com/locate/scitotenv
137
Review
Abstract
Household hazardous waste (HHW) includes waste from a number of household products such as paint, garden pesticides,
pharmaceuticals, photographic chemicals, certain detergents, personal care products, fluorescent tubes, waste oil, heavy
metal- containing batteries, wood treated with dangerous substances, waste electronic and electrical equipment and discarded
CFC- containing equipment. Data on the amounts of HHW discarded are very limited and are hampered by insufficient
definitions of what constitutes HHW. Consequently, the risks associated with the disposal of HHW to landfill have not been
fully elucidated. This work has focused on the assessment of data concerning the presence of hazardous chemicals in
leachates as evidence of the disposal of HHW in municipal landfills. Evidence is sought from a number of sources on the
occurrence in landfill leachates of hazardous components (heavy metals and xenobiotic organic compounds [XOC]) from
household products and the possible disposal-to-emissions pathways occurring within landfills. This review demonstrates
that a broad range of xenobiotic compounds occurring in leachate can be linked to HHW but further work is required to
assess whether such compounds pose a risk to the environment and human health as a result of leakage/seepage or through
treatment and discharge.
D 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Xenobiotic organic compounds; Heavy metals; Municipal solid waste disposal; Endocrine disruptors; Pharmaceuticals; Pesticides
Phenols
Phenol 108-95-2 Slimicide, disinfectant, drugs and manu. X/Y 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 15
Ethylphenols 90-00-6 Solvent, naturally occurring in some X/Y 1, 3, 15
foods
Cresols 1319-77-3 Wood preservatives, drugs, disinfectant Y 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 12, 13, 15
and manu.
Bisphenol a As phenol Manufacture of epoxy resins, coating Y 1, 6, 7, 15
on food cans?
Dimethylphenols 105-67-9 Solvent X(Y) 1, 12, 15
2-Meth/4-methoxyphenol 90-05-1/50-76-5 Manu. antioxidants, drugs, plastics, Y 1
dyes: flavouring
Chlorophenols 95-57-8 Pesticides, antiseptics, manu., Cl-treated X(Y) 1, 7, 12, 13, 15
water
2,4-Dichlorophenol 120-83-2 Manu. herbicides, PCP: mothballs, Y 7
disinfectant
3,5-Dichlorophenol 591-35-5 Manu. herbicides, PCP: mothballs, Y 1
disinfectant
Trichlorophenols N/A PCP and organochlorine pesticide X/Y 15
metabolites
2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 58-90-2 Pesticides, wood preservative X 1, 15
Pentachlorophenol 87-86-5 Wood preservative no longer used in Y(old) 2, 15
households
Polychlorinated biphenyls 1336-36-3 Transformers and capacitors: b1970s X 2
used in consumerables paint,
adhesives, fluorescent lamps, oil, WEEE
Alkylphenols
Nonylphenol 104-40-5 Surfactants X/Y 1, 15
Nonylphenol ethoxylate 9016-40-9/NA 31 Detergents, wetting/dispersing agents, X/Y 15
emulsifier
Pesticides
Aldrin/dieldrin 309-00-2/60-57-1 Banned insecticides X 2
Ametryn 834-12-8 Herbicide X 1
(continued on next page)
Table 1 (continued)
Compounds CAS no. Use Presence Landfill type
in HHW and reference
Pesticides
Ampa N/A Glyphosate X 1
Atrazine 1912-24-9 HerbicideUS licenced Y 2, 7
Bentazon 25057-89-0 Herbicide X 1
Chloridazon 1698-60-8 Pyridazinone herbicide X 1
Chlorpropham 101-21-3 Carbinilate herbicide X 1
DDT {DDD, DDE} 50-29-3 Banned insecticides X 2
{72-54/55-8/9}
Phthalates
Monomethyl phthalate Plastics Y 1
Dimethylphthalate Plastics Y 1, 7
Diethyl phthalate 84-66-2 All plastic consumerables, insecticides, Y 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 15
drugs, cosmetics
Methyl-ethyl phthalate Plastics Y 1, 9
Mono-(2-ethylhexyl) Plastics Y 1, 9
phthalate
Di-(2-ethylhexyl) 117-81-7 All plastics including medical ware Y 1, 6, 7, 9, 10, 15
phthalate
Mono-butylphthalate Plastics Y 1, 9
Di-n-butylphthalate 84-74-2 PVC plastics and nitrocellulose Y 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 15
lacquers (varnish)
