The Top 5 Tips On Leachate Treatment by Short Rotation Willow Coppicing

Many people face different challenges daily. Lots of people are called on to to deal with the challenge of leachate treatment by short rotation willow coppicing. Some apparently breeze through it, succeeding easily. Some do not ever succeed, although they try quite hard. Exactly why is this? Why is it that way? Exactly what are the key components that pre-determine probable success or failure? Which are the keys to finding yourself in that group that are going to enjoy success?

The true secret to success is in the planning, in identifying all important tasks beforehand. When you have an approach, once you know how, it is not difficult! And so, are you really serious about leachate treatment by short rotation willow coppicing? Why then you will want to get yourself "a track to run on", and know very well what it takes, up-front. In a nutshell, you'll want to acquire understanding of precisely what is involved and why it is important.

Let us discuss the 5 most essential things to know/steps to consider adopting to be able to succeed at leachate treatment by short rotation willow coppicing:

1. Short rotation willow coppicing which is often called SRC is a sustainable and low cost method for leachate treatment, but it will only ever be suitable for a very limited number of landfills. So why might this be important? The reader of this article should not run-off and assume it will be suitable or even approved by the regulatory authorities for his landfill site. So if I follow this route what is going to happen? A small proportion of landfill site owners will find that they can obtain cheap leachate treatment and disposal, while at the same time obtaining good green credentials for operating a sustainable energy efficient leachate treatment method.

2. The SRC method is based upon the irrigation of leachate into the willow crop only during periods when there is a soil-moisture deficit and this is mostly only during the summer months. That'll be apt to be important since the Environment Agency will expect that the irrigation only takes place when there will be a benefit to the crop from the nutrients in the leachate and those nutrients and all other contaminants must not run-off to pollute water courses nearby. And also, because if there is no benefit to a crop then the process is one of waste processing and not one of growing a valuable crop which will have willing buyers keen to use the chipped wood for a valuable purpose, such as heating homes and schools.

3. A successful application for a SRC method to treat leachate will have to tackle the problem of salinity build-up from leachate (which naturally has a higher than normal salt content) irrigated during the dry months. This is because if salt builds up in any soil the point will eventually be reached when it becomes too saline to support the willows. Controlled salinity flushing in wet weather in each autumn/ winter is essential for this method and it must be achieved without raising the salinity of nearby watercourses significantly at all. Those proposing SRC for leachate treatment must always have a "flushing method" or work-around for this problem, in their project. This could certainly also be a wise idea because the EA will normally expect this to be a problem considered and solved (at least in theory) before any submission for modification of the Environmental Permit can be passed.

4. The growing and harvesting of the short rotation coppicing can be sub-contracted to a local farmer. Alright, so what is really important about this? Most landfill operators don't posses the right equipment, or the trained staff, to undertake the farming work involved in cropping and chipping the SRC. Will there be some other reason? Some of the plant such as the willow coppice harvester equipment that most UK SRC use, is highly specialist and only used once every 3 years when the coppice shoots and foliage reach an optimum size/yield, and thus is equipment best hired rather than bought.

5. Leachate still, even from the most modern and highly controlled landfill sites, contains some additional trace quantities of metals, and like the salinity these must not be allowed to build up in the site. This means that they must be regulalrly monitored in most cases. And why might this become a good plan? As monitoring will normally show no measurable build-up for modern MSWs. What other reasons do you have back this up? The healthy appearance of the growing plants.

If you happen to really want to succeed at leachate treatment by short rotation willow coppicing, simply observe the above 5 steps. Then succeed and enjoy all of the benefits, enjoyment and fruits that go with your success. Disregarding them will set you up for sub par results. A lot worse results than might possibly otherwise be yours.

Discover some ways to understand leachate treatment by short rotation willow coppicing at our willow leachate treatment web site at leachate.co.uk/main/leachate-treatment/willow-coppicing-for-leachate-treatment.

Landfill Beset by Leachate Problems Seeks Police Escort - India

Not knowing the issues here, this article is hard to understand. It does not actually state why a police escort is sought, but presumably the local residents are so fed up with the landfill operator over bad-neighbour issues that there could be trouble for the contractors bringing in materials to remedy the problem. This seems crazy. If there are problems and the deliveries will reduce them the local people should allow the work to go ahead. Read the artcle below and visit the original web site by following the lick at the bottom of the page:

As part of resuming work on the sanitary landfill inside the Vilappilsala solid waste treatment plant, the City Corporation has requested the Police Department to provide escort for transporting the clay required for lining the various layers of the landfill.

