Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Applied Geophysics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jappgeo

Characterization of a dismissed landfill via electrical resistivity

tomography and mise-à-la-masse method
Lorenzo De Carlo a, Maria Teresa Perri b,⁎, Maria Clementina Caputo a, Rita Deiana c,
Michele Vurro a, Giorgio Cassiani b
a
Water Research Institute (IRSA), CNR, Bari, Italy
b
Dipartimento di Geoscienze, Università di Padova, Italy
c
Dipartimento dei Beni Culturali: archeologia, storia dell'arte, del cinema e della musica, Università di Padova, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Electrical resistivity methods are widely used for environmental applications, and they are particularly useful for the
Received 13 December 2012 characterization and monitoring of sites where the presence of contamination requires a thorough understanding
Accepted 27 July 2013 of the location and movement of water, that can act as a carrier of solutes. One such application is landfill studies,
Available online 3 August 2013
where the strong electrical contrasts between waste, leachate and surrounding formations make electrical methods
a nearly ideal tool for investigation. In spite of the advantages, however, electrical investigation of landfills poses
Keywords:
Landfill
also challenges, both logistical and interpretational. This paper presents the results of a study conducted on a
Confinement dismissed landfill, close to the city of Corigliano d'Otranto, in the Apulia region (Southern Italy). The landfill is locat-
Electrical methods ed in an abandoned quarry, that was subsequently re-utilized about thirty years ago as a site for urban waste dis-
Forward modeling posal. The waste was thought to be more than 20 m thick, and the landfill bottom was expected to be confined
with an HDPE (high-density poli-ethylene) liner. During the digging operations performed to build a nearby new
landfill, leachate was found, triggering an in-depth investigation including also non-invasive methods. The principal
goal was to verify whether the leachate is indeed confined, and to what extent, by the HDPE liner. We performed
both surface electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and mise-à-la-masse (MALM) surveys, facing the severe chal-
lenges posed by the rugged terrain of the abandoned quarry complex. A conductive body, probably associated with
leachate, was found as deep as 40 m below the current landfill surface i.e. at a depth much larger than the expected
20 m thickness of waste. Given the logistical difficulties that limit the geometry of acquisition, we utilized synthetic
forward modeling in order to confirm/dismiss interpretational hypotheses emerging from the ERT and MALM re-
sults. This integration between measurements and modeling helped narrow the alternative interpretations and
strengthened the confidence in results, confirming the effectiveness of non-invasive methods in landfill investiga-
tion and the importance of modeling in the interpretation of geophysical results.
© 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Landfills can have a strong impact on the surrounding environment,
mainly in relation to the possible leakage of contaminated fluids into the
subsoil and groundwater. Landfill leachate is generally very saline, rich
in organic matter, and electrically conductive. Therefore it is no surprise
that geophysical, and particularly electrical, techniques have long been
used as diagnostic tools for the visualization of landfill impacts in
the shallow subsurface. Geophysics has the competitive advantage
of being minimally-invasive, inexpensive and fast while still pro-
viding good resolution at the field scale. Note that the alternative use
of direct methods, such as drilling and sampling, implies the considerable
⁎ Corresponding author. Dipartimento di Geoscienze, Università di Padova, Padova, via
Gradenigo 6, 35131, Italy. Tel.: +39 338 6251593; fax: +39 049 8279134.
E-mail addresses: lorenzo.decarlo@ba.irsa.cnr.it (L. De Carlo), mariateresa.perri@unipd.it
(M.T. Perri), maria.caputo@ba.irsa.cnr.it (M.C. Caputo), rita.deiana@unipd.it (R. Deiana),
michele.vurro@ba.irsa.cnr.it (M. Vurro), giorgio.cassiani@unipd.it (G. Cassiani).
risk of damaging the landfill liners and creating new pathways for con-
taminant migration. Moreover, the application of electrical resistivity
methods to the characterization of municipal waste landfills has become
popular also because the electrical resistivity of waste varies consider-
ably with time due to waste decomposition and leachate formation.
Since the mid 1990s a large number of studies have appeared in the
scientific and technical literature dealing with the application of geo-
physical methods to landfill characterization. The majority of studies
involve the use of electrical and electromagnetic methods, mainly
motivated by the strong electrical conductivity contrast guaranteed by
landfill leachate. But also (refraction) seismics has been used to identify
the landfill structure. The most widely used techniques are:
• DC electrical methods and electrical resistivity tomography (ERT)
(Aristodemou and Thomas-Betts, 2000; Binley and Daily, 2003; Buselli
and Lu, 2001; Cardarelli and Bernabini, 1997; Carpenter et al., 1991;
Cassiani and Medina, 1997; Cassiani et al., 2006; Faraco Gallas et al.,
2011; Frid et al., 2008, 2010; Frolich et al., 1994, 1996; Johansson

