Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

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

Review

Landfill leachate treatment in Brazil – An overview T

∗
Alyne Moraes Costa, Raquel Greice de Souza Marotta Alfaia, Juacyara Carbonelli Campos
School of Chemistry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, 149 Athos da Silveira Ramos Avenue, Room E206, 21941-909, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The management of municipal solid waste (MSW) presents an ever increasing and more complex challenge in
Municipal solid waste global terms. The disposal of MSW in landfills generates leachate, a liquid highly polluting to the aquatic en-
Sanitary landfill vironment. This review describes the state-of-the-art approaches to treatments applied to leachate in Brazil,
Leachate composition highlighting the new technologies and alternatives that are still in the research phase, and compares the leachate
Developing country
treatment technologies applied around the world with the current scenario in Brazil. In Brazilian landfills, along
Biological processes and membrane filtration
with other technologies, the biological process is commonly applied, since this is a simple and economical
approach and often it is the only technique used in small municipalities. The sanitary landfills in large Brazilian
cities located in the states of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro, invest in or outsource landfill activities, where apply
advanced treatment technologies, such as membrane filtration. The use of membrane filtration technology in
these cases reveals similarities with leachate treatments applied in the developed countries of North America and
Europe. Brazilian researchers have highlighted the need to use efficient and economically viable technologies for
the treatment of leachate in Brazilian landfills. However, the current scenario of MSW management in Brazil
shows deficiencies related to the monitoring of sanitary landfills and limited information is available on the
performance of leachate treatment systems.

1. Introduction
The production of municipal solid waste (MSW) is directly related to
the development of human activity. Globally, accentuated technolo-
gical advances and urbanization has led to an increase in the con-
sumption of products by the population and, consequently, contributed
to the expressive volume of waste that is discarded annually. Over one
billion tons of wastes are produced worldwide and, according to
Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata (2012), this volume is expected to increase
over the years, reaching around 2.2 billion tons by 2025.
Solid waste generation can contribute to different scales of impacts
related to public health and the environment. When incorrectly man-
aged, MSW favors a spread of vector insects, the emission of toxic
pollutants, and the contamination of soil and water (Kjeldsen et al.,
2002).
Several different methods are available for waste treatment and
disposal (landfill, incineration, composting, among others) (Hamer,
2003). In most countries, including Brazil, placing waste in sanitary or
controlled landfills or open dumps is one of the main forms of the final
disposal of municipal solid waste.
In Brazil, approximately 215 thousand tons of MSW is generated
daily, which is equivalent to 1.033 kg per inhabitant per day (ABRELPE,
2017). For around 59,1% of this waste the final destination is sanitary
landfills, while around 40,9% of the MSW collected in the Brazilian
territory, that is, approximately 80 thousand tons/day are discarded
inadequately in controlled landfills and open dumps (ABRELPE, 2017).
According to Cerbato and Argolo (2012), controlled landfills can be
considered as an intermediate form between open dumps and sanitary
landfills. They are based on the isolation process of the old open dump
sites but with the implementation of leachate and gas drainage systems,
the compaction of residues and the covering of the cells at the end of
the working day. However, the absence of base waterproofing and the
treatment of leachate in controlled landfills leads to localized pollution,
compromising the quality of surface water and groundwater (Lanza and
Carvalho, 2006).
Since the establishment of the National Solid Waste Policy (Brazil,
2010), efforts have been made to close the open dumps and to correctly
dispose of MSW in sanitary landfills. On the other hand, the countries of
the European Union and Japan are moving towards waste incineration
as a way of putting an end to sanitary landfills. This is driven by the
reduced availability of large areas for their implantation and environ-
mental issues related to the generation of polluting effluents (Rabl
et al., 2008).
The disposal of waste in landfills results in the generation of

∗
Corresponding author. School of Chemistry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
E-mail address: juacyara@eq.ufrj.br (J.C. Campos).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.006
Received 12 April 2018; Received in revised form 29 October 2018; Accepted 1 November 2018
Available online 21 November 2018
0301-4797/ © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A.M. Costa et al. Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116

leachate, a highly polluting effluent due to the complexity of its com- Table 1
position, which includes a high concentration of organic material Variation in the physicochemical composition of leachate in relation to the age
(biodegradable and refractory), in which the humic compounds con- of the landfill site (adapted from Farquhar, 1989 and Ziyang et al, 2009).
stitute an important group, as well as nitrogenous compounds, heavy Parameters (mg.L-1) Landfill leachate age (years)
metals and inorganic salts (Christensen et al., 2001; Ziyang et al.,
2009). 0–5 5–10 10–20 > 20
The treatment of leachate involves the removal of organic material
pH* 3–6 6–7 7–7.5 7.5
and ammoniacal nitrogen, in addition to other toxic components, as a BOD 10,000–25,000 1000–4000 50–1000 < 50
fundamental prerequisite in order to comply with the criteria for the COD 15,000–40,000 10,000–20,000 1000–5000 < 1000
discharge of leachates into recipient water bodies. Combinations be- TKN 1500–4500 400–800 75–300 < 50
NH4+-N 1500–4250 250–700 50–200 < 30
tween conventional and advanced treatments for the removal of con-
Cl- 1000–3000 500–2000 100–500 < 100
taminants from landfill leachate have been increasingly explored, since P 100–300 10–100 – < 10
a universal treatment is not applicable to this highly complex and Alkalinity 8000–18,000 4500–6000 – –
variable effluent (Wiszniowski et al., 2006; Renou et al., 2008). Conductivity (μs.cm) 15,000–41,500 6,000–14,000 – –
This review describes the current approaches to the treatment of SO42- 500–2000 200–1000 50–200 < 50
Fe2+ 500–1500 500–1000 100–500 < 100
landfill leachate in Brazil, describing present practices and the new
Zn2+ 100–200 50–100 10–50 < 10
alternatives and technologies that are still in the research phase in this Total dissolved solids 10,000–25,000 5000–10,000 2000–5000 < 1000
country. Leachate treatment technologies applied around the world are (TDS)
compare with the current scenario in Brazil.
To facilitate the reading and allow a better understanding, this ar- *Unit in mg.L-1 not applicable to pH parameter.
( - ) Not measured.
ticle is divided into sections. The generation and composition of landfill
leachate, with a focus on Brazilian cities, are introduced in section 2.
