Laserfiche WebLink
TABLE 7 <br /> COMPARISON OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES <br /> OF VIABLE REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVES <br /> CORRAL HOLLOW SANITARY LANDFILL ENGINEERING FEASIBILITY STUDY <br /> Alternative Description Advantage Disadvantage <br /> No.1 Final Cover Proven technology. Does not address existing VOC impacts. Costly <br /> Extension Reduces potential for to implement. <br /> future landfill gas and <br /> leachate generation <br /> No.2 Landfill Gas Relatively low cost. Poor quality gas may affect flare station <br /> Extraction System Proven technology. operations. Implementation may be affected <br /> Expansion Can add to existing by landfill closure extension project. <br /> system. <br /> No.3 In-Situ IAS/VES Technically effective Large sparging and vapor extraction arrays <br /> required. Large on-going energy <br /> requirements.Highly visible elements may be <br /> prone to vandalism <br /> No.4 In-Situ Intrinsic Low costs May take more time to reach clean-up goal. <br /> Remediation Central Valley RWQCB may require a form of <br /> active remediation <br /> No.5 GW Extraction Well-documented Extensive extraction arrays required. Large <br /> with Ex-Situ Air effectiveness for VOCs. energy costs. High maintenance. Visibility <br /> Stripping Creates a hydraulic may lead to vandalism <br /> barrier to migration. <br /> No.6 GW Extraction Well-documented Extensive extraction arrays required. Large <br /> with Ex-Situ GAC effectiveness for VOCs. energy costs. High maintenance.GAC vessels <br /> Creates a hydraulic require periodic replacement and disposal. <br /> barrier to migration. Visibility may lead to vandalism. <br />