Codigestion of Untreated and Treated Sewage Sludge with the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sewage Sludge and Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes Samples
2.2. Samples Analysis
2.3. Experimental Setup
2.4. Experimental Procedure
3. Results and Discussion
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
AD | Anaerobic Digestion |
ASH | Ashes (%) |
BMP | Bio-Methane Potential |
BOD | Biochemical oxygen demand (mg/L) |
C/N | Carbon to Nitrogen ratio |
F.C. | Fixed Carbon (%) |
FVW | Fruit and Vegetable Wastes |
KW | Kitchen Waste |
LCFA | Long chain fatty acids |
M | Moisture (%) |
n.r. | not reported |
OFMSW | Organic Fraction Of Municipal Solid Waste |
PS | Primary Sludge |
SPG | Specific gas production (Nm/kg VS) |
SRT | Solids retention time (days) |
TAS | Thickened Activated Sludge |
TS | The total content of solids (%) |
VS | Volatile solids (%) |
WAS | Waste of Activated Sludge |
WUS | Waste Untreated Sludge |
References
- Council Directive. 1999/31/EC of 26 April 1999 on the landfill of waste. Off. J. Eur. Commun. 1999, L182, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
- Murto, L.; Bjornsson, B.; Mattiasson, B. Impact of food industrial waste on anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and pig manure. J. Environ. Manag. 2004, 70, 101–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Commission. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Future Steps in Bio-Waste Management in the European Union; COM235 Final; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. Environmental, Economic and Social Impacts of the Use of Sewage Sludge on Land; Final Report, Part III: Project Interim Reports; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- European Commission. European Commission Environmental Statistics and Accounts in Europe; European Commission: Brussels, Belgium, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Czepiel, P.M.; Crill, P.M.; Harriss, R.C. Methane Emissions from Municipal Wastewater Treatment Processes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 1993, 27, 2472–2477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolbl, S.; Forte-Tavčer, P.; Stres, B. Potential for valorization of dehydrated paper pulp sludge for biogas production: Addition of selected hydrolytic enzymes in semi-continuous anaerobic digestion assays. Energy 2017, 126, 326–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kolbl, S.; Paloczi, A.; Panjan, J.; Stres, B. Addressing case specific biogas plant tasks: Industry oriented methane yields derived from 5 L Automatic Methane Potential Test Systems in batch or semi-continuous tests using realistic inocula, substrate particle sizes and organic loading. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 153, 180–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cabbai, V.; Ballico, M.; Aneggi, E.; Goi, D. BMP tests of source selected OFMSW to evaluate anaerobic codigestion with sewage sludge. Waste Manag. 2013, 33, 1626–1632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bolzonella, D.; Battistoni, P.; Susini, C.; Cecchi, F. Anaerobic codigestion of waste activated sludge and OFMSW: The experiences of Viareggio and Treviso plants (Italy). Water Sci. Technol. 2006, 53, 203–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cavinato, C.; Bolzonella, D.; Pava, P.; Fatone, F.; Cecchi, F. Mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of waste active sludge and source sorted biowaste in pilot and full scale reactors. Renew. Energy 2013, 55, 260–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nielfa, A.; Cano, R.; Fdz–Polanco, M. Theoretical methane production generated by the co-digestion of organic fraction municipal solidwaste and biological sludge. Biotechnol. Rep. 2015, 5, 14–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, H.W.; Han, S.K.; Shin, H.S. The optimization of food waste addition as aco-substrate in anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge. Waste Manag. Res. 2003, 21, 515–526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomez Lahoz, C.; Fernandez Gimenez, B.; Garcia Herruzo, F.; Rodriguez Maroto, J.M.; Vereda-Alonso, C. Biomethanization of mixtures of fruits and vegetables solid wastes and sludge from a municipal wastewater treatment plant. J. Environ. Sci. Health A Tox. Hazard Subst. Environ. Eng. 2007, 42, 481–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sosnowski, P.; Wieczorek, A.; Ledakowicz, S. Anaerobic codigestion of sewage sludge and organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Adv. Environ. Res. 2003, 7, 609–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zitomer, D.H.; Johnson, C.C.; Speece, R.E. Metal Stimulation and Municipal Digester Thermophilic/Mesophilic Activity. J. Environ. Eng. 2008, 134, 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- El Zein, A.; Seif, H.; Gooda, E. Effect of Co-composting Fish and Banana Wastes with Organic Municipal Solid Wastes on Carbon/Nitrogen Ratio. Civ. Environ. 2015, 7, 122–139. [Google Scholar]
