Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 1925–1936 | Cite as

The dioxin/POPs legacy of pesticide production in Hamburg: Part 2—waste deposits and remediation of Georgswerder landfill

  • Rainer Götz
  • Volker Sokollek
  • Roland Weber
SI: HCH and Pesticide Forum

Abstract

α-HCH, β-HCH, and γ-HCH (lindane) were listed as persistent organic pollutants in the Stockholm Convention. Therefore, they need to be globally addressed including the wastes remaining from historic use and production. While at most lindane production sites the unintentionally produced 85 % HCH waste isomers have been deposited, at a former pesticide factory in Hamburg-Moorfleet HCH waste isomers have been recycled from 1953 to 1984 by thermal decomposition to chlorobenzenes and resulted in high polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxin/polychlorinated dibenzofuran (PCDD/PCDF)-contaminated residues. The management of the PCDD/PCDF-contaminated waste from the former pesticide factory in Hamburg has been assessed and quantified. Based on past accredited PCDD/PCDF measurements, the registered 3,700 tonnes of disposed thermal HCH decomposition residue contained 333 to 854 kg of PCDD/PCDF toxicity equivalent (I-TEQ) in 53–102 tonnes total sum of PCDD/PCDF. The wastes have been deposited together with other wastes in landfills in Hamburg and other parts of Germany. For the Georgswerder landfill (Hamburg), where approximately 50 % of the PCDD/PCDF is disposed, current and previous situation and remediation activities are described. While PCDD/PCDF leaching from the landfill is controlled and incinerated, more water soluble organochlorines (vinyl chloride, cis-1,2-dichlorethene, chlorobenzenes) and benzene remain as a challenge for groundwater management. A comprehensive aftercare program has been established and will need to be operated by future generations including renewal of containment systems. Former lindane/HCH productions need—in addition to HCH deposits—to be assessed for possible recycling practice of HCH and related PCDD/PCDF-containing deposits. This could systematically be addressed within the Stockholm Convention implementation.

Keywords

PCDD/PCDF Lindane HCH Recycling Landfill Remediation Stockholm Convention 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Lothar Moosmann of the Geologisches Landesamt in Hamburg, Germany for providing Figs. 2, 3, and 5 and to Tim Newfield for the native correction of the manuscript.

Supplementary material

11356_2012_986_MOESM1_ESM.xls (38 kb)
ESM 1 (XLS 38 kb)