Di-isobutylphthalate Plastics Y 1, 6, 9
Mono-benzylphthalate Plastics Y 1, 9
Butylbenzyl phthalate 85-68-7 Plastics Y 1, 9, 15
Dioctylphthalate 117-84-0 All plastics, pesticides and cosmetics Y 1, 6, 15
Phthalic acid N/A Phthalate breakdown product Y 1, 6, 10
Diheptyl phthalate 3648-21-3 Plastics Y 7
12 R.J.
R.J.Slack
Slacketetal.al./ /Science
Scienceofofthe
theTotal
TotalEnvironment
Environment337
337(2005)
(2005)119137
119137 12
7 7
Table 1 (continued)
Compounds CAS no. Use Presence Landfill type
in HHW and reference
Aromatic sulphonates
Naphthalene sulphonates Azo dyes, detergents, plasticisers Y 1
Benzene sulphonates 68411-30-3 Azo dyes, detergents, plasticisers Y 1
p-Toluenesulphonate 80-40-0 Azo dyes, detergents, plasticisers Y 1
Phosphonates
Tributylphosphate 126-73-8 Plasticiser, solvent, antifoaming agent Y 1, 3, 5, 6, 15
Triethylphosphate 78-40-0 Plasticiser, solvent, antifoaming agent Y 1, 3, 6, 7, 15
Terpenoids
Terpenoids (general) N/A Plant by-product, chemical intermediate Y 11
Borneol 507-70-0 Chemical, perfume, flavouring Y 6
intermediates
Camphor 76-22-2 Perfume and incense additive Y 1, 3, 5, 6, 8, 13, 15
1,8-Cineole 470-82-6 Flavours and fragrance Y 3, 6
Fenchone e.g. 1195-79-5 Flavouring Y 1, 3, 6, 13
Limonene 5989-27-5 Flavouring Y
Menthol 15356-70-4 Flavours and fragrance Y 3
Pinene e.g. 80-56-8 Flavours and fragrance Y 15
a-Terpineol 98-55-5 Flavours and fragrance Y 6, 7
Tetralins N/A Flavours and fragrance Y 15
Thymol 89-83-8 Flavours and fragrance Y 6
Pharmaceuticals
Ibuprofen 15687-27-1 Anti-inflammatory/analgesic-OTC Y 6
Propylphenazone
Phenazone 479-92-5/60-80-0 Analgesicrarely used today X 6, 15
Clofibric acid 882-09-7 Plant growth reg. and drug intermediate Y 6
Pyridines
Methylpyridine (2?) 109-06-8 Solvent and substrate for dyes, X 6
resins, drugs
Nicotine 54-11-5 Insecticide, tobacco X/Y 1, 6
Cotinine 486-56-6 Formed from oxidation of nicotine X/Y 6
Carboxylic acids
Benzoic acid 65-85-0 Food preservative, perfumes, Y 3, 6, 15
creams/drugs, manu.
