Disposal methods landfilling

Bratley, K. and Khan, A.Q. (1989) Waste management disposal methods Landfill 2(X)0. Presented at A.M.A. Environment conference Caring for the future. Newcastle-upon-Tyne. 10-12 July. 

Landfill - Typically, the ultimate disposal method for solid wastes Is landfilling. Leaks from landfills need not be reported as a release because the amount of the toxic chemical in the landfill as already been reported as a release. 

Arsenically treated wood. Discarded arsenically treated wood or wood products that are hazardous only because they exhibit certain toxic characteristics (e.g., contain harmful concentrations of metal or pesticide constituents), are excluded from the definition of hazardous waste. Once such treated wood is used, it may be disposed of by the user (commercial or residential) without being subject to hazardous waste regulation. This exclusion is based on the fact that the use of such wood products on the land is similar to the common disposal method, which is landfilling. This exclusion applies only to end-users and not to manufacturers. 

This is the most common disposal method. Kraft mills may use on-site landfills or off-site commercial landfills.63... 

Some mills will combust the biosolids for heat recovery in a specialized biosolids incinerator, or a hogged or fossil fuel power boiler. Currently, this disposal method is less common than landfilling.64... 

When viewing effluent treatment methods, it is clear that the basic problem of disposing safely of waste material is, in many cases, not so much solved but moved from one place to another. If a method of treatment can be used that allows material to be recycled, then the waste problem is truly solved. However, if the treatment simply concentrates the waste as concentrated liquid, slurry or solid in a form, which cannot be recycled, then it will still need to be disposed of. Landfill disposal of such waste is increasingly unacceptable and thermal oxidation causes pollution through products of combustion and liquors from scrubbing systems. The best method for dealing with effluent problems is to solve the problem at source by waste minimization, as will be discussed in Chapter 28. 

The concentrations of hazardous substances in waste are often limited with respect to different disposal methods. This could also be discussed for valuable resources to avoid mixing up of products containing the resource with other waste items. If this dilution cannot be avoided, disposal in landfills or reuse as part of construction material will lead to non-retrievable losses. 

Endrin and endrin aldehyde are listed as hazardous wastes and disposal of wastes is controlled by a number of federal regulations. Past disposal methods have included landfills (EPA 1987c). Chemical treatment (reductive dechlorination) and incineration are possible disposal methods (HSDB 1995 IRPTC 1985). Existing information on disposal appears adequate. No information was found on disposal of endrin ketone however, because endrin is no longer used in the United States, current levels of endrin ketone in wastes should be minimal and additional information on disposal is not needed. 

The U S. EPA is funding research at Emec Consultants, Export, Pennsylvania, on methods to the suppress or eliminate cyanide formation in spent potlining from industrial primary aluminum production cells. Because over 100,000 tons of this material are disposed in landfills annually, it would be desirable to avoid the formation of cyanide during the production of the cells. 

This traditional system is still the disposal method most widely used in the EU. In landfills, biodegradable waste decomposes to produce landfill gas and leachate. The landfill gas consists mainly of methane and, if not captured, contributes considerably to the greenhouse effect. For this reason, the move away from landfill is an important part of the European Waste Framework Directive. 

A question of some importance, of course, is the method of disposal of these hazardous wastes. At one time, the two most popular methods of disposal were landfill and impoundment in surface bodies of water especially built to hold such wastes. Both of these methods pose serious problems, however, as hazardous wastes can sometimes evaporate into the air or soak into the ground and contaminate both surface water and groundwater. Some of the most deplorable cases of environmental pollution in the last century have been associated with one or the other of these two methods of hazardous waste disposal. 

Disposal of exhausted solids can be easily overlooked al the plant design stage, particularly when these have no intrinsic value alternative disposal methods might include landfill uf inert material or incineration, hydrolysis, or pyrolysis of organic materials. Liquid, solid, and gaseous emissions are all subject to the usual environmental considerations. 

The RCRA Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) or Land Ban program establishes treatment standards for hazardous waste that are protective of human health and the environment. Once the treatment standards have been met, the waste may be disposed in a landfill or in a surface impoundment. These treatment standards constitute the action levels when determining whether the waste is hazardous per RCRA Subtitle C and whether the treated waste can be disposed in a landfill, surface impoundment or by another land disposal method. 

There are no known whole tire disposal methods without adverse effects. Disposing of the tires above ground creates the hazards of mosquitoes and fires. The alternate disposal method is landfilling or burial, which is also not without problems. In landfills, tires require a large volume because about 75 percent of the space a tire occupies is void. This void space provides potential sites for gas collection or the harboring of rodents. Some landfill operators report that tires tend to float or rise in a landfill and come to the surface, piercing the landfill cover. 

There are several disposal methods that may be acceptable for specific types of products under certain local conditions. These include high-temperature incineration, chemical treatment and specially engineered landfill. There are also several promising new developments (e.g. gas-phase chemical reduction and plasma energy pyrolysis). However, it is essential to select the disposal method on a case-bycase basis. 

We can not see any other way that such a process can become commercially viable. In the end, the right degree of competition is reached only if alternative competing technologies are properly costed in a sustainable manner. Currently, the cost of landfill disposal does not recover all costs to make this disposal method sustainable and in that sense landfill disposal is heavily subsidized. 

Disposal by landfilling or other method, % of total generated... 

The four ultimate disposal methods defined by the EPA are landfarming, deep-well injection, landfilling, and ocean dumping. Landfarming, used for organic wastes, relies on nutrients in the soil to convert wastes into nonhazardous materials that may enrich the soil. The latter three methods concentrate on containing, not converting, wastes and may be used on various waste types. Briefly describe each of these four disposal methods. 

The disposal of municipal and industrial wastes has become an important problem because the traditional means of disposal, landfill, has become environmentally much less acceptable than previously. In addition, special incinerator systems are required to meet environmental standards for disposal by incineration. Disposal of wastes by landfill or incineration also includes a potential loss of energy sources and, in some cases, valuable mineral resources. New, much stricter regulation of these disposal methods will make the economics of waste processing for resource recovery much more favorable. 

Sodium sulfide, at least, is of value to pulp mills, which use the kraft process for pulping and, if near by, can provide a useful outlet for this waste product. However, if this recycle method is not feasible a caustic oxidizer may be used to convert the sodium sulfide to the more environmentally acceptable sodium sulfate, for ultimate disposal by landfill (Eq. 18.47). 

---