The leachate treatment technologies used in Brazil and around the The characteristics of landfill leachates is also dependent on the
world as well as studies carried out in Brazil that are focused on the physical-chemical parameters and those commonly used for the char-
treatment of landfill leachate are discussed in section 3 and, lastly, acterization of the leachate are pH, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
section 4 presents the conclusions. chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammoniacal nitrogen (NeNH4+),
total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), phosphorus, chloride, alkalinity, solids
2. Generation of leachate in landfills series and heavy metals (Kjeldsen et al., 2002; Bhatt et al., 2017).
Table 1 shows the variation in the data over time for the composi-
Landfill leachates are defined as liquid effluents generated as a re- tion of a North American leachate proposed by Farquhar (1989). The
sult of the percolation of rainwater through the solid waste disposed of concentrations of the chemical compounds at the start of operation of
in landfills, as well as the moisture present in the waste and the de- the landfill are high and over time (years), with the stabilization of the
gradation products of the residues (Salem et al., 2008). waste, these tend to decrease continuously, except the pH parameter.
The volume of leachate generated is directly related to factors such The data presented in Table 1 do not necessarily apply to other
as precipitation, evapotranspiration, surface runoff, infiltration, regions of the world, such as South America (Brazil), where socio-
groundwater intrusion into the landfill and degree of compaction of the economic and climatic conditions, among other factors, can differ
waste (El-Fadel et al., 2002; Renou et al., 2008). Therefore, different considerably.
techniques (linings, waterproofing layers and cover layers) are applied
to control the entry of water into the landfill and, consequently, the 2.1. Characteristics of Brazilian landfill leachates
volume of leachate generated (Dajić et al., 2016).
The composition of landfill leachate is highly variable and hetero- In landfills, different physical, chemical and biological processes
geneous. However, it generally contains the following components: a occur which, in turn, constantly affect the composition of the leachate,
high concentration of dissolved organic material (volatile fatty acids influencing its characteristics (Qasin and Chiang, 1994).
and refractory organic compounds, such as humic and fulvic acids); In Brazil, the tropical climate, with elevated temperatures and vo-
macro inorganic components including ammoniacal nitrogen lumes of precipitation, favors the process of waste degradation and
(NeNH4+), sodium (Na+), potassium (K+), chloride (Cl−), calcium leachate formation (Monteiro et al., 2002; Tränkler et al., 2005). In
(Ca2+), magnesium (Mg2+), iron (Fe2+), manganese (Mn2+), sulfate turn, the leachate composition presents high concentrations of organic
(SO42−) and hydrogen carbonate (HCO3−); heavy metals such as cad- material, reflecting the consumption profile of Brazilians. According to
mium (Cd2+), nickel (Ni2+) chromium (Cr3+), lead (Pb2+), copper Alfaia et al. (2017), in all regions of Brazil over 50% of the total MSW
(Cu2+) and zinc (Zn2+); and xenobiotic organic compounds (e.g., generated is matter of organic origin.
aromatic hydrocarbons, phenols and pesticides) (Slack et al., 2005; Table 2 (supplementary material) shows the physical-chemical
Schiopu and Gavrilescu, 2010). According to Kjeldsen et al. (2002), the characteristics of the landfill leachates from different regions in Brazil
composition of the leachate varies significantly according to several and general data for the respective landfills studied.
factors, such as the composition of the waste received, the age of the In general, Brazilian leachates have a high concentration of organic
landfill and the climate. matter. However, some landfills, such as those in Rolândia, Belo
The age of the landfill is a determinant factor in the composition of Horizonte and Muribeca have low concentrations of biodegradable or-
the leachate since several parameters change as the landfill passes ganic material, expressed as BOD5, indicating that the largest fraction of
through the stabilization phases (Kulikowska and Klimiuk, 2008). Ac- organic material present in these landfills is comprised of recalcitrant
cording to Christensen et al. (2001), during the initial phase of the compounds (e.g., humic and fulvic acids). This can be explained by the
landfill, called the acid phase, the leachate presents low hydrogen ionic fact that these landfills are old and the biodegradability of landfill
potential (pH) and high concentrations of easily degraded organic material reduces over time.
matter and volatile acids. In mature landfills, which are in the metha- The ratio between BOD5 and COD values for old landfills is very low
nogenic phase, significant methane production is observed, the pH of (Assou et al., 2016), for instance, for the Muribeca landfill a ratio of
the leachate is high and the organic material is present as humic and 0.022 has been reported. This is consistent with a study by Kjeldsen
fulvic fractions (Kurniawan et al., 2006; Kulikowska and Klimiuk, et al. (2002), where landfills of advanced age, found to be in the me-
2008). thanogenic phase, had BOD to COD ratios of < 0.1. Also, it was noted

111
A.M. Costa et al.
that the pH values of the landfills analyzed were high (average value of
8.11), which may be associated with the presence of high alkalinity
values, considering that landfills had reached the methanogenic phase.
Regarding the values for ammoniacal nitrogen, the Seropédica
landfill showed a concentration of 2185 mg.L−1, the highest observed
among the landfills studied. The main source of ammoniacal nitrogen
found in leachate is the degradation of proteins, which can constitute
0.5% of the dry mass of the residue (Senior and Balba, 1987; Jokela
et al., 2002). According to Ehrig (1988), high concentrations of am-
moniacal nitrogen are found in old landfills, since it is not significantly
reduced over the years. Therefore, stabilized landfill leachates are rich
in ammoniacal nitrogen and thus they can be a major source of pollu-
tion in the long term, requiring the application of technologies aimed at
their removal (Schiopu and Gavrilescu, 2010).
Heavy metals are found in leachates as a result of the different
wastes that are discarded in landfills, such as: lamps, batteries, paints,
packaging used for chemicals and pharmaceuticals (Monteiro, 2001).
According to Baun and Christensen (2004), heavy metals have the ca-
pacity to form complexes with molecules of organic material, salts and
alkalinity, which are commonly found in leachates. Table 3 (supple-
mentary material) shows the characterization of metals present in
landfill leachates from different regions in Brazil.
According to Table 3, the concentrations of heavy metals in the
leachates from landfill sites in Brazil are low and this is due to the low
solubility of metals at alkaline pH. This is consistent with a report by
Kulikowska and Klimiuk (2008) that heavy metal concentrations tend
to be high in landfill leachates in the initial phase of operation, due to
the low pH value and over the years, as the residues stabilize and the
landfill reaches the methanogenic phase, the high pH value reduces the
solubility of the metals.