- Kaparaju, P.; Ellegaard, L.; Angelidaki, I. Effects of mixing on methane production during thermophilic anaerobic digestion of manure: Lab-scale and pilot-scale studies. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 4919–4928. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elsayed, M.; Andres, Y.; Blel, M.; Gad, A. Methane Production By Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Sewage Sludge and Wheat Straw Under Mesophilic Conditions. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res. 2015, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Sreekrishnan, T.R.; Kohli, S.; Rana, V. Enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates using different techniques—A review. Bioresour. Technol. 2004, 95, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mata-Alvarez, J.; Dosta, J.; Macè, S.; Astals, S. Codigestion of solid wastes: A review of its uses and perspectives including modelling. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2011, 31, 99–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pereira, M.A.; Pires, O.C.; Mota, M.; Alves, M.M. Anaerobic biodegradation of oleic and palmitic acids: Evidence of mass transfer limitation caused by long chain fatty acid accumulation onto the anaerobic sludge. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2005, 92, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Pereira, M.A.; Cavaleiro, A.J.; Mota, M.; Alves, M.M. Accumulation of long-chain fatty acids onto anaerobic sludge under steady state and shock loading conditions: Effect on acetogenic and methanogenic activity. Water Sci. Technol. 2003, 48, 33–40. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Zaher, U.; Li, R.; Jeppsson, U.; Steyer, J.P.; Chen, S. GISCOD: General integrated solid waste co-digestion model. Water Res. 2009, 43, 2717–2727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bolzonella, D.; Battistoni, P.; Mata-Alvarez, J.; Cecchi, F. Anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes: Process behaviour in transient conditions. Water Sci. Technol. 2003, 48, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Caffaz, S.; Bettazzi, E.; Scaglione, D.; Lubello, C. An integrated approach in a municipal WWTP: Anaerobic codigestion of sludge with organic waste and nutrient removal from supernatant. Water Sci. Technol. 2008, 58, 669–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zupančiča, D.G.; Uranjek-Ževartb, N.; Roša, M. Full-scale anaerobic co-digestion of organic waste and municipal sludge. Biomass Bioenergy 2008, 32, 162–167. [Google Scholar]
- Buratti, C.; Barbanera, M.; Bartocci, P.; Fantozzi, F. Thermogravimetric analysis of the behavior of sub-bituminous coal and cellulosic ethanol residue during co-combustion. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 186, 154–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fantozzi, F.; Buratti, C.; Morlino, C.; Massoli, S. Analysis of biogas yield and quality produced by anaerobic digestion of different combination of biomass and inoculums. In Proceedings of the 16th Biomass Conference and Exhibition, Valencia, Italy, 2–4 June 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Fantozzi, F.; Buratti, C. Biogas production from different substrates in an experimental continuously stirred tank reactor anaerobic digester. Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 2783–5789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fantozzi, F.; Buratti, C. Anaerobic digestion of mechanically treated OFMSW: Experimental data on biogas/methane production and residues characterization. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 8885–8892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ismail, Z.Z.; Talib, A.R. Assessment of anaerobic co-digestion of agro wastes for biogas recovery: A bench scale application to date palm wastes. Energy Environ. 2014, 5, 591–600. [Google Scholar]
- Jianzheng, L.; Ajay, K.; Junguo, H.; Qiaoying, B.; Sheng, C.; Peng, W. Assessment of the effects of dry anaerobic co-digestion of cow dung with waste water sludge on biogas yield and biodegradability. Int. J. Phys. Sci. 2011, 5, 591–600. [Google Scholar]
