Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
ENGINEERIN
G
[Type the document subtitle]
WASTE :
3
Municipal Waste also called Municipal
refuse comprises food waste rubbish,
ashes and residues, demolition and
construction, special waste that is
street sweeping, roadside litter, catch
basin debris & dead animals and
treatment plant waste i.e., semi -semi
solid waste from water and industrial
waste treatments.
Infectivity
Irritant (Allergic response)
Toxicity
Radio activity
MUNICIPAL WASTE :
5
Open aveus Street, alley, park, special waste,
vacant, plot, highway rubbish
Treatment water, waste order & Treatment,
sites industrial treatment plant waste
primarily
compressed of
residual
sludged.
Physical Properties Of Waste :
Moisture Content
Food Waste 15
6
Paper 45
Cardboard 10
Plastic 10
Garden 10
Wood 5
Tin Cans 5
(100−79)
= 100 = 21.0%
100
7
DENSITY :
Determine density
8
1000 𝑘𝑔
Density = = 90.33kg/m3
11.07 𝑚3
General :
γ0 = ∑ yn zn
1
If groundwater is present,
𝑢0 = 𝛾𝑤 ℎ𝑤
𝛾𝑤 i s u n i t w e i g h t o f w a t e r .
9
Total stress minus pore pressure is
called effective stress
σ′ = σ - u
Pore pressure may also develop when
an external load is applied to a soil or
refuse mass.
Settlement Components :
𝑆𝑡 = 𝑆𝑖 + 𝑆𝑐 + 𝑆𝑠
𝑆𝑖 = i n i t i a l s e t t l e m e n t
𝑆𝑠 = T o t a l s e t t l e m e n t
S c = m v . H . ′
10
𝐻. ′
S c = ∑ 𝐷
Example :
Solution :
10 𝑋 30
S = = 0.12m
2.5 𝑋 103
30
Fill height = = 2m.
15
11
Additional stress from the remaining
2m fill.
∆σ = 2x15 = 30 kpa
Additional settlement
10 𝑋 30
S = = 0.01m
30 𝑋 1000
12
Landfill primary compression :
13
time scale and can be deter mined by
secondary compression.
𝑡
𝑆𝑠 = 𝐶 ′ α H l o g 𝑡𝑝
In general,
𝑆𝑑−𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ℎ1 𝐶11
14
Where 𝑆𝑑−𝑚𝑎𝑥 is upper bound on
decomposition settlement from time t1
t o t h e e n d o f d e c o m p o s i t i o n , ℎ1 i s t h e
t h i c k n e s s o f r e f u s e a t t i m e 𝑡1 a n d 𝐶11 i s
the fraction by dry weights of (TVS -
lignin) at time t1.
C 1 2 /C 1 1 = 𝑒 −𝜉(𝑡2−𝑡1)
Also,
𝑆𝑑𝑡 = 𝑆𝑑−𝑚𝑎𝑥 ( 1 - e - 𝝽 )
W h e r e 𝑆𝑑𝑡 i s d e c o m p o s i t i o n s e t t l e m e n t
at time t after the date and refuse is
tested.
Example :
A landfill 50 ft thick was found to
contain 19% by dry weight TVS and 14%
lignin. Assuming a 10% cover by
volume and decay constant of 0.06 yr -1
Solution :
15
𝑆𝑑−𝑚𝑎𝑥 = ( 1 - 0 . 1 ) ( 5 0 ) ( 0 . 0 5 )
= 2.25 feet
Example :
17
Food waste 0.2-0.4 0.29
Paper 0.05-0.1 0.09
Cardboard 0.04-0.06 0.05
Plastic 0.05-0.07 0.06
Textile 0.05-0.07 0.06
Rubber 0.1-0.15 0.13
Leather 0.1-0.2 0.16
Yard waste 0.05-0.15 0.10
Wood 0.15-0.3 0.23
Glass 0.1-0.2 0.15
Tin Cans 0.1-0.2 0.15
Silt/ Ash /Dirt 0.6-1.5 1.20
18
Typical Chemical Composition Of
Waste
Percentage by weight
Constituent Range Typical
Carbon 50-60 50
Oxygen 30-40 32
Ash 5-10 5
Food waste 14
Paper 40
Cardboard 9
Plastic 9
Yard waste 12
Wood 5
19
Tin Cans 6
Solution :
i)Moisture Content
Using typical data on moisture content
of municipal solid waste dry mass
corresponding to 100 kg of sample may
be calculated.
ii) Density
20
Using the typical data of MSW, the
volume corresponding to 1000kg of
sample may be calculated as
21
Food waste 14 4,650 65100
Paper 40 16,750 6,70,000
Cardboard 9 16,300 1,46,700
Plastics 9 32,600 2,93,400
Yard waste 12 6,500 78,000
Wood 5 18,600 93,000
Tin can 6 700 4,200
Total 13,50,400
Example :
22
Component Percent by mass
Food waste 15
Paper 45
Cardboard 5
Plastics 5
Yard Waste 10
Wood 5
Solution :
23
Mass (kg)
Component Moist Dry L H O N S Ash
Mass(kg) Mass
Food waste 15 4.5 2.16 0.288 1.692 0.117 0.018 0.225
Paper 45 42.3 18.4 2.538 18.612 0.127 0.084 2.538
Cardboard 5 4.75 2.090 0.280 2.118 0.014 0.009 0.237
Plastics 5 4.90 2.94 0.352 1.117 - - 0.490
Yard waste 10 4.0 1.912 0.24 1.52 0.136 0.012 0.180
Wood 5 4.0 1.98 0.24 1.708 0.008 0.004 0.060
Total - 85 64.45 29.482 3.938 26.767 0.402 0.127 3.73
24
Component Mass(kg) Percent by
mass
Carbon 29.482 34.684
Hydrogen 3.938+2.283=6.221 7.318
Oxygen 26.767+18.266=45.033 52.98
Nitrogen 0.402 0.472
Sulfur 0.127 0.149
Ash 3.73 4.388
Energy Content= 3 3 7 C + 1 4 2 0 ( H −O
8) + 93 S +
23N kJ/kg
25
52.98
= 337(34.684) + 1420 (7.318 - ) + 93 (0.149)
8
+ 23 (0.472)
= 12700.83 kJ/kg
FunctionalElement :
1) Waste generation
26
3) Collection
6) Disposal
Waste
Generation
Storage
Collection
Transfer Processing
and and
Transport Recover
Disposal
27
relationship in each element and to develop
where possible.
28
Factor Affecting Generation o f Waste
1) Geographical Location
3) Collection frequency
5) Characteristics of Populace
7) Public attitude
8) Legislation
ON-SITE HANDLING :
29
collection point and to return empty containers
to the point where they are stored between
location.
30
containers (4) or other processing equipment
such as incinerators.
