chemical treatment

chemical treatment

parameters constant, th los’l 11’111″ :tion cost), the lower th head will III ower hydraulic driving for ‘ Illllllli’ll II ~ in the liner is likewis r !un’ll

a pipes in a leachate coli I III, terial and the following prop IliI ,tive design a” stormwater frolll leachate collection system.

-s) = 8.2 in = 0.00024 cm/s Il/S

15.2 cm

q)1/2] J +_- K

~ o 02)( )1/2] = 1~ ‘/I I. (0.02)2 + 0.00024 024 0.01

eonets] have been introduced to 1111 II I :stems over such natural materials .11 ~ II ~s superimposed over each other, P’” I :y (or transmissivity). If a geonci I’ II he spacing between the collection I’ll”

2/day

umm

Comments

BOD/COD Best used on “young” leachate Flexible, shock resistant, proven, minimum SRT increases with increasing organic strength, > 90% BOD removal possible Good application to small flows, > 90% BOD removal possible Aerobic polishing necessary to achieve high-quality effluent > 95% COD removal, > 99% BOD removal

BOD/COD

Ic BOD/COD

BOD/COD

ul tion/precipitation Heavy metals

Useful as polishing step or for treatment of “old” leachate High removal of Fe. Zn; moderate removal of Cr, Cu. or Mn; little removal of Cd, Pb, or Ni Raw leachate treatment requires high chemical dosages, better used as polishing step 10-70% COD removal, slight metal removal 30-70% COD removal after biological or chemical treatment 90-96% TDS removal

It I leal oxidation COD

II It xehange II rption

COD BOD/COD

Total dissolved solids (TOSs)

I V osmosis

11111r: Reinhart, D. R, and C. J. Grosh. 1997. “Analysis of Florida MSW Landfill Leachate Quality Data.” Report to the , I ,It /11 Center for Solid and, Hazardous Waste Management (March).

hate Treatment and Disposal III wet areas, leachate treatment. use, and disposal represents one of the major I PIlI s of landfill operations-not only during the active life of the landfill but I I r a significant period of time after closure. Due to the cost implications, con- “II’I’tlble attention must be given to selecting the most environmentally responsible, I II ! -Ifective alternative for leachate treatment and disposal. The optimal treatmentI”1111 n may change over time as new technologies are developed, new regulations III promulgated, and/or leachate quality varies as a function oflandfill age.

Leachate-treatment needs depend upon the final disposition of the leachate. 1111111 disposal of leachate may be accomplished through co-disposal at a wastewa- It I II’ atment plant or through direct discharge, both of which could be preceded II~’ in-site treatment. Leachate treatment is often difficult because of high organic 111’1 th, irregular production rates and composition, variation in biodegradabil- II I And low phosphorous content (if biological treatment is considered). Several uuh rs have discussed leachate treatment options,”:” which are briefly summa- III. ! in Table 8-11. Generally, where on-site treatment and discharge is selected. I vrral unit processes are required to address the range of contaminants present.

1.11 ample, a leachate treatment facility at the AI Turi Landfill in Orange County, c’W York uses polymer coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation, followed

II anaerobic biological treatment, two-stage aerobic biological treatment,

The post chemical treatment appeared first on best homeworkhelp.

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"