Environ Monit Assess DOI 10.1007/s10661-011-2034-6 A new method for environmental site assessment of urban solid waste landfills Fatemeh Ghanbari · Farham Amin Sharee · Masoud Monavari · Narges Zaredar Received: 7 June 2010 / Accepted: 16 March 2011 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011 Abstract Regarding various types of pollutant, similar methods, much more criteria (53 parame- waste management requires high attention. En- ters) can be considered within this method, so vironmental site selection study, prior to landfill the results will be more calculable. According to operation, and subsequently, monitoring and this method, Rasht landfill (site H) is classified maintaining of the location, are of foremost points as unacceptable landfill site i.e. there is an urgent in landfill site selection process. By means of these need for a new suitable site for landfill, while studies, it is possible to control the undesirable Andishe Landfill (site D) is ranked as acceptable impacts caused by landfills. Study ahead aims at landfill site but needs environmental management examination of effectiveness of a new method program to handle the existing weaknesses. called Monavari 95–2 in landfill site assessment. For this purpose, two landfills Rasht and An- Keywords Landfill site assessment · Arid area · disheh, which are, respectively, located on humid Humid area · Solid wastes · Deposition · and arid areas, were selected as case studies. Then, Waste management the results obtained from both sites were com- pared with each other to find out the weaknesses and strengths of each site. Compared with others Introduction Lack of sufficient laws and regulation and enough land for landfilling have caused several environ- mental pollutions and natural resources degrada- F. Ghanbari tion in developing countries. Landfill site selection Environmental Research Institute of Jahade Daneshgahi, Jahade Daneshgahi, Rasht, Guilan, Iran should take into account a wide range of fac- tors including legal, physical, political, and health F. Amin Sharee (B) factors in order to reduce potential negative im- Department of Science, Najafabad Branch, pacts on the environment (Zamorano et al. 2008; Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Isfahan, Iran e-mail: [email protected], Choudhury and Savoikar 2009; Laner et al. 2009; [email protected] Kurniawan and Chan 2006; Read et al. 1997). The pollutants caused by landfill leachate is among the · M. Monavari N. Zaredar most challengeable environmental issues (Deng Department of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, and Englehardt 2006; Eggen et al. 2010; Koshy Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran et al. 2007; Ponthieu et al. 2007). Currently, the Environ Monit Assess easiest and the most prevalent way of waste dis- (Monavari and Shariat 2000), Drastic Method posal in humid area of the country is open dump- (Gebhardt and Jankowski 1986; Silva Garcia ing (Monavari and Shariat 2000). Landfill is one et al. 2004;Wang2007), and USEPA Method of the most widely employed methods of disposal (Christensen et al. 1992). In this research, Mon- for municipal solid waste (El-Fadel et al. 1997). avari Method was used for the mentioned landfills Studies carried out on developing countries shows assessing, whereas this method has regarded more that according to the existing constraints, land parameters rather than the other methods; more- filling is the most important method in solid waste over, it has taken into consideration environmen- management and final deposit (Johannesson and tal, health, and physical aspects. This method was Boyer 1999). applies for the first time in 48 cities of Northern Wastes containing high volume of latex cause provinces of Iran as well as Golestan Province important issues in waste management in devel- (Monavari 1999;Farzaneh2003). In 2007, this oping countries. More humidity of area provides method was used for evaluating tourist town of more leaches regardless of precipitation. Studies Namakabroud in Mazandaran Province (Isapour on Kahrizak Landfill of Tehran showed that the 2007). highest amount of produced latex in the landfill In this research, in order to examine the has been occurred due to existence of water in the effectiveness of a new method called Movavari- wastes and not the precipitation penetrated in to 95–2 in environmental site assessment of landfills, the wastes (Safari and Baronian 2002). Previously, two landfills Rasht and Andishe were chosen as a natural water passage, valley, a part of water- indicators of humid and arid regions, respectively. shed, or a hole were considered as a landfill which Landfill of Rasht (site H) in Gilan Province was covered by soil and ignored after filling its ca- is located on Saravan altitudes, 15 Km far from pacity (Wright and Nebel 2004). Also, traditional the city (Shomal Consulting Engineers 1997). landfills were always associated with operational Monthly and annually average precipitations in difficulties such as noxious