Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Waste Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wasman

Enhanced methane recovery by food waste leachate injection into a landll in Korea
Shishir Kumar Behera a, Dong-Hoon Kim b, Hang-Sik Shin c, Si-Kyung Cho c, Seok-Pyo Yoon d, Hung-Suck Park a,
a

Center for Clean Technology and Resource Recycling, University of Ulsan, Ulsan, South Korea Bioenergy Research Center, Korea Institute of Energy Research, Daejeon, South Korea c Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, South Korea d Department of Environmental Engineering, Semyung University, Jecheon, South Korea
b

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
The current food waste leachate (FWL) disposal practice in Korea warrants urgent attention and necessary action to develop an innovative and sustainable disposal strategy, which is both environmentally friendly and economically benecial. In this study, methane production by FWL injection into a municipal solid waste landll with landll gas (LFG) recovery facility was evaluated for a period of more than 4 months. With the target of recovering LFG with methane content $50%, optimum LFG extraction rate was decided by a trial and error approach during the eld investigation in ve different phases. The results showed that, upon FWL injection, LFG extraction rate of $20 m3/h was reasonable to recover LFG with methane content $58%. Considering the estimated methane production potential of 31.7 m3 CH4 per ton of FWL, methane recovery from the landll was enhanced by 14%. The scientic ndings of this short-term investigation indicates that FWL can be injected into the existing sanitary landlls to tackle the present issue and such landlls with efcient liner and gas collection facility can be utilized as absolute and sustainable environmental infrastructures. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 27 January 2011 Accepted 5 May 2011 Available online 31 May 2011 Keywords: Food waste leachate Landll Landll gas Methane Recovery

1. Introduction Consequent upon the adoption of strict food waste management policies in Korea in 1997 and prohibition of direct disposal in landlls from 2005, food waste recycling facilities were installed throughout the country to produce various useful resources such as feedstock for animals, fertilizer to be used on agricultural lands etc. In reality, however, 7090% of the food waste treated in such facilities is resulting in a dense, malodorous liquid called food waste leachate (FWL), which is eventually discharged to the ocean (Behera et al., 2010). Additional details pertaining to FWL is mentioned elsewhere (Lee et al., 2009). According to the London dumping convention and inter-governmental treaties, the marine disposal of organic sludge including FWL will be prohibited in Korea from 2012 (Ohm et al., 2009). Thus, the present situation warrants nding an environmentally friendly yet economically benecial approach to address the problem from a sustainability view point. The conventional dry tomb approach of dumping the municipal solid wastes (MSW) in landll sites is primarily aimed at reducing the environmental risks by minimizing landll leachate (LFL) generation and landll gas (LFG) emission. Though the liner
Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 52 259 1050; fax: +82 52 221 0152.
E-mail address: parkhs@ulsan.ac.kr (H.-S. Park). 0956-053X/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.05.005

system, LFL collection and treatment systems and LFG collection and management systems have been strengthened in the recent years, the inertial dry tomb approach still appears to be a global trend. On the other hand, due to low water content of MSW inside landll, biological activity decreases and stabilization of wastes is extended. Consequently, monitoring of LFG emission and leachate generation is required for a very long period of time even after closure of the site, which is against the concept of sustainability (Zhao et al., 2008; Benson et al., 2007; Valencia et al., 2009; Benbelkacem et al., 2010). Table 1 shows that the disposal of wastes in the city of Ulsan, South Korea has started reducing from the year 2000 due to the integrated solid waste management measures taken toward vigorous recycling of wastes. Particularly, due to the installation and operation of food waste recycling facility in 2004, landlling of food wastes came to an end resulting in the reduction of LFG production (Fig. 1). This could be the reason why over 50% of landlls with LFG recovery facility in Korea are suffering from reduced LFG production (Lee et al., 2009). The development of this adverse situation might be attributed to the waste management policy adopted in Korea that was not harmonized with the technological advancement in the area of landll management. In order to accelerate the stabilization of wastes, landlls should be designed and operated in a different manner which can establish favorable conditions for biodegradation. In this

S.K. Behera et al. / Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132 Table 1 MSW types and their quantities during lling in landll site.a Year MSW (ton/yr) Organic Food and vegetable 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
a b

