Landfill site selection utilizing TOPSIS methodology and clay liner geotechnical characterization: a case study for Ankara, Turkey
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：G?zde P?nar Yal (1)
Haluk Akgün (2) - 关键词：Landfill site selection ; Pairwise comparison method (PCM) ; Analytical hierarchy method (AHP) ; Technique for order preference by similarity to the ideal solution (TOPSIS) ; Geotechnical characterization of compacted Ankara clay ; G?lba?? ; Ankara
- 刊名：Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment
- 出版年：2014
- 出版时间：May 2014
- 年：2014
- 卷：73
- 期：2
- 页码：369-388
- 全文大小：
- 参考文献：1. Akyürek B, Bilginer E, ?atal E, Da?er Z, Soysal Y, Sunu O (1980) The geology of the vicinity of Elvidan-?aban?zü ?ank?r? and Hasayaz-?ank?r? Kalecik-Ankara. MTA report no. 6741 (in Turkish)
2. Akyürek B, Bilginer E, Akba? B, Hep?en N, Sunu O, Soysal Y (1982) The geology of the vicinity of Ankara-Elmada?-Kalecik. MTA report no. 7298 (in Turkish)
3. Akyürek B, Bilginer E, Akba? B, Hep?en N, Sunu O, Soysal Y (1984) Fundamental geological characteristics of the Ankara-Elmada?-Kalecik region. Jeoloji Mühendisli?i 10:31-6 (in Turkish)
4. Ankara Metropolitan Municipality (2006) 2023 Ankara municipality regulatory development plan. Ankara metropolitan municipality. Directorate of development of city planning, Ankara (in Turkish)
5. Aras IA (1991) Clay mineralogy and sedimentological features of the Late Pliocene sediments in Ankara area. MSc. Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
6. ASTM D0698-07E01. Test methods for laboratory compaction characteristics of soil using standard effort (12 400 ft-lbf/ft3 (600 kN-m/m3)). Annual book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol 04.08, soil and rock, building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
7. ASTM D2487-10. Practice for classification of soils for engineering purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). Annual book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol 04.08, soil and rock, building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
8. ASTM D5856-95R07. Test method for measurement of hydraulic conductivity of porous material using a rigid-wall, compaction-mold permeameter. Annual book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol 04.08, soil and rock, building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
9. ASTM D0422-63R07. Test method for particle-size analysis of soils. Annual book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol 04.08, soil and rock, building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
10. ASTM D0854-10. Test methods for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer. Annual book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol. 04.08, soil and rock, building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
11. ASTM D2435-11. Standard test methods for one-dimensional consolidation properties of soils using incremental loading. Annul book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol 04.01, soil and rock, building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
12. ASTM D4318-10. Test methods for liquid limit, plastic limit, and plasticity index of soils. Annual book of ASTM standards, section?4, vol. 04.08, soil and rock; building stones. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA
13. Baban S, Parry T (2001) Developing and applying a GIS-assisted approach to locating wind farms in the UK. Renew Energ 24:59-1 CrossRef
14. ?alg?n R, Ercan T, Pehlivano?lu H, ?engün M (1973) Geology of the vicinity of Ankara. MTA report no. 6487 (in Turkish)
15. ?amur ZM, Yaz?cigil H, Alt?nbilek HD (1997) Hydrogeochemical modeling of waters in Mogan and Eymir lakes special environmental protection area, Ankara, Turkey. Water Environ Res 69(6):1144-153 CrossRef
16. Canpolat F, ?amur MZ, Yaz?c?gil H (2001) Hydrogeochemical evaluation of heavy metal loadings to waters and sediments by leachate: a case study from the G?lba?? waste disposal site, Ankara, Turkey. Int Geol Rev 43(10):930-44 CrossRef