According to Ghost et al. (2017), knowledge of the toxic potential of
a leachate is essential before its discharge into water bodies, since
pollutants in high concentrations can, individually or in combination,
lead to high levels of toxicity. Since landfill leachates contain con-
taminants that can be harmful to the environment and human health, a
detailed overview of the treatments which can be applied to this pol-
luting effluent is provided below.
3. Leachate treatment technologies
Currently, several different technologies are available for the
treatment of landfill leachate, aimed at achieving the standards estab-
lished by legislation. The treatment of a leachate can be carried out
through biological processes (activated sludge, aerobic and anaerobic
stabilization lagoons and biological filters); physical-chemical processes
(flotation, coagulation/flocculation, adsorption, chemical precipitation,
air stripping, pH adjustment, chemical oxidation, ion exchange, elec-
trochemical treatment); membrane filtration (microfiltration, ultra-
filtration, nanofiltration and reverse osmosis), advanced oxidative
treatments (Fenton process and ozonization) and natural systems
(wetlands) (Wiszniowski et al., 2006; Renou et al., 2008; Raghab et al.,
2013).
The schematic in Fig. 1 shows which parameters should be eval-
uated in the choice of a treatment for a landfill leachate.
According to Fig. 1, for a leachate containing a high concentration
of organic material (> 10,000 mg.L−1) the most appropriate approach
is biological treatment. However, for leachates with a high concentra-
tion of ammoniacal nitrogen and a low biodegradability, the most
suitable approach is a physical-chemical process, possibly in combina-
tion with biological treatment.
Table 4 shows the types of treatments applied to leachates and an
evaluation of the treatment efficiency according to the age of the MSW.
It can be observed in Table 4 that biological processes are highly
efficient for the treatment of leachates from young landfills (< 5 years).
Due to its simplicity and cost-effectiveness, biological treatment is ap-
plied when the leachate presents a high concentration of easily
112
Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116
biodegradable material (Bulc and Justin, 2007). However, this ap-
proach is not applicable to mature landfills (> 10 years), which are in
the methanogenic phase, where the leachate contains compounds
which are not easily degraded, such as humic and fulvic acids, and the
BOD5/COD ratio is < 0.1 (Christensen et al., 2001; Kurniawan et al.,
2006).
The search for efficient technologies for the treatment of mature
landfills has been intensifying, seeking to obtain final effluents that
comply with the current environmental standards. According to Ahmed
and Lan (2012), a membrane treatment process combined with biolo-
gical treatment, carried out in a membrane bioreactor (MBR), presents
high efficiency for the removal of COD, BOD, ammonia and the micro
pollutants in leachate produced by mature landfills.
The most advanced leachate treatment technologies are not feasible
in some countries due to, for instance, the high cost of implantation and
maintenance and the volumes of leachate to be treated (Vital et al.,
2014). In Brazil, there is a notable contrast between the leachate
treatment technologies applied at metropolitan landfills and at small
landfills, which will be discussed in the following section.
3.1. Treatment of leachate in Brazil
In Brazil, control over the discharge of effluents began in the 1970s.
In 1986, with the formulation of CONAMA Resolution n° 20 (Brazil,
1986), the first classification and categorization of water bodies in
Brazil was carried out. The most recent version, which is currently in
force, is Resolution n° 430 (Brazil, 2011). This Resolution deals with the
conditions, parameters, standards and guidelines for the management
of effluent discharge in receiving water bodies. In this resolution, the
effluent from solid waste landfills (leachate) was included, with release
conditions and standards distinct from those established for sanitary
sewage treatment systems.
For the discharge of a leachate to recipient water bodies, it must
adhere to the guidelines established by current federal legislation, but
the state and municipal environmental agencies can supplement this
according to particular circumstances. Minas Gerais State was the
pioneer in Brazil in terms of presenting a specific normative delibera-
tion for the discharge of effluents from leachate treatment systems for
sanitary landfills (COPAM/CERH, 2008).
The treatment of landfill leachate in Brazil by means of a biological
process is the most common and economically viable approach, pre-
senting high efficiency in the removal of biodegradable organic mate-
rial (Morais et al., 2006). An example of this type of treatment is the
stabilization lagoon, which is widely used in rural areas due to climatic
conditions and the availability of areas for the treatment of leachate
(Martins et al., 2010; Maia et al., 2015).
In order to illustrate the diversity of technologies available for the
treatment of landfill leachates, those applied in some Brazilian cities are
detailed in Table 5 (supplementary material).
In Table 5, it can be observed that most Brazilian cities employ
conventional treatment techniques such as lagoon systems, biological
filters, activated sludge and wetlands. Of particular note are the cities of
Muribeca, Palmas and Dourados, where leachate treatment is per-
formed with the application of only biological treatment techniques.
It should be noted that in Brazil, the use of biological treatment in
landfill leachates was a way of reproducing the model consolidated for
decades in sewage treatment plants (Gomes, 2009). Due to lack of
knowledge about the characteristics of the leachate, the use of the same
techniques and design parameters used for the sewage treatment have
been applied in leachate treatment plants and many of these plants still
operate with the same conditions until nowadays, even though biolo-
gical process is not the indicated technique for old and low biode-
gradability leachates. In general, this situation can also be observed in
small landfills operated by the prefectures, where little investment is
destined for the leachate treatment.
The process of phytoremediation, that is, treatment of effluent
A.M. Costa et al. Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116

Fig. 1. Parameters considered in the selection of the appropriate treatment for leachate (Adapted from Forgie, 1988 and Renou et al., 2008).

Table 4 implementation and operation of landfill sites. According to CONAMA

Leachate treatment efficiency according to leachate age (adapted from Qasin Resolution n° 430 (Brazil, 2011), which establishes standards for the
and Chiang, 1994; Abbas et al., 2009). discharge of effluents in water bodies, municipal wastewater treatment
Leachate Treatment Leachate age (years) plant that receive landfill leachate effluents are not be required to
comply with the ammoniacal nitrogen standard. Thus, following the
Young Medium Old (> 10) introduction of this resolution, many cities opted for this alternative,
(< 5) (5–10)
which is potentially hazardous for the environment.