According to officials, around 300 loads of clay will be required for layering the landfill which is being constructed to dispose of the garbage rejects that have accumulated inside the plant over the years.

Transportation of clay to the Vilappilsala plant would commence on February 13 and would continue for nearly a week, Deputy Mayor G. Happykumar said.

“Urban Affairs Minister P.K. Kunhalikutty had the other day convened a meeting of contractors who have taken up works of sanitary landfill and leachate treatment plant inside the plant and officials of the Kerala Sustainable Urban Development Project (KSUDP), the nodal agency for the projects. At the meeting, it was decided to immediately resume the pending work in the plant as per the directive of the High Court. As per this, we are resuming the work on the sanitary landfill. Work on the leachate treatment plant will be resumed soon,” Mr Happykumar said.

Corporation health officer D. Sreekumar said that the sanitary landfill would have the capacity of 95 tonnes of garbage rejects a day for seven years. The Rs.6 crore project was being funded by the Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM).

Mr. Happykumar said that construction of sanitary landfill and leachate teratment plant would be completed by March-April. “Whether the plant will be closed in the future or not, completion of these two project is crucial to combat the environment pollution in the plant. Both the accumulated rejects as well as leachate seeping from it will have to be properly treated, even if the government decided to decommission the plant,'' he said.

View the original article here

Perry County landfill gets permit to expand - The Buckeye Lake Beacon

COLUMBUS – Ohio EPA has issued Tunnel Hill Partners LP a final solid waste permit and modification to its wastewater discharge permit. The final air permit was issued earlier this summer. The company requested the permits to expand the landfill at 2500 Township Road 205, Route 2 in New Lexington. The landfill spans Pike, Harrison and Clayton townships in Perry County.

Ohio EPA held a public hearing on May 11, 2011, and an information session on June 3, 2010, to explain the proposed expansion, answer questions and receive public comments. Before issuing the permits, Ohio EPA reviewed the technical aspects of the applications and determined that they met the requirements of state and federal clean air and water quality standards and solid waste rules.

The solid waste permit will allow a lateral and vertical expansion at the 544-acre facility. The lateral expansion will increase the approved disposal area by 69 acres. The vertical expansion authorizes new disposal capacity above the previously authorized 49-acre disposal area. This will bring the landfill’s footprint to 118 acres. ( Currently, the landfill’s developed footprint is 11.7 acres, though it has been previously approved to occupy 49 acres.)

Additionally, the permit increases the authorized maximum daily waste receipt from 5,000 tons to 8,000 tons. If the landfill took in 8,000 tons of waste per day, it would take 11.5 years to fill. The landfill design includes a composite liner; leachate collection (the water that has come in contact with buried landfill wastes); surface water management; ground water monitoring; and final closure cap. The permit also requires 30 years of post-closure care and financial assurance for closure and post-closure care.

A draft modification to the landfill’s wastewater discharge permit took effect on September 1, 2011. The modification was required since the surface area contributing storm water runoff to the sedimentation pond will change. Landfill leachate is not permitted to go to the sediment pond. The permit limits discharges of pollutants into Rush Creek.

In June, Ohio EPA issued the company a final air permit that establishes allowable emissions from unpaved roadways and parking areas, the municipal solid waste landfill and rail unloading areas based on an anticipated increase in the waste acceptance rate. The air permit also establishes requirements for landfill gas collection and control.

The permits and related materials are available for review at Ohio EPA’s Southeast District Office (2195 Front Street, Logan, Ohio 43138) by first calling (740) 385-8501 or (800) 686-7330.

Issuance of the final solid waste permit and wastewater permit modification can be appealed to the Ohio Environmental Review Appeals Commission (ERAC). Appeals generally must be filed within 30 days of issuing the final action; therefore, Ohio EPA recommends that anyone wishing to file an appeal contact ERAC online or at (614) 466-8950 for more information.

