Rawfill Landfill Miner Guide

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Rawfill Landfill Miner Guide LANDFILL MINER GUIDE Copyright © 2021 RAWFILL Project partners, All rights reserved. Authors: Pascal Beese-Vasbender (BAV) David Caterina (University of Liège) Martje Ceulemans (VITO) Jonathan Chambers (British Geological Survey) Ben Dashwood (British Geological Survey) Renaud De Rijdt (ATRASOL) Stefanie De Smet (VITO) Alain Ducheyne (VITO) Cornelia Inauen (British Geological Survey) Itzel Isunza Manrique (University of Liège) Laura Lamair (SPAQuE) Simon Loisel (SAS Les Champs Jouault) Sébastien Moreaux (ATRASOL) Claudia Neculau (SPAQuE) Frédéric Nguyen (University of Liège) Marta Popova (SPAQuE) Michaël Van Raemdonck (OVAM) Gaëtan Vivien (SAS Les Champs Jouault) Arnaud Watlet (British Geological Survey) Eddy Wille (OVAM) This guide is the result of teamwork among the RAWFILL project partners. In detail, they respectively took responsibility for the following chapters: OVAM (Chapters 1, 2, 3 & 7), University of Liège and British Geological Survey (Chapter 4), ATRASOL (Chapters 5, 6, 8 & 9), SPAQuE (Chapters 9, 10 & 13) and VITO (Chapter 11). Table of contents 1 Rationale of RAWFILL project .......................................................................... 15 Introduction ........................................................................................... 15 Basic principles of the linear economy ........................................................ 15 Resources and reserves ........................................................................... 16 Scarcity, depletion and availability of resources: critical raw materials ........... 16 EU Flagship on resource efficiency ............................................................. 18 Geogenic and anthropogenic resources ...................................................... 19 Landfills and landfilling in a circular economy: ELFM as an innovative concept . 20 Dynamic Landfill Management as an innovative concept ............................... 21 References ............................................................................................. 22 2 Recall of the concept of Enhanced landfill mining, conceptual site model ............... 24 Introduction ........................................................................................... 24 The use of conceptual site models in traditional soil remediation projects ....... 24 Alternative models and flow schemes: The Doughnut-model ......................... 27 Challenges and goals: climate change, soil sealing, water scarcity, Sustainable Development Goals ........................................................................................... 28 References ............................................................................................. 30 3 Legal framework and perspectives ................................................................... 31 Introduction ........................................................................................... 31 EU-legislation and impact on regional level ................................................. 31 References ............................................................................................. 36 4 Geophysical imaging ...................................................................................... 38 Introduction ........................................................................................... 38 Why geophysics? ..................................................................................... 38 Principles on how to use Geophysics .......................................................... 39 A priori information and identification of knowledge gaps ............................. 41 Geophysical survey .................................................................................. 43 4.5.1. Selection of appropriate geophysical methods & feasibility study ................ 46 4.5.2. Survey design and selection of measurement parameters .......................... 47 Calibration and validation through targeted sampling ................................... 49 Building of a resource distribution model (RDM) .......................................... 50 Conclusions ............................................................................................ 52 References ............................................................................................. 53 5 Waste sampling and analysis ........................................................................... 54 Introduction ........................................................................................... 54 LANDFILL MINER GUIDE - TABLE OF CONTENTS 5/194 Waste homogeneity and heterogeneity ...................................................... 54 Sampling methods................................................................................... 55 5.3.1 Boreholes ......................................................................................... 55 5.3.2 Trenches .......................................................................................... 56 Sampling strategy ................................................................................... 59 Log description of the waste deposits ......................................................... 59 5.5.1 Water content ................................................................................... 61 5.5.2 Waste consistency ............................................................................. 61 5.5.3 Degradation ..................................................................................... 61 5.5.4 Waste homogeneity ........................................................................... 