Combined treatment with domestic A B C In the case of large sanitary landfills, such as the waste treatment
wastewater plants located in Seropédica, São Gonçalo, Gramacho, Campos, Rio
Recycling A B C Claro and Osasco there was investment in the outsourcing of services
Aerobic process (suspended growth) A B C for the disposal and treatment of waste. In addition, these cities have
Aerobic process (fixed film) A B C
Anaerobic process (suspended A B C
their own leachate treatment stations within their facilities, with ad-
growth) vanced treatment technologies, such as membrane filtration.
Anaerobic process (fixed film) A B C
Natural evaporation A A A
Coagulation/flocculation C B B 3.2. Comparison of the treatment of leachate from Brazil and other
Chemical precipitation C B C countries
Carbon adsorption C B A
Oxidation C B B
Air stripping C B B Investment in advanced technologies for the treatment of leachate is
Ion exchange A A A directly related to the purchasing power of cities/countries. Thus, stark
Microfiltration C – – contrasts are observed in terms of MSW management approaches and
Ultrafiltration C – –
leachate treatment systems when comparing the developed countries of
Nanofiltration A A A
Reverse Osmosis A A A North America and Europe with developing countries in South America
and Asia (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). In Brazil this contrast is
Legend: A-Good; B-Fair; C-Poor. observed within its territory.
Most Brazilian sanitary landfills and controlled landfills still use the
through the use of aquatic plants and microorganisms in a natural ha- biological system as a single treatment option for leachate, where it is
bitat to reduce the levels of pollutants, is carried out in five cities in highlighted the techniques with activated sludge, lagoons system, bio-
Table 5: Muribeca and Curitiba. According to studies by Mannarino logical filter and wetlands.
et al. (2006), the implantation of wetlands is feasible in Brazilian mu- Wetlands have been the target of many researchers seeking viable
nicipalities with few resources due to their low cost, simple operation alternatives for the treatment of sanitary landfill leachate in temperate
and availability of areas for their installation. In addition, the tropical and subtropical areas, and it is estimated that there are more than
climate favors the evapotranspiration process. 10,000 wetlands in North America (Wu et al., 2015).
Plants in some of the cities analyzed, such as São Pedro da Aldeia The treatment of leachate in wetlands is also studied in countries
and Jaboticabal apply the combined treatment of the leachate with the located in tropical regions, such as those in Central and South America
domestic sewage. In the country's largest capital São Paulo, is common (e.g., Costa Rica and Colombia).
the sanitary landfills perform the treatment of leachate in conjunction University researchers in Costa Rica have studied the applicability
with sewage treatment, only 3% of the capital's sanitary landfills have a of wetlands to the treatment of various effluents, such as wastewater
leachate treatment station their own facilities (Sproviere and Contrera, from cattle farms, dairy plants, paper production plants and leachate
2017). from sanitary landfills. Nahlik and Mitsch (2006) noted in their studies
According to Campos et al. (2013), the combined treatment of that the choice of wetland design and hydraulic retention time are
leachate with sanitary sewage in a municipal wastewater treatment important factors to be adjusted depending on the effluent to be treated.
plant is a strategy aimed at minimizing the costs associated with the In the case of Costa Rica, where the economy is based on ecological

113
A.M. Costa et al.
tourism and agriculture, the treatment of effluents through wetlands
can provide an ecological and low-cost solution to the growing pro-
blems of water pollution arising from the intensification of agricultural
activity (Mitsch et al., 2008).
Madera and Valencia-Zuluaga (2009) studied leachate treatment in
subsurface flow wetlands in a pilot plant located in the President Re-
gional landfill in the city of Cali, Colombia. The authors demonstrated
that wetlands showed high adaptability in tropical environments, pro-
moting the removal of pollutants, such as heavy metals.
In Brazil, the incorrect disposal of MSW in open dumps represents
about 18% of the waste generated, that is 35,368t of MSW/day
(ABRELPE, 2017). This practice of disposition is also very common in
developing Asian countries. According to Yadav and Samadder (2018),
the final disposal of waste in open dumps represents on average 60% of
waste collected in India, 50% in Bangladesh, 85% in Sri Lanka, 80% in
Pakistan and 40% in Indonesia. Considering these percentages, it is
observed that Brazil is a country that, even in slow steps, is investing in
the correct disposal of waste, and this has been verified since the ex-
pansion of coverage of collection services, closure of open dumps and
development of research in the area.
And in relation to the development of leachate treatment technol-
ogies, Brazilian sanitary landfills located in large metropolitan areas
have chosen to outsource their services, favoring the modernization of
the technologies used, with the use the membranes (MBR, ultrafiltra-
tion, nanofiltration and reverse osmosis), reflecting the trend that has
been used by developed countries.
Membrane filtration technology is one of the highly applicable
treatments in North America, for municipal and industrial wastewater
and also sanitary landfill leachate (Yang et al., 2006; Zhao et al., 2012).
MBR and reverse osmosis (RO) systems have been successfully applied
to the removal of organic, inorganic and heavy metal compounds from
leachate as an additional step to conventional physical-chemical and
biological treatments (Robinson, 2005; Renou et al., 2008; Ahmed and
Lan, 2012).
An example of the application of membranes is the Seneca Meadows
landfill, which is the largest active landfill located in New York State,
United State. According to Baker et al. (2015), reverse osmosis tech-
nology is used for the treatment of leachate at this landfill since it offers
the advantages a low capital cost and the ability to treat large volumes
to within the limits for effluents permitted by legislation, with the re-
moval of more than 95% of pollutants.
According to Robinson (2005), membrane-based leachate treatment
technologies, such as the MBR system, have been used in landfills in
several European countries (e.g., Germany) since the 1990s. An ex-
ample is the treatment of leachate from the Hannover landfill in Ger-
many consists of an MBR system with oxygen injection, followed by
ultrafiltration membranes (Löblich, 2015).
Finally, evidence shows a lack of availability of data on leachate
treatment systems over the life of Brazilian landfills. That occurs due to
the lack of availability of information by the private companies that
manage the large sanitary landfills, but also by the lack of requirement
by the government and the management of this information, as a way of
making them public.
3.3. The future for leachate treatment: studies in Brazil
According to Contrera et al. (2014), many Brazilian cities present
difficulties in relation to treating wastewaters from sanitary landfills. In
practice, the application of only anaerobic and aerobic stabilization
lagoons has proved not to be the most appropriate treatment for old
sanitary landfill leachates.
