Landfills, disposal

A primary source of environmental pollution from printing ink comes from the metal-based pigments used, as well as various resins, waxes, and drying agents that are also part of the inks. These materials are added to inks regardless of the source of the oil. As a result, petroleum inks are just as suitable for landfill disposal under U.S. EPA regulations as are vegetable oil inks. 

Glass is a material having properties that provide attributes for many commercial products. As some of these products reach the end of thek useful life and are discarded, there is often the opportunity to have the glass recycled into other useful products. In many respects, this alternative is preferred over the glass entering a municipal waste stream for landfill disposal. 

Because powdered activated carbon is generally used in relatively small quantities, the spent carbon has often been disposed of in landfills. However, landfill disposal is becoming more restrictive environmentally and more costiy. Thus large consumers of powdered carbon find that regeneration is an attractive alternative. Examples of regeneration systems for powdered activated carbon include the Zimpro/Passavant wet air oxidation process (46), the multihearth furnace as used in the DuPont PACT process (47,48), and the Shirco infrared furnace (49,50). 

LANDFILL Disposal of wastc in the ground. This method is eommonly used for both domestie waste and more hazardous ehemieal waste. Landfill sites used for diffieult and potentially-dangerous wastes are now engineered, managed and monitored to prevent poisons leaking out. 

Landfill disposal of certain categories of solid waste may result in gas generation, mainly methane, and a highly polluted leachate. The methane may be drawn off, to avoid a flammable hazard on- or off-site. The leachate is pumped off for treatment. 

Corrective Action Application In Massachusetts, a municipal wastewater treatment plant receives a number of wastestreams containing heavy metals from local industries. When tested, the dewatered sludge failed the EP toxicity test. In order to permit landfill disposal of the sludge, solidification processes were examined. A soluble, silicate-based system, developed by Chemfix, was ultimately selected which produced a product whose leachate passed the EP toxicity test (Sullivan, 1984). 

Figures are given for annual waste production in the Paris area and its composition is outlined. Many of the Paris area cities joined with Paris to create a solid wastes metropolitan authority for domestic waste treatment (SYCTOM). Three incineration plants bum 75% of the SYCTOM area solid wastes and the energy produced provides 43% of the energy consumed by the Paris urban heating network. Landfill is now expensive. There has been a reduction in the number of sites and French legislation prohibits landfill disposal of untreated solid wastes after 2002. A sorting unit at the landfill site was due to open in 1993 and another unit was planned for one of the incineration plants.

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 ability to minimize the amount of solid waste requiring landfill disposal. Solid by-products have a market value can be used as fuel or construction material, and are non-hazardous. 

A major attraction of landfill disposal of wastes has been its low cost. However, the increasingly stringent regulatory requirements have... 

In most countries, solid waste containing metals such as neutralization sludge from the plating industry and flue dust from the metal and steel industries is currently collected and dumped in landfill, where it constitutes a perpetual toxic threat to the environment and a waste of resources. The alternatives to this landfill disposal are either to reduce the rate of discharge at source by an individually designed recovery process or to separate and recover the metals from the collected waste in a centrally located facility. A presumption for a centrally located facility would be that companies with metals in their effluents require treatment of their total wastewater streams. This could be accomplished through the relatively simple process of neutralization, which requires minor investment in sedimentation tanks and dewatering equipment and involves relatively modest operation costs. 

Chemical degradation has been investigated by Shlh and Dal Porto Q) and by Lande ( ) under EPA auspices as an alternative approach (to landfill disposal) for the removal of pesticide residues. Among candidate reactions for the safe detoxification of pesticides, only alkaline hydrolysis was recommended. Several organophosphates and carbamates were identified as amenable to a degradation procedure using strong base/aqueous alcohol. The... 

Exposure at waste sites is most likely to occur from the landfill disposal of waste by-products originating from chlorinated hydrocarbon manufacture. 