0926-9851/$ – see front matter © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2013.07.010
2 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10
et al., 2011; Khalil, 2012; Mota et al., 2004; Porsani et al., 2004; Senos
Matias et al., 1994).
• Electromagnetic induction methods (Al-Tarazi et al., 2008; Buselli and
Lu, 2001; Monteiro Santos et al., 2006; Nobes et al., 2000; Noguera
et al., 2002; Olofsson et al., 2006; Senos Matias et al., 1994;
Triantafilis et al., 2011).
• Ground penetrating radar (GPR) (Cassiani et al., 2008; Hermozilha
et al., 2010; Olofsson et al., 2006; Porsani et al., 2004).
• Induced polarization (Aristodemou and Thomas-Betts, 2000; Bavusi
et al., 2006; Buselli and Lu, 2001; Faraco Gallas et al., 2011; Fiandaca
et al., 2012; Gazoty et al., 2012; Leroux et al., 2007).
• Self-potential (Bavusi et al., 2006; Buselli and Lu, 2001; Faraco Gallas
et al., 2011; Mota et al., 2004; Naudet et al., 2003, 2004).
• Refraction seismics (Cardarelli and Bernabini, 1997; Carpenter et al.,
1991; De Iaco et al., 2003; Lanz et al., 1998).
The application of geophysical techniques to landfills, as for many
other environmental problems, involves tackling two different,
complementary issues (see e.g. Binley et al., 2011), namely:
(a) structural (static) characterization
(b) fluid-dynamics, including the motion of contaminants.
These two categories find more specific implementation for the land-
fill problems as follows:
• landfill structure identification (Bernstone and Dahlin, 1996a,b;
Bernstone et al., 2000; Chambers et al., 2006; Ogilvy et al., 2002);
• liner integrity and leakage localization (Binley et al., 1997; White and
Barker, 1997);
• leachate migration monitoring (Acworth and Jorstad, 2006; Clement
et al., 2010, 2011; Guérin et al., 2004; Olofsson et al., 2006; Radulescu
et al., 2007; Soupios et al., 2007a, b; Zume et al., 2006);
• moisture content distribution and age of waste assessment (Acworth
and Jorstad, 2006; Cassiani et al., 2008; Frolich et al., 1994, 1996;
Imhoff et al., 2007; Meju, 2000);
• localization of gas migration pathways (Georgaki et al., 2008; Johansson
et al., 2011).
Possibly the most common single issue to be tackled in landfill studies
is the confinement of waste and leachate within the landfill boundaries.
The evaluation of this confinement often requires non-invasive investiga-
tions that do not jeopardize the landfill integrity itself. Consequently,
Fig. 1. The landfill area at Corigliano d'Otranto with the position of the borehole P4.
(Image source: Google Earth).
geophysics is generally applied from the land surface, i.e. not in borehole
applications. This acquisition configuration is not ideal in terms of resolu-
tion at the relevant depth of investigation, that can exceed a few tens of
meters. Therefore much reliance is placed upon the reliability of inversion
approaches to image the landfill subsurface.
In particular, most of the above studies have shown that surface
electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) is a suitable method to study
resistivity distribution in landfills at the suitable spatial scale (ten to
hundreds of meters wide and down to 30 m depth). Time-lapse ERT
has also been considered to monitor the state of landfill material
particularly when fluid recirculation is a waste treatment option
(Clément et al., 2010, 2011; Guérin et al., 2004; Radulescu et al.,
2007). Note that the use of borehole ERT (Perri et al., 2012) at landfills
is obviously difficult given the necessary attention towards keeping
the liner integrity.
The logistical limitations of surface ERT applications on landfills
imply that other, less sophisticated, resistivity techniques can also
be useful to complete the overall dataset, even though by them-
selves they are inherently weak. One such technique is the classical
mise-à-la-masse (MALM) technique. This is an electrical resistivity
method that has been used particularly in the mining industry for
nearly a century (e.g. Schlumberger, 1920) to delineate conductive ore
bodies: a current electrode is placed in the conductive body (either at
a surface exposure or in a drill hole), with a second current electrode
posed at a large distance (theoretically at infinity). The equi-potential
contour lines can be mapped and their shape can give information on
the shape of the conductive body. The same approach can be used also
for saline tracer test monitoring over time, injecting current in the
conductive plume body and monitoring its evolution (e.g. Nimmer and
Osiensky, 2002; Osiensky, 1997). A similar approach can be used to
map any conductive body, including landfill waste — this indeed is the
basis for landfill liner integrity tests (Binley et al., 1997; White and
Barker, 1997).
In consideration of the logistical limitations and the consequent
limits in data collection, the available data shall be exploited to their
maximum information content. One way of exploiting data of limited
nature, that are insufficient to yield a unique inverted image of reality,
is to compare them against the predictions of geophysical forward
models constructed on the basis of alternative scenarios. In this respect,
remarkable work has been conducted in the field of landfill characteri-
zation by Radulescu et al. (2007) and Clément et al. (2010, 2011).
 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10
In this paper we present the case study of a dismissed quarry, located
in the city of Corigliano d'Otranto, in the Apulia region (Southern Italy),
utilized some thirty years ago for municipal waste disposal.
Our objectives are:
a. to present the results of an effective non-invasive characterization of
an abandoned landfill site, based on both ERT and MALM methods,
with the main goal of confirming or dismissing the presence of a
bottom liner, and possible leachate migration from the landfill.
b. to present the use and value of electrical forward modeling for the
full exploitation of data information content, and the discrimination
between possible alternative scenarios.
2. Study area
The test site comprises a dismissed quarry in Southern Italy, located
in the north-western part of the municipality of Corigliano d'Otranto,
about 2 km away from the town and about 20 km from the Adriatic
sea (Fig. 1). In the late 1980s municipal waste disposal was authorized
in the dismissed quarry. The waste thickness is thought to be more
than 20 m thick, and the landfill bottom is thought to be confined by
an HDPE (high density poly-ethylene) liner: evidence of the liner pres-
ence can indeed be observed on site only along the SW border of the
landfill. The landfill is covered with a thin layer of topsoil.
Near the site a new landfill is currently being built, exploiting the
volume that is made available by another part of the dismissed quarry.
During the digging operations, leachate emerged at the base of the
scarp separating the old landfill from the new one (Fig. 1).
This evidence of leachate migration triggered a detailed study of the
area in order to assess the possibility and seriousness of groundwater
and subsoil contamination. The study area has a significant value not
only from an environmental point of view, but also mainly for social
health aspects because many wells, both for drinkable use and irriga-
tion, are located close to the landfill. Previous studies carried out in
the study area were inconclusive regarding the local groundwater
flow direction, given the very small hydraulic gradient of the water
table.
Fig. 2. Schematic geological map of the Apulia region.
3
From a geological point of view, the bedrock is formed by a Creta-
ceous carbonatic platform, of some thousands meters thick, charac-
terized by dolomitic, karstified and vacuolar limestone.
The Mesozoic basement is covered by Miocenic and Plio-Pleistocenic
deposits constituted by calcarenite lithofacies having different structur-
al, textural and, consequently, hydraulic properties. These deposits are
outcropping in the study area, as shown in Fig. 2. Locally the thickness
of the Plio-Pleistocenic deposits is about 100 m, as shown by the stratig-
raphy of one among the many boreholes performed before the building
of the landfills, particularly the one close to the boundary between old
and new landfill, P4 in Fig. 1, reported in Table 1.
Several injection tests have been performed at different depths
during the drilling, and the corresponding permeability values are
reported in Table 1 too. The hydrogeology of the area is characterized
from double-layers aquifer: the shallow lies in the Plio-Plistocenic
deposits and has reduced its storage in the last decade due to the
overexploitation of the groundwater. The main aquifer is the deeper
one, which lies in the Cretaceous carbonatic rocks, characterized from
fracture and karst permeability. This aquifer, generally phreatic, in the
study area is confined from the upper layer characterized by low per-
meability due to the absence of fractures. This is why the water table
was found at 115 meter depth during the drilling and subsequently
has reached the static level at 80 m below the ground surface.
3. Field surveys
The key issue to be solved at the Corigliano landfill site is the exis-
tence, extent, integrity and effectiveness of the HDPE liner at the bottom
of the old landfill. Given the risk associated to direct investigations, that
can worsen the situation of the waste confinement within the landfill,
non-invasive (geophysical) investigations are the methods chosen to
solve the problem. Between May and June 2010, 2D ERT lines and a
MALM survey have been conducted at the site. The locations of the
ERT lines and the MALM configuration are shown in Fig. 3. The whole
area is fairly wide and locally impervious, and big efforts have been de-
voted particularly to acquire geophysical data along the scarp that con-
nects the old and the new landfill (Fig. 4). Note that the entire landfill
complex is fenced, and the area to its East is also composed of an old,
4 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10