View the original article here

Leachate Problems are Now Minor in Eastern Creek Sydney Landfill's 5 Clean-Up Orders in 5 Years

The locals say that there is a "Pollution trail to this megadump", and yet leachate problems affecting watercourses don't seem to be major, and are less acute than in the previous 4 years this article mentions. It is an operational hazard for a landfill owner that delivery vehicles may fly tip, and the public blame the site operator for transgressions which in truth are beyond the control of the landfill operator. Nevertheless, there is no excuse for leachate odours when it must surely be possible to recirculate leachate inoto old mature waste where it will be treated anaeribically and without odur within the waste? Read the article below about this case and visit the original article site by using the link below the quoted article:

IAN MALOUF, the man who boasts he is opening the biggest landfill site in the southern hemisphere at Eastern Creek, acknowledges pollution lapses by his waste empire. But he blames them on rogue employees and waste transporters.

(Video shows Lucas Heights Landfill, Sydney and not the landfill in the article.)

Mr Malouf, the self-made millionaire behind Dial a Dump, told The Sun-Herald that he runs a conscientious business and pollution offences this year arose from employees ''breaching strict guidelines and procedures of which they were adequately aware''.

But it is not the first time. Companies linked to Mr Malouf have been subject to five clean-up orders in the past five years, according to the Office of Environment and Heritage.

In April this year, the OEH received numerous complaints about odours again coming from Mr Malouf's Alexandra Landfill site. A surprise inspection found a pipe connected to infested leachate, which was pumping it into a stormwater drain.

Then, in June, OEH inspectors again visited the site and found his wife Larissa's company, Boiling Pty Ltd, had 170,000-cubic-metre stockpiles of waste contaminated with asbestos. Other pollution breaches date back to 2002, when Mr Malouf's company Alexandria Landfill Pty Ltd was ordered to clean up leachates after residents complained about a stench.

In 2007, another property, at Marulan, was found with 1300 cubic metres of asbestos-contaminated soil levelled and spread across it. This property belongs to Mr Malouf's mother-in-law, Kathleen Hopkins's company, Kathkin Pty Ltd, as trustee for his five children.

More below

A spokesman for the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, said he was made aware of the investigations by the OEH before attending the opening party for Mr Malouf's new venture at the Eastern Creek landfill site on December 8 - a $500,000 celebration that featured 600 guests, acrobats, fireworks and a lion cub.

Mr O'Farrell's spokesman said: ''That's why he went out of his way during his remarks at the opening to say the NSW government has a strong independent environmental regulator and he expects all companies to comply or face the full force of the law.''

But inquiries by The Sun-Herald have revealed that Mr Malouf - who with his wife has donated almost $40,000 to the Liberal Party in recent years - has not yet been granted a licence to operate the landfill known as the Genesis facility. The application is with the OEH, which is considering it.

Alexandria Landfill and Boiling are yet to complete the clean-up ordered at the Alexandria sites.

Mr Malouf said the property on Red Hills Road at Marulan was cleaned up at his own expense. He said it was inadvertently contaminated with asbestos after a delivery of landscaping materials to the family property.

''Naturally I would not endanger the health and wellbeing of my children intentionally,'' he said.

More below

Mr Malouf said the companies had never been prosecuted and that he ''would have preferred that these events necessitating clean-up notices had not occurred''.

In an emailed response to questions, he said: ''As the CEO of the organisation which has held environmental protection licences for almost 25 years, it is understandable that during that period of time one or two incidents would be expected to occur. Those employees never get named but as a hands-on CEO I must carry that burden.''

Mr Malouf lists his address as a mansion in Vaucluse which traded last year for $15 million and was once owned by the Adler family. He is a law school dropout who decided that his future was in waste. After leaving school, he has said, he raised $700 cash to buy a truck and went door-to-door offering to take rubbish to the tip. He bought a tipper truck and a bobcat and his mother answered the phones while his father helped shovel loads of rubbish. Over the past two decades, he has built the Dial a Dump empire which stretches from skip bins to waste and recycling.

Records show he bought the Alexandria Landfill site from Sydney City Council in 2000 and created a recycling facility. In 2002 he was issued with four clean-up notices after the OEH received complaints relating to odours. Inspectors found landfill leachate was causing the stench. Another clean-up notice was issued after failed attempts to fix the problem and complaints increased.

In 2005 Mr Malouf paid $143 million for the Eastern Creek site and he said he spent another $157 million developing it. It will boast state-of-the-art recycling technology. He has promised there will be no odours, and lining of the pit to stop leaching.

