Biochemical methane potential applied to solid wastes - review T. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

SLIDE 1

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

Biochemical methane potential applied to solid wastes - review

• T. M. Cabrita1, M. T. Santos1, A. M. Barreiros1

1 ADEQ, Instituto Superior de Engenharia de Lisboa - ISEL/IPL.

SLIDE 2

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

2

Contents

• Introduction
• Goals
• BMP publications
• BMP methods
• Factors affecting BMP tests
• BMP applied to solid substrates
• BMP conditions and results
• Conclusions
• Future work

SLIDE 3

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

3

Introduction

• Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a widely applied technology to treat

solid wastes and produce biogas

• In Europe, exist around of 120 full-scale plants to AD municipal solid

wastes.

Central Sewage Sludge Treatment Plant Bottrop

http://blogs.qub.ac.uk/atbest/page/2/

http://www.adp.pt/pt/sustentabilidade/inovacao-e- desenvolvimento---conheca-os-projetos-em-curso/?id=37

SLIDE 4

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

4

Introduction

• In Portugal (2013) biogas come from landfills (96 %), wastewater

treatment plants and solid waste treatment plants

• Represent 1 % of the renewable sources

Tratolixo, E.I.M.S.A. Valorsul, S. A.

SLIDE 5

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

5

Introduction

AD - optimization

How to increase the biogas production ?

Wastes from several sources or mixtures

BMP – Biochemical methane potential

• To obtain the biodegradability of different substrates or

mixture of substrates;

• To choose potential substrates to anaerobic digestion

most widely used technique

SLIDE 6

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

6

Introduction

What is BMP test ?

Batch test Substrates

Syringe Rubber Reactor

Inoculum

SLIDE 7

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

7

Present and evaluate the BMP factors, methodologies, solid organic substrates and results Goal

• Substrate

BMP publications

How to do BMP test ?

• Inoculum
• Methodology

With or without pre-treatment Source Amount Operational conditions Gas measurement conditions

SLIDE 8

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

8

BMP publications

• Publications between 2008 and 2015 - keywords “anaerobic digestion” and “BMP”
• Survey - Online Knowledge Library (B-on) with peer-reviewed publications.

*Results up until the end of April

100 200 300 400 500 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 AD-BMP - publications

*

How much interest exists for BMP?

• From 100 to almost

500

• Great amount of data

biodegradability comparison from different solid wastes still problematic

SLIDE 9

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

9

BMP methods

• Owen et al. (1979) presents the most popular method for BMP

in the last 3 decades. Still used with modifications (e.g. volume reactor, inoculum source and concentration);

• Chynoweth et al. (1993) analysed the influence of 3 factors:

inoculum source, inoculum/substrate ratio (I/S) and particle size – inoculum active, I/S  2, particle size > 1 mm;

• Owens & Chynoweth (1993) also modified the Owen et al.

(1979) methodology – substrate 2 g VS/L, medium with different mineral concentrations and inoculum (fed of 1.6 g VS/L), bottles 275 mL (100 mL of inoculum);

SLIDE 10

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

10

BMP methods

• Angelidaki and Ahring (1993) referred the need to acclimate the

inoculum to specific conditions like the ammonia concentration;

• Angelidaki and Ahring (1997) - bottles of 117 mL with 20 mL of

an adapted inoculum;

• Hansen et al. (2004) adapted and modified
• bottles of 2 L

(400 mL de inoculum and 100 mL of sample);

SLIDE 11

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

11

BMP methods

• Angelidaki and Sanders (2004) - a substantial uncertainty in

BMP – AD is a complex process. Different units, e.g. L CH4/kg- waste, L CH4/L-waste, L CH4/kg-VS added or L CH4/kg-COD added (P = 1 atm and T = 0 ºC);

• Angelidaki et al. (2009) - guidelines and advices for several

factors - substrate, inoculum source, inoculum activity, medium blank and controls, replicates, mixing, data collection, bottles volume (0.1 to 2 L), interpretation and reporting conditions;

• Other methods: technical guideline VDI 4630 (2006) and ISO

guideline 11734 (1995).