ON SITE STORAGE :
2) Container location
Containers :
2) Collection frequency
Container Location :
ON-SITE PROCESSING
32
COLLECTION SERVICES :
33
1) Hauled container system
1) Tilt-frame container
2) Trash Trailer
34
Application of trash trailer is similar to that of
tilt-frame container system. Trash-trailer are
better for collection of especially heavy
rubbish, such as sand timber and metal scrap
and often used for collection of demolition
waste at construction site.
35
DETERMINATION OF VEHICLE AND LABOR
REQUIREMENTS
Hauled-container system :
Thcs = (Phcs+S+a+bx)
Where,
Phcs = Pc+uc+dbc—(A)
36
Phcs = Pick up time per trip, h/trip
Term Definition
Pickup(P) Hauled- Time spent picking up
container system, Phcs the loaded it contents
have been emptied
Stationary container Time spent spent loading
system Pscs the prior to loading the
contents of last container
Haul(h) Haul-container Time required to reach
system hscs location where the empty
disposal site is not
included.
Stationary-container Time required to reach
system, hscs have been emptied or the
collection disposal site
until the truck on the
next collection route.
At site(s) Time spent at disposal
site, the time spent
unloading.
37
Term Definition
oH-route(w) All time spent on
activities that are
operation. Necessary off-
route time included
day,2) Time lost due to
unavoidable congestion
and 3)
38
waiting to unload as well as on productive from
the point of view of the overall collection.
Speed limit a b
km/h(mi/h)
h/trip h/km (h/mile)
39
𝑁𝑑 = [ ( 1 - W ) H - ( t 1 + t 2 ) ] / ( 𝑃ℎ𝑐𝑠 + s + a + 𝑏𝑥 )
𝑁𝑑 = N o . o f t r i p / d a y
40
Collection system
Hauled-container system
Stationary-container system
+uc
41
Example :
Solution :
𝑃ℎ𝑐𝑠 = 𝑃𝑐 + 𝑈𝑐 + 𝑑𝑏𝑐
Use,
𝑃𝑐 + 𝑈𝑐 = 0 . 4 h / t r i p
𝑑𝑏𝑐 = 0 . 1 h / t r i p ( g i v e n )
𝑃ℎ𝑐𝑠 = ( 0 . 4 + 0 . 1 ) h / t r i p = 0 . 5 h / t r i p
𝑇ℎ𝑐𝑠 = ( P h c s + S + a + b x )
𝑃ℎ𝑐𝑠 = 0 . 5 h / t r i p
42
s = 0.133
a = 0.016
b = 0.011
𝑇ℎ𝑐𝑠 = [ 0 . 5 + 0 . 1 3 3 + 0 . 0 1 6 + 0 . 0 1 1 ( 5 0 ) ] h / t r i p
𝑇ℎ𝑐𝑠 = 1 . 2 0 h / t r i p
W = 0.15 assumed
H = 8
t1 = 0.25h (given)
t2 = 0.33h (given)
𝑁𝑑 = [ ( 1 - 0 . 1 5 ) 8 - ( 0 . 2 5 + 0 . 3 3 ) ] / 1 . 2 h / t r i p
= (6.8-0.58)/1.20 = 5.18 trip/d
𝑁𝑑 a c t u a l = 5 t r i p s / d
H = [(5x1.2)+0.58]/0.85
43
Comment :
Stationary-container system :
𝑇𝑠𝑐𝑠 = ( 𝑃𝑠𝑐𝑠 + s + a + 𝑏𝑥 )
𝑇𝑠𝑐𝑠 = T i m e p e r t r i p f o r s t a t i o n a r y - c o n t a i n e r
h/trip
𝑃𝑠𝑐𝑠 = P i c k u p t i m e p e r t r i p f o r s t a t i o n a r y
container system
𝑃𝑠𝑐𝑠 = 𝐶 + 𝑢𝑐 + ( 𝑛𝑝 - 1 ) ( 𝑑𝑏𝑐 )
𝑃𝑠𝑐𝑠 = P i c k u p t i m e p e r t r i p f o r s t a t i o n a r y
container system h/trip
𝐶𝑡 = n u m b e r o f c o n t a i n e r e m p t i e d p e r t r i p ,
container/ trip
44
𝑢𝑐 = a v e r a g e u n l o a d i n g t i m e p e r c o n t a i n e r f o r
stationary-container system, h/container.
𝑛𝑝 = n u m b e r o f c o n t a i n e r p i c k u p l o c a t i o n p e r
location per trip
𝑑𝑏𝑐 = a v e r a g e t i m e s p e n t d r i v i n g b e t w e e n
container locations, h/location (determined
locally)
The term 𝑛𝑝 - 1 a c c o u n t f o r t h e f a c t t h a t t h e
number of times the collec tion vehicle will have
to be drven between container locations is
equal to the number of containers less.
C t = 𝑉𝒓/ 𝐶𝑓
r = compaction ratio
45
Number of trip required per day is given by
𝑁𝑑 = v d / v r
Where,
𝑁𝑑 = N u m b e r o f c o l l e c t i o n t r i p r e q u i r e d p e r
day, trips/d
Example :
location = 2
46
e) Container unloading time = 0.1h/container
location = 0.1h
location = 0.33h
= 0.25h
k) Nu m ber o f tr i p s to di s po s al si t e p er d a y = 2
l) Length of workday = 8h
Solution :
1. Using equation
H = ( ( t 1 + t 2 ) + 𝑁𝑑 ( T s c s ) ) / ( 1 - W )
Where,
Use H = 8h
t1 = 0.33 (given)
t2 = 0.25 (given)
𝑁𝑑 = 2 . 0 ( g i v e n )
W = 0.15 (assumed)
47
2. Determine pick up time per trip
Tscs = (Pscs+s+a+bx)
Use
Tscs = 3.1hr
S = 0.1h/trip
a = 0.016
b = 0.011
x = 60 km
P s c s = 𝑐𝑡 𝑢𝑐 + ( 𝑛𝑝 - 1 ) d b c
Use,
Pscs = 2.32h/trip
𝑢𝑐 = 0 . 1 h / c o n t a i n e r
𝑛𝑝 = c t / 2 ( 2 c o n t a i n e r / l o c a t i o n )
dbc = 0.1h
𝑐𝑡 0 . 1 + ( 0 . 5 𝑐𝑡 - 1 ) 0 . 1 = 2 . 3 2
0.15 ct = 2.42
ct = 16.13 Use 16
48
4. Using equation
𝑐𝑡 = V r / 𝑐𝑓
U s e 𝑐𝑡 = 1 6
r = 2.5(given)
c = 4m3 (given)
f = 0.75 (given)
16 (4𝑚3 ) 0.74
v = = 19.2 m3
2.5
COLLECTION ROUTES
49
4) Scattered pick up point where small
quantities of solid waste are generated.
LAYOUT OF ROUTES :
50
been laid out haul distance should be
determined.