62 5.5.5 Waste composition ............................................................................ 62 5.5.6 Proportion of fine materials ................................................................ 63 Conclusions ............................................................................................ 63 References ............................................................................................. 64 6 Enhanced Landfill Inventory Framework (ELIF) .................................................. 65 Introduction ........................................................................................... 65 What is ELIF ? ......................................................................................... 65 Structure and tool ................................................................................... 67 6.3.1 ELIF Structure .................................................................................. 67 6.3.2 ELIF Tool .......................................................................................... 68 6.3.3 Structure of the tool .......................................................................... 68 RAWFILL LF# files ................................................................................... 69 6.4.1 Structure of a sheet ........................................................................... 69 6.4.2 Landfill description ............................................................................ 70 6.4.3 Waste description .............................................................................. 70 6.4.4 Environmental form ........................................................................... 70 6.4.5 Social form ....................................................................................... 70 6.4.6 Technical form .................................................................................. 71 6.4.7 Economical form ............................................................................... 71 6.4.8 Additional Information ....................................................................... 71 6.4.9 Resource Distribution Model ............................................................... 71 6.4.10 Comment Report ............................................................................... 71 6.4.11 ELIF RAW DATA ................................................................................ 71 6.4.12 Import DST 1 - Cedalion site visit ........................................................ 72 RAWFILL ELIF file .................................................................................... 72 6.5.1 ELIF RAW DATA ................................................................................ 72 LANDFILL MINER GUIDE - TABLE OF CONTENTS 6/194 6.5.2 DST1 INPUT ..................................................................................... 72 Conclusions ............................................................................................ 72 7 Decision support tools (DSTs) .......................................................................... 73 Introduction ........................................................................................... 73 Overview of current Decision Support Tools (DSTs) ..................................... 73 7.2.1 RECLAF model .................................................................................. 73 7.2.2 The Smart Ground model ................................................................... 74 7.2.3 Holistic Management of Brownfield Regeneration (HOMBRE) ................... 74 7.2.4 FLAMINCO ........................................................................................ 75 DST 1 (Cedalion): fast screening & recommendations .................................. 75 7.3.1 Objectives and definitions .................................................................. 75 7.3.2 Criteria in the model .........................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Assessment of the Possible Reuse of Extractive Waste Coming from Abandoned Mine Sites: Case Study in Gorno, Italy
    sustainability Article Assessment of the Possible Reuse of Extractive Waste Coming from Abandoned Mine Sites: Case Study in Gorno, Italy Neha Mehta 1,2, Giovanna Antonella Dino 1,*, Iride Passarella 3, Franco Ajmone-Marsan 4, Piergiorgio Rossetti 1 and Domenico Antonio De Luca 1 1 Department of Earth Sciences, University of Turin, 10125 Torino, Italy; [email protected] (N.M.); [email protected] (P.R.); [email protected] (D.A.D.L.) 2 School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Queen’s University Belfast, Belfast, BT9 5AH, UK 3 Horizon s.r.l., 10095 Grugliasco (TO), Italy; [email protected] 4 Department of Agricultural, Forestry and Food Sciences, University of Turin, 10095 Grugliasco (TO), Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-011-6705150 Received: 21 January 2020; Accepted: 17 March 2020; Published: 21 March 2020 Abstract: Supply of resources, a growing population, and environmental pollution are some of the main challenges facing the contemporary world. The rapid development of mining activities has produced huge amounts of waste. This waste, found in abandoned mine sites, provides the potential opportunity of extracting raw material. The current study, therefore, focuses on testing the validation of a shared methodology to recover extractive waste from abandoned mines, and applies this methodology to a case study in Gorno, northwest Italy. The methods focused on: (1) analyzing the impact of tailings and fine fraction of waste rock (<2 mm) on plants (Cress - Lepidium Sativum) to assess usability of both as soil additive, and (2) recovering raw materials from tailings and coarse fraction (>2 mm) of waste rock, by means of dressing methods like wet shaking table and froth flotation.