Table 1
Stratigraphy of the borehole P4 with the results of the performed injection tests at
different depths.

Measurement sections Storativity Trasmissivity Permeability

(in meters below ground surface) S T (m2/s) Kz (m/s)

0–10 2.00E-04 1.02E-04 5.10E-05

Uggiano la Chiesa sands
(Plio-Pleistocene)
10–20 No collected data due to the presence of large
Uggiano la Chiesa sands fractures
(Plio-Pleistocene)
24–30 1.06E-03 6.70E-04 3.35E-04
Calcarenites of Andrano
(Plio-Pleistocene)
30–44.5 5.0E-3 5.58E-05 2.79E-05
Calcarenites of Andrano
(Plio-Pleistocene)
44.5–60 2.0E-3 7.53E-06 3.77E-06
Pietra Leccese (Miocene) Fig. 4. Electrodes installation along the scarp which divides the old from the new landfill.
60–69.7 3.5E-4 1.86E-05 9.30E-06
Pietra Leccese (Miocene)
69.7–110 2.00E-03 6.14E-06 1.54E-06
Pietra Leccese (Miocene)
3.1. Electrical resistivity tomography
110–120 Injection test not performed
Dolomie of Galatina (Cretaceous)
Considering the logistical limitations, we elected to concentrate our
efforts on a few, significant ERT survey lines that have sufficient length
dismissed landfill. The presence of the motorway running to the North– as to image the subsurface to a sufficient depth, i.e. over 20 m and
East of the site also limits accessibility for electrical measurements. The down to 40 m below the ground surface. We also collected shorter
only area, outside of the quarry complex, that allows free access is the ERT lines, that could be extended on the flat portion of the old landfill,
agricultural land to its South–West, that is, however, separated by the coinciding with the extent of the MALM lines shown in Fig. 3. But
road and a high wall. Therefore, even though the area is mostly flat these shorter lines cannot be inverted reliably for depths larger than
around the quarry complex, access for geo-electrical work is not easily the 20 m of the expected waste thickness. Therefore they add practical-
guaranteed. High values of contact resistance (often larger than ly nothing to our understanding of the site structure, and are not
20 kOhm), particularly in the areas void of vegetation (see white areas discussed here.
in Fig. 3), implied the need to wet the electrodes in order to improve As shown in Fig. 3, two ERT profiles, named Line 1 and Line 2, were
the measurement quality. collected inside the landfill complex in order to evaluate the thickness