Example :
1. General
1.6kg/person/day
c) Collection frequency
51
2. Route Constraints
a) No U Turn in Street
Solution :
52
2. Determine compacted volume of waste to be
collected per week.
= 40m3/wk
Comment :
53
Schedule :
Where
week
Example :
54
A single truck can service 300 customers in a
single day and have time to take the full loads
to the landfill. The town wants to collect on
Monday, Tuesday, Thursday & Friday leavi ng
Wednesday for special project and maintenance.
SF 5000x1
N = = = 4.2 Trucks
XW 300x4
The community will need 5 trucks.
Start
Finish
Example 1
55
Start
Finish
Example 2
56
TRANSFER STATIONS
2. Capacity requirement
4. Environmental requirement
1. Direct discharge
2. Storage discharge
57
Direct Discharge
Storage Discharge
58
2) Within easy access of major arferial
highway route.
SAMPLING OF WASTE
Y = 2 a r c s i n √𝐗
Y is transformation value of X
n = (ZS/s) 2
Where
n = number of samples
level desired
(transformed basis)
= 2 a r c S i n √X - 2 a r c S i n √𝑋 ± ∆
Example:
60
Therefore, X = P.04036 (Y=0.4045)
Solution :
Therefore,
𝑠1 = | 2 a r c s i n √0.04036
= | 2 a r c s i n √0.0516
= | 0.4045 – 0.4582 |
= 0.0537
and 𝑠2 = | 2 a r c s i n √0.04036
= | 2 a r c s i n √0.0643
= |0.4045 - 0.|
= 0.1081
61
We get, n = 6
Z = 196,z + 0.684
We get,
n=2
62
Critical Statistics Obtained From Typical Data
Range
X Y V (no. of
sample)
Paper 0.04036 0.4045 0.0742 2-6
Rubber, Leather 0.0596 0.1545 0.0298 13-35
& synthetic
Glass 0.00558 0.1495 0.0285 9-10
Metals 0.00506 0.1424 0.0277 13-20
Total 0.4221 1.4144 0.1766 1-36
compostable
matter
Inert 0.4793 1.4979 0.0731 2-3
Y = Transformation value of X
V = Standard deviation
63
Number of sample required in case of nitrogen
is about 380 and that for carbon is one.
US Department of Health
Education & Welfare
Bureau of Solid waste Management 1969
Example :
64
Element C H O N S Moisture Inert
Percent by 28 5 22 4 1 20 20
weight
Solution :
= 1.579 tons/day
22
= 5 - = 2.25%
8
= 22/8 = 2.75%
= 22 + 2.75 = 24.75
= 30.375 tons/day
65
Loss of heat energy can be determined
1
Due to unburned 0.01579x1.5x105x32789
carbon
=7.766
2
Due to inherent 0.2x1.5x`105x2420
moisture
= 7.26
3
Due to moisture 0.2475x1.5x105x2420
in bound water
= 8.98
4
Due to moisture 0.2025x1.5x105x2420
from oxidation
= 7.35
5
Radiation Loss 1.5x105x0.005 =
6
Heat available in 0.2104x1.5x105x1.047 kJ/kg
Residue
k x (698k-298k) = 1.321
= 1.65x109 – 0.32677x109
= 1.323x109 kJ/d
66
Example :
Solution :
C + O 2 CO2
67
𝟑𝟐
O2 required = (1000 x ) = 1306.93 kg
𝟏𝟐
2 H2+O2 2H2O
= 1388.85kg
68
CHAPTER 2
L AND FILL DE SIGN
Site Selection :
For site selection three major issues are
essential, environmental, economic and
political. Political factor is heavily impacted by
public attitude. For sitting study to achieve
public acceptance citizen group should
participate in identifying sitting criteria and
their relative importance. Ultimate goal is to
select the site that will provide greatest
environmental protection. The outcome of
sitting study depends on relative importance
given to different criteria. Once a site is
accepted construction of landfill should begin
immediately, waiting often makes the site
unacceptable due to various socio economic and
regulatory reasons.
69
Define Project and its needs
70
Groundwater
Fault Zone
Land Use
Surface Water
Aquifers
71
Factor to consider in site Assessment
Area with
Impartibility with Dedicated land
high ground
existing solid economy and
water table.
waste management communication
system. resources.
Forest,
Effect on properly
wilderness &
value highly
scenic areas
productive
Geology.
agricultural areas
land development.
Numerical Procedure
C = ∑𝑛𝑖=1.W 2 S i
Where W is weight, S is suitability rating, i is
the criterion number & n is number of criterion
weight are assigned to various criteria and sub
criteria. For example, weight of 5 may be
assigned to most important criteria and weight
of 1 may be assigned to criteria considered
least important. A site that is considered good
with respect to specific criterion could be given
a suitability rating of 3 mod erate a rating of 2
and fair of
73
For example a subsoil permeability of less than
10-7cm/s is considered good since this value is
specified for a soil liner by many regulatory
agencies. site s with a high Cation Exchange
Capacity (CEC) also can be considered good. A
CEC greater than 25mg / 100 gram (milli
equivalent per 100 grams) could have a rating
of 3 and CEC less than 15 at a rating of 1.
74
Criteria Sub criteria Definition Significance
permeability
is preferable
for sitting.
PH Indication of Characterizes
acidity and tendency of
alkalinity soil sorption
(PH=7=neutral of heavy
) metals
Greater PH is
preferable
for siting.
75
Criteria Sub criteria Definition Significance
76
Criteria Sub criteria Definition Significance
77
Criteria Sub criteria Definition Significance
78
Ground Movement of Sites where
water flow ground water direction of
system with ground water
Criteria Sub Definition Significance
criteria
regard to flow is away
direction & from use, or
velocity where flow is
upward or
where water is
deep are
preferable all
else being
equal.
79
Monito Refers to Sites are
ring RCRA easier to
aspect requirement monitor (e.g.
for ground presence of
water layer of sand
monitoring and gravel)
Criteria Sub Definition Significance
criteria
or have a
known
discharge
body (e.g., a
lake) are
preferable
all else being
equal.
80
preferable
all else being
equal.
81
Surface Proximities to
and stream/lakes
ground Refer to overload Impact
water proximity & opportunity
hydrolo protected use of of run off
gy nearest and
lake/stream contaminants
pollutant /
Criteria Sub Definition Significance
criteria
lake stream.
82
Run & Runoff relates to Sites with
Run off rainwater leakage little need
or leachate that for
drain overland control of
away from facility. run
Run on refers to on from
drainage overland upland and
into any part of the slow runoff
facility. are
Criteria Sub Definition Significance
criteria
preferable.
Run on is
usually
controlled by
berm stream
diversion.
Runoff
control is
impacted by
velocity of
water
traversing
the site.
83
Sites with ground water quality is poor 11 is
good for site.
