Professional Documents
Culture Documents
20160135
Artigo
One of the outstanding issues of concern by governments and society in general relates to the final destination of solid waste,
which can bring severe impacts on social, political, economic and environmental dimensions. The sustainable development of
enterprises and industries goes for the care of the planet, thus ensuring the quality of life for future generations and the planet.
The disposal of municipal waste in landfills is the technique most commonly employed for the remediation of solid residues. The
residues undergo decomposition beneath the soil and in the presence of water this generates leachate, which percolates down to the
bottom of the landfill through drainage. This drained liquid is collected from the landfill installations and subjected to treatment,
which involves physico-chemical and biological processes. Landfill leachate commonly contains heavy metals due to the incorrect
disposal of products such as fluorescent bulbs and batteries. In this context, a method for the treatment of sludge originating from the
physicochemical remediation of leachate using thermal plasma is proposed in this paper. The efficiency of the method was verified
by monitoring the total organic carbon content, water content and density of the sludge. The quantity of metals present in the samples
was determined before and after pyrolysis by thermal plasma using flame atomic absorption spectroscopy (FAAS), scanning electron
microscopy (SEM) and X-ray fluorescence (XRF) spectrometry techniques. The results show that the leachate treatment method used
was efficient, presenting the best results for the samples of iron and zinc.
Keywords: landfill leachate; sludge; thermal plasma.
INTRODUCTION
Increased consumerism, mainly due to easily available credit
and globalization, leads to solid residues being generated in greater
amounts and with different characteristics, particularly in big cities.
The relevant authorities therefore need to find solutions for the appropriate disposal of these residues considering the associated social,
political, economic and environmental issues. In this context, landfills
represent an environmentally acceptable destination for solid residues.
Landfill remains the most commonly used method for the final
disposal of urban solid residues in many countries, due to its economic advantages and easy management. In a landfill, the residues
are placed in layers over soil which has been rendered impermeable.
These layers are compressed to reduce their volume and periodically
covered with appropriate material. The degradation of the organic
fraction of the residues combined with the percolation of rainwater
through the landfill produces a liquid called leachate. This is a dark
liquid with an unpleasant smell which contains high loads of organic
solids and inorganic substances (associated with the water) as well as
the products resulting from the digestion of organic matter by autochthonous microorganisms.1,2 Due to the recalcitrant characteristics
of this leachate, its treatment has been extensively studied and a vast
amount of relevant literature is available.3-9
According to environmental regulations, the conditions and
standards established for the discharge of effluent to water bodies
must be adhered to. Thus, leachate cannot be discharged to natural
*e-mail: anelise.cubas@unisul.br
Application of thermal plasma for inertization of sludge produced during treatment of landfill leachate
907
908
Cubas et al.
Quim. Nova
Leaching tests
Figure 1. Furnace in which the transferred arc plasma torch was placed
Application of thermal plasma for inertization of sludge produced during treatment of landfill leachate
inerted sludge sample were used. The samples were kept in a muffle
oven at 105 C for 1 h, and then weighed again to obtain the sample
moisture content. The samples were then kept for 2 h in a muffle oven
at 440 C, and weighed again to obtain the organic matter content.
909
Figure 2. Results for scanning electron microscopy analysis (SEM) of raw sludge sample
910
Cubas et al.