Fig. 3. Location of the ERT and MALM measurements carried out at the Corigliano site. The red dashed lines represent the 2D ERT profiles, while the orange dots indicate the location of the
potential electrodes used for the MALM survey. The MALM survey has been completed with voltage measurements also along Line 2 and Line 3. Current was injected between electrodes A
and B, and voltage was measured with reference to electrode P.
(Image source: Google Earth).
 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10
of the waste in the old quarry. Line 2 covers both the old and the new
landfills, cutting across the main topographic feature of the site, i.e.
the scarp sloping from the old landfill to the bottom of the nearby quar-
ry to be used for the new landfill (Fig. 4). On the contrary, Line 1 runs
horizontally along the dirt road separating the old and new landfills,
and extends laterally beyond in order to reach a suitable depth of inves-
tigation. Line 3 was conducted outside the landfill to obtain resistivity
data of the undisturbed geological layers not involved by waste disposal.
The line runs in the agricultural field, parallel to the local road flanking
the landfill complex to the South–East. A comparison between Lines 1
and 2 on one hand and Line 3 on the other hand is a first necessary
check of the impact of the existing landfill on the resistivity structure
of the subsurface.
All three resistivity lines were acquired using a 235 m long array of
48 stainless steel electrodes with 5 m spacing. An IRIS Syscal Pro 48
resistivity meter was used to collect more than 2000 resistance
quadripole for each profile, by running full direct and reciprocal data
acquisition to ensure a correct error estimation (Binley et al., 1995). A
Wenner–Schlumberger configuration was used because it offers a
reasonable compromise between resolution and investigation depth.
Using this set-up all three lines reached an approximated depth of
investigation of 40 m from the ground surface.
3.2. Mise-à-la-masse
In order to complement the information obtained from ERT, a MALM
survey was also carried out covering most of the available surface inside
and outside of the landfill complex. The geometry of the MALM survey
aims at identifying current pathways between the inner and outer
parts of the landfill, thus checking the existence and continuity of the
HDPE liner that is, at the same time, a hydraulic barrier and an electrical
insulator (Binley et al., 1997; White and Barker, 1997). Therefore one
current electrode (A in Fig. 3) is located inside the landfill, and the
other one (B in Fig. 3) is outside. All voltage measurements are referred
to the same electrode (P in Fig. 3) thus producing a voltage map that
shall indicate the presence of current pathways. Fig. 3 shows the
locations of the MALM voltage electrodes, partly following 7 alignments
with 2 m spacing (orange dotted lines) and partly reproducing the
alignments of ERT Lines 2 and 3, with 5 m spacing. Note that the two
shorter alignments located to the South–West are next to each other
but on either side of the HDPE liner that in that area visible at the ground
surface.
4. Field results
ERT data were inverted using the code ProfileR (A. Binley — Lancaster
University), an inverse solution for a 2-D resistivity distribution based
on computation of 3-D current flow using a quadrilateral finite element
mesh. The inverse solution is based on a regularised objective function
combined with weighted least squares, as defined in Binley and
Kemna (2005). As a complete reciprocal acquisition scheme was
adopted, we could make a correct estimation of measurement errors,
and thus we decided to use only the data satisfying a maximum 10%
reciprocal error. The same corresponding error value was used to
drive the inverse procedure.
The results of ERT surveys provide a clear evidence of the effect that
the landfill material has on the electrical resistivity structure of the sub-
surface. Line 3 (Fig. 5), placed outside the landfill, shows a very regular
distribution of electrical resistivity across the entire section, compatible
with unsaturated sands and limestone. On the contrary, Lines 1 and 2
(Fig. 6a and b, respectively) show the presence of a strong heterogeneity
induced by the old landfill waste. Both Lines 1 and 2 show the presence
of an electrically conductive body (with log10 resistivity approximately
below 1.6 Ω m), presumably representing the landfill waste. However
the bottom of this conductive body appears to be much shallower in
Line 1 (about 20 m below ground) than in Line 2 (over 40 m below
5
ground). This apparent contradiction is in fact a geometric effect: Line
1 violates the assumption, always made in 2D ERT, that the resistivity
distribution is the same for all vertical planes parallel to the vertical
plane crossing the acquisition line. The presence of the very steep
scarp (Fig. 4) on the North-Western side of Line 1 clearly makes the
assumption invalid and makes it impossible to interpret quantitatively
the subsurface model in terms on relevant depths and resistivity values.
On the contrary, Line 2, which cuts the scarp along its maximum slope,
provides a quantitative interpretation of the electrical properties of the
subsurface. The conductive body shows an irregular shape and its
bottom is more than 40 m deep from the top of the old landfill surface,
thus well below the bottom of the known abandoned quarry (20 m
from the surface — the same depth as the bottom of the nearby new
landfill).
The evidence from Line 2 might indicate that the waste body is
much thicker than the originally supposed (20 m) or, more likely,
that a vertical migration of conductive leachate penetrates the sup-
posedly impermeable landfill bottom. The possible leachate plume
is more pronounced to the North, in accordance with the evidence
of leachate emergence at the base of the scarp.
In apparent contradiction with the ERT results, the MALM survey
produced a map that is showing a sharp voltage jump in correspon-
dence of the limits of the old landfill, in particular across the visible
emergence of the HDPE liner along the South–West boundary (Fig. 7).
However, given the poor confinement close to ground surface (no
other evidence of the liner is present except for the South–West bound-
ary) it is no surprise that the electrical current can circumvent the bar-
rier, at least close to the surface to the North, and close to the circuit.
Therefore, a qualitative inspection of the map in Fig. 7, by itself, cannot
either confirm or dismiss the existence of an HDPE liner capable of
limiting, if not totally excluding, leachate migration at depth.
The apparent partial contradiction of evidence from ERT and MALM
surveys calls definitely for a quantitative modeling approach that can
help discriminate possible scenarios.
5. Synthetic modeling
In order to assimilate all the collected data into a comprehensive
quantitative framework, that can help discriminate between alternative
interpretation scenarios, we constructed a three-dimensional resistivity
model of the Corigliano landfill site, including the variable topography.
As far as the subsurface structure is concerned, we exploited the infor-
mation directly available from the ERT field acquisitions (see Fig. 6)
and developed first of all a reasonable 3D reference model (Fig. 8).
This reference model includes four regions:
(1) a region representing the waste body with a log10 resistivity
value equal to 1 Ω m;
(2) a region with a very high log10 resistivity value (6 Ω m)
representing the HDPE liner;
(3) a region representing the undisturbed Uggiano La Chiesa Sands,
characterized by a log10 resistivity value equal to 2.845 Ω m;
Fig. 5. Electrical resistivity tomography along Line 3. The z axis is expressed in meters
below the ground surface.
6 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10

Fig. 6. Electrical resistivity tomography images along Line 1 (a) and Line 2 (b). The z axis is expressed in meters below the ground surface. Line 1 and Line 2 cross each other almost in their
medium point, as indicated by the black narrows on the top of the sections. Note the strong scale difference between the surveys runs within the landfill (Line 1 and Line 2) and outside
(Line 3 — Fig. 5).

