4.

0 Case Study

4.1 Introduction

Malaysia's population has been growing at a 2.4% yearly pace, and MSW generation has been rapidly increasing.
As a result, various types of MSW, such as commercial, industrial, and agricultural byproducts, have been thrown in
landfills over time. As a result, proper MSW management is critical [1] to protecting both human and environmental
livelihoods. Because of the staggering amount of MSW, responsible parties, mostly municipalities and landfill
operators globally, are having difficulty disposing of it in a sustainable manner. Furthermore, determining the best
and most feasible solution for restricting the disposal of huge amounts of MSW at low prices while preventing
environmental impact is difficult due to the multiple considerations necessary.

Malaysia's population has been expanding at a rate of 2.4% each year. The goal of this study is to provide a brief
overview of the PBSL's landfill leachate treatment research efforts as well as PBSL functioning and management.
Finally, a future treatment approach for PBSL leachate is proposed for further research.

4.2 Pulau Burung Sanitary Landfill (PBSL)

At the Byram Reserves near Nibong Tebal, Penang, one can find PBSL. Its overall area is
62.4 ha, of which 33 ha are now under operation. Every day, it receives about 1,800 tons of solid
waste from municipal and non-hazardous industrial sources. The mainland supplies the majority
of the incoming MSW (600 tons on average), and Penang Island supplies the remaining quantity.
This landfill has a natural marine clay liner because of its proximity to the water. The trash was
disposed of without efficient management or leachate control for the first ten years of operation,
from the early 1980s until 1990. PBSL started operating in 1991 as a semi-aerobic system that
utilized a controlled tipping procedure to meet Level II sanitary landfill criteria. By
implementing controlled tipping with leachate recirculation in 2001, PBLS was upgraded to a
Level III sanitary landfill [3]. To ensure effective daily operation and management at the landfill,
PBSL's operation was delegated to a private concessionaire in 2012. PBSL's location is shown in
Figure 1 using a satellite image.
In 1990, neither adequate management nor leachate control were in place. PBSL has chosen
the Fukuoka approach when it comes to build landfill systems since it allows for natural air
penetration into the waste body via the leachate collection pipelines. This method enhances
waste stability and raises leachate quality due to the enhanced microbial activity in the waste [4].
Several nations, including China, Iran, Malaysia, Iran, and Japan, have used the Fukuoka
technique. Compared to aerobic landfills, this method has a number of benefits, including
improved aerobic biodegradation of organic waste, less methane emission, a lower leachate
pollutant load, and economic viability [3].
 FIGURE 1: Satellite image of PBSL

4.3 PBSL Leachate Characteristics

Leachate is the term for the liquid that permeates the waste and water produced at the dump site.
The resulting liquid is made up of dissolved waste components, suspended particles, and waste
degradation byproducts from diverse microorganism activities. Depending on the kind of waste
that is dumped at a landfill, leachate contains a variety of pollutants. Young leachate is defined as
leachate produced during the first five years (or so) of a landfill's operation, when it is in an
acidogenic phase. Leachate produced by landfills older than ten years and often in the
methanogenic phase is referred to as "old leachate."
PBSL's leachate is categorized as old or stable leachate because the plant has been operational for more than 20
years. Common metrics used to describe the properties of landfill leachate include COD, TOC, BOD5, BOD5/COD
ratio, pH, SS, turbidity, NH3-N, Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN), bacterial count, and heavy metal concentrations.
Table 1 displays the characteristics of the PBSL leachate. The Environmental Quality (Control of Pollution from
Solid Waste Transfer Station and Landfill) Regulations 2009 (PU(A) 433) Second Schedule must be followed by the
Malaysian Department of Environment before leachate can be discharged into waterways (Regulation 13). In
conclusion, the indicator that is most frequently employed to identify organic contamination is BOD5. Measurement
of the dissolved oxygen that bacteria need in order to determine BOD5.
 According to reports, the average BOD5 and COD values were 243 and 2345 mg/L,
respectively. At the time, the anticipated BOD5/COD ratio was 0.124. BOD5/COD ratios are
frequently used to illustrate changes in the concentration of biodegradable substances in
leachate. The ratio indicates that the leachate was not sufficiently biodegradable. The low
BOD5/COD ratio indicated that the leachate was stable and difficult to further deteriorate
(0.124). The high pH value, low levels of COD, BOD5, and heavy metals all indicated that the
leachate was in the anaerobic stage of methane fermentation. Due to higher metal solubility in
the early stages of landfill operation, heavy metal concentrations are usually high, whereas low
pH was brought on by the release of organic acids.