Phenylacetic acid 103-82-2 Fragrance/flavour, drugs (penicillin) Y 3, 6
Benzenetricarboxyl acids e.g. 528-44-9 Plastic softeners Y 3, 6
Palmitic acid 57-10-3 Food, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals Y 3, 6, 15
Stearic acid 57-11-4 Food, cosmetics and pharmaceuticals Y 3, 6, 15
Linoleic acid 60-33-3 Food and fragrance Y 3, 6
Aliphatics
n-Tricosane 638-67-5 Plastics and intermediate X 6, 7
n-Triacontane 638-68-6 Intermediate X 6, 7
(continued on next page)
Table 1 (continued)
Compounds CAS no. Use Presence Landfill type
in HHW and reference
Alcohols and ethers
Glycol ethers e.g. 111-76-2 Solvent {paint, varnish, inks, pesticides, Y 6
antifreeze}
General alcohols N/A Solvents Y 1
Diphenylethers 101-54-8 Flame retardant, plasticiser, herbicide Y 6
Miscellaneous
Acetone 67-64-1 Solvent and in manu. of plastics, Y 1
drugs and fibres
Analines N/A Ink/dye, resins, drugs, agrochemical X/Y 3, 6, 7
intermediate
Benzonitrile 100-47-0 Solvent: dye, drugs, rubber, lacquer Y 3, 4, 7, 15
manu.
Benzthiazoles N/A Manu. of drugs, rubber, Y 6, 7
agrochemicals, etc.
Dibenzofuran 13-26-49 From fossil fuel combustionincl. X 7
Diesel fuel
Caffeine 58-08-2 Food additive, drugs Y 1, 7
Esters 110843-98-6 Many uses during manufacture Y 6, 15
Tetrahydrofuran 109-99-9 Food additive, reagent Y 1
(drugs, perfumes), solvent
Indane 90989-41-6 Fuel and metal cleaning Y 1, 6
Indene 95-13-6 Solvent and intermediate Y 8
Indoles N/A Intermediates, food colourant, Y 6, 15
drugs/hallucinogenics,
perfumes, etc.
MTBE 1634-04-4 Solvent used as additive in unleaded X(Y) 1
petrol
Siloxanes N/A Silicone polymersvarnish, Y 6, 15
oils/waxes, rubber
Styrene 100-442-5 Naturally occurring, used for Y 8, 15
plastics/rubber manu.
Trifluralin 158-20-98 Herbicide X 2
Presence in HHW: X=non-municipal/household use, Y=municipal/household use, X/Y=either/or but generally non-municipal/household use,
X(Y)=non-municipal/household but possibly occurring in MSW, Y(old)=no longer used in municipal/household products but possibly
occurring in MSW.
Landfill types: (1) co-disposal landfills cited by (Kjeldsen et al., 2002); (2) MSW landfills although co-disposal likely in all (Robinson,
Gronow,
1993); (3) co-disposal landfills (Reinhard et al., 1984); (4) simulation using household waste (Oman and Rosqvist, 1999); (5) co-disposal
landfill (Christensen et al., 2001); (6) no details supplied (Schwarzbauer et al., 2002); (7) co-disposal landfill (Yasuhara et al., 1997); (8) co-
dispoal landfill (Zou et al., 2003); (9) mixed landfills receiving different wastes (Jonsson et al., 2003); (10) simulation using household waste
(Bauer and Herrman, 1997); (11) MSW landfill (Leenheer et al., 2003); (12) co-dispoal landfill (Ask Reitzel and Ledin, 2002); (13) co-
disposal landfill (Baun et al., 2003); (14) co-disposal landfill (Lyngkilde and Christensen, 1992); (15) co-disposal landfill (Paxeus, 2000).
