Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Using published data, this study examined differences in pollutant levels in the leachate between landfills
Received 14 January 2019 and dumpsites in Africa, Asia and Latin America. It is the first to focus on the impacts of climate and the
Revised 24 April 2019 age of the site on the pollutants in these continents, from a holistic perspective. Differences between geo-
Accepted 17 June 2019
graphical regions were limited. While it was found that there were statistically significant differences in
organic, inorganic loads and heavy metals between landfills and dumpsites, with higher concentration of
pollutants in dumpsites. Links between selected metals were found, in particular for Cu, Cr, Zn, Pb and
Keywords:
Mn. Contrary to the findings of others, climate and the age of the site generally did not have statistically
Climate
Dumpsite
significant impacts on pollutant levels. This suggests that the concentration of pollutants from sites in the
Landfill three continents may be more influenced by local conditions, consumption patterns and the waste man-
Leachate agement habits of individuals. Implications for governance are discussed.
Pollutants Ó 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Developing countries
Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416
2. Literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 417
3. Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
3.1. Key types of sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
3.2. Parameters chosen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
3.3. Characterisation of the landfills and dumpsites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
3.4. Statistical analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
4. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
4.1. Key types of sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
4.2. Leachate quality by site . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 418
5. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421
Annex 1. Data of the dumpsites analysed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 421
Annex 2. Data of the landfills analysed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 424
Annex 3. Results of statistical analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 427
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430
1. Introduction son per day. With rapid population growth and urbanization,
annual waste generation is expected to increase by 70% from
Globally, waste generation rates are rising (Kaza et al., 2018; 2016 levels to 3.40 billion tonnes in 2050 (Kaza et al., 2018).
Mor et al., 2018). In 2016, the worlds’ cities generated 2.01 billion According to the World Bank (2018), ‘developing’ countries are
tonnes of solid waste, amounting to a footprint of 0.74 kg per per- those with a per capita gross national income (GNI) of $US12,055
(i.e. upper middle income), with ‘developed’ countries being those
⇑ Corresponding author. with a higher GNI. Managing waste effectively is essential for
E-mail address: mentore.vaccari@unibs.it (M. Vaccari). building sustainable and liveable cities, but it remains a challenge
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.06.032
0956-053X/Ó 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
M. Vaccari et al. / Waste Management 95 (2019) 416–431 417
for many developing countries and cities (Collivignarelli et al., 2017). For example, in tropical climates such as in Brazil, elevated
2011; Di Bella and Vaccari, 2014; Ravindra et al., 2015; UNEP temperatures and volumes of precipitation speed up the process of
and ISWA, 2015; Mor et al., 2018). waste degradation and leachate formation (Monteiro et al., 2002;
The International Solid Waste Association (ISWA, 2016) states Tränkler et al., 2005). The quantity and type of waste received by
that dumpsites receive roughly 40% of the world’s waste and they landfills is also important (ISWA, 2012). For example, higher quanti-
serve around 3–4 billion people. Most of the world’s dumpsites and ties of bio-waste may accentuate environmental degradation and/or
non-engineered landfills are located in Africa, Latin America and climate impacts. For older landfills and those with no liners, leachate
Asia, and impact directly on the public and environmental health is often rarely collected and therefore will percolate into the ground-
of approximately 64 million people (Mavropoulos and Newman, water (Qi et al., 2018). Various authors (e.g. Sinha et al., 1978; Zan
2015; ISWA, 2016). At the same time, some two billion people have et al., 2013), have shown that the free ion activity of Zn, Cu, Ni, Cd,
no waste collection and three billion no controlled waste disposal and Pb in metal-contaminated soil is a function of pH and soil
(CIWM and WasteAid UK, 2018). As a result around nine million organic carbon. For example, the lower the pH, the higher the solu-
people die each year of diseases linked to either mismanagement bility of the cations (Martı´nez and Motto, 2000).
of waste or pollutants. In ‘young’ landfills (0–5 years, i.e. the acid phase), the leachate
ISWA (2012) notes that in many developing economies, uncon- has a low pH and high concentrations of easily degraded organic
trolled open dumpsites are more widely employed than controlled matter and volatile acids. In mature landfills (the methanogenic
and engineered landfills. Residents in developing countries phase), methane production is high, the pH of the leachate is high
(especially the urban poor), are particularly severely impacted by inef- and the organic material is present primarily as humic and fulvic
fective management of waste. According to the World Bank (2018), fractions (Kurniawan et al., 2006; Kulikowska and Klimiuk, 2008;
waste management can often comprise 20–50% of municipal budgets. Ziyang et al, 2009).
Thus in developing countries, over 90% of the waste is often disposed Open dumps and poorly managed landfills pose a risk to health
in unregulated dumps or openly burned. Some 38 out of 50 of the and safety, as well as to the environment. The risks posed by the
world’s largest uncontrolled dumpsites are in coastal areas, meaning leachate, are amplified by the lack of leachate containment sys-
that the waste and leachate go directly into the water courses and tems in many developing countries, leading to high concentrations
sea (ISWA, 2016). Indeed, Cole (2018) argues that more effective man- of organic and inorganic pollutants in the surface and ground
agement of waste in developing countries could halve the quantity of water (Oyelami et al., 2013; Maiti et al., 2016; ISWA, 2016;
plastics going into the world’s oceans. Bhatt et al. (2017) note that dri- Naveen et al., 2017). In a previous study by the authors (Vaccari
ven by increasingly stringent international policies, it is likely that the et al., 2018), it was found that the concentration of the hazards
frequency and range of monitoring various leachate quality parame- determined in leachate from dumpsites in developing countries,
ters (e.g. BOD, COD, alkalinity, organic compounds, total dissolved strongly influenced the geographical range of the risk. Risks are
solids, etc.) in developing countries will increase. therefore posed not only to individuals (directly and indirectly),
Understanding the risks posed by the sites in developing but also to the surrounding animals and plants, and ecosystems.
