A comparison of bulk inorganic constituents and trace pollutant concentration in leachates by landfill type.

IF 3.7 4区 环境科学与生态学 Q3 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL Waste Management & Research Pub Date : 2025-03-12 DOI:10.1177/0734242X251322146
Dreyton Lott, Roya P Darioosh, Kate Weiksnar, Steven Laux, Timothy G Townsend
{"title":"A comparison of bulk inorganic constituents and trace pollutant concentration in leachates by landfill type.","authors":"Dreyton Lott, Roya P Darioosh, Kate Weiksnar, Steven Laux, Timothy G Townsend","doi":"10.1177/0734242X251322146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Landfill leachate characteristics vary depending on the type of waste facilities accept, such as municipal solid waste (MSW), construction and demolition debris (CDD) and MSW incineration (MSWI) ash. Optimizing disposal and treatment practices requires a thorough understanding of the behaviour of leachates from different classifications of refuse. This study provides a critical analysis of variation in leachate quality among over 80 sites based on landfill category: MSW, bulky debris, MSWI ash and MSW-MSWI ash co-disposal. Alkalinity was highest in leachates from facilities accepting MSW (average 2,810 mg L<sup>-1</sup>), and the average pH from sites disposing of only ash (7.04) was lower than anticipated. As expected, all leachates were observed to have much greater concentrations of chemical oxygen demand compared to biochemical oxygen demand and require advanced secondary treatment to remove this recalcitrant organic matter. Unsurprisingly, leachates from facilities accepting only ash had elevated concentrations of salts (32,400 mg L<sup>-1</sup> TDS), and those from MSW disposing sites reported high ammonia-nitrogen (381 mg L<sup>-1</sup>); co-disposal of MSW with ash resulted in elevated concentrations of both TDS and ammonia-nitrogen (19,400 mg L<sup>-1</sup> TDS, 543 mg L<sup>-1</sup> NH<sub>3</sub>-N). Metal concentrations among all leachate types were similar, though arsenic was elevated in landfills accepting only CDD. Trace organic chemicals like benzene were much higher in leachates from sites disposing of unburned residuals compared to those only accepting ash. Variation among landfill types were attributed to leachate flow characteristics, pH, degradation, waste composition and other biogeochemical interactions. The results demonstrate co-disposal practices can potentially require more leachate treatment than separate disposal scenarios.</p>","PeriodicalId":23671,"journal":{"name":"Waste Management & Research","volume":" ","pages":"734242X251322146"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Waste Management & Research","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X251322146","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Landfill leachate characteristics vary depending on the type of waste facilities accept, such as municipal solid waste (MSW), construction and demolition debris (CDD) and MSW incineration (MSWI) ash. Optimizing disposal and treatment practices requires a thorough understanding of the behaviour of leachates from different classifications of refuse. This study provides a critical analysis of variation in leachate quality among over 80 sites based on landfill category: MSW, bulky debris, MSWI ash and MSW-MSWI ash co-disposal. Alkalinity was highest in leachates from facilities accepting MSW (average 2,810 mg L-1), and the average pH from sites disposing of only ash (7.04) was lower than anticipated. As expected, all leachates were observed to have much greater concentrations of chemical oxygen demand compared to biochemical oxygen demand and require advanced secondary treatment to remove this recalcitrant organic matter. Unsurprisingly, leachates from facilities accepting only ash had elevated concentrations of salts (32,400 mg L-1 TDS), and those from MSW disposing sites reported high ammonia-nitrogen (381 mg L-1); co-disposal of MSW with ash resulted in elevated concentrations of both TDS and ammonia-nitrogen (19,400 mg L-1 TDS, 543 mg L-1 NH3-N). Metal concentrations among all leachate types were similar, though arsenic was elevated in landfills accepting only CDD. Trace organic chemicals like benzene were much higher in leachates from sites disposing of unburned residuals compared to those only accepting ash. Variation among landfill types were attributed to leachate flow characteristics, pH, degradation, waste composition and other biogeochemical interactions. The results demonstrate co-disposal practices can potentially require more leachate treatment than separate disposal scenarios.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Waste Management & Research
Waste Management & Research 环境科学-工程:环境
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
232
审稿时长
4.1 months
期刊介绍: Waste Management & Research (WM&R) publishes peer-reviewed articles relating to both the theory and practice of waste management and research. Published on behalf of the International Solid Waste Association (ISWA) topics include: wastes (focus on solids), processes and technologies, management systems and tools, and policy and regulatory frameworks, sustainable waste management designs, operations, policies or practices.
期刊最新文献
Smart waste management and air pollution forecasting: Harnessing Internet of things and fully Elman neural network. A comparison of bulk inorganic constituents and trace pollutant concentration in leachates by landfill type. Food waste minimisation and energy efficiency for carbon emission reduction. A comprehensive review on applications of multi-criteria decision-making methods in healthcare waste management. Classification of e-waste using machine learning-assisted laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1