AREA A/B ENGINEERING REPORT - Waste Management

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Geosyntec Consultants Integrated Systems for Overlapping Protection: Managed MSW landfills may have differences in designs and in operational methods to reflect local climate, geology, and adjacent land use. However, effective landfill designs consider these site-specific differences and appropriately incorporate the systems necessary to optimize landfill performance and provide integrated waste containment, leachate management, and landfill gas control. In this way, no single element is relied upon to protect human health and the environment. It is the combination of multiple systems and active management (including monitoring) that provides a comprehensive level of protection. Empirical studies of liner quality and impacts to groundwater downstream of Subtitle D-lined landfills using site-specific data indicate that properly installed liner systems and effectively maintained leachate collection systems can prevent leachate impacts to groundwater. For example, a recent study that included more than 60,000 data records collected from some 740 monitoring wells installed at over 100 landfills showed no evidence of leachate impacts to groundwater from Subtitle D-lined cells. These results are consistent with earlier USEPA studies on the effectiveness of engineered liners to contain MSW leachate. Planning for Care After Closure: There is considerable empirical evidence that the modern managed MSW landfill is a safe and responsible long-term waste management solution. Tools exist to evaluate appropriate levels of care after closure, and monitoring can confirm that any changes made are protective of human health and the environment. Because leachate and landfill gas concentrations and volumes decrease during the post closure period, a performance-based evaluation of threat after closure can represent not only current conditions but future conditions as well. Regulations stipulate that post closure care be provided for a period of 30 years, unless it is demonstrated to the regulatory agency that any change would not harm human health and the environment. As summarized in the post-closure care guidance document published by the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC) in 2006, enhanced landfill management has the potential to end regulated post-closure care activities earlier than the traditional 30 years. ITRC is a coalition of state environmental regulators working with the USEPA and other federal partners, industry, and stakeholders to advance innovative environmental decision making (see www.itrcweb.org for more information regarding the work of ITRC). Planning for Care after Closure Quote from the Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC) Technical Regulatory Guidance document on Post-Closure Care (September 2006): “Ongoing evaluation of MSW leachate quality and landfill gas production indicates that leachate quality improves and landfill gas production decreases from the time of closure in a manner that makes the 30-year prescriptive post-closure care term reasonable for financial planning purposes.” MD10186.doc 13 29 March 2009
Beyond <strong>Waste</strong> Containment – Landfills as a Resource Geosyntec Consultants The science of waste containment, degradation, and treatment continues to evolve in response to industry and socio-economic needs. Three areas of study and advanced use of MSW landfills as a resource beyond providing a responsible means of waste disposal include the following. • Landfill gas-to-energy (LFGE), in which the methane contained in landfill gas is utilized to provide renewable green energy and further optimize greenhouse gas emission reductions through replacement of fossil-fuel derived energy. • Enhanced waste treatment through wet landfill operation (that is, where the landfill is operated as a waste treatment vessel rather than a storage unit and generally cited in industry references as “bioreactor operation”). Enhanced waste treatment landfills are engineered to degrade the waste faster, speeding up landfill gas production, and facilitating more efficient energy use (thus decreasing the time for which that active landfill gas management is needed). • Carbon sequestration, in which carbon is permanently stored in the landfill and removed from the global carbon cycle, leading to more accurate inventories of greenhouse gas emissions from solid waste management activities. With effective end-use planning, the managed landfill can also provide beneficial use of the land to sustain wildlife habitats and parks and offer “green space solutions” (such as golf courses or walking trails). In summary, the technical, regulatory, and operations sectors of the solid waste management industry continue to study the science of landfill systems and waste degradation in order to improve landfill efficiency, environmental compliance, and responsiveness to public needs. Peerreviewed studies have concluded that actively managed modern MSW landfills are effective in containing and treating solid waste, and preventing impact to the environment. Moreover, they can be used as a source of renewable green energy for local communities and industries. MD10186.doc 14 29 March 2009
