Natural and Advanced Treatment Systems for Wastewater Management at Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site in Developing Countries

Natural and Advanced Treatment Systems for Wastewater Management at Municipal Solid Waste Disposal Site in Developing Countries C. Chiemchaisri Department of Environmental Engineering, Kasetsart University Bangkok 19, Thailand

Introduction Landfill of fresh wastes is the most common way of disposing municipal solid wastes especially in developing countries During landfill operation, pollution arise from leachate contamination is one of the most concerned environmental impact. Landfill Depth Infiltration Evaporation Waste Characteristics and age of wastes Precipitation Leachate Production Several factors affect leachate quantity and characteristics, e.g. e precipitation, waste characteristics, age of landfill etc.

Variation in Leachate Characteristics: Problem encountered Leachate characteristics varied significantly along the operation of landfill In young landfill: - High organic (BOD, COD) concentration - High degree of biodegradability (BOD/COD) - Relatively low nitrogen content (high COD/N)-nutrient limit condition BOD (mg/l) 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 th Year 2 nd Year ControlledCondition Rainfall Period Dry Period Actual Climatic Lysimeter1 Lysimeter2 Lysimeter3 Lysimeter4 As the landfill is aged: - Low organic BOD concentration - Low BOD/COD (Less than.1)-biological treatment not effective - High nitrogen content (low COD/N) - toxic condition Ideally, the treatment should be done by the combination of biological and physico-chemical chemical processes but its application is limited due to high cost. TKN (mg/l) 1, - 4, 3,5 3, 2,5 2, 1,5 1, 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Time(days) 1 th Year 2 nd Year Controlled Condition Rainfall Period Dry Period Actual Climatic Lysimeter1 Lysimeter2 Lysimeter3 Lysimeter4-1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Time (days)

Alternatives for Leachate Management at Solid Waste Disposal Site 1. Leachate recirculation/ Evaporation on final cover soil - Cheapest solution - Salt accumulation- detrimental effect to vegetation - Not possible during rainy season 2. Stabilization ponds - Most popular treatment process due to low cost - Moderate treatment efficiencies - Hydraulic governed process/ Poor performance at high flow 3. Constructed wetland - Improved performance from stabilization pond - Nutrient removal possible 4. Conventional biological treatment processes (e.g. A/S, biob io-film] - Good treatment efficiencies but ineffective for old leachate ate - High investment/ operation cost 5. Advanced treatment system (e.g. combined biological/chemical processes, MBR) - Improved performance from conventional processes - High investment/operation cost

Natural Treatment System using Constructed Wetland For the treatment of Young and Stabilized Waste Leachate Direct application of sub-surface surface horizontal flow constructed wetland to young and stabilized municipal solid waste leachate. Organic and nitrogen removal were evaluated at different hydraulic loading rates (HLR) of 1, 28 and 56 mm/d (equivalent to HRT of 28, 1 and 5 days).

Subsurface Horizontal Flow Constructed Wetland (Cattail) size: 1 m (W) x 3 m (L) X.7 m (D) Leachate Storage Sampling Pipe(PVC) Size 2 inch Pipe(PVC) Size 1/2 inch Water Level +.7 m. (from bottom) Gravel Croase Sand Pipe(PVC) Size 2 inch

Leachate characteristics Parameter Young leachate (Run I-III) Stabilized leachate (Run I) Stabilized leachate (Run II-III) ph 4.3-6.5 8.2-8.5 7.9-9.2 BOD (mg/l) 3,15-7,4 29-278 15-68 COD (mg/l) 5,85-12,82 1,613-4,56 414-2,184 SS (mg/l) 32-825 124-223 1-158 NH 3 -N (mg/l) 43-18 711-967 88-35 TKN (mg/l) 144-366 846-1,454 17-411 PO 4 (mg/l) 4.3-23.4 7.3-8.8 1.4-5.4 EC (ms/cm) 1.5-6.7 17.4-21.3 1.4-13.1

Steady state performance young leachate Parameter HLR %R HLR %R HLR % R 1 mm/d 28 mm/d 56 mm/d ph 7.6 (.3) 8.1 (.1) 7.6 (.3) BOD (mg/l) 136 (171) 98 32 (31) 99 115 (36) 97 COD (mg/l) 757 (692) 94 438 (294) 97 364 (169) 96 SS (mg/l) 3 (25) 88 113 (128) 71 87 (19) 88 NH 3 -N (mg/l) 44 (2) 72 (4) 98 (18) TKN (mg/l) 86 (4) 43 114 (37) 36 182 (24) 8 NO 2 -N (mg/l) 3.9 (6.6) 1.9 (2.3).3 (.1) NO 3 -N (mg/l).7 (.2) 4.2 (4.8) 3. (.3) PO 4 (mg/l).1 (.1) 99.5 (.1) 95.9 (.3) 95 Remark: average (SD) values - High organic removal efficiencies (>9%) was achieved in HSF treating young leachate at HLR of 1-56 mm/d. Moderate TKN removal (36-43%) was obtained.