17. Chamber of Environmental Engineers (2009) Environmental state report Ankara: solid waste problem in residential areas, air pollution, surface and subsurface water pollution, drinking water problem of Ankara, urban transformation. TMMOB Chamber of Environmental Engineers, Ankara, p 26 (in Turkish)
18. Daniel D, Benson C (1990) Water content density criteria for compacted soil liners. J Geotech Eng ASCE 116:1811-830 CrossRef
19. Dilek E (2006) The importance of the landscape remediation of the unregulated Tuzlu?ay?r–Mamak dumpsite. Tar?m Bilimleri Dergisi 4 (in Turkish)
20. Din MA, Jaafar WZW, Obot MM, Hussin WMAW (2008) How GIS can be useful tool to deal with landfill site selection. International symposium on geoinformatics for spatial infrastructure development in earth and applied sciences, 5- May
21. Erol O (1973) Geomorphological evolution of the Ankara region. A.Suat Erk Geology Symposium Publications, 25-5, Ankara
22. General Command of Mapping—Turkey (2002) Topographic maps of Turkey, 1:25,000, Ankara
23. General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration (1997) Geological maps of Turkey, Ankara, F-15, 1:100,000, Ankara
24. General Directorate of Rural Services (2009) National soil database, 1:25,000, Ankara
25. Gordon M, Huebner P, Kmet P (1990) An evaluation of the performance of four clay lined landfills in Wisconsin. In: Proceedings of the seventh annual waste conference, Wisconsin, pp 399-60
26. Guiqina W, Lib Q, Guoxuea L, Lijunc C (2009) Landfill site selection using spatial information technologies and AHP: a case study in Beijing, China. J Environ Manag 90:2414-421 CrossRef
27. Güng?r K, Toruno?lu E (2000) The last status and ideas on the Ankara solid waste problem. Turkiye Mühendislik Haberleri 409:19-1 (in Turkish)
28. Hwang C, Yoon K (1981) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications: a state of the art survey. Springer, New York, p 75 CrossRef
29. Kalafat D, Güne? Y, Kara M, Deniz P, Kekoval? K, Kuleli HS, Gülen L, Y?lmazer M, ?zel NM (2007) A revised and extended earthquake catalogue for Turkey since 1900 (Mw?≥?.0). Bo?azi?i University, Istanbul
30. Kaplan T (2004) Neotectonics and seismicity of the Ankara region: a case study in the Uru? area. MSc. Thesis, Ankara, METU, Ankara
31. Kleindorfer P, Kunreuter H, Schoemaker P (1984) Decision sciences: an integrative perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
32. Ko?yi?it A (1991) Changing stress orientation in progressive intracontinental deformation as indicated by the neotectonics of the Ankara region (NW Central Anatolia). Türkiye Petrol Jeologlar? Derne?i Bülteni 3:43-5 (in Turkish)
33. Ko?yi?it A (2003) General neotectonic characteristics and seismicity of Mid-Anatolia. Türkiye Petrol Jeologlar? Derne?i Bulliten—Special Issue, 1-6 (in Turkish)
34. Ko?yi?it A, Lünel A (1987) Geology and tectonic settings of Al?? region. METU J Appl Sci 201:35-7
35. Ko?yi?it A, Türkmeno?lu A (1991) The geology and mineralogy of the formation known as Ankara clay: a geological perspective on the Ankara clay problem. V. National Clay Symposium Proceedings Book, pp 87-01
36. Malczewski J (1999) GIS and multicriteria decision analysis. Wiley, New York, p 392
37. Met ?, Akgün H, Türkmeno?lu AG (2005) Environmental geological and geotechnical investigations related to the potential use of Ankara clay as a compacted landfill liner material, Turkey. Environ Geol 47(2):225-36 CrossRef
38. Nas B, Cay T, Iscan F, Berk A (2009) Selection of MSW landfill site for Konya, Turkey using GIS and multi-criteria evaluation. Environ Monit Assess 160:491-00 CrossRef
39. Ordemir I, Alyanak T, Birand A (1965) Report on Ankara clay: M.E.T.U. Fac Eng 12:27
40. Ordemir I, Soydemir C, Birand A (1977) Swelling problems of Ankara clay. In: International conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Tokyo 1, pp 243-47
41. Pitz G, McKillip J (1984) Decision analysis for analysis for program evaluations. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA
42. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of Environment and Forestry (2010) http://www.mevzuat.adalet.gov.tr/html/20743.html. Accessed April 2010
43. Saaty TL (1980) Risk—its priority and probability: the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 7(2):159-72