(4) a region representing the soil layer, with a log10 resistivity value
equal to1.3 Ω m.
Subsequently, several 3D forward solutions have been calculated
starting from such a reference model, but taking into consideration var-
ious scenarios and, in particular, different integrity conditions of the
HDPE liner, as described hereafter.
Each electrical resistivity 3D model can be used to produce synthetic
resistance datasets for ERT acquisitions and synthetic voltage maps for
MALM surveys. The synthetic ERT resistance datasets have been created
with the same scheme and geometry adopted in the field, and inverted
to produce resistivity images that can be compared directly with the
ones produced with field data. Note that, in order to take into account
the same error level of that calculated for the field measurements, be-
fore performing 2D ERT inversion a Gaussian noise equal to 10% has
been added to every synthetic dataset. The synthetic MALM voltage
maps can be compared directly with the one measured in the field.
The 3D forward modeling for ERT and MALM surveys was performed
using the code R3t (A. Binley — Lancaster University). The inversions for
2D ERT problems were computed using the code ProfileR, as described in
the previous section for field data. The mesh that has been considered
for 3D problems consists of an unstructured tetrahedral mesh, which in-
cludes a total of 268,504 elements; the quadrilateral mesh that was used
in 2D synthetic modeling is the same of that implemented for the field
dataset.

Fig. 8. A section of the 3D reference model of the Corigliano d'Otranto landfill in terms of
Fig. 7. Map of MALM voltage distribution in the old landfill. The values are expressed in electrical resistivity (in log10 Ω m scale) .
mV/A (the voltage values are standardized by the corresponding current values). (Image visualized by ParaView).
 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10 7

understanding of the level of damage that the liner must have

suffered and the consequences for possible subsoil contamination.
In particular, we considered a landfill with a damaged HDPE liner, as
shown in Fig. 11. The effects on the electrical resistivity distribution in
the subsurface due to the damaged structure and the probable vertical
migration of a very conductive leachate below the HDPE level are appar-
ent. The direct comparison between the real ERT profile of Fig. 6 and the
simulated ERT profile of Fig. 11 seems to corroborate the hypothesis of a
lack of confinement by the liner and a migration of conductive leachate
through the supposedly impermeable barrier. The MALM map obtained
in this case is shown in Fig. 12: no strong difference between the maps
of voltage distribution of Figs. 10 and 12 is visible. This points towards
the lack of resolution and reliability that conclusions based on MALM
alone can give.
Finally, we considered a case study where leachate accumulation is
due to an absence of effective facilities for rainwater interception and
leachate drainage. In particular, we supposed that a very low resistive
leachate (log10 (ρ) = 0, in Ω m) wets the deepest waste level and mi-
grates through the liner damage into the underlying vadose zone. The
migration of leachate is only reproduced by placing a body of low resis-
tivity also below the liner, while the leachate flow is not simulated. The
key results related to the relevant simulated ERT survey are shown in
Fig. 13. In this scenario, the differences between the real ERT profile of
Fig. 6 and the simulated ERT profile of Fig. 13 are even smaller than
for the scenario in Fig. 11, thus pointing towards the likely presence of
a substantial leachate volume also below the liner. With regard to
MALM survey, the map of voltage distribution obtained considering
this model is shown in Fig. 14. Note again that there are no significant,
diagnostic variations with respect to the maps presented in Figs. 10
and 12. Again, we have to conclude for the weak sensitivity of the
MALM method, in the adopted configuration, towards liner discontinu-
ities at the bottom of the landfill.

6. Discussion and conclusions

Fig. 9. Simulated ERT image (b) related to the scenario where the bottom liner is consid- The use of geophysical methods is particularly useful in characteriz-
ered to be continuous and undamaged (a).
ing complex structures, such as dismissed landfills, when direct investi-
gations are infeasible of risk. These sites are difficult to characterize
5.1. Undamaged HDPE liner using direct investigations, above all concerning the check of the integ-
rity of the HDPE liner, placed at the bottom of the structure. In this case,
The first case discussed here considers the presence of an undamaged geophysics, and electrical methods in particular, can obtain spatially dis-
liner at the bottom of the landfill. The synthetic ERT results obtained for tributed information over large areas with good resolution.
this case are shown in Fig. 9, where a detail of the HDPE liner structure
as hypothesized in the 3D model is also presented.
The synthetic ERT results for this scenario demonstrate that the low
resistive region related to the waste mass, about 20 m thick in the 3D
model, is well imaged to its real depth in the ERT inversion.
A comparison between the real ERT profile in Fig. 6 and the synthetic
ERT profile in Fig. 9 leads rapidly to the conclusion that the hypothesis of
the presence of an intact liner can be reasonably excluded.
The map of MALM voltage distribution obtained considering this
model is shown in Fig. 10. The values of voltage (in mV/A) are quite sim-
ilar to those measured in the field (Fig. 7). An incomplete correspondence
between the real and the simulated results is justifiable as the exact
values of resistivity distribution in the field is not reproduced in the 3D
model. The electrical barrier due to the presence of HDPE is however ev-
ident in the sharp step of electrical potential along the SW border of the
landfill, as in the field case. Therefore the MALM results are, unlike the
ERT results, not in contradiction with the hypothesis of an undamaged
liner.

