangiin Davaa, and Narangiin Enger landfill sites located
in Pakistan; (Right): Tsagaan Davaa, Morangiin Davaa, and Narangiin Enger landfill sites located
in Mongolia.
in Mongolia.
TableIndexes
2.1. Main 1 specified the products
and Parameters utilized
Used for for the analysis and the relative satellite
the Analysis
acquisition
2.1.1. NDVI platform. The area of acquisition is also reported.

TableThe NDVI is theofmost

1. Identification known and
the considered used and
products vegetation index for
related satellite quantifying green veg-
platform.
etation by measuring plant health based on how a plant reflects light (usually sunlight)
Area at specific frequencies. Product
The NDVIID calculation normalizes green leaf scattering
Platform
in the near
S2B_MSIL1C_20180403T035539_N0206_R004_T48UXU_20180403T075550
infrared (NIR) wavelength and chlorophyll absorption in the red wavelength (RED), ac-
S2B_MSIL2A_20190415T034539_N0211_R104_T48UXU_20190415T072335
cording to the following expression:
Mongolia Sentinel-2
S2B_MSIL2A_20200402T035539_N0214_R004_T48UXU_20200402T072357
NIR − RED
S2B_MSIL2A_20210404T034529_N0300_R104_T48UXU_20210404T055850
NDVI = (1)
NIR + RED
S2B_MSIL1C_20200405T054639_N0209_R048_T43RCQ_20200405T092247
Sentinel-2
S2B_MSIL2A_20210331T054639_N0300_R048_T43RCQ_20210331T083756
where NIR and RED are the reflectance provided by Sentinel-2 Level L2A band 8 and
LC08_L2SP_150038_20200325_20200822_02_T1
band 4LC08_L2SP_149038_20200403_20200822_02_T1
products, respectively [47].
Pakistan The equation above always results in an NDVI value between −1 and +1. Landsat-8
A number
LC08_L2SP_150038_20210328_20210402_02_T1
between − 1 and 0 suggests an inanimate object,
LC08_L2SP_150038_20210413_20210423_02_T1 such as roads, buildings, water bodies, or
dead plants. Values close to zero generally correspond to barren areas of rock, sand, or
S1A_IW_SLC__1SDV_20200326T130416_20200326T130443_031847_03ACE3_78A8
soil. Low, positive values represent unhealthy plants and stressed leaves (and Sentinel-1
S1A_IW_SLC__1SDV_20210414T130422_20210414T130450_037447_046A1C_37E5 scrubland or

2.1. Main Indexes and Parameters Used for the Analysis

2.1.1. NDVI
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 13 of 25

grassland as the type of vegetation). In contrast, high values indicate healthy plants and
leaves (and dense evergreen forest as the type of vegetation).

2.1.2. NDWI
The NDWI can also be considered an independent vegetation index complementary
to the NDVI. The NDWI is sensitive to changes in the water content of vegetation canopies.
The following equation (Equation (2)) describes how the NDWI is calculated:

GREEN − NIR
NDWI = (2)
GREEN + NIR
where GREEN and NIR are the reflectance provided by Sentinel-2 Level L2A band 3 and
band 8 products, respectively [48].
The equation above results in an NDWI value between −1 and +1. A number between
−1 and 0 suggests an inanimate object, such as roads, buildings, water bodies, or dead
plants. Moreover, the higher the NDWI value between 0 and 1, the greater the vegetation
canopies’ water content. Moreover, the NDWI is insensitive to atmospheric conditions.

2.1.3. DDI and SAVI

The SAVI (soil-adjusted vegetation index) is a modification of the NDVI to take into
account vegetation density [49], and it is defined as (Equation (3)):

(NIR − RED) × (1·L)

SAVI = (3)
NIR + RED + L
where NIR and RED are as defined above, and L is a canopy background adjustment factor,
assumed equal to 0.5. The SAVI is used to calculate the DDI. The latter is not a widely used
index for RS applications since, in contrast to the indexes mentioned above, it is a specific
indicator for dump detection and monitoring. Indeed, it extends the NDVI idea by using a
soil-adjusted vegetation index and combining it with the local texture of an image at the
waste site. The index is based on the following formula (Equation (4)):

DDI = SAVI × Entropy (4)

where Entropy is a statistical measure of randomness that can be used to characterize the
texture of an input image around a target pixel [45]. In this context, it is applied to the
vegetation index images through the gray-level co-occurrence matrix. (GLCM) [50].

2.1.4. Land Surface Temperature

The LST is a key parameter that can be retrieved from TIR remotely sensed data.
Many algorithms are available for LST estimation from satellite data. A method for surface
temperature retrieval from Landsat data using a single band (Band 10) algorithm, based on
the radiative transfer equation, has been implemented, e.g., in [51], in case of lakes, but it
can be generalized to land surfaces by adopting appropriate values of surface emissivity. To
this aim, the emissivity can be assumed on the reference of an empirical relation reported
below (see Equation (5)), which was suggested in a previous work [52].

ε = 1.0094 + 0.047 × ln(NDVI) (5)

The proposed algorithm for the land surface temperature estimation consists of de-
riving the atmospheric corrected spectral radiance for a single Landsat thermal band,
exploiting a NASA web tool which provides three parameters requested in the radiative-
transfer-based Planck equation.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 14 of 25

The first step in this workflow is radiometric calibration, which obtains the spectral
radiances from the digital number values measured by sensors on board satellites (as
shown in Equation (6)).

Lmax λ − Lmin λ
   
W
L1 = × (DN − DNmin ) + Lmin λ (6)
DNmax − DNmin m2 ·sr·µm

where L1 is the spectral radiance, DN is the digital number, Lmin λ and Lmax λ are the
spectral radiances scaled on the base of DNmin (the minimum pixel value before radiometric
calibration) and DNmax (the maximum pixel value before radiometric calibration) reported
in the metadata of Landsat products.
Then, atmospherically corrected spectral radiance values can be obtained from the
following Equation (7):

L1 − L ↑ 1−ε
     
W
L2 = − ×L ↓ (7)
ετ ε m2 ·sr·µm

where the atmospheric upwelling (L↑) and downwelling (L↓), radiance, and the total
atmospheric transmission (τ) are derived from the NASA-developed web tool for correcting
thermal bands in Landsat data, which can be accessed at the following link: http://atmcorr.
gsfc.nasa.gov. (Last accessed on 24 February 2023).
The land surface temperature is finally obtained (see Equation (8)) by inverting
Planck’s function, where K1 and K2 are constants reported in the metadata of each Landsat
satellite product (e.g., K1 = 774.885 and K2 = 1321.079 for Landsat-8/TIRS).