countries, and the key factors influencing these risks (particularly Therefore, ineffective landfills and dumpsites in developing
leachate contaminant levels), is therefore crucial to the develop- countries can result in both environmental hazards (e.g. surface
ment of measures to mitigate them (Zurbrügg et al., 2014; and ground water pollution, fires and the production of greenhouse
Perteghella and Vaccari, 2017). While various studies have sought gases), and public health hazards (Kaza et al., 2018; Vaccari et al.,
to examine a range of issues related to landfill leachate (e.g. quan- 2018). For example, Cole (2018) notes that if the growing volume
tities, treatment and sources), none has sought to undertake a large of waste in emerging economies is not properly controlled, dump-
scale, empirical characterisation of leachate from landfills and sites could account for 8–10% of global greenhouse gas emissions
dumpsites in developing countries. This study therefore aimed to by 2025.
empirically compare and contrast the nature of the risks posed These hazards result because leachate contains various organic
by leachate from landfills and dumpsites, in developing countries. materials (e.g. biodegradable and non-biodegradable carbon,
including humic compounds) and inorganic materials (e.g. heavy
2. Literature review metals), nitrogen compounds (e.g. organic nitrogen, ammonia-
nitrogen, nitrites and nitrates), and inorganic salts (Kamaruddin
Open dumps and non-engineered landfills are common in devel- et al., 2017; Saleem et al., 2018). Among the key heavy metals mainly
oping countries (ISWA, 2016; Kaza et al., 2018; Costa et al., 2019; present in leachate are Cu, Zn, Pb, Cd, Hg and As (Shehzad et al.,
Idowu et al., 2019). For example, studies have suggested that less 2015). Oyelami et al. (2013) found that for most of the trace metals,
than 10% of the waste in Nigeria and Ghana goes to an engineered the concentrations were below detectable limits, except for Zn, Fe,
landfill site (Aziale and Asafo-Adjei, 2013). While, Adeniran et al. and Mn. Fe and Zn concentrations fell well within the acceptable
(2014) found that some 68% of the waste in Nigeria is indiscrimi- limit of both World Health Organization (WHO) and National Stan-
nately dumped. Despite the fact that the sites are commonly used, dards for Drinking Water Quality (NSDWQ) standards, while Mn
studies examining the factors driving the composition of the lea- concentrations were above the limit in most of the surface and shal-
chate (the effluent that forms at the bottom of the landfill), from low groundwater downslope of the dumpsite. However, the risks
these sites are often dated, and tend to be focused at a country level (e.g. the concentrations of BOD and COD in particular), can decrease
(e.g. Gomez Martin et al., 1995; Tatsi and Zouboulis, 2002; Al-Yaqout as a function of time and space (Kulikowska and Klimiuk, 2008;
and Hamoda, 2003; Kylefors, 2003; Eusufet al., 2007; Kulikowska Bhatt et al., 2017). Given the changing nature of waste being gener-
and Klimiuk, 2008; Sourmunen et al., 2008). There are only a very ated (e.g. with growing quantities of electrical and electronic wastes,
limited number of studies that have attempted a more global analy- containing a range of heavy metals), and expected increased moni-
sis (e.g. Zacharof and Butler, 2004; Bhatt et al., 2017). However, toring regime in developing countries, it is important to have an
Zacharof and Butler (2004)’s work focuses only on estimating total understanding of the potential risks posed.
organic carbon, BOD, and ammonia over time. While Bhatt et al. Thus while previous studies have examined various hazards
(2017) is concerned primarily with COD and BOD. posed by landfills and dumpsites in developing countries, they
Key influencing factors on leachate composition have been found have been limited, and in some cases inconclusive. A more holistic
to include the types of waste received, the age of the landfill and the study examining a wider range of geographical and environmental
climate (Kjeldsen et al., 2002; Castillo et al., 2007; Naveen et al., parameters is therefore needed.
418 M. Vaccari et al. / Waste Management 95 (2019) 416–431
3.1. Key types of sites A defined significance level, a, is the probability of a study
rejecting the null hypothesis. While the p-value is the probability
Three main types of sites were initially distinguished of obtaining a result at least as extreme, assuming the null hypoth-
(Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012; Mavropoulos and Newman, esis was true (Dalgaard, 2008).
2015): The unpaired Student’s t-test was first conducted (Armitage and
Berry, 1994; Coombs et al., 1996; Ruxton, 2006). However, since the
– dumpsites: open and not regulated holes in the ground with no unpaired t-test is not very strong when the two population variances
environmental protection; are not assumed to be equal, further analysis through the Welch’s
– engineered landfill: characterized by the registration and place- test was then undertaken (Derrick et al., 2016; Ruxton, 2006). As a
ment/compaction of waste; it uses daily cover material, surface consequence, finally, only the Welch’s test results are reported.
and ground water monitoring, infrastructure and a liner; For the Welch’s test, Eqs. (5) and (6) were utilised as follows
– sanitary landfill: characterized by the registration and place- (Derrick et al., 2016):
ment/compaction of waste; it uses daily cover, measures for final l l2
top cover and closure, proper siting, infrastructure, a liner and t ¼ q1ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð5Þ
d21 d2
leachate treatment are in place, as well as a post-closure plan. n1
þ n22
2 2
d1 d2
A search was made using relevant search engines (e.g. Science- n1
þ n22
Direct) and key search words (e.g. landfills, dumpsites, leachate
m ¼ 2 2 2 2 ð6Þ
d d
1 2
and developing countries). As the aim was to look at developing n1 n2
þ ðn2 1Þ
ðn1 1Þ
countries, the search focused on landfills and dumpsites in Asia,
Africa and Latin America. Papers from 2005 were chosen to ensure Once t and m were computed, these statistics were then used
the currency of the information. Only an interesting paper was older with the t-distribution to test the null hypothesis that the two pop-
(Stuart and Klinck, 1998). In total, 137 samples from 104 landfills ulation means were equal (Coombs et al., 1996). The probability of
from Latin America, Asia and Africa were analysed. In some cases, the null hypothesis occurring was indicated by the p-value.
the articles did not give a clear distinction between sanitary and
engineered landfills, as a result the two categories were combined. 4. Results and discussion
Specific information related to each site analysed are available in
Annex 1 and Annex 2, concerning dumpsites and landfills, 4.1. Key types of sites
respectively.
