LANDFILL SIMULATION REACTORS – A

METHOD TO PREDICT THE BEHAVIOUR

OF FIELD-SCALE LANDFILLS?

J. FELLNER, D. LANER AND P. H. BRUNNER

Institute for Water Quality, Resource and Waste Management, Vienna University
of Technology, Vienna, Austria.
Email: johann.fellner@tuwien.ac.at

G. DÖBERL
Umweltbundesamt – Federal Environment Agency of Austria, Department for
Contaminated Sites, Spittelauer Lände 5, A-1090 Vienna, Austria

SUMMARY: Investigations into landfill simulation reactors and a full scale landfills are used for
predicting emissions from municipal solid waste landfills. In the present study the water flow
and solute transport through a landfill simulation reactor and a full scale landfill (using the same
waste) has been investigated. The results indicate that, due to preferential flow pathways the
water flow in field-scale landfills is less uniform than in laboratory experiments. Based on tracer
experiments, it can be discerned that in laboratory-scale experiments around 40% of pore water
participates in solute transport, whereas this fraction amounts to less than 0.2% in the
investigated full-scale landfill. Main consequences of the difference in water flow and thus
solute transport are: (a) leachate emissions from full-scale landfills decrease faster than predicted
by laboratory experiments, and (b) the stock of materials remaining in the landfill body, and thus
the long-term emission potential, is likely to be underestimated by laboratory landfill
simulations.

1. INTRODUCTION

Methods for predicting the future behaviour of landfills are based either on the observation of
landfills, on laboratory experiments, on mathematical models for describing biochemical,
chemical, and physical processes, and on the observation of natural analogs such as peat bogs.
All methods show different advantages and disadvantages (Döberl, 2004), and have been used
for various purposes and time scales.
The methodology probably most often used in the past for predicting emissions from landfills
is based on laboratory experiments. They include waste analysis, batch tests (waste mass
investigated in the range of some hundred grams, e.g. leaching tests to determine the potentially
mobile fraction), and the operation of so called landfill simulation reactors (LSR) with an
experimental volume ranging from 0.1 to 10 m³.
While batch tests are mainly performed to determine the potentially mobile substance fraction
in wastes, LSR are largely used to assess the future emission behaviour of landfills. Using the
fact that the rate of water flow accelerates or slows down the rate of biochemical, chemical, and

Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”

Santander, Spain; 27 - 28 April 2011
 Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”, 2011

physical processes within landfills, landfill simulation reactors are usually operated at high water
flow rates. According to Beaven and Knox (1999) determining the amount of water (given in
liters) passing through a given waste mass (given in kg dry matter of waste), commonly known
as liquid to solid (L/S)-ratio, allows relating the LSR results to full-scale-landfills.
However, the transformation of LSR results to full scale landfills implies a similar water
distribution within landfills and LSR, because the kinetics of metabolic reactions largely depend
on the water content (Klink and Ham, 1982) and its distribution within the waste (Bendz, 1998).
The present paper addresses the crucial question; whether the basic assumption of a uniform
distribution of water flow within landfilled MSW is valid for different scales.

2. MATERIALS & METHODS

The study presented is based on investigations of a full scale landfill (see Figure 1, volume ~
80,000 m³) and two landfill simulation reactors LSR with a volume of less than 0.10 m³ (see
Figure 2). The waste built in the LSR was excavated from the full scale landfill, hence alike
waste used in both investigations.

silt 0,9 m humus 0,1 m compost 0,7 m leachate

gravel 0,2 m humus 0,1 m compost 0,7 m gravel 1,3 m recirculation
gravel 1,3 m

compartment compartment compartment

I MSW12 m II MSW 12 m III MSW 14 m

gravel 0,5 m gravel 0,5 m

silt 1,7 m leachate silt 1,7 m leachate gravel 0,5 m leachate
gravel 0,5 m pipes gravel 0,5 m pipes foil pipe
foil foil

Figure 1: Cross-section of the full scale landfill investigated (Huber et al., 2004)

landfill gas

Waste leachate
V~ 0,15 m³ recirculation

Figure 2: Landfill Simulation Reactor (after Döberl et al., 2005)

The hydraulic conditions in both systems (landfill and landfill simulation reactor) were
 Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”, 2011