2127

Inorganic Paper 44,899 38,362 50,699 22,594 18,250 12,534 10,288 16,646 13,213 7348 12,118 12,739 Wood 13,053 18,834 25,550 15,586 15,175 9617 8241 11,219 6607 2475 2847 694 Rubber and leather 6727 8213 11,607 7264 2168 1228 2047 3132 3249 2707 2555 1570 Plastics 14,935 13,104 14,454 10,111 5546 5720 3836 7904 10,585 8778 9563 5913 Miscellaneous 27,526 23,652 30,697 11,206 10,158 9348 20,645 13,623 13,432 10,557 6169 11,388 40,442 59,532 56,466 100,120 40,880 59,860 55,480 50,735 55,298 39,822 30,624 19,090

Total

73,535 71,066 67,270 37,267 21,703 16,412 8963 0 0 0 1,716b 0

221,117 232,761 256,741 204,145 113,880 114,720 109,500 103,259 102,383 71,686 65,591 51,392

Environment white book, Ulsan Metropolitan city, 2009. Illegal food waste disposal along with other wastes.

Fig. 1. LFG production prole of the selected landll site.

to considerable interest in controlling LFG emission into the atmosphere (Perera et al., 2002). Thus, introduction of active LFG recovery systems would enable high methane recovery rate that would ultimately limit the environmental impact of landlls by reduced greenhouse gas emissions. This paper presents results from the eld study carried out for more than 4 months investigating the performance of the landll with regard to methane recovery enhancement through FWL injection. Field investigation results are compared with our previous work in a simulated laboratory-scale landll and percentage enhanced methane recovery was estimated as a result of FWL injection to the landll. Given the relatively short time period over which this eld study was performed, the ndings from this study do not necessarily reect long-term conditions and deserves further investigation in the eld. 2. Materials and methods 2.1. Landll site The city of Ulsan is located in the south-eastern part (352813 N and 1293336 E) of South Korea. The landll site under study in Ulsan was opened in 1994 and has a surface area of approximately 135,000 m2. It is expected to be lled up in the year 2014 with a total amount of 4070,000 ton of waste. The different types of waste and their quantities in each year are shown in Table 1. The biogas recovery system installed in the landll site is composed of 49 gas wells. A total of ve test wells (Nos. 3, 12, 17, 23, and 46) are used in this investigation for LFG extraction (Fig. 2). LFL collected on site is treated in the leachate treatment facility and subsequently passed onto the municipal waste water treatment facility for further treatment. The average temperature at Ulsan is 14.6 C. Total annual precipitation is 1342.2 mm including a total snowfall of 35 mm. The average temperatures are 4.0, 13.8, 23.2, and 16 C for winter, spring, summer, and fall, respectively. The average low temperature in winter is 4.0 C and the high temperature in summer is 28.4 C. 2.2. FWL injection As liquid waste disposal in landll sites is prohibited in Korea, this particular eld-scale investigation of FWL injection into landll was carried out upon special permission from the Ministry of Environment, Korea. FWL was collected from Sung-am food waste resource recovery plant in Ulsan, Korea. It had average total solid

context, the bioreactor landll approach insists on controlling the moisture mostly through the recirculation of the landll leachate (LFL) generated. Increasing the moisture content and ux through the landll creates favorable environment for microbiological processes and organic matter decomposition (Leckie et al., 1979; Ham and Booker, 1982). The recirculation of LFL or liquid addition not only decreases the life of landll by accelerated decomposition of MSW, resulting in enhanced LFG production and quicker waste stabilization (see for example, Warith et al., 2001; Khire and Mukherjee, 2007), but also reduces the long-term aftercare burden on future generations. Though this idea was conveyed long time back, the dry tomb concept is still preferred and promoted by the regulations in many of the developed and developing countries. Nevertheless, in the past few years the idea of utilizing non-hazardous liquid organic wastes in the landlls, to be used as bioreactors, for accelerated biodegradation and enhanced LFG production has again resurfaced for the development of landll sustainability (Behera et al., 2010). Our previous works (Lee et al., 2009; Behera et al., 2010) shows that FWL, being a mechanically treated food waste, is highly biodegradable. Hence, injection of FWL to the existing landll sites, with efcient LFG recovery and LFL collection facilities, may supplement the required organics and other nutrients to accelerate biological decomposition of wastes and maintain a continual biogas production. Besides, the landll sites with efcient LFL collection systems and LFG recovery facilities can represent a perfect low-cost solution for liquid organic waste generators. Anew, liquid organic wastes with similar characteristics as that of FWL may also be accepted at landlls and put to benecial use. Furthermore, the recent concerns of global warming related to methane have led

