*Rebuilt in new StoryMaps, here*Swipe from the historic old landfill aerial to the new redeveloped site. Notice the site is now home to a warehouse and distribution center, continued commercial use, public open space and restored wetlands. This map was created using some content directly from EPA's superfund redevelopment initiative websites and documents. This swiper web mapping application was created to depict the before and after conditions of the PJP Landfill Superfund site, highlighting redevelopment features.

Photogrammetry-derived orthoimagery and elevation data for Kongiganak, Alaska, collected June 7, 2023, Raw Data File 2024-20, provides low-altitude aerial images from an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) in the community of Kongiganak, Alaska, on June 7, 2023. We used Structure-from-Motion (SfM) photogrammetry to produce two digital surface models (DSM) and two orthorectified images. The populated areas of Kongiganak were the focus of the primary aerial survey, while the secondary aerial survey covered the landfill to the northwest of the community. The orthoimage and elevation data are useful for assessing riverine hazards and changes over time. All files can be downloaded from the Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys website (http://doi.org/10.14509/31288).

Damping and soil pollution: In 1995, a Special Inventory Study on landfills and ditch damping was carried out for the entire rural area in South Holland, the Bio-s. It was an aerial interpretation, in which aerial photos from 1955 were compared with aerial photos from 1992. It was determined which watercourses and ponds that were still visible in 1955 had disappeared in 1992 and where there had to be a damping. In this way, approximately 40,000 damped locks were detected between 1955 and 1992. The fact that there is a ditch damping does not mean that there is also soil contamination. For example, it is known that locks in areas where a land consolidation was carried out are often filled with unsuspected land that was released elsewhere within the project. For individual parcels of arable land, the ditches are often ploughed densely and even in such cases the presence of soil contamination is not plausible in advance. Damping in the peat meadow area is different, because it often uses material that was supplied from elsewhere. These attenuations must be considered suspicious in advance. Furthermore, it can be said that attenuations are relatively less common in former polders. These have a subdivision with relatively wide plots and few, mostly also narrow ditches. Quality When using the data on ditch damping, a number of file limitations must be taken into account. The main limitations are: It is an interpretation of aerial photographs from the period 1955 - 1992. Damping outside this period is therefore not included. - The urban area and the urban extension areas from 1955 to 1992 were also excluded from the survey. - Interpreting aerial photographs in contiguous greenhouse areas has not been carried out, or has been carried out only to a limited extent, due to technical limitations relating to the tracing of damped locks. - Elevations, landfills and ditch dampings were recorded as a single layer of information during the aerial interpretation. - Due to misinterpretation of aerial photographs, a margin of error between 0 and 5 percent should be taken into account.These are errors due to overshadowed ditches, locks that have grown up due to natural landing, ditches that have been incorrectly interpreted as ditches and errors when digitising the photos. Data is mainly used by Ground Matters. Disclaimer: This map with ditch dampings is a snapshot and therefore not complete. It is likely that more locks are muted, which are not indicated on this map. Always consult https://topotijdreis.nl/

Author: Lund, William R.

*Rebuilt in new StoryMaps, here*The Operating Industries, Inc. (OII) Landfill Superfund site is in Monterey Park, California. Swipe between the historical aerial of the landfill area and the current imagery of the commercial redevelopment. This map was created using some content directly from EPA's superfund redevelopment initiative websites and documents. This swiper web mapping application depicts the before and after conditions of the Operating Industries, Inc. (OII) Landfill Superfund site, highlighting redevelopment features.

The Historical Municipal Landfills dataset is a spatial representation of the locations of historic landfills in the province of Alberta. The data was originally captured in a 1982 survey conducted by MacLaren Plansearch Lavalin where counties within Alberta were asked to identify the quarter section that landfills were located in. MacLaren ranked the results of the survey categorizing landfill locations based on their potential risk for environmental and human health impacts. In 1985 Associated Engineering did an evaluation of a selection of sites which MacLaren had ranked as having the greatest potential risk and identified them on hardcopy aerial photographs. A subset of the remaining landfills in the MacLaren report were located on historic aerial photographs as part of an Alberta Environment and Protected Areas project where the footprint of the landfill was digitized. These three sources were used in the creation of this dataset: MacLaren Plansearch report. Associated Engineering Report. and Alberta Environment and Protected Areas digitization project.

