PHYTOREMEDIATION OF LANDFILL LEACHATE USING HIBISCUS CANNABINUS AND
ACACIA MANGIUM
MEERA A/P MUNUSAMY
DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE
INSTITUTE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES FACULTY OF SCIENCE
UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
2013
ii UNIVERSITY MALAYA
ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION
Name of Candidate: Meera a/p Munusamy (I.C. No: 820626-10-5730) Registration / Matric No: SGR090002
Name of Degree: Master of Science
Title of Project Paper/ Research Report / Dissertation / Thesis: Phytoremediation of Landfill Leachate using Hibiscus cannabinus and Acacia mangium
Field of Study: Environmental Technology I do solemnly and sincerely declare that:
(1) I am the sole author / writer of this Work;
(2) This Work is original;
(3) Any use of any work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing and for permitted purposes and any excerpt or extract from, or reference to or reproduction of any copyright work has been disclosed expressly and sufficiently and the title of the Work and its authorship have been acknowledged in this Work;
(4) I do not have any actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the making of this work constitutes an infringement of any copyright work;
(5) I hereby assign all and every rights in the copyright to this Work to the University of Malaya (“UM”), who henceforth shall be the owner of the copy right in this Work and that any reproduction or use in any form or by any means what so ever is prohibited without the written consent of UM having been first had and obtained;
(6) I am fully aware that if in the course of making this Work I have infringed any copyright whether intentionally or otherwise, I may be subject to legal action or any other action as may be determined by UM.
……… ………..
Candidate’s Signature Date
Subscribed and solemnly declared before,
……… ………...
Witness’s Signature Date
Name:
Designation:
iii ABSTRACT
Resource managers are challenged with waste disposal, leachate produced from its degradation and its impacts to the environment. Jeram landfill leachate contains high amount of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N. Knowledge about the response of Hibiscus cannabinus (Kenaf) and Acacia mangium (Akasia) to landfill leachate irrigation is limited; therefore this study was initiated to investigate the effect of phytoremediation on Jeram landfill leachate.
During pot-culture research, Kenaf and Akasia were irrigated for a period of 120 days in a nursery. Also, hydroponic culture employing Kenaf and Akasia for uptake of pollutants from leachate was carried out in a constructed wetland for contaminant bioconcentration study. These results detail the extensive variation in treatments of leachate, plant responses to leachate irrigation, along with the need and efficacy of plant and growth medium selection to choose superior phytoremediator plant. Leachate which was pretreated with FeCl3 (4g/L) recorded an optimum condition for highest phytoremediation rate at 25% (0.24% N-content) in Kenaf and Akasia in both the pot- culture and hydroponic-culture systems.
Evaluation consisted of testing for differences in plant growth and biomass of leaves, stems, and roots, along with total Fe, As, CN and NH3-N concentration in control and harvest soil, wastewater and in leaf, stems and root tissue. Accumulation of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N was assessed based on mathematical models: Bioconcentration Factor (BCF), Translocation Factor (TF) and Bioaccumulation Kinetics. Kenaf sequestered 0.1–0.7 mg As, 18.5-51.7 mg Fe, 0.1-0.6 mg CN and 2.4-10.5mg NH3-N /g dry weight, which implies that Kenaf can be a bioavailable sink for toxic metals.
Akasia, being a leguminous plant recorded higher BCF than Kenaf for Fe (9.1-14.3), NH3-N (4.2-8.8), CN (1.1-4.3) and As (1.5-2.9). In hydroponic culture, Akasia marked a
iv 24% increase in contaminant uptake efficiency compared to Kenaf through rhizofiltration mechanism.
The ability of Kenaf and Akasia to tolerate these metals and avoid phytotoxicity could be attributed to the phytostabilisation of the metals in the plant roots and hence reduction of toxic metal mobility (translocation factor < 1). During irrigation with leachate, Kenaf and Akasia were also found to have higher biomass compared to control plants. Kenaf and Akasia recorded 49% and 53% higher bioaccumulation capacity, respectively indicating its suitability for phytoextraction of leachate contaminated sites.
The bioaccumulation rate constant of the contaminants in Kenaf and Akasia were in the range of 0.01-0.03 and 0.02–0.04/day, respectively. Half-life of contaminants in Kenaf and Akasia were 35-60 and 25-68 days, respectively.
