Characterising of Leachate Pollution With Time

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)
Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org

Volume 7, Issue 10, October 2018 ISSN 2319 - 4847
Characterising of Leachate Pollution with Time

Simeon Otieno Dulo
Senior Lecturer, Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, University of Nairobi
ABSTRACT
This paper presents findings of a study on the leachate pollutant levels of uncollected solid waste on the environment. The
composition and concentration of leachate from uncollected solid waste dumpsite within the University of Nairobi was analysed
and reported. Plots are made of the variation of the concentration of the constituents of the leachate over time and simulation
of the same was made. A physical model of solid waste samples at the dumpsite were subjected to synthetic leachate
precipitation in the laboratory. The composition of the leachate was then measured. TDS, total hardness, conductivity,
turbidity, and COD and nitrates concentration were found to decrease with an increase in depth while alkalinity, chlorides, pH
and DO were found to increase as depth increased.
Keywords: Characterisation, Pollution, Solid waste, Management, Leachate,
1. INTRODUCTION
Waste generation in most developing countries is estimated to increase exponentially in tandem with population growth
[4, 5, 6]. Kenya is no exception as shown in Figure 1. The trend in efficient solid waste management in Kenyan towns
over the last two decades has continued to display a widening gap between the waste generation and collections in the
mid-eighties all the way to the turn of the century, as illustrated in Figure 2. From data archived from the councils it
was evident that the balance uncollected waste was dumped indiscriminately in the residential, commercial and in some
instance industrial areas of the towns. Refuse placed in a landfill or open dumpsite, undergoes oxidation and
decomposition in the presence of oxygen, moisture and appropriate temperature [14]. Water, which is essential for
decomposition is derived from the waste itself and it is about 10 to 20% by volume or 100-200 mm2 for each 1 m2 of
refuse.
Figure 1: Estimated waste generation trends in Kenya
Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 31

Figure 2: Estimated collection and waste generation trends in Kenya

The type of refuse, ambient temperature, oxygen supply and water content influence the rate of decomposition. When
infiltration exceeds the total evapo-infiltration plus the moisture retention capacity of the refuse in the gravitational
field, the water percolates through the refuse removing dissolved and or suspended products of biological and chemical
decomposition. Subsequently, the effluent from the landfill or open dumpsites is enriched in many hazardous
constituents. The composition of solid waste controls the composition of the leachate produced from a Municipal solid
waste disposal site.
Ground water pollution by a landfill depends on the kind of leaching process and the character of transport. The
leaching process is controlled by rainfall infiltration that dissolves substances from the waste matrix. The quality of
leachate depends on the prevailing atmospheric temperatures, elapsed time since the waste was deposited at the site, the
composition of the waste and the availability of moisture and oxygen [2, 7]. On the other hand, the quantity of leachate
depends on the precipitation falling on a waste, groundwater intrusions, moisture content of the waste and the site
exposure. When any of these increases, the amount of leachate produced also increases. The reducing concentrations of
the parameters can be attributed to natural attenuation. This is the process by which the concentration of leachate
parameters is reduced to lower levels by natural processes [11, 15]. Attenuation of leachate occurs in two stages; in the
first stage, soil in the initially unsaturated zone reacts with the leachate constituents and alters the leachate. This was
the case in the samples taken from the test pits. The second stage of attenuation was mimicked in the long-term
laboratory study of the leachate quality. This would be the scenario in the ground water aquifer.
Natural attenuation can take place by the exchange of ions of one type by ions of another type without disturbing the
mineral structure of the soil (known as the isomorphous substitution) [12]. This mainly involves clay minerals. It may
also take place when the microorganisms break down the organic debris. The resulting small sized organic debris
infiltrates the pore spaces in the soil reducing permeability. This also increases the surface area onto which leachate
constituents can be absorbed. The microorganisms can also lead to the production of complex organic compounds
which react with leachate constituents. The leachate constituents may also get adsorbed on the surfaces of individual
clay particles. This greatly reduces the total dissolved solids in the leachate. In the percolation process, the suspended
and settle able constituents may get physically trapped by the random structure of the soil system.
Water from precipitation or leachate from a dumpsite tends to move downward through the zone of aeration, but once it
reaches the zone of saturation, it moves with the ground water. This ground water movement can be either local (i.e.
heading for the nearest discharge point into a swamp, pond or surface stream) or regional (usually deeper than and
often running underneath local discharge points and toward major points of discharge – rivers, lakes, and oceans).
Fine-grained soils with small pores act as effective filters for bacteria, but such filtration is not effective for removal of
dissolved chemicals. Therefore, special caution must be exercised when dumpsites are in abandoned quarries and strip
mines to make sure refuse does not meet exposed aquifer. Special caution should also be exercised at dumpsites located
where leachate has direct access to surface water [15].
2. METHODOLOGY
Sampling – The solid waste for analysis was sampled from different positions around the solid waste pile. These were
then reconstituted to form the bulk sample.

