Proceedings of the XII International Symposium on Environmental

Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Volume I – Environmental Geotechnology

ISBN: 978-0-9856219-0-2

Editors:

Gustavo B. Menezes

H. Keith Moo-Young

Crist Khachikian

T. Cássia de Brito Galvão

Copyright © 2012- The information contained on the Proceedings of the “XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology and Global Sustainable Development” may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form of by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, webpage or website, without the prior written permission of the editor. Please contact us ("Menezes, Gustavo Borel" gmeneze@exchange.calstatela.edu) if you need permission to reproduce partially or totally any of the published articles.

Table of Contents

Editorial: The Role of Environmental Geotechnology in the 21st century ..............................1 Gustavo B. Menezes, H. Keith Moo-Young, T. Cássia de Brito Galvão, Crist Khachikian 

Assessing the Impact of Climate Change on the Water Resources in the Geba Basin in Northern Ethiopia ...............................................................................................3 Haddush G. Aforki,*, Florimond De Smedt2, Tesfamicheal G.Yohannes3, Kristine Walraevens4, Kindeya Gebrehiwot5, Hans Bauer6, Jozef Deckers6

 

Biocementation: a solution for desertification ..........................................................................12 Maryam Naeimi,* Chu Jian and Volodymyr Ivanov1

 

Drought and Desertification in Turkey and Its Economic Impacts ........................................21 Deniz EKİNCİ,* and Arif YAVUZ2

 

Evaluation of risk Sechage-Humidification of a Clay Soil of Algiers: Case the Argillaceous Marnes ........................................................................................................31 Fatma Zohra AISSIOU* & Ammar NECHNECH 

An experimental study on the ultrasonic soil washing for the remediation of crude oil contaminated soil .............................................................................................44 Xinyuan Song, Jianbing Li*, and Lei Liu 

Assessment of contamination and migration of heavy metals at landfill site .........................54 Maninder Kaur Sidhu1,* and Siby John2

 

Characterization of metal resistant endophytic Bacillus sp. and its potential to decrease lead phytotoxicity in Alnus firma ...................................................................62 Mi-Na Shin, Jaehong Shim1, Kui-Jae Lee1, Seralathan Kamala-Kannan1, Sunyoung Bae2, Jai-Young Lee3, Byung-Taek Oh1,*

 

Cr Stable Isotopes and Monitoring Fate and Transport of Chromium – A Review ...............................................................................................................................69 Andre Ellis,*, Thomas Johnson2, Thomas Bullen3, Alejandro Villalobos-Aragon4, David Wang1,5 and Swati Joshi1

 

Long-term mobility of elements from monolithic fly ash based geopolymer concrete .............................................................................................................................80 Olanrewaju Sanusi,* and Vincent Ogunro2

 

Production of biochar by hydrothermal carbonization of food waste and wood waste and its sorption capacity .......................................................................................92 Sunyoung Bae,* and Jai-Young Lee2

 

Remediation of Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons from the Contaminated Soil using Sequential Remediation Treatments ..................................................................100 Jai-Young Lee, Kyoung-Joo Park2, Byung-Taek Oh3, Ye Jin Bang4, and Sunyoung Bae5,*

 

Removal of As and Heavy Metals (Cd, Cu, Pb) in Fine Soil from Soil Washing Process using Chelating Agent ......................................................................................107 Minah Oh․So Young Moon1․SeungJin Oh1․HeeHoon Chae․Jai-Young Lee* 

Study of the Environmental Impact Associated with the Application of Residue Generated by the Phosphate Industry as Landfill Cover...........................................117 Vanusa Maria Feliciano Jacomino and Stela Dalva Santos Cota 

The sorption and desorption of three micropollutants in a wastewater irrigated and a pristine soil ...........................................................................................................126 J. C. Durán-Álvarez, B. Prado, G. López-Ortiz and B. Jiménez,

 

Effect of air pollution on urban morphology ..........................................................................135 A.Hasseine1,*, S.Houda2, A.Merzougui, D.Laiadi1, J.chaouki3

 

Analytical Solution of Diffusion Equation in Three Dimensions ..........................................145 Emadelden A. Fouad,*,Khaled S. M. Essa2and A. N. Mina3

 

Environmental Challenges Arising from Plastic Waste in Urban Nigeria ...........................154 Owuama, C. Ozioma 1*

 