SLIDE 12

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

12

Factors affecting BMP tests

Experimental Conditions Gas Measurement Systems Volumetric methods Manometric methods GC Operational Conditions Physical Reactor capacity Temperature Stirring Incubation time Chemical Headspace gas pH and alkalinity Mineral medium I/S ratio

SLIDE 13

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

13

BMP applied to solid substrates

• Approximately 70 different substrates (around 80 references)

submitted to BMP tests;

• Solids contents expressed in different units such as g/L, g/kg, %,

mg/L and in wet base;

• Total solids (TS) contents represented in:

 Percentage - 0.7 to almost 100 %;  g/kg units - 47.3 to 991 g/kg;  g/L - 3.97 to 331.33 g/L;

• Volatile solids (VS) contents presented in different bases, e.g.

related with TS, dry mass and wet weight.

SLIDE 14

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

14

BMP applied to solid substrates

Substrate TS VS Reference Brewery grain waste 24.2 % 23.0 % Kafle et al. 2013 Food waste 48,400 ± 2,700 mg/L 27,900 ± 1,300 mg/L Elbeshbishy et al. 2012 Organic fraction of municipal solid waste 461 g/kg 386 g/kg Nielfa et al. 2015 Two-phase olive mill solid waste 265 ± 3 g/kg 228 ± 2 g/kg Rincón et al. 2016 Livestock residues on- farm 42-45 wt%, wet basis 31-35 wt%, wet basis Yap et al. 2016 Secondary sewage sludge from WWTP 19.05 ± 1.21 g/L 13.99 ± 1.05 g/L Abelleira-Pereira et al. 2015 Source-separated

• rganic household waste

24-86 % ww 81-94 % TS Naroznova et al. 2016

Examples of solid substrates and solids contents

SLIDE 15

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

15

BMP conditions and results

• Several items were analysed (2011 to 2016): inoculum and substrate

sources, pre-treatment, reactor volume, headspace, I/S ratio, temperature, incubation time and measurement of biogas;

Reference Inoculum source Pre-treatment Reactor (mL) I/S T (°C) Incubation time (d) Biogas Production Apples et al. 2011 Digested sludge na 1,000 100 g/500 g MC 21 25-456.3 mL CH4/g ODM Fernández-Cegrí et

• al. 2012

GS Chemical and TC (75 ⁰C) 250 (EV) 2 VS/2.5 COD 35 7-10 0-273 mL CH4 /gCODadded Ruggeri et al. 2015 CM NaOH, Salts, US, US+salts 250 na 30

• App. 60

2-193 L CH4 /kgVS0 Naroznova et al. 2016 Collected from a WWTP na 1,000 2 VS 37 45 202-572 mL CH4/g VSsubtrate

Examples of solid substrates and solids contents

na: not available CM – Cattle manure; COD – Chemical oxygen demand; EV – Effective volume; GS – Granular sludge; MC – Mesophilic conditions; ODM – Organic dry matter; T – Temperature; TC – Thermochemical; US – Ultrasonic; VS – Volatile solids; WWTP – Wastewater treatment plant

SLIDE 16

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

16

BMP experimental conditions and results

Author Subs trate origin Inoculum

• rigin

Pretreatm ent Reactor (m L ) Headspace volum e (m l) Num ber of replicates I/S Tem perature (°C) Mix ing rate Incubation tim e (d) Meas urem ent of biogas Biogas Production Standard Conditions Lalabut et al. 2011 Raw m anures ; Food res idues; Invas ive aquatic plants ; Others (s witchgras s , corn s ilage, corn leachate, m

• uthwash, sus pended

FOG and s ettled FOG ). farm

• bas ed com

pletely m ix ed anaerobic digester

• 250

35 m anual 40 cum ulative pres s ure - pres sure trans ducers 106.5-648.5 m L CH4/g V Sadded s tp L una- delRis co et al. 2011 G rass s ilage, m aize silage, different m ix s ilages (gras s es and legum es , m ix rate is not s pecified), cow s lurry, pig s lurry, ferm entation s lops and grain m ill res idues . Anaerobic reactor of a WWTP

• 575

375 triplicate 150 m l / 0.3 g TS 36 regularly once a day, m anually 48-72 increas e in press ure in the gas phas e

