GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | March 4, 2010

The Geosynthetic Institute (GSI) hosts its 24th annual conference in Dallas March 16, 2011. GRI-24 is part of the four-day Geo-Frontiers 2011, which is organized by ASCE’s Geo-Institute, the North American Geosynthetics Society (NAGS), the Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI), and the Geosynthetic Materials Association (GMA).

The title of the GRI-24 conference is “Enhancing Sustainability Using Geosynthetics.”

GRI’s call recommends that papers are geosynthetics-related, but that the topic should revolve around some aspects of sustainability. This conference is a bit different in that it encompasses all types of geosynthetics and all types of applications, each viewed from the context of sustainability. In so doing, many papers contrast traditional solutions to geosynthetic solutions from both cost and carbon-footprint perspectives.

The papers and their presentations are divided into three categories with following preliminary topics:

Session 1 - Transportation and Geotechnical Applications

• gravity walls vs. MSE walls
• aggregate vs. geosynthetic pavement sections
• asphalt vs. geosynthetic pavement overlays
• traditional vs. plastic pipe comparisons

Session 2 - Environmental and Hydraulic

• reducing landfill footprints
• landfill berms for increased airspace
• waterproofing dams and other hydraulic structures
• geofoam gravel drainage vs. natural aggregates
• solar panels on exposed landfill covers
• the “perpetual” landfill

• geosynthetic-related green roofs
• contrasting various sedimentation/retention systems
• geosynthetic vs. natural soil installation contrasts
• Pacific region perspectives on sustainability
• principles in the calculation of CO₂ emissions
• ISO Standards vis-à-vis sustainability

Interested parties should submit a title and brief abstract to GRI by May 31, 2010.

Contacts:

Robert M. Koerner, Ph.D., P.E.
Director
robert.koerner@coe.drexel.edu

George R. Koerner, Ph.D., P.E.
CQA Director, Director Designate
gkoerner@dca.net

For more information: www.geosynthetic-institute.org

Source: Geosynthetic Institute

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | February 25, 2010

Cadwallader Technical Services (CTS) has announced the release of a new 80-minute geosynthetics training video “How to Heat Seam and Field Test Geomembranes” as an updated, menu-driven DVD. The DVD is divided into 25 sections and subsections, each accessible and viewable on field laptop and office computers.

A preview and other information about this training aid is at www.geofailures.com/training.

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | February 19, 2010

ASTM International Committee D35 on Geosynthetics has named Robert E. Mackey, a partner and senior design engineer at S2L Inc. in Maitland, Fla., as its new chair. The 300-member committee oversees 130 ASTM standards related to the geosynthetics industry.

Mackey is a long-time contributor to Geosynthetics magazine and is a member of the magazine’s Editorial Advisory Committee.

In addition to his duties as ASTM chair, Mackey also works on several D35 subcommittees and is a past chair of Subcommittee D35.04 on Geosynthetic Clay Liners. In 2003, the committee honored him with the ASTM Award of Merit, the Society’s highest recognition for individual contributions to standards activities. He has been a member of ASTM International since 1989.

At S2L Inc., a consulting engineering firm specializing in waste management issues and waste containment facilities, which he joined in 1997, Mackey manages permitting and design projects for waste management facilities and assessment of groundwater monitoring programs. He is the firm’s chief technical expert on waste containment facility design and the materials used in construction.

Outside ASTM International, Mackey is a member of the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Florida Engineering Society, the North American Geosynthetics Society, the Solid Waste Association of North America, and the International Organization for Standardization, where he works on Technical Committee 221 on Geosynthetics. He is also an adjunct professor in the Department of Civil, Environmental and Construction Engineering at the University of Central Florida.

Sources: ASTM, PR Newswire

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | February 11, 2010

As states continue to wait for action on a jobs bill, the list of ‘ready-to-go’ state infrastructure projects has surpassed the 9,800 mark, based on a December 2009 survey by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).

These projects, valued at more than $79 billion, project that state departments of transportation will then have the resources necessary to put hundreds of thousands of people back to work on projects that will improve travel and boost the economy.

In 2009, the transportation sector received just 6% of economic recovery funds, yet spending on state highway, bridge, transit, port, rail, and aviation projects has accounted, so far, for more than 24% of the jobs created. According to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, at least 250,000 direct, on-projects jobs, as well as hundreds of thousands of indirect jobs, were the result of 7,900 highway and transit projects that have broken ground across the country.

“Since we first released our survey back in December 2009, states have identified 300 additional ‘ready-to-go’ projects that can be approved for funding within 120 days,’ said John Horsley, AASHTO executive director. “States continue to turn recovery dollars into real jobs and paychecks.”

Since then, the House of Representatives has approved the Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010, which would provide $37 billion for transportation projects-$27.5 billion for highway infrastructure projects and $8.4 billion for public transportation. Based on the record demonstrated under the Recovery Act, such funding could potentially create or support 1.1 million jobs.

“This survey illustrates the growing need for a significant investment in transportation infrastructure projects,” Horsley said. “The benefits are guaranteed and long lasting. Instead of the unemployment line, we’ll give hundreds of thousands of Americans the lifeline they need to stay in their homes, pay taxes, and rebuild our economy.”

See the updated survey at: downloads.transportation.org/Ready-to-Go.pdf.

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | February 8, 2010

The Geosynthetic Institute (GSI) and the National Pingtung University of Science and Technology (NPUST) have announced the 1st GSI-Asia Geosynthetics Conference.

The conference is scheduled for Nov. 16-18, 2010, in Taichung, Taiwan. Sponsors for the event include: the National Science Council and the Taiwan ministries of economy and education.

The conference theme is Geosynthetics in Infrastructure Applications, with main topics including: mechanically stabilized earth structures, coastal and hydraulic engineering, erosion control and sustainable engineering, and transportation and pavement engineering.

