Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Landfill”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Mixed Waste Landfill Annual Long-Term Monitoring & Maintenance Report (Apr 2015-Mar 2016)

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) is a multi-purpose engineering and science laboratory owned by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)/National Nuclear Security Administration. SNL is managed and operated by Sandia Corporation (Sandia), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lockheed Martin Corporation. Sandia National Laboratories, New Mexico (SNL/NM) is located within the boundaries of Kirtland Air Force Base (KAFB), southeast of the City of Albuquerque in Bernalillo County, New Mexico. The Mixed Waste Landfill (MWL) is located 4 miles south of SNL/NM central facilities and 5 miles southeast of Albuquerque International Sunport, in the north-central portion of Technical Area (TA)-III. The MWL disposal area comprises 2.6 acres. During operations, the MWL accepted containerized and other low-level radioactive waste and minor amounts of mixed waste from SNL/NM research facilities and off-site DOE and U.S. Department of Defense generators from March 1959 to December 1988. More specific information regarding the MWL inventory and past disposal practices is presented in the MWL Phase 2 RCRA Facility Investigation Report (Peace et al. September 2002) and the extensive MWL Administrative Record.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Mechanical and biochemical recovery of landfill waste in an underserved community

Historically in the United States, waste collected for recycling has been sold and shipped to processors in China. In 2013 and 2018, China introduced the Green Fence and National Sword policies which restricts the import of contaminated materials and banned the import of many recyclables. The cost of recycling in the United States has increased following these policy changes, which has led to many communities reducing their recycling programs or halting them altogether. Rural and underserved communities that don’t have resources to afford sophisticated recycling programs have been heavily impacted. Previous work at INL demonstrated that MSW is a potentially viable feedstock for both biochemical and thermochemical conversion. The goal of this project is to assess preprocessing tools that can produce consistent feedstocks that meet conversion specifications, remove problematic contaminants, and reduce the amount of waste that is landfilled. Municipal solid waste was collected from an underserved community in southeast Idaho, contaminants were characterized, and mechanically separated into two discrete fractions. The unit operations identified during mechanical separation trials will be mobilized to on-site with a goal of 50% recovery of paper and plastic waste.

09 - BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Modeling Stress-Induced Pore Water Pressures in The Vadose Zone Beneath a Composite-Lined Landfill - 20029

A finite-element model was developed to evaluate mechanisms contributing to positive pore pressures measured with sealed pressure transducers in the geological buffer beneath the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility, a composite-lined mixed waste disposal facility operated by the US Department of Energy. The geological buffer is a 3-m-thick engineered fine-textured layer directly beneath the Environmental Management Waste Management Facility's composite liner, and above the groundwater table. The model accounts for changes in pore water pressure resulting from (i) loading imposed by waste placed on the overlying liner, (ii) moistening of the geological buffer due to equilibration with the underlying geological materials, and (iii) fluctuations in the elevation of the underlying groundwater table. Pore water pressures predicted by the model are in good agreement with pore water pressures measured in the field. The predictions confirm that positive pore water pressures recorded by the sealed pressure transducers in the geological buffer are excess pore water pressures induced by the vertical normal stress imposed by waste placed on the liner, and are not due to a rise in the groundwater table. Simulations also showed that two additional years of filling would further increase the pore water pressure without any change in elevation of the groundwater table. The geological buffer remained unsaturated during the simulation, with a B-coefficient (parameter indicative of the degree of saturation) similar to that computed from the field-measured pore water pressures and waste filling records. Larger increases in pore water pressure were observed when the geological buffer was assumed to have higher initial saturation, as was observed in the field data. Incorporating seasonal fluctuations in the groundwater table beneath the geological buffer in the model resulted in predictions of small seasonal oscillation in the pore water pressure at the measurement location, similar to seasonal oscillations observed in the field. Predictions made with the model indicate that the dissipation of the excess pore water pressures will occur over decades due to the low hydraulic conductivity of the geological buffer material. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Chemical Waste Landfill Annual Post-Closure Report. Calendar Year 2020