Development of e-Phytoremediation Modeling System (e-PMS) marked an integration of biological and artificial intelligence knowledge, thus serves as Decision Support System (DSS) platform for future research directions in phytoremediation. The user-friendly interphase and models applied determines the potential and performance of phytoremediator plants.
Overall, these results documented successful uptake of nutrients without detrimental impacts to plant health, which validated the use of landfill leachate as an irrigation and fertilization source for Kenaf and Akasia. In addition, these data will serve as a basis for researchers and resource managers making decisions about future leachate remediation projects.
v ABSTRAK
Pengurus-pengurus sumber tercabar oleh masalah pelupusan sisa, air larut resap yang terhasil daripada degradasi dan impak negatif kepada alam sekitar. Air larut resap dari tapak pelupusan sisa Jeram mengandungi Fe, As, CN dan NH3-N pada kepekatan tinggi. Pengetahuan mengenai tindakbalas Hibiscus cannabinus (Kenaf) dan Acacia mangium (Akasia) terhadap air larut resap adalah terhad, walhal, kajian ini telah dilaksanakan untuk mengkaji kesan fitoremediasi terhadap rawatan air larut resap.
Kenaf dan Akasia telah difertigasi dengan air larut resap bagi tempoh 120 hari di tapak semaian dalam kajian kultur-pot. Selain itu, kultur hidroponik menggunakan Kenaf dan Akasia untuk penyerapan bahan pencemar daripada air larut resap dijalankan di tanah benceh buatan untuk kajian perbandingan bioakumulasi. Kajian ini memperincikan variasi yang luas dalam rawatan air larut resap, tindakbalas tumbuhan kepada rawatan air larut resap, termasuk keperluan dan keberkesanan tumbuhan dan pemilihan medium pertumbuhan dalam penentuan tumbuhan “phytoremediator” yang unggul. Air larut resap yang diprarawat dengan FeCl3 (4g/L) mencatatkan keadaan optimum untuk fitoremediasi kadar tertinggi pada 25% (0.24% kandungan-N) bagi Kenaf dan Akasia dalam kultur-pot dan kultur hidroponik.
Kajian ini meliputi ujian pertumbuhan tumbuhan dan biomas daun, batang, dan akar. Kepekatan Fe, As, CN dan NH3-N dalam set kawalan, tanah yang dituai, air kumbahan dan di dalam tisu daun, batang dan akar diselidik. Penyerapan Fe, As, CN dan NH3-N dinilai berdasarkan model-model matematik: Faktor Bioakumulasi (BCF), Faktor Translokasi (TF) dan Kinetik Bioakumulasi. Kenaf menyerap 0.1-0.7 mg As, 18.5-51.7 mg Fe, 0.1-0.6 mg CN dan 2.4-10.5mg NH3-N/g berat kering, menandakan potensi Kenaf sebagai takungan logam toksik. Akasia, sejenis tumbuhan kekacang mencatatkan BCF yang lebih tinggi daripada Kenaf bagi Fe (9.1-14.3), NH3-N (4.2-8.8), CN (1.1-4.3) dan As (1.5-2.9). Dalam kultur hidroponik, Akasia mencatatkan
vi peningkatan sebanyak 24% dalam keberkesanan penyerapan beban pencemar berbanding Kenaf melalui mekanisme rizofiltrasi.
Keupayaan Kenaf dan Akasia untuk menyerap bahan pencemar dan mengelakkan “phytotoxicity” berkemungkinan disebabkan oleh fitostabilisasi logam dalam akar tumbuhan dan seterusnya pengurangan mobiliti logam toksik (Faktor Translokasi <1). Kenaf dan Akasia yang dirawat dengan air larut resap juga didapati mempunyai biomas yang lebih tinggi berbanding tumbuhan Kawalan. Kenaf dan Akasia mencatatkan 49% dan 53% keupayaan bioakumulasi yang tinggi, menunjukkan kesesuaian untuk “phytoextraction” tapak tercemar oleh bahan larut resap. Pemalar kadar bioakumulasi bebanan pencemar dalam Kenaf dan Akasia adalah dalam lingkungan 0.01-0.03 dan 0.02-0.04/hari, masing-masing. Separuh hayat bahan pencemar dalam Kenaf dan Akasia adalah 35-60 dan 25-68 hari.