- Yao, F.X.; Macías, F.; Santesteban, A.; Virgel, S.; Blanco, F.; Jiang, X.; Camps Arbestain, M. Influence of the acid buffering capacity of different types of Technosols on the chemistry of their leachates. Chemosphere 2009, 74, 250–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fonoll, X.; Astals, S.; Dosta, J.; Mata-Alvarez, J. Anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and fruit wastes: Evaluation of the transitory states when the co-substrateis change. Chemosphere 2015, 262, 1268–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, P.; Zhang, G.; Wang, W. Ultrasonic treatment of biological sludge: Floc disintegration, cell lysis and inactivation. Bioresour. Technol. 2007, 98, 207–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lebiocka, M.; Piotrowicz, A. Co-digestion of sewage sludge and organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Acomperison between laboratory and technical scales. Environ. Prot. Eng. 2012, 38, 157–162. [Google Scholar]
- Borowski, S. Co/digestion of the hydromechanically separated organic fraction of municipal solid waste with sewage sludge. J. Environ. Manag. 2015, 147, 87–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Heo, N.H.; Park, S.C.; Kang, H. Effects of mixture ratio and hydraulic retention time on single-stage anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and waste activated sludge. J. Environ. Sci. Health A Tox. Hazard Subst. Environ. Eng. 2004, 39, 1739–1756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gomez, X.; Cuetos, M.J.; Cara, J.; Moran, A.; Garcia, A.I. Anaerobic co-digestion of primary sludge and the fruit and vegetable fraction of the municipal solid wastes: Conditions for mixing and evaluation of the organic loading rate. Renew. Energy 2006, 31, 2017–2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Composition | SPG | CH | Method | References |
---|---|---|---|---|
(100% WAS) | 0.390 (m/kg VS) | 64% | BMP | [9] |
(41.5% WAS-58.5% OFMSW) | 0.620 (m/kg VS) | n.r. | BMP | [9] |
(50% WAS-50% OFMSW) | 0.34 (m/kg VS) | 60% | Pilot scale | [11] |
(100% WAS) | 0.15 (m/kgVS) | 61.8% | Pilot scale | [11] |
(50% WAS-50% OFMSW) | 0.35 (m/kg VS) | 60% | Full Scale | [11] |
(75% WAS-25% OFMSW) | 0.45 (m/kg VS) | 53.8% | Pilot scale | [9] |
(41% WAS-59% OFMSW) | 0.43 (m/kg VS) | 64% | Full scale | [25] |
(77% TAS-23% (KW & FWP)) | 0.38 (Nm/kg VS) | n.r. | Pilot scale | [26] |
((60% PS & 40% WAS)-OFMSW) | 0.6 (m/kg VS) | n.r. | Full scale | [27] |
(100% biological sludge) | 0.27 (m/kg VS) | 60% | BMP | [12] |
(80% OFMSW-20% biological sludge) | 0.22 (m/kg VS) | n.r. | BMP | [27] |
Moisture (%) | Total Solids (%) | Volatile Solids (%) | Ash (%wb) | Fixed Carbon (%wb) | pH | C/N | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
WUS | 93.97 | 6.03 | 4.33 | 1.7 | 0 | 7.01 | 12 |
WAS | 95 | 5.0 | 3.12 | 1.88 | 0 | 7.3 | 8.6 |
OFMSW | 76.22 | 23.78 | 19 | 1.9 | 2.88 | 6.25 | 35.8 |
Inoculum | 97.0 | 3 | 2.06 | 0.94 | 0 | 7.78 | 13 |
Vessels | Substrate | Moisture (%) | VS/TS | C/N | pH |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 & 2 | 107 g WUS | 6.9 (vessel 1) | |||
(70%-30% weight) | 46 g OFMSW | 90.6 | 83.3 | 17.67 | 7.0 (vessel 2) |
WUS:OFMSW | 47 g Inoculum | ||||
3 & 4 | 59 g WUS | 6.4 (vessel 3) | |||
(50%-50% weight) | 59 g OFMSW | 90.0 | 85.6 | 19.37 | 6.1 (vessel 4) |
WUS:OFMSW | 82 g Inoculum | ||||
5 | |||||
(100% weight) | 200 g Inoculum | 97 | 68.7 | 13 | 7.8 |
6 | |||||
(100% weight) | 200 g WUS | 93.97 | 71.8 | 12 | 7.0 |
1* & 2* | 107 g WAS | 6.9 (vessel 1) | |||
(70%-30%) | 46 g OFMSW | 91.15 | 81.2 | 15.85 | 7.0 (vessel 2) |
WAS:OFMSW | 47 g Inoculum | ||||
3* & 4* | 59 g WAS | 6.9 (vessel 1) | |||
(50%-50% weight) | 59 g OFMSW | 90.28 | 84.56 | 18.37 | 7.0 (vessel 2) |
WAS:OFMSW | 82 g Inoculum | ||||
6* | |||||
(100% weight) | 200 g WAS | 95 | 62.4 | 8.6 | 7.3 |
Biogas (Nm3/kg VS) | Methane (Nm3/kg VS) | VS Removed | |
---|---|---|---|
(WUS:OFMSW) | |||
(70%-30% weight) | 0.444 | 0.331 | 66 |
(50%-50% weight) | 0.399 | 0.315 | 60 |
(100% WUS) | 0.644 | 0.499 | 72 |
(WAS:OFMSW) | |||
(70%-30% weight) | 0.370 | 0.243 | 58 |
(50%-50% weight) | 0.245 | 0.162 | 58 |
(100% WUS) | 0.410 | 0.283 | 65 |
© 2017 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Al bkoor Alrawashdeh, K.; Pugliese, A.; Slopiecka, K.; Pistolesi, V.; Massoli, S.; Bartocci, P.; Bidini, G.; Fantozzi, F. Codigestion of Untreated and Treated Sewage Sludge with the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes. Fermentation 2017, 3, 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation3030035
Al bkoor Alrawashdeh K, Pugliese A, Slopiecka K, Pistolesi V, Massoli S, Bartocci P, Bidini G, Fantozzi F. Codigestion of Untreated and Treated Sewage Sludge with the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes. Fermentation. 2017; 3(3):35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation3030035
Chicago/Turabian StyleAl bkoor Alrawashdeh, Khalideh, Annarita Pugliese, Katarzyna Slopiecka, Valentina Pistolesi, Sara Massoli, Pietro Bartocci, Gianni Bidini, and Francesco Fantozzi. 2017. "Codigestion of Untreated and Treated Sewage Sludge with the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes" Fermentation 3, no. 3: 35. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation3030035