Volume 6, Issue 2 (Spring 2018)
Iran J Health Sci 2018, 6(2): 11-30 |
Back to browse issues page
Department of Water Science Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamedan, Iran. , behzadsarhadi@gmail.com
Abstract: (4220 Views)
Abstract
Background and purpose: This paper presents a case study in simulation of process governing leachate occurrence and subsequent transport, and investigates its migration away from the landfill to control environmental adverse effects on a deep aquifer.
Materials and Methods: The landfill examined in this study was an area of 240 ha and received 500 ton/day of solid waste generated from Hamedan and its surrounding including Bahar, and Jurghan. Based on the finite difference technique, leachate transport and penetration into the Hamedan plain aquifer was simulated exerting MODFLOW and MT3DMS codes in GMS Software.
Results: It was concluded that landfill geological structure had the greatest influence on the transfer of urban solid waste leachate in traditional disposal sites. A low permeable conglomerate layer prohibited leachate migration to the main semi-confined aquifer. The results also indicated that urban solid waste leachate was only excited to migrate toward recharging waterways of aquifer by surface flows flooding as well as severe rainfalls.
Conclusion: Geological structure of the landfill area had the greatest influence on the development of leachate pollution of municipal solid waste in traditional disposal sites. The spread of pollution to the deep aquifer near the waste disposal site was practically inhibited by an impermeable conglomerate layer in the municipal waste disposal.
Background and purpose: This paper presents a case study in simulation of process governing leachate occurrence and subsequent transport, and investigates its migration away from the landfill to control environmental adverse effects on a deep aquifer.
Materials and Methods: The landfill examined in this study was an area of 240 ha and received 500 ton/day of solid waste generated from Hamedan and its surrounding including Bahar, and Jurghan. Based on the finite difference technique, leachate transport and penetration into the Hamedan plain aquifer was simulated exerting MODFLOW and MT3DMS codes in GMS Software.
Results: It was concluded that landfill geological structure had the greatest influence on the transfer of urban solid waste leachate in traditional disposal sites. A low permeable conglomerate layer prohibited leachate migration to the main semi-confined aquifer. The results also indicated that urban solid waste leachate was only excited to migrate toward recharging waterways of aquifer by surface flows flooding as well as severe rainfalls.
Conclusion: Geological structure of the landfill area had the greatest influence on the development of leachate pollution of municipal solid waste in traditional disposal sites. The spread of pollution to the deep aquifer near the waste disposal site was practically inhibited by an impermeable conglomerate layer in the municipal waste disposal.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Environmental Health
References
1. Akhavan S, Abedi-Koupai J, Mousavi SF, Afyuni M, Eslamian SS. Abbaspour KC. Application of SWAT model to investigate nitrate leaching in Hamadan–Bahar Watershed, Iran. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 2010; 139(4): 675-688. [DOI:10.1016/j.agee.2010.10.015]
2. Akhavan S, Mousavi SF, Abedi-Koupai J, Abbaspour KC. Conditioning DRASTIC model to simulate nitrate pollution case study: Hamadan–Bahar plain. Environmental Earth Sciences. 2011; 63(6): 1155-1167. [DOI:10.1007/s12665-010-0790-1]
3. Almasri MN, Kaluarachchi JJ. Modeling nitrate contamination of groundwater in agricultural watersheds. Journal of Hydrology. 2007; 343(3): 211-229. [DOI:10.1016/j.jhydrol.2007.06.016]
4. Aquaveo Team. GMS: Solids to MODFLOW Command. Xmswiki. Accessed 22 October 2016. available from: https://www.xmswiki.com/wiki/GMS:Solids_to_MODFLOW_Command.
5. Aquaveo Team. GMS: Zone Budget. Xmswiki. Accessed 6 January 2016. available from: https://www. xmswiki. Com/wiki/GMS:Zone_Budget.
6. Batu V. Applied flow and solute transport modeling in aquifers: fundamental principles and analytical and numerical methods. Boca Raton, Florida, CRC Press, Taylor& Francis Group. 2005. [DOI:10.1201/9781420037470]
7. Bear J. Hydraulics of groundwater, McGraw-Hill series in water resources and environmental engineering. McGraw-Hill, New York. 1979.
8. Camba A, González-García S, Bala A, Fullana-i-Palmer P, Moreira MT, Feijoo G. Modeling the leachate flow and aggregated emissions from municipal waste landfills under life cycle thinking in the Oceanic region of the Iberian Peninsula. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2014; 67: 98-106. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.013]
9. Chain ESK, Walle FBD, Reston SN. Sanitary landfill leachates and their treatment. Journal of Environmental Engineering. 1976; 10:411-431.