K
LST =  2  [K] (8)
K1
ln L2

In order to mitigate possible year-dependent climatological effects, each LST map

reported in the results was obtained by averaging the LST values retrieved through the
aforementioned procedure applied to two Landsat products collected in a period consistent
with the acquisition days of the images used for computing the other indexes considered
for the analysis.

2.1.5. Backscatter Coefficient

In literature, the SAR data employment revealed significant results, mainly by provid-
ing information about the structural changes occurring in landfills or, generally speaking,
waste disposal sites. Indeed, since multispectral data provide details concerning the radio-
metric characterization of the observed surface, SAR acts as a complementary technology
due to its geometry-based observables. Moreover, with SAR data, it is also possible to
measure a variation occurring on the landfill surface when the optical signal is saturated or
not exploitable because of weather conditions [45]. From an operational perspective, the
radar signal is transmitted by the satellite down to the Earth’s surface and scattered back
towards the satellite’s antenna by the Earth’s surface itself. Concerning this mechanism,
SAR backscatter consists of part of that signal recorded by the onboard satellite’s sensor.
Many factors related to the surface structure influence the SAR backscatter, including the
surface’s roughness and its electrical conductivity (or dielectric constant). Rough surfaces
will backscatter more radar energy back to the satellite radar antenna, while smooth sur-
faces will backscatter much less or even no energy back to the satellite radar antenna. A
second influence on radar backscatter is due to the surface’s electrical conductivity (dielec-
tric constant), which is directly related to the moisture content of the soil. A high moisture
content means a high backscatter, and a low moisture content means a low backscatter.
Another factor influencing the SAR backscatter is the local incidence angle, which is defined
by the incident radar beam and the normal to the intercepting surface since reflectivity
from distributed scatterers decreases with increasing local incidence angles. Concerning the
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 15 of 25

backscatter analysis, a couple of SAR acquisitions related to the two years considered were
processed to obtain the backscatter coefficient in both polarization (VH and VV). Regarding
the processing, the two images were ingested in the SNAP software version 8 to progres-
sively apply all the needed operators to obtain the backscatter coefficient. Particularly the
following sequence of processing function were applied.
i. Apply Orbit File;
ii. S-1 TOPS Split;
iii. Calibration;
iv. S-1 TOPS Deburst;
v. Terrain Correction;
vi. Speckle Filter.
The above-mentioned functions represent the typical operators needed to process
Sentinel-1 SLC data as described, e.g., in [53,54].

2.2. Single-Parameter-Based Analysis

2.2.1. Vegetation-Indexes-Based Analysis
The Tsagaan Davaa landfill is located in Mongolia. A land cover change in the
southernmost part of the landfill can be observed between 2020 and 2021, as shown on
the left in Figure 3. Despite the cloud cover, the change was still visible. As can be
found in the literature, the NDVI is a well-established index that is also frequently used
in landfill detection because it can correlate vegetation stress to potential waste-induced
contamination. For this purpose, the NDVI was applied to this site, and it is shown on
the right side of the image before and after the event. The index clearly highlights the
area of interest in both 2020 and 2021, reporting a lower value within the landfill than the
surrounding areas. The event is also clearly represented by the NDVI index, which rose in
2021 when the change occurred. To quantify the increase in NDVI values, the mean values
over the area where the land cover change occurred (black dashed polygons in Figure 3)
were computed before and after the above-mentioned event, and the values are reported
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 26
in Table 2. The results show an increase in the NDVI values, which was expected due to
the removal of waste material and the resulting land cover change suggested by the visual
interpretation of the Google Earth imagery.

Figure 3. Tsagaan Davaa landfill site. (Left): Google Earth image over the area; (Right): NDVI map.
Figure
Red 3. Tsagaan
line: Davaa
landfill landfillblack
perimeter, site. (Left):
dashed Google Earthaffected
line: area image over theland
by the area;cover
(Right): NDVI map.
change.
Red line: landfill perimeter, black dashed line: area affected by the land cover change.
Table 2. NDVI mean values computed over the southern area of the Tsagaan Davaa landfill site. An
increase
The NDWIbetweenwas2020 and 2021for
analyzed occurred due to theDavaa
the Morangiin land cover change.
landfill in Mongolia, shown in
Figure 4 on the left. The NDWI was used since the soil water content can be related to the
Index 2020 2021
leachate produced by waste. In this site, between 2018 and 2019, a waste disposal site
expansion in the NDVI 0.089 in the NDWI values is noted
southern part occurred. An increase 0.176for the
site’s southern part, according to expectations.
Moreover the above-mentioned NDWI increase can be observed not only in the
illustration (Figure 4), but also by computing the mean values over the event-related area
of the landfill (Table 3), suggesting the potential presence of leachates in the site,
particularly in the area affected by the new waste disposal (in the southern area).
 Red line: landfill perimeter, black dashed line: area affected by the land cover change.

The NDWI was analyzed for the Morangiin Davaa landfill in Mongolia, shown in
Figure 4 on the left. The NDWI was used since the soil water content can be related to the
leachate produced by waste. In this site, between 2018 and 2019, a waste disposal site
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 expansion in the southern part occurred. An increase in the NDWI values is noted for16the of 25
site’s southern part, according to expectations.
Moreover the above-mentioned NDWI increase can be observed not only in the
illustration (Figurewas
The NDWI 4), but also by for
analyzed computing the mean
the Morangiin values
Davaa over the
landfill event-related
in Mongolia, areain
shown
ofFigure
the landfill (Table 3), suggesting the potential presence of leachates
4 on the left. The NDWI was used since the soil water content can be related in the site,to
particularly
the leachate in produced
the area affected
by waste.by In
thethis
new waste
site, disposal
between 2018(inand
the2019,
southern area).
a waste disposal site
expansion in the southern part occurred. An increase in the NDWI values is noted for the
Table 3. southern
site’s NDWI mean values
part, computed
according over the southern area of the Morangiin Davaa landfill site.
to expectations.
An increase betweenthe
Moreover 2018 and 2019 occurred NDWI
above-mentioned due to the new waste
increase candisposal.
be observed not only in the
illustration (Figure 4), but also by computing
Index 2018 the mean values over the event-related
2019 area of
the landfill (Table 3), suggesting the potential presence of leachates in the site, particularly
NDWI −0.304 −0.211
in the area affected by the new waste disposal (in the southern area).