Example :
Solution :
84
selecting these numbers if sitting process is to
come to fruition.
i) Site data
Suitability Numbers
85
10−4 t o 10−3 3
Greater than 1
Type of soil Low plasticity 10
clay
Silty clay 9
Sand clay 7
Glacial Till 5
Silty Sand 3
Sand & gravel 1
Annual recharge(mm) Greater than 30 10
Depth of soil(m) 26 to 30 9
21 to 25 8
16 to 20 6
11 to 15 5
Criteria Description Suitability
/Sub criteria rating
6 to 10 3
2 to 5 2
1 or less 1
Slope(%) 0 to 1 10
1 to 2 9
2 to 4 7
4 to 6 5
6 to 12 3
12 to 15 2
Greater than 15 1
Annual Recharge 0 to 50 10
50 to 100 8
101 to 200 6
201 to 400 4
86
401 to 600 2
Greater than 1
600
RANKING OF SITE A
RANKING OF SITE B
LANDFILL :
Design concept of natural attenuation (NA )
type landfill consist of allowing the leach ate to
percolate through the landfill base with
expectation that the leach ate will be attenuated
(purified) by the unsaturated soil zone beneath
the landfill and by the ground water aquifer.
88
Two types of filling method are used in
operating an NA type landfill.
1) Area method
2) Trench method
89
Slope Landfill :
90
COMPONENT OF LANDFILL :
91
Cell :
Daily Cover :
Lift:
Bench :
93
be treated before release in ground or in
sewerage system.
LINER :
94
FINAL COVER :
Example :
Solution:
= 65,000x2
= 130,000 kg/d
= 14,600m2/year
= 1.46 ha/year
Example :
Solution :
96
𝟏𝟓𝟎
𝐿2 = = 10 m
𝟏𝟓
𝐴𝑇1 = 𝐿1 x 𝑊 = 1 4 . 2 8 x 5 = 7 1 . 4 m 2
𝐴𝑇2 = 𝐿2 x 𝑊 = 1 0 x 5 = 5 0 m 2
𝐴𝑇3 = 𝐿3 x 𝑊 = 8 . 3 3 x 5 = 4 1 . 6 6 m 2
𝐴𝐹1 = 𝐿1 x 9 . 4 8 6 = 1 4 . 2 8 x 9 . 4 8 6 = 1 3 5 . 4 6 m 2
𝐴𝐹2 = 𝐿2 x 9 . 4 8 6 = 1 0 x 9 . 4 8 6 = 9 8 . 8 6 m 2
𝐴𝐹3 = 𝐿3 x 9 . 4 8 6 = 8 . 3 3 x 9 . 4 8 6 = 7 9 . 0 5 m 2
𝑽𝑺𝑳 = c o v e r t h i c k n e s s x ( 𝑨𝑻 + 𝑨𝑭 + 𝑨𝑺)
𝑉𝑆𝐿1 = 0 . 1 5 x ( 7 1 . 4 + 1 3 5 . 4 6 + 4 7 . 4 3 ) = 3 8 . 1 4 3 m 2
𝑉𝑆𝐿2 = 0 . 1 5 x ( 5 0 + 9 4 . 8 6 + 4 7 . 4 3 ) = 2 8 . 8 4 3 m 2
𝑉𝑆𝐿3 = 0 . 1 5 x ( 4 1 . 6 6 + 7 9 . 0 5 + 4 7 . 4 3 ) = 2 5 . 2 2 1 m 2
97
Ratio of volume of waste to the volume of cover
s o i l 𝑉𝑆𝑊 /𝑉𝑆𝐿 a r e
𝑉𝑆𝑊1 /𝑉𝑆𝐿1 = 2 1 4 . 2 8 / 3 8 . 1 4 3 = 5 . 6 1 7
𝑉𝑆𝑊2 /𝑉𝑆𝐿2 = 1 5 0 / 2 8 . 8 4 3 = 5 . 2
𝑉𝑆𝑊3 /𝑉𝑆𝐿3 = 1 2 5 / 2 5 . 2 2 1 = 4 . 9 5 6
𝐖
= (1+x)n Tons per year
𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝟏 𝐱
T = 𝟐
( W + W ( 1 + 𝟏𝟎𝟎) n ) n T o n s
6 . T o t a l v o l u m e o f w a s t e i n y e a r s ( 𝑉𝑊 ) o n t h e
assumption 0.85l t/m3 density of waste.
𝑉𝑊 = 𝑇/0.85 ( m 3 )
98
7. T o t a l v o l u m e o f d a i l y c o v e r i n n y e a r s ( 𝑉𝑑𝑐 )
(on the basis of 15 m soil cover on top and side
for lift height of 1.5 to 2m)
𝑉𝑆 = m 𝑉𝑊
(If m=0.10 for biodegradable waste, m will be
less than 0.05 for incinerated liner waste. )
𝐶𝑖 = 𝑉𝑤 + 𝑉𝑑 + 𝑉𝑐 − 𝑉𝑠 (𝜇. 𝑚)
11. Shape of Landfill
Combination.
99
12. Estimate of Landfill height
( a ) R e s t r i c t e d a r e a a v a i l a b l e = 𝐴𝑖 ( m 2 )
facilities = 0.15A2
A r e a a v a i l a b l e f o r l a n d f i l l i n g = 0 . 8 5 𝐴𝑖
𝐻𝑖 = 𝐶𝑖 / 0 . 9 𝐴𝑖 ( m )
(b) No limitation area
Possible maximum Height = H2
𝐴𝑖 = 𝐶𝑖 / 𝐻𝑖
Total area required
𝐴 = 1 . 1 5 𝐴𝑖
Example :
BASIC DATA :
Location : Kathmandu
100
Sub soil : Sandy, SILT up to 20m below ground
t o n s / 𝑚3 )
= ( 7 x 1 0 6 ) / 0 . 8 5 = 8 . 2 5 x 1 0 6 𝑚3
= 0 . 1 x 8 . 2 5 x 1 0 6 = 0 . 8 2 5 x 1 0 6 𝑚3
= 1 0 3 x 1 0 6 𝐴𝑖
= 0 . 8 2 5 x 1 0 6 𝑚3
𝐶𝑖 = ( 8 . 2 5 + 0 . 8 2 5 + 1 . 0 3 - 0 . 8 2 5 ) x 1 0 6
101
Likely shape of Landfill
Rectangular in plan
Area required
= (9.28x106)/20
= 4.15 x 105 m2
= 41.5 Hectares
= 450m x 900m
LANDFILL PHASES :
c) Number of phases = 16
102
e) Plan area of phase
of each cell)/2.0
= 22 x 42m approx
capacity
Other Facilities
a) Surface water drain
103
b) Leachate Collection Pipe
plan)
1) Land requirement
2) Type of waste
facilities
104
Factor Remarks
Design Access Pave all weather access roads to
landfill site; temporary roads to
unloading.
Factor Remarks
Ground water Divert any underground Spring; if
105
protection required install sealants for leaching
control; install well for gas and
ground water monitoring.