Pembangunan e- Pemodelan Sistem Fitoremediasi (e-PMS) memperlihatkan integrasi pengetahuan biologi dan “artificial intelligence” dan justeru itu, berfungsi sebagai landasan Sistem Sokongan Keputusan (DSS) ke arah kemajuan halatuju penyelidikan dalam bidang teknologi persekitaran. Fasa mesra-pengguna dan model- model yang diaplikasi menentukan potensi dan prestasi tumbuhan “phytoremediator”
yang dikaji.
Secara keseluruhannya, keputusan kajian ini mendokumenkan pengambilan nutrien yang berjaya tanpa kesan yang memudaratkan kesihatan tumbuhan kajian.
Fenomena ini mengesahkan penggunaan air larut resap dari tapak pelupusan sisa sebagai sumber fertigasi untuk Kenaf dan Akasia. Di samping itu, data-data ini akan menjadi panduan bagi golongan penyelidik dan pengurus sumber yang berkecimpung dalam projek pemulihan dan rawatan bahan larut resap di masa akan datang.
vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
In the process of meeting the requirements of the Master of Science degree, numerous individuals have been lending a helping hands and thoughts throughout the processes.
First and foremost thanks to God for His blessings upon completion of this Thesis. Next, I would like to express my thanks to my Supervisor, Prof. Dr. P.
Agamuthu for his guidance and support in making this Thesis a reality and also collegues from Solid Waste Laboratory, Institute of Graduate Studies, University of Malaya for their assistance and advice.
I would also like to acknowledge National Hydraulics Research Institute of Malaysia and University of Malaya {IPPP /UPGP/Geran (RU/PPP)/2009B} for the financial assistance in carrying out the project.
Besides that, I would like to express gratitude to Water Quality Laboratory of National Hydraulics Research Institute of Malaysia for the laboratory facilities;
Malaysian Tobacco Board and Forest Research Institute of Malaysia (FRIM) for providing the Kenaf and Akasia seeds used for the study.
Special thanks also to Worldwide Landfill Sdn. Bhd. to allow me to collect samples from Jeram Sanitary Landfill.
In addition, I would love to dedicate my sincere gratitude towards my parents, Mr. & Mrs. Munusamy and husband, Mr. A. Poovaneswaran for their continuous inspiration, moral energy and unwavering confidence.
Last but not least, I truly and sincerely appreciate those who have been helpful directly or indirectly in the process of accomplishing this Thesis.
viii TABLE OF CONTENTS
Contents Page
ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION ii
ABSTRACT iii
ABSTRAK v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS viii
LIST OF TABLES xiii
LIST OF FIGURES xvii
LIST OF PLATES xxi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xxiv
LIST OF APPENDICES xxv
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background 1
1.1 Problem Statement 9
1.2 Research Objectives 10
1.3 Research Hypotheses 11
1.4 Dissertation Organization 12
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.0 Literature Review 13
2.1 Solid Waste Definition and Classification 13
2.2 Definition of MSW 14
2.3 MSW generation in Malaysia 14
2.4 Malaysian MSW Composition 17
2.5 Solid Waste Disposal Technology 21
2.6 Definition of landfill 23
2.7 Jeram Sanitary Landfill 28
2.8 Composition of biomass in Jeram MSW 34
ix
2.9 Leachate 35
2.10 Standards of Acceptable Conditions for Discharge of leachate from landfill according to Malaysian Legislation
41 2.10.1 Acceptable conditions for discharge of leachate 41 2.10.2 Monitoring of leachate discharge 43
2.10.3 Methods of Analysis of Leachate: THIRD SCHEDULE (Regulation 15)
43
2.10.4 Specification of Point of Disharge of Leachate:
FOURTH SCHEDULE (Regulation 16)
44
2.11 Heavy metals in landfills 44
2.12 Phytoremediation 48
2.12.1 Definition of Phytoremediation 48
2.12.2 Uses of Phytoremediation 51
2.12.3 Advantages and limitations of phytoremediation 52 2.12.3.1 Advantages of phytoremediation 52 2.12.3.2 Limitations of phytoremediation 52 2.12.4 Mechanisms of Phytoremediation 53
2.12.4.1 Phytoextraction 53