Figure 4. Morangiin Davaa landfill site. (Left): Google Earth acquisition over the area; (Right): NDWI
Figure
map. 4.
RedMorangiin Davaa
line: landfill landfillblack
perimeter, site. dashed
(Left): Google Earth
line: area acquisition
affected over disposal.
by the waste the area; (Right):
NDWI map. Red line: landfill perimeter, black dashed line: area affected by the waste disposal.
Table 3. NDWI mean values computed over the southern area of the Morangiin Davaa landfill site.
An increase between 2018 and 2019 occurred due to the new waste disposal.

Index 2018 2019

NDWI −0.304 −0.211

In the Narangiin Enger landfill, Mongolia, an event occurred between 2020 and 2021:
a land cover change in the southern area of the site, shown on the left in Figure 5. The DDI
was developed specifically for landfill detection, and an application example is shown for
this site. The land cover change is distinctly detected since a decrease in DDI values in that
specific area of the site was observed. Also in this case, the mean values over the southern
area (black dashed polygon in Figure 5) of the site were computed before and after the land
cover change (Table 4). A decrease from −1.12 to −5.65 occurred in the area of interest,
confirming what was expected.

Table 4. NDWI mean values computed over the southern area of the Narangiin Enger landfill site.
An increase between 2020 and 2021 occurred due to land cover change.

Index 2020 2021

DDI −1.121 −5.645
 this site. The land cover change is distinctly detected since a decrease in DDI values in
that specific area of the site was observed. Also in this case, the mean values over the
southern area (black dashed polygon in Figure 5) of the site were computed before and
after the land cover change (Table 4). A decrease from −1.12 to −5.65 occurred in the area
of interest, confirming what was expected.

Table 4. NDWI mean values computed over the southern area of the Narangiin Enger landfill site.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 An increase between 2020 and 2021 occurred due to land cover change. 17 of 25
Index 2020 2021
DDI −1.121 −5.645

Figure 5. NarangiinFigure
Enger landifllEnger
5. Narangiin site.landifll
(Left):site. Google Earth
(Left): Google Earthacquisition
acquisition overover the(Right):
the area; area;DDI
(Right): DDI
map. Red line: landfill perimeter; black dashed line: area affected by the land cover change.
map. Red line: landfill perimeter; black dashed line: area affected by the land cover change.
2.2.2. Land-Surface-Temperature-Based Analysis
2.2.2. Land-Surface-Temperature-Based Analysis
The LST was computed for the Main Faisalabad landfill in Pakistan (see Figure 6). It
The LST wasappeared
computed that there
forwere
thenoMainevident changes in thelandfill
Faisalabad surface temperature
in Pakistandistribution in
(see Figure 6). It
the images representing the two years considered and, overall, in the shape of the landfill,
appeared that there were no evident changes in the surface temperature distribution
the LST was able to effectively delineate the perimeter of the landfill from the surrounding in the
images representing area. the
It cantwo years
be noted thatconsidered
the LST values in and,
2021 overall,
were higher inthan
thethose
shape of the
registered landfill, the
in the
same period of 2020 for the same scene, but what is important to underline is that the
LST was able to effectively delineate the perimeter of the landfill from the surrounding area.
spatial distribution of the LST values in the images as proportionally conserved. As
It can be noted that the LST values
previously mentioned, in there
since 2021were were higher
no evident thanbetween
changes those2020
registered
and 2021, thein the same
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEWperiod of 2020 for the same scene, but what is important to underline is that ofthe18spatial
mean values were computed over the entire site area to investigate the possibility of 26
delineating the landfill perimeter using the temperature information. In this case, the
distribution of the LST values
comparison of the in
LSTthe images
between the twoas years
proportionally
could be affectedconserved. As previously
by differing annual
mentioned, sinceclimatology.
there were no evident
To consider changes
this effect, an overallbetween
temperature 2020 andcomputed
shift was 2021, the mean values
between
the two images by considering only the area outside the landfill, obtaining a shift value of
were (LST
inside computed
IN) and over the entire site area to investigate the possibility of delineating
5.9 °C. As mentioned, it is worth focusing on the difference between the site’s temperature the two
outside (LST OUT) the site to quantify the difference in both the
examined years. The results, shown in Table 5, suggest a temperature gap of about 5 °Cof
landfill perimeter andusing
the the temperature
surrounding area’s information.
temperature. For this purpose,Inthethis
meancase,
LST the
was comparison
computed
thewas
that LSTconserved
between the overtwo time.years could be affected by differing annual climatology. To
consider this effect, an overall temperature shift was computed between the two images
by considering only the area outside thelandfill
landfill, ◦ C. As
Table 5. LST mean values computed inside the site obtaining a shift value
and in the surrounding of The
area. 5.9 higher
mentioned,
temperature it is the
inside worthsite focusing
comparedon thesurroundings
to the difference between the site’s
was maintained overtemperature
time. and the
surrounding area’s temperature. For this purpose, the mean LST was computed inside (LST
Index 2020 2021
IN) and outside (LST OUT) the site to quantify the difference in both the two examined
LST IN (°C) 38.319
years. The results, shown in Table 5, suggest a temperature gap of about 5 ◦ C that was 42.943
LST OUT
conserved (°C)
over time. 29.475 35.382

Figure
Figure6.6.Main
MainFaisalabad
Faisalabadlandfill
landfillsite.
site.(Left): Google
(Left): GoogleEarth
Earthacquisition over
acquisition the
over area;
the area;(Middle):
(Middle):LST
LST
map in 2020; (Right): LST map in 2021. Red line: landfill perimeter.
map in 2020; (Right): LST map in 2021. Red line: landfill perimeter.