investigated by tracer experiments. For the tests at the landfill, 800 g of the dye uranine was
applied in an aqueous solution of 100 liters by a single pulse. For the injection of the tracer, the
landfill cover was partly removed by digging trenches over a total area of 30 m². Two days
before the tracer was applied, 200 liters of water were poured into the trenches to pre-wet the
waste. The day after tracer application, again 200 liters of water were applied. After complete
infiltration, the trenches were filled again with the material excavated, thus restoring initial
hydraulic permeability of the cover layer. The concentration of the dye in the leachate was
determined by photometry, whereby prior to analysis, leachate samples were filtrated (0.45 µm)
and the pH value was adjusted to 8.5. The detection limit for uranine in the leachate was about
0.05 mg/l.
In the landfill simulation reactors, 150 g NaCl dissolved in 500 ml water were applied as a
tracer. Since a linear correlation between the concentration of chloride and the electric
conductivity of the leachate was observed in experiments, the tracer breakthrough was
determined by measuring the electric conductivity of the leachate discharged. In order to
minimize interferences with Cl contained in the waste material, tracer tests were performed after
the waste in the reactors has been flushed with water.
The tracer experiments resulted in a break-through-curve (tracer concentration versus time or
water discharged, respectively). This curve was analyzed applying the transfer-function-model as
described in Jury and Roth (1990) in order to calculate the median of the tracer travel time and
the volume fraction participating in solute transport. For a narrow-pulse input of a tracer through
the surface of an experimental volume at time zero, the solute travel time probability density
function g(t) can be expressed by the equations given in White et al. (1986).
2
−( ln ( t ) − µ )
1 2⋅σ 2
g( t ) = ⋅e
2 ⋅ π ⋅σ ⋅ t (1)

Where µ and σ are fitting parameters and t is the time variable. From these variables, the
solute transport volume θ% and the solute travel time distribution %t are calculated (White et al.,
st

1986):

q ⋅%t
θ% st =
L (2)

where

%t = exp ( µ ) (3)

The solute transport volume θ% st is defined as the volume fraction of the wetted pore space active
in the advective transport of solute.

3. RESULTS & DISCUSSION

3.1. Full Scale Landfill

At the landfill the tracer (uranine) was detected in the leachate already 30 hours after injection
(deposition height ~ 12 m). 54 hours later, the main peak was observed. A second, smaller peak
appeared after two months. Three months after the tracer application the uranine concentration in
 Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”, 2011

the leachate dropped below the detection limit of 0.05 mg/l. Until this time, 50% of the tracer
mass applied has been recovered in the leachate.

10 8

9
7
tracer conc. [mg/l]
8

leachate discharge [mm/d]

Tracer application leachate discharge [mm/d] 6
7 22nd of March
Uranine [mg/l]

5
6

5 4

4
3
3
2
2
1
1

0 0
1.3.04

8.3.04

15.3.04

22.3.04

29.3.04

5.4.04

12.4.04

19.4.04

26.4.04

3.5.04

10.5.04

17.5.04

24.5.04

31.5.04

7.6.04

14.6.04

21.6.04

28.6.04
time [d]

Figure 3. Tracer concentration (uranine) and leachate discharge rate during the experiment at the
full scale landfill (Fellner et al., 2009)

The leachate discharge rate during the tracer experiment a varied between 0.1 and 5 mm/d,
whereby the occurrence of tracer peaks corresponds with high discharge rates, indicating the
rapid flow of infiltrating rainwater through preferential pathways towards the bottom of the
landfill.
Applying the transfer function model to the observed tracer breakthrough curve (normalized
tracer mass flux converted to a steady state water flow density q of 0.58 mm/d) results in the
following values of the fitting parameters: µ = 0.75 and σ = 2.4. For a detail description how
these values were derived see Fellner et al. (2009). The values of the fitting parameters µ and
σ denote a median of the solute travel time %t of 11 days and a solute transport volume θ% st of
0.0006 m³/m³ at the full scale landfill.

3.2. Landfill Simulation Reactors

500 ml of NaCl solution were sprinkled over the surface of the LSR (1200 cm²) with a flow rate
of 25 ml/s. After the tracer has been applied, water was added with the same flow rate for about
1,800 seconds. The breakthrough curves observed during the experiment are given in Figure 4.
The main tracer peak was detected after 230 seconds at both reactors. In total between 70 and 80
% of the tracer mass applied were recovered in the leachate of the reactors.
 Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”, 2011

7.0

6.0
LSR 1 LSR 2

5.0

4.0
Cl [g/l]

3.0

2.0

1.0

0.0
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000

Time [s]

Figure 4. Tracer concentration (chloride) during the experiments at the landfill simulation
reactors

When the transfer function model (Jury and Roth, 1990) is applied to the normalized tracer
breakthrough curves (which are obtained from the breakthrough curves in Figure 4) the solute
transport volume θ% amounts to 0.135 m³/m³ and the solute travel time %t is about 500 seconds.
st

