THE VALIDATION AND DEVELOPMENT

OF AN INTEGRATED LANDFILL GAS RISK

ASSESSMENT MODEL: GASSIM

R.G. GREGORY*, G.M. ATTENBOROUGH**, D.H. HALL* AND C. DEED°

* Golder Associates (UK) Ltd, Nottingham, NG12 4DG, UK

** Golder Associates (UK) Ltd, Maidenhead, Berkshire, SL6 8BY, UK
° Environment Agency, NCAS, Cameron House, Lancaster, LA1 4XQ UK

SUMMARY: The emissions of bulk and trace gases from landfills created either directly from
waste decomposition or from the combustion of landfill gas (LFG) during flaring and/or gas
utilisation, have the potential to impact the global atmosphere, the local environment and expose
humans to potential health risks. The European Directives on Landfill and on Integrated
Pollution Prevention and Control have been incorporated into UK regulations, and GasSim has
been developed for the Environment Agency of England and Wales (the Agency) as a risk
assessment tool to aid in the evaluation of these impacts, and help landfill operators comply with
the new regulations and guidance. GasSim assesses the likelihood of these processes and the
magnitude of the impacts and considers the uncertainty in processes and parameters, using a
Monte Carlo Simulation, in a reproducible manner.

1. INTRODUCTION

There have been a number of drivers behind the development of GasSim. First was the need to
substantiate and quantify the potential human exposure from living near and working on
landfills. Recent research (Elliott et al, 2001; Vrijheid et al, 2002) has indicated a statistical (but
not necessarily causal) relationship between an adverse effect on human health, e.g. birth defects,
and landfill emissions. Second was the need for a management tool to help the UK meet the
Kyoto requirement to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases to the environment. Methane is
the second most important anthropogenic greenhouse gas, after carbon dioxide, and is emitted
from landfills in significant quantities. Thirdly, the regulatory regime was changing, and a
consistent and auditable approach to LFG management was required.
There are three European Union (EU) Directives, which apply to the generation and
management of landfill gas:
• the European Union Waste Framework Directive (EC, 1991), which requires that waste is
recovered or disposed without using methods that could endanger human health or harm the
environment;
• the Landfill Directive (EC, 1999), which requires waste operators to control the accumulation
and migration of LFG, to collect and flare or utilise LFG from landfills receiving
biodegradable waste, and minimise damage or deterioration of the environment; and

Proceedings Sardinia 2003, Ninth International Waste Management and Landfill Symposium
S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Italy; 6 - 10 October 2003
 2003 by CISA, Environmental Sanitary Engineering Centre, Italy
• the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) Directive (EC, 1996), which requires
preventative measures are taken against pollution through flaring and utilisation.
These directives, which have been implemented into UK regulations, cover the design,
construction, operation and maintenance of the LFG management systems and require:
• gas management systems to control the migration and release of LFG;
• minimising the contribution to global warming;
• management of odour; and
• reporting of releases of named pollutants (the Pollution Inventory). This requires either
measurement or modelling of gas generation, surface emissions, and combustion plant
emissions, including tracking and reporting the changes to these emissions through time.
The guidance developed for the industry by the Environment Agency (Environment Agency,
2002a), to guide the management of LFG under the new regulations, adopts a risk based
approach coupled with the concept of BAT (best available techniques) (Environment Agency,
2002b), to minimise the impact on:
• health from trace components and combustion products;
• the local environment by odour and vegetation stress; and
• global atmosphere by ozone depletion and global warming.
The risk of these processes occurring has previously been assessed using a mixture of
experience, calculations and computer models. GasSim has therefore been developed to support
the risk assessors’ experience by providing a standard methodology and LFG generation and
emissions management tool for the Environment Agency, landfill operators, gas utilisation plant
operators and consultants.
In order to quantitatively evaluate the risks of these processes and the magnitude of the
impacts, GasSim considers the uncertainty in input parameters using a Monte Carlo Simulation.
Allowing Parameter uncertainty (and to some extent model uncertainty) to be dealt with by
specifying a range of values for each input parameter rather than a single number, using
probability density functions (PDFs). GasSim is designed to aid LFG risk assessment, by
enabling LFG generation, emissions, migration/dispersion and impact/exposure to be assessed in
a reproducible manner by those familiar with the subject. GasSim was developed from the
Environment Agency’s HELGA research model (Gregory et al., 1999).