The purpose of this CWL Annual Post-Closure Care Report is to document monitoring, inspection, maintenance, and repair activities conducted during CY 2020 as required by PCCP Attachment 1, Section 1.12 (NMED October 2009 and subsequent revisions). This annual report documents post-closure care activities conducted from January through December 2020 and fulfills the PCCP requirement for annual reporting to the NMED.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Treatment Technology Assessment for Landfill Leachate

This presentation by NETL was given at the 2022 American Society of Mechanical Engineers conference in Pittsburgh, PA (July 18-21, 2022). The presentation gives an overview of an analysis of wastewater emissions associated with coal combustion residual leachate, including constituents present, variability according to coal type burned at the plant, national estimates of total volume of wastewater that requires treatment, and the cost to treat.

Able, Chad↗
DOE OSTI2022

Treatment Technology Assessment for Landfill Leachate (Video)

This presentation by NETL was given at the 2022 American Society of Mechanical Engineers conference in Pittsburgh, PA (July 18-21, 2022). The presentation gives an overview of an analysis of wastewater emissions associated with coal combustion residual leachate, including constituents present, variability according to coal type burned at the plant, national estimates of total volume of wastewater that requires treatment, and the cost to treat.

Able, Chad↗
DOE OSTI2020

Whose Gas is it anyway? Differentiating the Source of a Large Soil Vapor Plume beneath Two Adjacent Waste Sites - 20487

DOE contractor CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Company is currently responsible for conducting groundwater contamination monitoring at several RCRA treatment, storage, and disposal units located on the Hanford Site in Richland, Washington State. The Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill treatment, storage, and disposal unit presents a distinct groundwater monitoring problem because of a large multi-contaminant soil vapor plume beneath it that is a likely source of low-level volatile organic compound groundwater contamination. Adjacent to Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill is the Solid Waste Landfill. Volatile organic compounds are inventory components of both the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and the Solid Waste Landfill. Therefore, it is possible that both sites could be contributing to the soil vapor plume. For regulatory purposes, it is important to differentiate which site is the primary contributor of volatile organic compounds to the plume. An approach was developed to identify the primary volatile organic compound source of the soil vapor plume beneath Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill. The site conceptual model hypothesis of vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to the dissolved phase in groundwater was tested by a simple mathematical model of vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations at the groundwater/air interface. Once it was shown that vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to groundwater was a valid conceptual model for Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill, spatial and statistical methods were used to determine the primary site contributing to the majority of volatile organic compounds to the soil vapor plume. Average groundwater chloroform, tetrachloroethene, and trichloroethene concentrations from Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill monitoring network wells were plotted on maps of the facilities and immediate vicinities and compared to soil vapor sampling probe locations. Principal component analysis and mixing ratios were used to identify source contributions of each treatment, storage, and disposal unit to the plume. Results of the vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations mathematical model showed that transport phenomena outweigh steady-state equilibria. Estimated vapor/liquid equilibrium concentrations were considerably lower than soil vapor measurements. The results indicate that dynamic vadose zone and groundwater factors such as decreased vapor concentrations with depth, vapor dilution from dispersion in the vadose zone, and advective and diffusional volatile organic compound dilution in groundwater result in groundwater volatile organic compound concentrations much less than would be measured under steady-state equilibrium conditions. Site source contribution differentiation by principal component analysis and mixing ratios was inconclusive using actual soil gas data because of the similarity in concentration values in both datasets for Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill. Similar data populations suggest mixing of the vapor contributions from both sites by dispersion through the soil matrix pore spaces. However, when groundwater volatile organic compound data were compared between the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill and Solid Waste Landfill monitoring networks, Solid Waste Landfill mean concentrations were higher, suggesting more vapor-phase volatile organic compound transport to groundwater at those locations. Simulated volatile organic compound soil vapor and groundwater datasets created to test the methods developed for this study show that the method can be successful in source differentiation when significantly different datasets are compared. This paper will describe a method of testing a conceptual model for vapor-phase contaminant transport to groundwater and for differentiating site sources of contaminants comprising a mixed-constituent soil vapor plume. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Post-Closure Inspection Report for the Tonopah Test Range and Nevada Test and Training Range, Nevada for Calendar Year 2020 (Rev. 0)