COD and nitrogen profile (HLR = 1 mm/d) SCOD TN Org-N NH3-N NO2-N NO3-N Concentration (mg/l) 8 6 4 2 66 49 27 2 Inf (Pre -HSF ) Port 1(Pre -HSF ) Port 2(Pre -HSF ) Eff (Pre -HSF ) Concentration (mg/l) 3 2 1 232 148 83.2.9 157 97 48 8.43.7 128 45 63 7.612. 98 27 61 7.52.6 Inf (Pre-HSF) Port 1(Pre-HSF) Port 2(Pre-HSF) Eff (Pre-HSF) - Most of COD were removed within the first 1 m distance from the inlet - Nitrogen transformation gradually took place along the treatment path. - There was no significant level of oxidized nitrogen found in the system at steady state. - DO in plant root zone was found in range between.9-1.4 mg/l @ HLR of 1 mm/d to.1-.2 mg/l @HLR of 56 mm/d

Steady state performance stabilized leachate Parameter HLR 1 mm/d %R HLR 28 mm/d %R HLR 56 mm/d % R ph BOD (mg/l) COD (mg/l) SS (mg/l) NH 3 -N (mg/l) TKN (mg/l) NO 2 -N (mg/l) NO 3 -N (mg/l) PO 4 (mg/l) 8.4 (.3) 47 (31) 1,489 (529) 4 (15) 281 (191) 358 (191) 54 (47) 4.2 (5.7) 2.2 (2.1) 71 58 56 46 21 8.6 (.1) 27 (1) 1,37(175) 51 (1) 133 (62) 224 (5) 4.9 (3.4) 1.6 (1.2) 2.1 (.7) 55 42 66 41 48 7.9 (.1) 11 (1) 185 (115) 28 (4) 55 (6) 154 (14) 17.1 (3.1) 6.8 (1.3) 1.2 (.7) 44 63 66 2 25 Remark: average (SD) values Lower organic removal (41-77% BOD) was observed when the system was applied to the treatment of old leachate with BOD/COD <.1. Nevertheless, moderated TKN removal (41%) was still achieved at HLR of 28 mm/d when influent TKN was controlled at 1-3 mg/l.

COD and nitrogen profile stabilized leachate SCOD TN Org -N NH3-N NO2-N NO3-N Concentr ation (mg/l ) 4 3 2 1 3176 196 1826 1661 Inf (Post-HSF) Port 1(Post-HSF) Port 2(Post-HSF) Eff (Post-HSF) Concentratio (mg/l) 868 57 6 4 2 12 1.62.2 45 29 15 4.34. 62 4 19 17.61.9 55 46 7 5.53.6 Inf (Post -HSF ) Port 1(Post -HSF ) Port 2(Post -HSF ) Eff (Post -HSF ) - COD were gradually removed along the treatment pathway. - Nitrogen transformation were low. Majority of nitrogen was in ammonium form - Similar TKN removal efficiency was obtained at HLR of 28 mm/d when compared HLR of 1 mm/d at the same N loading rate. - Increase of HLR to 56 mm/d reduced TKN removal to 2%. Nitrite accumulation was observed in this case.

Effect of leachate on plant growth - Higher plant growth was observed in unit fed with young leachate - For stabilized leachate, negative effect of localized NO 2 accumulation on plant growth was observed. 2 Plant Height Height (Post-HSF) Height (Post-VSF) Young leachate Stabilized leachate Height (cm) 15 1 5 Nitrite accumulation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 Time (d) Young leachate Stabilized leachate

Advanced Treatment System using Bio-film membrane bioreactor Level controller Vacuum gauge Peristaltic pump Sponge cube media Hollow fiber membrane Influent Air pump MBR treated water

Biofilm membrane bioreactor: Floating Media Bed/Hollow fiber Microfiltration Membrane Sponge cube media Biological activity on attached growth floating media Hollow fiber membrane Air pump Solid liquid separation by microfiltration membrane

MBR experimental system & Operation Sponge cube 2*2*2 cm size Porosity: 46% (external) Bed depth: 6 cm. Hollow fiber membrane: Pore size:.4 micron. Surface area:.2 m 2 HRT = 48 hours Aeration mode: Continuous aeration Intermittent aeration Reactor volume: 68 liters

Parameter Leachate Characteristics New wastes Stabilized wastes Mixed leachate ph 4.2-6. 7.8-9. 6.-8.6 BOD (mg/l) 75-14 37-9 5-119 COD (mg/l) 6-19 13-173 173 116-175 175 BOD/COD.7-.9.9.3-.7.7.4-.7.7 SS (mg/l) 2-8 9-14 1-2 NH 3 -N N (mg/l) 2-4 12-17 17 1-18 18 Org-N N (mg/l) 1-3 4-1 3-7 COD/N 2-3 1 1 TP (mg/l) 2-5 5-1 5-8

TMP Development in Biofilm MBR: Effect of Aeration 1 8 membrane washing 1 8 membrane washing TMP (kpa) 6 4 TMP (kpa) 6 4 2 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time (d) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time (d) Run 1A Run 2A Run 3-1A Run 1B Run 2B Run 3-1B a) Continuous aeration b) Intermittent aeration - MLSS in MBR was between 133-198 mg/l, higher under continuous aeration mode - TMP increasing rate was affected by MLSS concentration. - However, aeration mode had greater effect on TMP development (2-4% higher under intermittent aeration mode) - The permeate flux could be kept constant at.17 m 3 /m 2 d.