2. CONCEPTUAL MODEL

The conceptual model (Figure 1) has a modular structure. Each module incorporates the effects
of additional processes. Progression to successive modules is only necessary if this information
is required, e.g. LFG generation and emissions can be determined without proceeding through
subsequent modules to optimise time and data collection constraints. Time dependency is built
into all modules.
GasSim is divided into 5 main modules (or assessment stages), described in detail below:
• gas generation (the source term);
• gas emissions (fugitive surface and lateral emissions, and combustion plant emissions);
• environmental transport through atmospheric dispersion;
• environmental transport through terrestrial lateral migration; and
• human exposure and other environmental impacts.
Figure 1. The GasSim Conceptual Model.

2.1 Gas Generation (the Source Term)

The heart of the model is the source term module, which simulates the generation of methane,
carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and hydrogen sulphide produced from the following characteristics:
• the waste breakdown, the mix of different waste streams e.g. domestic, civic amenity and
commercial waste;
• the waste composition, e.g. the proportion of paper, textiles and putrescible materials. The
waste fractions are defined by the percentage of the material that can decompose, the
proportion of cellulose and hemi-cellulose, and the degradability of the waste fraction;
• the waste moisture content, from the infiltration, leachate management, and waste physical
parameters; and
• the overall biodegradability or rate of decay of cellulose in the waste fractions.
The definition of these input parameters allows the model to be highly flexible and tailored to
individual landfill sites, taking account of specific waste streams, filling/deposition rates and
environmental conditions.
The degradation of carbon in the waste is either simulated by dividing the waste make-up of
the different waste streams into three waste fractions, which degrade slowly (e.g. newspaper),
moderately (e.g. miscellaneous combustible) or rapidly (e.g. putrescibles). Alternatively this can
be simulated using the LandGem approach (Pelt et al., 1998). Both methods determine the
quantity of available carbon used to produce methane and carbon dioxide in a given year.
The generation of trace gases is simulated by the user defining the concentration of the trace
gas (mg.m-3) within the bulk landfill gas. GasSim determines the quantity of trace gas generated
by proportioning the concentration of the trace gas species to the LFG generation rate.
Additionally GasSim allows the trace gas concentration to deplete over time, using a half-life
approach to simulate a declining source term.

2.2 Emissions
Emissions from a landfill are normally, but not always, controlled by engineering measures, e.g.
the installation of engineered barriers (cap and liner) and gas collection system. The gas
collected can then be flared or utilised. The GasSim model assumes that any LFG generated and
not collected will be emitted through the landfill cap or lateral liner at a steady state. The
emissions from engines and/or flares are determined from the quantity of gas combusted and:
• the concentration of the species in LFG and/or the combustion emissions; or
• the concentration of a parent species, which reacts to form the emitted species, in LFG; or
• the monitored concentration of the emissions.
GasSim is a steady state model that assumes that all the gas generated is emitted by some
pathway or another. This gas will be either collected and used by flares and/or engines or lost
through fugitive surface or lateral emissions. Surface emissions are determined by combining
the fugitive emissions from the completed (capped) and operational (uncapped) areas. This
differentiation is made since GasSim assumes that gas generated from the uncapped area is
emitted directly through the surface, without methane oxidation. It is assumed the open surface
of the waste will be far more permeable that the sides of the landfill, which may or may not be
engineered. The surface emissions from the uncapped areas are calculated using the percentage
of the uncapped area and the gas generation rate. For the engineered surfaces, the proportion of
emissions lost laterally through the side liner, compared to the proportion lost through the capped
surface is calculated and partitioned using the permeability, thickness and unsaturated surface
area of the most impervious layers of each. GasSim assumes that gas movement is via plug flow
and that both the cap and liner are homogenous and isotropic, even though in practice poor
cap/liner construction and maintenance can result in cracks and micro-fractures. Although these
may be locally important, their net effect on the emissions will be averaged out across the site.
GasSim also allows the option to reduce the emissions of methane through the cap by
biological methane oxidation by simulating the quantity of emission that pass though that cap
(and are subject to oxidative processes) compared to that which passes unoxidised through
fissures. The model allows the use of the IPCC methodology (IPCC 1996a, 1996b), or a user
defined approach where the emissions through the cap are reduced by a user defined or default
percentage if a sufficiently oxidative thickness of soil is present above the cap, and the flux is
less than the methane oxidising capacity of the microbial population. The amount of fissuring of
the cap can be specifically modelled.
GasSim simulates the surface and lateral emission of trace gases using the concentration of
the species per m3 of LFG and the LFG emission rate, by proportioning the quantity of trace gas
generated along the same lines as the as the bulk gases.