In the laboratory - all the samples were air dried. The solid wastes were then sorted out to determine the compositions.
The solid waste and the different soil samples were then subjected to the synthetic precipitation leachate procedure (to
simulate the rainfall in the dump site). The rate of application of water onto the samples was determined from the
rainfall data. The elements that were tested for in the soil samples were determined by the quality of leachate generated
from the solid wastes. The standard methods for the examination of waste and wastewater [1] and the USEPA 1992,
SW-846 Test Methods [16] for Evaluating Solid Waste was used to analyse the samples.
3. RESULTS
3.1 Results of the Pollution trends
To understand and manage the pollution threats, the pollutants’ behaviours were investigated for their trends. The plots
in figures 3 to 6 show linear fits on the results. In figure 3, the iron concentrations had a rising trend through the test
period and gave a coefficient of determination of 0.75. The other heavy metal parameters, namely zinc, copper, nickel
and lead reduced in concentration over the test period, with coefficient of determinants of 0.262, 0.25, 0.277 and
0.307respectively, thus the linear fit was only good for zinc.
Figure 3: Linear Trends for Heavy Metal Content of Leachate Sample

The linear fits made to the TDS, Bacterial count and the specific conductivity as illustrated in figures 4 had coefficients
of determinants of 0.881, 0.246 and 0.796 respectively. Unlike the other two parameters, linear fit did not suite
bacterial count.
Figure 4: Linear Trends for Parameters with Time

Figure 5 illustrates the trends for BOD, alkalinity, chlorides, turbidity and COD on linear fits. Their respective

coefficients of determinations were 0.736, 0.341, 0.457, 0.65 and 0.77, showing that BOD and COD were best suited.
In figure 6 the Total hardness, nitrates, and alkalinity are illustrated on linear fits. Their respective coefficients of
determinations were 0.34, 0.44 and 0.341, which were not very good fits.
3.2 Results of the Pollution Exponential Trend Analysis

Since the best possible trend cannot be deduced by one test fit, the results were subjected to an exponential trend fit as
presented in the plots in figures 7 to 10. In figure 7, the iron concentrations had a rising trend through the test period
and gave a coefficient of determination of 0.75. The other heavy metal parameters, namely zinc, copper, nickel and
lead reduced in concentration over the test period, with worse coefficients of determinants than the linear fits.

Figure 7: Exponential Trends for Heavy Metal content
Polynomial fits were made to the TDS, Bacterial count and the specific conductivity as illustrated in figures 8 and 9,
respectively. The coefficients of determinants were found to be 0.95, 0.2686 and 0.8913.
Figure 8: Exponential Trends for Bacterial Count and Total Dissolved Solids with Time
Figure 9: Exponential Trends for Specific Conductivity with Time

The BOD and turbidity concentrations fitted exponentially with a coefficient of determination of 0.81 and 0.713
respectively. These were two parameters among the ones best suited by the exponential fit.

Figure 9: Exponential Trends for Turbidity and BOD with Time
Figure 10 illustrates the trends for alkalinity, chlorides and COD on exponential fits. Their respective coefficients of
determinations were 0.3413, 0.586 and 0.73, showing that only COD was best suited for the fit as in conformity to the
BOD coefficient of determination with the exponential fit in figure 8.
Figure 10: Exponential Trends for Alkalinity, Chlorides and COD with Time
Figure 11 illustrates the trends for alkalinity, total hardness and nitrates on exponential fits. Their respective
coefficients of determinations were 0.3413, 0.4177 and 0.5802.

Figure 11: Exponential Trends for Alkalinity, Total Hardness and Nitrates with Time
In figure 11 the total hardness started at 154 mg/l to 874 mg/l by the end of the test period. Alkalinity started at 348
mg/l had a slight drop in the first month and rose for the remaining period of the first year before dropping in the
second year ending at 213 mg/l. The nitrates on the other had started low over the first two years and suddenly rising in
the third two parameters then suddenly shot up in the third year of study.
Figures 12 show a steady decline in value from chloride (138 mg/l), BOD (368 mg/l) and COD (473 mg/l)
concentration over the entire period of the study, with more than 100% change in the first year, followed by a reducing
rate for the remainder of the study period to 68 mg/l, 16 mg/l and 130 mg/l respectively. The pH on the other hand
remained alkaline in the range of 7.1 to 8.6.0
Figure 12: Variation of pH, Chloride, BOD and COD with Time
4. DISCUSSION
Production of leachate from sanitary landfills is an environmental hazard. There are several factors that influence the
generation of leachate. Some of these are precipitation, runoff, evaporation, waste density, and depth of the landfill. Not
much leachate is produced until the landfill is fully saturated. The leachate that is generated comes from the
decomposition of the landfill waste [11]. This occurs in three possible stages: First aerobic decomposition dominates, in
this phase the temperatures rise well above ambient temperatures and produce leachates mainly of soluble salts. The
second stage is believed to be anaerobic decomposition. The first part of this decomposition produces large amounts of