106
facilities be provided
1) Access road
2) Equipment shelters
3) Storage site
5) Landfill area
107
6) Planting
Example :
109
110
Solution :
A r e a 𝑚2 Capacity Cover
Lift At Average between material
Number Elevation contour between contour 𝑚3
Interval Interval
1 0 5550* 6015 18045 3609
2 3 6480 6945 20835 4167
3 6 7410 7875 23625 4725
4 9 8340 8805 26415 5283
5 12 9270 9135 29205 5841
6 15 10200
Total = 118125 23625
T o t a l c a p a c i t y 𝑚3
T o t a l c o v e r 𝑚3
111
Zero is computed as 5550m2
= (200m-15m) x 30m
1 8 , 0 4 5 m 3 = 6 0 1 5 𝑚2 x 3 m ( l i f t h e i g h t )
3 6 0 9 m 3 = 1 8 0 4 5 𝑚3 x ( 1 / 5 ) , r a t i o o f c o v e r m a t e r i a l
to solid waste
V o l = 2 [ 1 / 3 ( 2 𝑥 𝑋 𝑥) ] + 𝐿 ( 1 / 2 𝑥 2 )
Thus,
𝐿 = 2(155m) + 30m + 4 (2/3x) = 340 + 2.67 𝑥
Hence,
V o l = 1 . 3 3 𝑥3 + ( 3 4 0 + 2 . 6 7 ) ( 1 / 2 x 2 )
= 1 7 0 𝑥2 + 2 . 6 7 𝑥3
112
Equate above expression to require cover
volume and solve for 𝑥 by trial & error.
Try 𝑥 = 10m
Try 𝑥 = 11.0m
113
LIFE CYCLE OF LANDFILL :
With respect to environmental aspect of
sanitary landfilling has different phase in life
cycle.
1. Planning phase :
2. Construction phase :
3. Operation Phase :
4. Completed Phase :
114
Potential Environmental Emissions :
115
Role of Land filling in solid waste management :
116
AVOIDANCE
Clean Techn0ology
Internal recycling
Administrative action
𝑾𝟎
MATERIAL RECOVERY
Intelligent Production Technology
Separate Collection
Recycling Plants
𝑾𝟏
ENERGY RECOVERY
RDF Production
Incineration
Anaerobic Digestion
Pyrolisis
𝑾𝟐
SECURE LANDFILLING
Dry Land filling
Waste fixation
Waste Capsulation
Natural Processes
Proper Engineering
𝑾𝟑
FINAL STORAGE
QUALITY
117
avoidable, non recoverable, non recycl able,
non-burnable which should be disposed to land.
Uncontrolled
Step 1
Landfilling
118
As in above figure higher level of waste
management is reached in third step when is
WM is applied.
119
CHAPTER 3
LINER
1. Clayey Soil
2. Synthetic Membrane
3. Amended Soil
120
(haxo.1990). A Geomembrane consist of one or
more sheets.
121
122
1. Leachate collection and removal system
LCRS
2. Geomembrane
3. Soil Liner
4. Filter
5. Leachate collection
123
Leakage detection system under subtitle C
regulation can be constructed of sand with
hydraulic conductivity of 0.01 cm/s or more &
12 in (30.5 cm) or more thickness of synthetic
drainage layer ( geonet or geocomposite) with a
t r a n s m i s s i v i t y o f 3 x 10−5 𝑚2 / s o r m o r e .
A minimum of 1% is stipulated.
T r a n s m i s s i v i t y o f n o l e s s t h a n 5 x 10−4 𝑚2 / s i s
usually specified. Transmissivity is the product
of thickness and hydraulic conductivity.
124
SUBGRADE PREPARATION:
125
COMPACTED SOIL LINERS
Material selection:
Little 0 - 15 0 - 30 12 or more
Little to moderate 15 - 30 30 - 50 10 – 12
126
Figure shows a section of landfill with a
leachate mound resting on somewhat pervious
stratum which is turn overlies a low
permeability material.
127
Example :
A t l e v e l a ( 𝐻1 - 𝐻0 )= 0 , q = 0
A n d a t l e v e l b ( 𝐻1 - 𝐻0 )= - 5 f t
128
q=-(5/3)Kw. The average flow per unit length
through length a to b is –(5/6)kw.
(6.1m-4.6m)
( 𝐻1 - 𝐻0 )= 5 , q = - ( 5 / 3 ) k w
From a to b:
Q = - ( 5 / 6 ) ( 10−9 m / s ) ( 1 . 5 )
2 0 0 0 = - 2 . 5 x 10−6 𝑚3 / s
From b to c:
Q = - ( 5 / 3 ) ( 10−9 m / s ) ( 3 . 0 5 ) ( 2 0 0 0 )
= - 1 0 x 10−6 𝑚3 / s
T o t a l f l o w = - 1 2 . 5 x 10−6 𝑚3 / s
TRANST TIME:
While assessing the thickness of clay liners, it
is usually necessary to restrict the transit time
to no less than 30 or 50 years. Contaminant in
leachate can penetrate an exit the liner by
advection of seepage of fluid the liner under a
hydraulic gradient or by chemical diffusion or
both. Following equation can be used for
calculating transit time.
129
This formula requires estimating the suction
and unsaturated permeability of liner which
may be determined experimentally.
Example :
Solution:
a. t = 0 . 3 x 9 0 x 9 0 / ( 10−7 ( 3 0 + 9 0 + 5 )
= 1 . 9 4 4 x 108 s
=6.2 yr.
b. ℎ𝑠 = −38𝑐𝑚
t = ( 0 . 4 5 - 0 . 3 ) x 108 { 9 0 - ( 3 0 + 3 8 ) l n ( 3 0 + 3 8 + 9 0 ) / ( 3 0 + 3 8 ) }
= 2 . 7 8 x 108 𝑠
=8.8 yr.
130
Example :
Solution :
H=30cm=0.3m
K=0.001 m/s
Using equation,
Q = k ℎ2
For h<D
Q = 0 . 0 0 1 ( 0.3)2
= 0 . 0 0 0 0 9 𝑚3 / a c r e / s
= 2052 gal/acre/day
ALR=Q/2=1026 gal/acre/day.
131
Example :
A g e o n e t h a s a t r a n s m i s s i v i t y ( 𝑘𝐷 ) o f 3 x 10−5 𝑚2 /
𝑠. A s s u m i n g a n a l l o w a b l e h e a d b u i l d u p o f 3 0 c m ,
determine ALR if the design thickness is 6 cm
and one leak per acre is expected.
Solution :
Q = 3 x 10−5 ( 0 . 6 - 0 . 0 6 )
= 1 . 6 2 x 10−5 𝑚3 / s
= 369 gal/acre/day
132
A=Top line leakage
B=Construction water
C=Consolidation water
D=Infiltration water
Q=LDCRS flow
LINING SYSTEM
133
134
135
There are two lining system base lining system
and cover lining system as shown in fig above
c o n d u c t i v i t y o f 1 x 10−2 𝑐𝑚/𝑠
at a slope of 3 to 5 percent.