    [Show full text]
  • Integration of Resource Recovery Into Current Waste Management Through
    INTEGRATION OF RESOURCE RECOVERY INTO CURRENT WASTE MANAGEMENT THROUGH (ENHANCED) LANDFILL MINING Juan Carlos Hernández Parrodi 1,2,*, Hugo Lucas 3, Marco Gigantino 4, Giovanna Sauve 5, John Laurence Esguerra 6,7, Paul Einhäupl 5,7, Daniel Vollprecht 2, Roland Pomberger 2, Bernd Friedrich 3, Karel Van Acker 5, Joakim Krook 6, Niclas Svensson 6 and Steven Van Passel 7 1 Renewi Belgium SA/NV, NEW-MINE project, 3920 Lommel, Belgium 2 Montanuniversität Leoben, Department of Environmental and Energy Process Engineering, 8700 Leoben, Austria 3 RWTH Aachen University, Process Metallurgy and Metal Recycling, 52056 Aachen, Germany 4 ETH Zürich, Department of Mechanical and Process Engineering, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland 5 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Department of Materials Engineering, 3001 Leuven, Belgium 6 Linköping University, Environmental Technology and Management, 58183 Linköping, Sweden 7 Universiteit Antwerpen, Department of Engineering Management, 2000 Antwerpen, Belgium Article Info: ABSTRACT Received: Europe has somewhere between 150,000 and 500,000 landfill sites, with an estimat- 1 November 2019 Accepted: ed 90% of them being “non-sanitary” landfills, predating the EU Landfill Directive of 15 November 2019 1999/31/EC. These older landfills tend to be filled with municipal solid waste and Available online: often lack any environmental protection technology. “Doing nothing”, state-of-the- 23 December 2019 art aftercare or remediating them depends largely on technical, societal and eco- Keywords: nomic conditions which vary between countries. Beside “doing nothing” and land- Landfill mining strategies fill aftercare, there are different scenarios in landfill mining, from re-landfilling the Enhanced landfill mining waste into “sanitary landfills” to seizing the opportunity for a combined resource-re- Resource recovery covery and remediation strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Recycling Annual Report
    helped us remediate these Land Recycling sites and make them safe. At the same time, we’ve put these sites to productive use and created new jobs. You may have heard of the many great business success stories, like the redevelopment of the Industrial Plaza of York, which won the prestigious Phoenix Award at this year’s International Industrial Site Recycling Conference. Or, perhaps you’ve heard of the partnership between Bethlehem Steel s Governor, I’m proud to say that Corporation and the Smithsonian Institution to Pennsylvania is on the move and form an Industrial Heritage Museum, the first Achanging before our eyes. We have of its kind in our nation. cut business taxes, slashed red tape and are nurturing our already vibrant technology The following report will take you on a journey community. through time from an era not so long ago when Pennsylvania was a bustle of industrial activity Pennsylvania’s Land Recycling Program is to our Commonwealth of today — a about change. In May 1995, I signed the bills Pennsylvania that is more economically and that established the Land Recycling Program as environmentally vital than ever before. a national model for the reuse of industrial sites. At that time, I described the program as I now invite you to read about the extraordinary “simply a case of government making sense.” results this program has demonstrated in just Today, I think the program’s track record two years. And I invite you to contact DEP to speaks for itself. In just over two years, close find out how your company and community to 300 sites have entered the program and can participate in the Land Recycling Program we’ve successfully completed more than 100 and share in our success.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Recycling Program Q&A Database the Following Questions and Responses Were Found in the Database: 221 Agricultural Land
    Page 1 of 119 Land Recycling Program Q&A Database The following questions and responses were found in the database: ID#: 221 Category: Agricultural Land Question: Are farms ineligible for Act 2 liability relief? Response: Generally, yes. Act 2 was enacted to facilitate the cleanup of former industrial sites and return them to productive use, and to help prevent the needless development of prime farmland, open space areas and natural areas. Act 2 does not apply to farmland that has residual concentrations of agricultural chemicals applied to the land using normal, routine and proper application methodologies established by the EPA, DEP, the PA Department of Agriculture, and the chemical’s manufacturer. Such normal agricultural practices do not constitute “releases” for the purposes of Act 2. If specific areas of a farm have been affected by a spill or release of regulated substances (i.e., through a practice) that does not fit within the scope of normal and routine agricultural practices, Act 2 would be available for those affected parts of the farm. An example of this would be a release of fuel oil from a leaking storage tank. Regulations: References: ID#: 222 Category: Agricultural Land Question: What if the farm has a known release of a contaminant? Response: The Department will use its authority under statutes other than Act 2 to enforce the cleanup of releases to farmland properties of agricultural chemicals that do not fit the definition of being released in the normal course of farming practices, such as leaks from fuel storage tanks. Regulations: References: Page 2 of 119 ID#: 223 Category: Agricultural Land Question: Can I take a whole farm through the Act 2 program? Response: No.
