EXPECTED ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS OF THE PRODUCED LEACHATE FROM ERBIL LANDFILL SITE ON THE SURROUNDED WATER SOURCES

Shuokr Q. Aziz1,*, Hamidi A. Aziz2, Mohammed J.K. Bashir3, Salem S. Abu Amr4 1,*: Dept. of Civil Eng., College of Eng., University of SalahaddinErbil, Iraq; Corresponding author, shoker71@yahoo.com 2: School of Civil Eng., Eng. Campus, USM, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia, cehamidi@eng.usm.my 3: Faculty of Eng. and Green Tech. (FEGT), Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, 31900 Kampar, Perak, Malaysia, gaborbash@hotmail.com 4: School of Civil Eng., Eng. Campus, USM, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia, sabuamr@hotmail.com

ABSTRACT Currently, estimated buried municipal solid waste at Erbil landfill site (ELS) exceeded 600 tons/day. Based on the age of ELS, the landfill is considered as Level 2 (sanitary landfill with daily cover), anaerobic landfill, and in the methane formation phase. Generated leachate from ELS regards as stabilized leachate. The values of parameters such as pH (>7.5), NH3-N (> 400 mg/L), COD (<4000 mg/L), BOD5 (100-3500 mg/L), BOD5/COD (< 0.1), TOC (5200 mg/L), TOC/COD (> 0.5), NO2-N (0.1-1.5 mg/L), and TDS (1100- 6400 mg/L) for mature leachate at ELS were explained. Additionally, the characteristics of surface water and groundwater were studied. Movement of the produced raw leachate from ELS causes problems for the surrounded environment, particularly water sources. Based on the outcomes of this work, the appropriate collection and treatment of produced hazardous leachate from ELS before discharge to the natural environment has been made a legal requirement to prevent pollution of water resources and avoid both acute and chronic toxicities. KEYWORDS: Landfill leachate, solid waste, water sources, environmental pollution, Erbil I. INTRODUCTION Municipal solid waste (MSW) disposal by sanitary landfilling continues to be extensively permitted and employed due to its economic benefits. Landfilling has been shown to be the most economic MSW disposal method when compared with other means of disposal such as compositing and incineration etc. [1]. Besides its advantages, the production of leachate is one of the major shortcomings of landfills. Gas and inert solids are other outputs of landfills. Leachate is liquid formed primarily by the percolation of precipitation water through an open landfill or through the cap of a completed site. Leachates may contain large amounts of organic contaminants measured as chemical oxygen demand (COD), 5 days biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5), ammonia-nitrogen (NH3-N), significant concentration of heavy metals, and inorganic salts. It is also rich in phenol, nitrogen, and phosphorus. If not treated and safely disposed, landfill leachate could be a potential source of surface and ground water contamination, as it could percolate through soils and subsoils, causing severe pollution
Copyright 2012 IUG. The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

to receiving waters [1-2]. Generally, the risks of the leachate on the natural environment are determined by comparing leachate characteistics with the standards. The nature of landfill leachate depends on the type of MSW being dumped, landfill age, moisture content, seasonal and weather variations, site hydrology, the stage of decomposition in a landfill, pH, and biodegradability ratio and it could be classified as young, intermediate, and stabilized. Obviously, as landfill age increases, the biodegradable fraction of organic pollutants in leachate decrease as an outcome of the anaerobic decomposition occurring in landfill site. Thus it contains much more refractory organics than young leachate [2-4]. Currently, there are a number of landfills in Erbil Districts, Iraq. Most are simply dumping grounds without any environmental protection. The resulting leachate is discharged directly into water courses and natural environment without any treatment, which can threaten the surrounding ecosystem, particularly in cases where landfills are located upstream of water intakes. In the extant literature, a gap of knowledge could be found regarding produced leachate from Erbil landfill site (ELS) and the expected threaten on the water sources. Thus, this study was focused on the risks of produced landfill leachate from ELS on the surrounded water sources. Previously, this kind of study has not been conducted.