2.2.3. SAR-Based Analysis

Regarding the indexes derived from optical data, SAR images were processed to
obtain the backscatter coefficient in VH and VV polarizations. In this regard, the site of
New Faisalabad, located in Pakistan, was selected as a reference site for the analysis. The
site is reported on the left side in Figure 7, as shown in Google Earth. In these images, a
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 18 of 25

Table 5. LST mean values computed inside the landfill site and in the surrounding area. The higher
temperature inside the site compared to the surroundings was maintained over time.

Index 2020 2021

LST IN (◦ C) 38.319 42.943
LST OUT (◦ C) 29.475 35.382

2.2.3. SAR-Based Analysis

Regarding the indexes derived from optical data, SAR images were processed to obtain
the backscatter coefficient in VH and VV polarizations. In this regard, the site of New
Faisalabad, located in Pakistan, was selected as a reference site for the analysis. The site is
Sensors 2023, 23, x FOR PEER REVIEW
reported on the left side in Figure 7, as shown in Google Earth. In these images, a19significant
of 26

expansion in the southern area of the site can be observed between 2020 and 2021.

Figure
Figure 7. New
7. New Faisalabad
Faisalabad landfill
landfill site. (Left):
site. (Left): Google Google
Earth Earth acquisition
acquisition over
over the the(Right):
area; area; (Right):
backscatter
mapsbackscatter
in VH andmaps in VH and VVRed
VV polarizations. polarizations. Redperimeter.
line: landfill line: landfill perimeter.

2.3.
As Multiple-Parameter-Based
shown in Figure 7, theAnalysis
backscatter highlighted the perimeter of the landfill, since
highSAR- andof
values Multiple-Optical-Parameters-Based
the backscatter coefficient occurred Analysis
inside the site boundaries, while the
Further
surrounding to was
area the characterized
above-illustratedbyanalysis of the single
lower values. selected parameters,
The expansion of the sitei.e.,
can be
multispectral
assumed, since theindexes, the LST,
backscatter and SAR-derived
coefficient increasedbackscatter, their joint application
for both polarizations is
in the southern
worth showing. In particular, for the sake of simplicity, the three vegetation indexes
area of the site. The increasing backscatter coefficient can be attributed to a change in the and
the LST
scattering were computed
mechanism, on the site
confirming the adopted
expectedforsurface
the SAR-based
variationanalysis,
suggestedi.e., by
thethe
New visual
Faisalabad landfill.
interpretation of the Google Earth images. Indeed, the surface of the area subject to the
As represented in Figure 8, the three indexes, i.e., NDVI, NDWI, and DDI, revealed
expansion changed from bare soil to a waste disposal that, assuming its heterogenous
the dump area relative to its surroundings. However, the land cover pattern affected the
composition and geometry, brought an increase in the signal intensity measured by the
accuracy of the results. For example, the large, bare soil surface outside the dump, in the
radarbottom
sensor.left corner of the images, reported values for the indexes comparable to those
From the
inside thedump.
comparison
Despiterepresented in Table
this, the southern part 6,
of it
theisarea
possible to notice
of interest showed an aincrease
slight of
about 4 dB from
decrease 2020
in the to 2021
NDVI andinanboth polarizations.
increase in the NDWI and DDI in 2021, according to
expectations regarding the change in the analysis. In addition, the pixel distribution of the
Tablethree indexes
6. Mean appeared
values more homogeneous
of the backscatter coefficient in the 2021over
computed images, causing area
the southern the of
dump
the New
boundaries
Faisalabad tosite
landfill be (where
more defined
the waste indisposal
the southern part due to the waste disposal that
occurred).
occurred.
Indexof the analysis, the LST was2020
As part computed from images acquired 2021in the two
considered years
SAR VH (dB) (see Figure 8). Despite the
−16.380 slightly different temperature
−12.187 ranges
observed in the
SAR VV (dB) two years, it can be noted that
−9.033 the southern part of the landfill
−5.337 (which is
the part under investigation) was affected by an increase in the LST values when
compared to the surrounding areas. This outcome is aligned with the results obtained
using the other indexes considered.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 19 of 25

2.3. Multiple-Parameter-Based Analysis

SAR- and Multiple-Optical-Parameters-Based Analysis
Further to the above-illustrated analysis of the single selected parameters, i.e., multispec-
tral indexes, the LST, and SAR-derived backscatter, their joint application is worth showing. In
particular, for the sake of simplicity, the three vegetation indexes and the LST were computed
on the site adopted for the SAR-based analysis, i.e., the New Faisalabad landfill.
As represented in Figure 8, the three indexes, i.e., NDVI, NDWI, and DDI, revealed
the dump area relative to its surroundings. However, the land cover pattern affected the
accuracy of the results. For example, the large, bare soil surface outside the dump, in the
bottom left corner of the images, reported values for the indexes comparable to those inside
the dump. Despite this, the southern part of the area of interest showed a slight decrease
in the NDVI and an increase in the NDWI and DDI in 2021, according to expectations
regarding the change in the analysis. In addition, the pixel distribution of the three indexes
appeared more homogeneous in the 2021 images, causing the dump boundaries to be more
defined in the southern part due to the waste disposal that occurred.
As part of the analysis, the LST was computed from images acquired in the two
considered years (see Figure 8). Despite the slightly different temperature ranges observed
in the two years, it can be noted that the southern part of the landfill (which is the part
under investigation) was affected by an increase in the LST values when compared to
the surrounding areas. This outcome is aligned with the results obtained using the other
indexes considered.
Regarding the previous analysis, the mean values were computed over the area affected
by the change (the southern area of the site, highlighted with a black dashed line in Figure 8)
for 2020 and 2021. The computed values show an expected trend for all the indexes (Table 7).
Particularly, the NDVI decreased while the NDWI increased by about 0.04 and 0.03, respec-
tively. In addition, the DDI increased, showing a higher difference from 2020 to 2021 when
compared to the other multispectral indices (3.78). As previously mentioned, the comparison
between the two LST images acquired in different years is affected by a climatology-dependent
shift. As in the previous case study, the shift was computed between the two images by con-
sidering only the area outside the landfill, obtaining a value of 6.2 ◦ C. Moreover, to evaluate
the temperature change due to the waste disposal, the LST was computed by averaging the
images over the specific area, i.e., the southern part of the site. As a result, a difference of 8.5 ◦ C
was obtained so that if the climatology-dependent temperature shift is subtracted, an increase
of 2.3 ◦ C can be associated with the waste disposal that occurred. To provide an overview of
the variations related to all the parameters, the SAR backscatter in both polarizations is also
listed in Table 7.

