My
spouse shook my world the other day! A tedious conference call at work had her
scrolling her Facebook feed, and, as she is a nerd like me, her feed has some
great science stories. I was busy with my own biosolids science inquiry, so I
was inclined at first to ignore her FB messenger notes.
But
how can you ignore Records Found in Dusty Basement Undermine Decades of Dietary
Advice? We all know a plant-based diet is the
pathway to good health. But National Institutes of Health employee Christopher
Ramsden had uncovered a trove of 9,000 patient files of a seminal nutrition
study completed 40 year ago, the data from which, when reanalyzed, turned
upside down the conventional wisdom that a diet high in saturated fats
increased risk of deaths due to heart disease. The data showed the opposite!
What?!
I have been eating bean burgers when my health would have been better served by
beef burgers?
And,
a short while later, another FB Messenger note from my wife excitedly urged me
to read about plastic-eating waxworms. We all know that the health of soils and
oceans, on which human existence depends, is ultimately doomed by accumulation
of plastic, particularly of the micro kind. But here the LA Times was
announcing, in Stubborn plastic may have finally met its match: the hungry wax
worm, “researchers set wax worms loose on a
polyethylene film, watching holes appear after just 40 minutes… So far, the
scientists are not sure whether this ability is due to the wax moth larva, or
to the microbes within its gut.” I went to Google Scholar to find,
despite being a faithful reader of Engineering Science & Technology, I had
missed an article back in November 2014 (Evidence of polyethylene biodegradation by bacterial strains
from the guts of plastic-eating waxworms)
announcing “the results demonstrated the presence of PE-degrading bacteria in
the guts of waxworms and provided promising evidence for the biodegradation of
PE in the environment.”
I
should have known, gut bacteria are the heroes; they even eat plastic.
Maybe humanity is not doomed, not yet at least, by plastic.
All
of this “news” had distracted me from my own biosolids investigation of the
bizarre. I had been uncovering a wholly unexpected adverse environmental effect
of biosolids. Let me hasten to say, there is NO FIRM EVIDENCE, not
yet at least, that biosolids is responsible for this: Elevated Temperature
Landfills.
For
the better part of 30 years I have held the firm conviction that biosolids
co-disposal with municipal solid waste (MSW) is a win-win, filling in
space-wasting voids in the emplaced trash, hastening biogas production and
accelerating settling. Biosolids co-disposal is so beneficial for MSW
landfills that it warrants a discounted tipping fee, I would argue
(unsuccessfully so with landfill companies).
What
I know is true, like plastic is forever and animal fat ruins hearts, may not be
true!
Eminent
emeritus Virginia Tech professor John Novak had first planted the doubt, which
I mostly ignored. In his keynote presentation to the 2015 WEF biosolids
conference, Dr. Novak darkly warned, almost off-handedly, against over reliance
on co-disposal at landfills, as disposal challenges go beyond odors. In a
casual follow-up conversation with Dr. Novak I first heard the phrase “elevated
temperatures.”
There
the matter lay, until the recent 2017 WEF Conference in Seattle. From another
industry insider, I learned a research project had been launched to study
Elevated Temperature Landfills (ETLF). This was no small investigation. Major
companies had gotten together to fund it. A highly-credentialed team had been
assembled. Some extraordinary situations had been reported by the press.
I
did some Internet sleuthing and followed with interviewing. The Environmental Research
and Education Foundation, formed as a research arm of the solid
waste industry in 1998, requested proposal to study ETLF in 2015, resulting in CCL receives Environmental Research & Education Foundation
(EREF) funds research grant on elevated landfill temperatures.
This team is led by Dr. Marco J. Castaldi, an
engineering professor at the City University of New York (CUNY) and includes Dr. Morton A. Barlaz,
professor at North Carolina State University. A PowerPoint presentation
posted by Dr. Barlaz, Heat Generation and Accumulation at Municipal Solid Waste
Landfills Experiencing Elevated Temperatures,
provides eye-popping descriptions of ETLF at work and the importance of the new
study.
A
Google search points to at least one shocking situation. The online waste
industry publication Waste360 has tackled this topic, first with a
March 2016 overview ( Elevated Landfill Temperatures a Concern for Operators ) and then with a three-part series of
articles on elevated temperature landfills ( Diagnosing and Understanding Elevated Temperature Landfills
). In November 2016, Waste360 provided The Bridgeton Landfill "Fire" Explained (Updated),
in which the story of the St. Louis, Missouri, landfill owned by Republic
Services, is described. This is already national news, albeit National
Public Radio: Landfill Fire Threatens Nuclear Waste Site Outside St. Louis.