II. MATERIALS AND METHODS A. Site Characteristics ELS is situated near Kani-Qrzhala Sub-District (from left-side of Erbil-Mosul main road) in Erbil City, Iraq. It is approximately 15 km far from city centre of Erbil City (Figure 1). The total landfill site area is 37 ha, but only a part is currently operational in receiving more than 600 tons of solid waste daily. This site was opened in 2001. Generally, this site has a natural sandy gravel and clay layers. The buried municipal solid waste (MSW) is mixed without proper separation of the components, Figure 2. So far, the scientific documents on MSW characteristics in Erbil City are very limited. Currently, a part of recyclable materials (particularly plastic, glass and metals) are separated by scavengers. Due to lack of scientific sanitary landfill design in this site, the produced landfill leachate mixes with the natural environment.

Copyright 2012 IUG.

The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

Erbil landfill site

Figure 1: Satellite image of Erbil landfill site [5]

Figure 2: Erbil landfill site

B. Types of Landfills Based on landfill structure, there were various types of landfill sites (Table1). This categorization of landfills is based on the landfill structure. Additionally and depending on Action Plan 1988-Malaysia, there were 4 levels improvement aimed for landfills [6] which were: Level 1: controlled dumping, Level 2: sanitary landfill with daily cover, Level 3: sanitary landfill with leachate circulation, and Level 4: sanitary landfill with leachate treatment facilities. ELS is remain within Level 2 and it is anaerobic landfill.
The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

Copyright 2012 IUG.

Table 1: Categorization of landfill structure [6] No. 1 Category Anaerobic landfill Anaerobic sanitary landfill Improved anaerobic sanitary landfill Semi-aerobic landfill Details Disposed solid wastes are filled in digged area of plane field or valley. The wastes are filled with water under anaerobic condition. Anaerobic landfill with cover like sandwich shape. Conditions of disposed wastes are similar as type 1. This kind has leachate collection system in the bottom of the landfill site. Other parameters are same as anaerobic sanitary landifll. The conditions are still anaerobic and moisture content is much less than anaerobic sanitary landfill. Leachate collection pipe is larger than the one of improved sanitary landfill. The openings of the pipe are surrounded by air and the pipe is covered with small crushed stones. Moisture content in disposed solid waste is low. Oxygen is supplied to solid waste from leachate collection pipe. Besides of the leachate collection pipe, air supply pipes are attached and air is obligated to enter the solid waste of which condition becomes more aerobic than semi-aerobic landfill.

Aerobic landfill

C. Characteristics of Landfill Laechate MSW placed in a sanitary landfill could undergo through a number of physical, chemical, and biological processes as said earlier. Aerobic and anaerobic decomposition of the organic materials results in both liquid (leachate) and gaseous end products. Produced leachate could contain large amounts of contaminants measured as COD, BOD5, NH3N, suspended solids, heavy metals, phenols, and phosphorus [1, 3, 7]. Generally, the pollutants in leachate could be classified into three groups: 1) Organic matter including dissolved organic matter (volatile fatty acids, humic and fulvic compounds); 2) Inorganic matter (NH3-N, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphate, chlorides, and sodium); and 3) Heavy metals such as iron, zinc, copper, lead, manganese etc. (Tables 2-3).

Copyright 2012 IUG.

The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

Table 2: Typical landfill leachate characteristics [8-9] Type of landfill leachate No. Parameter Unit Young (< 5 years) <6.5 mg/L >10000 0.51.0 80% VFAa mg/L <400 <0.3 g/L mg/L
b

Intermediate (510years) 6.57.5 400010000 0.10.5 530% VFAa + HFAb NAc NAc Low Medium
b

Stabilized (> 10 years) >7.5 <4000 <0.1 HFAb >400 >0.5 NAc Low Low

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
a

pH COD BOD5/COD Organic compound NH3-N TOC/COD Kjeldahl nitrogen Heavy metals Biodegradability

0.3 0.5

0.10.2 Low to medium Important

c

= Volatile fatty acids, =Humic and fulvic acids, and = Not available

Table 3: Landfill leachate constituent concentration ranges as a function of the degree of landfill stabilization [10] Phases Parameters Transition (0-5 years) BOD5 COD TOC Ammonia NO2--N TDS 100-11000 500-22000 100-3000 0-190 0.1-500 2500-14000

Acidformation (5-10 years) 1000-57000 1500-71000 500-28000 30-3000 0.1-20 4000-55000

Methane formation (10-20 years) 100-3500 150-10000 50-2200 6-430 0.1-1.5 1100-6400

Final maturation (>20 years) 4-120 30-900 70-260 6-430 0.5-0.6 1460-4640

Copyright 2012 IUG.