2128

S.K. Behera et al. / Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132

Fig. 3a shows the FWL injection pipe (inverse T shape; diameter 150 mm and height 4.5 m; protrusion of 0.5 m above the ground) that was used in this investigation. FWL was injected at four axial points, 10 m apart from the gas extraction well No. 17 (Fig. 3b). The installation of FWL distributors was done after excavating the landll site (Fig. 4). FWL was injected into the landll site through a compressor at several different times during the investigation (instead of once continuously) to promote its absorption and prevent any possible buildup of excess pore pressure within the waste. The test well Nos. 3, 12, 23 and 46 were used as baseline references, around which FWL was not injected. 2.3. LFG extraction At the landll site, the gas extraction system consisting of 49 wells was installed during the establishment of LFG recovery system in 2002. In an average, the depth of each well (perforated plastic pipes placed and surrounded with gravel) is 17 m. LFG was extracted, collected and analyzed at selected intervals through an online monitoring system. LFG extracted from four test wells (Nos. 3, 12, 23, and 46) were used to nd a baseline reference. Among these test wells, LFG extraction results of well No. 46 was considered in this study due to its proximity to well No. 17 and similarity in LFG production pattern with those of the other wells (Nos. 3, 12, and 23). 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Variation of methane content with LFG extraction rate This section compares the optimal methane recovery at highest possible LFG extraction rates from wells 17 and 46 and determines the best operating conditions to evaluate the feasibility of the landll system for FWL injection. The entire investigation was carried out in 5 phases for 130 days. As shown in Fig. 5, in Phase 1, the average initial methane content at well No. 46 was about 53% corresponding to an average LFG extraction rate of 12 m3/h. With an increase of LFG extraction rate to 27 m3/h in Phase 2, the methane content in LFG was reduced to 49%. It was observed that maintaining the methane content at more than 50% would not be possible if LFG extraction is continued at the present rate. Thus, in order to facilitate the methane content to reach at the initial value (53%), LFG extraction rate was reduced to 12 m3/h and operated almost in this condition for the remaining period of the study. As a result, the methane content at the end of the investigation was observed to maintain a steady value of $52%. On the other hand, at well No. 17, LFG extraction was started with 14 m3/h for 8 days and then it was increased to 16 m3/h for 12 days. Consequently, the methane content of LFG was observed to vary between 55% and 56%. In Phase 1, the initial methane content and LFG extraction rate, as compared to well No. 46, was higher which gives a rough indication of the effect of injecting 2.7 ton FWL and 32.3 ton LFL to the landll system in the initial stage (Table 2). Due to increase in methane content with extraction rate in well No. 17, LFG extraction rate was gradually increased to 22 and 30 m3/h following the injection of 28.5 ton FWL and 127.5 ton LFL. However, the methane content at these extraction rates decreased to 51%. In order to determine an optimal LFG extraction rate, it was gradually reduced in an interval of 30 days (Phases 2 and 3) and maintained at the initial extraction rate of 14 m3/h. Besides, due to the operational problem caused by heavy rain, more LFG extraction was not possible during Phase 3. As a result, methane content in LFG was observed to increase slowly and reached at an average of 52%. Subsequently, followed by the injection of 78.4 ton FWL and 229.6 ton LFL in three steps,

Fig. 2. Layout of landll site and LFG extraction monitoring locations.

(TS) content, volatile solid/total solid (VS/TS) ratio, total BOD and total CODcr values of 16%, 91%, 146.1 g/L and 161 g/L, respectively with a variation of 5% during the entire investigation. In order to inject the FWL without any possible blockage in the injection nozzle, FWL was diluted with LFL. The total BOD and CODcr values of LFL were 27 and 601 mg/L, respectively. As the objective of this investigation was to inject FWL only, LFL:FWL ratio was gradually reduced from 12 to 2 (Table 2), which revealed that FWL can be injected even at the lowest LFL: FWL ratio of 2 without any technical difculty. The rst injection of FWL was started 28 days prior to LFG extraction.

Table 2 Quantity of FWL and LFL injected and their ratio. Duration (days) 30 36 25 23 16 (March 11April 9) (April 10May 15) (May 16June 9) (June 10July 2) (July 3July 18) LFL (ton) 32.3 127.5 88.8 104.8 36 FWL (ton) 2.7 28.5 22.2 38.2 18 LFL:FWL ratio 12.0 4.5 4.0 2.7 2.0

Note: LFL: Landll leachate.

S.K. Behera et al. / Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132

2129

(a)

(b)

Fig. 3. Schematic of FWL injection method (a); Plan of LFG extraction well and FWL injection points (b).

