Pengelolaan Sampah & Limbah Perkotaan

INTRODUCTION: GEOLOGY FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT

Dr. Doni Prakasa E Putra Jurusan Teknik Geologi Fakultas Teknik UNIVERSITAS GADJAH MADA

WASTE TYPES
Municipal solid waste (MSW) is a waste type that includes predominantly household waste (domestic waste) with sometimes the addition of commercial wastes collected by a municipality within a given area.

Hazardous waste is a waste with properties that make it dangerous or potentially harmful to human health or the environment.

LOCATION OF DISPOSAL? Radioactive wastes are waste

types containing radioactive chemical elements that do not have a practical purpose. They are sometimes the products of nuclear processes, such as nuclear fission

Four Characteristics of Hazardous Waste

Ignitability wastes that pose a fire hazard Corrosivity wastes that have ability to corrode materials Reactivity wastes that tend to react spontaneously Toxicity wastes that may release toxicants

Unit Waste Generation

Current Situation

RECENT PROBLEM

RECENT PROBLEM
SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL SITE

AIR POLLUTION

CAUSES

WATER POLLUTION
SURFACE WATER & GROUNDWATER

SOIL POLLUTION
Land Capability is Low for Waste Disposal Site

Social Problems

Average chemical composition of municipal landfill leachates

Constituent Unit Indonesia Newa Oldb 7.7 7.9 1848 9830 1.4 < 0.01 2.4 <0.005 <0.01 <0.005 <0.10 <0.02 <0.005 1960 153 36.8 0.64 35.8 < 1.00 3.2 125 24.9 445 57.6 1439 66 3251 67 5867 17.6 North America New Old 5.2 7.3 9200 1400 12620 1144 500 2 49 0.5 0.1 45 <1 742 197 989 8 7 5 277 81 2136 254 22650 81 14950 COD BOD TOC Great Britain New Old 6.7 7.5 654 27 33 0.5 0.020 0.015 0.130 0.090 0.130 0.130 0.280 0.200 0.420 0.170 17 1.1 676 67 384 250 2241 151 36817 2307 18632 374 12217 733 Germany New Old 6 8 780 15 25 0.7 0.006 0.006 0.3 0.3 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.2 0.2 5 0.6 2100 2100 1350 1350 3 3 500 80 470 180 1200 600 1100 1100 1350 1350 22000 3000 13000 180 7000 1300

pH EC S/cm TDS mg/L Total Iron mg/L Manganesse mg/L Cadmium mg/L Chromium mg/L Copper mg/L Lead mg/L Nickel mg/L Zinc mg/L Chloride mg/L Total Nitrogen mg/L Nitrate mg/L Phosphate mg/L Sulphate mg/L Magnesium mg/L Calcium mg/L Potassium mg/L Sodium mg/L COD mg/L BOD mg/L TOC mg/L Description: EC Specific Electric Conductivity TDS Total Dissolved Solid

Chemical Oxygen Demand Biological Oxygen Demand Total Organic Carbon

Leachate production/percolation rate can be predicted using water balance method. It involves the elements of a water balance in which precipitation either runs off from the landfill or infiltrates as shown on equation below (Fenn et al, 1975 in Farquhar, 1989).
PERC = P RO ET S + G Where : PERC P RO ET S G

leachate percolation rate precipitation run off evapotranspiration soil moisture storage groundwater inflow

Selecting Land for Landfill Location

LAND CAPABILITY FOR WASTE DISPOSAL SITE
Earth Science Information

WASTE DISPOSAL SITE

LAND SUITABILITY FOR WASTE DISPOSAL SITE
EconomicalPoliticalSocial Risks & Benefits
Existing Land Use

Site Selection Objectives

Waste Disposal Site Criteria

Isolate solid and liquid waste protect surface and groundwater resources reduce potential problems related to local biology, air quality, traffic, social-economic issue, etc. Therefore, a potential sites suitability through: Geology Assessment and Environmental Impact Assessment

Planning Stage
GEOLOGY MAP HYDROGEOLOGY MAP

QUALITY OF HOST ROCK GROUNDWATER SUSCEPTIBILITY TO CONTAMINATION LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY HYDROLOGY CLIMATE LANDUSE TRANSPORTATION SOCIAL ASPECT

Phase I

Phase II

Phase III

OBJECTIVES
LEARN & UNDERSTANDING HOW TO EVALUATE/DETERMINE THE SITE LOCATION OF WASTE DISPOSAL BASED ON THE GEOLOGY CONDITION

UNDERSTANDING THE GEOLOGICAL FACTORS OF LAND

UNDERSTANDING THE GEOLOGIC PARAMETERS FOR SITING LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES

UNDERSTANDING THE WAY OF ANALYSIS & EVALUATION FOR SITING LAND DISPOSAL FACILITIES BASED ON THE GEOLOGIC PARAMETERS

Important Parameters

QUALITY OF HOST ROCK GROUNDWATER SUSCEPTIBILITY TO CONTAMINATION LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY HYDROLOGY CLIMATE

Quality of Host Rock

Regularity of Rocks/Deposits Structural Integrity

Physical, Geotechnical & (Geochemical ) Properties of Earth Materials

Rocks vs Soils Type of Rocks Igneous Rocks (Batuan Beku) Sedimentary Rocks (Batuan Sedimen) Metamorphic Rocks (Batuan Metamorf)