4.4 Availability of Landfill Leachate Treatment

Since the presence of leachate in surface or ground water is highly undesirable, numerous strategies for its removal
have been devised. Leachate treatment plant performance is influenced by a variety of factors, including leachate
quality and amount, its characteristics, discharge restrictions or removal efficiency requirements, residual product
quantity and management, site location, and economics. Additionally, the treatment capability must be in line with
the actual characteristics of a given leachate. The availability of landfill leachate treatment is shown in Figure 2.
 FIGURE 2: Landfill leachate treatment

4.5 Physico-chemical
Treatment
Traditional physicochemical techniques can be used in conjunction with biological treatments as co-treatments.
These methods have been demonstrated to be effective at removing dangerous components from leachate, including
humic and fulvic acids, heavy metals, adsorbable organically bound halogens (AOXs), polychlorinated biphenyls
(PCBs), and a range of other persistent organic pollutants [6]. One of the most anticipated physical-chemical
processes is adsorption, which has many benefits over alternative treatments. treatment.
I. Adsorption

Leachate treatment can greatly benefit from the equilibrium separation technique of
adsorption. The high cost of this approach, however, limits its ability to successfully treat
leachate, as does the need for ongoing activated carbon replacement. The preliminary results of
their adsorption method tests for PBSL leachate were presented in [4]. Iron (Fe), which was
found in average concentrations ranging from 4.1 to 19.5 mg/L in the leachate oxidation pond,
was removed using limestone chips as filter media. More than 90% of the Fe could be extracted
from the leachate using four sets of filter columns, a metal loading of 0.5 kg/m3/day, and a
retention duration of 58 minutes. The surface charge of the limestone particles was found to be
what caused the removal of Fe2+. With an effective bed volume of 4.5 m3, the predicted
breakthrough time at the PBSL for 100 m3/day of entering leachate is 8 months.
 Using an environmentally friendly composite adsorbent, [7] looked into the effectiveness of
fixed-bed operation for the removal of ammoniacal nitrogen (NH3-N) and COD from PBSL
leachate. To create a mesoporous composite, cement paste was combined with rice husk ash,
clinoptilolite, palm shell carbon, and limestone powder. The efficiency of the column for
adsorbing NH3-N and COD after regeneration increased to 90.0% and 93.7%, respectively, from
86.4% and 92.6% when utilizing new adsorbent According to the researchers, adsorption via
metal exchange was what caused the lowering of NH3-N and the trapping of COD fractions on
the composite structures, which significantly improved removal efficiency.

Additionally, [8] used batch research to treat PBSL leachate by removing NH3-N, Fe2+, and
Zn2+ using silica sand. The results showed that the ammoniacal nitrogen, iron, and zinc removal
efficiencies were, respectively, 51%, 44.4%, and 39.2% with a shaking time of 90 minutes, a
settle time of 60 minutes, and a dosage of 60 g (0.5 kg/L) of silica sand. They believed that silica
sand might be used more successfully as a filter media in an initial treatment step before more
physicochemical treatments because of its inherent capacity for organic molecules.

After discovering this finding, [9] attempted to alter silica sand using a different NaOH
impregnation ratio to get similar features. With improvements in Fe2+ and Zn2+ of more than
60%, they found that modified silica sand functioned best at IR 1.5. Separately, [10] examined
different Fe2+ and orthophosphate impregnation ratios on coffee ground husk (PO4–P). They
found that impregnation ratios of 2.5 and 0.5 were the most effective for the adsorption of Fe2+
and PO4-P, respectively, at doses of 10 g at pH 8.1. A pH of 13 was optimum for the removal of
iron, while a pH of 5 to 11 was necessary to remove PO4-P. Additionally, [11] looked into
several Durio zibethinus peel preparation procedures for NH3-N removal from PBSL leachate in
the search for a different precursor for activated carbon. They found that in order to remove
more than 50% of NH3-N, the optimum ideal parameters of activation temperature, 400 °C;
activation period, 2.27 h; and IR, 3, were required. Because adsorption technology continues to
be the most extensively studied approach for PBSL leachate, Table 2 lists the successful
adsorption technologies with a focus on their treatment efficacy.
 Table 2: Successful adsorption treatment from previous work.