Evaluation of organic carbon stored in topsoil of recovered borrowed areas for the construction of hydroelectric power plants, in Brazil ..........................................163 Arnaldo T. Coelho, T. Cássia de Brito Galvao2,*, Marco Antônio S. Ramidan3, Ênio Marcus B. Fonseca4, Rodrigo C. Junqueira5, Joaquim Fernandes T. Coelho6 

Evaluation vulnerability in wide area due to river levee and bank seepage failure focusing on grain size distribution................................................................................176 Keisuke Fujita,* Hideo Komine2 Satoshi Murakami3 and Kazuya Yasuhara4

 

Outdoor Luminous environment assessment and evaluation for a sustainable urban development. A case study .................................................................................188 Marouane Samir Guedouh,* noureddine Zemmouri 2 

Simulation of Airflow and Pollutant Dispersion around buildings and palm trees ............198 S.Houda, A.Hasseine2, A.Merzougui3, D.Aaiadi4

 

Sustainable energy supply and storage with enhanced geothermal energy systems ............................................................................................................................206 Rolf Katzenbach,* and Frithjof Clauss2

 

Using Rain Water in Jeddah in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as an indicator to air pollution and its impact on seed germination of Phaseolous vulgaris and lentil (Lens culinaris) seeds ...........................................................................................216 Areej Baeshen* and Batoul Abdullatif 

Using the ground temperature for Heating and Cooling a Passive House ...........................229 M.A.Boukli Hacene,, N.E.Chabane Sari1

 

Waste material and Soil Strength .............................................................................................244 Amin Chegenizadeh,* and Hamid Nikraz2

 

Control of Gas Emissions below new Buildings ......................................................................254 

Frank Otto 

Computer Simulation of Levee’s Erosion and Overtopping .................................................264 Mehrad KAMALZARE1, Thomas F. ZIMMIE, Christopher STUETZLE3, Barbara CUTLER, W. Randolph FRANKLIN 

Indigenizing planning for geotechnical and environmental sustainability: toward mitigating natural disasters in the Philippines ............................................................274 Joselito F. Buhangin 

Probabilistic Design of Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Slopes ............................................282 Amit Srivastava and Krishna R. Reddy,*

 

Object-based Segmentation of Multi-temporal Quickbird Imagery for Landslide Detection .........................................................................................................................291 Owen Parker,* and Leonhard Blesius1

 

Soil Water Characteristic Curves of Residual Soil .................................................................300 Ecidinéia Pinto Soares de Mendonça,* Antônio Ananias de Mendonça2

Eduardo Antônio Gomes Marques3 Raquel de Abreu Quintanilha4 

The role of Landslide education in environmental hazard prevention and health promotion in Niger Delta Region of Nigeria ...............................................................316 Dr. Mfrekemfon P. Inyang* and Inyang, Obonganyie P. 

A Determination of Unsaturated Geotechnical Parameters of a Compacted Residual Soil ...................................................................................................................324 Vinícius Queiroga Fortes Ribeiro,* Lúcio Flávio de Souza Villar 

Assessment of Soil Characteristics for Contaminated Site adjacent to the Refinery in Korea ...........................................................................................................341 Soyoung MOON, Minah OH, Sungjin PARK, Jungyo CHENG, Sungyoung BAE, Jai-Young LEE1*

 

Corrosivity Potential of a Pipeline Project in a Brackish Environment ...............................348 Owuama C. Ozioma* and Kennedy C. Owuama 

Geotechnical Investigation of Overburden Wastes of Jharia Coalfields India ....................358 Dr. Biswajit Paul 

Urban daylight luminous environment estimation and mapping using satellite remote sensing cloud data .............................................................................................368 Dr. Noureddine Zemmouri,* and Malika Zemmouri2

 

Introduction to Green roofs based on recycled materials and recycling of water at home as a method to reduce the impact of pollution in big cities .........................376 Daniel Uriel Ventura Cáceres 

Displacement of infrastructures due to large tailings heaps of viscoplastic salt material and the resulting soil-structure-interaction ................................................385 Rolf Katzenbach,* and Steffen Leppla2

 

Shear property of solid waste materials by in-situ direct shear test .....................................394 

Shintaro Miyamoto*, Kiyoshi Omine2, Noriyuki Yasufuku3, Atsushi Yamawaki4, Youichi Doi5, Mikio Kawasaki6

 

Migration of waste leachates through natural substrata under landfills with no engineering liners ...........................................................................................................404 Regadío, M.,*, de Soto, I. S.2, Ruiz, A. I3, Rodríguez, M4. and Cuevas, J5. 

