Scholarlink

<p>Precise appraisal of leachate generation is crucial for effective landfill design and environmental protection. This study employs the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model to simulate leachate production under varying rainfall conditions (high, average, and low) in three Indian cities—Shillong (high rainfall, 4360&#xa0;mm), Kolkata (average rainfall, 1330&#xa0;mm), and Jaisalmer (low rainfall, 390&#xa0;mm). Eight different landfill configurations, including open, covered, and engineered systems with various liner and cover combinations, were analyzed over five years. Results indicate that open landfills allow significant rainfall infiltration (39%), leading to high leachate production (percolation rate, 2250&#xa0;mm/year), especially under heavy rainfall. Among the cover systems, the geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) cover showed the best performance (percolation rate, &lt; 0.04&#xa0;mm/year) in the initial years, while its performance degraded in the later years. The double liner system was most effective (leakage rate,10<sup>− 5</sup> mm/year) in minimizing leachate percolation across all rainfall scenarios. Comparative layout analysis confirms that rainfall is the primary driver of leachate generation in Shillong, while inherent waste moisture plays a larger role in Kolkata and Jaisalmer. The GCL cover system (annual percolation, 4.23–0.18&#xa0;mm/year), composite liner (0.47–0.30&#xa0;mm/year), and double liner (0.00007–6.37 × 10⁻⁵ mm/year) demonstrated effective performance across all three cities. Additionally, the study found that actual leachate percolation over five years totaled 11,287&#xa0;mm, whereas the HELP model, using default waste parameters, estimated 15,463&#xa0;mm—reflecting a 37% overestimation. This research provides valuable insights for optimizing landfill sealing structures and minimizing leachate-related environmental risks.</p> Graphical Abstract <p></p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

An integrated comparative assessment of landfill water balance, leachate generation, and sealing systems under varying rainfall using the HELP model: a case study from three Indian cities

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年8月3日

查看全文
  • Abdur Rahaman,
  • Suresh A. Kartha

摘要

Precise appraisal of leachate generation is crucial for effective landfill design and environmental protection. This study employs the Hydrologic Evaluation of Landfill Performance (HELP) model to simulate leachate production under varying rainfall conditions (high, average, and low) in three Indian cities—Shillong (high rainfall, 4360 mm), Kolkata (average rainfall, 1330 mm), and Jaisalmer (low rainfall, 390 mm). Eight different landfill configurations, including open, covered, and engineered systems with various liner and cover combinations, were analyzed over five years. Results indicate that open landfills allow significant rainfall infiltration (39%), leading to high leachate production (percolation rate, 2250 mm/year), especially under heavy rainfall. Among the cover systems, the geosynthetic clay liner (GCL) cover showed the best performance (percolation rate, < 0.04 mm/year) in the initial years, while its performance degraded in the later years. The double liner system was most effective (leakage rate,10− 5 mm/year) in minimizing leachate percolation across all rainfall scenarios. Comparative layout analysis confirms that rainfall is the primary driver of leachate generation in Shillong, while inherent waste moisture plays a larger role in Kolkata and Jaisalmer. The GCL cover system (annual percolation, 4.23–0.18 mm/year), composite liner (0.47–0.30 mm/year), and double liner (0.00007–6.37 × 10⁻⁵ mm/year) demonstrated effective performance across all three cities. Additionally, the study found that actual leachate percolation over five years totaled 11,287 mm, whereas the HELP model, using default waste parameters, estimated 15,463 mm—reflecting a 37% overestimation. This research provides valuable insights for optimizing landfill sealing structures and minimizing leachate-related environmental risks.

Graphical Abstract