This report provides the results of the annual post-closure use restriction (UR) inspections at corrective action sites (CASs) located on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) and Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR). This report covers post-closure UR inspections for calendar year 2020, and includes visual inspections and repair activities completed at the following corrective action units (CAUs): • CAU 407, Roller Coaster RadSafe Area (TTR) • CAU 424, Area 3 Landfill Complexes (TTR) • CAU 453, Area 9 UXO Landfill (TTR) • CAU 487, Thunderwell Site (TTR). Note: CAU 400, Bomblet Pit and Five Points Landfill (TTR) (CASs TA-19-001-05PT, Ordnance Disposal Pit; and TA-55-00-TAB2, Ordnance Disposal Pit) no longer requires inspection and reporting, as described in the Post-Closure Inspection Report for the Tonopah Test Range and Nevada Test and Training Range, Nevada for Calendar Year 2019. Site figures are included in Appendix A. The Post-Closure Inspection Plans and Record of Technical Change modifying the requirements for each UR are included in Appendix B. The Post-Closure Inspection Checklists are included in Appendix C. Field Notes are included in Appendix D. Appendix E, Inspection Photographs, does not include photographs because none were taken during the 2020 post-closure inspections. Appendix F, Post-Closure Vegetation Monitoring Report, does not include any data because vegetation monitoring was not conducted or required at any CAU in 2020. Visual inspections were conducted according to the post-closure requirements outlined in specific CAU and CAS URs, and approved by NDEP. The annual post-closure inspections for CASs associated with CAUs 407, 424, 453, and 487 were conducted on May 20, 2020. No maintenance or repair issues were noted at CAUs 487, or at CASs associated with CAU 424 (except CASs 03-08-002-A304 and 03-08-002-A308). Maintenance items and subsequent repairs include the following: • CAU 407, CAS TA-23-001-TARC (Roller Coaster RadSafe Area): A UR sign was loose and was rehung during the inspection. • CAU 424, CAS 03-08-002-A304 (Landfill Cell A3-4): The northeast monument needed a UR sign. The UR sign was attached to the monument on August 11, 2020. • CAU 424, CAS 03-08-002-A308 (Landfill Cell A3-8): The southeast monument needed additional lava rock. The lava rock was added during the inspection. • CAU 453, CAS 09-55-001-0952 (Area 9 Landfill): Two animal burrows were noted in the western portion of the northern and southern trenches (one burrow per trench). The animal burrows were repaired on August 11, 2020.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Assessment of Combustion Residual Leachate Volume, Composition, and Treatment Costs

Combustion residuals and the resulting leachate from storage sites represent a large volume of wastewater in the United States (U.S.) that has not been quantified. Here this work estimates the constituents present, volume of wastewater, and costs of treatment for both combustion residual landfill leachate and the leachate from surface impoundment closures. Combustion residual landfill leachate produced from contact with bituminous coal combustion byproducts is generally predicted to be higher in lithium and manganese, whereas landfill leachate produced from contact with subbituminous coal combustion byproducts is generally predicted to be higher in mercury and vanadium. The annual volume of a single landfill with combustion residual leachate can reach more than 800,000 cubic meters. This leachate represents an annual volume of 26.8–42.8 million cubic meters nationally. Closing surface impoundments can yield between 830 and 1040 cubic meters of leachate nationally for a three-year closure period. Costs as low as $1.5/m 3 or as high as $95/m 3 are observed. Treatment trains will need to remove 72% of total suspended solids (TSS), 87% of arsenic, and 64% of mercury from landfill leachate. When applied to impoundments, these treatment trains would need to remove 97% of arsenic.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2021

Wind turbine blade material in the United States: Quantities, costs, and end-of-life options