According to the NPR article, “Specifically, Acting EPA Regional Administrator
Mark Hague says there is "no imminent threat" of the underground fire
in what's known as the Bridgeton Landfill reaching the radioactive waste
at the adjacent West Lake Landfill.”
Do
you feel reassured?
Another
research team in Louisiana is “hot” on the trail of symptoms and causes of
elevated temperature landfills. Navid H. Jafari is the
lead author of Spatial and temporal characteristics of elevated temperatures in
municipal solid waste landfills. The
authors state: “In particular, MSW landfills undergo changes in behavior that
typically follow a progression of indicators, e.g., elevated temperatures,
changes in gas composition, elevated gas pressures, increased leachate
migration, slope movement, and unusual and rapid surface settlement.”
So
far, no mention of biosolids in on-line PowerPoints or by the media.
Nevertheless,
the hallway conversation in Seattle turned to a recent tragedy at Greentree
Landfill in Kersey, PA, this past February. One article among many is Worker’s Body Found After Being Buried In Trash At
Pa. Landfill. The speculation heard in
Seattle is that the surface instability at Greentree arose from a “hot spot”
associated with a high proportion of biosolids disposal accepted at this
landfill.
When
Waste Management, Inc., (WM) took steps in February 2015 to change its policies
on biosolids acceptance, the principal assumption was its impetus was odor
complaints. That this step should apply to WM’s Pennsylvania facilities
seemed to be reasonable (Pennsylvania Orders Waste Management to Close Tullytown Landfill
by 2017). After all, NYC DEP, a major customer
at the time, does not certify its biosolids as compliant with Class B pathogen
standards or with Vector Attraction Reduction standards, and Pennsylvania
regulations seem to require this level of stabilization for landfill
acceptance.
But
WM’s policy on biosolids co-disposal may include other considerations – for
instance a risk of elevated temperature. A recently retired WM engineer
explained in a recent interview that no WM landfills receiving a proportion of
biosolids lower than 10 percent of daily trash acceptance had displayed
problems with elevated temperatures. While this is not a basis for a
cause/effect relationship, if you are a landfill operator a reasonable course
of action is to impose a 10% maximum acceptance rate for biosolids. That is
what WM did in 2015. Other landfill owners, including Greentree’s, did
not.
But
how could biosolids be involved with elevated temperatures? In Waste360’s
Diagnosing and Understanding Elevated Temperature Landfills
(Part 3), the authors suggest the reaction is
“Pyrolysis… the thermochemical decomposition of organic matter at
elevated temperature in the absence of oxygen.” As a follower of the
WE&RF LIFT program, I recalled the proposal from a start-up enterprise, HydroTORR’s ZIP-Carb (Zero
Input Process Carbonization), deploying hydrothermal carbonization (HTC), a
wet-state thermal decomposition under elevated temperature and pressure in an
oxygen starved environment, very pyrolysis-like. That modern landfills
are hundreds of feet thick, totally insulated, oxygen-free and wet with
recirculating leachate, internal conditions are seemingly consonant with HTC.
One
researcher involved with HydroTORR is Dr. M Toufiq Reza,
formerly of University of Nevada, now at Ohio University, Athens. He has a
specialization in “applied bioenergy.” When I put my hypothesis to him, Dr.
Reza gave it a few hours consideration and in an email back to me suggested
that high strength leachate combined with biosolids sealed in waste cells under
pressure “might go for an exothermic decarboxilation reaction resulting in CO2
and heat.” These are the two key indicators of elevated temperature
landfills.
The
science is still not there to link biosolids and elevated temperatures, at
least not yet. But, if science can surprise me with contrary conclusions on
plastic and lard, it can surprise me with contrary conclusions on biosolids in
landfills.
I participated in the March for Science in
Philadelphia on Earth Day. It was a perfect venue for me to recommit to keeping
science front and center with biosolids. Dr. Reza wrote: “To test the
hypothesis, I may need to test the leachate sludge and aged-sludge.” He
stands ready to do some research, and I invite you to join me in
elevating the SCIENCE OF HOT BIOSOLIDS.
No comments:
Post a Comment