As shown in Fig. 1, most of the samples in Latin America (70%)
were from sanitary or engineered landfills, while in Asia more than
3.2. Parameters chosen a half (57%) were dumpsites, and in Africa most (62%) came from
sanitary or engineered landfills.
Municipal solid waste composition, elapsed time, temperature, Fig. 2 shows that in Latin America most (80%) of the landfills
moisture and available oxygen are important factors influencing were in an area where the annual rainfall is between 1000–
the leachate quality. Thus, the type and age of the site as well as 1500 mm. In Asia, almost half (46.24%) of the landfills were in an
any pre-treatment of the waste or the presence of liners were area where the annual rainfall is over 1500 mm, while in Africa
noted. Based on Kamaruddin et al. (2017), the main parameters there was a fairly even spread of rainfall levels. Furthermore, most
selected were COD, BOD5, Ammonia Nitrogen (NH3-N), Al, As, Cd, of the data were from (dump) sites in Asian countries (indeed, 93
Cr, Cu, Fe, Hg, Mn, Ni, Pb and Zn. For each parameter, the mean of the 137 samples were from Asia), and they experienced high
l, standard deviation r, median Me and coefficient of variation levels of rainfall (>1500 mm). Therefore, the quantity of leachate
CV were calculated to determine the spread of the factors and produced would have been high. In addition, this quantity of lea-
impact of each at the site. chate would have led to a higher degree of solubilisation and the
In any paper when the value assigned to a parameter was given transport of the heavy metals.
as ‘‘less than . . .”, this value was used. When a range was indicated,
the mean of the two values was used. 4.2. Leachate quality by site
Table 2
Statistical comparison of pollutant levels in dumpsites and sanitary landfills (values
are expressed as mg/L).
Welch’s test
t m p
COD 2.60 80.42 <0.05
BOD5 0.67 86.84 >0.5
NH3-N 0.13 78.90 >0.5
As 4.00 12.06 <0.005
Cd 2.87 33.14 <0.01
Cr 2.01 33.55 <0.1
Fig. 2. Number of samples analysed according to the annual rainfall of the zone and Cu 3.05 47.86 <0.005
continent. Fe 1.08 33.79 <0.3
Mn 2.97 32.80 <0.01
Ni 0.96 39.38 <0.4
Pb 2.33 57.69 <0.05
Zn 2.69 36.79 <0.02
Table 1
A comparison of the biochemical parameters in the landfills and dumpsites (values are expressed as mg/L).
Table 3
Comparison of biochemical parameters between dumpsites and landfills from climatic zone A (values are expressed as mg/L).
Table 4
A comparison of the biochemical parameters in dumpsites and landfills from climatic zone C (values are expressed as mg/L).
Table 5
Comparison of biochemical parameters in landfills aged more than 10 years, and less than or equal to 10 years (values are expressed as mg/L).
Table 6
Comparison of biochemical parameters in landfills with age 10 years in climatic zones A or C (values are expressed as mg/L).
Overall, differences in pollutant levels between zones A and C Motto, 2000; Zan et al., 2013). For example, Sinha et al. (1978)
were not found to be statistically significant. The only exception postulated on a solubility relationship between Fe, Mn, Cu and
was COD (see Annex 3, Table A3.12), which was statistically signif- Zn in alkaline and calcareous soils. The pH of the soil, as well
icant higher in the case of dumpsites from climatic zones A com- as its organic matter content were found to significantly affect
pared to C. the solubility of the four micronutrient cations. It would be
The existence of links between Cu, Cr, Zn, Pb and Mn (Table 2; interesting therefore to undertake further work on the nature
Table A3.11 and A3.13 Annex 3) is an interesting one as it con- of the soils within the sites in the different regions. Such work
firms the findings of others (e.g. Sinha et al., 1978; Martı´nez and would provide further evidence as regards the nature of the risks
M. Vaccari et al. / Waste Management 95 (2019) 416–431 421
and the pathways, and serve to inform the design of sites, exclu-
Hg
Castillo et al., 2007; Kulikowska and Klimiuk, 2008; Naveen et al.,
2017; Mor et al., 2018), in this study, climate and age generally
As
did not appear to have statistically significant differences in pollu-
tant levels (Tables A3.12–A3.17, Annex 3). This leads to the infer-
0.52
0.52
0.0837 0.00793 0.2
ence that the concentration of the pollutants from sites in the
Zn
three continents may be more influenced by local conditions, con-
0.4596 1.5432
0.3009 0.6244
[mg/l] [mg/l] [mg/l]
sumption patterns and the waste management habits of individu-
Cr
als, than climate and the age of the site. For example, it is known
that the income level of a country influences the solid waste com-
position as well as the solid waste generation per capita (UNEP
Ni
and ISWA, 2015), factors which condition the quality of leachate.
0.02772 20.13
This is an issue that warrants further investigation.