The U.S. Geological Survey deployed small uncrewed aircraft systems (sUAS) to collect aerial remote sensing data across sites within the Lower Darby Creek Superfund Site and the adjacent John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge (JHNWR) ~5 miles outside of Philadelphia, PA in March and August of 2024. March datasets include aerial images from natural color (RGB) and thermal infra-red (TIR) sensors across the JHNWR and adjacent tributaries as well as the nearby Clearview Landfill within the superfund site. August datasets include aerial images from natural color (RGB), thermal-infrared (TIR), multispectral sensors, and raw lidar over the Clearview Landfill only. These datasets were processed to produce high resolution digital elevation models (DEM), image mosaics, and lidar point clouds (LPC). Black and white cross-coded ground control points (GCPs) were surveyed using Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS and RTK-GPS enabled AeroPoints to georeference the model and orthomosaics during post-processing. The elevation and imagery products were produced to help partners at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) acquire accurate elevation data for target sites during the winter "leaf-off" period (March) and monitor changes in vegetation cover during peak growing season (August) building a baseline conditions dataset starting in August 2023. The March field collection included more baseline lidar data for additional large swaths of the National Wildlife Refuge as well as the thermal imagery dataset, which is the only planned thermal survey, and as a result took several days to complete. Although lidar was collecting during the August field effort, the focus was for vegetation at the Clearview Landfill and so only required one day of surveying. Future data collections are planned to support long-term monitoring of landscape change resulting from remediation efforts and potential storm impacts.

reports, photographs, surveys , aerial photographs of the ranadi landfill site

The U.S. Geological Survey deployed small uncrewed aircraft systems (sUAS) to collect aerial remote sensing data across sites within the Lower Darby Creek Superfund Site and the adjacent John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge (JHNWR) ~5 miles outside of Philadelphia, PA in March and August of 2024. March datasets include aerial images from natural color (RGB) and thermal infra-red (TIR) sensors across the JHNWR and adjacent tributaries as well as the nearby Clearview Landfill within the superfund site. August datasets include aerial images from natural color (RGB), thermal-infrared (TIR), multispectral sensors, and raw lidar over the Clearview Landfill only. These datasets were processed to produce high resolution digital elevation models (DEM), image mosaics, and lidar point clouds (LPC). Black and white cross-coded ground control points (GCPs) were surveyed using Real Time Kinematic (RTK) GPS and RTK-GPS enabled AeroPoints to georeference the model and orthomosaics during post-processing. The elevation and imagery products were produced to help partners at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) acquire accurate elevation data for target sites during the winter "leaf-off" period (March) and monitor changes in vegetation cover during peak growing season (August) building a baseline conditions dataset starting in August 2023. The March field collection included more baseline lidar data for additional large swaths of the National Wildlife Refuge as well as the thermal imagery dataset, which is the only planned thermal survey, and as a result took several days to complete. Although lidar was collecting during the August field effort, the focus was for vegetation at the Clearview Landfill and so only required one day of surveying. Future data collections are planned to support long-term monitoring of landscape change resulting from remediation efforts and potential storm impacts.

Abstract The Waste Management Facilities Database presents the spatial locations; in point format, all known waste management, recycling and reprocessing facilities within Australia. The Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment (DAWE) compiled this database with the following public and private agencies:

Geoscience Australia Qld Dept of Environment and Science Canberra Region Joint Organisation Hunter Joint Organisation of Councils NetWaste Illawarra Shoalhaven Joint Organisation ACT City Services NT council websites SA council websites Tas council websites Metropolitan Waste & Resource Recovery Group Loddon Mallee Waste & Resource Recovery Group Barwon South West Waste & Resource Recovery Group Grampians Central West Waste & Resource Recovery Group Gippsland Waste & Resource Recovery Group North East Waste & Resource Recovery Group Goulburn Valley Waste & Resource Recovery Group WA council websites Cleanaway website Veolia website Repurpose It website Advanced Circular Polymers website NSW Return and Earn Qld Containers for Change NT Container Deposits SA Container Deposit Locations ACT Container Deposit Locations NSW EPA SA EPA Re.Group website Bingo Industries website Industry sources Coles website Woolworths website ACT Government EPA Tasmania WA DWER National TV and computer drop-off locations Green Industries SA Qld Dept of Environment and Science AORA NSW EPA NT EPA APCO Qld council websites NSW council websites Vic council websites Sustainability Victoria Norske Skog Australia website InfraBuild website Liberty Primary Steel website Recycal website Sell and Parker website Future Recycling website TES-AMM Australia website Tambo Waste website NAWMA website Infrastructure survey responses WA DWER infrastructure survey responses