LFG extraction rates in Phases 4 and 5 were increased to 16 and 19 m3/h and methane content at these extraction rates were, in an average, 55% and 58%, respectively. It was, thus, clear from this eld investigation that the pragmatic LFG extraction rate in the well No. 46 was 12 m3/h and the extracted LFG was composed of a methane content of $50%. On the other hand, in the well No. 17, it was reasonable to recover LFG at an extraction rate of 19 m3/h with a methane content of $58% which indicated that methane content in LFG was 3% higher at 1.35 times higher LFG extraction rate. This short-term investigation gave an indication of feasibility of higher methane recovery due to FWL injection in the landll site.

3.2. Estimation of recovery enhancement by methane balance In Fig. 6 the methane production rate from landll site (well No. 17) has been compared with that of methane production based on our previous simulated landll study (Behera et al., 2010), where a maximum methane yield of 294 ml CH4/g VS or in other words 31.7 m3 CH4 per ton of FWL (TS = 12.4% and VS/TS ratio = 87%) was produced under the prevailing conditions. The data shown in Fig. 6 revealed that methane production rate was signicantly enhanced in the landll (well No. 17) as a result of FWL injection. First, methane production rate up to day 7 was $7.5 m3/h, which was considered as a conservative value of

2130

S.K. Behera et al. / Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132

Fig. 4. Installation of distributors for injected FWL.

Fig. 5. Variation of LFG extraction rate and methane content at wells 17 and 46.

background methane production rate (without FWL injection). After this, depending upon LFG extraction rate, methane production rate increased up to $8.5 m3/h until the end of Phase 1. Subsequently, in Phase 2, the methane production rate increased to

as high as $15 m3/h and maintained almost constant value for 6 days (May 813), and then reduced to a stable value of $12 m3/h for 23 days (May 14June 5). The discrepancy in result, as observed in Phase 3, may be attributed to the fact that LFG could

S.K. Behera et al. / Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132

2131

Fig. 6. Comparison of methane production rates from well 17 under various conditions.

not be properly extracted due to the operational problem caused by heavy rain. Though a slight increase in LFG extraction rate in Phase 4 increased the methane production rate, it was still lower when compared to the expected value; probably the extraction rate was not enough to recover all the produced LFG. As depicted in Phase 5, an average methane production rate of $10 m3/h was observed irrespective of some deviation from this value. Overall, the results showed that the methane production rate in the eld investigation was higher than the expected value (based on the simulated landll study), except the Phases 3 and 4. This may probably be due to possible synergistic effect of FWL mixed with MSW, which could have resulted in higher methane production rate as compared to the expected value. Anew, estimation of percentage enhancement of methane recovery due to FWL injection into the landll site (well No. 17) was calculated as the ratio of total amount of methane extracted from the landll to that of the total amount of methane which would have been generated from MSW disposal and FWL injection and extracted from air. Mathematically, it is represented as:

Percentage enhancement P

Q e Ce P 100 Q f C f Q w C w Q a C a 1

time. So, generation of methane from FWL is a time dependent process. However, as the conditions in landll site and our previous experimental conditions are expected to be different, LFG generation in landll site may require a lag time. Assuming the lag time and biodegradation of FWL to be 28 days and 70%, respectively (based on the simulated landll study), methane recovery during the entire period of investigation was estimated to be 114% (Eq. (1)). In other words, there was an additional methane recovery of 14% upon FWL injection, based on the simulated landll experimental methane production of 31.7 m3 CH4 per ton of FWL. Similarly, methane recovery in phases 1 to 5 were separately found to be 111%, 140%, 84%, 92% and 112%, respectively. As compared to phases 1, 2 and 5, insignicant methane recovery in phases 3 and 4 is due to the operational problem, as discussed earlier. The result from a simulated landll cannot necessarily be used for an accurate estimation of methane recovery enhancement in a real-world landll site. Nevertheless, it can be a conservative estimate of methane production rate in the landll upon FWL injection, which may be considered as not only due to the sole decomposition of FWL but also due to the decomposition of MSW with FWL and/or LFL, resulting in a synergistic effect on methane production. 3.3. Discussion and implication The background methane production rate (Fig. 6) in this study was assumed as the methane production in the landll without FWL injection during the rst week of this investigation. Excluding the results during Phases 3 and 4, the methane production rate in this study was, in general, higher as compared to the laboratoryscale simulated landll result. As mentioned in section 3, one may be concerned by the perturbations in the methane production rate prole of the eld result (well No. 17) shown in Fig. 6 (during Phases 3 and 4). This was mainly due to the operational problem owing to which total LFG produced was not completely extracted, as evident from the increasing trend of methane content prole (Fig. 5). MSW is absolutely heterogeneous in nature and the degradation of MSW in landlls is a long-term process (Attal and Akunna,