12 R.J.
R.J.Slack
Slacketetal.al./ /Science
Scienceofofthe
theTotal
TotalEnvironment
Environment337
337(2005)
(2005)119137
119137 12
9 9
Table 2
Heavy metal concentration ranges detected in landfill leachates
Metal Use Concentration US drinking water UK drinking water References
range (mg/l) standards (mg/l) standards (mg/l)
Cadmium Batteries, appliances 0.00010.4 0.005 0.005 (Christensen et al., 2001)
Nickel Batteries, appliances 0.003613 N/A 0.05 (Christensen et al., 2001;
Kruempelbeck and Ehrig, 1999)
Zinc Batteries, packaging 0.0031000 5 5 (Christensen et al., 2001)
Copper Electrical appliances 0.00210 1.3 3 (Christensen et al., 2001;
Jensen and Christensen, 1999)
Lead Batteries, appliances 0.0015 0 0.05 (Christensen et al., 2001)
Chromium Electrical appliances 01.62 0.1 0.05 (Jensen and Christensen,
1999; Robinson, 1995)
Mercury Batteries, appliances 0.000050.16 0.002 0.001 (Christensen et al., 2001)
Arsenic Appliances 0.011 0 0.05 (Christensen et al., 2001)
Cobalt Appliances 0.0051.5 N/A N/A (Christensen et al., 2001)
(Jones et al., 2001) such as the analgesics diclofenac polyethoxylates (Riediker et al., 2000; Kjeldsen et
and ketoprofen (Heberer et al., 1997; Sacher et al., al., 2002). Such surfactants occur in laundry deter-
2001); antibiotics sulfamethoxazole, dehydroerythro- gents and personal care products, although the latter
mycin and sulfamethazine (Hartig et al., 1999; Hirsch surfactant, particularly as nonylphenol ethoxylates, is
et al., 1999); the antiepileptic drug carbamazepine not commonly used due to concerns over environ-
(Seiler et al., 1999; Schwarzbauer et al., 2002); and mental and health problems, especially endocrine
the h-blocker sotalol (Sacher et al., 2001). disruption (Jobling and Sumpter, 1991).
Pesticides and herbicides are frequently recorded Nevertheless, nonylphenol has been reported to be
in MSW landfill leachate. N,N-Diethyltoluamide present in municipal landfill leachate in some
(DEET), bentazon, MCPA and particularly mecoprop countries (Paxeus,
(2-(4-chloro-2-methylphenoxy)propionic acid) are 2000; Behnisch et al., 2001; Coors et al., 2003).
common and persistent in anaerobic landfill con- Synthetic musks, used to fragrance detergents and
ditions (Schultz and Kjeldsen, 1986; Gintautas et al., personal care products, are reported to possess toxic
1992; Lyngkilde and Christensen, 1992; Kjeldsen, capabilities and, although not yet monitored in
1993; Oman and Hynning, 1993; Christensen et al., leachate, have been recorded in sewage receiving
2001; Kjeldsen et al., 2002). Christensen et al. waters in a number of countries, but first found in
(2001) and Kjeldsen et al. (2002) cite the discovery Japan (Yamagishi et al., 1981, 1983; Ford, 1991;
of at least a further 40 different pesticides in landfill Daughton and Ternes, 1999).
leachate, including the Red Listed aquatic pollutants Other significant representative xenobiotic com-
atrazine and simazine (Alloway and Ayres, 1997), pounds distinguishable in leachate include more
with the most frequently occurring being listed in chlorinated organics (Reinhard et al., 1984; Yasuhara
Table 1. Naphthalene and related compound con- et al., 1997; Paxeus, 2000; Schwarzbauer et al.,
tamination of leachate is also commonly reported 2002) such as pentachlorophenol, one of many such
(Reinhard et al., 1984; Yasuhara et al., 1997): this com- pounds considered to be a dpriority pollutantT
compound is a recent addition to the UKs Approved by the US EPA (Pohland et al., 1998). 2,4-
Supply List (Health and Safety Commission (HSC), Dichlorobenzoic acid, together with other chlorinated
2002), a classification system applied to chemicals aromatics includ- ing benzene and methylphenol,
considered to be dangerous. 2-Butylphenyl methyl- occur in varying quantities in leachate
carbamate (BPMC) and benthiocarb have also been (Schwarzbauer et al., 2002). Leachate
detected (Yasuhara et al., 1997). concentrations of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) tend
Detergent surfactants are reported from leachate to be low compared to other organic compounds due
analyses, particularly sulphonates and alkylphenol to high rates of attenuation (Reinhart and Pohland,
