Note: Sample below may appear distorted but all corresponding word document files contain proper formattingExcerpt from Term Paper:
Whereas conventional, compacted clay barriers are designed to prevent the infiltration of water into the waste below the cover, evapotranspiration takes a decidedly different approach. The cover technique actually uses to its advantage the high water storage capacity of fine grained soils to retain water in the soil above the waste and refuse. The water is "stored" in that layer until it is released back into the atmosphere either through evaporation from the soil or transpiration from the native vegetation that is planted on the surface (EPA 2). One of the only limitations of the evapotranspiration cover is its inability to function adequately outside of arid and semi-arid environments. Only there can the refuse be covered in a reasonable amount of soil with a storage capacity great enough to manage and store the water that will enter the soil at the landfill site. In humid climates, or ones with higher annual rainfalls, evapotranspiration is not as functional as a landfill cover (Albright et al. 75).
Whereas evapotranspiration covers have not been as effective in wetter climates, geomembranes are nearly as effective as evapotranspiration covers, but can function in essentially any climate (Albright et al. 75). This is an important feature in a landfill cover, because obviously many landfills in the United States will be built in the humid Southeast or the rainy Northwest. Landfill cover systems must be developed for those regions as well in order to protect the environment from contamination and human health from pollutants. In those places that evapotranspiration covers would be ineffective, geomembranes offer a useful alternative. They consist, basically, of a layer of synthetic material -- generally a plastic of some kind -- that diverts water around and away from the refuse site. In combination with compacted clay and, sometimes, surface vegetation, geomembranes are functional alternatives to conventional landfill covers.
But, of course, these are not the only alternatives available. Research is being conducted into more exotic and unexpected landfill cover systems, whose effectiveness is less certain though nonetheless promising. Research into the use of anaerobically digested lime-stabilized wastewater sludge and soil as a cover for landfills produced surprisingly positive results. The researchers found that, in fact, the cover method had no negative effect on the landfill and produced no leached contaminants more significant than those produced from a clay compacted, conventional cover. The true potential of this cover type is in its extreme cost effectiveness, the fact that it could serve as an outlet for lime waste, and the sludge actually enhances and hastens natural decomposition of the landfill waste (Rhew and Barlaz 499). While it might seem a bit unconventional, perhaps too alternative, to simply dump sludge on top of a landfill as a cover method, there is every indication that it could be a successful remediation strategy as an alternative cover.
Another promising, albeit equally alternative method, is the use of cellulose material as a cover. Though actually forbidden by regulation in some places, there is research to suggest that cellulose covers could provide reasonable protection and sequestration of landfill contaminants. In the case of a recent study, researchers examined the effects of covering a landfill with waste cellulose material produced during the paper recycling process (Panarotto et al. 123). The researchers found, amazingly, that this cover method had no negative effects on the hydraulic or geomechanical requirements of a basic landfill cover. In other words, a cellulose cover of waste paper product performed as well as a landfill cover as required by the local laws and regulations. There was some concern that that cover material would not be a success because it is biodegradable and would settle in variable, and highly unpredictable, ways. But this proved not to be the case. After 400 days of close scrutiny by the researchers, it became clear that the cellulose cover was as functional as any conventional method for protecting landfills.
It is clear that modern landfills are moving towards a crisis point. Environmental damage and health threats caused by improperly contained landfills sites are increasing. The conventional techniques for completely isolating landfill waste form the surrounding environment is, quite simply, unrealistic. Worse, the damage that compacted clay barriers inevitably suffer means that an unfortunately high proportion of landfills using this cover technique are facing systemic failures. These threats add up to the need for new landfill cover strategies that are more cost-effective and more in-tune with the natural cycles and processes that consistently undermine the efficacy of conventional covers.
As this literature review has shown, however, alternative cover strategies for landfills have reached a significant stage of technical maturity and can be implemented in many sites without fear or compunction. Especially promising are methods like evapotranspiration, geomembranes, and anisotropic barriers that direct water away from the landfill site instead of through it. Together, these alternatives and others challenge the conventional wisdom that there is only one solution to the problem of waste remediation. Complete sequestration and "entombment" is not a viable option save perhaps in a few isolated incidences. To produce truly successful landfill covers, waste managers must attune themselves more closely to the local process and natural cycles that will affect the landfill site immediately and in the future. In this way, landfill covers can be implemented that are best suited for the specific locations in which they are needed.
Albright, William H., Benson, Craig H., Gee, Glendon W., Roesler, Arthur C., and Rock, Steven a. "Examining the Alternatives." Civil Engineering 73.5 (May 2003): 70-75.