Major presentations during GSI-Asia include:

• Imad L.Al-Qadi, Director, Illinois Center of Transportation
  “Geosynthetics in pavements: Optimization through advanced modeling and field response measurements”
• Chris Lawson, Global Director, Soil Reinforcement & Geosynthetics, TenCate
  “Geosynthetic soil reinforcement in Asia”
• Robert M. Koerner, Director, GSI
  “The importance of drainage control for MSE walls and slopes”
• Jorge G. Zornberg, Vice President, IGS
  “Geosynthetic capillary barriers”

Event Highlights

Nov. 16-18, 2010

Venue: Windsor Hotel, Taichung
78-3, Sec. 3, Taichung Kang Rd., Taichung 40764 TAIWAN (R.O.C.)
Organization: National Pingtung University of Science and Technology (NPUST)
Executive organization: Geosynthetics Institute, Taiwan Chapter (GSI-Taiwan)
Co-organizations: West Pacific Chapter of IGS, the Taiwan Group/American Society of Civil Engineers, Chinese Geosynthetics Association, Geosynthetics Institute-Korea (GSI-Korea)
Under the auspices of: Geosynthetic Institute (GSI), International Geosynthetics Society (IGS)
Official language: English
Conference theme: Geosynthetics in Infrastructure Applications
Main topics:
Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Structures
Coastal & Hydraulic Engineering
Erosion Control & Sustainable Engineering
Transportation and Pavement Engineering

Registration Fees

Before April 30

Delegate: US$ 300

Student: A: US$ 100
B: US$ 75

After May 1

Delegate: US$ 400

Student: A: US$ 150
B: US$ 120

Accompanying person: US$ 100

Category A: Australia, China, Iran, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, New Zealand, Taiwan, Thailand, and other non-member countries

Category B: All other member countries in GSI-Asia area (Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Papua NG, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Vietnam)

Quest for erosion control delivers additional benefits.

Geosynthetics | February 2010

By Alexandria Hayes

Introduction

After four years as a district landfill manager for IESI Corp., Delaney Lewis was discouraged. Although one of the Louisiana landfills for which he was responsible exhibited ideal geology, the soil characteristics were not conducive for effective side-slope maintenance.

The soil of the LaSalle-Grant Landfill in central Louisiana was highly erodible, had a high plasticity index, and had a natural pH of 4.0. Consequently, Lewis spent every spring repairing the slopes, amending the soil with lime (four tons per acre), seeding, and hydromulching, only to watch his hard work end up as sediment at the bottom of the landfill.

He had tried everything he knew how to do, yet every effort failed to rectify the problem. It became evident that erosion-control success would require an unconventional approach.

Lewis and IESI’s south region engineer, Mike Friesen, started asking their contacts if anyone else in the field had a potential solution. Then industry veteran Juene Franklin, from the Houston engineering firm Riley, Park, Hayden and Associates, directed them to a new product developed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lower post-closure liabilities at landfills. Franklin thought the product, a synthetic turf system, could mitigate slope failures such as those at the LaSalle-Grant facility.

A new approach

This synthetic turf system consists of three primary components: (1) two layers of woven geotextiles with tufted UV-resistant polyethylene grass that is laid over (2) a 50-mil LLDPE structured drainage geomembrane and infilled with (3) sand, as shown in Figure 1.

The geomembrane layer serves as the containment liner atop the landfill’s intermediate soil cover. Integral 3.6mm studs on the top surface facilitate drainage, while integral 4.4mm spikes on the undersurface provide friction.

The turf’s grass blades are interlocked with 3/4-1in. of sand ballast that, combined with the liner’s surface studs, provide sufficient interface friction that the structured geomembrane and turf layers do not require anchoring for stability. They are anchored for termination purposes only at the toe or on the outside of a perimeter swale, depending on the site design.

Rainfall penetrates through the sand and into the high-transmissivity drain liner below, which can handle rainfall of more than 4in. per hour. Hence, erosion energy resides in the structured geomembrane and not in the sand surface.

The project

The LaSalle-Grant Landfill is situated on 232 acres about 50 miles northeast of Alexandria, La. Opened in 1991 and permitted as a Type I and Type II facility, it is owned by LaSalle Parish and is operated by IESI.

The landfill accepts 500 tons of combined municipal solid waste and industrial waste per day. The landfill’s current working area has a 65-acre footprint and side slopes that range from 3H:1V to 4H:1V.

Since the turf system’s 38-degree interface friction (more than a 3.0 factor of safety against sliding failure) looked promising as an effective side slope stabilizer (see Figure 2), Lewis and Friesen were intrigued. “I felt we didn’t have any other options, so why not try it,” said Lewis.

In October 2008, installation of the new turf system commenced over 2.5 acres of the landfill. Installation workers needed four days to lay down the turf and it looked “just beautiful,” Lewis said. But he wondered whether a system so simple to implement could fix such an intractable problem. However, the IESI team was persuaded enough by the initial results that in February 2009, the company moved on to Phase 2 of the project, covering another 3 acres.

Surprising results

It was only when Lewis and his colleagues saw the cover in action during the spring 2009 runoffs that they became truly convinced of the new turf system’s ability to provide long-term erosion control. The friction characteristics of the cover are detailed in Figure 3.

Since the initial installations, the covered area has endured 73.5in. of rainfall, including some in excess of 4in. per hour. Three months after Phase 1 was installed, a tornado spinning across the front of the landfill (about a quarter mile from the turf cap) generated 70mph shear winds. Then a levee situated above the turf area broke, releasing 5 acres of water to wash across the turf. None of these events affected the turf.

“The grass looks great. The sand didn’t move and there was no erosion,” Lewis said. “We’d been killing ourselves working and reworking these slopes and now it appeared we had a really good answer. After we put the turf down, we didn’t have to do anything to it again,” he said.