136
USEPA subtitle D cover system
1 x 10−5 c m / s O v e r l a i n b y a m i n i m u m 6 i n c h
∆ℎ
q=kiA=k 𝐴
𝐿
137
q=flow rate
k=Coefficient of permeability
i=hydraulic gradient
∆ℎ
= = head loss per unit length
𝐿
occurs.
Example :
C a l c u l a t e t h e l e a k a g e r a t e t h r o u g h a 1 m2 6 0 - c m
thick soil Liner with a coefficient of
−7
p e r m e a b i l i t y o f 1 x 10 cm/s if 30cm liquid exists
above the liner.
Solution :
Here,
q = KiA
K = 1 x 10−7 c m / s = 1 x 10−9 m / s
30+60
i = =1.5
60
A = 1 m2
q = 1 x 10−9 m / s x 1 . 5 x 1 m2
= 1 . 5 x 10−9 m3 / s
138
Example :
Solution :
Q = 0 . 7 a0.1 K s 0.88 hw
Q = 0 . 7 a0.1 K s 0.88 hw
hw = L i q u i d d e p t h o n g e o m e m b r a n e
= 0.3m
139
a = 1 cm2 = 0 . 0 0 0 1 m2
0.88
0.7(0.0001)0.1 (1x10−9 ) (0.3)
= m3 /s p e r m2
4000
= 2 . 5 x 10−13 m3 /s p e r m2
a = 3 . 1 mm2 = 0 . 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 m2
= 1 . 8 x 10−13 m3 /s p e r m2
LINER DESIGN:
140
Breakthrough time can be determined by
d2 h
t = 𝑘(𝑑+ℎ)
where,
k=permeability in m/year
141
CHAPTER 4
LEACHATE GENERATION
Clogging:
142
Crushing of pipe:
Faulty Design:
30m
Drainage
Layer
Leachate
Liner
60m
Collection Pipe
15m
60m
143
Leachate pipes are generally installed in
trenches that are filled with gravel. The
trenches are lined with geotextile to minimize
entry of fines.
Soil Filter:
FIRST CRITERIA
SECOND CRITERIA
Example :
Vc = 1 . 2 5 𝑓𝑡 3 / m i n , c y c l i n g t i m e
( 2 t ) = 1 2 m i n , Df = 2 f t a n d
hd = 1 6 f t . A s s u m e a p u m p e f f i c i e n t o f 8 0 %
144
Solution :
Given relation,
Ss = Vc t
Vc = r a t e o f l e a c h a t e c o l l e c t i o n p e r m i n u t e
Vc t + Vc t
𝑃1 = = 2 Vc v o l u m e / m i n u t e
𝑡
Ss = Ar x Df
F r o m t h e k n o w n d i f f e r e n c e i n h e a d hd b e t w e e n
suction and delivery the pumps break
Horsepower
γ1 hd 𝑃1
BHP =
550𝐸
In which
γ1 = L e a c h a t e d e n s i t y
E = Pump efficiency
= 1 . 2 5 x 6 = 7 . 5 𝑓𝑡 3
= 0 . 0 7 𝑚3 /𝑚𝑖𝑛
62.4 x 1.1 x16 x 2.5
BHP = = 6.24
550 𝑥 0.8
146
Leachate tank should have enough volume to
hold a leachate for a period of time (usually 1 -3
days) during a peak leakage.
STORM WATER
1.486 2⁄ 1⁄
V = γh 3 S 2
𝑛
V = mean velocity of water
γh = m e a n h y d r a u l i c r a d i u s
Example:
147
For all drainage design, a trial and error
method is used to find dimension. For most
148
cases a slope of base is assumed and kept
constant throughout the trial and error process.
INITIAL DESIGN
149
1 . R e c o m m e n d e d v a l u e s o f nγ a n d V f o r D e s i g n
of Drainage Swale in Landfill.
Variable Values
nγ Initial 0.02 – 0.03
Long term 0.1 – 0.14
150
g (ρs − ρw )
Vs = d2
18 μ
In which,
Vs = s e t t l i n g v e l o c i t y o f a p a r t i c l e
g = gravitational constant
ρs = density of a particle
ρw = d e n s i t y o f w a t e r
S e d i m e n t a t i o n B a s i n s u r f a c e a r e a f o r 1 𝐦𝟑 / s e c f l o w .
0 . 1 ( 1 0 0 μm) 125
0 . 0 6 ( 6 0 μm) 263
0 . 0 4 ( 4 0 μm) 476
0 . 0 1 ( 1 0 μm) 6 . 7 x 103
0 . 0 0 1 ( 1 μm) 6 . 7 x 105
151
Example :
= 1 . 5 x 4 7 9 = 7 1 4 m2
2 A2 = 7 1 4
A = 18.9m.
152
Anchor Trench Design
153
M a x i m u m a l l o w a b l e p u l l ( Fp ) a t a p o i n t A .
Fp = σy t l
Where
σy = Y i e l d s t r e s s o f s y n t h e t i c m e m b r a n e
F R = Ys h b t a n δ + W L A t a n δ
Where,
Ys = u n i t w e i g h t o f s o i l
b = trench width
h = trench depth
δ = friction angle
Frc = Ys ( h + h′ ) t a n δ + ( W + Ys ) L A t a n δ
W i s n e g l i g i b l e c o m p a r e t o Ys a s a f e t y f a c t o r
( 1 . 2 – 1 . 5 ) m a y b e u s e d t o c a l c u l a t e d Frc .
154
Example :
h = 0.57m
155
156
Leachate collection pipe are perforated to allow
leachate collection and removal. The size and
spacing should be designed for adequate flow.
Where,
Q is flow rate,
0.375
𝑄 0.5
D = 0.237 ( )
𝑆
157
Example :
Solution,
e = 4 0 c m / y r = 1 . 2 7 x 10−6 𝑐𝑚/𝑠
Q = 1 0 0 m x 3 0 0 m x 1 . 2 7 x 10−8 𝑚/𝑠
= 3 . 8 1 x 10−4 𝑚3 /𝑠
0.5
3.81𝑥10−4
D = 0.237( )0.375
0.0005
=0.051m = 5.1 cm
Q = 8 0 0 m x 3 0 0 m x 1 . 2 7 x 10−8 𝑚/𝑠
= 3 . 0 5 x 10−3 𝑚3 /𝑠
158
0.375
0.003050.5
D = 0.237 ( )
0.001
=0.098 = 9.8cm
GEOTEXTILE:-
Permittivity is defined as
Ψ = 𝐾𝑛 /𝑡
Ψ is permittivity
Ψ = 𝐾𝑛 /𝑡= 𝑄𝑑 /ℎ
159
Example :
Solution :
a . 𝑄𝑑 = 0 . 0 0 4 5 6 f t / d a y
Ψ required =0.00456/1
= 0 . 0 0 4 5 6 day −1
= 5 . 3 x 10−8 S −1
b. Ψ geotextile
= 600 / (50x4185)
= 2 . 9 x 10−3 S −1
GAS GENERATION
160
COMPOSITION :
47.7
Methane
47
Carbon dioxide
3.7
Nitrogen
0.8
Oxygen
0.1
Hydrogen
0.01
Hydrogen Sulfide
0.1
Carbon Monoxide
Trace Compound 0.5
161
an average landfill life of 30 years, the
production per kilogram of dry weight would
be 213/kg, which is consistent with analytical
prediction.