Asked about the leachate at the Alexandria site, Mr Malouf said: ''We are not aware that it [pumping of leachates] has ever happened and the matter is currently being investigated by OEH. Management has conducted an internal voluntary environmental audit and believes it has isolated the identity of a person or persons who may have potentially breached the site's operational procedures.''

The OEH report said the asbestos ''stockpiles'' at the same site were believed to have been generated by the processing of waste. Mr Malouf blamed a waste transporter for depositing the material. He said that transporter had now been banned.

The OEH said it had ''current'' investigations into the Malouf companies, which were preparing advice about how to fix the problems.

View the original article here

Vilappilsala Capacity of garbage plant inadequate

Leachate from yard frequently reaches the Karamana river

The garbage plant at Vilappilsala can effectively process only a portion of the solid waste that reaches the yard from the capital city, a report submitted by the Kerala State Pollution Control Board (PCB) to the High Court of Kerala has observed.

The plant has the capacity to process only 90 tonnes of solid waste a day.

The average quantity of waste reaching the 46-acre plant daily, until it was shut down on December 21, 2011, was around 203 tonnes, of which 114 tonnes was biodegradable waste, according to the report.

PCB environmental engineer K.R. Santhoshkumar and advocate commission K. Meera were tasked by the High Court to inspect the plant and report the facilities there.

The report further observed that the leachate flowing from two uncapped landfills inside the plant frequently reached the Karamana river through the Meenambally canal, causing river water pollution.

Although the leachate is collected in temporary ponds and treated using alum, lime and bleaching powder, these temporary measures were inadequate to check the pollution caused by the leachate.

The PCB has in its report directed the City Corporation to commission the permanent leachate treatment plant under construction inside the plant within 60 days.

The board has recommended the construction of a dike between the landfills and the stream to prevent flow of leachate into the river.In order to control the stench emanating from the windrow composts in the plant, the PCB has recommended frequent turning of windrows or providing forced aeration. As of now the windrows are turned every five days.

Another recommendation to control the stench was providing sufficient ventilation by providing adequate number of air blowers and bio-filters.

The PCB report also makes a set of recommendations for maintaining the general hygienic conditions inside the plant.

Providing a 100 meter buffer zone around the periphery of the plant is among these.

Ensuring source level segregation of plastic and biodegradable waste and transporting garbage to the plant in covered vehicles with leachate collection facility are among the other recommendations.

The PCB report has directed the Corporation to complete all the recommended modifications at the Vilappilsala plant within 60 days.

View the original article here

Guatali Leachate Raises Sewage Works Discharge Issues - Plus Funny Leachate Drinking Video!

Guam Waterworks Authority will need to be careful about accepting leachate at their sewage works. Leachate  being a very high strength liquid could nock out a smallish treatment works. Here, quoted below, is the article to which I refer:

A company that hopes to build a landfill in Santa Rita has proposed to truck leachate to the Hag't'a wastewater treatment plant, but hasn't sought the approval of the Guam Waterworks Authority.

WE HOPE YOU LIKE OUR (UNRELATED) LEACHATE VIDEO BELOW. WE FOUND IT AMUSING!

Wagdy Guirguis, president of Guam Resource Recovery Partners, said Tuesday that trucking leachate is just a backup plan that will never actually be used, but his company's assessment of its proposed Guatali landfill says otherwise.

And there have been no discussions about Waterworks accepting thousands of gallons of leachate, which is basically garbage juice, from the Guatali landfill, said agency spokeswoman Heidi Ballendorf.

If a truck full of leachate shows up tomorrow unannounced, it would be turned away, she said. Unless an agreement is negotiated to preserve water quality, the Waterworks will reject the waste, she said.

That could be a problem for Guam Resource Recovery Partners, which is seeking a permit for its Guatali landfill proposal from the Guam Environmental Protection Agency.

Guam EPA has asked the public to comment on the controversial proposal. Comments are due by Dec. 13.

Guam Resource Recovery Partners has proposed to build its landfill on an 87-acre parcel of Chamorro Land Trust property in the Guatali area of Santa Rita. The 22-acre landfill cells would be bracketed by wetlands and north of a river basin.