5.2. Damaged HDPE liner

Fig. 10. Simulated MALM map related to the scenario where the bottom liner is considered
Given the results obtained in the first example, different scenar- to be continuous and undamaged. The red dashed line represents the contour of the sim-
ios have been subsequently examined in an attempt of refining our ulated liner close to the surface.
8 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10
Fig. 11. Simulated ERT image (b) related to the scenario where the bottom liner is damaged and limited vertical migration of leachate is present (a).
The results in this paper largely confirm the above considerations,
showing the results of applying two geo-electrical methods (ERT and
MALM) to a dismissed landfill, where the logistical constraints limit
Fig. 12. Simulated MALM map related to the scenario where the bottom liner is damaged
and limited vertical migration of leachate is present. The red dashed line represents the
contour of the simulated liner close to the surface.
also the applicability of geophysics in general. In particular, ERT profiles
and MALM measurements have been collected inside and outside the
landfill in order to verify the thickness of the waste, evaluate the integ-
rity of the HDPE liner and visualize possible preferential pathways of
leachate in the underlying vadose zone.
The ERT results show the presence of a conductive body, having ir-
regular shape and associated to the landfill material, that reaches
40 m depth from the surface, a depth larger of 20 m than the expected
waste thickness. This result could be explained considering a vertical
migration of conductive landfill leachate through the landfill bottom,
made of HDPE liner, supposedly impermeable.
The MALM measurements, on the other hand, seem to indicate that
the liner is present and relatively continuous, even though some current
from inside to outside of the landfill has been recorded — this however
could be linked solely to a lack of insulation in the shallow layer cover-
ing the waste mass.
Given the partial inconclusiveness of the field results, partly due to
the logistical limitations encountered in the geophysical data acquisi-
tion, we resorted to the support of 3D geo-electrical forward modeling,
in order to discriminate the likelihood of different possible scenarios.
The support given by this forward modeling proved extremely valuable,
as it pointed clearly towards the effectiveness of ERT results at identify-
ing the presence of a damage in the liner with very likely leachate
migration in the subsoil. At the same time, the forward modeling proved
that the MALM approach, in the given configuration, could not resolve
the presence of a damage in the liner located at the bottom of the
landfill.
 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10
Fig. 13. Simulated ERT image (b) related to the scenario where the bottom liner is damaged and a very low resistive leachate wets the deepest waste level and penetrates below the liner (a).
As a general conclusion, we strongly endorse the use of forward
modeling both in the interpretation phase (as shown here), and also
in the design phase of any survey that has a clearly identifiable goal
from the outset.
Fig. 14. Simulated MALM map related to the scenario where the bottom liner is damaged
and a very low resistive leachate wets the deepest waste level and penetrates below the
liner. The red dashed line represents the contour of the simulated liner close to the surface.
9
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Giuseppe Bagnolo for his help in ac-
quiring geophysical data along the scarp.
References
Acworth, R.I., Jorstad, L.B., 2006. Integration of multi-channel piezometry and electrical
tomography to better define chemical heterogeneity in a landfill leachate plume
within a sand aquifer. Journal of Contaminant Hydrology 83 (3–4), 200–220.
Al-Tarazi, E., Abu Rajab, J., Al-Naqa, A., El-Waheidi, M., 2008. Detecting leachate plumes and
groundwater pollution at Ruseifa municipal land fill utilizing VLF-EM method. Journal of
Applied Geophysics 65, 121–131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2008.06.005.
Aristodemou, E., Thomas-Betts, A., 2000. DC resistivity and induced polarisation investigations
at a waste disposal site and its environments. Journal of Applied Geophysics 44, 275–302.
Bavusi, M., Rizzo, E., Lapenna, V., 2006. Electromagnetic methods to characterize the Savoia
di Lucania waste dump (Southern Italy). Environmental Geology 51, 301–308.
Bernstone, C., Dahlin, T., 1996a. 2D resistivity surveying of old landfills. Extended Abstracts,
Procs. 2nd Meeting Environmental and Engineering Geophysics, Nantes, 2-5 September
1996, pp. 188–191.
Bernstone, C., Dahlin, T., 1996b. Electromagnetic and DC resistivity mapping of waste
deposits and industrial sites — experiences from southern Sweden. Extended Abstracts
58th EAGE Conference, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 3–7 June 1996, M014 (2 pp.).
Bernstone, C., Dahlin, T., Ohlsson, T., Hogland, W., 2000. DC-resistivity mapping of internal
landfill structures: two pre-excavation surveys. Environmental Geology 39 (3–4),
360–371.
Binley, A., Daily, W., 2003. The performance of electrical methods for assessing the integrity
of geomembrane liners in landfill caps and waste storage ponds. Journal of Environmen-
tal & Engineering Geophysics 8, 227. http://dx.doi.org/10.4133/JEEG8.4.227.
Binley, A., Kemna, A., 2005. Electrical methods. In: Rubin, Hubbard (Eds.), Hydrogeophysics.
Springer, pp. 129–156.
Binley, A., Ramirez, A., Daily, W., 1995. Regularised image reconstruction of noisy electrical
resistance tomography data. In: Beck, M.S., Hoyle, B.S., Morris, M.A., Waterfall, R.C.,
Williams, R.A. (Eds.), Process Tomography — 1995, Proceedings of the 4th Workshop
10 L. De Carlo et al. / Journal of Applied Geophysics 98 (2013) 1–10
of the European Concerted Action on Process Tomography, Bergen, 6–8 April 1995, pp.