The treatment of the leachate should be initiated together with the
start of operation of the landfill, because in the young landfills, the
biological treatment has high efficiency of removal of biodegradable
organic matter. But as the age of the landfill advances, it becomes
harder to remove refractory compounds and the concentration of
114
Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116
pollutants can exceed the requirements of the legislation for the dis-
posal of these effluents and advanced technologies and consequently
higher costs in relation to the treatment of leachate will be necessary
(Castilhos Junior et al., 2009, Kawahigashi et al., 2014).
Thus, there is a need for the association of complementary treat-
ments together with the biological processes and many research activ-
ities related to this important theme have been performed.
Treatment with activated carbon has been successfully applied to
landfill leachates around the world, due to its high efficiency in the
removal of organic compounds and ammoniacal nitrogen, both found in
abundance in landfill leachate (Foo and Hameed, 2010). In Brazil, the
applicability of powdered (or granular) activated carbon combined
with the activated sludge process, known as the powdered activated
carbon treatment (PACT) system, has been studied in recent years, as a
pre-treatment or post-treatment stage in leachate treatment (Mendes
et al., 2013; Da Silva et al., 2014; Bou et al., 2015).
A study on the PACT process, which combines biological oxidation
in activated sludge with adsorption onto activated carbon powder, was
carried out in bench scale by Bou et al. (2015), in order to evaluate the
color and turbidity removal in the combined treatment of sanitary
landfill leachate and domestic sewage. The removal efficiencies ob-
tained were 77.8% for color and 68.2% for turbidity. However, in re-
lation to turbidity, the PACT process obtained lower levels of removal
than the conventional activated sludge process (72.3%). According to
the authors, the PACT process obtained greater efficiency in the re-
moval of color, since the activated carbon preferentially removes dis-
solved solids and therefore did not influence significantly the removal
of the turbidity.
Another alternative for the use of activated carbon is the reactive
barrier technique with the addition of activated carbon, which has been
studied by Lins et al. (2011) employing the leachate of the Muribeca
landfill (Pernambuco State). This technique is based on a combined
system of soil, plants, microorganisms and activated carbon, to remove
and degrade toxic substances from the leachate. The study was carried
out in pilot scale, as a tertiary treatment phase, after chemical pre-
cipitation and ammonia stripping. The efficiency in terms of organic
matter removal of was > 80%. It was concluded that the application of
the reactive barrier technique is economically feasible and easy to op-
erate, reaching high values of efficiency in the removal of BOD and
COD.
Many advances have been made in relation to advanced oxidative
processes (AOPs), following intensive research, and those in which
Fenton's reagent is employed are considered the most cost-effective
(Englehardt et al., 2006).
The Fenton process was also studied by Lima et al. (2017) for the
removal of recalcitrant organic matter from the leachate generated in
the stabilized landfills of Gericinó and Gramacho and a landfill in op-
eration at Seropédica, all located in Rio de Janeiro State. The levels for
the removal of recalcitrant substances reached in the study were 88%
for the Gericinó leachate, 85% for the Gramacho leachate and 76% for
the Seropédica leachate. In relation to the fractions of humic sub-
stances, the fulvic acids showed higher levels of removal than the humic
acids, reaching 92% removal for the Gramacho leachate.
A possible alternative for percolation effluents with a high compo-
sition of recalcitrant compounds, generally associated with old or
closed landfills, is the use of an oxidation process with ozone as a
treatment step (Kurniawan et al., 2006).
Scandelai et al. (2014) evaluated the applicability of ozonation in
combination with catalytic metal oxides (O3/TiO2 and O3/ZnO) to the
leachate of the Maringá landfill (Paraná State). The study showed that
ozone treatment with the addition of 1.0 g/L ZnO at pH 1 obtained
removal efficiencies of 63% for COD and 98.2% for true color. Ac-
cording to the authors, catalytic ozonation with ZnO provided better
removal efficiencies compared with conventional ozonation.
Biological reactor systems with membranes (MBRs) are also widely
researched for the treatment of effluents in Brazil. According to Ahmed
A.M. Costa et al.
and Lan (2012), MBR technology is promising because it is an advanced
biological process that does not make use of a conventional sedi-
mentation unit as in activated sludge processes, but instead a mem-
brane separation unit is employed. A unit comprised of an anaerobic
bioreactor with microfiltration membranes was used by Dacanal and
Beal (2010) to treat the leachate of the São Giácomo landfill, in the city
of Caxias do Sul (Rio Grande do Sul State). The researchers evidenced
that the presence of membranes in the reactor increased the efficiency
of the conventional biological process, allowing 90.4% removal of the
organic material, compared with 21.5% obtained with the use of the
biological filter alone.
Membrane separation processes (MSP), mainly reverse osmosis
treatment, have been considered the most suitable approach for
treating leachates to a standard that is compliant with the legislation, as
well as being more efficient and adaptable (Hasar et al., 2009). How-
ever, for this process to be successfully applied at a treatment center, an
appropriate pretreatment needs to be selected in order to reduce the
formation of fouling on the membranes (Renou et al., 2008).
The fate of the concentrate generated during treatment applying the
membrane separation process is an issue that has yet to be satisfactorily
resolved. Currently, it is generally treated and/or returned to the
landfill. Other solutions include solidification of the concentrate by
mixing it with the sludge from conventional treatment systems with
subsequent discharge to the landfill itself, or more costly procedures
such as transportation to an incineration plant designed to receive ha-
zardous liquid waste (Renou et al., 2008). Thus, less costly ways of
treating and correctly discarding the concentrate generated in the
membrane separation process need to be developed.
4. Conclusions
Sanitary landfill leachates are effluents of high polluting potential.
They have a complex and variable composition, which is strongly in-
fluenced by factors such as the climate, geology and age of the landfill.
Thus, finding a single treatment that can be applied to all leachates
remains a challenge worldwide.
The physical-chemical characterization of Brazilian landfill lea-
chates reveals a high concentration of organic material in the form of
COD and a low concentration of biodegradable organic material in the
form of BOD, indicating that organic material represents the largest
fraction of the landfills, and recalcitrant compounds, such as humic and
fulvic acids, are present. The low BOD/COD ratio and alkaline pH ob-
served at the landfills studied are characteristic of advanced age, that is,
the landfills appear to be in the methanogenic phase.
Heavy metals are present in low concentrations in the leachates
generated at Brazilian landfill sites and this is due to the low solubility
of metals at alkaline pH, a condition verified in stabilized landfills.