where, Qe, Qf, Qw and Qa are the total volume of LFG extracted, LFG produced due to FWL, LFG produced due to MSW present in landll site, and air suction rate, respectively. Ce, Cf, Cw and Ca are the methane concentrations in extracted LFG, in LFG produced due to FWL, in LFG produced from MSW, and in air, respectively. The contribution of methane from air was ignored due to negligible concentration of P methane in air. The methane extracted from the landll ( QeCe) 3 was 1296 m , the background methane production due to MSW P only ( QWCW, based on the average of methane production without FWL injection in a week) was 993 m3, and the anticipated methane P production due to FWL injection ( QfCf - as estimated from the simulated landll study) was 141.6 m3 (Fig. 6). As revealed from our previous studies (Lee et al., 2009; Behera et al., 2010), generation of biogas from FWL is very high during rst few days of digestion and continues at a relatively lower rate over a certain period of

2132

S.K. Behera et al. / Waste Management 31 (2011) 21262132

1995; Belevi and Baccini, 1989). The production of LFG, by anaerobic digestion of the organic fraction of MSW, mainly depends on the composition of the biodegradable fraction of a waste and its moisture content (Komilis et al., 1999), aside from depending on other factors such as pH, temperature, alkalinity and absence of toxic compound (Chan et al., 2002). Besides, the moisture that may be present in the landlls is less often uniformly distributed and a limited water inow into the landlls generally requires a long transitional period for active methanogensis to start in dry landlls (Komilis et al., 1999). The increase of the moisture content of waste by recirculation of LFL has shown to improve the leaching process and biochemical reactions within MSW in landlls. However, a higher rate of LFL recirculation may establish acidic conditions that could inhibit the methanogenic activity, resulting in the reduction of methane production. The objective of this study was not to evaluate the effect of LFL recirculation on methane production in the landll site. Moreover, due to the difculties associated with the eld-scale investigation, separate studies with the recirculation of LFL alone were not performed. However, gradual reduction of LFL: FWL ratio (from 12 to 2) was attempted at different intervals of time (Table 2), which revealed that FWL can even be injected at LFL: FWL ratio of 2 without any technical difculty. FWL is a mechanically pre-treated highly biodegradable waste with moisture content varying between 80 to 90% (Lee et al., 2009; Behera et al., 2010). Therefore, injection of FWL in a controlled manner can actively moisten MSW, which may be favorable for the microbes to accelerate the decomposition of hydrolyzed MSW along with FWL, provide rapid stabilization of waste and enhance the production of LFG. As observed from this study, waste degradation was accelerated by FWL injection leading to higher LFG production rate. Moreover, the percentage of methane in LFG was higher with FWL injection (well No. 17) as compared to without injection (well No. 46). It is possible that FWL with LFL, at the lowest possible injection ratio, could increase methanogenic bacteria activity and LFG production. This is because LFG production rate can be enhanced by the presence of more organic compounds and methanogenic bacteria. Thus, the dryness and lack of organic content in the landlls can be overcome by FWL injection. Overall, the preliminary result from this investigation favors the injection of FWL into the landll site. The result is satisfactory warranting further investigation over longer time periods to draw denitive conclusions towards implementing the system in real-world situation. The objectives of FWL injection into landll site are: (1) to provide an economical and eco-friendly sustainable disposal option, (2) to accelerate the stabilization of landlled waste, and (3) to operate and utilize the existing sanitary landlls as bioreactors and extract LFG through active LFG recovery systems. FWL injection to landll implies the utilization of landlls as bioreactors, which is a step ahead of LFL recirculation in landlls to accelerate the stabilization of wastes, by supplementing both organics as well as moisture. It has been shown that the quantity of leachate generated in bioreactor landlls is often not sufcient to cover the moisture requirement, which requires water or other nonhazardous liquids/semi-liquids to supplement the leachate (Warith, 2002). In this context, injection of FWL and other nonhazardous liquids/semi-liquids to the landlls with efcient LFG recovery facilities could be a scientic and innovative approach for sustainable landll management. Hence, re-evaluation of the existing sanitary landlls as environmentally friendly and sustainable infrastructures is required, rising above the conventional dry tomb approach.