gas and vapor, dust and this city are equal to 103 and 1,359 mm severally. leachate production, as well as rodent infestation No environmental and engineering standard has (Hamer 2003; Calabrò et al. 2010; Al-Yaqout et al. been applied at Rasht Landfill, and wastes are 2002; Kulikowska and Klimiuk 2008). Sanitary dumped in an open area in forest vales along land-filling is the best way to mitigate environ- Siahroud River. mental impacts followed by waste deposit, and in Landfill of Andisheh, in Tehran Province, is addition to reducing mephitis, preventing light ob- located on west side of Tehran. As regards, this jects scattering, insects and rodents thronging, and landfill is a vast area with slight slope; therefore, controlling the gas and leachate, it can decrease there is enough soil to cover the wastes. How- the volume of waste up to 50% (Glynn 2004; ever, appropriate soil use for this purpose has not Wang et al. 2009). been observed. Annual precipitation in this city is There is lack of international standards in terms 182 mm (Yekom Consulting Engineers 2001). of damages caused by unsanitary landfill which lead to environmental deteriorations and decrease the society health level (Hagerty et al. 1997). In Materials and methods many developing countries in which standards and regulation of landfills are not perfectly attended, Study areas assessment of landfills can clear existing limita- tions and problems in these areas. Thus, solving Rasht Landf ill existence weaknesses lead to decrease of negative environmental impacts. The location is situated between latitudes Basically, municipal solid waste landfills are 37◦048–37◦0537 N and longitudes 49◦3639– evaluated by methods such Oleckno Method 49◦3842 E. Its minimum height is equal to 38 m (Monavari and Arbab 2005; Abdoli et al. 2006; above the sea level while the maximum reaches Monavari et al. 2007), Monavari 95–2 Method 150 m. Topographically, the region includes low Environ Monit Assess height hills, seasonal streams, and several springs Andisheh Landf ill (Fig. 1). The average annual precipitation is equal to This site has shallow soil and medium loam gravel 1,359 mm, and monthly mean relative humidity in texture, with low to moderate salt constraint on this region is 81%. gypsum and calcareous material. Its average Fig. 1 Location of Rasht Landfill as a humid area in Iran Environ Monit Assess height is equal to 1,613 m. There is no perma- Methodology nent river within the landfill, but a seasonal river passes from a distance of 400–300 m of the region In this research, the following steps were applied: (Fig. 2). Prevailing winds within the most months of – Identifying of geographic and environmen- this place is derived from the southeast, and the tal conditions in Rasht and Andisheh landfill mean annual rainfall is varied between 127 and sites as indicators of humid and arid landfills, 150 mm. respectively. Fig. 2 Landfill of Andisheh as an arid area (Site A) Environ Monit Assess Table 1 Ranking of Criterion score Indicators Total criteria score Landfill classification index criteria in Monavari Method 95–2 4 Excellent 158 to 212 Acceptable 3 Good 106 to157 2 Medium 53 to157 1 Insignificant 0 to 52 −1 Weak 0 to −52 Unacceptable −2 Approximately unsuitable −53 to −105 −3 Unsuitable −106 to −157 − − − Monavari (1999) 4 Very unsuitable 158 to 212 – Applying “Monavari 95–2” Method to evalu- Results and discussion ate the condition of the mentioned landfills. Waste quality and quantity This method consists of 53 parameters, 20 of which are classified as physical, eight of which are Landf ill of site H (Rasht as an example grouped as qualifications and constraints and 25 of humid landf ill) parameters are categorized as health and environ- mental criteria (Table 3). There are some pre- Total input solid wastes transported in to the defined indices for each parameter separately to landfill H were calculated regarding the weight evaluate that special parameter. Indicator criteria of vehicles transporting solid waste. In general, in Monavari Method are given in Table 1. three municipals, 12 rural districts, 11 governmen- tal companies and offices, nine industrial towns, hospitals, and Livestock companies in Rasht de- – Comparison of factors influenced on environ- posit their waste into the landfill. Total amount ment using identification of the studied loca- of deposited waste is 593/4 t/day. Quantity of tions disadvantages different types of waste deposited into landfill (H) is shown in Table 2. As can be observed in Table 1, the first col- umn called criterion score refers to the score of Landf ill of site A (Andishe as an example each criterion regarding sanitary landfill point of of arid landf ill) view. It has a rage between −4 and 4. The sec- ond column is a descriptive grading of consid- The quantity of waste deposited in to the landfill ered criteria. For example, for industrial waste was estimated according to different types of deposited at the landfill site in case of respecting waste carrying by vehicles.