1991; Hohener et al., 2003). Even so, CFCs have
been recorded as gas and leachate
130 R.J.
R.J.Slack
Slacketetal.al./ /Science
Scienceofofthe
theTotal
TotalEnvironment
Environment337
337(2005)
(2005)119137
119137 13
0
emissions from MSW landfills in Germany and (European Commission, 2000). Commonly occurring
through Canadian landfill simulations (Lesage et al., heavy metals in landfill leachate include zinc, copper,
1993; Deipser and Stegmann, 1994), predominantly in cadmium, lead, nickel, chromium and mercury (Rein-
the acid phase before the onset of methanogenesis but hart, 1993). Heavy metals can form metal colloids or
detail about concentration and volume is lacking complexes, particularly with organic matter,
(Hohener et al., 2003). Whilst CFCs possess a low removing the metal from direct detection as free
level of toxicity in the aquatic environment, their metals (Gounaris et al., 1993; Christensen and
breakdown products are more reactive and inherently Christensen,
more toxic or carcinogenic (Hohener et al., 2003). 1999; Jensen and Christensen, 1999). As such, the
Complex fractions containing nicotine and benz- heavy metal content of leachate can be significantly
thiazol together with their oxidation products higher than free metal detection studies allow, and
(Schwarzbauer et al., 2002) and caffeine (Albaiges calculations based solely on the water solubility
et al., 1986) are common contaminants of leachate, constants of the pollutants will underestimate their
often existing at high concentrations in the German concentrations (Jonsson et al., 2003).
and Spanish landfills studied. Kjeldsen et al. (2002) Generally heavy metals, demonstrating high levels
highlight the discovery of levels of the gasoline of sorption and precipitation, do not constitute a
additive methyl-tert-butyl-ether (MTBE) found at groundwater pollution threat due to poor migration
significant concentrations in some Swedish landfills. into the leachate plume and low initial concentrations
Dioxanes (glycol ethylene ether) such as 1,4-dioxane leached from the solid waste (Table 2). Heavy metals
and dioxolans, originating from alkyd resin produc- can, however, reach problematic levels despite
tion wastes and discarded paint and similar products, depressed concentrations relative to other substances
are reported to occur in MSW leachate from Japanese evolved into the leachate. Ehrig (1983), Kjeldsen et
and Swedish landfills (Yasuhara et al., 1997; Paxe al. (2002) and Robinson (1995) found that heavy
us, metal levels, particularly mercury and cadmium, in
2000). Robinson, however, failed to detect many domestic waste landfill leachate are barely detectable
dRed and pose little threat to groundwater. Zinc, however,
ListT substances (Department of the Environment, is usually recorded at concentrations orders of
1988) in any of the landfill leachate samples collected magnitude greater than other heavy metals (Chris-
across England and Wales: other hazardous substan- tensen et al., 2001). Heavy metal contamination of
ces were detected at very low levels (Robinson, aquifers is almost exclusively as soluble high molec-
1995). ular weight organic complexes. Such contamination
Although concentrations of XOCs are only a small of groundwater can be of environmental and
fraction of the total carbon content of leachate, the potable drinking water concern, as the drinking water
levels observed in a multitude of studies indicate that stand- ards provided in Table 2 demonstrate
concern for aquifer contamination is justified (Reinhard et al.,
(Albaiges et al., 1986; Lyngkilde and Christensen, 1984). This concern is heightened by the identifica-
1992; Kjeldsen, 1993; Kjeldsen et al., 1998; Chris- tion of concentrations of heavy metals exceeding
tensen et al., 2001; Schwarzbauer et al., 2002). With legislative permits in leachate sampled in the USA
water quality levels in many countries set as low as and Eastern Europe, including drinking water limits
0.1 Ag/l for certain XOCs, the concentrations shown in Table 2 (Lu et al., 1985; Mikac et al., 1998).
achieved in leachate may therefore be perceived as a Even with the maximum permissible levels for heavy
potential threat to public health if incorrectly metals as high as 5 mg/l (US Drinking Water
managed (Kjeld- sen et al., 2002). Standard for zinc), weak leachate concentrations
can often approach this limit (Kjeldsen et al., 2002).