This means that the pore volume participating in solute transport expressed by θ% st is distinctly
higher than in the field experiment with the full scale landfill. Considering the volumetric water
content of the waste, which was about 0.35 m³/m³ in the LSR more than one third of the pore
water is exchanged by convective transport. For comparison, in experiments with 3.5 m³ of
MSW a similar range for the volume fraction participating in solute transport (around 25% of the
wetted pore space was active in advective solute transport) was found (Rosqvist and Bendz,
1999).
The results at the full scale landfill however, indicate that less than 0.2 % of the pore water
(0.40 m³/m³) was taking part in the transport of the tracer. Baumann and Schneider (1998), who
investigated the water flow through a full sized landfill (average deposition height 6 m), obtained
comparable results. They noticed that 1/8 to 3/8 of the water input reaches the leachate collection
system at the landfill bottom with negligible delay. Fellner (2004), who evaluated the
observations of Baumann and Schneider, calculated a solute transport volume θ% st of 0.004
m³/m³, which implies that only around 1% of pore water participates in tracer transport.
For a better visualization of the hydraulic conditions in both systems (landfill and LSR),
tracer flow for theoretically ideal homogeneous water distribution is illustrated in Figure 5. It is
obvious that conditions in LSR are much closer to uniform water flow, but far away from the
conditions in landfills.
 Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”, 2011

1.0

0.9

Normalized tracer mass flow (sum)

0.8 Field scale

0.7 Landfill Simulations Reactors

Ideal homogeneous water flow

0.6

0.5
[-]

0.4

0.3
Increasing heterogeneity
0.2

0.1

0.0
0.0001 0.0010 0.0100 0.1000 1.0000 10.0000
Bed-volumes [-]

Figure 5 Tracer mass flow (normalized) vs. bed volumes for the experiments at the full scale
landfill and the landfill simulations reactors

4. CONCLUSIONS

The results of the investigation clearly indicate a significant difference in the heterogeneity of
water flow in landfills and landfill simulation reactors. As the presence of water plays a key role
in the metabolism of landfills (Straub and Lynch, 1982; Ehrig, 1983), the transformation of
results obtained from landfill simulation reactor experiments to full scale landfill is highly
questionable. In order to evaluate the significance of LSR results, the consequences of diverse
water distribution on the emission behavior of waste deposits need to be investigated in detailed.
First results addressing this research question have been presented by Fellner et al. (2009). They
indicate that on the one hand emissions from full scale landfills decrease faster than predicted by
laboratory experiments, and on the other hand the stock of materials remaining in the landfill
body, and thus the long term emission potential, is likely to be underestimated by laboratory
landfill simulations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Austrian Ministry of
Agriculture, Forestry, Environment and Water Management.

REFERENCES

Baumann, T. and Schneider, M., 1998. Dynamik des Wasserhaushaltes von Hausmülldeponien.
EntsorgungsPraxis(3/98): 45-49.
 Fourth International Workshop “Hydro-Physico-Mechanics of Landfills”, 2011

Beaven, R.P. and Knox, K., 1999. Desgin of a Demonstration High Rate Flushing Bioreactor
Landfill, Southampton.
Döberl, G., 2004. Evaluierung von Modellen zur Bestimmung des langfristigen Verhaltens von
Hausmülldeponien - Wissensdefizite und neue Ansätze. PhD Thesis, Vienna University of
Technology, Vienna.
Döberl, G., Fellner, J., Allgaier, G., Brunner, P.H. and Stegmann, R. (2005): Eine neue Methode
zur Charakterisierung des Stabilisierungsgrades großer Altablagerungen (Projekt EMSA)";
Institut für Wassergüte, Ressourcenmanagement und Abfallwirtschaft, TU Wien, ISBN: 978-
3-85234-092-0.
Ehrig, H.-J., 1983. Quality and Quantity of Sanitary Landfill Leachate. Waste Management &
Research, 1: 53-68.
Fellner, J., Döberl, G., Allgaier, G. and Brunner, P.H., 2009. Comparing field investigations with
laboratory models to predict landfill leachate emissions. Waste Management, 29(6): 1844-
1851.
Fellner, J., 2004. A New Method for Modeling Water Flow and Water Storage in Municipal
Solid Waste Landfills. PhD Thesis, Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, 149 pp.
Ham, R.K. and Bookter, T.J., 1982. Decomposition of Solid Waste in Test Lysimeters. Journal
of Environmental Engineering, 108(6): 1147-1170.
Huber, R., J. Fellner, G. Döberl, and Brunner, P. H. (2004): Water Flows of MSW Landfills and
Implications for Long-Term Emissions. J. Environ. Sci. Heal. A 39(4):885-900.
Jury, W.A. and Roth, K., 1990. Transfer Functions and Solute Transport Through Soil: Theory
and Applications. Birkhaeuser Publ, Basel.
Klink, R.E. and Ham, R.K., 1982. Effects of moisture movement on methane production in solid
waste landfill samples. Resources and Conservation, 8(1): 29-41.
Rosqvist, H. and Bendz, D., 1999. An experimental evaluation of the solute transport volume in
biodegraded municipal solid waste. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 3(3): 429-438.
Straub, W.A. and Lynch, D.R., 1982. Models of Landfill Leaching: Organic strength. J.
Environmental Engineering, 108: 251-268.
White, R.E., Dyson, J.S., Haigh, R.H., Jury, W.A. and Sposito, G., 1986. A transfer function
model of solute transport through soil. 2. Illustrative applications. Water Resources Research,
22: 248-254.