• f tes t bottles using an abs olute

pres s ure trans ducer. G C Agricultural Subs trates : 238-319 L CH4.kgV S-1added; Food Indus try Was tes : 335- 714 L CH4.kgV S-1added; Cereal Indus try Res idues : 272-384 L CH4.kgV S-1added 0°C and 1 atm (s tp) Lesteur et al. 2011 MSW - cardboard, rice, rus k, potatoes , papers , vegetables , bread and a waste built by m ix ing s om e of the s im ple was tes) and lignocellulos ic green was tes active anaerobic s ludge

• 600

duplicate 0.5 35 35 every two days with Micro-G C MSW (graphical analys is): 87-355 m L CH4.g-1 V S; Raw s am ples : 20-400 m L CH4.g-1 V S Apples et al. 2011 thickened s ludge s am ples were collected from different WWTPs Diges ted s ludge

• riginating from

the fulls cale diges ter located at the WWTP

• 1000

triplicate 100 g I/500 g S m esophilic conditions 21 dis placem ent of the liquid in the cylinders . G C-TCD 25-456.3 m L CH4/g ODM V al del Rio et al. 2011 aerobic granular s ludge Therm al (60-210 °C) 570 170 1 g V S/V S 35 120 rpm 26 variation of pres s ure ins ide the glas s flas k by m eans of a pres s ure trans ducer and G C 169-404 m L-CH4/g-V Sf ed Nieto et

• al. 2012

was tes from three agro-food industries (dairy, cider production, cattle farm ing) Anaerobic s ludge from a m unicipal WWTP

• 2,000

1,400 duplicate 0.67, 1, 1.33, 2 and 4.00 V S 35 continuous ly on a s haking-table 55 m anually by a pres sure trans m itter and G C-TCD 202-549 m L STP CH4·g V S was te-1 STP, P=1 bar and T=0 ⁰C E lbes hbi s hy et al. 2012 OFMSW and prim ary sludge of WWPT 1 - prim ary m es ophilic AD at a WWTP; 2 - m es ophilic AD treating SSO , 3 - m es ophilic AD treating prim ary and s econdary wastewater

• 260

60 triplicate 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 m as s V SS/m as s COD 37 180 rpm

• app. 28

at the end of the tes t us ing appropriately sized glas s syringes in the 5–100 m L

• range. G

C-TCD prim ary s ludge: 221-283 m L CH4/g V SSs ub; food was te: 440-1400 m L CH4/g V SSs ub Triolo et

• al. 2012

Herbaceous plants that do not have a pers is tent woody s tem and nonherbaceous m aterial s uch as hedge and tree trim m ings . Fangel biogas plant 37ºC fed with 80% anim al s lurry and about 20% organic industrial was te

• 1,000

(working volum e) triplicate 3:1 TS 37 A couple of tim es during a working day, m anually

• app. 60

V DI and G C-TCD 104-388.9 CH4 N L kg V S-1 STP conditions (273 K, 1.013 hPa) Fernánd ez-Cegrí et al. 2012 The s unflower oil cake s am ple us ed in this s tudy was collected from a s unflower oil factory G ranular s ludge taken from an indus trial anaerobic reactor 35 ⁰C Chem ical and Therm

• chem

ical (75 ⁰C) (Ca(OH)2, NaOH, NaHCO3 and H2SO4) 250 (effective volum e) triplicate 2 V S/2.5 COD 35 300 rpm between 7 and 10 flus hing the gas through a 2 N NaOH s olution volum e displacem ent 0-273 m L CH4 g-1 CODadded s tp Costa et

• al. 2012

Chicken feather waste and poultry litter were collected from a local poultry indus try Anaerobic s uspend s ludge

• m

unicipal s ludge diges ter. Anaerobic granular s ludge - brewery indus try. Therm

• chem

ical (20- 90 ⁰C) (Ca(OH)2, NaOH) 50 (working volum e) triplicate 0.66, 0.71, 0.76 and 1.32 g V S/ g V S 37 and 65 (bioaugm ent ation) 80 G C/FID 45-123 L CH4 kg-1 V Sadded s tp Eiroa et