The turf system required no mowing, reduced leachate, emitted no fugitive gas, and stayed in place under extreme weather conditions.

“We [believe that] this cover meets or exceeds the intent of the EPA’s Subtitle D landfill closure regulations,” said Mike Friesen, IESI’s regional engineer. “The life of the grass is 50 or more years.” And if the grass color begins to fade 55 years from now, he noted, it is simple— and relatively cost-effective—to replace the grass, which has no effects on the integrity of the LLDPE structured geomembrane capitself.

“At that time, we’re talking about an aesthetic issue, not a compliance issue,” Friesen said. And the geomembrane never needs to be replaced.

Operational efficiencies

As the IESI team members realized how effective the turf system was at preventing side-slope erosion, they also discovered other ways it was proving beneficial.

Speed

It took a crew of workers about four days to install the first 2.5 acres of the new turf system. Even during spring—the rainiest season in Louisiana—turf installation can be accomplished in a few clear days.

There was no delay on cap performance while waiting for grass to grow. Erosion, water infiltration, and emissions were controlled once the turf system was in place. A Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality official, upon seeing the turf for the first time, said that he was impressed with the immediate impact the system had on surface water runoff.

Impact

Installation had little impact on ongoing landfill operations since there was no need for heavy equipment to traverse the property to deliver vegetative support soil (see Figure 1).

With soil-poor locations where dirt needs to be transported significant distances, the turf system eliminates the destruction of borrow locations as well as the cost of both the top 2ft of borrow soil and its transportation, potentially a significant cost savings.

Maintenance

Once the turf system was installed, there was no need to rebuild slopes, fertilize, plant seed, or mow grass. Perimeter roads remain clear of silt, water runoff is clear, and paper blows across the surface and is collected at litter fences.

Durabilty

The grass component maintains strength long-term (see Figure 5), with a 50-year-plus lifetime. The 50-mil LLDPE structured drainage geomembrane lasts indefinitely if installed and maintained per instructions.

Compliance

Because the underlying structured geomembrane is impermeable, the turf system cap meets or exceeds EPA Subtitle D regulations.

The product’s strength and durability provide protection from leachate, while eliminating gas emissions by containing 100% of the methane.

“Post-closure cap inspections are quicker and more effective,” said Friesen. “Without 2 feet of soil covering the liner, any deficiencies can be easily observed and repaired.”

Gas Control

The turf system precludes the need for gas wells and piping.

Pulling a vacuum on the structured geomembrane allows all gas to be vented for flaring or alternative energy generation. Under the turf system, the gas rises to the surface due to positive pressure and generates little condensate to be caught and managed.

Because it is economically feasible to close as little as an acre at a time, overall site emissions can be reduced in a working landfill by closing smaller areas. As soon as an area is closed, all emissions are controlled. Also, the structured geomembrane protects against oxygen infiltration, eliminating that as a fire pathway.

Environmental Benefits

By reducing borrow soil locations, the turf system prevents additional land destruction.

Capturing 100% of methane provides options for carbon credits and for potential energy conversion. The turf minimizes leachate, as the LLDPE structured geomembrane keeps water out of the landfill, and prevents siltation, as water runs cleanly off the synthetic surface.

It also results in reduced carbon emissions since heavy equipment is no longer required to prepare a vegetative soil cover on top of the geomembrane liner.

Financial Benefits

Both Friesen and Lewis agreed that IESI’s cost savings have been significant.

Estimated maintenance and soil cover savings range from $18,000 to $44,000 per acre per year, depending on the cost of soil, labor, and supplies, according to the turf’s manufacturer.1

Maintenance and soil cover savings will vary from landfill to landfill, based on disposal rates and operational costs. But all sites will enjoy an increase in vertical landfill area gained by reducing—from 2ft of soil to 1in. of sand—the layer above the geomembrane liner.

“When we realized that we could regain 2ft of airspace, coupled with reduced post-closure costs and a dual-use gas collection system, it became a very easy decision for us to include the turf system in our closure plan,” Lewis said. “The gain in airspace alone has the potential to offset half or more of the cost per acre of using the turf.”

Another area of universal savings is in capital spending and bond requirements. Friesen speculates that the millions of dollars set aside for future gas-system development and post-closure cap maintenance may be dramatically curtailed with the turf system.

“As a final cap, the turf is exceptional,” Friesen said. “Our landfill gas system costs have been reduced by 85% and post-closure costs have been reduced as well. Add to that the cap’s ability to act as a gas system and then future revenue from carbon credits and energy projects—it’s the icing on top of the icing on top of the cake.”

Conclusion

Louisiana is considering approval of the synthetic turf system for a final cover and Friesen said he is optimistic that other state’s officials will see the benefits of approving it also.

“It’s really a win for the states too. Some states will approve turf [for final covers] based on its performance at LaSalle. Others may require a trial study and they’ll get an incredible intermediate cover in the meantime,” Friesen said. He is working in Arkansas and Missouri to set up test sites to begin the approval process there. The synthetic turf system “will revolutionize this industry,” he predicted.

“From an operational standpoint, if we can relieve some of the headaches that [our landfill operators] have to deal with, it makes sense regardless of the cost,” said Friesen. “Add the fact that the turf system provides environmental protection while saving/making money—why wouldn’t you use it?”

Alex Hayes is a freelance writer and president of Blue Moon Communications in Stratham, N.H., alex@blmoon.com.

Geosynthetics | February 2010

To the editor:

Subject: Response to comment from Dr. [Ian] Peggs regarding spark testing on page 8 in the October/November 2009 issue of Geosynthetics, which was in response to “Geosynthetics in the construction of a Southern California subsurface biofilter cell system,” published in the August/September 2009 issue.

The authors appreciate and agree with Dr. Peggs’ comments regarding the spark testing. The purpose of the authors’ article was to highlight the application of the many geosynthetic materials in this unique project, and the sentence regarding spark testing was inaccurately stated. Several nondestructive tests, such as spark, vacuum, and air were used on the geomembrane seams during the construction.