References

  1. Bodenstein G (1972) Disposal of wastes from lindane manufacture. In: Uhlmann E, Verlag K (eds) Lindane monograph of an insecticide. Schillinger, Freiburg im Breisgau, pp 23–77Google Scholar
  2. Bürgerschaft Hamburg. (1985): Bürgerschaft der Freien und Hansestadt Hamburg, 11. Wahlperiode. Drucksache 11/3774, 26.02.1985Google Scholar
  3. Degler H-D, Uentzelmann D (Ed.) (1984) In supergift dioxin. Spiegel Buch, Rudolf Augstein GmbH Co. KG Hamburg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  4. Fiedler H, Hub M, Hutzinger O (1993) Stoffbericht Hexachlorcyclohexan (HCH); HCH in Altlasten Text und Berichte zur Altlastenbearbeitung , Band 9/93, Landesanstalt für Umweltschutz Baden-WürttembergGoogle Scholar
  5. Gillbricht C, Effenberger M, Sokollek V (2012) Gesicherte Altlasten in der Nachsorge – Erfahrungen aus Standorten in Hamburg. ITVA – Altlastensymposium, 22.-23.03.2012, Hamburg, Proceedings 51-57Google Scholar
  6. BWS GmbH (2004) Untersuchung und Bewertung der Stauwasserbeschaffenheit der Deponie Georgswerder. Bericht im Auftrag der Behörde für Umwelt und Gesundheit, Fachamt Altlastensanierung (unpublished)Google Scholar
  7. Götz R (1984) Untersuchungen an Sickerwässern der Mülldeponie Georgswerder in Hamburg. Müll und Abfall 12:349–356Google Scholar
  8. Götz R (1985) Polychlorierte Dibenzodioxine (PCDD), polychlorierte dibenzofurane (PCDF) und andere toxische organische Substanzen in Sickerfluessigkeiten der Muelldeponie Georgswerder/Hamburg. Vom Wasser 65:215–228Google Scholar
  9. Götz R (1986a) Chlorinated dioxins and dibenzofurans in leachate and sediments of the sanitary landfill in Hamburg-Georgswerder. Chemosphere 15:1981–1984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Götz R (1986b) Chemismus der dioxinhaltigen Sickeröle der Deponie Georgswerder/Hamburg. Müll und Abfall 1(86):2–8Google Scholar
  11. Holmstedt B (1981) Prolegomena to Seveso. Arch Toxicol 44:211–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jit S, Dadhwal M, Kumari H, Jindal S, Kaur J, Lata P, Niharika N, Lal D, Garg N, Gupta SK, Sharma P, Bala K, Singh A, Vijgen J, Weber R, Lal R (2010) Evaluation of hexachlorocyclohexane contamination from the last lindane production plant operating in India. Env Sci Pollut Res 18(4):586–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jürgens H-J, Roth R (1989) Case study and proposed decontamination steps of the soil and groundwater beneath a closed herbicide plant in Germany. Chemosphere 18:1163–1169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kilger R, Haupt T, Weisleder S (2010) Deponie Georgswerder – Umgestaltung zum Energieberg. Altlastenspektrum 19(04/10):165–171Google Scholar
  15. Schnittger P (2001) Sanierung der Deponie Georgswerder in Hamburg in Handbuch der Altlastensanierung, RdNr. 7, C. F. Müller Verlag, Hüthig GmbH & Co. KG Heidelberg, Germany. http://www.hamburg.de/contentblob/141902/data/veroeff-georgswerder-sanierung.pdf
  16. Scholz B, Engler M (1987) Determination of polychlorinated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans in wastes of technical hexachlorocyclohexane. Chemosphere 16:1829–1834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schumacher E (1985) Dioxine in der Deponie Georgswerder – Bekanntwerden, Untersuchungen, Gefährdungsabschätzung. Abfallwirtschaft in Forschung und Praxis, Band 14:81–84Google Scholar
  18. Schumacher E (1987) Untersuchungsergebnisse von PCDD/PCDF-Messungen auf Deponien. VDI-Bericht Nr 634:219–233Google Scholar
  19. Sievers S, Friesel P (1989) Soil contamination patterns of chlorinated organic compounds: looking for the source. Chemosphere 19:691–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sokollek V (2010a) Nachsorge der Deponie Georgswerder - Erfahrungen aus der Eigenkontrolle. – 25 Jahre Sanierung der Deponie Georgswerder, Proceedings, ed. Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Behörde für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt:23-45. http://www.hamburg.de/contentblob/2356970/data/tagungsband-25-jahre-dgw.pdf
  21. Sokollek V (2010b) Nachsorge der Deponie Georgswerder: Zwei Jahrzehnte Erfahrungen aus der Eigenkontrolle. Altlastenspektrum 19(04/10):172–179Google Scholar
  22. Sokollek V, Steinert B, Melchior S, Moosmann L (2003) Results from thirteen years of monitoring the encapsulated Georgswerder landfill (Hamburg) In: ConSoil 2003, 8th International FZK/TNO conference on contaminated Soil, conference proceedings. C 2582, 10 ppGoogle Scholar
