Professional Documents
Culture Documents
August 2013
Dr Robert Eden
Organics Ltd
Sovereign Court II, University of Warwick Science Park,
Coventry, England.
T: +44 24 7669 2141 F: +44 24 7669 2238
W: www.organics.com E:comms@organics.com
ABSTRACT
The Stevensons Road landfill site is well known in the industry for the difficulties caused to
the stakeholders involved in the site by the migration of landfill gas into an adjacent property,
where a housing estate is located. The current paper will discuss the issue of landfill gas
migration and how it may be reliably halted.
Organics has worked on several hundred landfill sites to control landfill gas migration, mainly
in the UK but also in many other countries around the world. The first site the author was
involved with was the Loscoe landfill site in the UK, where an explosion in a domestic
property in 1986 was the key event which signalled the commencement of the UK landfill gas
control industry.1 In the current paper the basic rules for landfill gas migration control will be
presented, together with selected case studies.
Experience has taught that even in the most difficult of situations, landfill gas migration may
be reliably prevented. The nature of the geology and hydrogeology, as well as the hazards
generated in possible migration events, determine the extent to which various measures
should be implemented.
KEYWORDS
Landfill, landfill gas, migration, migration control, explosive gases
INTRODUCTION
The Stevensons Road landfill ceased taking waste on the 24th June 2005. After that it was put
into an aftercare phase of operation, with the installation of leachate and gas collection works.
In March 2006 it was confirmed that landfill gas was migrating from the site into the Brookland
Greens Estate. On the 31st August 2008 methane gas was found to a concentration of 63% in a
property on the housing estate. On the 9th September 2008 emergency management
arrangements were implemented based on advice from the EPA indicating imminent danger to
residents. The Country Fire Authority led the emergency response, which involved forty-five
relocations.2
The circumstances surrounding these events, and their consequences, remain the subject of legal
proceedings. It is, therefore, not the remit of this paper to enter into the territory of causes and
responsibility, which is probably considerably more challenging than the subject matter under
review here. The subject of landfill gas migration, and the accepted practices for controlling
such migration, will be discussed in the following text.
It is a simple fact that there are a great many housing estates around the world located adjacent
to landfill sites. The Loscoe landfill site in Derbyshire, England, actually had a property explode
as a result of landfill gas migration. However, in all such instances the migration of landfill gas
has effectively been halted. The ability to prevent migration was encapsulated in the UK by
legislation which penalised managers who failed to take the necessary steps to prevent
migration of landfill gas offsite.3 Monitoring regimes were instituted for detecting migration, by
means of monitoring boreholes, and emergency response plans prepared to counter occurrences
of landfill gas migration.4 Some particularly difficult situations needed to be addressed.
Saturated sites, sites with perched water tables, sites abutting deep, fractured rock faces with no
lining and houses located at the top of the rock face; all of the worst possible combinations had
to be attended to.
By way of contrast, the Stevensons road site is relatively straightforward. It has permeable and
fractured-rock strata abutting the waste. There are water tables passing through the site.
However, the principles referred to in the following text may readily be implemented into such
sites.
negative pressure, or vacuum, throughout the network of pipes and wells. The gas compressor
may either be of the positive-displacement type or, more commonly, it may be a centrifugal
fan unit. Whilst it is normal to use vertical wells, systems have been developed based upon
horizontal wells.
Sizing a gas field
There are many methods of sizing a gas extraction system. The fact of the matter is that the
precise contents of a landfill site remain often unknown and indeterminable. In these
circumstances it is virtually impossible to provide an estimate of gas production potential to a
high-degree of accuracy. The use of mathematical models, pumping trials and other
associated techniques will reduce the level of uncertainty but until the gas extraction system is
actually installed and gas is being withdrawn from the site, the exact size of the resource will
be unknown.
Estimating landfill gas production rates is a large and mature subject in its own right with a
pedigree running for many years.5 The optimum method of sizing a gas field is, however, to
install and operate it. By this means alone will it be possible to be precise about gas quantities.
