The database on this web site will be used to write a paper which it is hoped will be presented at:
To be announced.
LEACHATE IRRIGATION: RELIABLE BAT PROCESS OR A HISTORICAL RELIC?
 Authors: To be announced
Abstract:
The authors demonstrate that on a significant number of landfill sites, leachate irrigation provides a secure and robust leachate treatment and disposal method, which when carried out with due care comprises the BAT (Best Available Technique) for these sites.
The authors are aware that the Waste Regulations, the introduction of PPC to treatment processes by Autumnt 2006, the Groundwater Directive, and the impending implementation of the Water Framework Directive are all likely to influence the selection of BAT processes, and the detailed Waste Management Licence or PPC Permit requirements for these installations.
However, Environment Agency Guidance for those operating irrigation schemes, and for others seeking to implement new projects, is lacking. Guidance has long been awaited, and although the Agency has provided a an Guidance Note (Final DRAFT - Sector Guidance Note IPPC S5.03)(SGN), available via its web site, the situation remains unclear. The EA’s Final Draft Guidance for the selection of BAT for leachate treatment, first published in 2003, was issued in Final Draft in November 2006.
The authors have been concerned that within the draft BAT guidance, as published, the SGN does not provide them with any assistance regarding the Agency’s views on irrigation treatment.
The case is made that, nevertheless, when alternative “BAT” processes are considered at some sites these are all high-energy consumption, and chemical usage processes. The environmental benefits derived from alternative processes at the case study sites included in the paper would be negligible and costs would rise five to tenfold.
The authors describe how the principle of BATNEEC could not be served by any interpretation of the law which prevented the use of leachate irrigation. Evidence is provided to show that in all the instances outlined in the paper, the reasonable expenditure principle, (ie that significant environmental benefit shall justify reasonable expenditure), could not be served by any blanket ban on irrigation treatment.
Case studies are provided for leachate irrigation sites which describe treatment systems employed and provide extensive monitoring data. Some of the case study sites serve closed landfill sites, and have been in use for more then 20 years, others are located at active landfills, comply with licenses issued in compliance with the Landfill Directive and other recent legislation, and are in more recent stages of development.
Some of the irrigation case studies comprise solely waste treatment, whereas more recent schemes are based upon the principle of “Beneficial Use” where the leachate is quality controlled, classified as a nutrient product/fertiliser, and benefits a crop, usually by the provision of additional nutrient where a deficit would otherwise have existed.
The case studies support the continuation of the practice of irrigation, where such schemes are based on good science, operated in accordance with appropriate licensing conditions, and can be shown to be of zero or negligible environmental impact.
The paper also provides an extensive list of leachate irrigation schemes throughout the UK and Europe, showing the extent to which landfill irrigation treatment is presently being successfully applied.
Keywords:
Leachate, leachate treatment, leachate irrigation, BAT, Best Available Technique, Waste Regulations, PPC, the Groundwater Directive, Water Framework Directive, Waste Management Licence, Environment Agency Guidance, Pre-Consultation, draft BAT, BATNEEC, Landfill Directive, Beneficial Use, environmental impact
|
