Outer Loop Landfill EPA/WMI Bioreactor...
Transcript of Outer Loop Landfill EPA/WMI Bioreactor...
EPA
Outer Loop LandfillEPA/WMI Bioreactor Research
2nd Intercontinental Landfill Research SymposiumAsheville, NC
14 October 2002
David CarsonOffice of Research and Development
National Risk Management Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH, USA
EPA
Presentation Content
uEPA Bioreactor CRADA with Waste Management, Inc.» Initial Data from Research Project
uSupporting Research
uDiscussion Questions
EPA
Bioreactor Fundamentals
u In simplest form, leachate reintroduced to the waste mass
u In more complex forms, sequenced addition of liquids, air or other combinations performed with aim of controlled, accelerated degradation
EPA
Bioreactors – Potential Benefits
u Bioreactors reduce long-term environmental risk
u Bioreactors act as on-site leachate pre-treatment systems, produce less potent leachate
u New bioreactors require relatively few physical modifications compared to traditional landfills
u Bioreactor techniques may be applicable to landfill remediation
u Bioreactors produce the same amount of methane, but at a faster rate corrective actions.
EPA
Key Performance Objectives
uAs a research effort: identify key operating parameters and develop guidance on operation and monitoring
uDemonstrate environmental protection benefits of bioreactor operational technique via enhanced control of leachate and gas
EPA
Bioreactors – Research Challenges
§ How can bioreactors enhance environmental protection?
§ Which bioreactor operational techniques most efficiently degradewaste?
§ How can operators distribute leachate and collect gas efficiently?
§ Is an interim cover necessary to cover a waste mass that is settling?
§ How do operators ensure physical stability over time?
§ How much moisture addition is optimal for degradation?
§ What limitations exist for natural degradation?
§ When can the landfill be “switched off” and closed?
§ Can post-closure care be reduced?
EPA
ORD Bioreactor Research
u Bioreactor CRADA» Cooperative Research and Development Agreement
with Waste Management Inc.— Share tasks and information— Signed in 2000 designed to end in 2005
u Supporting and Related Research Projects» State-of-the-Practice of Bioreactor Landfills» Microbial Temporal Analysis of Waste Degradation» Liner/GCL Interaction with MSW Leachate
u Upcoming EPA Bioreactor Workshop in February 2003
EPA
CRADA Bioreactor Research Team
NRMRL Bioreactor Team
<-- CRADA -->
Contractor Support
WMI Site Personnel
Waste ManagementBiosites Group
Gary HaterRoger Green
David CarsonContainment
Larry WetzelSolids Sampling
Jennifer GoetzSolids Sampling
Contractor SupportIn House
Wendy Davis-HooverSolids Decomposition
Bruce HarrisGas Emissions
Contractor SupportField
Susan ThorneloeLandfill Gas
Fran KremerProject Coordination
Contractor SupportStatistics & Data Mgt.
EPA
CRADA Project Objectives
§ To determine the parameters and trends that should be monitored to control and assess the performance of a bioreactor landfill.§ Leachate§ Gas Management/Fugitive Emissions§ Solids Decomposition
§ Two primary sites§ Area 7 – New fill§ Area 5 – Existing fill to be retrofitted, and will use
nitirified leachate to control ammonia levels§ Shared experimental control area
EPA Outer Loop Landfill, Louisville, KY
Unit 5RetrofitAnaerobic
Unit 7.3Control
Unit 7.4NewAerobic/Anaerobic Sequence
EPA
Experimental Design
u Facultative Landfill Bioreactor (FLB) and Aerobic-Anaerobic Landfill Bioreactor (AALB) treatments
u Conventional (no leachate addition) landfill control
u Treatment and control units composed of independent, paired cells
AALBA
AALBB
FLBA
FLBB
CTLA
CTLB
Received Waste2001
Received Waste1996-1998
Received Waste1999-2000
Source: Jim Markwiese, Neptune and Co.
EPA
Critical Measures
Example: Volatile Organic Acids
Critical measures were selected to capture waste stabilization
[ V
OA
] (
mg
/L)
Acclimation
Maturation
TransitionAcidogenesis
Methanogenesis
TimeSource: Jim Markwiese, Neptune and Co.
EPA
Critical Measures
uLeachate»BOD, COD, Temperature, pH, VOA’s
uMunicipal Solid Waste/Solids»Biochemical Methane Potential, Organic
Solids, Temperature, Settlement (GPS), Density, pH, Moisture Content
uGas»Methane, Carbon Dioxide, Oxygen, Volume
Source: CRADA Quality Assurance Project Plan Final 21 SEP 2001
EPA Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Outer Loop Unit 5
EPA
Unit 5 Trench Schematic
TYPICAL LATERAL CROSS SECTION
GROUND
GROUNDSURVEY POINTS
VALVE VAULT (12 “ CCP)
SURVEY POINTS
SURVEYPOINT
SURVEY POINTS
RISER TOGAS HEADER
GASRISER
THERMOCOUPLEMONITORING
WELL
SURVEY POINT3 “ HDPE PERFORATED DISTRIBUTION PIPE
3 “ HDPE SOLIDLEACHATE
DISTRIBUTION PIPEGAS
COLLECTIONPIPE
THERMOCOUPLEMONITORING WELL
PIEZOMETER
GAS HEADERPIPE (SOLID)
3 “ LEACHATERISER PIPE (SOLID)
VALVE
PIEZOMETER
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Unit 5 Trench Infiltration/Gas Collection Gallery
MUNICIPALSOLID WASTE
TIRE CHIPS
FLUFFEDSOLID WASTE
LIQUID PIPE DISTRIBUTION
LANDFILL GASCOLLECTION PIPE
COVER
THERMOCOUPLE MONITORING WELL2.5 ‘
30 “
7 ‘ to 12 ‘
APPROX. 5 ‘
2 ‘ to 3 ‘
6 “
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Unit 5 Sub Cell ArrangementGas Monitoring
1 5
4
Northmeteringstation
Southmeteringstation
32
to flare
N5.2 a and 5.2b
North5.1a and 5.2b
South
EPA Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Outer Loop Unit 7
EPA
Initial ResultsUnit 5Gas
EPA
Unit 5.1 Gas Composition vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Neptune, Inc.