2.12.4.2 Phytostabilization 55
2.12.4.3 Phytodegradation 55
2.12.4.4 Rhizofiltration/ Phytofiltration 56
2.12.4.5 Phytovolatilization 57
2.12.4.6 Phytostimulation 58
2.13 Plant Responses to Pollutants 59
2.13.1 Plant responses to heavy metal toxicity 59 2.13.2 Plant responses to landfill leachate toxicity 60
2.14 Test Plants 64
2.14.1 Hibiscus cannabinus (Local Name: Kenaf) 65
x 2.14.2 Acacia mangium (Local Name: Akasia kuning) 69
2.15 Contaminant Uptake by Test Plants in Pilot Scale Constructed Wetland via Mechanism of Rhizofiltration
72
2.16 Development of a Decision Support System for Phytoremediation 77 2.16.1 Decision Support System for the Requalification
of Contaminated Sites (DESYRE)
78 2.16.2 Rhizofiltration Greenhouse System (RGS) 80 2.16.3 Design of a Graphical User Inter-face (GUI)
Decision Support System for a Vegetated Treatment System
80
CHAPTER 3: MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY
3.0 Materials and Methodology 84
3.1 Description of Study site 84
3.2 Preparation of Test Plants 85
3.3 Test Media 90
3.4 Test Operations and Sampling 94
3.5 Sample Preparation for Heavy Metal Analysis: Acid Digestion 97 3.6 Sample Preparation for Macronutrients (NH3-N) analysis 99
3.7 Data Analysis 99
3.8 Plant Response/ Growth 100
3.9 Determination of Biaoccumulation rate constant and Half-life 101 3.10 A Suspended Net-Pot, Non-Circulating Hydroponic Method
System for Assessment of Contaminant Uptake by Test Plants
102
3.10.1 Experimental setup 103
3.10.2 Design and fabrication of system 104 3.10.3 Test plant material for hydroponic culture 106 3.10.4 Preparation of stock solution 108
3.10.5 Leachate as Growth Media 109
3.10.6 Sampling Operations 110
3.10.7 Plant cultivation in hydroponic culture 111
xi 3.10.8 Toxicity experiments and metal removal 113 3.11 Decision Support Software for Phytoremediation Systems 113 3.11.1 Process and Systems Model Integration 114 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.0 Results & Discussion 116
4.1 Physicochemical properties of leachate waste used for phytoremediation
116
4.2 Response of Kenaf plants to the leachate treatments and Biomass of Kenaf
121
4.3 Bioaccumulation of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N in Kenaf planted in soil contaminated with different treatments of leachate
125
4.4 Uptake of heavy metals by Kenaf 138
4.5 Response of Akasia plant to the leachate treatments and Biomass of Akasia
142
4.6 Bioaccumulation of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N in Akasia from soil contaminated with different treatments of leachate
146
4.7 Uptake of heavy metals by Akasia 158
4.8 Comparative Study of RGR and Contaminant Bioaccumulation based on N-content of Treatments
162
4.9 Comparison Study of Control Soil and Soil Standard 164 4.10 Kinetics of metal uptake: Biaccumulation Rate Constant (k) and
Half-Life (t1/2)
166 4.11 Comparative Study of Metal and Macronutrient Accumulation in
Test Plants via Hydroponic System
172 4.11.1 Bioaccumulation of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N in
hydroponically grown Kenaf from water contaminated with different concentrations of leachate
172
4.11.2 Uptake of heavy metals by hydroponically grown Kenaf
181 4.11.3 Bioaccumulation of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N in
hydroponically grown Akasia in different treatments of leachate
186
xii
4.11.4 Uptake of heavy metals by hydroponically grown Akasia
194
4.12 Comparative Study of Contaminant Bioaccumulation based on N- content of Treatments in Hydroponic Culture
198 4.13 Comparative Study on Efficiency of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N
Uptake and Bioaccumulation between the Two Test Plants: Kenaf and Akasia
200
4.13.1 Kenaf and Akasia grown in Pot culture system 200 4.13.2 Kenaf and Akasia grown in Hydroponic culture
system
203 4.14 Comparative Study on Efficiency of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N uptake
and bioaccumulation between two different systems of plant growth: Pot-culture system and Hydroponic culture system