The biofilter cell has been operational for more than one year and has provided valuable insights into the removal of selenium and nitrate from surface water using the bioreactor technology. The authors would like to thank the many interested individuals who have contacted us regarding the biofilter cell concept.

Letter submitted by Ronald Johnson and Sang-Sik Yeo, Geosyntec Consultants; and Randy Sundberg, Irvine Ranch Water District

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Geosynthetics magazine received a second-place Silver Award for Best Technical Article at the 2009 Minnesota Magazine & Publications Association’s annual awards event Nov. 5 in Minneapolis. It marked the fifth consecutive year that Geosynthetics has won an MMPA award.

The cover story, “Pyrite remediation: Geosynthetic answers for I-99’s problems” was written by Archie Filshill of CETCO Contracting Services. It was edited by Ron Bygness and designed by Heidi Hanson, both with Geosynthetics.

The article, which ran in the April/May 2009 issue, described how a host of geosynthetic materials were used to address iron pyrite issues during construction on Interstate-99 in Centre County, Pennsylvania.

The seven magazines published by the Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI) won six awards at the MMPA event.

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Introduction

The main objectives of this project were to build a retaining wall to support a road and to create more room for the width of the road, especially at the turn.

Potential problems

A primary goal was the repairing and widening of an existing 4m- (13ft)-wide road to 5m (15.5ft). In addition, the roadbed had sustained severe erosion damage at the steep, unstable embankment adjacent to the road.

Geosynthetic solutions

The first order of business was the construction of a retaining wall by stacking geocell panels to increase road width and eliminate embankment erosion.

Unstable soil and vegetation was cleared from the embankment. Then a soil base was leveled and pylons were inserted in the base 2m (5.75ft) deep. Two pylons were placed per geocell panel, with each panel measuring 2.56m x 1.6m (8.5ft x 5.25ft). The pylons were 6-in. PVC pipe filled with concrete and rebar frame.

The first layer of the 6-in. geocellular confinement material was filled with concrete. Subsequent layers were filled with on-site soil and compacted until level with the road surface (3m/10ft). Perforated pipe with a nonwoven geotextile covering was also used during construction for drainage.

The top layer was finished with road fill and guard rails were set in concrete within the geocells. Upon completion, the wall area measured 45m (150ft) long and 3m (10ft) high.

A six-man crew, with loader and operator, took five working days to complete this job.

Geosynthetics encourages your contributions of case histories, photos, and field tips. For submittal guidelines, contact Ron Bygness at 800 225 4324 or +1 651 225 6988; e-mail: rwbygness@ifai.com

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Introduction

The primary objective of this project was to protect the banks of a canal that was constructed in front, and throughout the grounds, of a new luxury hotel in Panama.

Bristol Buenaventura Resort, located approximately 85 miles west of Panama City on the Pacific Ocean coastline, opened in 2009. The manicured grounds include walking paths and gazebos strategically placed amid a winding, man-made canal.

The complete site preparation, all installations, and final finishing work were completed in about three weeks by local gardeners.

Potential problems

This new construction of a man-made, vegetated canal for an upscale beach resort required wall slope angles of 1:1 to 3:1, potentially unstable, and the construction schedule was fast-tracked including propagation of the vegetation.

The site plan called for a geotextile that was installed initially across the entire working area. Then the geocell layer was put in place. The geocell infill was local sand and sandy soil. Then sod was placed on the top of the geocell/soil layer.

Likely solutions

The key component for the contractor was the 4-in. perforated geocell material, filled with native sandy soil to stabilize the slopes.

First, a nonwoven geotextile was put in place, to serve as a separator and to impede erosion between the layers. Then the geocell layer was installed. After the geocells were in place, with the slopes stabilized, sod was then laid directly on top.

Installation of the 4,000m² of geocells, and putting the sod in place, took an eight-man crew about five days.

Geosynthetics encourages your contributions of case histories, photos, and field tips. For submittal guidelines, contact Ron Bygness at 800 225 4324 or +1 651 225 6988; e-mail: rwbygness@ifai.com

Geosynthetics | February 2010

By Robert M. Koerner

Background

The Marcellus Formation, also known as the Marcellus Subgroup of the Hamilton Group, Marcellus Member of the Romney Formation, or simply the Marcellus Shale, is a unit of marine sedimentary rock found in eastern North America.

Named for a distinctive outcropping near the village of Marcellus, N.Y., it extends throughout much of the Appalachian Basin (see map–right). The shale contains a massive supply of untapped natural gas reserves, and its proximity to the high-demand markets along the East Coast of the United States makes it an attractive target for energy development.

In April 2009, the U.S. Department of Energy estimated the Marcellus contains 262 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas.⁽¹⁾ State University of New York geology professor Gary Lash has calculated that more than 500 trillion cubic feet (14,000km³) of natural gas may be contained in the Marcellus black shale beds that lie between New York state and West Virginia⁽²⁾.

In 2008, Terry Engelder, a Pennsylvania State University geosciences professor, estimated the amount of natural gas in the Marcellus at 363 trillion cubic feet of recoverable resource, which would be enough to supply U.S. consumption for at least 14 years.⁽³⁾ If the entire formation contained gas, Engelder said the formation could contain 4,359 trillion cubic feet. Assuming a 30% recovery rate, this would lead to a 1,307 trillion cubic foot resource.⁽⁴⁾ That would be a 40-year supply for the entire U.S.!

Europe too

As The Economist reports,⁽⁷⁾ the situation of gas recovery from shale rock is a worldwide phenomenon.

For example, across Europe a stealthy land-grab is under way. Exxon Mobil is drilling in Germany’s Lower Saxony. ConocoPhillips has joined 3 Legs Resources, a small firm based on the Isle of Man, to explore a large tract of land in Poland. Austria’s OMV is testing geologic formations near Vienna. Shell is targeting Sweden.