2.2. Inorganic components Never- theless, particulate matter contaminated with
heavy metals has been cited as one of the primary
The inorganic element of leachate has been studied sources of heavy metal emissions from landfills
alongside organic constituents (Yasuhara et al., (Parker et al.,
1997). Heavy metals found in the inorganic fraction 2002).
are of particular interest due to their hazardous Other contaminants of landfill leachate can be
nature referred to as inorganic macrocomponents (Christen-
13 R.J.
R.J.Slack
Slacketetal.al./ /Science
Scienceofofthe
theTotal
TotalEnvironment
Environment337
337(2005)
(2005)119137
119137 131
1
sen et al., 2001). As occurs for dissolved organic in the former study and carbon tetrachloride in the
matter and the less concentrated subgroup xenobiotic latter being recorded at levels in excess of guideline
organic compounds, inorganic macrocomponents limits. However, the comprehensive sampling strat-
occur at much higher concentrations compared to egy reported by Parker et al. (2002) identified 557
heavy metals. Iron and manganese fall into this group trace components in landfill gas, 178 of which are
as they cannot be considered to be heavy metals, inherently toxic. Nevertheless, levels detected were
along with calcium, sodium, potassium, ammonia/ below statutory guidelines, specifically of the more
ammonium and others. Ammonical nitrogen (ammo- toxic substances such as mercury.
nia and/or ammonium) is recorded at high levels in
most landfill leachate studies with Robinson (1995)
and Kjeldsen et al. (2002) both describing it as the 4. Discussion
dominant pollutant.
The composition of leachate is an indicator of
the disposal of hazardous waste to landfills. Many
3. Landfill gas of the substances recorded in landfill emissions
have the potential to act as environmental contam-
During the methanogenic phase of landfill inants. It is important to recognise the potential
decomposition, many of the degradation products contribution made by hazardous waste from a
resulting from waste decomposition in the acid domestic origin to landfill emissions particularly in
anaerobic stage can be volatised from the leachate light of the growing and ever-changing variety of
(Christensen et al., 2001). As a result, landfill chemicals used within the home (Blundell, 2003).
gaseous emissions can contain similar hazardous Results of numerous studies indicate that the range
compounds to the leachate. Whilst the dominant and amounts of hazardous substances present in
proportion of landfill gas is methane (~5060%) leachate from MSW landfills, while only a fraction
followed by carbon dioxide (~ 40%), many trace of the total organic and inorganic content of
VOCs are also released (Kreith, 1995). VOC leachate, can be seen to approach the drinking
emissions, including saturated and unsaturated water standards set by many countries (Mikac et al.,
hydrocarbons, acidic hydrocarbons and organic 1998; Gendebien et al., 2002; Kjeldsen et al., 2002;
alcohols, aromatic hydrocarbons, halogenated com- Schwarzbauer et al., 2002).
pounds and sulphur compounds as identified in Leachate is a consequence of water entering the
leachate, can present health and environmental landfill and leaching biological and chemical compo-
concerns (Kreith, 1995). Zou et al. (2003) identified nents from the body of the waste. When evaluating
up to 60 VOC species in one landfill, 16 the disposal of HHW, the conditions within the
compounds of which were US EPA priority landfill must be acknowledged to determine the
pollutants including benzene and derivatives, and nature of the components and the likelihood of
chlorinated hydrocarbons and aromatics. Specific occurrence in leachate. Substances not found in
compounds occurring at higher levels, although HHW at disposal can occur in leachate as a result of
together rarely exceeding 1% v/v, were naphthalene, degradation and other transformations. Quantities of
chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, trichloroethane and hazardous sub- stances will vary according to landfill
chlorobenzene as well as benzene. The volatile conditions, particularly moisture content and ionic
heavy metals, arsenic and mercury, have been strength of the leachate. Charting the contamination
detected at trace levels in landfill gas, although of groundwater through leakage requires not only
association with particulate matter has been demon- knowledge of the leachate composition as it left the
strated to contribute more to the emissions of heavy landfill, but application of the attenuation
metals from landfills (Parker et al., 2002). Allen et processes known to affect leachate in sub-surface
al. (1997) recorded over 140 VOCs, whilst James strata (Christensen et al.,
and Stack (1997) and Assmuth and Kalevi (1992) 2001).