• al. 2012

Solid fis h was te - tuna, s ardine, m ackerel and needle fis h. s us pended s ludge - urban was tewater treatm ent plant. granular s ludge - brewery indus try. triplicate 0.15–0.18, 0.30–0.36 and 0.77–0.91 g V S/g V S; 0.4, 0.77 and 1.25 g V S/g V S; 0,71 and 0.83 g V S/g V S 37 between 60 and 80 (graphics difficult to read) pres s ure trans ducer. G C-FID 0.04-0.35 L CH4/g V Sadded; Co-diges tion (tuna:gors e): 0.16-0.21 L CH4/g V Sadded s tp Lim & Fox 2013 Thickened prim ary and secondary s ludge was obtained from a m unicipal activated s ludge facility. Anaerobic granular s ludge was obtained from an UASB treating indus trial was te.

• 250

100 triplicate 1/1, 1/3 and 1/8 35 21 the s yringe m ethod and equilibrating the pres s ure with atm

• s pheric

conditions . G C-TCD 21.93-76.27 m L CH4/g V Sadded Cavaleir

• et al.

2013 Two was tes from a m eat- proces s ing plant located in Portugal were us ed: (i) greaves, the res idue that rem ains after the rendering of pig tallow, and (ii) rinds , the tough outer covering of bacon or pig m eat. G ranular s ludge from a brewery was tewater treatm ent plant NaOH, NaOH+tem perature, NaOH+autoclaving, tem perature, E nzym e and Autoclaving+enzym e (25-121 ⁰C) 160 80 triplicate 4 g V S g-1 CODsoluble+colloidal and 1.3–3.3 g V S g- 1 CODtotal; untreated: 4 g V S g-1 CODtotal 37 150 rpm between 50 and 110 (graphics difficult to read) G C 305-919 L CH4@STP kg-1 V S of the original was te s tp Risberg et al. 2013 Dry (non-treated) and s team

• ex

ploded wheat s traw. Two batches of cattle m anure, both

• btained from

a farm biogas plant at m es ophilic tem perature with s ource- s orted m unicipal hous ehold waste and gras s silage

• 1120

420 triplicate 2 V S na na 25 and 60 G C 0.15-0.33 N L CH4/g V S Y an et al. 2013 Dewatered s ludge withdrawn from a WWTP diges ted s ludge withdrawn from the m es ophilic anaerobic diges ter in the WWTP m ild therm al (50-120 ⁰C) 3000 (working volum e) triplicate 0,0014, 0.0015, 0.0016, 0.0078, 0.013, 0.016 and 0.022 gSS/m g COD 100 rpm 30 water dis placem ent m ethod 67.7-144.7 m L CH4/g V Sadded (for 20 days and without the untreated) Wall el

• al. 2013

gras s s ilage; Fres h s lurry - dairy farm diges tate from two diges ters food was te while and m ix

• f poultry and

cattle m anure

• 500

100 triplicate 2 I/S 37 each bottle individually 30 flow m eas urem ent device which m eas ures gas through water dis placem ent 239-400 L CH4 kg-1 V S s tp Miao et

• al. 2014

algal biom as s - m ix ture of algae bloom and lake water. Swine m anure Swine m

• anure. G

ranular s ludge

• 500

100 triplicate 0.5, 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 V S 35 30 s

• n and 120 s off at

46 rpm 22 Biogas produced was firs t pas s ed through a scrubbing tubing filled with the alkali s olution for CO2 and H2S rem

• val, then trans ported to the gas

flow m

• eter. G

C-TCD codiges tion of blue algae with s wine m anure: 48.2- 212.7 m L CH4 g-1 V S; blue algae inoculated with granular s ludge: 32.8-73.5 m L CH4 g-1 V S Y

• on et
• al. 2014

was tes from a pig s laughterhous e Inoculum was collected from a farm

• s cale biogas

plant that diges ts piggery s lurry.

• 160

100 triplicate 0.67, 1, 2 and 10 V S 38 m anually daily 76 daily for the firs t 5 days and s ubs equently every 2 to 3 days by dis placem ent of an acidified brine s olution in a burette, recording the volum e of dis placed s olution after correcting for atm

• s pheric pres s ure.