Page 1 and 2: ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AT THE MAN
Page 3 and 4: TABLE OF CONTENTS Geosyntec Consult
Page 5 and 6: TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Geosy
Page 7 and 8: TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Geosy
Page 9 and 10: DEFINITIONS AND LIST OF ACRONYMS AC
Page 11 and 12: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Geosyntec Consult
Page 13 and 14: Geosyntec Consultants time, the lan
Page 15 and 16: Long-Term Liner System Performance
Page 17 and 18: Geosyntec Consultants generation is
Page 19: Geosyntec Consultants cover systems
Page 23 and 24: Geosyntec Consultants • Section 3
Page 25 and 26: Geosyntec Consultants Required by r
Page 27 and 28: • Landfill gas system monitoring
Page 29 and 30: Geosyntec Consultants An extensive
Page 31 and 32: 1.4.2 Permanent Storage of Biogenic
Page 33 and 34: 2. REGULATORY OVERSIGHT OF MANAGED
Page 35 and 36: 2.2.1 Siting Considerations Geosynt
Page 37 and 38: Geosyntec Consultants The LCRS is i
Page 39 and 40: • Control moisture and percolatio
Page 41 and 42: 3. DESIGN COMPONENT SYSTEMS OF A MA
Page 43 and 44: Prescriptive Final Cover System 1.
Page 45 and 46: 3.2.2 Key Environmentally Protectiv
Page 47 and 48: Geosyntec Consultants selected and
Page 49 and 50: Geosyntec Consultants • Leachate
Page 51 and 52: Geosyntec Consultants secondary, an
Page 53 and 54: Geosyntec Consultants along with re
Page 55 and 56: Geosyntec Consultants cover surface
Page 57 and 58: 3.5 Gas Management System Geosyntec
Page 59 and 60: Geosyntec Consultants • Passive c
Page 61 and 62: Geosyntec Consultants out certain p
Page 63 and 64: Geosyntec Consultants on the curren
Page 65 and 66: 4. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A M
Page 67 and 68: Geosyntec Consultants permit condit
Page 69 and 70: Geosyntec Consultants • Standard
Page 71 and 72:
Geosyntec Consultants Design of the
Page 73 and 74:
Geosyntec Consultants waste constit
Page 75 and 76:
5. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AT MANA
Page 77 and 78:
Geosyntec Consultants safeguards fo
Page 79 and 80:
Geosyntec Consultants LFG migration
Page 81 and 82:
Geosyntec Consultants Other example
Page 83 and 84:
Geosyntec Consultants operation is
Page 85 and 86:
Geosyntec Consultants landfill syst
Page 87 and 88:
Geosyntec Consultants behind the li
Page 89 and 90:
Table 6-0: Summary of Section 6 Tab
Page 91 and 92:
Containment Attribute Siting and De
Page 93 and 94:
Waste Treatment Attribute Siting an
Page 95 and 96:
Environmental and Performance Monit
Page 97 and 98:
they help reduce the dependency on
Page 99 and 100:
Geosyntec Consultants that landfill
Page 101 and 102:
7.4 Increased Beneficial End Use Op
Page 103 and 104:
8. REFERENCES Geosyntec Consultants
Page 105 and 106:
Geosyntec Consultants Eid H.T., Sta
Page 107 and 108:
Geosyntec Consultants Koerner R.M.,
Page 109 and 110:
Geosyntec Consultants Sangam H.P.,
Page 111 and 112:
Geosyntec Consultants Wardwell R.E.
Page 113 and 114:
I II III IV V VI VII VIII Figure A-
Page 115 and 116:
• Long-terms trends in MSW leacha
Page 117 and 118:
Geosyntec Consultants sites of diff
Page 119 and 120:
A2.1.5 Development of a “Biofilte
Page 121 and 122:
Geosyntec Consultants impact health
Page 123 and 124:
Geosyntec Consultants updated despi
Page 125 and 126:
Geosyntec Consultants Gibbons R.D.,
Page 127 and 128:
Geosyntec Consultants Pivato A., Mo
Page 129 and 130:
Geosyntec Consultants Youcai Z., Hu
Page 131 and 132:
• Long-term performance of leacha
Page 133 and 134:
AVERAGE LCRS FLOW RATE (lphd) 100,0
Page 135 and 136:
B3. LONG-TERM PERFORMANCE OF LEACHA
Page 137 and 138:
B4. FINAL COVER SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Page 139 and 140:
Geosyntec Consultants compacted but
Page 141 and 142:
Geosyntec Consultants various pract
Page 143 and 144:
Geosyntec Consultants In summary, a
Page 145 and 146:
REFERENCES Geosyntec Consultants Ab
Page 147 and 148:
Geosyntec Consultants Humer M., Lec
Page 149 and 150:
Geosyntec Consultants United States
Page 151 and 152:
Geosyntec Consultants These three s
Page 153 and 154:
Geosyntec Consultants discontinue o
Page 155 and 156:
C4. LONG-TERM INTEGRITY OF LANDFILL
Page 157 and 158:
Geosyntec Consultants well known, t
Page 159:
Geosyntec Consultants Zekkos D., Br
show all

AREA A/B ENGINEERING REPORT - Waste Management

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?