6.54
0.04532 1.14
3.83
6.14
Al
Further analyses showed that there were no statistically signif-
icant differences in the pollutant levels of sites that were 10 years
0.1714
0.4552
[mg/l] [mg/l]
0.420
0.64
0.68
old in climatic zone A, compared to those that were 10 years in
Pb
climatic zone C (see Annex 3, Table A3.17). However, this may sim-
2.657
2.711
ply have been due to limitations in the number of available data to
Cu
use (see Annex 3, Tables A39 and A310).
It is important to note that the only statistical significant differ-
0.02172
0.05784
0.00266
0.01021
nitrogen [mg/l] [mg/l] [mg/l]
0.046
<0.05
ence for almost all the pollutants was found when comparing dump-
Cd
sites and landfills. In this case, as already highlighted, the pollutant
concentrations were higher in the dumpsites.
1.99
5.76
4.55
3.6
4.5
Fe
24.51
43.83
61.34
63.35
5. Conclusions
9.78
31.3
Ammonia Mn
1253.5
1060.6
[mg/l]
fill leachate from Africa, Latin America and Asia, using existing
2776
930
data. Comparing dumpsites and landfills from climatic zone A, only
the concentrations of three heavy metals (Cr, Ni, Zn) were statisti-
[mg/l]
BOD5
720
32
paring the concentration of pollutants in dumpsite leachate from
different climatic zone (A and C), only COD was statistically signif-
23,306
27,200
[mg/l]
7845
COD
icantly higher in climatic zone A. The findings suggest that the con-
centration of pollutants from sites in the three continents are
influenced largely by local conditions, consumption patterns and
Rainfall the site
[mm/y] [years]
Climaticzone Annual Age of
47
47
47
47
13
14
12
22
50
50
1089
1089
1089
1089
1089
1089
721
185
721
by the ISWA to close dumpsites and poorly managed landfills are 540
therefore vital. However, engineered sites are financially expensive
to build and maintain. This is often well beyond the resources of
many developing countries. In addition, closing dumpsites is not
an easy or quick process. In many cases, there are also other factors
C
B
C
Woldeyohans et al.
(1998)
(2014)
(2014)
(2011)
(2011)
(2011)
(2011)
(2011)
(2015)
stringent policies (e.g. ISWA, 2016; Bhatt et al., 2017), and growing
public opinion to address the issues, a more detailed and holistic
understanding of the key risks, and the factors driving them, are
crucial to mitigating the risks.
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
Ethiopia
Country
Jordan
India
Iraq
Disposal Site
Disposal Site
Disposal Site
Disposal Site
and dumpsites from all over the world. This database should focus
not solely on the leachate, but also on the soils and surrounding
Erbil City
Delhi
Site
423
424
Annex 2. Data of the landfills analysed
425
(continued on next page)
426
Annex 2 (continued)
Table A3.1
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in dumpsites.
Table A3.2
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in sanitary landfills.
Table A3.3
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in dumpsites from climatic zone A.
Table A3.4
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in dumpsites from climatic zone C.
Table A3.5
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in landfills from climatic zone A.
Table A3.6
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in landfills from climatic zone C.
Table A3.7
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in landfills of more than 10 years.
Table A3.8
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in landfills of 10 years.
Table A3.9
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in landfills of 10 years and climatic zone A.
Table A3.10
Evaluation of biochemical parameters in landfills of 10 years and climatic zone C.
Table A3.14
Evaluation of statistical significance of the results comparing Table A3.5 (landfills
from climatic zone A) and Table A3.6 (landfills from climatic zone C).
Welch’s test
Table A3.11
t m p
Evaluation of statistical significance of the results comparing Table A3.1 (dumpsites)
and Table A3.2 (sanitary landfills). COD 1.11 41.70 <0.3
BOD5 0.91 35.42 <0.4
Welch’s test NH3-N 1.20 33.27 <0.3
t m p Fe 1.74 17.17 <0.1
Pb 1.95 13.16 <0.1
COD 2.60 80.42 <0.05 Cr 2.08 14.44 <0.1
BOD5 0.67 86.84 >0.5 Zn 0.87 27.07 <0.4
NH3-N 0.13 78.90 >0.5
Mn 2.97 32.80 <0.01
Fe 1.08 33.79 <0.3
Cd 2.87 33.14 <0.01
Cu 3.05 47.86 <0.005 Table A3.15
Pb 2.33 57.69 <0.05 Evaluation of statistical significance of the results comparing Table A3.7 (landfills of
Ni 0.96 39.38 <0.4 >10 years) and Table A3.8 (landfills of 10 years).
Cr 2.01 33.55 <0.1
Zn 2.69 36.79 <0.02 Welch’s test
As 4.00 12.06 <0.005 t m p
COD 1.46 23.49 <0.2
BOD5 1.09 42.81 <0.3
NH3-N 0.64 33.03 >0.5
Fe 0.30 33.00 >0.5
Cu 0.67 10.45 >0.5
Table A3.12 Pb 0.41 20.77 >0.5
Evaluation of statistical significance of the results comparing Table A3.3 (dumpsites Ni 0.44 12.10 >0.5
from climatic zone A) and Table A3.4 (dumpsites from climatic zone C). Cr 0.87 33.41 <0.4
Zn 1.67 30.19 <0.2
Welch’s test
t m p
COD 2.76 51.76 <0.01
Table A3.16
BOD5 1.53 47.72 <0.2
Evaluation of statistical significance of the results comparing Table A3.4 (dumpsites in
NH3-N 1.34 27.33 <0.2
climatic zone C) and Table A3.6 (landfills in climatic zone C).
Mn 2.15 9.54 <0.1
Fe 0.78 9.26 <0.5 Welch’s test
Pb 0.46 19.45 >0.5
t m p
COD 0.06 16.68 >0.5
BOD5 0.72 21.38 <0.5
NH3-N 1.22 34.12 <0.3
Fe 0.97 9.01 <0.4
Table A3.13 Pb 1.63 10.37 <0.2
Evaluation of statistical significance of the results comparing Table A3.3 (dumpsites in
climatic zone A) and Table A3.5 (landfills in climatic zone A).