This database is for public, industry and government use under the CC-BY arrangements. Currency Date modified: 1 November 2022 Modification frequency: None Data extent Spatial extent North: -9.00° South: -44.00° East: 154.00° West: 112.00° Source information Catalog entry: Waste Management Facilities Database Lineage statement This dataset replaces the original first version of the data published on 1 January 2012; which did not include the recycling facilities. This updated version of the data contains the recycling facilities. The waste management facilities dataset underwent a complete update in 2022 using waste data captured by the Department of Agriculture, Water and Environment (DAWE). The dataset was address matched using the address provided with the Geocoded National Address File (G-NAF) data. Where no spatial location was provided, GIS specialists attempted to find a corresponding GNAF address and updates to this address were completed where possible. Visually located sites were found using Esri World Imagery and aligned to match a similar location on the block based on the surrounding GNAF address. For example center or front of block. Some locations were unable to be located due to lack of ground truthing capability. All other waste facilities contain the spatial and attribution originally received from DAWE. The imagery used ranges from one meter or better satellite and aerial sources. Data dictionary All layers

Attribute name Description

Object ID Automatically generated system ID

Shape Geometry type (Point)

Feature Type A single feature type “Waste Management Facility” is the collective name of the different facility subtypes identified in the CLASS field.

Unique Record ID Generate to define record uniquely.

GA_ID ID of waste management facility that originated from the original Geoscience dataset.

Unique Site ID The identification number used in the Geoscience Australia database.

Authority Name of Authority provided by the data custodian.

Licence No Licence number provided by the data custodian.

Co Located When a number of different activities are carried out at the same site

Facility Management Type The Management type subtypes: Recycling; Drop-Off; Disposal; Not Classified; Reuse; Energy From Waste

Facility Infrastructure Type The Infrastructure type subtypes: Metals Recovery Facility; E-Waste Drop-Off Facility; Container Deposit Scheme Dropoff Facility; Landfill – Putrescible; Other Waste Facility; Transfer Station; Other Recycling Facility; Plastics Reprocessing Facility; Organics Recycling Facility; E-Waste Recycling Facility; Paper and Cardboard Recycling Facility; C&D Waste Recycling Facility; Reuse Shop; Landfill – Not Classified; Steel Reprocessing Facility; Other Metals Reprocessing Facility; Plastics Recovery Facility; Materials Recovery Facility (MRF); Thermal Energy from Waste Facility; Landfill – Inert; Refuse Derived Fuel Facility; Mechanical Biological Treatment Facility; Glass Beneficiation Facility; Rubber Recycling Facility; Anaerobic Digestion Facility; Glass Reprocessing Facility; Mattress Recycling Facility

Facility Owner Owner of the facility.

Facility Name Name of the facility.

State The state where this feature is located.

Address The address of this feature.

Suburb The suburb where this feature is located.

Postcode The postcode where this feature is located.

Operational Status Operational; or Closed

Spatial Confidence 5 – High; 4 – Above Average; 3 – Average; 2 – Below Average; 1 – Low; 0 – None

Capture Method The method used to capture the spatial component of the data: G-NAF Address Match; Manually Located – G-NAF Match; Manually Located – No G-NAF Match; Spatial as Received – No G-NAF Match; Non Spatial; Retired Spatial Data

Address Detail PID - G-NAF The unique ID defined within the G-NAF address data.

Formatted Address - G-NAF The G-NAF address where this feature is located.

Suburb - G-NAF The G-NAF suburb where this feature is located.

Postcode - G-NAF The G-NAF postcode where this feature is located.

Confidence - G-NAF 2 - This reflects that all three contributors have supplied an identical address; 1 - This reflects that a match has been achieved between only two contributors; 0 - This reflects that a single contributor holds this address and no match has been achieved with either or the other two contributors; -1 - Was not used in this process.

Date Created - G-NAF G-NAF date of creation.

Date Last Modified - G-NAF G-NAF last modified date.

Date Retired - G-NAF G-NAF retired date.

Contact Geoscience Australia, clientservices@ga.gov.au