volatile fatty acids and carbon dioxide. The facultative bacteria then get taken over by the methane producing bacteria.
These methane producing bacteria, which require neutral pH, convert the volatile fatty acids into methane and carbon
dioxide.
The decomposition process eventually decreases with landfill age due to substrate depletion. Through all the
decomposition processes the water that percolates through from precipitation carries these contaminants to the bottom
of the landfill producing the leachate. The liquid state leachate is not the only contaminant that must be regulated. Over
time the decomposition process produces gases that may be emitted to the atmosphere. These gases also must be
regulated. As for the liquid leachate once it has been collected into the sump from the bottom of the landfill it must
then undergo treatment before it can be distributed into receiving waters.
Treatment of landfill leachate is a difficult task due to the nature of the leachate. A typical landfill leachate usually
starts out as a high-strength wastewater, having low pH, high biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) and chemical oxygen
demand (COD), and the presence of toxic chemicals. This wastewater profile can change from landfill to landfill as
well as within the same landfill as it ages. Due to the changes of the wastewater composition over time, sometimes 30
years, the conventional biological waste treatment and chemical treatment processes separately do not achieve high
removal efficiency in the effluent. When it comes to the design of treatment facilities factors that influence the design
are leachate characteristics, effluent discharge regulations, costs, and permit requirements. Some of the common waste
treatment processes that have been applied to the landfill leachates are Activated Sludge, Waste Stabilization Ponds,
Aerated Lagoons, Trickling Filters, Rotating Biological Contactor, and Anaerobic Digestion.
In examples in the US, Lee, [10] envisages an emphasis on resource recovery and solid waste reduction. There will be
less landfills and more innovative ways of disposing solid waste. One way will be through incineration with some sort
of energy recovery system. Even though there will be less landfills in the future they will still play a major role in solid
waste and residual disposal. Each year the design of the landfills and leachate control strategies will become stricter to
protect the groundwater. So, when the permit application is submitted by the municipality to the state, these
applications will be looked at very closely to be sure the design engineer has properly designed the landfill. Designing a
landfill is not just the application of the liner system, there are issues of proper slopes for runoff, there must be a
sophisticated monitoring well system around the landfill, and most important the leachate must receive proper
treatment before discharge. All these regulations are mandated and enforced through each state to ensure the safety of
the soil and groundwater to be free from any solid waste contaminants.
From the leachate quality results, the specific conductivity, BOD, COD, TDS and Iron modelled linearly, gave good
results with R2 values of 0.796, 0.736, 0.77, 0.881 and 0.75 respectively. The specific conductivity and TDS gave a
better with the poly fit of R2 values of 0.891 and 0.9527 respectively. On the other hand, the Turbidity and BOD exhibit
better fit of R2 values of 0.0.713 and 0.8196 on the exponential model than linear fits. The other parameters tested in
this study were not able to fit well in the three categories of fits, indicating the degree of variability in their biological
and physical processes with time.
The heavy metal concentrations expressed the widest variation over the study period, though the linear trend (copper
0.25; zinc 0.26; Iron 0.75; coefficient of determination) fitted better in the heavy metal concentration than the
exponential fits
Presence of these pollution indicators is an indication that leachates may be a source of ground water pollution.
However, presence of these elements in the ground water does not necessarily mean that it is polluted, and pollution
criteria will depend on the type of use made of the water. The study further revealed that the level of the pollution
indicators in the leachate generated from solid waste is higher than that when the leachate has infiltrated into the soil.
This means that leachate washed directly to surface waters has higher potential to pollute than that percolating into the
water bearing strata below the dumping site.
References
[1.] American Public Health Association (APHA), (1985). Standard Methods for the Examination of Waste and Waste
Water.