Quim. Nova
Sample 1A (%)
Sample 1B (%)
40.46
40.31
40.39 0.11
9.82
10.14
9.98 0.23
3.74
3.64
3.69 0.07
1.17
1.23
1.20 0.04
0.85
0.84
0.85 0.01
0.68
0.66
0.67 0.01
Total Cl expressed as Cl
0.59
0.56
0.58 0.02
0.55
0.55
0.55 0.01
0.39
0.27
0.33 0.08
0.31
0.26
0.29 0.04
0.22
0.22
0.22 0.01
0.15
0.19
0.19 0.01
0.15
0.15
0.13 0.01
0.09
0.18
0.09
Mineral Part
59.16 0.65
LOI (n= 3)
750 C
40.80 1.02
Sum:
99.96 1.67
Figure 3. Spectrograms of the most stable elements in the raw sludge sample 1A obtained by XRF
Application of thermal plasma for inertization of sludge produced during treatment of landfill leachate
911
Table 3. Iron and zinc volatilization during the thermal plasma treatment
Iron
Sample*
Raw sludge
(mg L-1)
Gas cleaning
Volatilized metal
solution (mg L-1)
(%)
Si1
8.912
1.497
16.78
Si2
8.912
2.313
25.95
Si3
8.912
1.936
21.73
Sample*
Raw sludge
(mg L-1)
Sz1
0.801
0.331
Sz2
0.801
0.417
52.06
Sz3
0.801
0.216
26.966
Zinc
41.323
*Si1 sample of iron with 50% of sand; Si2 sample of iron with 100%
of sand; Si3 sample of iron with 200% of sand; Sz1 sample of zinc with
50% of sand; Sz2 sample of zinc with 100% of sand; Sz3 sample of zinc
with 200% of sand.
CONCLUSION
Mass reduction
Sample*
Gas cleaning
Volatilized metal
solution (mg L-1)
(%)
Reduction (%)
S1
4.50
1.146
74.534
S2
6.00
2.14
64.334
S3
9.00
4.753
47.189
According to Anyaegbunam,23 a thermal plasma is an electrically conductive gas in which an important fraction of the atoms
are ionized and capable of generating temperatures up to 10000 C
near its column with appropriate high tech. The energy generated by
plasma arcs has been recently applied to hazardous waste control.
In addition to its ability to sustain high temperatures, other attractive plasma technology features include its flexibility to operate in
either an oxidizing or reducing environment, resultant waste volume
reduction, low gas throughput, and flexibility to treat a large variety
of waste types.
The treatment by thermal plasma aimed at the inertization of the
iron and zinc present in sludge was efficient, demonstrating 100%
efficacy in reducing the concentration of these metals in the samples.
All of the samples, after exposure to the plasma, obtained values under
the LOD for the iron and zinc concentrations. The inertization of iron
and zinc in residues to be deposited in landfill sites has several advantages, considering that soil contamination by hazardous products is
a cumulative process, while the deposition of an inert residue in soil
is safer both for the environment and public health.
The presence of iron is related to the presence of this metal in
Brazilian soils. The presence of other metals, such as Al and Cr,
which were not analyzed by FAAS, are due to the diverse nature of
the slurry sludge samples, because of the variety of residues found
in landfill mass.
Figure 5. Results for scanning electron microscopy analysis of inerted leachate sample
912
Cubas et al.
Quim. Nova
Figure 6. Spectrograms of the most stable elements in the inerted leachate sample 1A obtained by XRF
Table 4. X-ray fluorescence analysis of the inerted leachate sample
Sample 1A (%)
Sample 1B (%)
91.85
93.04
92.45 0.84
3.02
2.94
2.98 0.06
1.62
1.22
1.42 0.28
Total Cl expressed as Cl
0.90
0.73
0.82 0.12
0.84
0.40
0.62 0.31
0.14
0.16
0.15 0.01
0.30
0.27
0.29 0.02
0.08
0.02
0.05 0.04
Elemental Composition n = 2
0.05
0.02
0.02
Mineral Part
98.79 1.69
LOI (n= 3)
750 C
1.20 0.56
Sum:
99.99 2.25
the thermal plasma process. In the case of zinc, as expected, the best
results were obtained for the Sz3 sample, wherein 200% sand sample
of zinc metal was not found in the leachate.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors wish to thank UNISUL and UFSC for the financial
and technical support to carry out this work.
REFERENCES
1. Koshy, L.; Paris, E.; Ling, S.; Jones, T.; Brub, K.; Sci. Total Environ.
2007, 384, 171.
2. Xie, B.; Xiong, S.; Hu, C.; Liang, S.; Zhang, X.; Lu, J.; Bioresour.
Technol. 2012, 103, 71.
