Repository logo
 

Hydrologic comparison of prescriptive and water balance covers

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorStock, Caleb Swenson, author
dc.contributor.authorBareither, Christopher A., advisor
dc.contributor.authorScalia, Joseph, IV, committee member
dc.contributor.authorPaschke, Mark W., committee member
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-10T20:05:11Z
dc.date.available2018-09-10T20:05:11Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this study was to compare the water balance of prescriptive and water balance cover (WBC) designs for Larimer County Landfill (LCL) via hydrologic modeling. A prescriptive cover is designed to limit percolation into underlying waste via a low permeability layer, whereas a WBC is designed to limit percolation via storing infiltrated precipitation and subsequently releasing the water through evaporation and transpiration. Guidance on WBC designs in Colorado are based on geographical location of the site and particle-size distribution of the available cover soils. Soil characteristics and engineering properties were determined from exhumed samples for a completed closure phase of LCL (Phase 1) and two borrow areas (Borrow Area 3 and Borrow Area 4). Hydrologic modeling was completed using VADOSE/W to predict the percolation rate through the prescriptive and water balance covers. The wettest ten consecutive years on record with a sufficiently complete meteorological data set (1992-2002) were selected for the analysis. Vegetation parameters were assigned to represent the revegetated state observed in Phase 1 and the natural conditions observed in the borrow areas. Predicted percolation through a prescriptive cover was < 0.1 to 2.2 mm/yr, depending on assumed saturated hydraulic conductivity. Evaporation was the primary process for removing water from the prescriptive cover models. Predicted percolation through the WBC models ranged from 6.3 to 11.3 mm/yr depending on the borrow area soil and vegetation parameters. Transpiration was the primary process for removing water from the WBC models. Within all of the regulatory acceptable cover models' evapotranspiration removed 94 to 102% of the precipitation received during the ten years modeled. Results of this study indicate that either a prescriptive cover with a total thickness of 106.7 cm (3.5 ft) or a WBC with a thickness of 76.2 cm (2.5 ft) will meet regulations for final closure cover at LCL.
dc.format.mediumborn digital
dc.format.mediummasters theses
dc.identifierStock_colostate_0053N_15007.pdf
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10217/191415
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherColorado State University. Libraries
dc.relation.ispartof2000-2019
dc.rightsCopyright and other restrictions may apply. User is responsible for compliance with all applicable laws. For information about copyright law, please see https://libguides.colostate.edu/copyright.
dc.subjectlandfill
dc.subjectclosure
dc.subjectwater balance cover
dc.titleHydrologic comparison of prescriptive and water balance covers
dc.typeText
dcterms.rights.dplaThis Item is protected by copyright and/or related rights (https://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/). You are free to use this Item in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights-holder(s).
thesis.degree.disciplineCivil and Environmental Engineering
thesis.degree.grantorColorado State University
thesis.degree.levelMasters
thesis.degree.nameMaster of Science (M.S.)

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Stock_colostate_0053N_15007.pdf
Size:
3.74 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Download

Collections

2000-2019
Theses and Dissertations