    [Show full text]
  • Cost of Organic Waste Technologies: a Case Study for New Jersey
    AIMS Energy, 3 (3): 450–462. DOI: 10.3934/energy.2015.3.450 Received date 28 June 2015, Accepted date 30 August 2015, Published date 15 September 2015 http://www.aimspress.com/ Research article Cost of organic waste technologies: A case study for New Jersey Gal Hochman 1,*, Shisi Wang 1, Qing Li 1, Paul D. Gottlieb 1, Fuqing Xu 2 and Yebo Li 2 1 Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA 2 The Ohio State University, Ohio 44691 * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel: +1-848-932-9142 Abstract: This paper evaluates the benefits of converting food waste and manure to biogas and/or fertilizer, while focusing on four available waste treatment technologies: direct combustion, landfilling, composting, and anaerobic digestion. These four alternative technologies were simulated using municipal-level data on food waste and manure in New Jersey. The criteria used to assess the four technologies include technological productivity, economic benefits, and impact on land scarcity. Anaerobic digestion with gas collection has the highest technological productivity; using anaerobic digesters would supply electricity to nearly ten thousand families in New Jersey. In terms of economic benefits, the landfill to gas method is the least costly method of treating waste. In comparison, direct combustion is by far the most costly method of all four waste-to-energy technologies. Keywords: Organic waste; manure; combustion; land-fill gas; aerobic composting; anaerobic digestion 1. Introduction Population growth and urbanization yield an increase in the generation and disposal of waste. On average, each person in the U.S. produces 1.5 kilograms of municipal solid waste (MSW) per day.
    [Show full text]
  • Overview of the Land Recycling Program
    Overview of the Land Recycling Program The Need for Land Recycling Past environmental policies in Pennsylvania disincentivized the private cleanup of old industrial sites, sometimes referred to as brownfields. Both state and federal cleanup laws can impose full responsibility for a site cleanup on new buyers, despite having no involvement in the contamination of the property. Pennsylvania’s policies promoted never-ending liability and discouraged private firms, lenders, and even public redevelopment authorities from getting involved. The positive aspects of an old industrial site, such as its location and available infrastructure, were frequently negated by the threat of huge, unknown cost and never-ending liability for an environmental cleanup of the site. Lenders were reluctant to invest in the purchase of such property if they become exposed to perpetual liability. Innocent buyers particularly shunned sites where those persons who were responsible for causing the contamination were bankrupt or couldn’t be identified. Too often, developers have chosen virgin properties as an alternative to old industrial sites with contamination problems. This has led to urban sprawl and the resulting loss of farmland, forests, and open space across Pennsylvania. The Land Recycling Program encourages the recycling and redevelopment of old industrial sites. It sets standards, by law, that are protective of human health and the environment and which consider future use. It provides potential developers with clear cleanup standards based on risk, not a moving target in a negotiated agreement, and provides an end to liability when that cleanup standard is achieved. These changes made many old industrial sites more attractive to potential developers.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Degradation
    SPM4 Land degradation Coordinating Lead Authors: Lennart Olsson (Sweden), Humberto Barbosa (Brazil) Lead Authors: Suruchi Bhadwal (India), Annette Cowie (Australia), Kenel Delusca (Haiti), Dulce Flores-Renteria (Mexico), Kathleen Hermans (Germany), Esteban Jobbagy (Argentina), Werner Kurz (Canada), Diqiang Li (China), Denis Jean Sonwa (Cameroon), Lindsay Stringer (United Kingdom) Contributing Authors: Timothy Crews (The United States of America), Martin Dallimer (United Kingdom), Joris Eekhout (The Netherlands), Karlheinz Erb (Italy), Eamon Haughey (Ireland), Richard Houghton (The United States of America), Muhammad Mohsin Iqbal (Pakistan), Francis X. Johnson (The United States of America), Woo-Kyun Lee (The Republic of Korea), John Morton (United Kingdom), Felipe Garcia Oliva (Mexico), Jan Petzold (Germany), Mohammad Rahimi (Iran), Florence Renou-Wilson (Ireland), Anna Tengberg (Sweden), Louis Verchot (Colombia/ The United States of America), Katharine Vincent (South Africa) Review Editors: José Manuel Moreno (Spain), Carolina Vera (Argentina) Chapter Scientist: Aliyu Salisu Barau (Nigeria) This chapter should be cited as: Olsson, L., H. Barbosa, S. Bhadwal, A. Cowie, K. Delusca, D. Flores-Renteria, K. Hermans, E. Jobbagy, W. Kurz, D. Li, D.J. Sonwa, L. Stringer, 2019: Land Degradation. In: Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change, desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S. Connors, R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Neogi, M. Pathak, J. Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. Malley, (eds.)]. In press.