The Functional Roles of Arbuscular Mychorrhizal Fungi in Protecting Kalanchoe Plants Grown in Sewage Water Contaminated Soil ................................414 Asrar Adulwasea A. 

Alternative Methodology for Tailings Dams Closure .............................................................430 Aloysio Portugal Maia Saliba,*, Ecidinéia Pinto S. Mendonça2, Flávia Alves Nascimento1, Marlon Borges Avelar1, Marcelo Garcia Miranda Diniz1, José Mário Queiroga Mafra2

 

Identification of Secondary Minerals in fly ash using XRD ..................................................437 Gautham Das, John Daniels and Georgi Chaykov 

Regression Models for Predicting Hydraulic Conductivity of Compacted Lateritic Clays ................................................................................................................447 K. J. Osinubi* and C. M. O. Nwaiwu 

The comparison of the tailing dam operational safety in Finland and Sweden ...................460 Jarmo Kivi, Kauko Kujala and Jouko Saarela 

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

404

Migration of waste leachates through natural substrata under landfills with no engineering

liners

Regadío, M.1,*, de Soto, I. S.2, Ruiz, A. I3, Rodríguez, M4. and Cuevas, J5.

Abstract

The study analyzes solid samples from two substrata (kaolinitic clay acid environment (1) and

illite-smectite carbonated clay environment (2) under old municipal landfills that were in direct

contact with the waste. The main soluble constituents of the leachates (Na+ sol, NH4+ sol,

alkalinity, Cl- sol) and the composition of the exchangeable complex in the clay minerals (Na+ ex,

NH4+ ex, K

+ ex) were measured in the solid samples as a function of depth to study the extend of

the pollution in the vertical direction. The purpose was to determine the capacity of the natural

substrata as geological barriers that can retain leachate pollution (Council Directive

1999/31/EC). In case (1) pollutants were not attenuated, but in case (2) the extent of the

potential impact of the main soluble components of the leachate became naturally retained after 1

m depth. The difference was attributed to the mineralogy and the enhancement of the migration

potential under acidic conditions.

Keywords: geological barrier, landfill, pollution front

Introduction

1, 2 Assistant Professor, Department of Geology and Geochemistry, Autónoma University of Madrid, Spain

3 Associate Professor, Department of Geology and Geochemistry, Autónoma University of Madrid, Spain

4 Researcher, CIEMAT, Ministerio de Economía y Competividad, Madrid, Spain.

5 Professor, Department of Geology and Geochemistry, Autónoma University of Madrid, Spain

* Corresponding author contact information: mercedes.regadio@uam.es, phone: (+34) 91 497 6709, fax: (+34) 91

497 49 00

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

405

Landfilling consists of permanent storage of waste in appropriate sites over the land

surface or in excavations. The concept of appropriate sites is relatively new compared to the use

of landfills and it refers to natural soils which are capable of stopping landfills dangers. These

dangers are mainly given for leachate; i.e., a mixture of aqueous substances resulting from

percolating water in the waste itself, liquid byproducts of degradation reactions, rain or runoffs;

through the solid waste.

To deal with that, the Council Directive 1999/31/EC forces to locate a landfill on a

geological barrier; i.e., natural materials that, by means of natural processes (dilution, dispersion,

biodegradation, filtration, redox, precipitation, sorption or ionic exchange reactions), can reduce

and mitigate the contamination (Allen, 2001).

In the present work, the responses of two different natural and common clayey substrata

to leachates are investigated.

Experimental protocols

Five boreholes (B) from two landfills of 9 and 14 years old (L11 and L51, respectively)

were performed in areas with no engineered synthetic liners. The boreholes (L11-B1, L11-B2,

L51-B1, L51-B2, L51-B3) passed through the waste and extracted a continuous column of the

natural substrata by rotational drills. The columns were divided into samples from different

depths (0 – 6 m measured from the waste contact).

Measurements of pH and soluble ions (Cation+ sol, Anion- sol) were performed by means

of aqueous extracts of solid samples that were either first air dried for 7 days (pH and Anion- sol)

or not (Cation+ sol). In addition, measurements of moisture, mineralogy, specific surface area

(SSA), exchangeable cations (Cation+ ex) and cationic-exchange capacity (CEC) were determined

from the solid phase.