401–410.
Binley, A., Daily, W., Ramirez, A., 1997. Detecting leaks from environmental barriers using
electrical current imaging. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics 2
(1), 11–19.
Binley, A.M., Cassiani, G., Deiana, R., 2011. Hydrogeophysics — opportunities and challenges.
Bollettino di Geofisica Teorica ed Applicata 51 (4), 267–284.
Buselli, G., Lu, K.L., 2001. Groundwater contamination monitoring with multichannel
electrical and electromagnetic methods. Journal of Applied Geophysics 48, 11–23.
Cardarelli, E., Bernabini, M., 1997. Two case studies of the determination of parameters of
urban waste dumps. Journal of Applied Geophysics 36, 167–174.
Carpenter, P.J., Calkin, S.F., Kaufmann, R.S., 1991. Assessing a fractured landfill
cover using electrical resistivity and seismic refraction techniques. Geophysics 56
(11), 1896–1904. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1443001.
Cassiani, G., Medina, M.A., 1997. Incorporating geophysical auxiliary data into groundwa-
ter flow parameter estimation. Ground Water 35, 79–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
j.1745-6584.1997.tb00063.x.
Cassiani, G., Bruno, V., Villa, A., Fusi, N., Binley, A., 2006. A saline tracer test monitored via
time-lapse surface electrical resistivity tomography. Journal of Applied Geophysics
59, 244–259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo2005.10.007.
Cassiani, G., Fusi, N., Susanni, D., Deiana, R., 2008. Vertical radar profiles for the assessment of
landfill capping effectiveness. Near Surface Geophysics 6, 133–142. http://dx.doi.org/
10.3997/1873-0604.2008010.
Chambers, J.E., Kuras, O., Meldrum, P.I., Ogilvy, R.D., Hollands, J., 2006. Electrical resistivity
tomography applied to geologic, hydrogeologic, and engineering investigations at a
former waste-disposal site. Geophysics 71 (6), B231–B239.
Clément, R., Descloitres, M., Günther, T., Oxarango, L., Morra, C., Laurent, J.-P., Gourc,
J.-P., 2010. Improvement of electrical resistivity tomography for leachate injec-
tion monitoring. Waste Management 30, 452–464. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.wasman.2009.10.002.
Clément, R., Oxarango, L., Descloitres, M., 2011. Contribution of 3-D time-lapse
ERT to the study of leachate recirculation in a landfill. Waste Management
31, 457–467. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.09.005.
De Iaco, R., Green, A.G., Maurer, H.-R., Horstmeyer, H., 2003. A combined seismic reflec-
tion and refraction study of a landfill and its host sediments. Journal of Applied Geo-
physics 52, 139–156. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0926-9851(02)00255-0.
Faraco Gallas, J.D., Taioli, F., Malagutti Filho, W., 2011. Induced polarization, resistivity, and
self-potential: a case history of contamination evaluation due to landfill leakage.
Environmental Earth Sciences (2011) 63, 251–261. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12665-
010-0696-y.
Fiandaca, G., Auken, E., Christiansen, A.V., Gazoty, A., 2012. Time-domain-induced polariza-
tion: full-decay forward modeling and 1D laterally constrained inversion of cole–cole
parameters. Geophysics 77 (3), E213–E225. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/geo2011-0217.1.
Frid, V., Liskevich, G., Doudkinski, D., Korostishevsky, N., 2008. Evaluation of landfill dis-
posal boundary by means of electrical resistivity imaging. Environmental Geology
53, 1503–1508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00254-007-0761-3.
Frid, V., Doudkinski, D., Liskevich, G., Shafran, E., Averbakh, A., Korostishevsky, N.,
Prihodko, L., 2010. Geophysical–geochemical investigation of fire-prone land-
fills. Environmental Earth Sciences 60, 787–798. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/
s12665-009-0216-0.
Frolich, R.K., Urish, D.W., Fuller, J., O'Reilly, M., 1994. Use of geoelectrical methods in ground-
water pollution surveys in a coastal environment. Journal of Applied Geophysics 32
(2–3), 139–154.
Frolich, R.K., Fisher, J.J., Summerly, E., 1996. Electric–hydraulic conductivity correlation in
fractured crystalline bedrock: Central Landfill, Rhode Island, USA. Journal of Applied
Geophysics 35, 249–259.
Gazoty, A., Fiandaca, G., Pedersen, J., Auken, E., Christiansen, A.V., 2012. Mapping of land-
fills using time-domain spectral induced polarization data: the Eskelund case study.
Near Surface Geophysics 10 (6), 575–586.
Georgaki, I., Soupios, P., Sakkas, N., Ververidis, F., Trantas, E., Vallianatos, F., Manios, T.,
2008. Evaluating the use of electrical resistivity imaging technique for improving
CH 4 and CO 2 emission rate estimations in landfills. Science of the Total Environment
389, 522–531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2007.08.033.
Guérin, R., Munoz, M.L., Aran, C., Laperrelle, C., Hidra, M., Drouart, E., Grellier, S., 2004.
Leachate recirculation: moisture content assessment by means of a geophysical tech-
nique. Waste Management 24, 785–794.
Hermozilha, H., Grangeia, C., Matias, M.S., 2010. An integrated 3D constant offset GPR and
resistivity survey on a sealed landfill — Ilhavo, NW Portugal. Journal of Applied Geo-
physics 70, 58–71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2009.11.004.
Imhoff, P.T., Reinhart, D.R., Englund, M., Guérin, R., Gawande, N., Han, B., et al., 2007.
Methods for measuring liquid in bioreactor landfills — a critical review. Waste Man-
agement 27, 729–745.
Johansson, S., Rosqvist, H., Svensson, M., Dahlin, T., Leroux, V., 2011. An alternative method-
ology for the analysis of electrical resistivity data from a soil gas study. Geophysical Jour-
nal International 186 (2), 632–640. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-246X.2011.05080.
Khalil, M.H., 2012. Magnetic, geo-electric, and groundwater and soil quality analysis over
a land fill from a lead smelter, Cairo, Egypt. Journal of Applied Geophysics 86,
146–159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2012.08.004.