Prior to final connection of the wells with interconnecting pipework, a pumping trial,
employing an appropriately sized mobile flaring unit drawing landfill gas from segments of
the gas field, will enable an operator to determine the flow rates necessary for either gas use
or migration control. Short of being able to achieve such a complete installation at trial-stage,
it is necessary to use various other methods to estimate gas production potential.
Where such estimating methods are employed, the only protection against project failure in
these circumstances is to employ healthy factors of safety, of up to 50%. Where utilisation is
intended a deduction of 50% of the mean gas production estimate should be made; in the case
of migration control an addition of 50% of the necessary extraction flow rate should be
assumed for design purposes. Whilst some may consider these factors of safety excessively
aggressive, they will help ensure project success. Failure in commercial terms means there
will not be adequate gas to recover capital costs. Failure in terms of migration control will
mean that gas is escaping off-site.
The system objective
There are two clear and separate strategies employed in running a gas extraction system. The
first is designed to minimise gas migration off-site from the landfill. The second is to
maximise the production of gas for a specific landfill gas use facility. These objectives cannot
be confused. In the case of the former, migration control, it is adequate to maintain methane
levels in the extracted gas of approximately 20 to 30% without causing undue concern to the
overall optimum operation of the system. Where necessary to prevent migration, extracted gas
may sometimes contain close to zero methane. On the other hand, where a gas-use facility is
intended, should the methane percentage drop much below 40% there should be serious
concerns about the system viability. In the latter ease, it is usual to try and maintain
equilibrium gas production rates at around 50% methane by volume
Lateral emissions of landfill gas
Emissions of landfill gas through the surface boundaries of a landfill site are driven by
concentration differentials (diffusive flow according to Ficks Law), or pressure differentials
(advective flow), or both. Advective flows are promoted by pressure differentials between
locations. Slower, diffusional flow will still exist in these situations, but flow will be
predominantly advective. However, the impact of the slow diffusional flow of landfill gas into
confined spaces should not be underestimated.
It may take many years for the gas diffusing into a confined space to achieve the same
concentration as that achieved by an advective plume in a few days. However, both are
equally significant, as the build-up of gases can lead to potentially harmful situations.
Advective gas migration can be caused by rapid differential pressure changes such as the
passing of a low pressure weather system over the landfill site, coupled with a highly
permeable migration pathway (e.g. a fracture or conduit). It can also be caused by changing
liquid levels in the site or by the rapid relief of pressure, which has built up behind a gas
barrier (e.g. a clay liner).4
Migration control
To achieve migration control the fundamental requirement is to place a curtain of negative
pressure along the perimeter through which migration must be stopped. There are many
factors affecting the degree to which migration occurs along any one boundary, and these all
impact upon the quality of the methane obtained for flaring. It is often the case that a system
installed purely for migration control may not, in fact, be able to produce adequate methane
for flaring whilst at the same time maintaining effective perimeter sealing to migrating gases.
In order to flare landfill gas it is normal to set a minimum methane concentration of 20% for a
standard landfill gas flare. However, other technologies, such as regenerative thermal
oxidisers, may facilitate combustion at much lower methane concentrations.
Where it is desired that higher levels of methane, i.e. in the range 25-30%, should be available
to facilitate combustion of extracted gases, it may be necessary to have one or more lines of
gas wells located within the body of the waste and away from the edge of the site. Even with
this precaution, it may often not be possible to obtain gas of sufficient quality for flaring.
Where there are highly-permeable rock strata abutting the landfill, it is quite possible that a
large proportion of the full extraction potential will be used to draw air into the system to
prevent the loss of migration control.
In order to overcome the problem of excessive air induction from permeable strata, there are a
number of options. The installation of additional wells along the sensitive boundary will allow
for a smaller sphere of influence. For example, the well spacing may be reduced to 5 meters,
or less, as opposed to the more standard 20 to 40 metres. Alternatively, or in addition, the use
of a programmable timer, to control the periods of operation of extraction equipment, will
allow a higher rate of extraction and suction on an intermittent basis and in a manner which
helps to achieve a methane concentration adequate for flaring, whilst at the same time
preventing migration.
The use of increased suction will in all probability mean that larger quantities of air are drawn
in, as well as methane bearing landfill gases, from around the perimeter of the well itself.