If the landfill permit is approved, Guam Resource Recovery Partners plans to collect garbage on the property for three to five years, at which point it hopes to install an incinerator, which will burn the waste to produce energy. An incinerator of this type is currently illegal in Guam, so the plan hinges on a revision of law and additional permits.

However, in the years before the incinerator is built, Guam Resource Recovery Partners plans to stockpile waste in its two landfill cells, and a landfill facility like that will inevitably produce leachate.

The Guatali landfill is expected to produce an average of 36,000 gallons of leachate daily, according to an impact assessment filed with the permit application. The total will increase in the rainy season, when more storm water seeps through the landfill.

According to the proposal, some of the leachate will be absorbed through a process called "recirculation," which filters the trashy liquid back through the landfill, where it is re-absorbed.

Any leftover leachate will be trucked to the Hag't'a wastewater treatment plant, the impact assessment states. The document doesn't estimate how much liquid would be sent to the treatment plant.

If Guatali goes as planned, no leachate will make the trip to Hag't'a, Guirguis said. Despite the statements in the impact assessment, Guirguis said Guam Resource Recovery Partners expects that all of the Guatali leachate will be absorbed or evaporated when it recirculates through the landfill.

The company hasn't negotiated an agreement with GWA because it doesn't expect it will need one, Guirguis said. Recirculation should dispose of all the landfill's leachate through absorption and evaporation, even during the rainy season, Guirguis said.

The landfill impact assessment says the exact opposite.

"It is expected that leachate generation will exceed losses due to absorption and evaporation during the rainy season," the Guam Resource Recovery Partners document states. "At such times, leachate will be trucked off site for disposal at the Agana wastewater treatment plant."

Regardless of whether it's a backup plan or not, if Guam Resource Recovery Partners wants to dispose of a single drop of leachate in Hag't'a, it will have to broker a deal with GWA, Ballendorf said.

For example, Gershman, Brickner & Bratton Inc., the federal receiver in charge of solid waste operations in Guam, including the government landfill in Inarajan, only was allowed to send leachate to the Inarajan wastewater treatment plant after negotiating a similar agreement.

Now the receiver is able to pump its leachate to GWA's southern facility, but the company had to spend millions to "do it right," Ballendorf said.

"They promised to fund a five-year study of leachate to make sure it doesn't hurt the wastewater plant," Ballendorf wrote in an email. "If the leachate becomes a problem, they have agreed to put in a pre-treatment facility to fix that. Money is put aside in escrow for that."

David Manning, a local representative for Gershman, Brickner & Bratton Inc., wrote in an email that the receiver funded some capacity upgrades to ensure the Inarajan plant wouldn't be overwhelmed by the increase in waste.

Guirguis insisted the Layon landfill's leachate pipe wasn't in operation yet, but Manning and GWA confirmed it was. Guirguis also said the Layon landfill was using the re-circulation method, but Manning said this was never considered by the receiver.

"While I am not an expert in this area, ... I do know that one of the primary reasons we did not consider the re-circulation method is that it apparently has significant potential for problems in wet climates," Manning said.

View the original article here

Landfill leachate pilot awarded - Environmental Expert (press release)

Dynatec was awarded a contract in late 2011 to provide a turnkey pilot system for landfill leachate treatment for the City of Calgary. Here is their news release.

(Above video is by another MBR company but we thought it would be of interest. Dynatec do not appear to have produced a video of their product for YouTube.)

Dynatec was the only company to respond to the tender that has experience in producing pilot systems of this type and proven experience with landfill leachate treatment systems.  CH2M Hill is the city's engineer. The contract value is around $1M.  The system is expected to start up later this year.

Landfill leachate is a difficult wastewater to treat.

The leachate to be treated in this project includes high BOD and COD, heavy metals, and high ammonia. We face the challenge to evaluate treatment processes to either discharge to a POTW or directly to surface or ground water. The system will have to operate under extreme conditions with temperatures reaching -400. The system is designed for flexibility to evaluate different treatment processes.

Dynatec will use chemical pretreatment followed by our Hi-Rate MBR with aerobic and anoxic (MLE process) and a two-pass RO system. The pilot system will be containerized for mobility because the city wants to be able to test the process at other facilities.

Why Dynatec?  Dynatec has extensive experience in difficult wastewater treatment applications such as this one. Projects like the hazardous landfill in Bellevue, MI have given us the experience required to succesfully execute this type of project.

View the original article here