[2.] Cointreau, Sandra. (2004). "Sanitary Landfill Design and Siting Criteria." World Bank/Urban Infrastructure
Note. May 1996 and updated November 2004.
[3.] EMCA (1999), Environmental Management and Coordination Act Republic of Kenya, No. 8 of 1999.
Government Printer.
[4.] EMC (2007). Solid Waste Management: Issues and Challenges in Asia ©APO 2007, ISBN: 92-833-7058-9.
Report of the APO Survey on Solid-Waste Management 2004–05 Edited by the Environmental Management
Centre, Mumbai, India.
[5.] Environmental Resources Management (ERM) (2000) Review of Current Municipal Solid Waste Dump Sites in
the Greater Colombo Area, Western Province, Sri Lanka, Colombo Environmental Improvement Project and
Presidential Task Force on Solid Waste Management.
[6.] Environmental Resources Management (ERM) (2000). Strategic Planning Guide for Municipal Solid Waste
Management. CD-ROM prepared for the World Bank, SCD and DFID, Waste-Aware, London. (Accessed Nov
2006)
http://www.worldbank.org/urban/solid_wm/erm/start_up.pdf
[7.] Fatta D., Papadopoulos A. and Loizidou M. (1999). A study on the landfill leachate and its impact on the
groundwater quality. Environmental Geochemistry and Health, June 1999, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 175-190(16).
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
[8.] Griffin RA, Shrimp NF, Steele JD, Ruch RR, White WA, Hughes GM (1976). Attenuation of pollutants in
municipal landfill leachate by passage through clay. Environmental Science & Technology 10:1262–1268.
[9.] Jones-Lee, A. and Lee, G.F. (2000), “Appropriate Use of MSW Leachate Recycling in Municipal Solid Waste
Landfilling”. Proceedings Air and Waste Management Association 93rd national annual meeting, CD rom paper
00-455, Pittsburgh, PA, June 2000. http://www.gfredlee.com/nwqmcl.html. (Accessed Nov 2006)
[10.] Lee, G. F. and Jones-Lee, A., (2007). "Groundwater Quality Protection Issues," Report of G. Fred Lee &
Associates, El Macero, CA, February 2007; Presented in part at CA/NV AWWA Fall Conference, Sacramento,
CA, October (2007). (Accessed June 2008). http://www.gfredlee.com/Groundwater/GWProtectionIssues.pdf
[11.] Lee, G.F. (2003), “Comments on the California Integrated Waste Management Board Landfill Facility
Compliance Study,” Comments Submitted to CIWMB by G. Fred Lee & Associates, El Macero, CA, November
(2003a). (Accessed Nov 2006)
http://www.gfredlee.com/CIWMBcomments11-20-03.pdf.
[12.] Lee, G.F. (2002), “Solid Waste Management: USA Lined Landfilling Reliability,” An invited submission for
publication in Natural Resources Forum, a United Nations Journal, New York, NY, December (2002). (Accessed
Nov 2006)
http://www.gfredlee.com/UNpaper-landfills.pdf.
[13.] Lee G.F. and Lee, J. (1991) Landfill Solid and Hazardous Waste and Ground Water Quality Protection. (Accessed
Nov 2006)
http://www.scisoftware.com/publications/publications/publications.html.
[14.] Oweis I. and Khera R. (1998). Geotechnology of Waste Management, 2nd Edition. CL Engineering Publishers.
[15.] Vidanaarachchi CK, Yuen ST, Pilapitiya S (2006). Municipal solid waste management in the Southern Province
of Sri Lanka: problems, issues and challenges. Waste Management 26:920–930.
[16.] USEPA 1992, SW-846 Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste: Physical/Chemical Methods, United States
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste.
www.environment.nsw.gov.au/waste/envguidlns/compostingref.htm - 56k
AUTHOR
Simeon Dulo received a B.Sc. in Civil Engineering from the University of Nairobi, a M.Sc. in Water
Engineering from Birmingham University and a PhD. degree in Civil Engineering from University of
Nairobi in 1984, 1988 and 210, respectively. He has over 29 years of service at the Department of Civil
and Construction Engineering, University of Nairobi.

Characterising of Leachate Pollution With Time

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Characterising of Leachate Pollution With Time

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM)

Web Site: www.ijaiem.org Email: editor@ijaiem.org

Characterising of Leachate Pollution with Time

Figure 1: Estimated waste generation trends in Kenya

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 31

Figure 2: Estimated collection and waste generation trends in Kenya

then reconstituted to form the bulk sample.

Figure 3: Linear Trends for Heavy Metal Content of Leachate Sample

Figure 4: Linear Trends for Parameters with Time

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 33

Figure 5: Linear Trends for Parameters with Time

Figure 6: Linear Trends for Parameters with Time

3.2 Results of the Pollution Exponential Trend Analysis

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 34

Figure 7: Exponential Trends for Heavy Metal content

Figure 9: Exponential Trends for Specific Conductivity with Time

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 35

Figure 9: Exponential Trends for Turbidity and BOD with Time

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 36

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 37

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 38

Volume 7, Issue 9, October 2018 Page 39

S-ar putea să vă placă și