The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS A. Status of Erbil Landfill Site Figure 3 shows the schematic diagram of anaerobic, semi-aerobic, and aerobic landfills. Normally, landfill structure affects the characterization of produced leachate. The effect of landfill structure on the BOD5 concentration of landfill leachate is illustrated in Figure 4.

Figure 3: Schematic diagram of landfill design [11]

Copyright 2012 IUG. The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

Figure 4: Change in the BOD concentration of leachate by landfill type [11] In aerobic and semi-aerobic landfill types, the quality of landfill leachate improves importantly and more rapidly than in anaerobic landfills so that treatment costs for leachate could be reduced. In semi-aerobic system, the application of Fukuoka method results in much faster stabilization of landfill due to SPREP and JICA [11]: i) decrease in methane generation and therefore contributes to prevention of global warming, ii) enhanced settlement process of the landfill making it possible to return the finished landfill site to other uses, and iii) general effectiveness of semi-aerobic landfills based on the ability to continuously observe different performance parameters such as characteristics of landfill leachate (pH, colour, BOD5, COD, suspended solid, settlement, gases etc.). Finally, the aerobic conditions enhance the quality of formed landfill leachate by reducing the concentration of pollutants in the leachate and lowering the volume of produced gases; all of which guide to rapid stabilization of landfill leachate (Figures 3-4). Currently, ELS could be regarded as landfill with daily cover (Level 2) and anaerobic landfill. As mentioned previously, the concentration of pollutants for produced leachate from ELS (specifically concentration of organic matter) considered high when compared with semi-aerobic and aerobic landfills. B. Leachate Characteristics and Effects on the Water Sources In general, leachate characterization changes with the climatic regions in addition to the landfill operational practices. The main factors that affect the leachate characteristics are: 1) Waste composition, biodegradable or non-biodegradable, soluble or insoluble, organic or inorganic, liquid or solid, and toxic or nontoxic; 2) Design and operation of the landfill and its age; 3) Availability of moisture and oxygen; and 4) Site hydrology [12-13]. In addition, researchers studied landfill leachate characteristics in a number of countries (Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Hong Kong, South Africa, Korea, the United Kingdom, the Island of Mauritius, and New Zealand). The author reported that
Copyright 2012 IUG. The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

characteristics of landfill leachates throughout methanogenic phases of solid waste decomposition at very large landfills were remarkably regular, in spite of differences in solid waste types, climate, and countries (whether developed or developing) [6]. Obviously, as landfill age increases, the biodegradable fraction of organic pollutants in leachate decrease as an outcome of the anaerobic decomposition occurring in landfill site. Thus, mature or stabilized leachate contains much more refractory organics than young leachate. In this respect, young landfill leachate (age < 5 years) is typically characterized by high BOD5 (400013,000 mg/L) and COD (30,00060,000 mg/L) concentrations, fairly high amount of NH3-N (< 400 mg/L), high ratio of BOD5/COD (0.4 - 0.7), and a pH value < 6.5. In contrast, stabilized landfill leachate (age > 10 years) normally contains high quantity of NH3-N (> 400 mg/L), moderately high strength of COD (<4000 mg/L), and a low BOD5/COD ratio of less than 0.1 (Tables 2 and 3). Based on the age of ELS, landfill leachete at ELS could be considered as stabilized leachate; Characteristics of produced leachate from ELS are shown in Table 4. Table 4: Characteristics of Landfill leachate at ELS No. 123456789Parameter pH NH3-N (mg/L) COD (mg/L) BOD5 (mg/L) BOD5/COD TOC (mg/L) TOC/COD NO2N (mg/L) TDS (mg/L) Value > 7.5 > 400 mg/L <4000 mg/L 100-3500 < 0.1 50-2200 > 0.5 0.1-1.5 1100-6400

In Erbil City both surface and groundwater are used for drinking and other daily uses. Table 5 illustrates water quality for water sources (groundwater and river water) in Erbil City. Characteristics of groundwater and Greater-Zab river water were monitored during 12 months. Collection of samples and the experiments in the laboratory were carried out according to APHA [14]. To provide potable water for Erbil citizen, surface water from Greater-Zab treats via Ifraz treatment-plants; While, groundwater enters water distribution systems after chlorination process. If raw leachate is disposed without treatment, it could become a major source of water pollution because it can percolate through soils and sub-soils, causing high contamination of the receiving water (Figure 5). The treatment of potentially hazardous constituents of leachate prior to discharge is a legal requirement to avoid contamination of water resources to prevent both acute and chronic toxicity [15-18].