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

406

Major Anion- sol (soil-to-deionized water 1:10) were determined by ion chromatography

(METROHMTM 761 Compact IC) and pH (soil-to-deionized:water 1:2.5) was analyzed using a

glass combined electrode. Unlike the above, Cation+ ex and alkalinity (soil-to-deionized-water

1:10) were analyzed from the initial wet soil samples (without drying) to avoid the modification

of alkalinity or aqueous NH4+ by a previous drying treatment. Na+ sol and K+ sol were determined

using a Buck Scientific® PFP-7 flame photometer. NH4+ sol was estimated using an ion-selective

potentiometer (ORION® 9512 Ammonia Gas Sensing Electrode). Alkalinity was determined by

titration with an ORION® 960 potentiometer using a normalized H2SO4 solution (10-3 - 10-2 M)

and a pH meter (endpoint pH ≈ 4.8). The solids remaining after the extraction of the soluble

cations and alkalinity were used to determine the exchangeable cations (NH4+

ex, Na+ ex, K

+ ex)

and the CEC following Thomas (1982) and Rhoades (1982).

The bulk density of the substrata (ρb) was approximated by the hydrostatic balance

method.

Moisture (h) was also measured in duplicate using the formula (1) from Ministerio de

Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (1994). Approximately 5.00 ± 0.01 g of the original sample

was weighed before (mm) and after being dried at 105 ºC for 48 h (md).

h = (mm – md)/md · 100 (1)

The samples dried at 105 ºC were mechanically ground (Retsch MM200 grinder at 20/s

for 5 min) for specific-surface and global-mineralogy analyses. Wet samples were used in the

case of clay mineralogy. The SSA was measured in duplicate by the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller

(BET) method of nitrogen gas adsorption (77 K, a Micromeritics® GEMINI V equipment and a

standard analysis protocol software that obtains a five-point N2 adsorption isotherm). The

random-powder method was followed to study the overall mineralogical composition (pre-

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

407

dried and ground samples) and Schultz (1964) and Srodon et al. (2001) criteria were applied in

the semi-quantifications of the minerals. Lastly, the oriented-slide method was performed to

determine the clay mineralogy from the <2-µm size fraction of selected wet samples (each

sample followed the air drying, heat treatment and glycerol solvation processes (Moore &

Reynolds, 1997)). The clay mineral content was calculated as proposed by UNE 22–161–92 and

with the scattering correction factors of Barahona (1974).

The X-ray diffraction was applied for both mineralogy analyses (Philips X’Pert

diffractometer with a Ni-filtered Cu K α radiation at 40 kV and 40 mA with a step size of 0.016 º

and a speed of 2 s/step) and the software DRXWIN® (Primo, 2001) was used to analyze the data.

Results

The substrata under the landfills have a similar proportion of clay (sheet-silicate content,

Table 1). The sheet silicates are made up primarily of kaolinite in L11 (absent in L51) and

smectite in L51 (neither present in L11). Illite content is similar in both substrata, while a small

amount of chlorite was only detected in L11 substratum. Regarding the associated minerals, it is

noticeable the presence of carbonates, such as calcite, in L51 substratum (Table 1), much more in

L51-B2 than in the other boreholes.

Table 1. Average mineralogical composition (mass %) ± standard error of the landfills substrata

Substrata Sheet silicates Non sheet silicates Illite Smectite Kaolinite Chlorite ∑ Quartz

FeldsparsCalcite Dolomite

Sodic PotassicL11 6 ± 3 — 17 ± 2 — 32 ± 2 65 ± 2 2 ± 0 1 ± 0 — —L51 6 ± 2 19 ± 2 — 4 ± 1 38 ± 2 37 ± 4 8 ± 6 8 ± 1 15 ± 4 <1

∑: sum of sheet silicates.

Table 2 collects the minima and maxima values, and also the mean and standard

deviations of SSA, CEC, h and ρb. SSA and CEC vary positively related to the sheet-silicate

content. Generally, the deepest samples have less h and higher ρb than the others.

