Hydro-Geophysical Investigation of Contaminant Distribution at a Closed Landfill in Southwestern Ontario, Canada

DOI: 10.4236/gep.2014.23002   PDF   HTML     4,776 Downloads   5,739 Views  


This paper presents a hydro-geophysical investigation into the landfill leachate distribution and subsurface geology at a closed site in southwestern Ontario, Canada, using geophysical mapping and hydrological modeling approaches. Conductivity mapping was first conducted over the study site using a frequency-domain EM terrain conductivity meter, revealing an anomalous high-con- ductivity zone of about 200 m (S-N) × 80 m (W-E) at the western half of the site. The DC resistivity survey was then carried out at this anomalous zone with eight S-N profiles and three W-E profiles measuring 200m in length using a Wenner-α configuration. Our resistivity survey results indicate that the landfill leachate travels mainly south-east wards over the upper aquifer, with a minor vertical component into the upper weathered portion of the silt/sand aquitard at some locations. No contamination seems to exist in the lower sand aquifer. The geophysical results were later used to develop two conceptualized models for hydrological modeling. Our numerical results predict the leachate distribution at the study site in the future, confirming that the contaminant will occupy the entire upper aquifer and the most of the aquitard in a time of 1000 years, and that the barrier of the aquitard will protect the lower sand aquifer from the leachate pollution. These findings are critical in evaluating the current leachate conditions and the existing compliance monitoring plan for potential implementation at this study site and other sites in elsewhere.

Share and Cite:

Yang, J. and Joshi, S. (2014) Hydro-Geophysical Investigation of Contaminant Distribution at a Closed Landfill in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. Journal of Geoscience and Environment Protection, 2, 8-15. doi: 10.4236/gep.2014.23002.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] ABEM (2006). ABEM Terrameter SAS 1000/4000 Instructions Manual.
[2] Bernstone, C., & Dahlin, T. (1997). DC Resistivity Mapping of Old Landfills: Two Case Studies. European Journal of Engineering and Environmental Geophysics, 2, 121-136.
[3] Diersch, H. J. G. (2002). FEFLOW Reference Manual, Wasy GmbH, Berlin.
[4] El-Fadel, M., Findikakis, A. N., & Leckie, J. O. (1997). Modeling Leachate Generation and Transport in Solid Waste Landfills. Environmental Technology, 18, 669-686. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593331808616586
[5] EWSWA (2011). EWSWA Annual Monitoring Report. Genivar, 1-22.
[6] Farquhar, G. J. (1989). Leachate: Production and Characterization. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 16, 317-325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/l89-057
[7] Freeze, R. A., Massmann, J., Smith, L., Sperling, T., & James, B. (1990). Hy-drogeological Decision Analysis: A Framework, Groundwater, 28, 738-765. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.1990.tb01989.x
[8] Joshi, S. D. (2013). Hydrogeophysical Investigation of Contaminant Distribution at a Closed Landfill in Southwestern Ontario, Canada. M.Sc. Thesis, Windsor: University of Windsor.
[9] Kjeldsen, P., Barlaz, M. A., Rooker, A. P., Baun, A., Ledin, A., & Christensen, T. H. (2002). Present and Long-Term Composition of MSW Landfill Leachate: A Review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 32, 297-336. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10643380290813462
[10] Loke, M. H. (1999). A Practical Guide to 2D and 3D Surveys. Electrical Imaging Surveys for Environmental and Engineering Studies, 8-10.
[11] McNeill, J. D. (1980). Electromagnetic Terrain Conductivity Measurement at Low Induction Numbers. Geonics Ltd., Technical Note TN-6.
[12] Osiensky, J. L. (1995). Time Series Electrical Potential Field Measurements for Early Detection of Groundwater Contamination. Journal of Environmental Health, 30, 1601-1626.
[13] Radulescu, M., Valerian, C., & Yang, J. (2007). Time-Lapse Electrical Resistivity Anomalies Due to Contaminant Transport around Land Fills. Annals of Geophysics, 50, 453-468.
[14] Reichard, E. G., & Evans, J. S. (1989). Assessing the Value of Hydrological Information for Risk-Based Remedial Action Decisions. Water Resources Research, 25, 1451-1460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/WR025i007p01451
[15] RES2DINV Manual (2006). Geoelectrical Imaging 2D and 3D. Geotomo Software, 1-50.
[16] Scott, J., Beydoun, D., Amal, R., Low, G., & Cattle, J. (2005). Landfill Management, Leachate Generation and Leach Testing of Solid Wastes in Australia and Overseas. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 35, 239-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10643380590917969
[17] Taylor, R. S. (1999). Development and Applications of Geometric-Sounding Electromagnetic (G-SEM) Systems. Society of Exploration Geophysicists 1999 Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Sixty-Ninth Annual Meeting. http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/1.1821076
[18] Zhu, K., & Yang, J. (2008). Time-Dependent Magnetometric Resistivity Ano-malies of Groundwater Contamination: Synthetic Results from Computational Hydro-Geophysical Modeling. Applied Geophysics, 5, 322-330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11770-008-0041-3
[19] Zume, J. T., Tarhule, A., & Christenson, S. (2006). Subsurface Imaging of an Abandoned Solid Waste Landfill Site in Norman, Oklahoma. Groundwater Monitoring and Remediation, 26, 62-69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6592.2006.00066.x

comments powered by Disqus

Copyright © 2020 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.