found 33 and 30 VOCs, respectively, with benzene It is only possible to ascertain the presence of
particular substances selected for by the experimen-
132 R.J.
R.J.Slack
Slacketetal.al./ /Science
Scienceofofthe
theTotal
TotalEnvironment
Environment337
337(2005)
(2005)119137
119137 13
2
tal design (Isidori et al., 2003). The sampling some solvents, will be present in barely detectable
procedure may easily overlook certain groups of amounts in the absence of industrial waste (Baxter,
hazardous components and hence their contaminant 1985). Other chemicals, exemplified by phthalates,
capability will remain unevaluated. Synthetic musks may maintain the concentrations recorded in co-
are one such group thus far untested in landfill disposal leachates. Recent changes to legislation
leachate and yet identified in sewage receiving may make it possible to observe a change in
waters. The quantities of the hazardous chemicals leachate composition as co-disposal of hazardous
so far detected in leachate vary from study to study, with non-hazardous waste ceases and domestic
from trace levels to amounts exceeding established landfills accept non-hazardous wastes only (Euro-
limits. Such variation is the result of differences in pean Council, 1999).
disposal practice, levels of regulation, landfill design With increasing EU-led legislation implementing
and ultimately a reflection of the purchasing patterns regulations on product composition and disposal
of consumers (market forces, availability, culture, practices, such as the Restrictions on Hazardous
etc.) in different countries. Alternatively, sampling Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment
error might play a significant role through the (RoHS) Directive and the Waste Electrical and
inappropriate application of certain methodologies Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive (European
and analytical techniques (Parker, 1994; Paxe Parliament and Council, 2002a, b), leachate from
us, existing and new landfills can be expected to be
2000; Kjeldsen et al., 2002). As XOCs and heavy very different to that of older/closed sites, with the
metals occur at trace levels, accurate quantification potential for a rapid decline in the landfilling of
is often difficult. The heterogeneity of landfills also biodegradable substances and a resulting shift in
complicates sample selection. Landfill age is an landfill-contained chemical processes. The conse-
important contributory factor and as Robinson quences for the hazardous component of MSW
(1995) explains, leachate composition is variable requires further evaluation, although a decline in
over time and hence analyses should incorporate a organic matter through implementation of the Land-
time axis. fill Directive can be expected to result in leachates
The affects of the hazardous fraction of MSW containing predominantly inorganic ions and a
on leachate composition in all but a very few of consequent change in leachate treatment techniques.
the studies reviewed here (see Tables 1 and 2) The impact of DOC sorption on XOC and heavy
have been obscured through the co-disposal of metal attenuation may similarly be reduced.