  23. Sokollek V, Melchior S, Berger K, Steinert B, (2008) Zwanzig Jahre Überwachung und Nachsorge der gesicherten Deponie Georgswerder/Hamburg. – Skládkový Workshop (Deponieworkshop) Liberec – Zittau 2008, 27. – 28. 11. 2008, Technická Univerzita v Liberci, Hochschule Zittau/Görlitz, sborník konference, 131-148. http://www.hamburg.de/altlastensanierung/141886/gorgswerder-veroeffentlichungen.html
  24. UBA (2008) Nationaler Durchführungsplan unter dem Stockholmer Abkommen zu persistenten organischen Schadstoffen (POPs). Forschungsbericht 205 67 444 UBA-FB 001094Google Scholar
  25. Umweltbehörde Hamburg (1988) Sanierung der Deponie GeorgswerderGoogle Scholar
  26. Umweltbehörde Hamburg (1995) Deponie Georgswerder Sanierung 1984-95Google Scholar
  27. UNEP (2009) Report of the conference of the parties of the Stockholm Convention on persistent organic pollutants on the work of its fourth meeting. UNEP/POPS/COP.4/38. 8. May 2009; http://chm.pops.int/Programmes/NewPOPs/DecisionsRecommendations/tabid/671/language/en-US/Default.aspx
  28. UNEP (2011) Assessment of PCDD/PCDF release inventories—status 2011. PCDD/PCDF Release Inventories – Toolkit Update 2. Draft report 12/2011Google Scholar
  29. Universität Bayreuth, Tritschler & Partner GmbH (1995a) Dioxin-Bilanz für Hamburg, Abschlussbericht, Im Auftrag von: Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Umweltbehörde, Kapitel 3. http://www.hamburg.de/contentblob/112354/data/dioxinbilanz.pdf
  30. Universität Bayreuth, Tritschler & Partner GmbH (1995b) Dioxin-Bilanz für Hamburg, Zusammenfassender Endbericht. Hamburger Umweltberichte 51/95, Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, UmweltbehördeGoogle Scholar
  31. Vijgen J (2006a) The legacy of lindane HCH isomer production. http://ew.eea.europa.eu/Agriculture/Agreports/obsolete_pesticides/lindane_production.pdf/. Accessed 10 Feb.2012
  32. Vijgen J (2006b) The legacy of indane HCH isomer production. Annexes. IHPA, January 2006 http://ew.eea.europa.eu/Agriculture/Agreports/obsolete_pesticides/lindane_annexes.pdf. Accessed 10 Feb 2012
  33. Vijgen J, Abhilash PC, Li Y-F, Lal R, Forter M, Torres J, Singh N, Yunus M, Tian C, Schäffer A, Weber R (2011) HCH as new Stockholm Convention POPs—a global perspective on the management of lindane and its waste isomers. Env Sci Pollut Res. 18: 152-162. http://www.springerlink.com/content/g62g810418512421/fulltext.pdf
  34. Weber R, Varbelow G (2012) The dioxin/POPs legacy of pesticide production in Hamburg: part 1—remediation of production site. Env Sci Pollut Res. doi: 10.1007/s11356-012-1011-0
  35. Weber R, Behnisch PA, Brouwer A, van Bavel B, Lindstroem G, Zennegg M, Schilling B, Paepke O (2006) Contemporary relevance of dioxin and dioxin-like compound contaminations in residues from recycling of HCH waste. Organohalogen Compd 68:905–910Google Scholar
  36. Weber R, Gaus C, Tysklind M, Johnston P, Forter M, Hollert H, Heinisch H, Holoubek I, Lloyd-Smith M, Masunaga S, Moccarelli P, Santillo D, Seike N, Symons R, Torres JPM, Verta M, Varbelow G, Vijgen J, Watson A, Costner P, Woelz J, Wycisk P, Zennegg M (2008a) Dioxin- and POP-contaminated sites—contemporary and future relevance and challenges. Env Sci Pollut Res 15:363–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Weber R, Tysklind M, Gaus C (2008b) Dioxin—Contemporary and future challenges of historical legacies (editorial, dedicated to Otto Hutzinger). Env Sci Pollut Res 15:96–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Weber R, Watson A, Forter M, Oliaei F (2011) Persistent organic pollutants and landfills—a review of past experiences and future challenges. Waste Manag Res 29(1):107–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wycisk P, Stollberg R, Neumann C, Gossel W, Weiss H, Weber R (2012) Integrated methodology for assessing the HCH groundwater pollution at the multi-source contaminated mega-site bitterfeld/wolfen. Env Sci Pollut Res. doi: 10.1007/s11356-012-0963-4
  40. Wolf K (1986) The Hamburg-Georgswerder dumping ground. Situation, problems and administrative arrangements for production a rehabilitation plan. In: Assink JW, van den Brink WJ (eds) Contaminated soil. Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 723–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.HamburgGermany
  2. 2.Behörde für Stadtentwicklung und Umwelt Hamburg, Abteilung Bodenschutz/AltlastenHamburgGermany
  3. 3.POPs Environmental ConsultingGöppingenGermany

Personalised recommendations