XII

Table

Substrata

L11 L51

SSA: Spe

T

remarkab

Figure

A

L11 (Fig

case, NH

(in the sh

International S

e 2. Minima

SSA (m2/

m - M µ 2 - 20 10

4 - 33 14

ecific surfac

The pH subst

bly in shallow

2. a): pH ev

sol, alkalin

Although no

ure 2.b), the

H4+ sol, alkalin

hallowest sam

Symposium on

(m), maxim

param

/g) CE

± σ m - 0 ± 5 0.5 –

4 ± 10 6.6 –

e area, CEC

trata remains

w samples (F

volution with

nity) and exc

clear trend h

e transport of

nity and NH4

mples) to 0.1

n Environmenta

ma (M), mean

eters measur

EC (cmol+/kg

M µ ±14.4 7.1 ±

– 88.9 22.7 ±

C: cationic-ex

s basic under

Figure 2.a).

h depth. b), c

changeable c

has been iden

f the ions in

4+ ex decreas

1, 10 and 0.1

al Geotechnolo

408

ns (µ) and st

red in the lan

g) ± σ m -± 3.3 9.6 -

± 22.8 9.5 -

xchange cap

r L51, and a

c): Evolution

cations (K+ e

ntified for th

L51 shows a

e from 130 m

1, respective

ogy, Energy an

L

tandard devi

ndfill substra

h (%) M µ ± 24.6 21.4 ±

28.8 20.2 ±

acity, h: moi

acid under L1

n of soluble

ex, Na+ ex, N

he main solu

a decrease te

mmol/kg, 16

ely.

nd Global Susta

Los Angeles, C

ations (σ) va

ata

ρb

σ m - M8.5 1.28 - 2

6.5 1.35 - 2

isture, ρb: bu

11. The latte

ions (NH4+ s

NH4+ ex) vs.

uble and exch

endency (Fig

62 mmol/kg

ainable Develo

CA, June 27-29

alues of som

(·103 kg/m3)

M µ ± σ2.04 1.78 ± 0

2.11 1.67 ± 0

ulk density.

er is especial

sol, Na+ sol,

. depth

hangeable io

gure 2.c). In

and 10 cmo

opment

9, 2012

me

σ0.24 0.25

lly

, Cl-

ons in

this

l+/kg

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

409

Discussion

The landfills substrata were between 20% of moisture and 1.7·103 kg/m3 of density,

showing saturation conditions favourable to diffusion transport. Only L51 presents a retention of

the pollution front after 1-m depth (Figure 2.c), providing a percentage decrease of 94, 99 and

100% of the ions that contribute to the alkalinity, the NH4+ ex and the NH4

+ sol, respectively.

These results are comparable to those estimated for a clay-solidified grouting curtain (cement-

clay ratio of 1:3) by Chen et al. (2005), which were 83 and 95% for the minimum and maximum

retention. The calculated depth is within the same range as the ones registered in other two

natural clayey materials under 15-year old MW landfills (i) for Na+ and Cl- (up to 1.3 m) (Yanful

et al, 1988) and (ii) for Na+, Cl- and WSOC (1 m) (Quigley et al., 1987). On the other side,

deeper depths than this, were estimated by (i) Munro et al. (1997) in fractured indurated clayey

soils and (ii) Christensen et al.(1994); Williams (1999 and Butler et al. (2003) in sandstone and

sandy overburden.

As the natural geological barrier established in the Council Directive 1999/31/EC must be

at least 1 m thick (depth), it was calculated the ratio decrease per metre depth of each indicative

parameter, Dm (m-1), following the equation (2).

Dm= depthretentiondecreasepercentage

100 (2)

The results showed that after 1 m of the L51 material, NH4+ sol, alkalinity and NH4

+ ex

decrease 100, 90 and 90%, respectively.

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

410

The main differences between the substrata are the dominant minerals: although both

have similar sheet-silicate contents, L51 have an important presence of smectite and carbonate

minerals (Table 1). In the first case, smectite would be responsible for the high CEC and,

therefore, it provides an important surface and chemical reactivity with solutes by means of

exchangeable reactions. In the second case, carbonates act as a buffer system maintaining basic

conditions, which are favourable to precipitation of S2- under reducing conditions or metal

cations under oxidizing conditions (Figure 3). The inorganic carbon species, also contributes to

the immobilization of cationic pollutants.

Figure 3. Representation of pe vs. pH values of the substrata samples in the Fe-O2-H2O system

(25 ºC and 1 atm)

Summary

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14-16

-12

-8

-4

0

4

8

12

16

20 L11 L51

Fe3+

Fe(OH)3(s)

pe

pH

Fe2+

Reducing water limit, H2

Oxidizing water limit, O2

Fe(OH)2(s)

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

411

This study reports the influence of mineralogy and aqueous environment on the capacity

of two natural substrata to retain the leachate pollution. It was determined the variation of soluble

contaminants with depth and it was identified L51 substrata as a good barrier to the migration of

the main ions (>90% concentration decrease, in 1.05 m, after 14 years of waste deposit), unlike

in the case of L11 substrata. Comparing the results of the depth extend of the parameters in L51

to other studies, it was proved that this natural substrata can be as good as some engineering

barriers for retaining contaminants.