2.3 Environmental Transport

2.3.1 Lateral Migration
This is simulated simplistically assuming one-dimensional plug flow, which is emitted uniformly
from all sides of the landfill. The module uses an advection and dispersion equation to
determine the migration of gas emitted through the liner, which is similar to the equation used
for the migration of contaminants in groundwater by LandSim II (Environment Agency, 2002c).
The advection term is determined by the pressure in the landfill, which is proportional to the
quantity of gas that migrates laterally. GasSim assumes that the landfill is at steady state,
therefore the velocity at which the gas escapes the landfill can be determined. The dispersion
term simulates the concentration gradient, using the dispersivity of the gas in air with corrections
for the soil porosity and moisture content of the geosphere.
2.3.2 Atmospheric Dispersion
Atmospheric dispersion of the emissions from the engines, flares and the surface is simulated
using a simple Gaussian plume model (NRPB, 1995). This takes into account the effects of
thermal plume rise associated with flares and engines and simulates the removal of gases form
the atmosphere by both wet and dry deposition. GasSim assumes that the emissions from the
landfill represent a point source. The module simulates the dispersion of the gases using
meteorological data, e.g. the wind rose, the frequency of different Pasquill-Gifford stability
conditions, and the average wind speeds and mixing layer heights for each of these.

2.4 Environmental Impact/Exposure

The impact of the emissions can be assessed in several different ways, depending on the nature
and extent of the risk assessment:
• atmospheric concentrations of emitted substances at the site boundary or at any receptor;
• global warming potential and ozone depletion potential (GWP and ODP);
• potential for lateral terrestrial migration and vegetation stress;
• odour impacts;
• on-site worker exposure, and off-site population exposure at any receptor.

2.4.1 Atmospheric concentrations and environmental benchmarking

As part of the Agency’s methodology for a LFG risk assessment (Environment Agency, 2002a,
2002b), the landfill is treated as any other PPC process. The process contribution (PC) for a
number of selected combustion plant and fugitive landfill emissions from the landfill is the long
term (annual) mean exposure (at the 95th percentile). If these fall below 1% of the environmental
benchmark (usually the Environmental Assessment Level or EAL (Environment Agency,
2002b)) , then no additional evaluation is required. If they do not (and this is commonly the case
with combustion plant emissions) then additional assessment is required. For long-term releases,
the background concentration of a substance is usually the dominating factor. The recommended
approach is to calculate a value called the total predicted environmental concentration (PEC),
which is the sum of the PC and the local background concentration. More detailed modelling or
reassessment is potentially indicated if the value of the PEC exceeds 70% of the EAL. This is
because the background level is already high, and there is a risk that the additional contribution
from the landfill could breach the benchmark.

2.4.2 Climate change

The contribution that the landfill has on climate change is determined by calculating the GWP
and ODP, of the emissions from engines, flares and through the surface. The emissions through
the lateral liner are not included as this is an unintentional release pathway. The benefit of gas
utilisation/flaring over no active gas management can be evaluated, and this is a good module to
use to demonstrate overall control of LFG emissions.

2.4.3 Lateral migration and vegetation stress

The impact of methane, carbon dioxide, and other volatiles emitted from the landfill via lateral
migration can be evaluated at a human receptor offsite, and the impact on vegetation in the local
environment can also be simulated. The ground gas concentrations are used subsequently for
human exposure modelling. The zone in which vegetation stress could be significant is evaluated
by determining the distance at which the laterally migrated gases reduce below a default or user
defined level of displacement of root zone oxygen.
2.4.4 Odour
The impact of odour can be assessed in three ways. The first determines the point at which the
concentration of an odourous trace gas component falls below its odour threshold value. This is
simulated using the atmospheric distribution module and selecting the Pasquill categories F-G,
which represent those atmospheric conditions when the plume grounds closest to the landfill site,
and is most likely to be associated with odour complaints. The second method simulates the
emissions of European Odour Units (OUE) from the site. GasSim treats OUE as if they were any
other volatile substance. Thirdly, GasSim allows the simulation of measured OUE from various
parts of the site, including uncapped, capped and discrete features e.g. passive venting wells.