44. Schoemaker P, Waid C (1982) An experimental comparison of different approaches to determining weights in additive utility models. Manag Sci 28(2):182-96 CrossRef
45. Schroeder PR, Lloyd CM, Zappi PA, Aziz NM (1994a) The hydrologic evaluation of landfill performance (HELP) model: user’s guide for version 3. Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, EPA/600/R-94/168a, US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH
46. Schroeder PR, Dozier TS, Zappi PA, McEnroe BM, Sjostrom JW, Peyton RL (1994b) The hydrologic evaluation of landfill performance (HELP) model: engineering documentation for version 3. Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, EPA/600/R-94/168b, US Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH
47. ?ener B (2004) Landfill site selection by using Geographic Information Systems. MSc. Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
48. Sezer G (1998) Cation exchange capacity and contaminant uptake properties of some natural clays as potential landfill liners. MSc. Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
49. Sharifi M, Hadidi M, Vessa E, Mosstafakhani P, Taheri K, Shahoie S (2009) Integrating multi-criteria decision analysis for a GIS-based hazardous waste landfill siting in Kurdistan Province, Western Iran. Waste Manag (Oxford) 29:2740-758 CrossRef
50. State Hydraulic Works (1975) Hydrogeological survey of the Hatip plain. In: Publication of the Directorate of Geotechnical and Groundwater. General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works, Ankara. report no. 40 (in Turkish)
51. Stillwell WG, Seaver DA, Edwards W (1981) A comparison of weight approximation techniques in multiattribute utility decision making. Organ Behav Hum Perform 28(1):62-7 CrossRef
52. Turkish State Meteorological Service (2010) Data processing. http://www.dmi.gov.tr/veridegerlendirme/il-ve-ilceler-istatistik.aspx. Accessed April 2010
53. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2010) Code of federal regulations, Title 40, Part 258 Subtitle D, Criteria for Municipal Solid Waste Landfills
54. Voogd H (1983) Multicriteria decision-aid. Wiley, Chichester
55. Yal GP (2010) Landf?ll site selection and landfill liner design for Ankara. MSc. Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara
56. Yal GP, Akgün H (2013) Landfill site selection and landfill liner design for Ankara, Turkey. Environ Earth Sci 70(6):2729-752 - 作者单位：G?zde P?nar Yal (1)
Haluk Akgün (2)
1. SDS Enerji A.?., Ankara, Turkey
2. Geotechnology Unit, Department of Geological Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey - ISSN：1435-9537
文摘
The purpose of this study was to select alternative landfill sites for Ankara based on the growing trends of Ankara toward the G?lba?? municipality, and to eventually select the best alternative through the use of decision-making tools. Geographic information systems (GIS) and multi-criteria decision analyses were employed to perform landfill site selection. Several criteria, including geology, slope, proximity to roads, availability and proximity of landfill containment material, settlement, suitability for agriculture, vegetation cover, erosion, and lineament system were gathered in a GIS environment. A weight value was assigned to each criterion by applying the pairwise comparison method and the analytical hierarchy method. An ideal point method, namely, the Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to the Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was applied to choose the best alternative landfill site. The geotechnical properties of “Ankara clay- which shows widespread distribution in Ankara, were reviewed and assessed for the clay's suitability as a single, compacted clay liner and as a component of a geomembrane-compacted clay composite liner for the alternative landfill site selected. The HELP model was employed in order to determine the cumulative, mean leachate head and cumulative, unitized expected leakage rate amounts through the landfill. Four different profiles, from the least conservative to the most conservative, were created and analyzed.