3. Deng, Y.; Englehardt, J. D.; Water Res. 2006, 40, 3683.
4. Foo, K. Y.; Hameed, B. H.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2009, 171, 54.
5. Xie, B.; Lv, B. Y; Hu, C.; Liang, S. B.; Tang, Y.; Lu, J.; Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 7754.
6. Zhang, H.; Ran, X.; Wu, X.; Zhang, D.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2011, 188,
261.
Application of thermal plasma for inertization of sludge produced during treatment of landfill leachate
7. Turro, E.; Giannis, A.; Cossu, R.; Gidarakos, E.; Mantzavinosb, D.;
Katsaounis, A.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 207, 73.
8. Aziz, S. Q.; Aziz, H. A.; Yusoff, M. S.; Bashir, M. J. K.; J. Hazard.
Mater. 2011, 189, 404.
9. Li, H.; Zhou, S.; Huang, G.; Xu, B.; Process Saf. Environ. 2013, 91, 285.
10. Zhao, X.; Qu, J.; Liu, H.; Wang, C.; Xiao, S.; Liu, R.; Liu, P.; Lan, H.;
Hu, C.; Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 865.
11. Vedrenne, M.; Vasquez-Medrano R.; Prato-Garcia, D.; Frontana-Uribe,
B. A.; Inabez, J. G.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2012, 205, 208.
12. Kurniawan, T. A.; Lo, W.; Chan, G. Y. S.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2006, 129,
80.
13. Ahmed, F. N.; Lan, C. Q.; Desalination 2012, 287, 41.
14. Dewil, R.; Baeyens, J.; Neyens, E.; Environ. Eng. Sci. 2005, 23, 994.
15. Telles-Benatti, C.; Da Costa, A.C. S.; Granhen-Tavares, C.R.; J. Hazard.
Mater. 2009, 163, 1246.
16. Amokrane, A.; Comel, C.; Veron, J.; Water Res. 1997, 11, 2775.
17. Zouboulis, A. I.; Chai, X. L; Katsoyiannis, I. A.; J. Environ. Manage.
2004, 70, 35.
18. Manning, D. A. C.; Bewsher, A.; J. Chromatogr. 1997, 770, 203.
19. Morais, J. L.; Sirtori, C.; Peralta-Zamora, P. G.; Quim. Nova 2006, 29,
20.
20. Caramo, E. B.; Filho, I. N.; Muhel, C.; Quim. Nova 2001, 24, 554.
21. Bertazzoli, R.; Pelegrini, R.; Quim. Nova 2002, 25, 477.
22. Felipini, C. L.; Integrao 2005, 41, 147.
23. Anyaegbunam, F. N. C.; International Journal of Engineering Research
& Technology 2014, 3, 3.
24. Ganguli, A.; Tarey, R. D.; Curr. Sci. 2002, 83, 279.
25. Venkatramani, N.; Curr. Sci. 2002, 83, 254.
26. Huang, H.; Tang, L.; Energ. Convers. Manage. 2007, 48, 1331.
27. Pourali, M.; The IEEE Xplore digital library - Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers 2010, 1, 125.
28. Gomez, E.; Rani, D. A.; Cheeseman, C. R.; Deegan, D.; Wisec, M.; A.
Boccaccini, R.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2009, 161, 614.
29. Park, Y. J.; Heo, J.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2002, B91, 83.
30. Haugsten, K. E.; Gustavson, B.; Waste Manage. 2000, 20, 167.
31. Chu, J. P.; Hwang, I. J.; Tzeng, C. C.; Kuo, Y. Y.; Yu, Y. J.; J. Hazard.
Mater. 1998, 58, 179.
32. Katou, K.; Asou, T.; Kurauchi, Y.; Sameshima, R.; Thin Solid Films
2001, 386, 183.
33. Leal-Quirs, E.; Braz. J. Phys. 2004, 34, 1587.
34. Yang, S. F.; Wang, T. M.; Lee, W. C.; Sun, K. S.; Tzeng, C. C.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 182, 191.
35. Cheng, T. W.; Chu, J. P.; Tzeng, C. C.; Chen, Y. S.; Waste Manage. 2002,
22, 485.