4. Conclusion This investigation demonstrated the validity and feasibility of FWL injection to existing sanitary landlls resulting in enhanced methane recovery due to accelerated stabilization of landlled MSW and FWL degradation. FWL is a mechanically pre-treated highly biodegradable waste and can be injected to the landlls at a lowest possible LFL:FWL injection ratio of 2. The result showed that, upon FWL injection, an extraction rate of $20 m3/h can be maintained at the test well No. 17 to recover LFG with methane content $58% and a methane recovery enhancement of 14%. Based on the scientic evidence revealed from this study and considering the recent technological development in the area of landll management, a paradigm shift from dry tomb to a sustainable waste management infrastructure is required to solve this persisting problem. Result of this investigation is satisfactory warranting a long-term evaluation for the overall sustainability of non-hazardous liquid waste injection into landlls. Acknowledgements The authors acknowledge the support extended by the University of Ulsan and KICOX (Grant No. 2005-B029-01) for this research work. SKB thankfully acknowledges the Brain Korea 21 Post-doctoral fellowship from Ministry of Education, Science and Technology through Environmental Engineering Program at University of Ulsan. Authors also appreciate the valuable comments from the anonymous reviewer that improved the quality of this manuscript. References
Attal, A., Akunna, J., 1995. Anaerobic degradation of municipal wastes in landll. Environ. Sci. Technol. 29, 243253. Benbelkacem, H., Bayard, R., Abdelhay, A., Zhang, Y., Gourdon, R., 2010. Effect of leachate injection modes on municipal solid waste degradation in anaerobic bioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 52065212. Behera, S.K., Park, J.-M., Kim, K.-H., Park, H.-S., 2010. Methane production from food waste leachate in laboratory-scale simulated landll. Waste Manage. 30, 1502 1508. Belevi, H., Baccini, P., 1989. Long-term behavior of municipal solid wastes landlls. Waste Manage. Res. 7, 4356. Benson, C.H., Barlaz, M.A., Lane, D.T., Rawe, J.M., 2007. Practice review of ve bioreactor/recirculation landlls. Waste Manage. 27, 1329. Chan, G.Y.S., Chu, L.M., Wong, M.H., 2002. Effects of leachate recirculation on biogas production from landll co-disposal of municipal solid waste, sewage sludge and marine sediment. Environ. Pollut. 118, 393399. Ham, R.K., Booker, T.J., 1982. Decomposition of solid waste in lysimeters. J. Environ. Eng. 108, 11471170. Khire, M.V., Mukherjee, M., 2007. Leachate injection using vertical wells in bioreactor landlls. Waste Manage. 27, 12331247. Komilis, D.P., Ham, R.K., Stegmann, R., 1999. The effect of landll design and operation practices on waste degradation behavior: a review. Waste Manage. Res. 17, 2026. Leckie, J.D., Pacey, J.G., Haldavadakis, C.P., 1979. Landll management with moisture control. J. Environ. Eng. 105, 337355. Lee, D.H., Behera, S.K., Won, J.W., Park, H.S., 2009. Methane production potential of leachate generated from Korean food waste recycling facilities: a lab-scale study. Waste Manage. 29, 876882. Ohm, T.I., Chae, J.S., Kim, J.E., Kim, H.K., Moon, S.H., 2009. A study on the dewatering of industrial waste sludge by fry-drying technology. J. Hazard. Mater. 168, 445450. Perera, L.A.K., Achari, G., Hettiaratchi, J.P.A., 2002. Determination of source strength of landll gas: a numerical modeling approach. J. Environ. Eng. 128, 461471. Valencia, R., van der Zon, W., Woelders, H., Lubberding, H.J., Gizen, H.J., 2009. Achieving Final storage quality of municipal solid waste in pilot scale bioreactor landlls. Waste Manage. 29, 7885. Warith, M., 2002. Bioreactor landlls: experimental and eld results. Waste Manage. 22, 717. Warith, M.A., Smolkin, P.A., Caldwell, J.G., 2001. Effect of leachate recirculation on enhancement of biological degradation of solid waste: case study. Pract. Periodical Hazard., Toxic, Radioact. Waste Manage. 5, 4046. Zhao, X., Voice, T.C., Khire, M., Maher, S., Musleh, R., Heerwani, P., Hashsham, S., 2008. Start-up performance of a full-scale bioreactor landll cell under coldclimate conditions. Waste Manage. 28, 26232634.