United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Municipal Environmental
Research Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA-600/S2-84-124  Sept. 1984
Project  Summary
Comparison  of  Leachate
Characteristics from  Selected
Municipal  Solid Waste Test  Cells
Richard J. Wigh
  Leachate characteristics were com-
pared for  samples  taken  from  a
municipal solid waste test cell at Boone
County,  Kentucky, and for samples
from other  similar research  projects.
Leachate  concentrations  and  mass
removals  from five test  cells  were
compared for at least three  chemical
parameters. Weighted mean concentra-
tion  histories were compared  both
graphically and with  a  simple
mathematical  description  of the
concentration trend over time. Cell
performances were not identical, but
the  normalized   leachate  data did
indicate repetitive trends and a range of
performance.
  This Project Summary was developed
by  EPA's  Municipal  Environmental
Research  Laboratory, Cincinnati. OH,
to  announce key findings  of the
research  project  that is  fully
documented in a separate report  of the
same title (see Project Report entering
information at back).

Introduction
  The Boone County Field  Site (BCFS)
was established to investigate production
of leachate from municipal solid  waste
test cells and other environmental effects
of landfills. Research was also conducted
to determine the  effect of  cell size on
leachate characteristics and history and
to compare the performance of identical
small-scale cells. Five municipal solid
waste test cells were constructed during
1971 and  1972.  The research  was
concluded and the site was closed in
September 1980.
  One of  the   primary   conclusions
reached in the Boone County study was
that most of the leachate constituent
concentration histories showed generally
similar trends. The concentration history
appeared to be based more on cumulative
leachate volume rather  than on time.
Results also indicated that both identical
cells and different-sized cells demon-
strated a range of leachate behavior rather
than statistical similarity. The object of this
study  was to  compare results from
other  municipal refuse test cells with
those of the BCFS to determine whether
leachate characteristics  were  similar
over a wider range of experimental con-
ditions.
  Two  of the  BCFS  cells and three
additional test  cells  were  chosen  for
comparison. One was a  field-scale cell
constructed   in  Sonoma  County,
California, during 1971.  The two other
were from small-scale municipal refuse
cell research  conducted  at  Georgia
Institute of  Technology  in   Atlanta,
Georgia, by Frederick G. Pohland, and the
U.S. Environmental  Protection Agency
(EPA)  Center  Hill Research facility in
Cincinnati,  Ohio. Data for the selected
test cells are summarized in Table 1.
  For  these five cells,  only  chemical
oxygen demand (COD), chloride, and iron
were  analyzed  on  a  regular  basis
throughout  the entire project period for
all five studies. As a result, comparative
analysis of leachate composition had to
be limited in scope.

Findings
  Typical weighted mean concentration
histories and  mass removal plots are
shown in Figures 1 through 4. Data are
displayed as a function  of cumulative
leachate volume rather  than of time.

-------
 Table 1.    Summary of Test Cell Data
Avg. Annual
Leachate
Test Cell (L/kg dry refuse)
BCFS ttl
Sonoma Co Cell C
BCFS tt2B
Georgia Institute of
Technology Control Cell
Center Hill #4
057
1 91
0.58
2.15'
0.99
Refuse Mass
Dry Weight Max Refuse
(kg) Depth (m)
286,000
352.000
2.113
636'
1.855
256
2.62
2.56
3.28
2.4
Refuse Dry
Density
Ikg/m*)
429
460
314
186
290
                                                                                 equation increased with higher leachate
                                                                                 flow rate. Further modifications to the
                                                                                 equation were  needed to  make  more
                                                                                 definitive performance comparisons.
                                                                                   The  full  report  was  submitted   in
                                                                                 fulfillment   of  Purchase  Order  No.
                                                                                 C2652NAST by  Regional  Services
                                                                                 Corporation, Inc.,  under sponsorship  of
                                                                                 the  U.S.  Environmental  Protection
                                                                                 Agency.
 "'Estimated Values