Table 7. Mean values of all the considered indices computed over the southern area of the landfill
site (where the waste disposal occurred).

Index 2020 2021

NDVI 0.1634 0.121
NDWI −0.232 −0.205
DDI −5.196 −1.411
LST (◦ C) 34.641 43.186
SAR VH (dB) −16.380 −12.187
SAR VV (dB) −9.033 −5.337
SensorsSensors 2023,
2023, 23, 23, 3917
x FOR PEER REVIEW 20 of 2620 of 25

FigureFigure
8. New8.Faisalabad landfill
New Faisalabad site. In
landfill sequence:
site. NDVI,
In sequence: NDWI,
NDVI, DDI,
NDWI, LSTLST
DDI, andand
SAR backscatter
SAR inin VH
backscatter
VH andandVV
VVpolarizations.
polarizations.Red
Redline:
line: landfill perimeter;black
landfill perimeter; blackdashed
dashedline:
line:area
area affected
affected byby
thethe waste
waste disposal.
disposal.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 21 of 25

2.4. Discussion
Due to the rapid urbanization process and the even more rapid increase in the volume
of waste generated, efficient waste management is essential in current society. Globally, and
especially in low- and middle-income countries, most of the waste produced is dumped or
discarded in various types of landfills, which are not always equipped with appropriate
systems to collect leachates and gases. These are often open dumps or uncontrolled landfills
that pose a real threat to environmental protection and public health. The identification and
monitoring of these types of waste disposal systems are required in order to improve MSW
management. RS represents a valid method for landfill monitoring since it can overcome
the difficulties caused by on site surveys, which are often time- and resource-consuming.
Presently, RS platforms can carry a wide variety of heterogeneous sensors on board with
different spatial and spectral resolutions, which are capable of distantly monitoring the
Earth’s surface and extracting valuable information for this specific purpose.
This work reviewed the methods existing in the literature for the detection, mapping,
and monitoring of landfill sites, both authorized and illegal, through satellite RS technolo-
gies. In fact, the large amount of available and often open-access data acquired by different
satellite sensors has allowed for the development of these types of applications, making
this topic a subject of increasing interest to the scientific community. An analysis of the
literature showed that satellite RS data are sometimes used in combination with other
methodologies, such as aerial photography, GIS support, and field surveying. Among the
available satellite sensors, both passive, multispectral sensors and SAR sensors are consid-
ered. In the first case, a large number of the analyzed works made use of freely distributed
Landsat data, but very high-resolution images, such as those acquired by the Pleiades
and WorldView satellites, were also considered. Multispectral products are utilized to
estimate well-known multispectral indexes, such as the NDVI and NDWI, or to derive
specific indexes for dump detection, such as the DDI. Moreover, a wide number of studies
make use of Landsat sensors to derive the LST. On the other hand, SAR sensors, including
the instruments carried by Sentinel-1, Radarsat, Envisat, and Cosmo-SkyMed, are used to
study variations occurring in the landfill sites. SAR images are mainly applied to derive
information about water content and volume changes through SAR interferometry, or to
monitor deformation by analyzing time-series acquisitions. The acquisition from optical
and SAR sensors are often combined to exploit the complementary information or for visual
inspection purposes. In addition, it must also be pointed out that other RS platforms, such
as aircraft and lately, UAVs in particular, also exist and are used for a similar purpose and
with similar equipment.
The results presented in the analyzed works demonstrate the validity of satellite RS-
based methodologies. For example, thermal anomalies derived from the LST can aid in
deriving landfill locations or waste disposals inside the landfills, and also in correlating
the heat flux emitted from waste to the quantity of buried waste. The main drawback
is that the LST can be affected by local temperature anomalies caused by precipitation
or urban heat islands. Additionally, the vegetation health status obtained by the NDVI
represents an aid in locating dumping areas and assessing their impact on the environment.
The landfill spectral signatures can also be exploited for the generation of land cover
maps, although they have been shown to be prone to misclassification with urban areas.
Regarding SAR data, interferometry is used to generate elevation models to obtain the
height of the waste volume. Furthermore, backscatter coherence is studied to correlate this
parameter to changes in waste volume and the backscatter signal to obtain information
about moisture content. These complementary parameters, derived from multispectral and
SAR sensors, are often combined for a comprehensive analysis.
These state-of-the-art techniques were applied to selected landfill sites in order to
provide an overall analysis. Hence, the NDVI, NDWI, and DDI were derived from Sentinel-
2 images, the LST was obtained through Landsat sensors, and the backscatter coefficient
taken from Sentinel-1 products. For the Tsagan Davaa site, the NDVI proved to be sensitive
to the land cover change since the values significantly increased over the relevant area.
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 22 of 25