High concentrations of ammoniacal nitrogen have been observed at
landfills in different Brazilian cities. Ammoniacal nitrogen is one of the
main pollutants found in leachate and this is a potential source of
contamination in aquatic ecosystem if treatment aimed at its removal is
not performed.
In Brazil, landfill leachates are mainly treated through biological
processes, such as aerobic and anaerobic lagoons, biological filters,
activated sludge and wetlands. However, at some landfills sites more
advanced treatment technologies are applied, involving high installa-
tion and maintenance costs, such as the use of membranes.
There is notable heterogeneity in Brazil in relation to the treatment
of leachate originating from sanitary landfills. In the metropolises, there
is investment in large landfills with high revenues, with outsourcing of
the landfill activities and the use of more advanced treatment tech-
nologies. However, this is not the case in the smaller cities and towns in
Brazil, where limited investment in small landfills are associated with
simpler and less expensive solutions for the leachate treatment, such as
biological treatment techniques.
A comparison between the landfill leachate treatments performed in
115
Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116
Brazil and around the world reveals similarities in terms of the use of
the following technologies: MBR, reverse osmosis, wetlands, Fenton
process and air stripping. Also, in some cases, the more advanced
techniques, such as membrane filtration, widely used at landfills in
North America and Europe, are also used in Brazil, for example, at the
landfills of Seropédica, São Gonçalo, Gramacho and Campos in Rio de
Janeiro State, Rio Claro and Osasco in São Paulo State.
Regarding the future of leachate treatment in Brazil, considerable
efforts have been made to implement efficient technologies for the re-
moval of pollutants and achieve compliance with the standards estab-
lished by environmental legislation. These approaches also need to be
economically viable in order to be accessible to all municipalities in the
country.
Recent research studies highlight the following leachate treatments
for application in Brazil: activated carbon, reactive barriers, advanced
oxidative processes and membrane separation processes.
Finally, it can be concluded that, in Brazil, the monitoring of sani-
tary landfills is scarce, resulting in little information on the perfor-
mance of leachate treatment systems. The need for investment from the
collection of solid waste to the treatment of the effluents generated by
them; in research related to the subject and in environmental inspection
still represent great obstacles faced in the country.
Declarations of interest
None.
Acknowledgement
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES).
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.006.
References
Abbas, A.A., Jingsong, G., Ping, L.Z., Ya, P.Y., Al-Rekabi, W.S., 2009. Review on landfill
leachate treatment. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 6, 672–684.
ABRELPE- Brazilian Association of Public Cleaning and Special Waste Companies, 2017.
Overview of Solid Waste in Brazil. (In Portuguese). http://abrelpe.org.br/
panorama/, Accessed date: 12 October 2018.
Ahmed, F.N., Lan, C.Q., 2012. Treatment of landfill using membrane bioreactors: a re-
view. Desalination 287, 41–54.
Alfaia, R.G.S.M., Costa, A.M., Campos, J.C., 2017. Municipal solid waste in Brazil: a re-
view. Waste Manag. Res. 35, 1195–1209.
Assou, M., El Fels, L., El Asli, A., Fadiki, H., Souabi, S., Hafidi, M., 2016. Landfill leachate
treatment by a coagulation-flocculation process: effect of the introduction order of
the reagents. Desalin. Water Treat. 57, 21817–21826.
Baker, P., Pannuci, D., Weis, R., 2015. Seneca Meadows Landfill. Leachate Pre-treatment
Using Reverse Osmosis. http://nysaswm.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/
2015Spring_06RochemSMI.pdf, Accessed date: 5 October 2017.
Baun, D.L., Christensen, T.H., 2004. Speciation of heavy metals in landfill leachate: a
review. Waste Manag. Res. 22, 3–23.
Bhatt, A.H., Karanjekar, R.V., Altouqi, S., Sattler, M.L., Hossain, M.D.S., Chen, V.P., 2017.
Estimating landfill leachate BOD and COD based on rainfall, ambient temperature,
and waste composition: exploration of MARS statistical approach. Environ. Technol.
Inov. 8, 1–16.
Bou, A.S.F., Nascentes, A.L., Pereira, B.C., Da Silva, L.D.B., Ferreira, J.A.F., Campos, J.C.,
2015. Mathematical modeling of COD removal via the combined treatment of do-
mestic wastewater and landfill leachate based on the PACT process. J. Environ. Sci.
Health A. 50, 378–384.
Brazil, 1986. CONAMA Resolution N° 20 National Council for the Environment. Official
Diary of the Union (In Portuguese). http://www.mma.gov.br/port/conama/res/
res86/res2086.html, Accessed date: 14 June 2017.
Brazil, 2010. National Policy on Solid Waste N° 12.305. Official Diary of the Union (In
Portuguese). http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2007-2010/2010/lei/
l12305.htm, Accessed date: 8 October 2017.
Brazil, 2011. CONAMA Resolution N° 430 National Council for the Environment. Official
Diary of the Union (In Portuguese). http://www.mma.gov.br/port/conama/legiabre.
cfm?codlegi=646, Accessed date: 16 June 2017.
Bulc, T.G., Justin, Z., 2007. Sustainable solution for landfill leachate with a use of
A.M. Costa et al.
phytoremediation. In: Velini, A.A. (Ed.), Landfill Research Trends. Nova Science
Publishers, New York, pp. 103–139.
Campos, J.C., Machado, B.S., Blonski, M.E.D., Bila, D.M., Ferreira, J.A., 2013. Evaluation
of coagulation/flocculation process in the landfill leachate treatment at the Municipal
Wastewater Treatment Plant. Rev. Ambient. Água. 8, 43–53.
Castilhos Junior, A.B., Fernandes, F., Lange, L.C., Lopes, D.D., Costa, R.H.R., Silva, S.M.,
Martins, C.L., Ferreira, C.F.A., Moravia, W.G., 2009. Treatment of landfill leachate in
lagoon systems. In: Gomes, L.P. (Ed.), Characterization and Treatability of Landfill
Leachates for Brazilian Conditions. ABES, Rio de Janeiro (In Portuguese).
Cerbato, F., Argolo, J., 2012. Technical and socio-environmental analysis of the con-
trolled landfill of the municipality of amargosa-BA. Electron. J. Cult. Edu. 5, 118–134
(In Portuguese).
Christensen, T.H., Kjeldsen, P., Bjerg, P., Jensen, D.L., Christensen, J.B., Baun, A.,
Albrechtsen, H.-J., Heron, G., 2001. Biogeochemistry of landfill leachate plumes.