205
4.15 Development of Decision Support Software: e-PMS 210 4.16 Post-Harvest Processing of Test Plants 227
4.16.1 Akasia wood quality 227
4.16.2 Kenaf fibre quality 228
4.17 General Discussion 229
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION
5.1 Recommendations for Future Research
238 240
REFERENCES 242
APPENDICES 260
xiii LIST OF TABLES
Table No. Title Pages
2.1 Waste generation in Peninsular Malaysia 15 2.2 Generation of MSW in major urban areas in Peninsular
Malaysia (1970 – 2006)
16
2.3 Various data on the characteristic of Kuala Lumpur MSW 18 2.4 Average composition (weight percentage) of components in
MSW generated by various sources in Kuala Lumpur
19
2.5 The composition of solid waste in Malaysia in 2005 (RMK9) 20
2.6 Methods of waste disposal in Malaysia 23
2.7 Landfill classification 24
2.8 Landfilling Methods 25
2.9 Level of sanitary landfill system 25
2.10 Number of landfills that were in operation or closed throughout Malaysia as at September 2009
27
2.11 Summary of Physical Characteristic of Jeram sanitary landfill 30 2.12 Waste composition (based on on-site segregation) in Jeram
Sanitary Landfill (2010)
34
2.13 Components of landfill leachate 36
2.14 Physical and chemical characteristics of sanitary landfill leachate from two Malaysian landfills compared with leachate from other countries
37
2.15 Characteristics of leachate from MSW landfills of different age 38
2.16 Characteristics of Landfill Leachate 40
2.17 Impact on river pollution caused by leachate contamination 45 2.18 Average concentration of metal and non-metal elements in
surface and deep soil from an ex-landfill
46
2.19 General advantages and limitations of phytoremediation (USEPA, 2000)
52
xiv
2.20 Phytoremediation overview 58
2.21 Scientific Classification of Kenaf 66
2.22 Scientific Classification of Akasia 69
2.23 Typical parameters associated with the simulation of a vegetated remediation treatment system
81
2.24 Input and output parameters of GUI 82
3.1 Experimental Design of Test Media 94
3.2 Preparation of Gibeaut’s Nutrient Solution 108 3.3 Experimental Design of Leachate Nutrient Solution 109 4.1 Characteristics of untreated Jeram landfill leachate compared
with Acceptable conditions for Discharge of Leachate Regulations 2009, Environmental Quality Act (EQA 1974), MALAYSIA
116-117
4.2 Characteristics of FeCl3 treated leachate of Jeram landfill compared with Acceptable conditions for Discharge of Leachate Regulations 2009, Environmental Quality Act (EQA 1974), MALAYSIA
120-121
4.3 Relative Growth Rate of H. cannabinus L. treated with different concentrations of leachate
124
4.4 H. cannabinus Plant Dry Matter (PDM) and Dried Soil Sample Mass at final harvest (week 16)
131
4.5 Significant difference (P) of As bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in H. cannabinus according to the paired Student t test (t)
133
4.6 Significant difference (P) of Fe bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in H. cannabinus according to the paired Student t test (t)
133
4.7 Significant difference (P) of CN bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in H. cannabinus according to the paired Student t test (t)
134
4.8 Significant difference (P) of NH3-N bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in H.
cannabinus according to the paired Student t test (t)
134
4.9 Relative Growth Rate of A. mangium treated with different concentrations of leachate
144
xv 4.10 A. mangium Plant Dry Matter (PDM in g) and Dried Soil
Sample Mass (g) at final harvest (week 16)
151
4.11 Significant difference (P) of As bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in A. mangium according to the paired Student t test (t)
152
4.12 Significant difference (P) of Fe bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in A. mangium according to the paired Student t test (t)
153
4.13 Significant difference (P) of CN bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in A. mangium according to the paired Student t test (t)
