=======================Electronic Edition========================
RACHEL’S HAZARDOUS WASTE NEWS #71
—April 4, 1988—
News and resources for environmental justice.
——
Environmental Research Foundation
P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403
Fax (410) 263-8944; Internet: erf@igc.apc.org
==========
The Back issues and Index are available
here.
The official RACHEL archive is here.
It’s updated constantly.
To subscribe, send E-mail to rachel-weekly-
request@world.std.com
with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message. It’s free.
===Previous issue==========================================Next issue===
DECADE-OLD STUDY REVEALED THE POLLUTING EFFECTS OF LANDFILLS.
A careful study of 50 landfills in 1977 concluded that 43 out of
50 (86%) had contaminated underground water supplies beyond the
boundaries of the landfill. At the other 7 sites, off-site
contamination was measured but could not be attributed to the
landfills by the strict criteria used in the study. In other
words, the study of 50 landfills found groundwater pollution at
all 50 sites, but the contamination could be definitely traced to
the landfills in only 43 cases (86%).
The study was conducted by Geraghty & Miller of Port Washington,
NY, one of the nation’s leading hydrology consulting firms, under
contract to EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). They
looked at 122 sites in 15 states and finally selected 50 sites in
11 states for careful evaluation. They studied 7 in Wisconsin, 6
in Illinois, 5 in Indiana, 5 in Michigan, 2 in Pennsylvania, 5 in
New York, 9 in New Jersey, 3 in Connecticut, 5 in Massachusetts,
2 in New Hampshire, and 1 in Florida.
Criteria for selecting sites were strict: no site was selected if
it was already known to be contaminated or if there were reports
of bad taste or bad odors from drinking water near the site
already; sites were selected to include various geologic settings
(various rock and soil types) and various climatic conditions;
sites were selected to include different kinds of dumping
(landfills and lagoons), and different kinds of wastes. Some of
the wastes would be termed “hazardous” today, but many of the
wastes involved were not “hazardous” by today’s legal definitions
and are still allowed in municipal landfills today. Sites had to
be at least 3 years old.
The criteria for determining whether a site was contaminating
groundwater were strict. (1) Contaminants had to be measured in
groundwater beyond the perimeter of the site; (2) the
concentration of contaminants downstream of the site had to be
greater than the concentration of the same contaminants measured
in an uncontaminated background well; (3) all wells used had to
be tapping the same aquifer; (4) geologic interpretation of the
data by hydrologists had to convince them that the landfills was
the source of the contamination.
In 43 out of 50 cases, the landfill was confirmed as the source
of contamination. In four other cases, contamination was
confirmed, but the area of contamination was so great that
sources besides the landfill were also suspected; at three more
sites, contamination was found but data could not be gathered
from uncontaminated background wells. So contamination was
confirmed at all 50 sites, but in 7 cases, the project’s criteria
could not be met for deciding that the landfill was the culprit.
The term “landfill” was used to mean a dumping ground that
accepted garbage, demolition debris, municipal and industrial
solid wastes, sludges or liquids. The investigation “concentrated
on those landfills with a major component of industrial waste.”
Some of the landfills had liners, others did not. Since
publishing this study, the EPA has published its opinion several
times, that all landfill liners will eventually leak. (See HWN
#37.) Thus this study provides important evidence that all
landfills, lined or not, all eventually contaminate groundwater.
Lined landfills will contaminate groundwater more slowly than
unlined landfills, but the long-term effects will be the same:
someone’s groundwater will become contaminated whenever municipal
solid waste or industrial waste or legally hazardous wastes are
placed in the ground.
The study makes some interesting points worth remembering about
landfills: “The intermixing of inorganic and organic wastes,
wastes of high and low pH, and wastes having different physical
properties in a common disposal area, may lead to influences on
the environment not anticipated from any single waste material.”
(pg. 7) This is important because landfill liners are selected to
be compatible with the wastes that will be placed in a landfill.
However, as this statement says, the mixing of wastes in a
landfill will produced unanticipated chemical combinations with
unpredictable results. A landfill liner selected to withstand
attack from chemicals X, Y and Z may not withstand attack from
chemicals X and Z in combination, or Y and Z in combination. The
more chemicals involved, the greater the number of possible
combinations, the more complex the interactions will be, and the
less predictable the results become.
The study makes another valuable point: “The wastes that are
deposited continue to weather and leach for years.” (pg. 8) The
chemical interactions within a landfill do not cease when the
dumping stops. In the case of inorganic materials (arsenic, lead,
chromium and so forth) the duration of the hazard is essentially
infinite–toxic metals will never change into anything besides
toxic metals. (The Geraghty & Miller study found toxic heavy
metals at 49 of the 50 sites and found they contaminated
groundwater off-site at 40 of the 50 sites.)
When anyone proposes a new landfill and says that liners are
being selected to prevent contamination of the environment, you
should ask, (a) How can they possibly predict all the possible
combinations of chemicals that will be created inside the
landfill, producing new combinations of chemicals that will
attack the liners?; and (b) What is the expected duration of the
hazard inside the landfill vs. the expected duration of the
liners that have been selected?
If the proponents of a landfill project are honest, these
questions will force them to admit that they are not able to
predict the chemicals that will come in contact with the liner
(especially since the chemicals used by industry change from year
to year, and an average of 1000 new chemicals go into commercial
use each year); and they will be forced to admit that the
duration of the hazard (in the case of metals at least) is very
great (thousands of years or longer) whereas the expected
lifetime of any human-created material (including packed clay
liners and all FMLs [flexible membrane liners]) is much shorter
than the expected hazard. Leakage is inevitable.
Common sense and available data combine to force a single
conclusion: all landfills will eventually leak. Landfill liners
may SLOW the release of contaminants into groundwater but they
cannot PREVENT it. There is no such thing as a secure landfill.
The Geraghty & Miller study is THE PREVALANCE OF SUBSURFACE
MIGRATION OF HAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES AT SELECTED INDUSTRIAL
WASTE LAND DISPOSAL SITES [EPA/530-SW-634] first published by EPA
in 1977; sill available from National Technical Information
Service [NTIS], Springfield, VA 22161; phone (703) 487-4650;
order No. PB 275103; $44.95 plus $3.00 handling.
–Peter Montague, Ph.D.
Descriptor terms: landfilling; studies; findings; leaks;
leachate; water; groundwater; water pollution; ny; geraghty &
miller; epa; wi; il; in; mi; pa; ny; nj; ct; ma; nh; fl;
criteria; hazardous waste industry; msw; monitoring;
investigations; liners; toxicity; heaby metals; siting;