With the passage of time, the volumes of air being drawn into the vicinity of well will turn the
waste aerobic. In such a situation, all methane production would cease and be replaced by the
formation of carbon dioxide from wastes through which air passes.
be influencing separate wells in different ways. Also, as time passes the amount of gas
available from any one particular well may either increase or decrease, depending on such
factors as rainfall, temperature and available carbon for digestion by the bacteria.
Another major influence in the process of balancing the system is the lag involved in any
particular flow rate settling out in the area in the site from which landfill gas is being drawn.
For example, the flow rate may be increased on one well and adequate methane levels may be
observed for a period of time. However, a return to that well after several days may show that
the methane level is dropping rapidly because the well is drawing landfill gas above the
equilibrium production rate of its sphere of influence. It has simply taken several days for this
factor to work through to an observable reduction in methane percentage
The iterative approach
There are no simple answers to these difficulties. The necessary regular adjustment required
to wellheads may be made somewhat easier by installing centrally located manifold systems,
but the balancing of the gas field will remain a continual requirement. A simple form for
recording all available data from any one particular system is essential. By regularly
monitoring and reviewing the gas levels in off-site monitoring boreholes and the gas levels in
individual wells, it is possible to build up a picture of the typical operating ranges of any one
particular part of the site
Once a gas field has been settled in it becomes a more practical proposition to make small
adjustments to any particular section of the gas field. Such adjustments, once made, should be
noted. Upon a return to the site, the effect of these adjustments will become clear. Over a
period of time an operator will become familiar with the site that he/she is running and will
know approximately the positions in which well-head valves should be set up to achieve the
desired objectives.
The initial balancing is an iterative procedure and it is simply a matter of starting at the
beginning and going round the whole system recording the flow rates, suction pressures,
oxygen and methane levels. Once complete the operator must return to the beginning and start
again. In the first instance it is probably realistic to balance the system with three or four
sequential rotations around a single gas field. After this initial set-up the iteration should be
carried out over greater periods of time. Once the system is properly set up it may be adequate
to balance the system once a week or even, in certain circumstances, once a month.
For both migration control and gas use, the feedback loop involved must also be monitored.
With a migration control system, the feedback loop is to offsite migration monitoring wells.
With a gas use system, the feedback loop is with methane concentrations at the point of use.
LEACHATE AND WATER TABLES
In order for a gas extraction regime to function correctly it is necessary for leachate to be
substantially removed from a landfill site. Suction of gases will not occur, and a negative
pressure curtain will not be possible, where water is present in large quantities within a site. As
with landfill gas extraction, leachate extraction and control is also an established engineering
practice. There are several methods of removing leachate from a site, all of which may be
appropriate and applicable to any given location. The corollary of this requirement may well be
that large quantities of leachate need to be treated and removed off site. If this is the case, it will
be an inevitable consequence of a specific site design and installation. Short of removing the
site completely, leachate extraction will be required to enable landfill gas to be extracted and
controlled.
SUMMARY
Whilst it is acknowledged that hindsight gives a clear view of a situation, in the case of
Brookland Greens housing estate, it would have been possible to completely prevent migration
by clearing the site of leachate, installing a negative pressure curtain along the boundaries and
monitoring performance with suitably designed and installed monitoring wells. The fact that
this did not happen is a matter for historians and lawyers to understand. The fact remains,
however, that a situation like this does not need to happen again.
REFERENCES
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loscoe
2. Victoria Ombudsmans Report, Brookland Greens Estate investigation into methane gas
leaks, October 2009.
3. Environmental Protection Act 1990
4. UK Environment Agency. Guidance on the management of landfill gas, Landfill
Technical Guidance Note 03, 2004
5. Farquhar, G.J. and Rovers F.A. Gas Production during Refuse Decomposition. In: Water,
Air and Soil Pollution, 2, 483-495. 1973
6. Cooper, G., Gregory, R., Manley, B.J.W. and Naylor, E. (1993) Guidelines for the safe
control and utilisation of landfill gas. Published in seven volumes (1, 2, 3, 4A, 4B, 5, 6).
Reports ETSU B 1296 P1P6 (CWM067A/B/C/D1/D2/E/F/92). ETSU, Harwell.