153
4.14 Significant difference (P) of NH3-N bioaccumulation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf in A.
mangium according to the paired Student t test (t)
154
4.15 Concentration of contaminants in control soil at 120 days of treatments applied
164
4.16 USEPA Regulatory limits on heavy metals applied to soils 165 4.17 Bioaccumulation rate constant and half-life of Fe and As
accumulation from leachate polluted soil planted with Kenaf
168
4.18 Bioaccumulation rate constant and half-life of CN and NH3-N accumulation from leachate polluted soil planted with Kenaf
169
4.19 Bioaccumulation rate constant and half-life of Fe and As accumulation from leachate polluted soil planted with Akasia
170
4.20 Bioaccumulation rate constant and half-life of CN and NH3-N accumulation from leachate polluted soil planted with Akasia
171
4.21 Leaf length, Stem height and Root length of hydroponically grown Kenaf at week 5 of growth
174
4.22 H. cannabinus Plant Dry Matter (PDM in g) at final harvest (week 5)
184
4.23 Significant difference (P) of correlation between the root and stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in H. cannabinus according to the Pearson correlation test (r)
185
4.24 Leaf length, Stem height and Root length growth measurement of hydroponically grown Akasia at week 5 of growth
188
4.25 A. mangium Plant Dry Matter (PDM in g) at final harvest (week 5)
197
xvi 4.26 Significant difference (P) of correlation between the root and
stem, root and leaf, and stem and leaf of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in hydroponic culture of A. mangium according to the Pearson correlation test (r)
198
4.27 The geometric means and standard deviation ranges of the As concentrations waters (mg/L), as well as soils, sediments, aquatic and terrestrial plants (mg/kg dry weight) from the Taupo Volcanic Zone
201
4.28 Characteristics of Ampar Tenang and Jeram Sanitary Landfill (JSL) leachate
230
4.29 The growth traits of Populus and Salix treated with leachate 233
xvii LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Title Page
2.1 Increasing trend in per-capita generation of municipal solid waste (MSW) from 1985 to 2007
17
2.2 Composition of solid waste in Malaysia (9th Malaysian Plan) 20
2.3 Features of a Sanitary Landfill 28
2.4 Google map of Jeram Sanitary Landfill 29
2.5 The route of NH3–N removal 48
2.6 Model of Phytoremediation system 49
2.7 Phytoextraction 54
2.8 Phytostabilisation 55
2.9 Phytodegradation 56
2.10 Rhizofiltration 57
2.11 Phytovolatilisation 57
2.12 Phytostimulation 58
2.13 Interaction between plants and soil for metal ion acquisition and homeostasis
59
2.14 Schematic representation of the soil–plant bioreactor for the plant–soil based treatment of landfill leachate
61
2.15 Flowchart describing the interactions between the simulation model and the graphical user interface
82
3.1 Flow diagram of activities to be carried out for the hydroponics system studied in phytoremediation
102
3.2 Schematic diagram of hydroponic system 103 3.3 Flow Chart of Development of e-PMS Decision Support System 114-115 4.1 RGR of root (R), stem (S), leaves (L) and total Kenaf dry
biomass (TP)
124
4.2 As concentration in root, stem and leaves of kenaf under different leachate treatments
126
xviii 4.3 Fe concentrations in root, stem and leaves of kenaf under
different leachate treatments
127
4.4 CN concentrations in root, stem and leaves of kenaf under different leachate treatments
128
4.5 NH3-N concentrations in root, stem and leaves of kenaf under different leachate treatments
129
4.6 As accumulation (%) in Kenaf at week 8, 12 and 16 of growth 135 4.7 Fe accumulation (%) in Kenaf at week 8, 12 and 16 of growth 136 4.8 CN accumulation (%) in Kenaf at week 8, 12 and 16 of growth 137 4.9 NH3-N accumulation (%) in Kenaf at week 8, 12 and 16 of
growth
138
4.10 Bioconcentration Factor (BCF) of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in Kenaf under different leachate treatment. Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
139
4.11 Translocation Factor of Fe, As, CN and NH3-N in kenaf under different leachate concentrations. Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
140
4.12 RGR of root, stem, leaves and total Akasia dry biomass 145 4.13 As concentration in root, stem and leave of akasia under
different leachate treatments
147
4.14 Fe concentration in root, stem and leave of akasia under different leachate treatments
148
4.15 CN concentration in root, stem and leave of akasia under different leachate treatments
149
4.16 NH3-N concentration in root, stem and leaves of akasia under different leachate treatments
150
4.17 As accumulation (%) in Akasia at week 8, 12 and 16 of growth 155 4.18 Fe accumulation (%) in Akasia at week 8, 12 and 16 of growth 156 4.19 CN accumulation (%) in Akasia at week 8, 12 and 16 of growth 156 4.20 NH3-N accumulation (%) in Akasia at week 8, 12 and 16 of
growth
157
4.21 Bioconcentration Factor of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in akasia 158
xix under different leachate treatment. Bar indicates standard error
(n=4)
4.22 Translocation Factor of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in Akasia under different leachate treatment. Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
160
4.23 Growth of hydroponic culture of Kenaf in the treatment of leachate wastewater at week 7
175
4.24 As concentration in root, stem and leaves of Kenaf grown in hydroponic culture under different leachate treatments
176
4.25 Fe concentration in root, stem and leaves of Kenaf grown in hydroponic culture under different leachate treatments
177
4.26 CN concentration in root, stem and leaves of Kenaf grown hydroponically under different leachate treatments
177
4.27 NH3-N concentration in root, stem and leaves of Kenaf grown hydroponically under different leachate treatments
178
4.28 Bioconcentration factor (BCF) of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in hydroponically grown Kenaf under different leachate treatment.
Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
182
4.29 Translocation factor (TF) of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in
hydroponically grown Kenaf under different leachate treatment.
Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
183
4.30 Growth of hydroponic culture of Akasia in the treatment of leachate wastewater at week 5
189
4.31 As concentration in root, stem and leaves of Akasia grown
hydroponically under different leachate treatments (mean ± s.e.) 190 4.32 Fe concentration in root, stem and leaves of Akasia grown
hydroponically under different leachate treatments (mean ± s.e.)
191
4.33 CN concentration in root, stem and leaves of Akasia grown
hydroponically under different leachate treatments (mean ± s.e.) 192 4.34 NH3-N concentration in root, stem and leaves of Akasia grown
hydroponically under different leachate treatments (mean ± s.e.) 192 4.35 Bioconcentration factor (BCF) of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in
hydroponically grown Akasia under different leachate treatment.
Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
195
4.36 Translocation factor (TF) of As, Fe, CN and NH3-N in
hydroponically grown Akasia under different leachate treatment.
Bar indicates standard error (n=4)
196
xx 4.37 e-Phytoremediation Modeling System title page. The ‘Time of
the Day’ menu displays time. The user needs to click on the
‘Explore’ button to proceed to log on to the system
210
4.38 The Log In page. The user needs to click on the ‘Log In’ button to proceed to log on to the system
211
4.39A Test Plant Input Interphase: Display for Kenaf 212 4.39B Test Plant Input Interphase: Display for Akasia 212
4.40 Photograph of Kenaf plant 213
4.41 Form showing photograph of Kenaf flower 214
4.42 Display of Kenaf seed photograph 214
4.43 Photo of Akasia plant displayed when users click on the button
‘Show Picture of Akasia Plant’ on the Test Plant Input form
215
4.44 Window displaying photograph of Akasia flower 216 4.45 Window displaying photograph of Akasia seed 216 4.46 Window displaying list of e-PMS models and selection of type
of wastewater
217
4.47 First Order Kinetics Model component window 218 4.48 Form of Relative Growth Rate model component window 219 4.49 Bioconcentration Factor (BCF) model component window 220 4.50 Translocation Factor (TF) model component window 221
4.51 Information summary window 222
4.52A Form Question and Answer 223
4.52B Example of Q and A form based on actual example 224
4.53 Display of Glossary Form 225
4.54 Example of glossary term – “Phytoextraction” and its definition 225 4.55 Example of glossary term –“Leachate” and its definition 226
xxi LIST OF PLATES
Plate No.
Title Page
2.1 Typical view at a landfill 24
2.2 Open dump in Selangor (municipal solid waste) – Level 0 Landfill 26 2.3 Waste Management Centre in Bukit Nenas, Negeri Sembilan
(Scheduled waste) - Level IV Landfill
26
2.4 HDPE liner for the cells at Jeram Landfill 31
2.5 Equalisation Lagoon at Jeram landfill 32
2.6 Gas collection system at Jeram landfill 32
2.7 Weighing bridge 33
2.8 Compaction of waste 33
2.9 Leachate flowing into Sg. Kembong river system 39
2.10 Hibiscus cannabinus L. plant 65
2.11 Hibiscus cannabinus flower 66
2.12 Hibiscus cannabinus leaves 67
2.13 Acacia mangium plant 70
2.14 Acacia mangium flower 71
2.15 Acacia mangium leaves 71
2.16 Water lettuce 75
2.17 Water hyacinth 76
2.18 Water lily 76
2.19 Duckweed 77
3.1 Trays containing black soil prepared for seedling planting 84
3.2 Nursery setup 85
3.3 Kenaf seed 86
xxii
3.4 Akasia seed 87
3.5 Kenaf seedling of 10 – 12 cm tall (7 days of growth) 87
3.6 Akasia seedling (2 weeks old) 88
3.7 Poly bag containing 5 kg of black soil 88
3.8 Kenaf seedlings after transplanted into polybag 89 3.9 Akasia seedlings before being transplanted measuring 10 cm (after
1 month of germination)
89
3.10 Leachate pond at Jeram Sanitary Landfill, Selangor 90
3.11 Equalization Lagoon 91
3.12 Leachate sampling 91
3.13 Harvested plants separated into leaves, stem and root 95
3.14 Akasia plant root measurement 96
3.15 Harvested Akasia placed on polystyrene for total plant height measurement
96
3.16 Apparatus used for the hydroponics system set up 104 3.17 Diagram of hydroponic tank used for phytoremediation study 105
3.18 Net-pot 105
3.19 Akasia seeds sown into thread media in a net-pot 107 3.20 Kenaf seeds planted hydroponically (4-5 seeds per pot) 107 3.21 Leachate treatment sampled in graduated square bottles 110 3.22 Stem height measurement of harvested hydroponic plants 112 3.23 Root length measurement of harvested hydroponic plants 112
4.1 Harvested Kenaf at week 8 of growth 122
4.2 Kenaf plants at 12th week of growth 122