References Monteiro, V.E.D., Melo, M.C., Jucá, J.F.T., 2002. Biological degradation analysis in
Muribeca solid waste landfill associated with local climate, Recife, Brazil. In:
Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on Environmental
Al-Yaqout, A., Hamoda, M., 2003. Evaluation of landfill leachate in arid climate —A
Geotechnics. August 11th - 15th. Rio Janeiro, Brazil, (in Portuguese).
case study. Environ. Int. 29, 593–600.
Mor, S., Negi, P., Ravindra, K., 2018. Assessment of groundwater pollution by
Armitage, P., Berry, G., 1994. Statistical methods in medical research. Blackwell
landfills in India using Leachate Pollution Index and Estimation of Error.
Scientific Publications, Oxford.
Environmental Nanotechnology, Monitoring and Management. Accepted for
Adeniran, A.A., Adewole, A.A., Olofa, S.A., 2014. Impact of solid waste management
publication.
on Ado Ekiti property values. Civil and Environmental Research. 6 (9), 29–35.
Naveen, B.P., Mahapatra, D.M., Sitharam, T.G., Sivapullaiah, P.V., Ramachandra, T.V.,
Aziale, L.K., Asafo-Adjei, E., 2013. Logistic challenges in urban waste management in
2017. Physico-chemical and biological characterization of urban municipal
Ghana (a case of tema metropolitan assembly). Eur. J. Busin. Manage. 5 (32),
landfill leachate. Environ. Pollut. 220, 1–12.
116–128.
Oyelami, A.C., Agbede, Aladejana JA, Oyelami, O.O., 2013. Assessment of the impact
Bhatt, A.H., Karanjekar, R.V., Altouqi, S., Sattler, M.L., Hossain, M.D.S., Chen, V.P.,
of open waste dumpsites on ground water quality: a case study of the Onibu-Eja
2017. Estimating landfill leachate BOD and COD based on rainfall, ambient
dumpsite, southwestern Nigeria. Procedia Earth Planet. Sci. 7, 648–651.
temperature, and waste composition: Exploration of a MARS statistical
Perteghella, A., Vaccari, M., 2017. Organic waste valorization through composting
approach. Environ. Technol. Innovation 8, 1–16.
process: A full-scale case study in Maxixe, Mozambique. Environ. Eng. Manage.
Castillo, E., Vergara, M., Moreno, Y., 2007. Landfill leachate treatment using a
J. 16 (8), 1819–1826.
rotating biological contractor and upward-flow anerobic sludge bed reactor.
Qi, C., Huang, J., Wang, B., Deng, S., Wang, Y., Yu, G., 2018. Contaminants of emerging
Waste Manage. 27, 720–726.
concern in landfill leachate in China: a review. Emerg. Contamin. 1, 10 (in
CIWM and WasteAid UK (2018). From the land to the sea. Northampton. UK.
press).
Cole, C., (2018). Plastic crisis: divert foreign aid to dumpsites in developing countries.
Ravindra, K., Kaur, K., Mor, S., 2015. System analysis of municipal solid waste
Available at: https://theconversation.com/plastic-crisis-divert-foreign-aid-to-
management in Chandigarh and minimization practices for cleaner emissions. J.
dumpsites-in-developing-countries-94341 (accessed 22 April 2019).
Cleaner Prod. 89, 251–256.
Collivignarelli, C., Vaccari, M., Di Bella, V., Giardina, D., 2011. Techno-economic
Rubel, F., Brugger, K., Haslinger, K., Auer, I., 2016. The climate of the European Alps:
evaluation for the improvement of MSW collection in Somaliland and Puntland.
Shift of very high resolution Köppen-Geiger climate zones 1800–2100.
Waste Manage. Res. 29 (5), 521–531.
Meteorol. Z. 26 (2), 115–125.
Coombs, W.T., Algina, J., Oltman, D., 1996. Univariate and multivariate omnibus
Rubel, F., Kottek, M., 2010. Observed and projected climate shifts 1901–2100
hypothesis tests selected to control type I error rates when population
depicted by world maps of the Koppen-Geiger climate classification. Meteorol.
variances are not necessarily equal. Rev. Edu. Res. 66, 137–179.
Z. 19 (2), 135–141.
Costa, A.M., Alfaia, R.G.M., Campos, J.C., 2019. Landfill leachate treatment in Brazil –
Ruxton, G.D., 2006. The unequal variance t-test is an underused alternative to
An overview. J. Environ. Manage. 232, 110–116.
Student’s t-test and the Mann-Whitney U test. Behav. Ecol. 17 (4), 688–690.
Dalgaard, P., 2008. Introductory Statistics with R, pp. 155–162. Series Editors: J.
Saleem, M., Spagni, A., Alibardi, L., Bertucco, A., Lavagnolo, M.C., 2018. Assessment
Chambers, D. Hand, W. Hardle. Springer. ISBN 978-0-387-79053-4.
of dynamic membrane filtration for biological treatment of old landfill leachate.
Derrick, B., Toher, D., White, P., 2016. Why Welch’s test is Type I error robust. Quant.
J. Environ. Manage. 213, 27–35.
Methods Psychol. 12 (1), 30–38.
Shehzad, A., Bashir, M.J.K., Sethupathi, S., Lim, J.W., 2015. An overview of
Di Bella, V., Vaccari, M., 2014. Constraints for solid waste management in
heavily polluted landfill leachate treatment using food waste as an
Somaliland. Proc. Inst. Civil Eng.: Waste Resour. Manage. 167 (2), 62–71.
alternative and renewable source of activated carbon. Process Saf.
