Case study - impact assessment of proposed landfill site extension
Transcription
Case study - impact assessment of proposed landfill site extension
Case study - impact assessment of proposed landfill site extension Nigel Gibson Case study - impact assessment of proposed landfill site extension Objectives of this case study are to Illustrate the used of: – Complaints data – Olfactometric measurement – Emission factors – Dispersion modelling 1 Background The company operates an existing landfill site (site 1) taking non-inert waste from London Boroughs and Surrey. The infilling activities revolve around an old sand/gravel pit on the Thames flood plan. Site 1 is permitted to accept waste until august 2002 but pre-settlement levels are likely to be achieved before this time. Proposed situation (1) • • • ! ! An adjoining sand/gravel pit (site 2) is being worked out. The original planning permission for site 2 allows for landfilling of inert waste. The Company submits a planning application: to re-excavate under a portion of site 1 to retrieve sand/gravel under 15 year old waste deposits. The excavated waste is to be used to re-contour a portion of site 1 to landfill the excavated portion of site 1 and site 2 with non-inert waste in two phases 2 Proposed situation (2) Proposed situation (3) Planning permission is refused on the grounds of: “The development by virtue of its proximity to residential properties would give rise to occasional and unacceptable harm to the quality of life of the occupiers of those properties and amenities of the locality and would therefore be contrary to ……” 3 Complaints from site 1 NQ NO NM U S Å ç ã é ä~ áå í ë Q k çî pÉé j ~ó j ~ê g~ å M g ì ä= O Other sources in area 4 Approach taken by operator attribute most odour complaints to other sources in area measure odour emissions on site predict concentrations using dispersion modelling • • • Test work undertaken (operator) • • ! ! ! ! • Site boundary assessment Odour sampling undertaken on: tipping operation tipping area temporary covered area excavation trial pits Odour impact assessment 5 Complaints attributed to compost plant Sampling methods employed • • Hood method for surface sources Micrometeorological method for surface sources 6 plume Micromet mast 3 sample collection points on mast Excavation trial pit Emission rate ∝ conc. Distribution on mast and fetch 7 Results summary (operator) • • • • • • Waste unloading - 55 ou.m-2S-1 Working area 8.7 ou.m-2S-1 Covered area (soil) 0.7 to 0.9 ou.m-2S-1 Covered area (plastic) 0.5 to 0.6 ou.m-2S-1 Excavated waste (pit) 1,300 ou.m-2S-1 Excavated waste (deposited) 3 ou.m-2S-1 Impact assessment • Measured emission estimates used in dispersion modelling exercise (AERMOD). All sources treated as large area sources with an emission rate = sources area * emission estimate odour assessment criteria of: ! 5 ou/m3 as a 98th%ile (from Newbiggin) • • 8 Current situation-1 (operator) Current situation-2 (operator) 9 Future situation-2 Approach taken on behalf of planning authority (AEAT) • • Assigning realistic average odour emission factors to the various sources on site using measured data from assessments undertaken on other noninert landfill site. Considers situations that could ‘reasonably be expected to occur’ 10 Summary of data used by AEAT • • Tipping of Fresh waste 25 ou.m-2S-1 Operational area 1.5 ou.m-2S-1 Impact assessment • • • ! Measured emission estimates used in dispersion modelling exercise (ADMS 3). All sources treated as large area sources with an emission rate = sources area * emission estimate odour assessment criteria of: 3 ou/m3 as a 98th%ile (from Brogborough landfill site assessment) 11 Current situation (AEAT) Future situation (AEAT) 12 Data for future (operator) Phase A - Odour emission characteristics emission rate (ou/m 2/s) Area (m 2) Day Modelled Unloading – WTS 25 34.2 Unloading –bin 25 7.06 Deposited material 1375 8.7 Temp cover(soil) 9795 0.91 Temp 12191 0.55 cover(soil+plastic) Total 23411 Total (tipping area) 1425 total emission (ou/s) night Day Night 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.55 855 177 11963 8913 6705 23 23 1251 8913 6705 28613 12994 16915 1297 Data for future (AEAT) Phase A - Odour emission characteristics emission rate (ou/m2/s) Area (m2) Day Night Modelled Tipping area 1500 25 1.5 Temp cover 17825 1.5 1.5 Total 19325 Total emission (ou/s) Day Night 37500 26738 64238 2250 26738 28988 13 Additional data - 1 • • ! ! • Complaints records obtained from neighbouring borough (to north east of the site) Complaint locations lay: outside 5 ou.m-3 contour presented by operator within 5 ou.m-3 contour presented by AEAT Complainants describe odour as ‘fruity, citrousy’ - Additional data - 2 • Complainants describe odour as ‘fruity, citrousy’ Fresh waste Bottom of dustbin, rotten cabbage, fruity/citrous, acrid/putrid Young decomposing waste Sweet, sulphurous, gruity, citrousy, gassy Older mature waste Citrousy (lemonlike), fruity, gassy, pungent 14 Outcome Decision immanent 12 months after finishing the planning appeal Points to consider • • Data collection must reflect the range of emission conditions likely to occur Modelling should be targeted at assessing the more sensitive portion of the population especially in a new situation 15