A host of smaller firms is fanning out across other countries, including France. They are all looking for natural gas trapped in shale as a resource that has transformed the market for gas in America and may have a big impact on Europe, too.

The extent of such “unconventional” gas reserves in Europe is unknown. The International Energy Agency (IEA), which monitors the energy business for rich countries, recently estimated it at 35 trillion cubic meters—far less than in North America or Russia, but about six times the continent’s conventional reserves.

That would be enough, the IEA calculates, to displace 40 years of gas imports at current levels. Almost half of it is thought to be in shale; the rest comes from coalbed methane and tight gas. The German Research Centre for Geosciences is in the midst of a more-detailed assessment, backed by oil firms.

Gas capture

The Marcellus shale formation is extremely thick in its central locations, e.g., about 900ft (270m) in Pennsylvania, and it “pinches” out in the west by the Cincinnati Arch and in the north by Canada.⁽⁵⁾ Unfortunately, a major factor in the recovery of gas from the formation is that it is deep. It is, for example, 5000ft (1500m) in most locations and drilling must go through the upper formations to reach the gas reserves.

To capture the gas, two drilling technologies are used. One is horizontal drilling, with a vertical well reoriented to the horizontal so that it penetrates a maximum number of vertical rock fractures and extends a maximum distance within the gas-bearing rock (see sketch–left).

The second method is “hydrofracting” (or hydraulic fracturing). With this technique, water is pumped into the vertical portion of the well (which is solid casing) and then it continues into the perforated horizontal portion to produce a pressure that is high enough to fracture the surrounding rock. This water contains sand, called a “propant,” which prevents the fractured shale from collapsing back to its original tight formation.

The result is a highly fractured stratum penetrated by a long length of perforated well bore held open by the sand. Upon release of the water pressure a backflush of contaminated wastewater comes to the surface along with, and followed by, the natural gas. It goes without saying that gas royalties to property owners, state agencies, and other related parties is an active, and usually quite contentious, situation.(6)

Disposal and contamination issues

At least 4,000 new oil and gas wells were drilled in Pennsylvania in 2008, more than in any other state except Texas. This intense activity has forced state regulators to confront a problem that has been overlooked as gas drilling accelerates nationwide: How will the industry dispose of the enormous amount of wastewater it produces?

Oil and gas wells generate about nine million gallons of wastewater per day in Pennsylvania, according to industry estimates used by the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). By 2011, that figure is expected to rise to at least 19 million gallons. That’s more than all of the state’s combined waterways can safety absorb, DEP officials say.

Much of the wastewater is the byproduct of the drilling process called hydraulic fracturing (or “fracking”), which pumps at least a million gallons of water per well into the targeted formation to break the layers of rock and release the gas. When the water is depressurized and brought back to the surface, it can contain natural toxins accumulated during drilling, including cadmium and benzene.⁽⁶⁾ It can also contain small amounts of chemicals added to enhance drilling.

That said, DEP officials say one of the most worrisome contaminants in the wastewater is a gritty substance called total dissolved solids (TDS), a mixture of salt and other minerals found underground. Drilling wastewater contains so much TDS that is can be five times as salty as sea water. It is generally referred to as “brine.” Drilling companies currently dispose of this brine in municipal sewage plants, which then discharge it into rivers and streams.

The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency warns against this practice because sewage plants are not designed to remove TDS or any other chemicals the water may contain. Of even more concern, TDS can disrupt the plants’ treatment of ordinary sewage by killing microorganisms that are needed to treat human waste.⁽⁵⁾

Geosynthetic-lined surface impoundments

At minimum, geomembrane—and possibly geosynthetic clay liner barrier—systems can provide for long-term detention of the waste brine.

As seen in the aerial photograph above, a relatively small “self-contained” enterprise consists of the drilling operation and ancillary equipment (sometimes including temporary housing) along with a surface impoundment. While each surface impoundment is quite small (typically about 2.5 acres or 1.0 ha), when multiplied by the number of wells there is a very large market for geosynthetics in this type of application.

When an experienced designer considers, however, that geomembranes used to line such surface impoundments are often accompanied by “whales” or “hippos,” the situation often requires a drainage system located beneath the liner itself. Thus geotextiles, drainage materials and composites, geopipe, and other related products could also be involved.

Lastly, the issue of liner longevity for such an application is a vexing issue for all involved, certainly the local regulatory agency. At the heart of the issue is the eventual disposal of the contaminated brine. This is a current question for all state agencies having such gas-bearing geologic formations.

Bob Koerner, Ph.D., P.E., NAE, is director of the Geosynthetic Institute in Folsom, Pa., and is a member of Geosynthetics magazine’s Editorial Advisory Committee. GSI has conducted presentations for various groups regarding the design of liner systems as described here. GSI: +1 610 522 8440, www.geosynthetic-institute.org

References

¹U.S. Department of Energy (April 2009): Modern shale gas development in the United States: A primer, p. 17, PDF file, downloaded June 11, 2009.

²Bertola, David (2009-02-08). “Researchers: Shale holds vast supply of natural gas.” Business First of Buffalo.

³Esch, Mary (2008-11-04). “Estimated gas yield from Marcellus shale goes up”. Philly.com.

⁴“Got gas, lots,” Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, Nov. 5, 2008. www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/opinion/archive/s_596812.html.

⁵Harper, J. A. (2008), “The Marcellus shale, an old ‘new’ gas reservoir in Pennsylvania,” Pennsylvania Geology, Vol. 38, No. 1, Pennsylvania Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey.

⁶Sapien, J. (Oct. 4, 2009), “What can be done with wastewater?” Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, ww.postgazette.com/pg/09277/1002919-113.stm.