2.4.5 Exposure
Exposure to humans is determined for a number of set scenarios:
• Residential with plant uptake;
• Residential without plant uptake;
• Allotments;
• Commercial & Industrial; and
• Worker exposure.
Each of these exposure scenarios has a defined number of exposure pathways, exposure
algorithms, and exposure factors based on a member of the critical group, and each contaminant
considered has a contaminant specific set of physico-chemical properties associated with it.
GasSim primarily undertakes this exposure assessment following the approach used in the
CLEA model (Environment Agency and DEFRA, 2002), with some minor modifications.

3. MODEL VALIDATION

In order for any model to be used with confidence, it is essential that it can represent reality.
Therefore a series of verification and validation trials were undertaken. Verification comprised
comparison of the GasSim source term against other gas production models (HELGA: Gregory
et al., 1999, and LandGem: Pelt et al, 1998). When it was shown that GasSim produced good
replication of the outputs from these models, it was time to compare GasSim forecasts with other
landfills where data had been collected by different means (validation).

3.1 Validation of LFG Generation against Test Cells

The bulk gas generation source term was validated against LFG generation data collected by the
University of Strathclyde from the Auchencarroch test cells. The cells had received a range of
treatments and therefore the sum of all the gas produced by the emplaced waste 2 – 3 years after
filling was used to validate the model (Figure 2a). The model and data are in good agreement.

3.2 Validation of LFG Generation and Emissions against an unnamed UK Landfill

The bulk gas generation source term and surface emissions modules have also been validated
against a landfill in the UK which has received 2 million tonnes of domestic waste over an eight
year period, receiving 200,000 t.y-1 for the first four years, 260,000 t.y-1 for the next two years
and 333,000 t.y-1 for the final two years. Unlike Auchencarroch, which was fresh waste, the
simulated data were compared to monitoring data obtained 18 to 20 years after filling
commenced.
The landfill was constructed with a 1m CQA clay cap and liner, compacted to a specification of
1x10-9 m.s-1 , and occupies an area of 7 Ha. The site contained gas plant that could abstract
between 700 and 1000 m3h-1 , which was simulated at two different collection efficiencies:
• Scenario 1: 85% LFG collection efficiency and 70% biological oxidation of fugitive methane.
• Scenario 2: 85% LFG collection efficiency and 90% biological oxidation of fugitive methane.
Again, the correlation between the model and reality is good (Figure 2b).

Observed
range

2a. Auchencarroch Test Cells 2b. Unnamed UK Landfill

Figure 2. Modelled data overlain by observed ranges, for recently deposited waste (Figure
2a) and aged waste (Figure 2b).

The bulk LFG surface emissions module predicts that the average net surface emissions after
allowing for LFG collection and biological methane oxidation for this unnamed UK landfill lies
between 10-1 mg.m2.s-1 and 10-3 mg.m2.s-1, for both scenarios. The values are slightly higher
than those reported in the HELGA framework. However, these values are within the range
observed for similar sites reported in the HELGA framework (10-4 – 1 mg.m2.s-1) depending on
the methodology used to determine the emissions (Gregory et al. 1999).

3.3 Validation of Surface Emissions against an unnamed UK Landfill

The bulk gas source generation module has also been validated against a second unnamed UK
landfill, which has received 1.6 million tonnes of predominantly commercial waste, with varying
quantities of domestic and inert material, over a 24 year period. The carbon dioxide to methane
ratio of 43:57 was determined by on-site monitoring. The landfill occupies an area of
approximately 24 Ha. The 0.65m landfill clay cap was completed in 2002. The liner was
constructed to 1.5m thickness, with both the cap and the liner engineered to a CQA specification
of 1x10-9 m.s-1. The site contained one gas engine operating at 450 m3hr-1 and four flares (three
rated at 50 – 500 m3hr-1 and one 100 – 1500 m3hr-1, which were assumed to be operating at 90%
efficiency. The GasSim simulation predicts that the average net surface emissions after allowing
for LFG collection and biological methane oxidation are between 2x10-2 and 5x10-2 mg.m2s-1.
These values were within the range of methane emissions reported in the field from the different
capping types, which ranged from 2x10-4 mg.m2s-1 to 4x10+2 mg.m2s-1, and were very close to
the net average emission of 9x10-2 mg.m2s-1.
3.4 Validation of Trace Gas Surface Emissions against Green Valley Landfill (USA)
The trace surface emissions module has been validated against Green Valley landfill site (USA),
which had been monitored for the emissions of a number of trace gas species (Bogner et al.,
1997). GasSim was validated against measured emission rates for benzene, tetrachloroethene,
trichloroethene and vinyl chloride using default waste inputs and the default half life of 4.11
years ±1.56 years. The landfill was simulated as receiving 146,455 t.y-1 for 22 years, with a
compacted clay cap, and a surface area of 8 Ha. The site contained two 2345 m3h-1 engines and
two 3500 m3h-1 flares, which were assumed to be operating at between 70 and 90% efficiency.
The trace gas validation for Green Valley landfill indicated that the observed range of
benzene, tetrachloroethene and vinyl chloride were in the range that GasSim predicts (Table 1).