Wind energy has experienced enormous growth in the past few decades; as a result, there are thousands of wind turbines around the world that will reach the end of their design lifetimes in the coming years. Much of the material in those turbines can be recycled using conventional processes, but the composite material that is the main component of the blades is more challenging to recycle. In the United States, turbine blades may be disposed of in landfills, adding a new solid waste stream to the material already being landfilled. This paper presents a spatially resolved estimate of the mass and volume of wind turbine blade waste in each state by 2050 and compares these amounts to estimates of the remaining landfill capacity by state. In this work, we estimate costs for each stage of the disposal process to indicate cost levels for alternatives. Assuming a 20-year turbine lifetime, the cumulative blade waste in 2050 is approximately 2.2 million tons. This value represents approximately 1% of remaining landfill capacity by volume, or 0.2% by mass. We also find that the current cost of disposing of blades in large segments or through grinding is relatively low in comparison to the overall life-cycle cost of energy. Based on these findings, landfill space constraints and disposal costs appear unlikely to motivate a change in waste handling strategies under current policy conditions. Instead, more profound shifts in recycling technologies, blade materials, or policy may be needed to move towards a circular economy for wind turbine blades.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Rapid AI-based Dissection of Ashes using Raman and XRF Spectroscopy (RADAR-X)

Waste-to-energy (WTE) facilities incinerate ~35 million tons of municipal solid waste annually in the United States. The incineration process reduces the mass and the volume of the waste fraction by over 75 and 95%, respectively. The fraction left after incineration remains as ash residues and is referred to as WTE ash, compromising of bottom and fly ash. In the United States, ~10 million tons of WTE ashes are generated annually and predominantly landfilled because of the lack of secondary end-use pathways. This incurs a significant financial burden (landfilling costs) on U.S. WTE facilities and also results in the loss of materials to the landfill. The primary objective of this research is to understand better the elemental and mineralogical composition of WTE ashes from diverse origins and find composition dependent upcycling pathways for diverting these ashes from landfills. This primary objective was addressed through three research tasks –(Task I) An AI-led Multi-Modal Approach for Compositional Analysis, (Task II) Developing a Dissolution-Based Test for Real Time Analysis, and (Task III) Establishing composition-dependent end uses. The chemical composition of WTE ash is dependent on two factors, i.e., the input waste composition and the operational parameters of a WTE facility (combustion conditions). Amongst these two factors, the input waste composition will likely show spatial and temporal variation. As a result, the chemical composition of WTE ash will also fluctuate. To understand the spatial and temporal variation in WTE ash composition, in Task I, we collected 128 ash samples (62 bottom ash and 66 fly ash samples) from 11 WTE facilities located in 11 U.S. states and characterized them via X-ray Fluorescence, powder X-ray Diffraction, and Raman Spectroscopy. The findings from this extensive characterization work indicated that the key elements in WTE fly ashes are Ca, Cl (greater than 10 wt. %), Si, S, K, Zn ( between 1 and 10 wt. %), Mg, Al, P, Ti, Fe, Cu, Br, and Pb (between 0.1 and 1 wt. %). Similarly, the key elements in WTE bottom ash fraction finer than 45μm are Ca (greater than 10 wt. %), Mg, Al, Si, S, Cl, K, Ti, Fe, Zn (between 1 and 10 wt. %), P, V, Cr, Mn, Cu, Br, and Pb (between 0.1 and 1 wt. %). Here, we note that the dominant fraction of WTE bottom ash is the coarse fraction. The coarse WTE bottom ash fraction (rich in silicon) was not characterized in this study because of excessive grinding requirements and their unsuitability as a supplementary cementitious material due to their coarse nature. The elements in WTE bottom ashes are present as calcite, anhydrite, vaterite, hydroxyapatite, quartz, bassanite, gehlenite, akermanite, hydrocalumite, and portlandite. Similarly, the mineralogical species present in WTE fly ashes are calcium chloride hydroxide, halite, calcite, anhydrite, sylvite, hydrocalumite, vaterite, hannebachite, quartz, and bassanite. Temporal