⁷The Economist (2009), “Bubbling Under: The hunt for shale gas in Europe,” December 3, 2009, p. 75.

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Guarujá, Brazil

The 9ICG is organized by the Brazilian Chapter of the International Geosynthetics Society (IGS Brasil) and the Brazilian Association for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ABMS), under the auspices of the International Geosynthetics Society (IGS) and supported by the Brazilian Association of Nonwoven and Technical Textiles Industries (ABINT).

Geosynthetics magazine is a Strategic Partner for the event.

Conference Aims

The aims of this conference are to offer:

• an outstanding opportunity to exchange knowledge and experiences between geosynthetic researchers, consultants, owners, geotechnical and environmental engineers, geosynthetic manufacturers, project regulators, contractors, and academics through discussion about the main geosynthetics themes via keynote lectures, paper presentations, and debates.
• an overview of new technologies and innovations, by offering a large forum to engineers and researchers.

The conference will be conducted at high scientific and technical levels, and will present applications information to match the expectations of all participants.

Technical Program

The conference will highlight the main topics in the geosynthetic industry and applications. The traditional Giroud Lecture will be delivered in a special session. Keynote lectures and selected papers will be presented on the main themes:

• case histories
• design approaches and numerical solutions
• drainage and filtration
• durability and long-term performance
• geosynthetics in agriculture and aquaculture
• geosynthetics in dynamic applications
• geosynthetics in environmental applications
• geosynthetics in highways and railways
• geosynthetics in hydraulic applications
• geosynthetics in mining applications
• geosynthetics properties
• innovative uses and solutions
• new geosynthetic products
• reinforced walls and slopes
• reinforcement of embankments and unpaved roads
• soil-geosynthetic interaction

Exhibition

An international exhibition will be opened to the conference delegates and visitors to show the latest technological innovations, products, applications, and services provided by the geosynthetics industry.

The conference venue has outstanding exhibition facilities, with 2,000m2 of available space for about 80 exhibitors (manufacturers, laboratories, consultants, contractors, suppliers, installers, agencies, project offices, and all organizations related to geosynthetics).

Detailed information for both the 9IGC and the international exhibition is available at: www.9icg-brazil2010.info

Venue

The 9ICG will be held at the Sofitel Jequitimar in Guarujá, Brazil.

Guarujá is a beautiful coastal town about 88km (55mi) from the city of São Paulo, which is the largest urban area in South America and offers a variety of cultural, tourist, and gastronomic attractions.

Language

English is the official language of this conference.

Conference Secretariat

9ICG–Brazil 2010
Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 1478 sala
314, São Paulo, SP,
01451-001, Brazil
Tel.: + 55 11 3032 3399
Fax: + 55 11 3819 6311
info@9icg-brazil2010.info
www.9icg-brazil2010.info

SOURCE 9th International Conference on Geosynthetics

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Dr. Dov Leshchinsky, professor of civil engineering at the University of Delaware, is the 2010 recipient of the Martin S. Kapp Foundation Engineering Award.

The official presentation was made during the Hero and Awards Luncheon at the conclusion of the American Society of Civil Engineer’s 2010 geocongress in West Palm Beach, Fla., Feb. 24.

The Martin S. Kapp Foundation Engineering Award is a memorial in recognition of his outstanding professional accomplishments. The award, established in 1973, is supported by the income from a fund contributed by the friends and professional associates of Kapp.

ASCE’s website describes the Kapp Award as a recognition given to an individual on the basis of the best example of innovative or outstanding design or construction of foundations, earthworks, retaining structures, or underground construction. Emphasis is placed on constructed works where serious difficulties were overcome or where substantial economies were achieved.

Leshchinsky, a long-time contributor to Geosynthetics magazine, has been a tireless proponent regarding the design and use of geosynthetic-reinforced soil. He has traveled the world teaching educators and practitioners on the subject.

“Continuing education is the most efficient way to disseminate information to practicing engineers responsibly and rigorously,” he said in a 2009 interview.

In addition to teaching, Leshchinsky is frequently called as an expert witness. In 2005, he spent nearly three days in the Supreme Court in New South Wales, Australia, on a case concerning failure of the infamous “third runway” at the Sydney Airport. The judge accepted Leshchinsky’s opinion, and an appeal by the plaintiff was dismissed in October 2008.

“To me, this type of case underscores the importance of continuing education,” he said. “Proper design and installation are essential for geosynthetic structures to perform effectively.”

—Ron Bygness
(Diane Kukich, University of Delaware Office of Communications, also contributed to this article.)

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Drs. Ed Kavazanjian and Patrick J. Fox were the recipients of 2009 awards from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). Kavazanjian received the Ralph B. Peck Award and Fox was recognized with the Thomas A. Middlebrooks Award.

Ralph B. Peck Award—Edward Kavazanjian Jr.

The Ralph B. Peck Award is presented for outstanding contributions to the geotechnical engineering profession through the publication of a thoughtful, researched case history or histories, or the publication of recommended practices or design methodologies based on the evaluation of case histories.

The 2009 Peck Award for Kavazanjian was presented to him “for the use of case histories to evaluate static and dynamic properties of municipal solid waste and hazardous waste and to illustrate their application in landfill engineering. Through the use of case histories documented in his peer-reviewed publications, in refereed journals, and in conference proceedings, Dr. Kavazanjian has significantly advanced the state-of-the-practice and the state of geotechnical landfill engineering.”

Kavazanjian is currently an associate professor and interim chair of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at Arizona State University, http://kavazanjian.faculty.asu.edu.

Thomas A. Middlebrooks Award—Patrick J. Fox

Fox was awarded the 2009 Thomas A. Middlebrooks Award, with ASCE recognizing his paper “Effect of progressive failure on measured shear strength of geomembrane/GCL interface,” which was coauthored with Dr. Robert H. Kim. It was published in Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 134(4).