Appl. Geochem. 16, 659–718.
Contrera, R.C., Silva, K.C.C., Morita, D.M., Rodrigues, J.A.D., Zaiat, M., Schalch, V., 2014.
First-order kinetics of landfill leachate treatment in a pilot-scale anaerobic sequence
batch biofilm reactor. J. Environ. Manag. 145, 385–393.
COPAM/CERH- State water resource council, 2008. Normative deliberation of Minas
Gerais. J. Executive (1), 23. http://www.siam.mg.gov.br/ sla/download.pdf?
idNorma=8151, Accessed date: 18 May 2017 (In Portuguese).
Da Silva, A.A., Galvão, R.B., Assunção Júnior, V.G., 2014. Post-treatment of landfill
leachate from Cianorte-PR by upward filtration in gravel followed by adsorption on
granular activated carbon. Environ. Forum High. Paul. 10, 220–233 (In Portuguese).
Dacanal, M., Beal, L.L., 2010. Anaerobic filter associated to the microfiltration membrane
treating landfill leachate. Eng. Sanit. Ambient. 15, 11–18.
Dajić, A., Mihajlović, M., Jovanović, M., Karanac, M., Stevanović, D., Jovanović, J., 2016.
Landfill design: need for improvement of water and soil protection requirements in
EU Landfill Directive. Clean Technol. Environ. 1, 753–764.
Ehrig, H.-J., 1988. Water and element balances of landfills. In: Baccini, P. (Ed.), The
Landfill. Springer, Berlin.
El-Fadel, M., Bou-Zed, E., Chahine, W., Alayli, B., 2002. Temporal variation of leachate
quality from pre-sorted and baled municipal solid waste with high organic and
moisture content. Waste Manag. 22, 269–282.
Englehardt, J.D., Deng, Y., Meeroff, D., Legrenzi, Y., Mognol, J., Polar, J., 2006. Options
for Managing Municipal Landfill Leachate: Year 1 Development of Iron-mediated
Treatment Processes. Technical Report, Florida.
Farquhar, G.J., 1989. Leachate: production and characterization. Can. J. Civ. Eng. 16,
317–325.
Foo, K.Y., Hameed, B.H., 2010. Insights into the modeling of adsorption isotherm systems.
Chem. Eng. J. 156, 2–10.
Forgie, D.J.L., 1988. Selection of the most appropriate leachate treatment methods. Water
Pollut. Res. J. Can. 23, 308–355.
Ghost, P., Thakur, I.S., Kaushik, A., 2017. Bioassays for toxicology risk assessment of
landfill leachate: a review. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 141, 259–270.
Gomes, L.P., 2009. PROSAB. Solid Wastes: Characterization and Treatability Studies of
Leachate from Sanitary Landfills for Brazilian Conditions. ABES, Rio de Janeiro (In
Portuguese).
Hamer, G., 2003. Solid waste treatment and disposal effects on public health and en-
vironmental safety. Biotechnol. Adv. 22, 71–79.
Hasar, H., Unsal, S.A., Ipek, U., Karatas, S., Cinar, O., Yaman, C., Kinaci, C., 2009.
Stripping/flocculation/membrane bioreactor/reverse osmosis treatment of municipal
landfill leachate. J. Hazard. Mater. 171, 309–317.
Hoornweg, D., Bhada-Tata, P., 2012. What a Waste: Waste Management Around the
Word. Word Bank, Washington.
Jokela, J.P.Y., Kettunen, R.H., Sormunen, K.M., Rintala, J.A., 2002. Biological nitrogen
removal from municipal landfill leachate: low-cost nitrification in biofilters and la-
boratory scale in-situ denitrification. Water Res. 36, 4079–4087.
Kawahigashi, F., Mendes, M.B., Júnior, V.G.A., Gomes, V.H., Fernandes, F., Hirooka, E.Y.,
Kuroda, E.K., 2014. Post-treatment of landfill leachate with activated carbon. Eng.
Sanit. Ambient. 19, 235–244 (In Portuguese).
Kjeldsen, P., Barlaz, M.A., Rooker, A.P., Baun, A., Ledin, A., Christensen, T.H., 2002.
Present and long-term composition of MSW landfill leachate: a review. Crit. Rev.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 3, 297–336.
Kulikowska, D., Klimiuk, E., 2008. The effect of landfill age on municipal leachate
composition. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 5981–5985.
Kurniawan, T.A., Lo, W., Chan, G.Y.S., 2006. Physical-chemical treatments for removal of
recalcitrant contaminants from landfill leachate. J. Hazard. Mater. 129, 80–100.
Lanza, V.C.V., Carvalho, A.L., 2006. Basic Operations for Landfill Operation. FEAM, Belo
Horizonte, pp. 07–34 (In Portuguese).
Lima, L.S.M.S., De Almeida, R., Quintaes, B.R., Bila, D.M., Campos, J.C., 2017. Analysis of
quantification methodologies for humic substances in leachates from solid waste
landfills. Rev. Ambient. Água. 12, 87–98.
Lins, E.A.M., Lins, C.M.M.S., Jucá, J.F.T., Alves, M.C.M., Palha, M.L.A.P.F., 2011. Study of
the leachate characteristics of the Muribeca landfill before and after closure. In: 26th
Brazilian Congress of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, September 25th to
29th. Porto Alegre, Brazil (In Portuguese).
Löblich, D.S., 2015. Filtration by membranes. In: Workshop on Processes for the
Treatment of Landfill Leachate. November 30th. Faculty of Public Health, University
of São Paulo (In Portuguese). http://www.ablp.org.br/pdf/Chorume-Seminario-
ABLP-SP-2015-Stefan-Loblich-2.pdf, Accessed date: 14 August 2017.
116
Journal of Environmental Management 232 (2019) 110–116
Madera, C., Valencia- Zuluaga, V., 2009. Landfill leachate treatment: one of the bigger
and underestimated problems of the urban water management in developing coun-
tries. In: 9th World Wide Workshop for Young Environmental Scientists, October
26th to 30th. Belo Horizonte, Brazil (In Portuguese).
Maia, S.I., Restrepo, J.J.B., Castilhos Junior, A.B., Franco, D., 2015. Evaluation of the
biological treatment of landfill leachate on a real scale in the Southern Region of
Brazil. Eng. Sanit. Ambient. 20, 665–675 (In Portuguese).