The NDWI analyzed for Morangin Davaa also increased as expected in correspondence
with the site spatial variation (a new waste disposal). It is worth noting that this index is
strictly related to the presence of water or liquid material. This means that its sensitivity to
landfill changes, as for the other considered indexes, can be influenced by the waste type
and composition. Concerning the DDI, the analysis conducted for the site of Narangin
Engeer showed a sensitivity of the index to land cover changes. Particularly, the DDI values
drastically decreased when waste materials were not more visible in the VHR Google
Earth image over the analyzed area. The LST, as demonstrated by the analysis of the
Main Faisalabad landfill, also proved to be an effective measure for site identification. As
mentioned in the related paragraph, the comparison of the LST values computed from
images acquired in two different years was affected by a climatology-dependent shift,
which must be considered. Taking into account this shift, using the LST images allowed for
the separation of the landfill site from the surrounding area, proving that the LST can be
useful for site identification and monitoring. Concerning the SAR-based analysis, which
was conducted for the site of New Faisalabad, the backscatter coefficient was shown to
be sensitive to the landfill structure since the delineation of the site seemed to have been
properly distinguished from the surrounding area. Moreover, the occurrence of a new
waste disposal appears to have been correlated to the increase in the backscatter (in the
two polarizations, VH and VV) from both a visual and numerical perspective. Eventually,
on the same site, a multiple-parameters-based analysis was performed. Particularly, the
NDVI, NDWI, and DDI succeeded in highlighting the landfill area and the changes that
occurred. Despite this, it is possible to note that nearby areas with particular land cover
showed index values comparable to those inside the landfill. On the other hand, the LST
and backscatter seemed to properly highlight the perimeter of the site and the variation
occurring after the new waste disposal.
In general, the measures obtained from the multispectral and SAR images can con-
tribute to the identification of the landfill site and its changes. In particular, when compared
to the optical indexes and LST products, SAR backscatter seems to be more sensitive to the
geometry of the landfill sites since the radar signal strictly depends on possible changes of
the scattering mechanisms occurring on the surface. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that
the combined use of all the selected parameters can improve the quality and robustness
of the analysis with respect to the landfill site evolution. Indeed, temporal comparisons
obtained using only one of the parameters can be affected by some influencing factors. Par-
ticularly, as previously mentioned, the vegetation indexes may show similarities between
the spectral response inside the landfill and some areas on the surrounding surface. On the
other hand, the LST and SAR-derived backscatter can be affected by climatology-dependent
temperature shifts and different soil conditions (e.g., soil moisture content), respectively.
Given all these considerations, the multi-parameter approach may represent an enhanced
monitoring strategy for landfill evolution. Specifically, if we consider the results obtained
for the case study, a decrease in the NDVI values and an increase in all the other parameters
could be associated with the occurrence of a new waste disposal.

3. Conclusions
Landfilling remains a common method used worldwide for waste disposal, despite causing
several negative impacts to the environment. The leachate produced by the waste seeps into the
ground surface, contaminating the water and soil, and the gases produced by the waste piles
affect the air, impacting local settlements and the whole natural environment. It follows that the
identification and monitoring of these sites is essential to ensure a high quality of life and to
preserve the health of humans and all other species and their natural habitats.
This review focused on the use of sensors onboard satellite platforms for the remote
identification and monitoring of dumping sites. The number of relevant studies in the state
of the art demonstrates the growing interest of the scientific community in this important
topic for environmental safety. The use of satellite sensors opens numerous possibilities,
allowing for the exploitation of spectral-based indexes and measurements that can be
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 23 of 25

retrieved from different kinds of multi- and hyperspectral sensors and SAR sensors. We
hope that our work will help researchers attain a comprehensive overview of the potential
of satellite data for landfill identification, which is also outlined by means of a short practical
analysis. Moreover, future significant developments in monitoring landfills with remote
sensors can be provided by the growing use of new platforms, i.e., UAVs, the information
retrievable from recent satellite atmospheric missions, such as GhGSat and Sentinel-5P, and
hyperspectral data, such as those provided by the PRISMA and EnMAP missions, which
will lead to fruitful future advanced monitoring procedures in this field.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, L.G.P., G.G. and D.D.S.; methodology, L.G.P., G.G. and
D.D.S.; software, L.G.P.; formal analysis, L.G.P. and G.G.; visualization, L.G.P. and G.G.; resources,
L.G.P., G.G. and D.D.S.; data curation, L.G.P. and G.G; writing—original draft preparation, L.G.P.,
G.G. and D.D.S.; writing—review and editing, F.D.F. and G.S.; supervision, G.S. and F.D.F.; project
administration, F.D.F.; funding acquisition, G.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published
version of the manuscript.
Funding: Not applicable.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: The data used for the analysis are free and open access data from the
Copernicus Open Access Hub (https://scihub.copernicus.eu/ accessed on 31 August 2022) and United
States Geological Survey (USGS) (https://earthexplorer.usgs.gov/ accessed on 12 February 2023).
Acknowledgments: The research leading to these results has received funding from the European
Union under EU CBRN CoE Project 65, which was implemented by the Military Institute of Chemistry
and Radiometry, Fondazione FORMIT, Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie Chimiche “Giulio Natta”–
Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, the Military Institute of Hygiene and Epidemiology and Fon-
dazione Alessandro Volta. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the European Union. This research was funded by European Union grant number
IFS/2017/388-397.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hannan, M.A.; Abdulla Al Mamun, Md.; Hussain, A.; Basri, H.; Begum, R.A. A Review on Technologies and Their Usage in Solid
Waste Monitoring and Management Systems: Issues and Challenges. Waste Manag. 2015, 43, 509–523. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
2. Giusti, L. A Review of Waste Management Practices and Their Impact on Human Health. Waste Manag. 2009, 29, 2227–2239.
[CrossRef]
3. Khan, S.; Anjum, R.; Raza, S.T.; Ahmed Bazai, N.; Ihtisham, M. Technologies for Municipal Solid Waste Management: Current
Status, Challenges, and Future Perspectives. Chemosphere 2022, 288, 132403. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
4. Vaverková, M.D. Landfill Impacts on the Environment—Review. Geosciences 2019, 9, 431. [CrossRef]
5. Massoud, M.A.; Khoury, R.; Ghanem, R.; Ghoussainy, R.; Merhbi, F. Development of a Pragmatic Methodology for the Environ-
mental Assessment of Uncontrolled Dumpsites in Developing Countries. Environ. Earth Sci. 2022, 81, 296. [CrossRef]
6. Iacoboaea, C.; Petrescu, F. Landfill Monitoring Using Remote Sensing: A Case Study of Glina, Romania. Waste Manag. Res. 2013,
31, 1075–1080. [CrossRef]
7. Glanville, K.; Chang, H.-C. Mapping Illegal Domestic Waste Disposal Potential to Support Waste Management Efforts in
Queensland, Australia. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2015, 29, 1042–1058. [CrossRef]
8. Irvine, J.M.; Evers, T.K.; Smyre, J.L.; Huff, D.; King, A.L.; Stahl, G.; Odenweller, J. The Detection and Mapping of Buried Waste.
Int. J. Remote Sens. 1997, 18, 1583–1595. [CrossRef]
9. Wezernak, C.T.; Thomson, F.J. Monitoring of Dumping by Means of Satellite Remote Sensing. AMBIO 1973, 2, 84–86.
10. Jensen, J.R.; Christensen, E.J. Solid and Hazardous Waste Disposal Site Selection Using Digital Geographic Information System
Techniques. Sci. Total Environ. 1986, 56, 265–276. [CrossRef]
11. Olui, M.; Schaller, A. Remote Sensing and Geophysical Survey in Site Investigations for Special Waste Disposal: Case Study Trgovska Gora
(Croatia); EARsel Symposium: Porto, Portugal, 2005; p. 8.
12. Biotto, G.; Silvestri, S.; Gobbo, L.; Furlan, E.; Valenti, S.; Rosselli, R. GIS, Multi-criteria and Multi-factor Spatial Analysis for the
Probability Assessment of the Existence of Illegal Landfills. Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2009, 23, 1233–1244. [CrossRef]
13. Lucendo-Monedero, A.L.; Jordá-Borrell, R.; Ruiz-Rodríguez, F. Predictive Model for Areas with Illegal Landfills Using Logistic
Regression. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2015, 58, 1309–1326. [CrossRef]
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 24 of 25