industrial and manufacturing wastes with MSW. Current European legislation tends to the treat-
Table 1 reveals that many of the MSW landfills are ment of all landfill emissions preventing many of
in fact co-disposal sites, industrial and manufactur- the potentially hazardous substances from entering
ing solid and liquid wastes having been integrated the environment at large. As a result, the pollution
into the domestic refuse. The hazardous compounds risk is allayed to a variable extent. Methane is often
linked directly to MSW are therefore few in used for electricity generation, whilst leachate is
number and variety, a reflection of the limited currently treated in systems comparable to sewage
number of compounds analysed for and the use of treatment works. Use of ozonation plants and UV
experimental landfill simulations (Oman and radiation are increasingly recognised as effective
Rosqvist, 1999). The pesticide mecoprop and additions to leachate and wastewater treatment
phthalates DEHP and DEP are the substances most operations given the low efficiency of conventional
commonly linked to MSW (Gintautas et al., 1992; processes regarding chemical removal. As a result,
Bauer et al., 1998; Jonsson et al., 2003). Whilst a pesticide, pharmaceutical and even phthalate
large proportion of the XOCs listed in Table 1 and removal (Bauer et al., 1998) will increase, possibly
all of the heavy metals from Table 2 are found in reducing the likelihood of groundwater contamina-
household products, the significance of the contri- tion by these substances. However, such measures
bution made by MSW or even household waste to are costly and unlikely to occur unless specific
the final leachate make-up is uncertain. It can be legislative drivers are in place, particularly for
supposed that certain of the substances, particularly
13 R.J.
R.J.Slack
Slacketetal.al./ /Science
Scienceofofthe
theTotal
TotalEnvironment
Environment337
337(2005)
(2005)119137
119137 133
3
MSW landfills. Other risk mitigation measures disposal pathway, particularly when conditions and
applied to landfill leachate include combinations of processes within the landfill are understood. The
biological processes, coagulation/precipitation, awareness of the waste types disposed of is
adsorption and membrane processes, all of which insufficient for determination of leachate composi-
utilise the physical, chemical and biological proper- tion without subsequent consideration of the fate and
ties of the hazardous substances (Enzminger et al., behaviour of hazardous substances within the body
1987). Research also cites the benefits of traditional of the landfill. Leachate is a consequence of the
treatment using microbial anaerobic decomposition waste types disposed and the conditions prevalent
(Pohland, 1991; Staples et al., 1997; Gavala et al., within the body of the landfill determining degrada-
2003; Jonsson et al., 2003). However, a need for tion/transformation processes.
more non-biological techniques for leachate treat- Data relating directly to MSW or household waste
ment is predicted. A comprehensive understanding landfill sites are few, with most information deriving
of the wastes disposed of, the underlying landfill from co-disposal landfills. The analytical techniques
processes and, the emissions from landfills, now applied to leachate samples can also impose limi-
and in the future, can contribute to the assessment tations on the determination of the contaminants
of the economic and environmental necessity of arising from HHW. As co-disposal of hazardous
taking such steps. industrial waste with MSW is soon to be banned, the
Further work is required to quantify the amounts impact of the hazardous element of MSW or HHW
of hazardous substances emitted from MSW landfill requires further assessment. The hazardous nature of
and ascertain the links to HHW disposal. Leachate certain types of MSW has the potential to rival
concentrations can potentially act as a guide to certain industrial wastes as pollutant risks. The
amounts of the hazardous substances disposed in changing state of legislation also will impact on
household waste and provide an indication of the HHW behaviour within landfills and the quantities of
chemical pathways operating/occurring within the HHW disposed to landfill.
landfill body. The risks from the release of such Further work in this area is needed to clarify the
substances into the surrounding environment, either origins of the MSW leachate contaminants recorded
as a result of leakage or through insufficient leachate and the possible affects of legislatively driven
treatment, require assessment to evaluate the poten- changes to landfill management on landfill
tial harm to health and the environment from composition. Crucially, the risks to environment and
continued disposal of HHW to landfill. Prioritization human health from HHW disposal to landfills
of the most harmful will enable waste managers to requires further attestation through the
provide the most appropriate leachate treatment quantification of emissions and likelihood of release
options on identification of the hazardous substance, after leachate/gas treatment or as a consequence of
or permit alternative disposal practices to be devel- leakage or seepage. This latter point is needed before
oped. As more waste is diverted from landfill, it will further legislation relating to HHW disposal to
be important to assess how this will affect HHW landfills, such as the WEEE Directive, is
disposal and potential leachate toxicity. considered.
5. Conclusions References