36. Cheng, T. W.; Huang, M. Z; Tzeng, C. C.; Cheng, K. B.; Ueng, T. H.;
Chemosphere 2007, 68, 1937.
37. Cubas, A. L. V.; Machado, M. M.; Machado, M. M.; Gross, F.;
Magnago, R. F.; Moecke, E. H. S.; de Souza, I. G.; Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2014, 48, 2853.
38. Silva, L. J.; Alves, F. C.; Frana, F. P.; Waste Manage. Res. 2012, 30,
1016.
913
39. Kim, S. W.; Park, H. S.; Kim, H. J.; Vacuum 2003, 70, 59.
40. Zhu, T.; Li, J.; Jin, Y.; Liang, Y.; Ma, G.; Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.
2008, 5, 375.
41. Kourti, I.; Rani D. A.; Bustos, A. G.; Deegan, D.; Boccaccini, A. R.;
Cheeseman, C. R.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2011, 196, 86.
42. Kuo, Y. M.; Tseng, H. J.; Chang, J. E.; Wang, J.W.; Wang, C. T.; Chen,
H. T.; J. Hazard. Mater. 2008, 156, 442.
43. Bonizzoni, G.; Vassallo, E.; Vacuum 2002, 64, 327.
44. Chang, J. S.; Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 2001, 2, 571.
45. Cheng, T. W.; Tu, C. C.; Ko, M. S.; Ueng, T. H.; Ceram. Int. 2011, 37,
2437.
46. Kogelschatz, U.; Plasma Phys. Controlled Fusion 2004, 46, B63.
47. Pfender, E.; Plasma Chem. Plasma Proc. 1999, 19, 1.
48. Cubas, A. L. V.; PhD Thesis, Universidade de Santa Catarina,
Florianpolis, Brasil, 2004.
49. Allison, L. E.; Methods of soil analysis, American Society of Agronomy,
Soil Science Society of America: Madison, 1965, p. 1367.
50. Associao Brasileira de Normas Tcnicas. NBR 10005: Procedimento
para obteno de extrato lixiviado de resduos slidos. Rio de Janeiro,
2004.
51. Currie, L.; Horwitz, W.; IUPAC recommendations for defining and measuring detection and quantification limits; Analysis Magazine 1994, 22,
M24.
52. American Public Health Association APHA; Standard Methods for
examination of water and wastewater, 21st ed., APHA/AWWA/WEF:
Washington, 2005. 1368p.
53. Manual de mtodos de anlise de solo; Claessen, M. E. C., Barreto, W.
O., Paula, J. L., Duarte, M. N., orgs.; Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa
Agropecuria, 1997.
54. Yabe, M. J. S.; Oliveira, E.; Quim. Nova 1998, 21, 551.
55. Tortora, G. J.; Funke, B. R.; Case, C. L.; Microbiology: An Introduction,
9th ed., Benjamin Cummings: San Francisco, 2006, pp. 636-637, 727728.
56. Merten, G. H., Minella, J. P.; Revista Agroecologia e Desenvolvimento
Rural Sustentvel 2002, 3, 33.
57. Carvalho Filho, A.; Curi, N.; Marques, J. J. G. S. M.; Shinzato, E.;
Freitas, D. A. F.; Jesus, E. A.; Massahud, R. T. L .R.; R. Bras. Ci. Solo
2011, 35, 793.
58. Mancuso, M. A.; Azvedo, F. C. G.; Wastowski, A. D.; Fioreze, M.; Geol.
USP, Sr. cient. 2016, 16, 85.
59. Silva, R. V.; Vendruscolo, R.; Santos, A. T.; Andrade, A. M. H.; XX Salo
de Iniciao Cientfica, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul,
Porto Alegre, Brasil, 2008.
60. CONAMA Conselho Nacional de Meio Ambiente. Resoluo n. 430,
de 13 de maio de 2011. Regulates the conditions and effluent discharge
standards, complements and modifies Resolution No. 357 of 17 March
2005, of Conselho Nacional do Meio Ambiente-CONAMA. Available
in: http://www.mma.gov.br/port/conama/legiabre.cfm?codlegi=646,
accessed April 2016.