G C-TCD Diges tive tract content: 0.357-1.076 Nm 3/kg- V Sadded; Intes tine residue: 0.511-0.848 Nm 3/kg- V Sadded; blood: 0.450- 0.799 Nm 3/kg-V Sadded s tp Shen et

• al. 2014

Bam boo was te from a chops tick production factory. Anaerobic s ludge collected from a m esophilic biogas diges ter feed with dewatered s ewage s ludge from a local was tewater treatm ent plant . acid, alkaline, enzym e and alkaline aided enzym e na triplicates (in s om e cases duplicates ) 2 37 Interm ittent, s et at 1.5 Hz with 60 s on and 60 s off 30-33 na 25-303.3 m l CH4/g V S Cano et

• al. 2014

biological s ludge thickened - WWTP; OFMSW - s ynthetic m ix ture of foods ; MSW s orted from a waste treatm ent plant; greas e waste a DAF - WWTP; s pent grain from brewery industry; cow m anure from s laughterhous e. WWTP m es ophilic diges ted s ludge Therm al hydrolys is (120-170 ⁰C) 300 triplicate 1:1 V S 35 s tirred in a horizontal s haker

• app. 40

Periodical m

• nitoring analyses of

biogas production by press ure m eter. G C 184-524 m LCH4/gV Sin Ferreira et al. 2014 Pig s lurry anaerobic inoculum us ed was taken from a pilot s ludge diges ter treating activated s ludge Therm al s team ex plosion (120-180 ⁰C) 300 190 triplicate 2 gV S/V S 35.1 cons tant m ix ing in a s haker table

• app. 40

m anually by a pres sure trans m

• itter. G

C- TCD 159-329 m L CH4/gV Sf ed STP – 0 ºC, 1 atm Y

• ng et
• al. 2015

Food was te and s traw s hredded to a s m all size Anaerobic granular s ludge - UASB reactor treating s tarch process ing was te water at 35 ⁰C

• 1000

400 triplicate 0.014 g V S /12 g V S 35 50 rpm 8 water dis location m ethod and G C-TCD 0.157-0.392 m 3CH4/kg V S s tp (0 ⁰C, 1.013 x 105 Pa) Suhr et

• al. 2015

Solid was te produced in recirculating aquaculture s ys tem s Diges ted cow m anure

• 540

340 triplicate 4, 8 and 16 g/g 35 24 G C 359 ± 29 m L CH4g−1TV S stp (20 ºC, 1 atm .) Nuchdan g et al. 2015 variety of paragras s sam ples Mes ophilic anaerobic s ludge was obtained from a dom es tic was tewater treatm ent plant in Bangkok,

• Thailand. A portion of the

s ludge was acclim ated to fibrous s ubs trates in raw palm

• il m

ill effluent

• 100

40 1 g V S/g V S 32-35 80 periodically with s yringes and G C 277 and 316 m l STP/g V S STP: 0 ºC and 1 atm Xue et

• al. 2015

Dewatered/high s olid s ludge from a m unicipal WWTP pre-incubation at 35 ⁰C in a water bath for 2 d L

• w-tem

perature therm al (60-90 ⁰C) and high-tem perature therm al (120-180 ⁰C) hydrolys is proces s 500 2/1 V S 37 120 rpm 28 G C/TCD 0.94 -1.07 L biogas /g V S rem

• ved

Abelleira- Pereira et

• al. 2015

Secondary s ewage s ludge - WWTP Anaerobically diges ted s ludge - m es ophilic anaerobic diges ter fed with m ix ed sludge from the local WWTP therm al hydrolys is and advanced therm al hydrolys is (with hydrogen perox ide) (90-170 ⁰C) 160 60 triplicate 2 35 Cons tant m ix ing by an orbital m echanical shake 28 periodically with a m anual pres s ure transm iter and G C-TCD 227-327 m LCH4/gV Sf ed s tp (P=1 bar and T=0 ºC) Carls s on et al. 2015 Com pos ite slurry s am ples Diges tate collected from a codiges tion plant treating SSOFMSW, m anure and industrial waste. 1000 700 5 replicates 2/1 V S 37 35 With gas tight s yringe and G C-TCD 445-568 m 3 N CH4/ton V S introduced STP: 0 ºC and 1 atm Kinnune n et al. 2015 was tewater treatm ent plant that treats pulp and paper indus try was tewater. Mes ophilically digested m unicipal s ewage s ludge Was tewater Treatm ent Plant and diges tate from CSTR therm al (80-134 ⁰C) 120 60 2 V S/V S 35 35 water displacem ent and G C-FID between 40 and 160 N L CH4 kg-1 V S norm al tem peratur e and pres s ure (NTP) Witars a & L ans ing, 2015 Both uns eparated m anure and separated m anure BARC m es ophilic diges ter treating the s eparated dairy m anure. 250 120 triplicate 1 V S uns eparated m anure; 2 V S s eparated m anure 14 and 24 (in s eparated cham bers ) no m ix ing 216 at leas t once every week us ing a graduated, gas -tight, wet-tipped 50m L glass syringe. G C-FID 107-479 m L CH4/g V S added s tp (0 ◦C and 1 atm ) Y in et al. 2015 Pharm aceutical s ludge obtained from a pharm aceutical factory Inoculum s ludge - diges ter from fecal s ludge c 1000 0, 0.65, 2.58 and 10.32 TS 37

• app. 55

water dis location m ethod and Biogas Analyzer (daily) 6.98-499.46 m L biogas / g TS pharm aceutical s ludge Rico et

• al. 2015

s olid fraction (SF) of dairy m anure. Raw m anure s lurry was s eparated into s olid and liquid fractions s creened liquid fraction (LF) of dairy m anure diges ted at 50 ⁰C 500 1 V S 35 for m anure and L

• F. 50 for SF.

m anually s tirred

• nce a day

80 pres s ure m easurem ent and G C-TCD 298 (m anure), 343 (LF) and 265 (SF) L CH4 kg-1 V S Ruggeri et al. 2015 Olive m ill was tewaters (OMWW) and olive pom ace (OP) Bovine m anure NaOH, Salts , Ultras onic, Ultras onic+s alts 250 triplicate 30 70 rpm

• app. 60

water dislocation m ethod and G C 2-193 L CH4 /kgV S0 Ebner et

• al. 2016

Com m ercial food was te. Dairy m anure s lurry post s olid separated effluent - com plete m ix anaerobic diges ter at m es ophilic codiges ted dairy m anure with as s orted food was tes.

• 500

triplicate 2 gV S/gV S 37 Mix ing at 10 s per m inute. 33 continuous ly us ing the AMPTS II (Bioproces s Control) and G C-TCD 165-496 m L CH4/g V Sadded s tp (0 ◦C and 1 atm ) Khan et

• al. 2016

Hay (control and s tandard s ubs trate), peel, s talk, fles h and unpeeled banana prepared as des cribed previous ly (Bolduan et al., 2011; Brulé, 2014).

• 2000

four replicates 0.7 V S 37 1 m in every 15 m in by m agnetic s tirrers 35 according to a volum etric m ethod and with a m ethane analyzer equipped with an infrared s ens or 0.256-0.367 m 3 CH4/kg V S s tp (0 °C, 1013.25 hPa) Narozno va et al. 2016 source-separated organic hous ehold waste collected from a was tewater treatm ent plant

• 1000

adjus ted to 70% 2 V S 37 45 G C-FID 202-572 m L CH4/g V Ssubtrate s tp Abudi et

• al. 2016

thickened was te activated sludge (TWAS) from was tewater treatm ent plant. Rice s traw (RS) wastewater treatm ent plant Therm al and therm

• NaOH for TWAS (70-

90 ⁰C). NaOH and H2O2 for RS. 250 70 duplicate 0.5 TS 37 100 rpm 50 water dis placem ent m ethod and G C- TCD 184.63-401.89 m L biogas /gV Sadded L u et al. 2016 Food waste from a canteen Anaerobic s ludge - up-flow anaerobic diges ter of a paper m ill Storage was us ed as a pretreatm

• ent. Food

was tes were s eparately s tored for 0 to 12 days . 1000 triplicate 2:1 V S 35 hand-shaked before sam pling 21/60 The biogas produced firs t flowed into a bottle with 3 m

• l/L

NaOH to absorb CO2, and the rem aining gas volum e was m easured by the principle of water-dis placem ent and buoyancy 311-571 m L CH4/g-V Sadded; 285-696 m L CH4/g-V Sadded Rincón et al. 2016 two-phas e olive m ill s olid was te (OMSW) or alperujo full-s cale anaerobic reactor treating brewery was tewater at m esophilic tem perature s team

• ex

plosion (200 ⁰C). Afterwards a liquid fraction (L F) and a s olid fraction (SF) were obtained. 250 (effective volum e) triplicate 2 V S 35 500 rpm 23 liquid dis placem ent pass ing the biogas through a 3N NaOH s olution to capture CO2 on the as s um ption that the rem aining gas was m ethane. (L F) 589±42 m L CH4/g V Sadded; (SF) 263±1 m L CH4/g V Sadded; (Untreated) 366±4 m L CH4/g V Sadded

• Rincón

et al. 2013 The two-phas e OMSW us ed was collected from the E x perim ental Olive Oil Factory indus trial anaerobic reactor treating brewery was tewater 35 ⁰C Therm al (100-180 ⁰C) 250 (effective volum e) duplicate 2 V S 35 500 rpm period of c.a. 20 liquid dis placem ent pass ing the biogas through a 3N NaOH s olution to capture CO2 on the as s um ption that the rem aining gas was m ethane. 373-392 m L CH4/g V Sadded Hernánd ez-Shek et al. 2016 Water hyacinth (WH) was

• harvested. Fruit and vegetable

was te (FV W) was collected from typical m arket m es ophilic anaerobic s ewage s ludge - upflow sludge blanket reactor treating dom es tic was tewater.

• 500

100 triplicate 37 60 liquid dis placem ent technique and G C- TCD 0.114 m 3 biogas kg-1 V Sadded (WH); 0.141 m 3 biogas kg-1 V Sadded (WH+FV W) Haak et

• al. 2016

float from a dis s olved air flotation unit (DAF s ludge) and was te activated s ludge (WAS) collected from a large refinery active m es ophilic AD at a m unicipal was tewater treatm ent plant. Ozonation in a bubble colum n s etup 60 DAF s ludge 2-10 gV S/gV SDAF; Treated DAF s ludge 20–100 gV S/gV SDAF; WAS 5 gV S/gV SWAS m esophilic conditions constant 30-50 80-160 Lbiogas /kgCODadded Ware & Power 2016 s elected solid waste fractions from cattle, pig and chicken s laughtering facilities . granular m es ophilic inoculum s ourced from a m esophilic Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactor treating dairy proces s ing waste Pas teuris ation 1000 100 triplicate 2 V S 36-39 daily 30-50 directly through pos itive liquid dis placem

• ent. To directly m

eas ure the m ethane fraction of the biogas produced the biogas was pas s ed through an alkaline s olution 465.34-515.47 m LCH4 gV S-1 (UP); 501.13-650.92 m L CH4 gV S-1 (P)

Pre-treatments - thermal and chemical Inoculum source - sludge from WWTP Reactor volume - 60 to 3,000 mL I/S - 2 Incubation time - 7 to 216 d Biogas - pressure transducer, volume displacement and syringe Methane content - GC Results of BMP tests - very discrepant and difficult to compare

SLIDE 17

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

17

Conclusions

• BMP continues to be widely used to analyse the potential organic

solid wastes

• Several attempts were made in recent years to normalise the BMP

tests

• The variability of the substrate sources and its characteristics and

the available resources imply adaptation of several operational conditions tests.

• BMP results, namely the biogas or methane production should be

presented in comparable units.

SLIDE 18

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

18

Future Work

• Application of cheaper BMP methodologies and with less waste

production;

• Continue the investigation concerning the availability of potential

substrates for anaerobic digestion;

• Promote the waste management – more waste valorisation and

less waste to landfill;

• More biogas production - energy resource applications.

SLIDE 19

• M. T
• M. T. Santos, Cyprus

Santos, Cyprus 2016 2016

19

Thank you for your attention Questions ?

email: tsantos@deq.isel.ipl.pt