4.3 Harvested Kenaf plant at week 16 of growth 123
4.4 Akasia at week 8th of growth 142
4.5 Akasia at week 12th of growth 143
xxiii 4.6 Harvested Akasia at week 16th of growth 143 4.7 Kenaf seedling grown hydroponically after 1 week of growth 172 4.8 Kenaf plants at 4th week of growth in hydroponic culture 173 4.9 Kenaf plants ready to be harvested at week 7 of growth in
hydroponic culture
173
4.10 Kenaf plants dried up after 5 weeks of growth 180
4.11 Kenaf dried up – leaves turn yellow 180
4.12 Akasia seedling on growth bed in hydroponic culture 186 4.13 Akasia seedling after 2 weeks of growth in hydroponic culture 186 4.14 Akasia seedling after 3 weeks of growth in hydroponic culture 187 4.15 Harvested akasia plants at week 5 of growth in hydroponic culture 187 4.16 Akasia roots grown hydroponically attacked by White rot fungi 194
xxiv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
APHA American Public Health Association As Arsenic
BCF Bioconcentration Factor
BOD Biological Oxygen Demand
CN Cyanide
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
dH2O Distilled water
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DoE Department of Environment
DSS Decision Support System
e-PMS e-Phytoremediation Modeling System FAO Food and Agriculture Organization Fe Ferum
FRTR Federal Remediation Technologies Roundtable
GNP Gross National Product
ICP-OES Inductively Coupled Plasma - Optical Emission Spectrometer
IF Inorganic fertiliser
MSW Municipal solid waste
NH3-N Ammoniacal-Nitrogen
PDM Plant dry matter
RGR Relative growth rate
RL Raw leachate
TF Translocation Factor
TL Treated leachate
TSS Total suspended solid
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency WHO World Health Organization
xxv LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix No. Title Pages
APPENDIX A:
Table A.1 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of As concentrations in H. cannabinus, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
261
Table A.2 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of Fe concentrations in H. cannabinus, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
261
Table A.3 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of CN concentrations in H. cannabinus, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
262
Table A.4 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of NH3-N concentrations in
H. cannabinus, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
262
Table A.5 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of As concentrations in A. mangium, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
263
Table A.6 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of Fe concentrations in A. mangium, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
263
Table A.7 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of CN concentrations in A. mangium, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
264
Table A.8 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of NH3-N concentrations in
A. mangium, soil sample and control soil (without plants) at final harvest (week 16)
264
APPENDIX B:
Table B.1 Dutch Intervention Standard for surface and deep soil analysis
265
APPENDIX C:
Table C.1 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of As concentration in H. cannabinus plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
269
Table C.2 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of Fe concentration in 269
xxvi H. cannabinus plant parts and leachate solution at final
harvest (week 5)
Table C.3 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of CN concentration in H. cannabinus plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
270
Table C.4 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of NH3-N concentration in
H. cannabinus plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
270
Table C.5 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of As concentrations (mg g-1) in A.mangium plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
271
Table C.6 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of Fe concentrations (mg g-1) in A.mangium plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
271
Table C.7 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of CN concentrations (mg g-1) in A.mangium plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
272
Table C.8 Mean and standard deviation (SD) of NH3-N concentrations (mg g-1) in A.mangium plant parts and leachate solution at final harvest (week 5)
272
APPENDIX D: Compact Disc of e-PMS Decision Support System 273 APPENDIX E: Research Paper published at International Journal of
Phytoremediation
274