ROCK STRENGTH
In a very general sense, rock strengths are related to origin; e.g., dense igneous rocks are stronger than dense sedimentary rocks Rock strength is also related to: Texture (interlocking textures are stronger) Anisotropy (the existence of preferred failure planes) Mineralogy (e.g., quartz is stronger than calcite) Moisture Content (dry rocks tend to be stronger than saturated rocks) Degree and Type of Cement (e.g., quartz is stronger than calcite and complete cementation makes rock stronger than just partial cementation)

Rock Weathering Classification

Grade *

Term

R6 R5

Extremely strong Very strong

R4

Strong

R3

Medium strong

R2

Weak

R1

Very weak

R0

Extremely weak

Table 11.2: Field estimates of uniaxial compressive strength UCS Point Field estimate of strength Examples (MPa) Load Index (MPa) > 250 > 10 Specimen can only be chipped with a Fresh basalt, chert, diabase, gneiss, geological hammer granite, quartzite 100 to 250 4 to 10 Specimen requires many blows of a Amphibolite, sandstone, basalt, geological hammer to fracture it gabbro, gneiss, granodiorite, limestone, marble, rhyolite, tuff 50 to 100 2 to 4 Specimen requires more than one Limestone, marble, phyllite, blow of a geological hammer to sandstone, schist, shale fracture it 25 to 50 1 to 2 Cannot be scraped with a pocket Claystone, coal, concrete, schist, knife, specimen can be fractured with shale, siltstone a single blow from a geological hammer 5 to 25 ** Can be peeled with a pocket knife Chalk, rocksalt, potash with difficulty, shallow indentation made by firm blow with point of a geological hammer 1 to 5 ** Crumbles under firm blows with point Highly weathered or altered rock of a geological hammer, can be peeled by a pocket knife 0.25 to 1 ** Indented by thumbnail Stiff fault gouge

* Grade according to Brown (1981). ** Point load tests on rocks with a uniaxial compressive strength < 25 MPa are likely to yield highly ambiguous results.

Differences in the rock textures

Igneous isometric

Differences in the rock textures

Sedimentary rocks have layers, bedding, strata

Regularity of Rocks/Deposits

Photo: Putra, 2001

Dipping and Cleavage

Moderate Permeability DIPPING

Low Permeability

Differences in the rock textures

Metamorphic rocks are banded, and foliated

Quality of Host Rock: Structural Integrity

Seismic Risk Zones (Faults, Fractures) or other hazard such as landslide/rockfall Dipping and Cleavage Weathering

Fault and Fractures

Photo: Putra, 2001

Hutchinson, 2000

Structural Geology
Hutchinson and Diederichs, 1996

Relative Properties Strong Massive

Stope

Fair Discrete Joints

Weak Low Integrity

QUIZ
Batupasir-tufan/Tufaceous sandstone

Breksi Andesit/Andesitic Breccia

Batulempung-tufan/Tufaceous claystone Batugamping/Limestone/Kalkstein

Seismic Risk Zones

Should be not an areas where a previous high magnitude earthquake is occurred relate to faulting and jointing of rocks (fractures). The present of faults and fractures is extremely important, because (1) its increase the permeability of host rocks, (2) its provide natural pathway for flow of contaminants, even in low permeability and lowporosity rock. Land disposal facility should be placed at least 60 m / 200 feet from the fault.

Groundwater/Aquifer Susceptibility to Contaminant

Regionally can be assessed using Hydrogeological Map Locally should be assessed using intrinsic groundwater vulnerability mapping, such as: (1) Le Grand Method, (2) GOD and/or GODS Method, (3) DRASTIC Method, (4) SVV Method (Putra, 2007), etc

Rock Properties Affecting Groundwater

AQUIFER AQUICLUDE AQUIFUG AQUITARD

CONFINING BED/LAYER

Hydraulic Conductivity

Hydrogeological Map

Type of Aquifer

Le Grand Method (unconsolidated rocks)

Evaluation of Pollution Potential According to Le Grand Method

Total Point 04 48 8 12 12 25 25 35 Possibility of Pollution Imminent Probable or possible Possible but not likely Very improbable Impossible

Quiz
Perkirakan kerentanan area terhadap pencemaran airtanah dari suatu TPA jika: host rocks berupa endapan pasir kasar kedalaman muka airtanah 5 m kemiringan muka airtanah 10% jarak area tersebut dari sumber pencemar 0m Gunakan LeGrand Method!

GOD Method

GODS Method

Quiz
Suatu lokasi calon TPA memiliki karakteristik berikut: Lapisan tanah penutup berukuran lanau (silt) Jenis batuan volcanic tuff, Sistem akuifer bebas (unconfined aquifer) Kedalaman muka airtanah 15 m Pertanyaan : Bagaimana kerentanan area tersebut terhadap pencemaran airtanah? (gunakan metoda GODS)

LOCAL TOPOGRAPHY

Nearness to Surface Water Bodies Variation in Elevation Slope

TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP
A

INFORMATION GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION

ELEVATION SLOPE STREAMS/RIVERS
B

EXISTING LANDUSE

Local Topography: Variation in Elevation

High Topographic Relief High Hills or Deep Valleys and commonly related to deep water table. Low Topographic Relief typically has a shallow water table

The strength requirements are less for a facility built on a flat slope than on a steep one

Local Topography: Nearness to Surface Water Bodies

A high elevation site may have the advantage of remoteness from the water table, but the disadvantage of contaminating a larger zone

Hydrology & Climate

Hydrology: - Proximity to surface water distance from the land disposal facilities - Possibility of flooding (Flood Hazard) Climate: - Precipitation low precipitation area - Wind slow wind (defined as below 3 m/s)

Thank You For Your Attention