10. Curry N, Pillay P. Biogas prediction and design of a food waste to energy system for the urban environment. Renewable Energy. 2011; 41: 200-209. [DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2011.10.019]
11. Dimitrijevic MD, Dimitrijevic MN, Vulovic D. 1:100,000 Geological Map of Iran. Ministry of Mines and Metals, Geological Survey of Iran, Tehran, Iran. 1971.
12. Domenico PA, Schwartz FW. Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology. 2nd edn, New York, John Wiley & Sons Inc. 1998. [PMCID]
13. Ehteshami M, Biglarijoo N. Determination of nitrate concentration in groundwater in agricultural area in Babol County, Iran. Journal of Research in Health Sciences. 2014; 2(4): 1-9.
14. Emami MH. 1:100,000 Geological Map of Iran, Sheet 5566. Ministry of Mines and Metals, Geological Survey of Iran, Tehran, Iran. 1994.
15. Fetter CW, Applied Hydrogeology Applied hydrogeology Visual Mod flow, Flownet and Aqtesolv student version software on CD-ROM ((Fourth edition edn.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall. 2001.
16. Gorsevski PV, Donevska KR, Mitrovski CD, Frizado JP. Integrating multi-criteria evaluation techniques with geographic information systems for landfill site selection: A case study using ordered weighted average. Journal of Waste Management. 2012; 32(2): 287-296. [DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.09.023] [PMID]
17. Guerrero LA, Maas G, Hogland W. Solid waste management challenges for cities in developing countries. Journal of Waste Management. 2013; 33(1): 220-232. [DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2012.09.008] [PMID]
18. H. R. W. A (Hamadan Regional Water Authority). Accessed 22 October 2016. available from: http://www.hmrw.ir/
19. Heath RC, Basic ground-water hydrology. Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper, 2220, Virginia, U.S. USGS Reston, V. A. 1983; pp. 86.
20. Hou D, He J, Lü C, Ren L, Fan Q, Wang J, Xie Z. Distribution characteristics and potential ecological risk assessment of heavy metals (Cu, Pb, Zn, Cd) in water and sediments from Lake Dalinouer, China. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety. 2013; 93: 135-144. [DOI:10.1016/j.ecoenv.2013.03.012] [PMID]
21. Khanlari GR, Taleb-Beydokhti A, Momeni AA, Ahmadi HR. Influence of Hamedan landfill leachate on groundwater. Journal of the Engineering Geological Society of Iran. 2013; 5(3-4): 81-92.
22. Kiddee P, Naidu R, Wong M H, Hearn L, Muller JF. Field investigation of the quality of fresh and aged leachate from selected landfills receiving e-waste in an arid climate. Journal of Waste Management, 2014; 34(11): 2292-2304. [DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.06.018] [PMID]
23. Krook J, Svensson N, Eklund M. Landfill mining: A critical review of two decades of research. Journal of Waste Management. 2012; 32(3): 513-520. [DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.10.015] [PMID]
24. Morris DA, Johnson AI. Summary of hydrologic and physical properties of rock and soil materials, as analyzed by the hydrologic laboratory of the U.S. Geological Survey, 1948-60, Virginia, U.S. Govt. Print. Off., Water Supply Paper. 1967; pp. 42.
25. Nakhaei M, Dadgar MA, Amiri V. Geochemical processes analysis and evaluation of groundwater quality in Hamadan Province, Western Iran. Arabian Journal of Geosciences. 2016; 9(5): 1-13. [DOI:10.1007/s12517-016-2409-7]
26. Rosenshein JS, Moore JE. A history of hydrogeology in the United States Geological Survey. History of Hydrogeology. 2012; pp. 381. [PMCID]
27. Todd DK, Larry WM. Groundwater Hydrology, 3rd edn, New york, John Wiley & sons, NJ. 2005; pp. 636.
28. Trauth N, Schmidt C, Vieweg M, Oswald SE, Fleckenstein JH. Hydraulic controls of in‐stream gravel bar hyporheic exchange and reactions. Water Resources Research. 2015; 51(4): 2243-2263. [DOI:10.1002/2014WR015857]
29. Wick K, Heumesser C, Schmid E. Groundwater nitrate contamination: factors and indicators. Journal of Environmental Management. 2012; 111(3): 178-186. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.06.030] [PMID] [PMCID]
30. Zheng C, Wang PP. MT3DMS: a modular three-dimensional multispecies transport model for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical reactions of contaminants in groundwater systems. Documentation and user's guide, Departments of Geology and Mathematics, University of Alabama. 1999; pp. 202.
31. Zheng C, Wang PP. MT3DMS: a modular three-dimensional multispecies transport model for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical reactions of contaminants in groundwater systems. Tuscaloosa, Alabama. 1999; 35487-0338, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, pp. 8-28.
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |