A critical review on anaerobic co-digestion achievements between 2010 and 2013

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.039Get rights and content

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion is a commercial reality for several kinds of waste. Nonetheless, anaerobic digestion of single substrates presents some drawbacks linked to substrate characteristics. Anaerobic co-digestion, the simultaneous digestion of two or more substrates, is a feasible option to overcome the drawbacks of mono-digestion and to improve plant׳s economic feasibility. At present, since 50% of the publication has been published in the last two years, anaerobic co-digestion can be considered the most relevant topic within anaerobic digestion research. The aim of this paper is to present a review of the achievements and perspectives of anaerobic co-digestion within the period 2010–2013, which represents a continuation of the previous review made by the authors [3]. In the present review, the publications have been classified as for the main substrate, i.e., animal manures, sewage sludge and biowaste. Animal manures stand as the most reported substrate, agro-industrial waste and the organic fraction of the municipal solid waste being the most reported co-substrate. Special emphasis has been made to the effect of the co-digestion over digestate quality, since land application seems to be the best option for digestate recycling. Traditionally, anaerobic co-digestion between sewage sludge and the organic fraction of the municipal solid waste has been the most reported co-digestion mixture. However, between 2010 and 2013 the publications dealing with fats, oils and greases and algae as sludge co-substrate have increased. This is because both co-substrates can be obtained at the same wastewater treatment plant. In contrast, biowaste as a main substrate has not been as studied as manures or sewage sludge. Finally, three interdisciplinary sections have been written for addressing novelty aspects in anaerobic co-digestion, i.e., pre-treatments, microbial dynamics and modeling. However, much effort needs to be done in these later aspects to better understand and predict anaerobic co-digestion.

Introduction

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a biological treatment performed in the absence of oxygen to stabilize organic matter while producing biogas, a mixture formed mainly of methane and carbon dioxide. The oldest and more widespread application of AD is the treatment of sewage sludge (SS). AD experienced an important growth after the first energy crisis in the 1970s, especially with the appearance of immobilized biomass systems to treat soluble effluents, and now it can be considered a mature technology [1], [2]. Nonetheless, AD of single substrates (mono-digestion) presents some drawbacks linked to substrate properties. For instance, (i) SS is characterized by low organic loads, (ii) animal manures have low organic loads and high N concentrations, that may inhibit methanogens, (iii) the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) has improper materials as well as a relatively high concentration of heavy metals, (iv) crops and agro-industrial wastes are seasonal substrates, which might lack N, and (v) slaughterhouse wastes (SHW) include risks associated with the high concentration of N and/or long chain fatty acids (LCFA), both potential inhibitors of the methanogenic activity. Most of these problems can be solved by the addition of a co-substrate in what has been recently called anaerobic co-digestion (AcoD).

AcoD, the simultaneous AD of two or more substrates, is a feasible option to overcome the drawbacks of mono-digestion and to improve the economic viability of AD plants due to higher methane production [1]. Initially, because of the research perspective, AcoD focused on mixing substrates which favor positive interactions, i.e. macro- and micronutrient equilibrium, moisture balance and/or dilute inhibitory or toxic compounds [3]. Under these circumstances, 1+1>2 may be achieved, that means, co-digestion is producing more methane than the addition of the methane produced in both single digestions. However, nowadays, because of the industrial outlook and since the improvement of methane production is mainly a consequence of the increase in the organic loading rate (OLR) rather than synergisms, all kinds of mixtures are considered and used. Actually, the transport cost of the co-substrate from the generation point to the AD plant is the first selection criteria. Despite this fact, it is still important to choose the best co-substrate and blend ratio with the aim of favoring synergisms, dilute harmful compounds, optimize methane production and not disrupt digestate quality.

As illustrated in Fig. 1, AcoD publications have experienced a dramatic increase in the last years. In fact, at the present time, AcoD can be considered the most relevant topic within anaerobic digestion research. As can be seen, 50% of the overall papers have been published between 2012 and 2013, whereas 75% of them have been published in the period 2009–2013.

Examining the papers published between 2010 and 2013, it appears that the most frequent main substrates are animal manures (54%), SS (22%) and the OFMSW (11%). At the same time, the most used co-substrates are industrial waste (41%), agricultural waste (23%) and municipal waste (20%) (Fig. 2).

The aim of this paper is to present a review of the achievements and perspectives of anaerobic co-digestion within the period 2010–2013 (up to the 13th World Congress on Anaerobic Digestion), which represents a continuation of the previous review made by the authors [3]. The use of manures, sewage sludge, and organic fraction of municipal solid waste as main substrates, either full-scale or research experiences, is discussed throughout the paper. Furthermore, the review also pays attention to other aspects like pretreatments, digestate quality, microbial community dynamics, and modeling.