Copyright 2012 IUG.

The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

Table 5: Characteristics of groundwater and Greater-Zab river in Erbil City, Iraq. Source No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Parameter Temperature (oC) Turbidity (NTU) EC (u mohs/cm) pH T. alkalinity (mg/L) T. hardness (mg/L) Sodium (mg/L) Pottasium (mg/L) Calcium (mg/L) Magnesium (mg/L) Chloride (mg/L) Nitrate (mg/L) Groundwater Greater -Zab water Minimum Maximum Average Minimum Maximum Average 21.0 0.3 416.0 7.19 180.0 167.0 4.0 0.6 24.0 18.7 17.8 20.5 23.0 2.7 613.0 7.92 219.0 288.0 8.4 1.1 36.0 50.0 42.0 45.0 22.3 1.2 503.0 7.63 216.8 236.3 6.6 0.7 31.5 38.1 30.4 32.8 7.5 6.9 271.0 7.45 146.0 134.0 2.0 0.5 21.0 16.0 10.6 0.1 29.0 320.0 439.0 8.52 212.0 276.0 13.4 1.5 35.2 51.0 28.4 10.0 17.9 89.6 366.3 8.06 173..3 204.2 5.9 1.0 28.0 32.4 16.0 4.9

Due to lack of the proper design of ELS, the produced raw landfill leachate can not be collected and monitored. It mixes with the natural environment. Of course, mixing raw landfill leachtae from ELS with the natural environment causes threaten to the environment (particularly water sources).

Figure 5: Movement of water in the landfill [18] C. Potential Treatment Techniques for Produced Leachate from ELS To reduce the negative impact of discharged leachate on environment, several techniques of water and wastewater treatment have been used. The technologies which
Copyright 2012 IUG. The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

were developed for the treatment of landfill leachate could be classified as physical, chemical, and biological [1, 19]. Normally, the techniques are applied as an integrated system because it is not easy to achieve the satisfying treatment efficiency by using only one technology. Traditional treatment techniques generally demand multistage process treatment. To set up acceptable treatment process for removal of contaminates from leachates, various physicochemical and biological techniques and/or their different combinations could be applied. The implementation of the most suitable technique for the treatment of leachate is directly governed by the characteristics of the leachate. Comparison of the techniques for different landfill ages with changeable success is illustrated in Table 6. In general, biological treatment processes are effective for young or freshly (<5 years) produced leachate, but are ineffective for leachate from older landfills (>10 years old). In contrast, physicalchemical methods which are not favoured for young leachate treatment are advised for older leachate treatment [20]. As mentioned before, produced landfill leachate from ELS considered as stabilized leachate. Thus, physical-chemical techniques are suggested for treatment of leachate from ELS [3, 6]. Furthermore, recently published works explained that combination of physical-chemical and biological processes (such as adsorption and aerobic processes) is efficient in removal of risky pollutants from mature landfill leachte [4, 6]. Table 6: Effectiveness of leachate treatment techniques versus leachate age [19] No. Type of treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Combined treatment with domestic sewage Recycling Aerobic processes Anaerobic processes Coagulation/flocculation Chemical precipitation Adsorption Oxidation Stripping Ion exchange Microfiltration Ultrafiltration Nanofiltration Reverse osmosis Leacgate age (year) Young (<5) Good Good Good Good Poor Poor Poor Poor Poor Good Poor Poor Good Good Medium (5-10) Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Fair Good Good Good Old (>10) poor poor poor poor Fair Poor Good Fair Fair Good Good Good

Copyright 2012 IUG.