The Middlebrooks Award is made to the author or authors of a paper published by ASCE and judged worthy of special commendation for its merit as a contribution to geotechnical engineering. Papers written by young engineers are given preference.

Fox is currently a professor in the Department of Structural Engineering at the University of California San Diego. From 2003–2009, he was an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Ohio State University.

Source: ASCE

Geosynthetics | February 2010

The third edition of RemTech Expo, Remediation Technologies Exhibition and Conferences, took place in Ferrara, Italy, last September, with the auspices of various leading societies, including the IGS Italian Chapter (AGI-IGS).

RemTech Expo is an event entirely dedicated to remediation techniques and to territory requalification, the ideal place for meetings among operators, manufacturers, contractors, institutions, and academics to build together workable solutions for the environment.

More than 2,500 visitors attended the event, up 30% from 2008. At the end of the Opening Conference chaired by Daniele Cazzuffi, coordinator of the RemTech Scientific Committee and IGS immediate past president, the ceremony of the first RemTech Degree Awards took place. The awards were assigned to the six best theses discussed at Italian universities and related to reclamation technologies.

The exhibition hall included more than 110 booths, including 12 specifically for geosynthetics manufacturers, distributors, and applicators. About 30 technical sessions were organized by the exhibitors, all well attended.

The Proceedings of the International Symposium on Contaminated Soils and Sediments are available on a CD-ROM (containing 42 papers in English for a total of 336 pages) by contacting info@deaedizioni.it.

The next edition of RemTech will take place in September 2010.

Reported by: Daniele Cazzuffi, IGS immediate past president and coordinator of the RemTech Scientific Committee

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Steel transmission pipelines installed in mountainous regions often face significant risks during their construction and service life. One of the biggest challenges is to protect the pipe and its external coatings against mechanical damage.

Currently, the pipeline industry uses a wide range of supplementary mechanical protection systems, including nonwoven geotextiles. The materials for this type of application are typically a polypropylene fiber-based roll that is installed around the steel pipe in the field, usually before the lowering-in phase.

The nonwoven geotextiles, available in different styles and thicknesses, are usually specified at 4–14mm for this type of pipeline installation. These materials protect the pipe during lowering-in, backfilling, and the pipeline’s service life. The quality of the protection, as always, is highly dependent on the skills of the field installation team.

Source: Pipelines International, December 2009

Geosynthetics | February 2010

The Utah Transit Authority’s West Valley Trax light-rail line in Salt Lake City is being called the nation’s second-largest geofoam project, behind only the massive Interstate-15 reconstruction from 1997–2001.

On June 18, 2008, UTA began construction on a line to a new West Valley city hub. The total project cost is estimated at $250 million and this span covers 5.1 miles. Embankments at some stretches of the route are 50ft high.

The West Valley line is expected to open in 2011, drawing a projected 3,500 daily commuters.

This Trax line used an estimated 1,890,000ft3 or 597 truckloads of geofoam. The first shipments arrived in February 2009, with geofoam installation completed in January 2010.

Source: ACH Foam Technologies

Geosynthetics | February 2010

GMA’s Lobby Day in Washington, D.C., is set for March 2 and will be held in conjunction with a cooperating division from the Industrial Fabrics Association International (IFAI).

The event will begin with a joint dinner and program on Monday evening, March 1, with GMA attendees and members of the United States Industrial Fabric Institute (USIFI), also a division of IFAI.

Congressional and agency visits will be conducted Tuesday, March 2. GMA members will meet congressional office members to advocate for geosynthetic liners in coal-ash waste sites, funding for a cost-benefit study for geotextiles as separators in roadways in the Transportation Reauthorization Bill, and the inclusion of projects using geosynthetic materials in the Water Resources Development Act.

To participate and for more information, contact Andrew Aho: +1 651 225 6907, amaho@ifai.com.

Source: ACH Foam Technologies

Geosynthetics | February 2010

Neither Mullen Burst Strength ASTM D3786 nor Puncture Strength ASTM D4833 is recognized by ASTM Committee D35 on geosynthetics as an acceptable geotextile test method. Also, AASHTO M288 has recently (M288-05) replaced ASTM D4833 with the Static (CBR) Puncture ASTM D6241.

Starting in 2010, ASTM D4833 and D3786 will no longer be published by GMA members on their QA, QC, or other geotextile technical data. Also, Geosynthetics magazine will highlight the geotextile specs for ASTM D4833 (photo at right) and note that they will be replaced by Static (CBR) Puncture ASTM D6241 in subsequent issues (see GMA introduction from December 2009) and in the annual Geosynthetics Specifier’s Guide.

Under the auspices of ASTM, within Committee D35, geosynthetic test methods and specifications are currently being developed, and will continue to be developed, to replace irrelevant textile index test methods. GMA members provide leadership in the development of testing standards for Committee D35.

–Ron Bygness

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | January 29, 2010

Allan Block Corp. announced in January its new AB Fieldstone Collection that incorporates recycled materials to create a mortarless, green retaining wall system using post-consumer materials without diminishing the quality of the blocks.

A company press release said the lightweight units install quicker and easier than natural stone and lock together to build small landscape walls up to large commercial retaining walls. The AB Fieldstone system is described as “green, natural, and friendly.”

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | January 21, 2010

Enhanced field maintenance information and instructional videos are now available at www.turface.com.

Turface Athletics launched the site specific to its products as part of a continued effort to provide educational information and solutions for professionals and volunteers caring for infields and sports turf, according to a company press release.

The site includes a section that details each of the Turface products for infields and turf, presents solutions to common field maintenance problems and helps determine the appropriate product for various applications, the release stated. (Previously, Turface product information was found on the parent company site, www.profileproducts.com.)

“The Turface Web site nicely organizes product information, educational field maintenance solutions, and event information about our Keep America Playing (KAP) program,” said Jeff Langner, brand manager for Turface Athletics.