Combustible portions of the wastes that cannot be recycled are then burned to produce energy. In this respect, a resource recovery plant is similar to a waste-to-energy incinerator. In fact, the terms resource recovery plant and waste-to-energy incinerator are sometimes used interchangeably. Noncombustible materials in waste are then shredded and buried in a sanitary landfill. Since they are treated before dumping, they tend to take up less space and are more suitable for landfill disposal. 

After a demonstration at the Hanford Site C Reactor in 1998, the DOE estimated that it would cost approximately 50,000 to remediate the 1956 contaminated lead bricks on site. Costs would range from 0.96 per pound if the bricks were presurveyed for contamination levels to 0.99 per pound if the bricks were not presurveyed. The presurveying option is less expensive because not all of the bricks would require decontamination. These estimates do not include money earned from the salvage value of the bricks (D198327, pp.l6, 17). The DOE notes that TechXtract was not cost effective at Hanford due to the cheap costs of landfill disposal at the facility (D222719, p. 6). 

TABLE 1 Asphaltic Metals Stabilization (AMS) vs. Hazardous Waste Landfill Disposal (HWLD) Cost Comparison... 

Table 1 gives a cost comparison of asphaltic metals stabilization (AMS) versus hazardous waste landfill disposal (HWLD). The AMS eliminated 173.00/ton in state and county taxes. 

The CFX MiniFix technology is categorized as a chemical fixation/stabilization process. The patented process, enhanced by additional proprietary developments, stabilizes mobile constituents within a waste matrix by ntiUzing the chemical reactions between complex silicates. The reactions solidify and stabilize the wastes into a claylike product that is suitable for either on-site or landfill disposal. The matrix-forming chemistry is assisted as needed by reaction-promoting additives. 

The treatment costs using the DETOX process are substantially lower than those using traditional technologies such as incineration, landfill disposal, and alternative destructive technologies. Treatment costs for the process are equivalent to or less costly than nondestructive technologies such as encapsulation (D10163T, p. 2). 

The Chemical Stabilization Technology (CHEM-STA ) is a proprietary contaminant immobilization mechanism for treating soils, sludges, and ashes contaminated with toxic heavy metals and hydrocarbons. The three-step process can be applied either in situ or ex situ to form stable and insoluble chemical compounds. Treated wastes are usually acceptable for landfill disposal. This technology is commercially available from Environmental Solutions, Inc. (ESI). According to the vendor, CHEM-STA has the following advantages ... 

The vendor states the cost of full-scale MERS treatment depends on soil characteristics, the concentration and chemical state of the targeted metal contaminants, the concentration of unregulated metals, and the cleanup objectives. The vendor claims the cost of MERS processing is competitive with the cost of landfill disposal, soil stabilization, and soil washing (D124538,... 

It provides a reliable and cost-effective option to landfill disposal. 

The vendor estimates that treatment costs for a Bio-Raptor soil remediation would range from 15 to 100 per ton of treated soil compared with treatment costs of 100 to 400 per ton for other applicable technologies such as landfill disposal, mobile incineration, and stabilization. The vendor states that typical treatment costs using Bio-Raptor system are 3 per ton for the treatment of manure and 2.70 per ton to reduce odor, pathogens, and waste volume in yard waste (D204637, pp. 16, 28). 

Landfill disposal of HT tnaterials. This scenario supposes that HT materials are stable enough to be considered as inert materials that can be disposed into monofills, hereafter referred to as glassfills , requiring no special attention (e.g., technical barriers or precautionary monitoring of leachates). 

Despite the emphasis on waste minimization and recycling, society will continue to generate waste requiring incineration or landfill disposal in the foreseeable future. Owing to the formation of bottom and fly ash through MSW incineration, it is important to find criteria for their utilization in an environmentally sound manner. This is in line with the policies adopted by several EU countries, such as Italy, where the utilization of... 

The use of phosphate has been widely evaluated and subjected to field trials for Pb-contaminated soils. Most treatment systems involve excavation, pug milling of the soil with the stabilization agent, and either replacement or landfill disposal. Occasionally, for larger sites and deeper contamination, in situ mixing with large augers is used. 

---