Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Start Date
14-5-2024 3:00 PM
End Date
14-5-2024 3:30 PM
Description
Comparing Landfill Post-Closure Stormwater Runoff – Vegetated Soil Cover versus Engineered Synthetic Turf Cover Authors Mr. Mark Taylor - United States - WSP USA, Inc. Mr. Chris Jordan - United States - WSP USA, Inc. Mr. Chris Timpson - United States - WatershedGeo Dr. Ming Zhu - United States - WatershedGeo Abstract An evaluation was conducted of the effects on stormwater runoff, conveyance, and on-site retention as the result of specifying an engineered synthetic turf cover system (specifically ClosureTurf®) versus a conventional vegetated soil cover system for final closure of a CCR landfill in the Southeast U.S. A HydroCAD® H&H model was developed based on a permitted final closure engineering plan that utilized a soil cover system with vegetated stormwater benches and HDPE culvert slope drains as cross-slope and downslope conveyances, respectively. Open channel down chutes on the landfill side slopes were assumed to replace the proposed pipe slope drain system. The principal finding was that the substitution of an engineered synthetic turf cover system for the conventional vegetated soil cover system for landfill closure did not result in the need for substantial revisions to the existing infrastructure for post-closure stormwater management, including perimeter channels, culvert piping systems, and wet detention basins. In this presentation, the following topics are discussed: • Hydrologic response of engineered synthetic turf landfill cover compared to vegetated soil landfill cover. • Hydraulic impacts on stormwater conveyances from stormwater runoff from engineered synthetic turf landfill cover compared to vegetated soil landfill cover. • Soil loss (erosion) of engineered synthetic turf infill versus vegetated soil and its impact on required sediment storage and downstream water quality.
Document Type
Presentation
Comparing Landfill Post-Closure Stormwater Runoff – Vegetated Soil Cover versus Engineered Synthetic Turf Cover
Grand Rapids, Michigan
Comparing Landfill Post-Closure Stormwater Runoff – Vegetated Soil Cover versus Engineered Synthetic Turf Cover Authors Mr. Mark Taylor - United States - WSP USA, Inc. Mr. Chris Jordan - United States - WSP USA, Inc. Mr. Chris Timpson - United States - WatershedGeo Dr. Ming Zhu - United States - WatershedGeo Abstract An evaluation was conducted of the effects on stormwater runoff, conveyance, and on-site retention as the result of specifying an engineered synthetic turf cover system (specifically ClosureTurf®) versus a conventional vegetated soil cover system for final closure of a CCR landfill in the Southeast U.S. A HydroCAD® H&H model was developed based on a permitted final closure engineering plan that utilized a soil cover system with vegetated stormwater benches and HDPE culvert slope drains as cross-slope and downslope conveyances, respectively. Open channel down chutes on the landfill side slopes were assumed to replace the proposed pipe slope drain system. The principal finding was that the substitution of an engineered synthetic turf cover system for the conventional vegetated soil cover system for landfill closure did not result in the need for substantial revisions to the existing infrastructure for post-closure stormwater management, including perimeter channels, culvert piping systems, and wet detention basins. In this presentation, the following topics are discussed: • Hydrologic response of engineered synthetic turf landfill cover compared to vegetated soil landfill cover. • Hydraulic impacts on stormwater conveyances from stormwater runoff from engineered synthetic turf landfill cover compared to vegetated soil landfill cover. • Soil loss (erosion) of engineered synthetic turf infill versus vegetated soil and its impact on required sediment storage and downstream water quality.