LeachateInjectionBegins
EPA
Unit 5.2 Gas Composition vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Neptune, Inc.
LeachateInjectionBegins
EPA
Modeled v. Actual Methane ProductionUnit 5
1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
methane production
(ft3/min)
0
100
200
300
400
500
k=0.03
k=0.07
k=0.05
MODEL ASSUMPTIONS:2,085,748 tons (1995-2001)
L0=1.6 ft3/lbcollection efficiency= 100%
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Modeled v. Actual Methane ProductionUnit 5
9/1/2001 12/1/2001 3/1/2002 6/1/2002
methane production
(ft3/min)
0
100
200
300
400
500
k=0.03
k=0.05
k=0.07
sdf
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Initial ResultsUnit 5
Leachate
EPA
Outer Loop Unit 5 Leachate Sampling
EPA
Outer Loop Unit 7 Leachate Sampling
EPA
Unit 5Cumulative Liquid Addition and AUF vs. Time
5/1/2001 9/1/2001 1/1/2002 5/1/2002
gallons
0
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
2500000
3000000
AUF
0.810
0.812
0.814
0.816
0.818
0.820
0.822
0.824
0.826
0.828
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Unit 5Liquid Addition and Leachate Removal vs. Time
CUMULATIVE LIQUID ADDITIONCUMULATIVE LEACHATE REMOVAL
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
51A(gallons)
500000
1000000
1500000
200000051B
52B
1/02 3/02 5/02 7/02 9/02 11/02
52A
1/02 3/02 5/02 7/02 9/02 11/02
500000
1000000
1500000
2000000
EPA
Unit 5 LeachateBOD/COD vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Neptune, Inc.
LeachateInjectionBegins
EPA
51A
05/01 09/01 01/02 05/02
(gal
lons
)
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
(mg/
L)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
pH (
s.u.
)
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
tem
pera
ture
(o C
)
20
25
30
35
40
cumulative liquid added
BOD COD pH
leachate temperature
Unit 5.1A Leachate Composition vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Initial ResultsUnit 5Solids
EPA
Baseline Waste Sampling
EPA
Baseline Waste Sampling
EPA
Solids Analysis
EPA
Unit 5.1AWaste and Ambient Temperature and Leachate Addition vs. Time
04/12/02 04/19/02
Liquid Volume (gallons)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Temperature
(oC)
0
10
20
30
40
51A T04 Ambient
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
EPA
Unit 5 Waste Density vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
06/01 10/01 02/02 06/02 10/02
(tons/yd3)
0.810
0.812
0.814
0.816
0.818
0.820
0.822
0.824
0.826
0.828
fgd
EPA
Unit 5 Waste Volume vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
06/01 10/01 02/02 06/02 10/02
waste volume
(yd3)
2520000
2530000
2540000
2550000
2560000
2570000
2580000
jkil
EPA
Unit 5 Airspace Recovery vs. Time
Figure Courtesy of Waste Management, Inc.
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
airs
pace
vol
ume
chan
ge (p
erce
nt)
0
5
10
15
EPA
Fugitive Air Emissions Monitoring
EPA
Static FTIR - Background
EPA
Scanning FTIR
EPA
Summary
uProject is in the initial stages of a multiyear study»This project, coupled with supporting research
will enhance understanding of bioreactors—Project XL—Assessment of Bioreactor Performance
StudyuEarly bioreactor results are as expected
EPA
CRADA Next Steps
uContinue Monitoring»Revise Monitoring Plan as Needed
u Issue Interim Report in 2003
u Issue Detailed Technical Report in 2005
EPA
Discussion Questions
uQ. How effective is bioreactor technology in achieving desired aims?
u A. Too early to tell at this project, but beneficial trends as expected.
uQ. What research gaps exist?u A. Which monitoring parameters needed at working fills
to maintain control.uQ. What challenges were faced?u A. Continuity of operations, retrofitting of system to
existing fill, changing waste stream, daily operations, permit proceedings
EPA
Discussion Questions (cont’d)
uQ. What recommendations can be made for future design and operation?
uA. Waste placement planning, gas collection timing
uQ. How were instruments used in process control?
uA. Parameter control is direct for some parameters, delayed for others, data management is a concern
EPA