variation in ash composition may also result in significant fluctuations in chemical compositions. Therefore, a WTE facility may need to monitor the ash composition (elemental and mineralogical composition) in real time. In Task I, we evaluated the possibility of using a portable X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometer to monitor the elemental composition in real-time. Specifically, we collected XRF data on identical specimens via a portable XRF spectrometer (low-end) and a lab-based benchtop XRF spectrometer (high-end). The collected data was used to train an A.I. algorithm (portable XRF data as an input and benchtop XRF data as an output) to predict accurate elemental composition using portable XRF data. Finally, we developed a 2-minute photobleaching protocol to monitor the mineralogical characteristics of WTE ashes via Raman spectroscopy. Overall, the activities in Task I improved our understanding of ash composition and developed techniques to monitor elemental and mineralogical composition in near real-time. Based on the findings of Task I, we find that WTE ashes exhibit wide variability in mineralogy. For ICP-based elemental analysis, all the mineralogical species in WTE ashes must be brought into solution. This is traditionally accomplished with acid digestion using a combination of multiple acids. However, acid digestion with multiple acids is time-consuming and often fails to ensure complete digestion of the ash matrix. To address this limitation, in Task II, we developed an alkali-fusion-based digestion protocol using a combination of lithium tetraborate, lithium metaborate, and their combinations as possible alkali fluxes for digesting WTE ashes entirely and rapidly. The validity of the developed method was evaluated on two standard ash specimens, i.e., SRM 1633c coal fly ash and BCR-176R incineration fly ash specimen. The findings suggest that the developed protocol can ensure complete digestion of elements such as Al, Ba, Ca, Cr, Cu, Mg, Mn, P, Sr, V, Zn, Be, K, and rare earth elements. The recent changes in the energy market towards renewables and increased metal recycling have resulted in reduced supplies of supplementary cementitious materials (coal fly ash and slag). Therefore, in Task III, we evaluated the possibility of employing WTE ashes as SCMs. As the chemical composition of WTE ashes varies temporally (on an hourly basis), there was also a need to develop tests that can evaluate the suitability of material to act as supplementary cementitious material rapidly, i.e., in a few minutes. Therefore, in Task II, we also developed a rapid test to assess the suitability of a material to act as an SCM in 5 minutes. This represents a significant advance over the state-of-the-art R 3 test, which takes ~144 hours. This test was initially validated on amorphous aluminosilicates, such as calcined clays, and could be extended to evaluate other industrial by-products, such as WTE ashes. In Task III, we evaluated the possibility of employing WTE ashes for two applications, i.e., as an SCM and a lime substitute for clay stabilization. The findings from Task I indicated that WTE ashes are enriched in chlorine and, therefore, cannot be used directly as an SCM due to corrosion-related risks and altered hydration kinetics. Accordingly, we developed an ash treatment protocol to reduce the solubility of chlorine-containing species in WTE ashes. The developed treatment protocol also immobilized lead in certain mineral forms. As a result of the treatment, WTE ashes can be used as SCMs without any corrosion or heavy metal leaching concerns. The second application examined in this study was clay stabilization. WTE ashes are calcium-rich and can be an adequate lime replacement for clay stabilization. Our findings reveal that the sum of the concentrations of Ca(OH) 2 and CaClOH controls the clay stabilization capability of WTE ashes. In summary, in this work, we evaluated the elemental and mineralogical characteristics of U.S. WTE ashes from diverse origins and developed tests to evaluate the chemical characteristics of these ashes in real time through a portable XRF and a benchtop Raman spectrometer. Based on the chemical characteristics of these ashes, we developed an ash treatment process to enable the use of WTE ashes as an SCM and also evaluated the possibility of employing these ashes for clay stabilization. Overall, the findings from this work enables the diversion of WTE ashes from landfills for multiple end-uses, i.e., as an SCM or a lime substitute for clay stabilization.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