Eusuf, M.A., Hossain, I., Noorbatcha, I.A., Zen, I.H., 2007. The effects of climate and
Environ. Prot. 98, 309–318.
waste composition on leachate and emissions of gas: A case study in Malaysian
Sinha, M.K., Dhillon, S.K., Dhillon, K.S., Dyanand, S., 1978. Solubility relationships of
context. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Sustainable Solid
iron, manganese, copper and zinc in alkaline and calcareous soils. Aust. J. Soil
Waste Management, pp. 437–443.
Res. 16 (1), 19–26.
Hoornweg, D., Bhada-Tata, P., 2012. What a waste. World Bank. Washington. DC,
Sourmunen, K., Ettala, M., Rintala, J., 2008. Internal leachate quality in a municipal
USA.
solid waste landfill: Vertical, horizontal and temporal variation and impacts of
Gomez Martin, M.A., Antiguedad Auzmendi, I., Pérez Olozaga, C., 1995. Landfill
leachate recirculation. J. Hazard. Mater. 160 (2), 601–607.
leachate: variation of quality with quantity. In: Christensen, T.H., Cossu, R.,
Stuart, M.E., Klinck, B.A., 1998. A catalogue of leachate quality for selected landfills
Stegmann, R. (Eds.). Sardinia ’95, Fifth International Landfill Symposium. S.
from newly industrialised countries. BGS Technical Report WC/98/49.
Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy, 2–6 October, vol. I(III). CISA (Environmental
Tatsi, A., Zouboulis, A., 2002. A field investigation of the quantity and quality of
Sanitary Engineering Centre), Cagliari. 345–354.
leachate from a municipal solid waste landfill in a Mediterranean climate
Idowu, I.A., Atherton, W., Hashim, K., Kot, P., Alkhaddar, R., Alo, B.I., Shaw, A., 2019.
(Thessaloniki, Greece). Adv. Environ. Res. 6 (3), 207–219.
An analyses of the status of landfill classification systems in developing
Tränkler, J., Visvanathan, C., Kuruparan, P., Tubtimthai, O., 2005. Influence of
countries: Sub Saharan Africa landfill experiences. Waste Manage. 87, 761–771.
tropical seasonal variation on landfill leachate characteristics- Results from
ISWA (International Solid Waste Association) (2012). State of the nation report:
lysimeter studies. Waste Manage. 25, 1013–1020.
landfilling practices and regulation in different countries.
UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme); International Solid Waste
ISWA (International Solid Waste Association) (2016). A roadmap for closing waste
Association (ISWA), 2015. Global Waste Management Outlook; United
dumpsites: the world’s most polluted places.
Nations Environment Programme: Nairobi, Kenya; ISBN 978-92-807-3479-9.
Kamaruddin, M.A., Yusoff, M.S., Rui, L.M., Isa, A.M., Zawawi, M.H., Alrozi, R., 2017. An
Vaccari, M., Vinti, G., Tudor, T., 2018. An analysis of the risk posed by leachate from
overview of municipal solid waste management and landfill leachate
dumpsites in developing countries. Environments 5 (9), 99.
treatment: Malaysia and Asian perspectives. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 24 (35),
World Bank, 2018. New country classifications by income level: 2018-2019.
26988–27020.
Available at: https://blogs.worldbank.org/opendata/new-country-
Kaza, S., Yao, L.C., Bhada-Tata, P., Van Woerden, F., 2018. What a Waste 2.0: a global
classifications-income-level-2018-2019 (accessed 22 April 2019).
snapshot of solid waste management to 2050. Urban Development.
Zacharof, A.I., Butler, A.P., 2004. Stochastic modelling of landfill leachate and biogas
Washington, DC. World Bank.
production incorporating waste heterogeneity. Model formulation and
Kjeldsen, P., Barlaz, M.A., Rooker, A.P., Baun, A., Ledin, A., Christensen, T.H., 2002.
uncertainty analysis. Waste Manage. 24 (5), 453–462.
Present and long-term composition of MSW landfill leachate: a review. Critic.
Zan, N.R., Datta, S.P., Rattan, R.K., Dwevedi, B.S., Meena, M.C., 2013. Prediction of the
Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 3, 297–336.
solubility of zinc, copper, nickel, cadmium, and lead in metal-contaminated
Kottek, M., Grieser, J., Beck, C., Rudolf, B., Rubel, F., 2006. World Map of the Köppen-
soils. Environ. Monit. Assess. 185 (12), 10015–10025.
Geiger climate classification updated. Meteorol. Z. 15 (3), 259–263.
Zurbrügg, C., Caniato, M., Vaccari, M., 2014. How assessment methods can support
Kottek, M., Rubel, F., 2017. World maps of Köppen-Geiger climate classification.
solid waste management in developing countries – A critical review.
High resolution map and data (Version March 2017). Available online at: http://
Sustainability 6 (2), 545–570.
koeppen-geiger.vu-wien.ac.at/present.htm (accessed 22 December 2018).
Kulikowska, D., Klimiuk, E., 2008. The effect of landfill age on municipal leachate References of Annex 1 and Annex 2
composition. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 5981–5985.
Kurniawan, T.A., Lo, W., Chan, G.Y.S., 2006. Physical-chemical treatments for Amaral, M.C.S., Ferreira, C.F.A., Lange, L., Aquino, S.F., 2007. Evaluation of the
removal of recalcitrant contaminants from landfill leachate. J. Hazard. Mater. molecular size distribution and anaerobic biodegradability landfill leachate.
129, 80–100. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste Management and
Kylefors, K., 2003. Evaluation of leachate composition by multivariate data analysis Landfill Symposium.