Mannarino, C.F., Ferreira, J.A., Campos, J.C., Ritter, E., 2006. Wetlands for landfill lea-
chate treatment - experiments at the Piraí landfill and at the Gramacho metropolitan
landfill (RJ). Eng. Sanit. Ambient. 11, 108–112 (In Portuguese).
Martins, C.L., Castilhos Junior, A.B., Da Costa, R.H.R., 2010. Leachate treatment system
performance of landfill with effluent recirculation. Eng. Sanit. Ambient. 15, 401–410
(In Portuguese).
Mendes, M.B., Kawahigashi, F., Kuroda, E.K.I., 2013. Adsorption of organic matter in
granular activated carbon after the treatment of landfill leachate. Environ. Forum
High. Paul. 9, 218–235.
Mitsch, W.J., Tejada, J., Nalhlik, A., Kohlmann, B., Bernal, B., Hernandéz, C.E., 2008.
Tropical wetlands for climate change research, water quality management and con-
servation education on a university campus in Costa Rica. Ecol. Eng. 34, 276–288.
Monteiro, J.H.P., 2001. Integrated solid waste management manual. In: Zveibil, V.Z.
(Ed.), IBAN, Rio de Janeiro (In Portuguese). http://www.resol.com.br/cartilha4/
manual.pdf, Accessed date: 14 June 2017.
Monteiro, V.E.D., Melo, M.C., Jucá, J.F.T., 2002. Biological degradation analysis in
Muribeca solid waste landfill associated with local climate, Recife, Brazil. In:
Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress on Environmental Geotechnics,
August 11th to 15th. Rio Janeiro, Brazil, (In Portuguese).
Morais, J.L., Sirtori, C., Peralta-Zamora, P.G., 2006. Treatment of slurry manure by het-
erogeneous photocatalysis integrated to conventional biological process. Quim.
Nova. 29, 20–23 (In Portuguese).
Nahlik, A.M., Mitsch, W.J., 2006. Tropical treatment wetlands dominated by free-floating
macrophytes for water quality improvement in Costa Rica. Ecol. Eng. 28, 246–257.
Qasin, S.R., Chiang, W., 1994. Sanitary Landfill Leachate - Generation, Control and
Treatment. CRC Press LLC, Florida.
Rabl, A., Spadaro, J.V., Zoughaib, A., 2008. Environmental impacts and costs of solid
waste: a comparation landfill and incineration. Waste Manag. Res. 26, 147–162.
Raghab, S.M., El Meguid, A.M.A., Hegazi, H.A., 2013. Treatment of leachate from mu-
nicipal solid waste landfill. HBCR J. 9, 187–192.
Renou, S., Givaudan, J.G., Poulain, S., Dirassouyan, F., Moulin, P., 2008. Landfill leachate
treatment: review and opportunity. J. Hazard. Mater. 150, 468–493.
Robinson, A.H., 2005. Landfill leachate treatment. Membr. Technol. 6, 6–12.
Salem, Z., Hamouri, K., Djeema, R., Allia, K., 2008. Evaluation of landfill leachate pol-
lution and treatment. Desalination 220, 108–114.
Scandelai, A.P.J., Tavares, C.R.G., Franco, J.M., Dias, P.R.Z., Corso, B.L., 2014. Treatment
of leachate from the Maringá-PR landfill by ozonation and catalytic combination with
metal oxides (O3/TiO2 and O3/ZnO). In: XX Brazilian Congress of Chemical
Engineering, October, 19th to 22nd. Florianópolis, Brazil, (In Portuguese).
Schiopu, A.-M., Gavrilescu, M., 2010. Options for the treatment and management of
municipal landfill leachate: common and Specific Issues. Clean. - Soil, Air, Water 38,
1101–1110.
Senior, E., Balba, M.T.M., 1987. Landfill Biotechnology. Bioenvironmental Systems. CRC
Press, Florida.
Slack, R.J., Gronow, J.R., Vouvoulis, N., 2005. Household hazardous waste in municipal
landfills: contaminants in leachate. Sci. Total Environ. 337, 119–137.
Sproviere, J.A.S., Contrera, R.C., 2017. Survey of landfills with treatment of leachate in
loco in the state of São Paulo and its technologies. In: V Symposium on Solid Waste
(SIRS), September 12th to 15th. São Paulo, Brazil (In Portuguese). http://soac.eesc.
usp.br/index.php/sirs/vsirs/paper/viewFile/779/393, Accessed date: 14 November
2017.
Tränkler, J., Visvanathan, C., Kuruparan, P., Tubtimthai, O., 2005. Influence of tropical
seasonal variation on landfill leachate characteristics- Results from lysimeter studies.
Waste Manag. 25, 1013–1020.
Vital, M.H.F., Ingouville, M., Pinto, M.A.C., 2014. Estimate of investments in landfills to
meet targets established by the National Solid Waste Policy between 2015 and 2019.
BNDES Set. 40, 43–92. (In Portuguese). https://web.bndes.gov.br/bib/jspui/
bitstream/1408/3041/1/Estimativa%20de%20investimentos%20em%20aterros%
20sanitarios_P.pdf, Accessed date: 8 June 2017.
Wiszniowski, J., Robert, D., Sumacz-Gorsha, J., Milksch, K., Weber, J.V., 2006. Landfill
leachate treatment methods: a review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 4, 51–61.
Wu, H., Zhang, J., Ngo, H.H., Guo, N., Hu, Z., Liang, S., Fan, J., Liu, H., 2015. A review on
the sustainability of constructed wetlands for wastewater treatment. Design and
operation. Bioresour. Technol. 175, 594–601.
Yadav, P., Samadder, S.R., 2018. A critical review of the life cycle assessment studies on
solid waste management in Asian countries. J. Clean. Prod. 185, 492–515.
Yang, W., Cicek, N., Ilg, J., 2006. State-of-the-art of membrane bioreactors: worldwide
research and commercial applications in North America. J. Membr. Sci. 270,
201–211.
Zhao, R., Novak, J.T., Goldsmith, D., 2012. Evaluation of on-site biological treatment for
landfill leachates and its impact: a size distribution study. Water Res. 46, 3837–3848.
Ziyang, L., Youcai, Z., Tao, Y., Yu, S., Huili, C., Nanwen, Z., Renhua, H., 2009. Natural
attenuation and characterization of contaminants composition in landfill leachate
under different disposing ages. Sci. Total Environ. 407, 3385–3391.