14. Notarnicola, C.; Angiulli, M.; Giasi, C.I. Southern Italy Illegal Dumps Detection Based on Spectral Analysis of Remotely Sensed
Data and Land-Cover Maps. Remote Sens. Environ. Monit. GIS Appl. Geol. III 2004, 5239, 483–493. [CrossRef]
15. Torres, R.N.; Fraternali, P. Learning to Identify Illegal Landfills through Scene Classification in Aerial Images. Remote Sens. 2021,
13, 4520. [CrossRef]
16. Persechino, G.; Schiano, P.; Lega, M.; Napoli, R.M.A.; Ferrara, C.; Kosmatka, J. Aerospace-Based Support Systems and Interoper-
ability: The Solution to Fight Illegal Dumping. WIT Trans. Ecol. Environ. 2010, 140, 203–214.
17. Sliusar, N.; Filkin, T.; Huber-Humer, M.; Ritzkowski, M. Drone Technology in Municipal Solid Waste Management and Landfilling:
A Comprehensive Review. Waste Manag. 2022, 139, 1–16. [CrossRef]
18. Gasbarra, D.; Toscano, P.; Famulari, D.; Finardi, S.; Di Tommasi, P.; Zaldei, A.; Carlucci, P.; Magliulo, E.; Gioli, B. Locating and
Quantifying Multiple Landfills Methane Emissions Using Aircraft Data. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 254, 112987. [CrossRef]
19. Manzo, C.; Mei, A.; Zampetti, E.; Bassani, C.; Paciucci, L.; Manetti, P. Top-down Approach from Satellite to Terrestrial Rover
Application for Environmental Monitoring of Landfills. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 584–585, 1333–1348. [CrossRef]
20. Silvestri, S.; Omri, M. A Method for the Remote Sensing Identification of Uncontrolled Landfills: Formulation and Validation.
Int. J. Remote Sens. 2008, 29, 975–989. [CrossRef]
21. Mahmood, K.; Ul-Haq, Z.; Faizi, F.; Batol, S.A. A Comparison of Satellite-Based Indices for Hazard Assessment of MSW Open
Dumps Using Spatial Analysis. Waste Manag. Res. 2019, 37, 219–236. [CrossRef]
22. Mahmood, K.; Batool, A.; Faizi, F.; Chaudhry, M.N.; Ul-Haq, Z.; Rana, A.D.; Tariq, S. Bio-Thermal Effects of Open Dumps on
Surroundings Detected by Remote Sensing—Influence of Geographical Conditions. Ecol. Indic. 2017, 82, 131–142. [CrossRef]
23. Massarelli, C. Fast Detection of Significantly Transformed Areas Due to Illegal Waste Burial with a Procedure Applicable to
Landsat Images. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2018, 39, 754–769. [CrossRef]
24. Parrilli, S.; Cicala, L.; VincenzoAngelino, C.; Amitrano, D. Illegal Micro-Dumps Monitoring: Pollution Sources and Targets
Detection in Satellite Images with the Scattering Transform. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote
Sensing Symposium IGARSS, Brussels, Belgium, 11–16 July 2021; pp. 4892–4895.
25. Aslam, B.; Maqsoom, A.; Tahir, M.D.; Ullah, F.; Rehman, M.S.U.; Albattah, M. Identifying and Ranking Landfill Sites for Municipal
Solid Waste Management: An Integrated Remote Sensing and GIS Approach. Buildings 2022, 12, 605. [CrossRef]
26. Mallick, J. Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Site Selection Based on Fuzzy-AHP and Geoinformation Techniques in Asir Region
Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1538. [CrossRef]
27. Gill, J.; Faisal, K.; Shaker, A.; Yan, W.Y. Detection of Waste Dumping Locations in Landfill Using Multi-Temporal Landsat Thermal
Images. Waste Manag. Res. 2019, 37, 386–393. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28. Nazari, R.; Alfergani, H.; Haas, F.; Karimi, M.E.; Fahad, M.G.R.; Sabrin, S.; Everett, J.; Bouaynaya, N.; Peters, R.W. Application of
Satellite Remote Sensing in Monitoring Elevated Internal Temperatures of Landfills. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 6801. [CrossRef]
29. Abu Qdais, H.; Shatnawi, N. Assessing and Predicting Landfill Surface Temperature Using Remote Sensing and an Artificial
Neural Network. Int. J. Remote Sens. 2019, 40, 9556–9571. [CrossRef]
30. Le Hung Trinh; Zablotskii, V.R.; Vu, D.T.; Zenkov, I.V.; Tong, T.H. Mapping and Assessing Landfills Surface Temperature Using
Landsat 8 Satellite Data. A Case Study in Vietnam. Izv. Atmos. Ocean. Phys. 2021, 57, 1098–1107. [CrossRef]
31. Elsadiq Ali, A.; Abdou Ibrahim, E.E.; Massad, E.M. Mapping Waste-Disposal Sites in Riyadh Using Radarsat Imagery. J. King
Saud Univ. Eng. Sci. 2009, 21, 7–13. [CrossRef]
32. Karathanassi, V.; Choussiafis, C.; Grammatikou, Z. Monitoring the Change in Volume of Waste in Landfill Using SAR Interferom-
etry. In Proceedings of the 32nd EARSel Symposium and 36th General Assembly, Mykonos, Greece, 21–24 May 2012.
33. Zhang, S.; Lv, Y.; Yang, H.; Han, Y.; Peng, J.; Lan, J.; Zhan, L.; Chen, Y.; Bate, B. Monitoring and Quantitative Human Risk
Assessment of Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Using Integrated Satellite–UAV–Ground Survey Approach. Remote Sens. 2021,
13, 4496. [CrossRef]
34. Milillo, P.; Fielding, E.J.; Masi, S.; Lundgren, P.; Serio, C. Monitoring Municipal Solid Waste Small Magnitude Landfill Settlement
with DInSAR. EARSeL eProceedings 2015, 14, 25. [CrossRef]
35. Du, Y.; Fu, H.; Liu, L.; Feng, G.; Wen, D.; Peng, X.; Ding, H. Continued Monitoring and Modeling of Xingfeng Solid Waste Landfill
Settlement, China, Based on Multiplatform SAR Images. Remote Sens. 2021, 13, 3286. [CrossRef]
36. Yan, W.Y.; Mahendrarajah, P.; Shaker, A.; Faisal, K.; Luong, R.; Al-Ahmad, M. Analysis of Multi-Temporal Landsat Satellite Images
for Monitoring Land Surface Temperature of Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Sites. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2014, 186, 8161–8173.
[CrossRef]
37. Yang, K.; Zhou, X.-N.; Yan, W.-A.; Hang, D.-R.; Steinmann, P. Landfills in Jiangsu Province, China, and Potential Threats for
Public Health: Leachate Appraisal and Spatial Analysis Using Geographic Information System and Remote Sensing. Waste Manag.
2008, 28, 2750–2757. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
38. Sarp, G.; Ozcelik, M. Evaluation of an Abandoned Aggregate Quarry Used for Uncontrolled Waste Disposal Using Remote
Sensing Technologies (Atabey, Isparta-Turkey). Arab. J. Geosci. 2018, 11, 557. [CrossRef]
39. Ganci, G.; Cappello, A.; Bilotta, G.; Pollicino, G.; Lodato, L. Characterizing Waste Disposal Sites by Using Multi-Spectral Satellite
Imagery. In EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts; EGU21. Copernicus Meetings; EGU EU Copernicus: Vienna, Austria, 2021.
40. Abou El-Magd, I.; Attwa, M.; El Bastawesy, M.; Gad, A.; Henaish, A.; Zamzam, S. Qualitative and Quantitative Characterization
of Municipal Waste in Uncontrolled Dumpsites and Landfills Using Integrated Remote Sensing, Geological and Geophysical
Data: A Case Study. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4539. [CrossRef]
Sensors 2023, 23, 3917 25 of 25