Organic Removal in Biofilm MBR: Effect of COD/N - BOD/COD removal was high when leachate with COD/N between 1 and 3 was fed. - Organic removal was severely deteriorated when leachate with COD/N of 1 was applied. 1 1 %BOD removal 8 6 4 2 %BOD removal 8 6 4 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 time (d) Run COD/N 1A= 3:1 Run COD/N 2A= 1:1 Run COD/N 3-1A = 1:1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 time (d) Run COD/N 1B= 3:1 Run COD/N 2B= 1:1 Run COD/N 3-1B = 1:1 %COD removal 1 8 6 4 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 time (d) Run COD/N 1A = 3:1 Run COD/N 2A = 1:1 Run COD/N 3-1A= 1:1 %COD removal 1 8 6 4 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 time (d) Run COD/N 1B= 3:1 Run COD/N 2B = 1:1 Run COD/N 3-1B = 1:1 a) Continuous aeration b) Intermittent aeration

Nitrogen Removal in Biofilm MBR: Effect of COD/N and aeration - At COD/N of 3, TKN removal was 93-98% under continuous aeration. Application of intermittent aeration reduced TKN removal to 6-7% (N uptake for cell synthesis) - At COD/N of 1, high TKN removal of >9% was achieved regardless of aeration mode. (Nitrification-denitrification) - At COD/N of 1, biological activity diminished. (Ammonia volatilization) TKN (mg/l) 75 1 6 8 45 6 3 4 15 2 % TKN removal 1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 time (d) Influent continuous aeration intermittent aeration %eff. of con. %eff. of int. a) COD/N of 3 TKN (mg/l) 3 24 1 8 18 6 12 4 6 2 1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 time (d) % TKN removal Influent continuous aeration intermittent aeration %eff. of con. %eff. of int. TN (mg/l) 3 24 18 12 6 1 11 21 31 41 51 61 71 time (d) 1 8 6 4 2 % TN removal Influent continuous aeration intermittent aeration %eff. of con. %eff. of int. b) COD/N of 1 c) COD/N of 1

Improvement of Stabilized Leachate Treatment by Chemical Precipitation - To improve the treatment of leachate from stabilized landfill with low COD/N, chemical precipitation using MgCl 2 + Na 2 HPO 4 was employed for ammonia removal. MgCl 2.6H 2 O + Na 2 HPO 4.12H 2 O +NH + 4 MgNH 4 PO 4.6H 2 O + 2NaCl - From standard jar test, the required dose of MgCl 2 and Na 2 HPO 4 for adjusting COD/N of stabilized leachate to 1 was 6.5-7.6 g/l and 5.4-6.3 g/l respectively. - After chemical pre-treatment, the pre-treated leachate can be successfully treated in MBR with COD and NH 3 removal efficiencies of 97% and 98%. The effluent from MBR contains COD and NH 3 -N N of 4 and 2 mg/l respectively.

Summary of MBR performance Integrated membrane system consisting of floating filter media - microfiltration membrane could be successfully applied for the treatment of leachate with different degree of stabilization. Hollow fiber microfiltration membrane in Biofilm MBR could be operated at constant permeate flux of.17 m/d under intermittent suction of 15 min. on and off. Aeration in MBR helped reducing the accumulation of biomass on the membrane surface and retarding TMP development. High degree of organic and nitrogen removal of more than 9% could be achieved in the system when COD/N was between 1-3. However, inhibition of biological activities was observed when stabilized landfill was fed. Optimum aeration pattern in MBR was 2 hour of non-aeration period followed by 1 hours of aeration period.

Comparison of natural and advanced treatment system For leachate management in developing countries Natural treatment system using constructed wetland are sufficiently effective for the treatment of fresh leachate containing high biodegradable organics provided that the organic loading to the system is properly controlled. Moderate removal of nutrient (N) is also attainable. Advanced treatment system using biofilm MBR are very effective for fresh and mixed leachate both in terms of organic and nitrogen. For highly stabilized lechate,, its combination with physico-chemical chemical treatment is recommended. Shortened HRT made the system compacted. The selection of appropriate treatment will depend on land area available, effluent quality requirement and affordable investment & operation on cost