(MVDA). J. Environ. Manage. 68 (4), 367–376. Aziz, S.Q., Aziz, H.A., Bashir, M.J.K., Mojiri, A., 2015. Assessment of various tropical
Maiti, S.K., De, S., Hazra, T., Debsarkar, A., Dutta, A., 2016. Characterization of municipal landfill leachate characteristics and treatment opportunities. Global
leachate and its impact on surface and groundwater quality of a closed NEST J. 17 (3), 439–450.
dumpsite—A case study at Dhapa, Kolkata, India. Procedia Environ. Sci. 35, 391– Aziz, S.Q., Maulood, Y.I., 2015. Contamination valuation of soil and groundwater
399. source at anaerobic municipal solid waste landfill site. Environ. Monit. Assess.
Martı́nez, C.E., Motto, H.L., 2000. Solubility of lead, zinc and copper added to mineral 187 (12), 755.
soils. Environ. Pollut. 101 (1), 153–158. Azzouz, L., Boudjema, N., Aouichat, F., Kherat, M., Mameri, N., 2018. Membrane
Mavropoulos, A., Newman, D., 2015. Wasted health-the Tragic case of dumpsites. bioreactor performance in treating Algiers’ landfill leachate from using
https://www.iswa.org/fileadmin/galleries/Task_Forces/THE_TRAGIC_CASE_OF_ indigenous bacteria and inoculating with activated sludge. Waste Manage. 75,
DUMPSITES.pdf (accessed 30 November 2018). 384–390.
M. Vaccari et al. / Waste Management 95 (2019) 416–431 431
Bakraouy, H., Souabi, S., Digua, K., Dkhissi, O., Sabar, M., Fadil, M., 2017. Mavakala, B.K., Faucheur, S.L., Mulaji, C.K., Laffite, A., Devarajan, N., Biey, E.M.,
Optimization of the treatment of an anaerobicpretreated landfill leachate by Giuliani, G., Otamonga, J., Kabatusuila, P., Mpiana, P.T., Poté, J., 2016. Leachates
acoagulation–flocculation process usingexperimental design methodology. draining from controlled municipal solid waste landfill: Detailed geochemical
Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 109, 621–630. characterization and toxicity tests. Waste Manage. 55, 238–248.
Beyene, H., Banerjee, S., 2011. Assessment of the pollution status of the solid waste Miguel, M.G., Belinassi, L., Dominguesa, L.M., Nour, E.A.A., Pereira, S.Y., 2012.
disposal site of addis ababa city with some selected trace elements, Ethiopia. Variations of the physical and chemical characteristics of sanitary landfill
World Appl. Sci. J. 14 (7), 1048–1057. leachate after percolation into tropical soils. Chem. Eng. Trans. 28, 19–24.
Chantou, T., Lemunier, M., Martel, J.-L., Straka, M., Oberti, O., 2013. Physico-chemical Mishra, H., Rathod, M., Karmakar, S., Kumar, R., 2016. A framework for assessment
and biological assessment of the stability state of landfilled waste in a dump and characterisation of municipal solid waste landfill leachate: an application
site. Proceedings Sardinia 2013, Fourteenth International Waste Management to the Turbhe landfill, Navi Mumbai, India. Environ. Monit. Assess. 188, 357.
and Landfill Symposium. Mor, M., Ravindra, K., Dahiya, R.P., Chandra, A., 2006. Leachate characterization and
Cumar, S.K.M., Nagaraja, B., 2011. Environmental impact of leachate characteristics assessment of groundwater pollution near municipal solid waste landfill site.
on water quality. Environ. Monit. Assess. 178, 499–505. Environ. Monit. Assess. 118, 435–456.
El Ouaer, M., Kallel, A., Kasmi, M., Hassen, A., Trabelsi, I., 2017. Tunisian landfill Nakhaei, M., Amiri, V., Rezaei, K., Moosaei, F., 2015. An investigation of the potential
leachate treatment using Chlorella sp.: effective factors and microalgae strain environmental contamination from the leachate of the Rasht waste disposal site
performance. Arabian J. Geosci. 10 (20), 1–9. in Iran. Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ. 74, 233–246.
Emenike, C.U., Fauziah, S.H., Agamuthu, P., 2012. Characterization and toxicological Oketola, A.A., Akpotu, S.O., 2015. Assessment of solid waste and dumpsite leachate
evaluation of leachate from closed sanitary landfill. Waste Manage. Res. 30 (9), and topsoil. Chem. Ecol. 31 (2), 134–146.
888–897. Rafizul, I.M., Alamgir, M., Islam, M.M., 2011. Evaluation of contamination potential
Ferrari, A., Pradella, I., 2011. Leachate management with an evaporator using biogas of sanitary landfill lysimeter using leachate pollution index. Proceedings
and lagoons with floating cover in a Brazilian sanitary landfill – A case study. Sardinia 2011, Thirteenth International Waste Management and Landfill
Proceedings Sardinia 2011, Thirteenth International Waste Management and Symposium.
Landfill Symposium. Robinson, H., 2005. The composition of leachates from very large landfills: an
Ferreira, J.A., Ritter, E., Pires, J.A.C., Valladão, I.C., 2007. Diffusion on the compacted international review. Proceedings Sardinia 2005, Tenth International Waste
soil foundation and geomembrane in Rio das Ostras sanitary landfill, Brazil. Management and Landfill Symposium.
Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste Management and Robinson, H.D., Van Der Merwe, W., Mitchell, C., Gombault, E., Novella, P., Carville,
Landfill Symposium. M.S., 2007. Treatment of leachate from a large hazardous waste landfill site in
Hilles, A.H., Abu Amr, S.S., Hussein, R.A., El-Sebaie, O.D., Arafa, A.I., 2016. South Africa. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste
Performance of combined sodium persulfate/H2O2 based advanced oxidation Management and Landfill Symposium.
process in stabilized landfill leachate treatment. J. Environ. Manage. 166, 493– Sellami, I., Trabelsi, I., Sayadi, S., Aloui, F., Medhioub, K., Ghrabi, A., Bousselmi, L.,
498. 2009. Characterization and anaerobic batch reactor treatment of Jebel Chakir
Hu, L., Zeng, G., Chen, G., Dong, H., Liu, Y., Wan, J., Chen, A., Guo, Z., Yan, M., Wu, H., Landfill leachate. Desalination 246, 417–424.
Yu, Z., 2016. Treatment of landfill leachate using immobilized Phanerochaete Sewwandi, B.G.N., Takahiro, K., Kawamoto, K., Hamamoto, S., Asamoto, S., Sato H.,
chrysosporium loaded with nitrogen-doped TiO2 nanoparticles. J. Hazard. 2013. Evaluation of leachate contamination potential of municipal solid waste
Mater. 301, 106–118. dumpsites in Sri Lanka using leachate pollution index. Proceedings Sardinia
Israde-Alcantara, I., Delgado, O.B., Chavez, A.C., 2005. Geological characterization 2013, Fourteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium
and environmental implications of the placement of the Morelia Dump, Shinzato, M., Martins, M., Schalch, V., Wendland, E., 2013. Characteristics of landed
Michoacán, Central Mexico. Air Waste Manage. Assoc. 55, 755–764. material from an abandoned waste dump in Brazil. Proceedings Sardinia 2013,
Kale, S.S., Kadam, A.K., Kumar, S., Pawar, N.J., 2010. Evaluating pollution potential of Fourteenth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium
leachate from landfill site, from the Pune metropolitan city and its impact on Sholichin, M., 2012. Field investigation of groundwater contamination from solid
shallow basaltic aquifers. Environ. Monit. Assess. 162, 327–346. waste landfill in Malang, Indonesia. Int. J. Civil Environ. Eng. 12 (02).
Kanmani, S., Gandhimathi, R., 2013. Assessment of heavy metal contamination in Singh, R.K., Datta, M., Nema, A.K., 2009. A new system for groundwater
soil due to leachate migration from an open dumping site. Appl. Water Sci. 3, contamination hazard rating of landfills. J. Environ. Manage. 91, 344–357.
193–205. Stuart, M.E., Klinck, B.A., 1998. A catalogue of leachate quality for selected landfills
Karthikeyan, O.P., Kurian, J., Nagendran, R., 2007. Leachate recirculation to reduce from newly industrialised countries. BGS Technical Report WC/98/49.
the pollution potential of waste mined from open dumpsite – A lysimeter study. Strachan, L.J., Robinson, H.D., Last, S.D., Payne, G., Wright, M., 2007. Development of
Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste Management and leachate treatment at a large new tropical landfill site. Proceedings Sardinia
Landfill Symposium. 2007, Eleventh International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium.
Kaur, K., Mor, S., Ravindra, K., 2016. Removal of chemical oxygen demand from Umar, M., Abdul Aziz, H., Yusoff, M.S., 2010. Variability of Parameters Involved in
landfill leachate using cow-dung ash as a low-cost adsorbent. J. Colloid Interface Leachate Pollution Index and Determination of LPI from Four Landfills in
Sci. 469, 338–343. Malaysia. International Journal of Chemical Engineering. Volume 2010, Article
Khanh, N.H., Linh, P.T., Cat, L.V., 2007. The characteristic of leachate and current ID 747953, 6 pages.
status of leachate treatment technology in Vietnam. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Wagh, M.P., Bhandari, P.K., Kurhade, S., 2014. Ground Water Contamination by
Eleventh International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium. Leachate. International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering
Kortegast, A.P., Eldridge, S.F., Richards, B.A., Yong, S., Chock, E.T., Bryce, A., Robinson, and Technology Volume 3, Special Issue 4.
H., Carville, M., 2007. Leachate generation and treatment at the Bukit Tagar Woldeyohans, A.M., Worku, T., Kloos, H., Mulat, W., 2014. Treatment of leachate by
landfill, Malaysia. Proceedings Sardinia 2007, Eleventh International Waste recirculating through dumped solid waste in a sanitary landfill in Addis Ababa,
Management and Landfill Symposium. Ethiopia. Ecol. Eng. 73, 254–259.
Lee, S., Hur, J., 2016. Heterogeneous adsorption behavior of landfill leachate on Yong, Z.J., Bashir, M.J.K., Ng, C.A., Sethupathi, S., Lim, J., 2018. A sequential treatment
granular activated carbon revealed by fluorescence excitation emission matrix of intermediate tropical landfill leachate using a sequencing batch reactor (SBR)
(EEM)-parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC). Chemosphere 149, 41–48. and coagulation. J. Environ. Manage. 205, 244–252.
Liermann, T.A., 2009. Fiji Islands’ naboro landfill leachate quality analysis and the Yusmartini, E.S., Setiabudidaya, D., Ridwan, Marsi, Faizal, 2013. Characteristics of
applicability of developed versus small island developing state discharge leachate at sukawinatan LANDFill, Palembang, Indonesia. J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. vol.
standards Degree of master of science in environmental engineering. Michigan 423 (1), 12048-12052.
Technological University. Ziyang, L., Youcai, Z., Tao, Y., Yu, S., Huili, C., Nanwen, Z., Renhua, H., 2009. Natural
Mahmud, K., Hossain, D., Shams, S., 2012. Different treatment strategies for highly attenuation and characterization of contaminants composition in landfill
polluted landfill leachate in developing countries. Waste Manage. 32, 2096– leachate under different disposing ages. Sci. Total Environ. 407, 3385–3391.
2105.