In Non-arid region
In Arid region
Example :
From equation, as
𝐶𝐻4 = 7 . 6 6 x 10−9 𝑚3 / m i n / k g
= 7 . 6 6 ( 0 . 5 2 5 x 106 m i n / y r )
162
GAS CONTROL:-
Passive Venting:
163
Active Venting:-
164
Landfill gas is measured in various ways that
may include conduction pumping test and is
vented by trenches, vent pipe and extraction
wells.
165
CHAPTER 5
MONITORING OF L AND FILL
MONITORING :
There are mainly two purpose of monitoring
whether land fill is performing as designed and
to ensure that land fill meet all the regulatory
requirement and standard. Usually hydro -
geologist are assigned the task of developing
performance monitoring program med for
groundwater around landfills.
LEAKAGE MONITORING :
Chance of damage
3. Chance of damage
during waste placement
during waste placement
is high.
is low.
169
DIRECT LEAKAGE MONITOR :
1) Suction Lysimeter
2) Basin Lysimeter
170
b) There should be at least one lysimeter below
each phase of containment type of landfill.
Suction Lysimeter
171
1. Vacuum operated
1. Vacuum operated
2. Vacuum-pressure operated
3. Vacuum pressure
Example :
172
= 30 days, liner permeability = 1x10 -7 cm/sec
average leach ate head over the liner = 30 cm
Solution :
Leakage/sec
= ( 1 x 1 0 - 8 ) x ( 1 3 0 + 3 0 ) x 𝐴/ ( 1 3 0 )
= (1.23 x 10-8) x 𝐴
Leakage/30 day
Therefore,
0.03 𝐴 = 4x1000
𝐴 = 125386 cm2
Assuming a length to breadth ratio of 2,
dimension of basin should be
2𝐵 x 𝐵 = 𝐴
173
1) Instrument that detect changes in moisture
content of vadose zone.
1) Direct method
2) Indirect method
174
Geophysical method falls in indirect method
and is useful for routine geophysical
techniques.
5) Frequency of sampling
Interbedded Aquifer :
175
different horizontal and vertical gradients in
each stratum, there is a possibility of existence
of vertical gradients in upper stratum in most
cases, proper assessment o f flow direction and
gradients (horizontal and vertical) is the key
successful monitoring network design.
176
Figure shows of a natural attenuation type
municipal waste landfill sited in a inter bedded
aquifer.
177
Three dimensional array of monitoring points is
needed for proper monitoring ground water
down-gradient of landfills
178
Monitoring points for each landfill should be
custom designed.
GAS MONITORING :
179
Gas migration seems to occur in pulses. Because
of high variability in gas concentration
quarterly or even monthly monitoring may not
detect real status of migration because time and
date of sampling may not synchronize with high
concentration.
180
Landfill Air Monitoring :
181
polluted air sample to analyze concentration of
pollutants. Gas sample devices are divided in
three categories passive, grab and active.
Passive sampling involves collection of
pollutants by diffusion of gas to a collection
medium. Although passive system is simple and
costless a long collectio n time is required (7-30
days).
Contaminants TLV
Dust 1mg/m3
(0.2 to 2 fiber/m3)
Benzene 10ppm
182
Coal dust 2mg/m3
Phenol 5ppm
Wood dust
183
Sometimes BOD and volume of leachate are
monitored daily prior to discharging leachate
into intake point of the treatment plant.
184
CHAPTER-4
CHAPTER 6
E NVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ASSE SSME NT
186
(socio-economical, morphological, etc.) in order
to show up the areas of minimum and/or
maximum impact, This method has proceed to
be called and has mainly been applied to
studies concerning the sitting of
infrastructures, roads, motorways, oil ducts,
etc.
187
control lists. The differences between the
various proposed types of matrix are to be
observed mainly in the variety, number and
specificity of control lists as well as in the
system of evaluation of the individualized
impact, With regard to assessment, this ranges
from the more individualizing of impact (
marked with some sort of sign, a cross, dash,
asterisk, etc.) to a qualitative evaluation (good,
moderate, sufficient, reasonable ) or to a
numerical evaluation which may be either
absolute or relative : generally an assessment is
effected regarding the result of impact (positive
or negative). The numerical evaluation is often
subject to criticism as it would seem to
introduce a criteria of objective jugdement that,
in reality, id impossible to achieve. Al ong the
better-known examples of matrix is Leopold's
matrix (Leopoldm 1971). This is made up of two
control lists including respectively 100 possible
actions linked to the proposed project and 88
environmental components which are
susceptible to impact. The impacts to be
analyzed therefore are 8800. This method
requires that the intersection between each
action and each out, a number (from 1 to 10) is
inserted in the upper part of the barred square
to indicate the size of impact. In the lower part
another number (from 1 to 10) to indicates the
importance. Other examples are afforded by
188
Moore's matrix (moore et al.,'1973) which
requires an assessment on a ground-level
ordinal scale (negligible, low, moderate, high)
and Clark's matrix (Clark et al.,1976) which
gives not a numerical assessment but a
qualitative evaluation based on a give-polarity
nominal scale:
beneficial/adverse
short term/long term
reversible/irreversible
direct/indirect
local/strategic
190
METHOD OF IMPACT ASSESSMENT USING
CHROMATIC MATRICES
General Description
191
1. a single project is a single site;
2. more than one project but relative to only
one site;
3. one project at different sites;
4. more than one project at more than one site;
5. a project that has already been carried out.
192
Considering the difficulty often encountered in
quantifying the entity of interaction between
the various control lists present in each matrix,
we used a chromatic representation to describe
them in a qualitative form. Two different
chromatic scales were used to which positive or
negative influences corresponded and which
include four assessment levels (expressed by
different tonalities). The four chromatic
tonalities correspond to negligible, low,
moderate or high qualitative levels.
193
ids assessed by means of different chromatic
tonalities.
194
indicators. In fact the definition of an
informative background of the existing
environmental categories constitutes one of the
main phases of the procedure of impact
assessment and is specifically demanded in
some counties (e.g. USA and France).
195
This matrix presents as control lists the
elements of impact and environmental
categories already defined in matrices A and Al
respectively.