Lanz, E., Maurer, H., Green, A.G., 1998. Refraction tomography over a buried waste dispos-
al site. Geophysics 63 (4), 1414–1433. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1444443.
Leroux, V., Dahlin, T., Svensson, M., 2007. Dense resistivity and induced polarization pro-
filing for a landfill restoration project at Harlov, Southern Sweden. Waste Manage-
ment & Research 25 (1), 49–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0734242X07073668.
Meju, M.A., 2000. Geoelectrical investigation of old/abandoned, covered landfill sites in
urban areas: model development with a genetic diagnosis approach. Journal of Applied
Geophysics 44 (2–3), 115–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0926-9851(00)00011-2.
Monteiro Santos, F.A., Mateus, A., Figueiras, J., Gonçalves, M.A., 2006. Mapping
groundwater contamination around a landfill facility using the VLF-EM method — a
case study. Journal of Applied Geophysics 60, 115–125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jappgeo.2006.01.002.
Mota, R., Monteiro Santos, F.A., Mateus, A., Marques, F.O., Gonçalves, M.A., Figueiras, J.,
Amaral, H., 2004. Granite fracturing and incipient pollution beneath a recent landfill
facility as detected by geoelectrical surveys. Journal of Applied Geophysics 57, 11–22.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2004.08.007.
Naudet, V., Revil, A., Bottero, J.-Y., Bégassat, P., 2003. Relationship between self-potential
(SP) signals and redox conditions in contaminated groundwater. Geophysical Research
Letters 30, 2091. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2003GL018096.
Naudet, V., Revil, A., Rizzo, E., Bottero, J.Y., Bégassat, P., 2004. Groundwater redox conditions
and conductivity in a contaminated plume from geoelectrical investigations. Hydrology
and Earth System Sciences 8 (1), 8–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/hess-8-8-2004.
Nimmer, R.E., Osiensky, J.L., 2002. Direct current and self-potential monitoring of an
evolving plume in a partially saturated fractured rock. Journal of Hydrology 267
(3–4), 258–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1694(02)00155-5.
Nobes, D.C., Armstrong, M.J., Close, M.E., 2000. Delineation of a landfill leachate plume and
flow channels in coastal sands near Christchurch, New Zealand, using a shallow
electromagnetic survey method. Hydrogeology Journal 8, 328–336. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s100400050018.
Noguera, J.F., Rivero, L., Font, X., Navarro, A., Martínez, F., 2002. Simultaneous use of geo-
chemical and geophysical methods to characterise abandoned landfills. Environmen-
tal Geology 41, 898–905. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00254-001-0467-x.
Ogilvy, R., Meldrum, P., Chambers, J., Williams, G., 2002. The use of 3D electrical resistivity
tomography to characterise waste and leachate distributions within a closed landfill
Thriplow, UK. Journal of Environmental and Engineering Geophysics 7, 11–18.
Olofsson, B., Jernberg, H., Rosenqvist, A., 2006. Tracing leachates at waste sites
using geophysical and geochemical modelling. Environmental Geology 49
(5), 720–732. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00254-005-0117-9.
Osiensky, J.L., 1997. Ground water modeling of mise-à-la-masse delineation of contami-
nated ground water plumes. Journal of Hydrology 197, 146–165.
Perri, M.T., Cassiani, G., Gervasio, I., Deiana, R., Binley, A., 2012. A saline tracer test moni-
tored via both surface and cross-borehole electrical resistivity tomography: compar-
ison of time-lapse results. Journal of Applied Geophysics 79, 6–16. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1016/j.jappgeo.2011.12.011.
Porsani, J.L., Filho, W.M., Elis, V.R., Shimeles, F., Dourado, J.C., Moura, H.P., 2004. The use of
GPR and VES in delineating a contamination plume in a landfill site: a case study in SE
Brazil. Journal of Applied Geophysics 55, 199–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.jappgeo.2003.11.001.
Radulescu, M., Valerian, C., Yang, J., 2007. Time-lapse electrical resistivity anomalies due
to contaminant transport around landfills. Annals of Geophysics 50 (3), 453–468.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4401/ag-3075.
Schlumberger, C., 1920. Ètude sur la prospection electrique du sous-sol. Gauthier-Villars.
Senos Matias, M., Marques da Silva, M., Ferreira, P., Ramalho, E., 1994. A geophysical and
hydrogeological study of aquifers contamination by a landfill. Journal of Applied
Geophysics 32 (2–3), 155–162.
Soupios, P., Papadopoulos, I., Kouli, M., Georgaki, I., Vallianatos, F., Kokkinou, E., 2007a. In-
vestigation of waste disposal areas using electrical methods: a case study from
Chania, Crete, Greece. Environmental Geology 51 (7), 1249–1261. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1007/s00254-006-0418-7.
Soupios, P., Papadopoulos, N., Papadopoulos, I., Kouli, M., Vallianatos, F., Sarris, A., Manios,
T., 2007b. Application of integrated methods in mapping waste disposal areas. Envi-
ronmental Geology 53 (3), 661–675. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00254-007-0681-2.
Triantafilis, J., Roe, J.A.E., Monteiro Santos, F.A., 2011. Detecting a leachate plume in an ae-
olian sand landscape using a DUALEM-421 induction probe to measure electrical con-
ductivity followed by inversion modeling. Soil Use and Management 27, 357–366.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2011.00352.x.
White, C.C., Barker, R.D., 1997. Electrical leak detection system for landfill liners: a case his-
tory. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation 17 (3), 153–159. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1111/j.1745-6592.1997.tb00590.x.
Zume, J.T., Tarhule, A., Christenson, S., 2006. Subsurface imaging of an abandoned solid waste
landfill site in Norman, Oklahoma. Ground Water Monitoring and Remediation 26 (2),
62–69.