Table 1 – Green Valley simulated and observed trace gas emissions.

Species GasSim Outcome Bogner et al. (1997) Reported range
5% (mg.m-2s-1) 95% (mg.m-2s-1) Min (mg.m-2s-1) Max (mg.m-2s-1)
Benzene 8.9x10-6 1.3 x10-2 - 5.37 x10-5
Tetrachloroethene 6.3 x10-6 1.6 x10-1 3.99x10-7 1.23 x10-5
Trichloroethene 3.6 x10-5 5.1 x10-2 4.50 x10 -10 3.10 x10-6
Vinyl Chloride 1.6 x10-5 1.8 x10-2 9.61 x10-6 3.18 x10-5

GasSim does overestimate the emissions of VOCs at this site. The 5th percentile of the GasSim
emissions forecasts occur at a similar order of magnitude as the maximum observed emissions.
This is believed to be due to differences between the conceptual models in GasSim and the
processes taking place at Green Valley. GasSim does not simulate compositional changes in
VOCs in the soil cap by microbiological and other processes, as discussed by Bogner et al.
(1997) whilst Bogner et al (1997) have limited data from high emission point sources, e.g.
fissures.

3.5 Other validation trials

3.5.1 Lateral migration
Additional validation data have been used to evaluate the lateral migration module. This has
been carried out against two sites: Foxhall landfill, a well documented case of lateral migration
from an unlined landfill (Williams et al. 1999), and Skellingsted landfill (Christophersen and
Kjeldsen, 2001). Both sites had a substantial amount of research data, and certainly far more than
would be expected to be available at any site where migration had not been identified. At
Foxhall, GasSim matched the extent of the plume with the 10th percentile (higher percentiles
overestimating migration), whereas at Skellingsted, GasSim estimates of the extent of the plume
bracketed the observations. In both cases, lateral migration is not far from the landfill (30 – 40m
at Foxhall, 15 – 35m at Skellingsted). The overestimatation of migration is attributed to another
conceptual model difference: GasSim does not allow for conversions or methane oxidation in the
migrating gas plume, whereas in reality this occurs.
The lateral migration module in GasSim is conceptually simplistic in design (though the
mathematics are not simple), and is primarily included in the model to provide a terrestrial
transport mechanism for volatiles to the exposure module. Since so much site specific data are
required to simulate terrestrial migration accurately, the lateral migration module should only be
used for scoping impact studies.
3.5.2 Atmospheric dispersion
A single validation trial was performed for the well documented hydrogen sulphide dispersion
plume reported from Nant y Gwyddon landfill (Scott et al., 1998). The hydrogen sulphide sub-
model was used to calculate emissions, and both this sub-model and the data collected on site
show log triangular distributions of hydrogen sulphide emissions over six orders of magnitude at
the landfill surface. The flux value used by Scott et al (1998) for atmospheric dispersion
purposes agrees well with the GasSim 50th percentile (10.8 g.h-1 compared with 15 g.h-1). While
the GasSim model should not be used to forecast individual odour events (it is primarily
designed to produce data for long term exposure calculations), the results of the dispersion model
are encouraging. Scott et al (1998) used ADMS to forecast the maximum predicted
concentrations at Brynhyfryd Street, 700m south of the landfill, as 10ppb, and the maximum
observed 30 minute average concentration as 6ppb. GasSim cannot forecast events of 30 minute
duration, but predicts Pasquill stability category F-G (near still air conditions) concentrations of
2.2ppb. Given the conceptual model differences between GasSim and ADMS, this is considered
to be a reasonable comparison.