Section snippets

Animal manures as a main substrate

In the rural sector, AD has been established as an important economical alternative, specifically as a renewable energy source; hence animal manures have become an important raw material [3]. Nonetheless, manures are often associated with poor methane yields. AcoD of manures with other substrates has been applied as a cost-effective alternative to improve process efficiency and consequently make plants economically feasible [4], [5], [6]. Two main models can be chosen for the implementation of

Sewage sludge as a main substrate

Sewage sludge ranks as the second main substrate for AcoD. Historically, AcoD between SS and OFMSW is the most reported co-digestion research. However, between 2010 and 2013 the publications dealing with fats, oils and greases (FOG) as SS co-substrate have steeply increased, amounting to 26% of the publications. Within the same period, other co-substrates such as fruit and vegetable waste (FVW), SHW, GLY, and algae have also been broadly reported.

The low organic load of the SS together with the

Biowaste as a main substrate

Biowaste, largely OFMSW (all qualities), as a main substrate has not been as studied as manures or SS (Fig. 2). That may be a consequence of several factors: the high biogas potential of this kind of waste, the lower number of plants and their location, but above all the presence of undesired compounds. The later makes that the digestates, followed or not by composting, able to be used in restricted applications (e.g., land reclamation, landfill daily cover, etc.) or even dumped in landfills.

Pre-treatments as option to improve AcoD performance

Pre-treatments applied to AcoD were rarely described in literature until 2011, when the production of papers related to this topic steeply increased. This boom is partly because, in some regions, easy biodegradable co-substrates are already being used or not available and consequently the utilization of more complex organic sources as co-substrates have been considered. Most of the research has been devoted to mechanical pre-treatments (including ultrasound) with a 33% of occurrence, followed

Microbial dynamics

During later years, the development of molecular techniques based on 16S rRNA sequences, such as FISH, PCR, DGGE or T-RFLP, have led to an increase of the number of papers dealing with the study of the microbial community. This is mainly due to the reduction of the investment (equipment) and operating (fungible and technician) costs, the increase of the methods reproducibility and the lower time spent for each analysis. These improvements have made possible the evaluation and/or quantification

Anaerobic co-digestion modeling

In later years (2010–2013), not much attention has been paid to AcoD modeling. It is indeed very surprising that only few articles among the more than two hundreds AcoD articles published within this period were devoted to this topic. It should be pointed out that reliable AcoD modeling is required to predict, in a clear and quantifiable manner, the effect of mixing two or more wastes in a digester and remove potentially negative impacts from mixing based on random or heuristic decisions [3],

Conclusions

Anaerobic co-digestion has been widely implemented in the rural sector because of the need to improve digesters biogas production. Agro-industrial waste and the organic fraction of the municipal solid waste are the most reported co-substrate for manure-based digesters. However, easily degradable substrates are currently limited. Therefore, more complex waste have been considered, which raised the interest on pre-treatments. Even though pre-treatments need to be further developed, because of the

References (179)

  • S. Astals et al.

    Anaerobic co-digestion of pig manure and crude glycerol at mesophilic conditions: biogas and digestate

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • L. Regueiro et al.

    Enhanced methane production from pig manure anaerobic digestion using fish and biodiesel wastes as co-substrates

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • X. Wu et al.

    Biogas and CH(4) productivity by co-digesting swine manure with three crop residues as an external carbon source

    Bioresour Technol

    (2010)
  • P. Panichnumsin et al.

    Production of methane by co-digestion of cassava pulp with various concentrations of pig manure

    Biomass Bioenergy

    (2010)
  • C. Zhang et al.

    The anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and cattle manure

    Bioresour Technol

    (2013)
  • C. Cavinato et al.

    Thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of cattle manure with agro-wastes and energy crops: comparison of pilot and full scale experiences

    Bioresour Technol

    (2010)
  • B. Kavacik et al.

    Biogas production from co-digestion of a mixture of cheese whey and dairy manure

    Biomass Bioenergy

    (2010)
  • M. Goberna et al.

    Mesophilic and thermophilic co-fermentation of cattle excreta and olive mill wastes in pilot anaerobic digesters

    Biomass Bioenergy

    (2010)
  • I.S. Zarkadas et al.

    Anaerobic co-digestion of table olive debittering & washing effluent, cattle manure and pig manure in batch and high volume laboratory anaerobic digesters: effect of temperature

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • A. Giuliano et al.

    Co-digestion of livestock effluents, energy crops and agro-waste: feeding and process optimization in mesophilic and thermophilic conditions

    Bioresour Technol

    (2013)
  • S. Astals et al.