The new site is separated into three areas: products, sports field solutions, and education. Video demonstrations are also available at the site’s resource library.

Turface Athletics is one of three primary businesses under the Profile Products corporate umbrella. The other two are: Profile Golf and Profile Erosion Control Solutions.

For more information about Profile Products: www.profileproducts.com.

GeosyntheticsMagazine.com | January 20, 2010

The International Geosynthetics Society (IGS) is holding its first-ever photo competition, just ahead of its planned April 2010 launch of the redesign IGS website and the May 2010 quadrennial IGS conference in Guaruja, Brazil. Winning photographs must demonstrate geosynthetic materials and technology in action, and may illustrate any phase of implementation, from design to completed projects. An annual contest is planned. Deadline is Feb. 1, 2010.

Geosyntheticsmagazine.com | January 13, 2010

A monitoring system fabric, based on geotextiles equipped with optical fibers, launches in the North American market this year.

TenCate’s GeoDetect, which has already been used in Europe for a few years, is called “the world’s first intelligent geotextile,” providing early warning of deformations in soil structures, according to a January press release.

The material consists of a geotextile that incorporates optical glass fibers, as well as special instrumentation equipment and software. The slightest settlements and changes in temperature and strain in, for example, embankments and dikes can thus be registered at an early stage. This makes it possible to take any necessary measures and to avoid breaches.

The system can be built into dike bodies during the construction of seawalls, roads, and railways and the building of retaining walls, tunnels, underground structures, and pipelines.

In Europe, GeoDetect was used in pilot projects, including one in France for the construction of the embankment for the rails of SNCF’s (French Railways) high-speed line (This project was featured in “Case history: ‘Intelligent’ geosynthetics” in the June/July 2008 issue of Geosynthetics magazine, pp. 20-22.)

For more information: media@tencate.com.

Geosyntheticsmagazine.com | January 8, 2010

A landfill in San Antonio, featured in the August/September issue of Geosynthetics, has received an award from the Texas Council of Engineering Companies (TCEC) for its use of photovoltaic (solar) panels.

Republic Services’ Tessman Road Landfill received a gold medal in the TCEC’s Engineering Excellence Awards. Specifically, the award is for an exposed geomembrane cover that is positioned atop closed sections of the landfill and serves as a mounting surface for panels that collect solar energy, which is then used for power generation.

Solar strips are attached to the geomembrane cap. The flexible, laminate-type photovoltaic solar collection strips are configured on the geomembrane cap to maximize hours of sunlight throughout the year, according to the Geosynthetics article.

Republic’s research suggests that more than 2,000 of the company’s closed landfill acres could eventually be covered with solar-energy geomembranes.

“We are honored that this innovative technology has been recognized for its positive impact on the surrounding community,” said Chris Synek, senior vice president-south for Republic, in a press release. “We’re continually researching, developing and implementing innovative technologies to help us preserve and conserve our natural resources.”

Geosyntheticsmagazine.com | December 8, 2009

Geotextile manufacturers are keen to update the specifying community regarding specifications that are outdated and no longer acceptable in the industry.

Two tests retired by industry approval standards continue to creep into the occasional specification: the Mullen Burst Test and the Puncture Strength Test. The Mullen test was devised in 1887 by J.W. Mullen as a measure for the puncture strength of paper. Eventually it was adopted by the textile industry along with the Puncture Strength Test. In the 1970s these tests were available to the geotextile industry.

However, since then industry experts have recognized that these tests are obsolete and currently prefer the Static (CBR) Puncture test.

GMA member companies are no longer publishing these tests on their QA, QC, or geotextile technical data. GMA is calling on all specifiers to bring their specifications into line with industry standards as described in the open letter to specifiers (see below).

An open letter to specifiers of geosynthetics

Dear Specifier,

In an attempt to keep those in the engineering and specifications community up-to-date on relevant changes in our ever evolving industry, we would like you to be aware that the general use of “cookie-cutter” type geosynthetic specifications is not a good practice. The test methods our members use on their geosynthetics are constantly revised or removed from accepted practice. The enclosed information summarizes some recent changes in the testing standards used for geosynthetics.

Neither Mullen Burst Strength ASTM D3786 nor Puncture Strength ASTM D4833 is recognized by ASTM Committee D35 on geosynthetics as an acceptable geotextile test method. Also, AASHTO M288 has recently (M288-05) replaced ASTM D4833 with the Static (CBR) Puncture ASTM D6241.

Starting in 2010, ASTM D4833 and D3786 will no longer be published by any of our members on their QA, QC or other geotextile technical data. Also, Geosynthetics magazine will highlight the geotextile specs for ASTM D4833 and note that they will be replaced by Static (CBR) Puncture ASTM D6241 in subsequent issues.

Under the auspices of ASTM, within Committee D35, geosynthetic test methods and specifications are currently being developed, and will continue to be developed, to replace irrelevant textile index test methods. Our members provide leadership in the development of testing standards for Committee D35.

Please refer to the ASTM website and the GSI website for the most current version of the test methods that you are specifying. For example, the industry still occasionally sees defunct specifications from federal and state organizations that refer to test methods such as ASTM D1682-59T (1975), “Standard Methods of Test for Breaking Load and Elongation of Textile Fabrics (withdrawn 1991)” and the like. Additionally, if you are not specifying ASTM or GSI test method standards, check with the specific author of the standard you are specifying for the most current version. And check with GMA-member geosynthetic manufacturers through their websites, published data, or product management personnel to confirm that the product you have specified is currently being manufactured.

Signed / (select) GMA members:

• ACE Geosynthetics
• Belton Industries Inc.
• Fiberweb
• Geosistemas Pavco S.A.
• GSE Lining Technologies Inc.
• Propex Inc.
• SKAPS
• TechFab India Industries Ltd.
• TenCate Geosynthetics
• Thrace-LINQ