Adsorbent Source Parameters Concern Removal

efficiency (%)
Zeolite Activated Local supply NH3-N, COD 80, 20
carbon NH3-N, COD 30, 80
Composite media NH3-N, COD 70, 60
Limestone: GAC Local supply Orthophosphate 98
(25:15) NH3-N 58

Limestone
Local supply Color 88
(35:5)
Durio zibethinus Agricultural waste COD 94
Chemical activation) NH3-N 42
Durio zibethinus Agricultural waste COD 42
(Physical activation) Color 40
Composite adsorbent Local supply NH3-N 60
COD 50
Color 90
Fe2+ 90
Tamarind fruit seed AC Agricultural waste Color 91
(Microwave) COD 80
Sugarcane bagasse AC Agricultural waste NH3-N 79
(Microwave) PO4–P 85
Banana fond AC B 93
Agricultural waste Fe2+ 95
(Microwave)

4.5 Conclusions

An overview of PBSL operation and management has been developed to help researchers better
understand how accessible leachate treatment research activities are. Adsorption treatment,
which is thought to be the most effective and widely used approach, has been evaluated in terms
of treatment effectiveness. Several summaries of the research-related activities are provided
below.
• Since the PBSL leachate is in a stable or mature condition, physico-chemical treatment is the only practical
method for treating the leachate.
• Higher removal efficiencies attained with adsorption treatment, which have been reported by numerous authors, as
evidence that this method is more reliable than the others.
• The option for co-treatment must coexist with a reliable and efficient landfill leachate treatment in order to reduce
the presence of dangerous factors in the leachate. This can be accomplished in the future by combining enhanced
biological and physico-chemical treatments.
 REFERENCES

1. Akinbile, C. O., Yusoff, M. S. & Ahmad Zuki, A. Z. 2012. Landfill leachate treatment using sub-surface flow
constructed wetland by Cyperus haspan. Waste Management, 32, 1387-1393.
2. Umar, M., Aziz, H. A. & Yusoff, M. S. 2010. Variability of parameters involved in leachate pollution index and
determination of LPI from four landfills in Malaysia. International Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2010.
3. Aziz, H. A., Adlan, M. N., Zahari, M. S. M. & Alias, S. 2004. Removal of ammoniacal nitrogen (N-NH3) from
municipal solid waste leachate by using activated carbon and limestone. Waste management & Research, 22,
371-375.
4. Chong, T. L., Matsufuji, Y. & Hassan, M. N. 2005. Implementation of the semi-aerobic landfill system (Fukuoka
method) in developing countries: A Malaysia cost analysis. Waste Management, 25, 702-711.
5. Aziz, S. Q., Aziz, H. A., Yusoff, M. S., Bashir, M. J. & Umar, M. 2010. Leachate characterization in semi-
aerobic and anaerobic sanitary landfills: a comparative study. Journal of Environmental Management, 91, 2608-
14.
6. Abbas, A. A., Jingsong, G., Liuzhi, P., Panying, Y. & Al-Rekabi, W. S. 2009. Review on landfill leachate
treatments. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 534-545.
7. Halim, A. A., Aziz, H. A., Johari, M. A. M., Ariffin, K. S. & Adlan, M. N. 2010. Ammoniacal nitrogen and COD
removal from semi-aerobic landfill leachate using a composite adsorbent: Fixed bed column adsorption
performance. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 175, 960-964.
8. Othman, E., Yusoff, M. S., Aziz, H. A., Adlan, M. N., Bashir, M. J. & Hung, Y.-T. 2010. The Effectiveness of
Silica Sand in Semi-Aerobic Stabilized Landfill Leachate Treatment. Water, 2, 904-915.
9. Kamaruddin, M. A., Yusoff, M. S., Aziz, A. A. & Rui, L. M. 2012. Influence of Impregnation Ratio on
Chemically Modified Silica Sand for Heavy Metals Removal from Stabilized Landfill Leachate. International
Journal of Environmental Protection, 2, 15-22.
10. Ching, S. L., Yusoff, M. S., Aziz, H. A. & Umar, M. 2011. Influence of impregnation ratio on coffee ground
activated carbon as landfill leachate adsorbent for removal of total iron and orthophosphate. Desalination, 279,
225-234.
11. Kamaruddin, M. A., Yusoff, M. S. & Ahmad, M. A. 2011. Optimization of durian peel based activated carbon
preparation conditions for ammoniacal nitrogen removal from semi-aerobic landfill leachate. Journal of
Scientific and Industrial Research, 70, 554-560.