Dwyer, Stephen F. "Alternative Landfill Covers Pass the Test." Civil Engineering 68.9 (Sept. 1998): 50-52.
Dwyer, Stephen F. "Finding a Better Cover." Civil Engineering 71.1 (Jan. 2001): 58-63.
Environmental Protection Agency. "Evapotranspiration Landfill Cover Systems Fact Sheet." EPA: Solid Waste and Emergency Response. Sept. 2003. Mar. 2007 http://www.epa.gov.
Hauser, Victor L. "Alternative Landfill Remediation -- Ready for Air Force Use." Proceedings, 2003 AFCEE Technology Transfer Workshop. 25 Feb. 2003. Mar. 2007 http://www.afcee.brooks.af.mil/products/techtrans/LandfillCovers/Alt_Cover_abst_final_AFCEE.pdf.
Koerner, Robert M. And Daniel, David E. "Better Cover-Ups." Civil Engineering 62.5 (Mar 1992): 55-57.
Panarotto, Claudia Teizeira, Cabral, Alexandre Rodrigues, and Lefebvre, Guy. "Environmental, Geotechnical, and Hydraulic Behavior of a Cellulose-Rich by-Product Used as Alternative Cover Material." Journal of Environmental Engineering and Science 4.2 (mar. 2005):…[continue]
"Alternative Landfill Covers Time For" (2007, March 28) Retrieved December 7, 2016, from http://www.paperdue.com/essay/alternative-landfill-covers-time-for-73119
"Alternative Landfill Covers Time For" 28 March 2007. Web.7 December. 2016. <http://www.paperdue.com/essay/alternative-landfill-covers-time-for-73119>
"Alternative Landfill Covers Time For", 28 March 2007, Accessed.7 December. 2016, http://www.paperdue.com/essay/alternative-landfill-covers-time-for-73119
20. In determining these ratios, the government must use Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for governments, and have its financial statements audited by an independent certified public accountant." (EPA). However, governments who are in default on general obligation bonds or that has any oustanding bonds below a certain rating are ineligible. Operators can also receive corporate guarantees from a guarantor, but that guarantor has to be either a parent corporation
9% Yard Trimmings - 12.9% Food scraps - 12.4%; Plastics - 11.7%; Rubber, leather and textiles - 7.3% Metals - 7.6% Wood - 5.5% Glass - 5.3% The following figure shows the number of landfills in the United States between 1998 and 2006 Number of Landfills in the United States 1998-2006 Source: EPA (1997) The work of van der Zee and de Visser entitled: "Assessing the Opportunities of Landfill Mining" states: "Long-term estimates make clear that the amount of solid waste
The waste group contains 3 items: WAS1 -- Storing of Recyclable Household Waste and Non-recyclable Waste WAS2 -- Building Location Waste Management WAS3 -- Composting Issue Measurement Criteria Points Awarded Household Recycling facilities Either Either Where the following recycling 1.8 services are given: • 3 internal storage bins for recyclable waste with -- min total capacity of 60 ltr -- no individual bin smaller than 15 ltr -- all of the bins in a devoted position that is accessible to disabled people 1.8 or or Where full recycling
Less need for more landfill space reduces the cost and resources needed to secure new landfill space. "Composting also extends municipal landfill life by diverting organic materials from landfills and provides a less costly alternative to conventional methods of remediating… contaminated soil." (EPA, 2008) Discussion It is evident that the advantages and benefits of composting are quite substantial, and arguably outweigh the disadvantages or issues involved with the process. Nevertheless, the
Nuclear Power the Best Alternative to Fossil Fuel? Is nuclear energy the best alternative to fossil fuels in terms of the need for energy, taking into account the economy and the environment? This is an issue that embraces several other issues, in particular global climate change, the science behind climate change, the politics surrounding climate change and the continuing need for new sources of energy. This paper will address those
New Product Plan The PhotoDrive Pro-is a portable hard drive with a high-res screen and fold-out keyboard. It is targeted at photographers both professional and serious amateur. This market has a perpetual need for storage, and benefits from the additionally functionality offered by this drive. In particular, the ability to operate in remote, dangerous or bad weather locations without risking their laptops is a valuable feature of this product. The product
Environmental Case Study Case Title: SWANCC v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Parties: The Petitioner is the Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County (SWANCC) and the respondent is the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Facts: The petitioner, SWANCC, is a consortium of 23 suburban Chicago cities and villages that united in an effort to locate and develop a disposal site for baled nonhazardous solid waste. SWANCC had