The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

10

IV. CONCLUSIONS ELS could be regarded as Level 2 (sanitary landfill with daily cover), anaerobic landfill, and in the methane formation phase. Produced landfill leachate from ELS considered as stabilized leachate (low biodegradability ratio, high concentration of COD, and low concentration of NH3-N) and it deteriorates the characteristics of the surrounded water sources. For this type of leachate, physical-chemical treatment method is effective. To minimize the threaten of the leachate from ELS on the natural environment, upgrading the site from Level 2 to Level 4 is essential. V. REFERENCES [1] S. Renou, G.J. Givaudan, S. Poulain, F. Dirassouyan and P. Moulin Landfill leachate treatment: Review and opportunity, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2008, Vol. 150. 468493. [2] S.Q. Aziz, H.A. Aziz, M.S. Yusoff, M.J.K. Bashir and M. Umar Leachate characterization in semi-aerobic and anaerobic sanitary landfills: A comparative study, Journal of Environmental Management, 2010, Vol. 91. 26082614. [3] K.Y. Foo and B.H. Hameed An overview of landfill leachate treatment via activated carbon adsorption process, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009, Vol. 171. 5460. [4] S.Q. Aziz, H.A. Aziz, M.S. Yusoff and M.J.K. Bashir Landfill leachate treatment using powdered activated carbon augmented sequencing batch reactor (SBR) process: Optimization by Response Surface Methodology, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2011, Vol. 189. 404413. [5] Satellite image of Erbil landfill site. [Online] January 5, 2012. [Cited: January 6, 2012] http://www.ierbil.com/erbil-map#!3 [6] S.Q. Aziz Landfill leachate treatment using powdered activated carbon augmented sequencing batch reactor (SBR) process", Unpublished PhD thesis, University Sains Malaysia, Malaysia, 2011. [7] A. Uygur and F. Kargi Biological nutrient removal from pre-treated landfill leachate in a sequencing batch reactor, Journal of Environmental Management, 2004, Vol. 71. 914. [8] H. Alvarez-Vazquez, B. Jefferson and S.J. Judd Membrane bioreactors vs conventional biological treatment of landfill leachate: A brief review, Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 2004, Vol. 79. 10431049. [9] E.S.K. Chian and F.B. DeWalle Sanitary landfill leachates and their leachate treatment, Journal of the Environmental Engineering Division, 1976, Vol. 102. 411432. [10] I. Kostova Leachate from sanitary landfillsorigin, characteristics, treatment, University of Architecture, Civil Engineering and Geodesy, Iskars Summer SchoolBorovetz, 26-29 July 2006. [11] SPREP, Japan International Cooperation Agency, JICA A practical guide to landfill management in Pacific island countries, Volume-1: Inland-based waste disposal, Second edition, 2010. [12] H.A. Aziz, M.S. Yusoff, M.N. Adlan, N.H. Adnan and S. Alias Physicochemical removal of iron from semiaerobic landfill leachate by limestone filter, Waste Management, 2004, Vol. 24. 353358.
Copyright 2012 IUG. The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

11

[13] A. Bagchi Design, of landfills and integrated solid waste management, Third edition. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2004. [14] American Public Health Association, APHA Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 21st edition, Washington, D.C., 2005. [15] L. Ziyang, Z. Youcai, Y. Tao, S. Yu, C. Huili, Z. Nanwen and H. Renhua Natural attenuation and characterization of contaminants composition in landfill leachate under different disposing ages, Science of the Total Environment, 2009, Vol. 407.33853391. [16] C.B. Oman and C. Junestedt,Chemical characterization of landll leachates400 parameters and compounds, Waste Management, 2008, Vol. 28. 18761891. [17] N. Sanphoti, S. Towprayoon and P. Chaiprasert Nopharatana, A.: The effects of leachate recirculation with supplemental water addition on methane production and waste decomposition in a simulated tropical landfill, Journal of Environmental Management, 2006, Vol. 81. 2735. [18] Asian Regional Research Programme on Environmental Technology, ARRPET State of the art review landfill leachate treatment, Asian Institute of Technology, Tongji University, 2004. [19] A.A. Abbas, G. Jingsong, L.Z. Ping, P.Y. Ya and W.S. Al-Rekabi Review on landfill leachate treatments, Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 2009, Vol. 5. 534545. [20] S. Ghafari, H.A. Aziz, M.H. Isa and A.A. Zinatizadeh Application of response surface methodology (RSM) to optimize coagulation-flocculation treatment of leachate using polyaluminum chloride (PAC) and alum, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 2009, Vol. 163. 650656.

Copyright 2012 IUG.

The 4th International Engineering Conference Towards engineering of 21st century

12