    [Show full text]
  • Land Consumption and Land Take: Enhancing Conceptual Clarity for Evaluating Spatial Governance in the EU Context
    sustainability Article Land Consumption and Land Take: Enhancing Conceptual Clarity for Evaluating Spatial Governance in the EU Context Elisabeth Marquard 1,* , Stephan Bartke 1 , Judith Gifreu i Font 2 , Alois Humer 3 , Arend Jonkman 4 , Evelin Jürgenson 5, Naja Marot 6, Lien Poelmans 7 , Blaž Repe 8 , Robert Rybski 9, Christoph Schröter-Schlaack 1, Jaroslava Sobocká 10, Michael Tophøj Sørensen 11 , Eliška Vejchodská 12,13 , Athena Yiannakou 14 and Jana Bovet 15 1 Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research—UFZ, Department of Economics, Permoserstraße 15, 04318 Leipzig, Germany; [email protected] (S.B.); [email protected] (C.S.-S.) 2 Faculty of Law, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra (Cerdanyola del Vallès), 08193 Barcelona, Spain; [email protected] 3 Department of Geography and Regional Research, University of Vienna, Universitaetsstrasse 7/5, 1010 Vienna, Austria; [email protected] 4 Department of Management in the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Julianalaan 134, 2628BL Delft, The Netherlands; [email protected] 5 Chair of Geomatics, Institute of Forestry and Rural Engineering, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Kreutzwaldi 5, 51014 Tartu, Estonia; [email protected] 6 Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Ljubljana, Jamnikarjeva ulica 101, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia; [email protected] 7 VITO—Vlaamse Instelling voor Technologisch Onderzoek, Unit Ruimtelijke Milieuaspecten, Boeretang 200, 2400 Mol, Belgium; [email protected]
    [Show full text]
  • Land Recycling & New Tools for Creating Healthier Communities & Economic Growth
    Land Food Healthcare Land Recycling & New Tools For Creating Healthier Communities & Economic Growth Dave Laney ATC Group Services New Tools • Community Health Economic Growth Workshop Objectives Community Development Challenges Food Deserts/Low Supermarket Access/Food Insecurity Medically Underserved Areas Zero Car Households Health Disparities (Zip Code vs. Genetic Code) Discuss New and Evolving Tools and Opportunities Healthfields Healthcentric Development & Mobil Health Clinics Safe & Reliable Housing School and Community Gardens/Farmers Markets Transit Oriented Development/Complete Streets Health In All Policies Importance of Healthier Communities Connection Between Community Health and Economic Vitality New Tools • Community Health Economic Growth Land Recycling, Redevelopment and Reuse What’s Old Is New Again! Vacant/abandoned, underutilized, and/or potentially contaminated properties Correlation between location of properties (brownfields) and communities in need Smarter Land Use and Design Principles Infill development Restoration and more efficient use of brownfields Adaptive reuse of buildings Supporting the character and vision of the surrounding area “Vacant Lot = Property Full of Opportunity” Brownfields to Healthfields: Transforming Community Health Land Recycling & New Tools For Creating Communities & Economic Growth August 19, 2016 OPPORTUNITY “a good chance for advancement or progress” Sustainable development Increase economic growth Eliminate environmental exposure Improve access to healthy
    [Show full text]
  • 11.Center for Creative Land Recycling
    —i H CENTER FOR CREATIVE LAND RECYCLING • RECLAIM. CONNECT, TRANSFORM. For Information, contact: Jean Hamerman — [email protected] 646-712-0535 Jeff Jones - [email protected] 518-265-0719 BOA and its Impact on Community Revitalization and Investment Strengthening Pre-Planning for Successful Land Reuse in Brownfield-Impacted Communities Throughout New York State Thank you Chair Kruger, Chair Weinstein and members of the Senate Finance and Assembly Ways and Means Committees, and Chair Kaminsky, Chair Englebright and members of the Senate and Assembly Environmental Conservation Committees for the opportunity to testify at this joint Legislative Budget Hearing on Environmental Conservation, We represent the Center for Creative Land Recycling (CCLR) and we are here to thank you and ask you for your continued support for the Brownfield Opportunity Areas (BOA] program, an environmental justice program with an outsized impact on community well-being and