41. Karimi, N.; Ng, K.T.W.; Richter, A. Development and Application of an Analytical Framework for Mapping Probable Illegal
Dumping Sites Using Nighttime Light Imagery and Various Remote Sensing Indices. Waste Manag. 2022, 143, 195–205. [CrossRef]
42. Karimi, N.; Ng, K.T.W. Mapping and Prioritizing Potential Illegal Dump Sites Using Geographic Information System Network
Analysis and Multiple Remote Sensing Indices. Earth 2022, 3, 1123–1137. [CrossRef]
43. Ottavianelli, G.; Hobbs, S.; Smith, R.; Morrison, K.; Bruno, D. SAR Interferometric Products and Hyperspectral Data for Monitoring
Solid Waste Landfill Operations. In Proceedings of the 4th ESA CHRIS Proba Workshop, Frascati, Italy, 19–21 September 2006.
44. Yonezawa, C. Possibility of Monitoring of Waste Disposal Site Using Satellite Imagery. J. Intell. FuzzySyst. 2009, 28, 23–28.
45. Cadau, E.G.; Putignano, C.; Aurigemma, R.; Melchiorre, A.; Bosco, P.; Tesseri, A.; Battazza, F. SIMDEO: An Integrated System for
Landfill Detection and Monitoring Using EO Data. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Symposium—IGARSS, Melbourne, VIC, Australia, 21–26 July 2013; pp. 3305–3308. [CrossRef]
46. Agapiou, A.; Papadopoulos, N.; Sarris, A. Detection of Olive Oil Mill Waste (OOMW) Disposal Areas Using High Resolution
GeoEye’s OrbView-3 and Google Earth Images. Open Geosci. 2016, 8, 700–710. [CrossRef]
47. D’Odorico, P.; Gonsamo, A.; Damm, A.; Schaepman, M.E. Experimental Evaluation of Sentinel-2 Spectral Response Functions for
NDVI Time-Series Continuity. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 2013, 51, 1336–1348. [CrossRef]
48. Du, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Ling, F.; Wang, Q.; Li, W.; Li, X. Water Bodies’ Mapping from Sentinel-2 Imagery with Modified Normalized
Difference Water Index at 10-m Spatial Resolution Produced by Sharpening the SWIR Band. Remote Sens. 2016, 8, 354. [CrossRef]
49. Huete, A.R. A Soil-Adjusted Vegetation Index (SAVI). Remote Sens. Environ. 1988, 25, 295–309. [CrossRef]
50. Haralick, R.M.; Shanmugam, K.; Dinstein, I. Textural Features for Image Classification. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 1973,
SMC-3, 610–621. [CrossRef]
51. De Santis, D.; Del Frate, F.; Schiavon, G. Analysis of Climate Change Effects on Surface Temperature in Central-Italy Lakes Using
Satellite Data Time-Series. Remote Sens. 2022, 14, 117. [CrossRef]
52. Valor, E.; Caselles, V. Mapping Land Surface Emissivity from NDVI: Application to European, African, and South American
Areas. Remote Sens. Environ. 1996, 57, 167–184. [CrossRef]
53. Flores-Anderson, A.I.; Herndon, K.E.; Thapa, R.B.; Cherrington, E. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Handbook: Comprehensive
Methodologies for Forest Monitoring and Biomass Estimation; NASA: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [CrossRef]
54. Mandal, D.; Vaka, D.S.; Bhogapurapu, N.R.; Vanama, V.S.K.; Kumar, V.; Rao, Y.S.; Bhattacharya, A. Sentinel-1 SLC Preprocessing
Workflow for Polarimetric Applications: A Generic Practice for Generating Dual-pol Covariance Matrix El-ements in SNAP S-1
Toolbox. Preprints.org 2019, 2019110393. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

View publication stats