196
In the case of a decision which depends on
the results of consideration of more than one
project based on more than one site, the number
of B matrices taken into account increase
considerably as they are equal to the
combination of all possible cases. However, the
examination of the al matrices alone will
provide enough information in order to
immediately discard those sites which are
clearly unsuitable to contain a certain type of
installation (e.g. a sanitary landfill), thereby
allowing the examination of a smaller number
of B matrices.
197
to limit, or rather to eliminate or reduce to
acceptable environmental levels, the negative
impacts. Theirs action must have an influence
on the causes which greatly contribute towards
the onset of negative elements of impact and
therefore their singling out must include a
careful evaluation of the A matrix. To this
regard, two important aspects mus t be
underlined. Firstly, it is necessary to have a
clear picture of all possible interrelations as
any one single element of impact may be
influences by more than one introduced
improvement. Moreover, it must not be
overlooked that these same measures may
produce simultaneously positive effects on
some elements and negative side effects on
others. For example, in the field of sanitary
landfilling, with the aim of limiting the impact
caused by the presence of leachate using a
collection system and an on-site treatment
process, together with the evident positive
effects, some negative effects may arise from
odors coming from various parts of the
treatment plant. Therefore the effic iency of the
measures will have to be assessed using the two
different chromatic scales already defined.
198
On the basis of the limitation measures utilized
and of their efficacy, evaluated using the C
matrix, the method provides a fifth matrix for
assessment of limited impact, that is of t he
residual impact once the operations of
BEGIN
Impact Source
(cause) Environmental
Matrix Matrix Indicator
Interactions Interactions
A A1
Magnitude Magnitude
Assessment Assessment
Impact Environmental
Matrix
Elements B Categories
Potential Impact
Assessment
Potential Impact
Matrix
Assessment
D
Further
Sites or
Plants
199
FINAL JUDGEMENT
201
APPLICATION OF THE METHOD TO SANITARY
LANDILL
202
not only take into account the ordinary working
phase but also the preceding phase and also the
phase of extraordinary exercise . Each of these
may be examined either as a single ph ase or
together with the others, in which case the
results may be summarized into a single group
of matrices.
Temporary Phase
203
The temporary phase concerns the time front
the decision to build the installation to its
completion. The necessity of constructing a
solid waste disposal plant is linked to the need
to solve a situation of environmental
degradation caused be the uncontrolled
disposal of waste matter together with
requirement of meeting precise legislative
dispositions.
204
Table 1 shows the two control lists of causes
and elements of impact summarizing the
considerations made hitherto.
205
Risk of accidents
Vectors
206
Phase of Extraordinary Functi oning
207
plant
Impacts
Negative Positive
208
Low orange blue
209
Figure 3. Representation of A matrices in case
of a sanitary landfill a) temporary phase; (b)
ordinary functioning phase; (c) extra-ordinary
functioning phase. Intersection cells between
causes and impact elements are pointed out
with a stronger frame. The frame will be filled
by the colour suggested by the assessment.
211
order to characterize the state of environmental
categories which existed prior to the
installation.
212
soil, etc., but also on traditions , socio-
economic state, urban standards etc. Figure 4
shows the overall matrix in which the
intersecting squares are simply individualized
by a darker border.
213
Impacts
Negative Positive
214
same procedure: the elements of impact will
differ but not the environmental categories
that, representing the environment, will remain
unchanged. A first analysis of the matrix shows
how some categories are affected by numerous
elements of impact: this with regard to
‘Resources’
Smells Air
215
Impacts
Negative Positive
Negative Positive
218
breaking gear, etc.) of exceptional events. The
limitation criteria which have been indentified
and proposed in the three C matrices certainly
do not exhaust all problems relative to control :
new proposals will consent the amplification
both of the extent and efficac y of actions of
limitation.
219
Figure 8.Representation of C matrix for a sanitary
landfill, in the phase extra ordinary
functioning.
220
matrix which reassumes all information
concerning environmental impact and directs
the final decision.
CONCLUSIVE CONSIDERATIONS
221
Figure 9. Representation of residual impact D
matrix in case of a sanitary landfill.
222
results of the study and a syntheti c and
efficient representation to the latter. The
seriousness and efficacy of the assessment must
on no account depend on the major or minor
graphic attraction or complexity of the tool.
223
orientation in the choice of the type of
installation.
224
of the final matrix. A final aspect, but by no
means the least important, is that of the
possibility offered by this tool of presenting in
and easy way the results of the impact study to
the public.
225
CHECKLIST
226
Will a granular drain be used at this site?
Y______N_____N/A
227
Will a geocomposite be used at this site?
Y______N_____N/A
228
Has the interface frictional behavior of the
geocomposite against adjacent layers been
considered for stabilit y analysis?
Y______N_____N/A
229
Have pipe material and installation
requirements been adequately specified?
Y______N_____N/A
5. Geo membrane.
230
Does the clay layer have a saturated
hydraulic conductivity of 1x10-7 cm/sec or
less? Y______N_____N/A
231
8. Geonet/ geocomposite drainage layer, Leak
Detection Layer if any (geonet/geonet with
geotextile laminated to one or both sides)
232
Have load, gradient, seating period and
boundary? Y______N_____N/A
233
2. Granular drainage layer, Leachate Collection
and Removal System(LCRS)
234
3. Geocomposite drainage layer, Leachate
Collection and Removal system(LCRS).
235
transmissivity requirements of the
geocomposite? Y______N_____N/A
1. Vegetation
236
Will plant density be sufficient to minimize
s o i l e r o s i o n t o n o m o r e t h a n 0 . 4 5 k g / 𝑚2 ( 2
tons per acre) per year as determined by the
Universal Soil Loss Equations?
Y______N_____N/A
2. Topsoil
237
Is traffic compaction specified using low
ground pressure equipment?
Y______N_____N/A
239
Have the reduction factors for creep,
intrusion, particulate clogging, biological
and chemical clogging been considered in the
hydraulic assessment of the geocomposite?
Y______N_____N/A
Have load, gradient, seating period and
boundary conditions been specified in the
transmissivity requirements of the
geocomposite? Y______N_____N/A
Has the interface frictional behavior of the
geocomposite against adjacent layers been
considered for stability analysis?
Y______N_____N/A
240
Is the hydraulic conductivity of the drainage
material greater than 1 x 10-2 cm/sec?
Y______N_____N/A
241
trench to prevent clogging ?
Y______N_____N/A
242
Do the contract documents adequately
specify material and installation
requirements? Y______N_____N/A
243
Have the state requirements for gas control
and treatment been determined?
Y______N_____N/A
244
If a geosynthetic gas collection layer is
used, does it have adequate flow cap acity?
(see also item 12) Y______N_____N/A
245
Is a monitoring schedule and contingency
plan specified for the collection system and
monitoring probes?
246
REFERENCES
Refereces
247
Cossuet al.( 1986).’Studio di
ImpattoAmbientaledell’impianto di depurazione
di Pero’,Ctip, Toma, Cogefar, Milano.
248
249
250