Having investigated in advance the potential impact of leachate pollution, we have

obtained proper estimations to considering the use of L51 illitic-smectitic materials as a

geological barrier. Its good retention capacity was attributed to smectite (mineral that governs

exchangeable reactions) and carbonates (minerals that govern pH state and

dissolution/precipitation of carbonate related aqueous species), both processes would confront

the advance of leachate pollution.

References

UNE 22-161-92. Standard method for mineralogical quantification of clay samples containing

sepiolite. 1992.

UNE 22-164-94. Standard method for BET specific surface determination in sepiolite-based

materials. 1994.

Council Directive 1999/31/EC, of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste. O.J.L. 005. European

Union legislation.

Allen, A. (2001). Containment landfills: the myth of sustainability. Engineering Geology, 60 (1-

4): 3-19.

Barahona, E. (1974). Arcillas de ladrillería de la provincia de Granada: evaluación de algunos

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

412

ensayos de materias primas. Granada University, PhD Thesis.

Butler, A. P., Brook, C., Godley, A., Lewin, K. & Young, C. P. (2003). Attenuation of landfill

leachate in unsaturated sandstone. In: Proc. Sardinia 2003, Ninth International Landfill

Symposium. Cagliari, CISA

Chen, Y. G., Zhang, K. N. & Huang, C. B. (2005). Analysis on contaminants transport process

through clay-solidified grouting curtain in MSW landfills. Journal of Central South

University of Technology, 12 (Suppl. 1): 168-172.

Christensen, T. H., Cossu, R. & Stegmann, R. (1994). Principles of landfill barrier systems. In

Landfilling on Waste: Barriers. T. H. Christensen, R. Cossu & R. Stegmann. E. and

F.N.Spon: 3-10. London.

Moore, D. M. & Reynolds, R. C., Jr. (1997). X - Ray Diffraction and the identification and

analysis of clay minerals. Oxford University Press, 332.

Munro, I. R. P., Macquarrie, K. T. B., Valsangkar, A. J. & Kan, K. T. (1997). Migration of

landfill leachate into a shallow clayey till in southern New Brunswick: A field and

modelling investigation. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 34 (2): 204-219.

Primo, V. (2001). DRXWIN© vs 2.2.56, A Graphical and analytical tool for powder XRD

Patterns.

Quigley, R. M., Fernandez, F., Yanful, E. K., Helgason, T., Margaritis, A. & Whitby, J. L.

(1987). Hydraulic conductivity of contaminated natural clay directly below a domestic

landfill. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 24 (3): 377-383.

Rhoades, J. D. (1982). Cation exchange capacity. In: Methods of Soil analysis. American Society

of Agronomy, Part 2. Agron. Monogr. 9. Madison.

Schultz, L. G. (19649. Quantitative interpretation of mineralogical composition from X-ray and

XII International Symposium on Environmental Geotechnology, Energy and Global Sustainable Development

Los Angeles, CA, June 27-29, 2012

413

chemical data for the Pierre Shale. U.S. Geological Survey professional paper, 391-c: 1-

31.

Srodon, J., Drits, V. A., Mccarty, D. K., Hsieh, J. C. C. & Eberl, D. D. (2001). Quantitative X-

Ray Diffraction analysis of clay-bearing rocks from random preparations. Clays and Clay

Minerals, 49 (6): 514-528.

Thomas, G. W. (1982). Exchangeable cations. In: Methods of Soil Analysis. American Society

of Agronomy, Part 2. Madison.

Williams, G.M. (1999). Natural Attenuation of contaminants in a lacustrine sand aquifer at Villa

Farm, UK. In: Proc. Sardinia 99, Seventh International Landfill Symposium: 229-236.

Cagliari, CISA

Yanful, E. K., Quigley, R. M. & Nesbitt, H. W. (1988). Heavy metal migration at a landfill site,

Sarnia, Ontario, Canada—2: metal partitioning and geotechnical implications. Applied

Geochemistry, 3: 623-629.