revitalization. Specifically, we are here to urge you to support BOA at the $2 million level recommended in the Governor’s proposed 2020-21 Environmental Protection Fund budget We are pleased to share this update on how this program benefits brownfield-impacted communities. CCLR is the leading national nonprofit dedicated to transforming communities through land reuse. This means converting abandoned or vacant commercial and industrial properties to assets that benefit the community, create jobs and generate new tax revenues. As US EPA’s Technical Assistance to Brownfield Communities provider for the State of New York, we help transformations happen by educating and linking communities to government agencies and the private sector to create optimal conditions for reinvestment.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Regulation in Europe: Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Sites Bradford S
    Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business Volume 10 Issue 3 Winter Winter 1990 Environmental Regulation in Europe: Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Sites Bradford S. Gentry Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/njilb Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation Bradford S. Gentry, Environmental Regulation in Europe: Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Sites, 10 Nw. J. Int'l L. & Bus. 397 (1989-1990) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business by an authorized administrator of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. Environmental Regulation in Europe: Hazardous Waste and Contaminated Sites Bradford S. Gentry * I. INTODUCTION Environmental problems now constitute one of the major political issues in Europe. Mrs. Thatcher has gone "green" and is working to lead the international response to global warming. The government in the Netherlands fell in the spring of 1989 as a result of disagreements over the funding of the country's ambitious environmental program. In the summer of 1988, the freighter Karin B wandered the oceans around Eu- rope seeking a port willing to off-load its cargo of hazardous wastes which had been illegally disposed of in Nigeria. The summer of 1988 also witnessed the death of seals in the North Sea, while many of Italy's most famous tourist breaches were closed by seaweed and pollution dur- ing the summer of 1989. More recently, the beaches in the Iron Curtain have revealed environmental degradation of immense proportions.
    [Show full text]
  • Developing the Case for Enhanced Landfill Mining in the UK
    Developing the case for enhanced landfill mining in the UK Stuart Wagland Senior Lecturer, Energy & Environmental Chemistry IOSH Environmental Waste Management Group July 2021 www.cranfield.ac.uk Overview of webinar Enhanced landfill mining in the UK • Background- UK landfill legacy and concept of ELFM • Recent sampling work and experimental data • Risks associated with landfill mining and remediation • ELFM in Europe and the UK- the next steps 2 Landfills in UK Substantial resource for future exploitation Over 20,000 legacy and current landfills in the UK Licences required from 1974 under the Control of Pollution Act Over 4,000 licensed sites, most of which are now closed Currently over 40 million tonnes of waste from all sources is deposited in UK landfills each year 3 Firstly, what is enhanced landfill mining?? Landfill mining: Enhanced landfill mining [ELFM]: 'a process for extracting materials ‘the safe conditioning, excavation or other solid natural resources and integrated valorisation of from waste materials that (historic and/or future) landfilled previously have been disposed of waste streams as both materials by burying them in the ground' (Waste-to-Material, WtM) and energy (Waste-to-Energy, WtE), (Krook at al. 2012) using innovative transformation technologies and respecting the most stringent social and ecological criteria.' (Jones et al. 2013) 4 Landfill mining vs enhanced landfill mining 'Landfill mining' is limited to: ELFM goes further and aims to elicit higher recovery rates • Capturing of methane for and value: energy purposes • Recovery of some • In-situ and ex-situ recovery materials through physical • Waste to materials and excavation energy using innovative • Excavation for reclamation and state-of-the art of land (i.e.
    [Show full text]