 Leachate  volume  and  mass  removals
 have been normalized by dividing by the
 dry weight of refuse in the cell. Leachate
 volume and mass  removal  from  the
 control cell at  Georgia  Institute  of
 Technology had to be estimated since
 leachate volumes were not recorded.
  Graphic   comparisons  of  weighted
 mean  concentration  histories and mass
 removals  for the  two field-scale  cells
 indicated performance similarity for COD,
 sodium, potassium,  and  ammonia-N.
 Chloride   concentrations  and  mass
 removals   had  similar trends,  but the
 Sonoma data were very erratic during the
 late   portions  of  the  study.  Iron
 concentrations  showed little similarity.
 Indications were that iron concentrations
 were diluted by higher rates of leachate
 flow,  apparently  because of a  time-
 dependent rate of iron availability  from
 the refuse mass. Calcium removals in the
 Sonoma study were only 60% of those
 in the Boone County field cell, perhaps
 because of dilution from higher leachate
 production. Ammonia-N removal differed
 by only 15% at a cumulative leachate
 volume of 4.5 L/kg of dry refuse.
  Graphic comparisons of leachate char-
 acteristics  from the small-scale  cells
 were limited to the  Boone County and
 Center Hill studies because of lack of
 leachate volume data from the work at
 Georgia   Institute  of  Technology.
 Weighted  mean concentrations for COD
 for  Boone  County and Center Hill had
 similar peaks at field capacity followed by
 comparable downward  trends.  Mass
 removals were almost identical over the
full  range  of the study.  COD mass
 removed from the field-scale cells  was
only 60% of that from the two small cells.
 Peak concentrations  of  chloride  in the
two small cells were  only slightly differ-
ent, but the concentrations in the Boone
County cell  tended  to  be   higher
throughout the study period, resulting in
a  mass removal  almost  twice  that
recorded at Center Hill. Iron showed very
little similarity in concentration or mass
removal,  perhaps because of  limited
solubility and subsequent dilution in the
higher flow Center Hill cell.
  Cell  performance was also compared
using  a  simple  exponential  equation
describing the leachate constituent con-
centration   trends.  The  equation
correlated  reasonably well  with  the
leachate history data over time (from the
point at which the cells  achieved field
capacity to a cumulative leachate volume
of 4.5 L/kg of dry refuse). This correlation
was demonstrated by the fact that 13 of
the  20 curve fittings had correlation
coefficients of 0.95  or greater. Lower
peak  concentrations  at  field  capacity
were generally predicted for  cells with
the highest  leachate production rates.
The mass generation rate constant in the
o>
.§'
§
  I
  8
  cj
  c
  <8
  I
                                                                Sonoma, Cell C
                                                                BCFSttl
Figure 1.
                             234

                     Cumulative Leachate Volume. L/kg of Dry Refuse

         COD concentration history.

-------
1
£
•s
  1
  o
  I
  8
  •S
  I
      100
       80
     40
     20
                      Sonoma, Cell C
                       BCFSH1
                                 234

                        Cumulative Leachate Volume, L/kg of Dry Refuse
Figure 2.    COD mass removal.
  I
  §
  .
  i
       SO
       40
      30
       2O
       10
                                                              O—Georgia Control

                                                              A	BCFSH2B

                                                              O   Center Hill *4
                                 2345
                        Cumulative Leachate Volume. L/kg of Dry Kef use
Figure  3.    Small cell COD concentration history.

-------
    o
    I
    §
    O
    1
    (o
        700
         80
         60
         40
         20
                 o-	Georgia Control
                 A	 BCFSH2B
                 o	Center Hill H4
  Figure 4.
                      12345

                          Cumulative Leachate Volume, L/kg of Dry Refuse

             Small cell COD mass removal.
      Richard J. Wigh is with Regional Services Corporation, Inc., Columbus, IN 47203.
      Norma M. Lewis is the EPA Project Officer (see below/.
      The complete  report, entitled "Comparison of Leachate Characteristics from
        Selected Municipal Solid Waste Test Cells," (Order No. PB 84-220 276; Cost:
        $ 10.00, subject to change) will be available only from:
              National Technical Information Service
              5285 Port Royal Road
              Springfield,  VA 22161
              Telephone: 703-487-4650
      The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
              Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
              U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
              Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
                                    OS  t-Wik   KPOTECTIoiM  AGhNCY
                                    "ftGlUiM  S  LJoRARY
                                          S   JtArtrtUK^  bTREEl
                                                                                U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1984 —759-015/7804

-------