Integrated resiliency and sustainability assessment of biogeochemical cover system to mitigate landfill gas emissions

Municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills are the third-largest anthropogenic source of methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) emissions in the United States, emitting 103.7 million metric tons of CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent in 2019. Despite engineered gas collection and soil cover systems, fugitive landfill gas (LFG) emissions, principally CH<sub>4</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub>, remain substantial. An innovative biogeochemical cover (BGCC) system integrates a CH<sub>4</sub>-oxidation layer (MOL) of biochar-amended soil with a CO<sub>2</sub>-sequestration layer (CSL) incorporating alkaline industrial byproducts, namely basic oxygen furnace (BOF) slag or cement kiln dust (CKD). Laboratory column experiments evaluated two configurations: BGCC-PWBOF (pinewood-biochar -MOL with BOF-slag -CSL) and BGCC-RHCKD (rice-husk-biochar -MOL with CKD-CSL), both demonstrating mitigation of CH<sub>4</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. Recognizing the urgency of climate mitigation, increasing climate-induced stresses, and the need for sustainable engineering, this study comparatively evaluates BGCC versus conventional soil cover (SC) systems using the tiered quantitative assessment of life-cycle sustainability and resiliency (TQUALICSR) framework. A comprehensive resilience assessment examined technical performance under representative climate shocks and quantified triple-bottom-line (TBL) implications in the event of failure; in parallel, a sustainability assessment spanned environmental, social, and economic dimensions. Results indicate that BGCC-RHCKD outperforms BGCC-PWBOF and SC in both resilience and sustainability. In addition, both BGCCs enable the beneficial use of materials such as biochar feedstocks, BOF slag, and CKD, otherwise destined for disposal, advancing waste-to-resource circularity. The findings indicate superior environmental sustainability, economic viability, and social acceptability for BGCC-RHCKD, providing a compelling case for its adoption as an alternative to conventional SC for enhanced mitigation and resource circularity across diverse operating conditions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Waste Management
Published
2025-10-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2025.115200
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Landfill Environmental Impact Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Integrated resiliency and sustainability assessment of biogeochemical cover system to mitigate landfill gas emissions

Krishna R. Reddy, Gaurav Verma
1 citations
Waste Management
Landfill Environmental Impact Studies
1.00
article

Integrated resiliency and sustainability assessment of biogeochemical cover system to mitigate landfill gas emissions

Krishna R. Reddy, Gaurav Verma
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills are the third-largest anthropogenic source of methane (CH<sub>4</sub>) emissions in the United States, emitting 103.7 million metric tons of CO<sub>2</sub>-equivalent in 2019. Despite engineered gas collection and soil cover systems, fugitive landfill gas (LFG) emissions, principally CH<sub>4</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub>, remain substantial. An innovative biogeochemical cover (BGCC) system integrates a CH<sub>4</sub>-oxidation layer (MOL) of biochar-amended soil with a CO<sub>2</sub>-sequestration layer (CSL) incorporating alkaline industrial byproducts, namely basic oxygen furnace (BOF) slag or cement kiln dust (CKD). Laboratory column experiments evaluated two configurations: BGCC-PWBOF (pinewood-biochar -MOL with BOF-slag -CSL) and BGCC-RHCKD (rice-husk-biochar -MOL with CKD-CSL), both demonstrating mitigation of CH<sub>4</sub> and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions. Recognizing the urgency of climate mitigation, increasing climate-induced stresses, and the need for sustainable engineering, this study comparatively evaluates BGCC versus conventional soil cover (SC) systems using the tiered quantitative assessment of life-cycle sustainability and resiliency (TQUALICSR) framework. A comprehensive resilience assessment examined technical performance under representative climate shocks and quantified triple-bottom-line (TBL) implications in the event of failure; in parallel, a sustainability assessment spanned environmental, social, and economic dimensions. Results indicate that BGCC-RHCKD outperforms BGCC-PWBOF and SC in both resilience and sustainability. In addition, both BGCCs enable the beneficial use of materials such as biochar feedstocks, BOF slag, and CKD, otherwise destined for disposal, advancing waste-to-resource circularity. The findings indicate superior environmental sustainability, economic viability, and social acceptability for BGCC-RHCKD, providing a compelling case for its adoption as an alternative to conventional SC for enhanced mitigation and resource circularity across diverse operating conditions.

Waste ManagementVol. 209
University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Landfill Environmental Impact Studies
1.00
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.