    Co-digestion of pig manure and glycerine: experimental and modeling study

    J Environ Manag

    (2011)
  • L. Castrillón et al.

    Methane production from cattle manure supplemented with crude glycerin from the biodiesel industry in CSTR and IBR

    Bioresour Technol

    (2013)
  • C. Fang et al.

    Anaerobic co-digestion of by-products from sugar production with cow manure

    Water Res

    (2011)
  • E. Alkaya et al.

    Anaerobic mesophilic co-digestion of sugar-beet processing wastewater and beet-pulp in batch reactors

    Renew Energy

    (2011)
  • S. Luste et al.

    Co-digestion of dairy cattle slurry and industrial meat-processing by-products—effect of ultrasound and hygienization pre-treatments

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • J. Pagés Díaz et al.

    Co-digestion of different waste mixtures from agro-industrial activities: kinetic evaluation and synergetic effects

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • B.A. Wartell et al.

    Methane production from horse manure and stall waste with softwood bedding

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • S. Robra et al.

    Generation of biogas using crude glycerin from biodiesel production as a supplement to cattle slurry

    Biomass Bioenergy

    (2010)
  • L. Castrillón et al.

    Optimization of biogas production from cattle manure by pre-treatment with ultrasound and co-digestion with crude glycerin

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • C. Fang et al.

    Anaerobic co-digestion of desugared molasses with cow manure; focusing on sodium and potassium inhibition

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • M.S. Fountoulakis et al.

    Removal of phenolics in olive mill wastewaters using the white-rot fungus Pleurotus ostreatus

    Water Res

    (2002)
  • E. Mizuki et al.

    Inhibitory effect of Citrus unshu peel on anaerobic digestion

    Biol Wastes

    (1990)
  • P. Peu et al.

    Sulphur fate and anaerobic biodegradation potential during co-digestion of seaweed biomass (Ulva sp.) with pig slurry

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • K.S. Creamer et al.

    Stable thermophilic anaerobic digestion of dissolved air flotation (DAF) sludge by co-digestion with swine manure

    Bioresour Technol

    (2010)
  • E. Marañón et al.

    Co-digestion of cattle manure with food waste and sludge to increase biogas production

    Waste Manag

    (2012)
  • S. Xie et al.

    Methane production from anaerobic co-digestion of the separated solid fraction of pig manure with dried grass silage

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • E. Comino et al.

    Investigation of increasing organic loading rate in the co-digestion of energy crops and cow manure mix

    Bioresour Technol

    (2010)
  • E. Comino et al.

    Biogas production by anaerobic co-digestion of cattle slurry and cheese whey

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • L. Bertin et al.

    Innovative two-stage anaerobic process for effective codigestion of cheese whey and cattle manure

    Bioresour Technol

    (2013)
  • C. González-Fernández et al.

    Evaluation of anaerobic codigestion of microalgal biomass and swine manure via response surface methodology

    Appl Energy

    (2011)
  • B. Riaño et al.

    Potential for methane production from anaerobic co-digestion of swine manure with winery wastewater

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • L. Ferreira et al.

    Utilization of wasted sardine oil as co-substrate with pig slurry for biogas production – a pilot experience of decentralized industrial organic waste management in a Portuguese pig farm

    Bioresour Technol

    (2012)
  • S. Nuchdang et al.

    Anaerobic digestion of glycerol and co-digestion of glycerol and pig manure

    J Environ Manag

    (2012)
  • J.A. Alburquerque et al.

    Chemical properties of anaerobic digestates affecting C and N dynamics in amended soils

    Agric Ecosyst Environ

    (2012)
  • J.B. Holm-Nielsen et al.

    The future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization

    Bioresour Technol

    (2009)
  • Y.A. Abdullahi et al.

    Investigating the effects of anaerobic and aerobic post-treatment on quality and stability of organic fraction of municipal solid waste as soil amendment

    Bioresour Technol

    (2008)
  • J.A. Alburquerque et al.

    Assessment of the fertiliser potential of digestates from farm and agroindustrial residues

    Biomass Bioenergy

    (2012)
  • M.A. Bustamante et al.

    Recycling of anaerobic digestates by composting: effect of the bulking agent used

    J Clean Prod

    (2013)
  • S. Heaven et al.

    Integration of on-farm biodiesel production with anaerobic digestion to maximise energy yield and greenhouse gas savings from process and farm residues

    Bioresour Technol

    (2011)
  • J.A. Alburquerque et al.

    Agricultural use of digestate for horticultural crop production and improvement of soil properties

    Eur J Agron

    (2012)
  • Cited by (826)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text