4. CONCLUSIONS VALIDATING THE MODEL

The GasSim model was designed to allow the risks from LFG to be assessed during both at the
planning, operational and post operational stages of a landfill stages to serve a number of
purposes:
• to aid decision making;
• to manage the environmental impact on local receptors, by allowing the optimisation of
different capping designs and flare/gas engine combinations; and
• to perform quantitative assessment of the exposure impact to humans, vegetation, the global
atmosphere, and the extent of odour releases.
The landfill can be simulated using a limited amount of site-specific data, with uncertainties in
the data sets modelled using PDFs and Monte Carlo simulation. Generic data are provided,
which cover information that individual site operators are unlikely to have, e.g. for trace gas
concentrations, destruction efficiencies of flares and gas engines, and composition of different
waste streams.
The verification trails have demonstrated that the GasSim model produces results that agree
with other models, namely LandGem and the equations used in HELGA framework. The initial
validation trails are encouraging with the source and emissions modules simulating gas
production in accordance with reality.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

GasSim was developed by Golder Associates and Land Quality Management Ltd for The
Environment Agency of England and Wales. This paper is produced with permission. The views
expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Agency.
This paper also helps us celebrate the life of Gary Attenborough (20 April 1971 – 28 October
2002). Four months after the release of GasSim, Gary suffered a fatal heart attack at the age of
31. Gary was a key technical contributor, and all who knew him and worked with him knew the
drive and enthusiasm he put into his work. He remains in our memories.
REFERENCES

Bognor J., Spokas K., Niemann M., Neimann L., and Baker J., (1997) Emissions of non-methane
organic compounds at the Illinois (USA) landfill site: preliminary field measurements.
Proceedings Sardinia 97, Sixth International Landfill Symposium, CISA, Cagliari, 127 – 138.
Christophersen, M., and Kjeldsen, P. (2001) Lateral gas transport in soil adjacent to an old
landfill: factors governing gas migration. Waste Management and Research, 19, 144 – 159.
EC, 1991, Council Directive 75/442/EEC on waste, as amended by Council Directive
91/156/EEC concerning The Framework Directive on Waste. Official Journal of the European
Communities.
EC, 1996. “Council Directive 96/61/EC of 24 September 1996 concerning Integrated Pollution
Prevention and Control”. Official Journal of the European Communities.
EC, 1999. “Council Directive 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste”. Official
Journal of the European Communities.
Elliott P., Morris S., Briggs D., de Hoogh C., Hurt C., Jensen T.K., Maitland I., Lewin A.,
Richardson S., Wakefield J., and Jarup L., 2001. Birth outcomes and selected cancers in
populations living near landfill sites. Report to Department of Health by the Small Area
Health Statistics Unit, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Imperial College,
London.
Environment Agency, 2002a, The Management of Landfill Gas. Environment Agency, draft for
consultation, November 2002.
Environment Agency, 2002b, Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC).
Environmental Assessment and Appraisal of BAT. Horizontal Guidance Note IPPC H1.
Environment Agency, draft 3.1 for consultation, July 2002.
Environment Agency, 2002c, LandSim, Landfill Performance Simulation by Monte Carlo
Simulation. Environment Agency R&D Publication 120.
Environment Agency and DEFRA, 2002, The contaminated land exposure assessment model
(CLEA): Technical basis and algorithms. Environment Agency R&D Publication CLR10.
Gregory R.G., Revans A.J., Hill M.D., Meadows M.P., Paul L. and Ferguson C.C., 1999,
A framework to assess the risks to human health and the environment from landfill gas.
Environment Agency Technical Report P271.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1996a. Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories: Reference Manual, Chapter 6.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 1996b. IPCC Expert Group on Waste, Topical
Workshop on Carbon Conversion and Methane Oxidation in Solid Waste Disposal Sites,
Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago, USA, 25 October 1996.
NRPB, 1995. Methodology for assessing the radiological consequences of routine releases of
radionuclides to the environment, Report EUR 15760, Luxembourg, European Commission.
Pelt R., White C., Blackard A., Bass R. L., and Burklin C., and Heaton R. E., 1998, User's
Manual Landfill Gas Emissions Model, USEPA Contract 68-D1-0117, EPA.
Scott, P.E., Crozier, F., Birch, C., and Leach, A. (1998). Investigations into odour problems at
Nant-y-Gwyddon landfill, South East Wales. Entec Report 97194 to the Environment Agency.
Vrijheid M., Dolk H., Armstrong B., Abramsky L., Bianchi F., Fazarinc I., Garne E., Ide R.,
Nelen V., Robert E., Scott J.E.S., Stone D. and Tenconi R. (2002). Chromosomal congenital
anomalies and residence near hazardous waste landfill sites. The Lancet, 359, 320-322.
Williams, G.M., Ward G., and Noy D.H. (1999). Dynamics of landfill gas migration in
unconsolidated sands. Waste Management and Research 17, 327 – 342.