Influence of Digester Temperature on Methane Yield of Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste (OFMSW)
Source abstract
Abstract
This study evaluates the anaerobic digestion (AD) of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) and digested sewage sludge (DSS) at lowered temperatures. AD batch tests for CH4 yield determination were carried out with DSS as inoculum between 23 and 40 °C. All results were related to organic dry matter and calculated for standard conditions (1013 hPa, 0 °C). The AD experiments at 40 °C and at 35 °C delivered specific CH4 yields of 325 ± 6 mL/g and 268 ± 27 mL/g for OFMSW alone. At lower temperatures, specific CH4 yields of 364 ± 25 mL/g (25 °C) and 172 ± 21 mL/g (23 °C) were reached. AD at 25 °C could be beneficial regarding energy input (heating costs) and energy output (CH4 yield). Plant operators could increase AD efficiencies by avoiding heating costs. The co-digestion of OFMSW together with DSS could lead to further synergies such as better exploitation of the energy potentials of DSS, but the digestate utilization could become problematic due to hygienic requirements. Efficiency potentials through lowered operating temperatures are limited. In further research, lowered process temperatures could be applied in the AD of energy crops due to large numbers of existing plants.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production · Municipal Solid Waste Management · Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Bioenergy, University of Applied Forest Sciences Rottenburg, Schadenweilerhof, 72108 Rottenburg, Germany
State Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Bioenergy, University of Hohenheim, Garbenstrasse 9, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Tropics and Subtropics Group, Institute of Agricultural Engineering, University of Hohenheim, Garbenstrasse 9, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Funding
Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg · European Regional Development Fund
References (80)
Show source-provided references
1. Characteristics of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste and methane production: A review10.1016/j.wasman.2016.05.016 ↗
2. Biowaste valorisation in a future circular bioeconomy10.1016/j.procir.2017.11.062 ↗
3. CD. 1999/31/EC (2021, January 26). Council Directive on the Landfill of Waste., Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:31999L0031&from=DE.
4. D. 2008/98/EC (2021, January 26). Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on waste and repealing certain Directives., Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32008L0098&from=EN.
5. D. 2018/850 (2021, January 26). Directive
6. (EU) 2018/850 of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 1999/31/EC on the Landfill of Waste., Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018L0850&from=EN.
7. Improving the sustainability of organic waste management practices in the food-energy-water nexus: A comparative review of anaerobic digestion and composting10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.025 ↗
8. Advantages and drawbacks of OFMSW and winery waste co-composting at pilot scale10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.029 ↗
9. Anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes. An overview of research achievements and perspectives10.1016/S0960-8524(00)00023-7 ↗
10. Rocamora, I., Wagland, S.T., Villa, R., Simpson, E.W., Fernández, O., and Bajón-Fernández, Y. (2020). Dry anaerobic digestion of organic waste: A review of operational parameters and their impact on process performance. Bioresour. Technol., 299.10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122681 ↗
11. Reichard, T. (2020, May 11). Biogasanlagen in der Steiermark: Eine Bestandsaufnahme im Juli 2005; 2006. Available online: https://www.abfallwirtschaft.steiermark.at/cms/dokumente/10212870_46555/a8aebd7f/Gesamtwerk_Biogasanlage_in_der_Steiermark_Internetversion.pdf.
12. Environmental and health impact of solid waste disposal in developing cities: A case study of Granville Brook Dumpsite, Freetown, Sierra Leone10.4236/jep.2013.47076 ↗
13. Municipal solid waste management and waste-to-energy in the context of a circular economy and energy recycling in Europe10.1016/j.energy.2017.11.128 ↗
14. Awiszus, S., Meissner, K., Reyer, S., and Müller, J. (2018). Gärrestverwertung in Einer Warmlufttrocknungsanlage mit Integrierter Stickstoffrückgewinnung, Landtechnik.
15. United Nations General Assembly (2020, May 11). The Future We Want. Available online: https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_66_288.pdf.
16. Jain, S., Newman, D., Nzihou, A., Dekker, H., Le Feuvre, P., Richter, H., Gobe, F., Morton, C., and Thompson, R. (2021, March 04). Global Potential of Biogas; 2019. Available online: https://www.worldbiogasassociation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/WBA-globalreport-56ppa4_digital-Sept-2019.pdf.
17. Solid waste issue: Sources, composition, disposal, recycling, and valorization10.1016/j.ejpe.2018.07.003 ↗
18. Lignocellulosic biomass-based biorefinery: An insight into commercialization and economic standout
19. Sara, M., Rouissi, T., Brar, S.K., and Blais, J.F. (2016). Life Cycle Analysis of Potential Substrates of Sustainable Biorefinery. Platform Chemical Biorefinery, Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-12-802980-0.00004-3 ↗
20. Wilken, D., Bontempo, G., Fürst, M., Hofmann, F., Strippel, F., Kramer, A., and Ricci-Jürgensen, M. (2021, March 03). Biowaste to Biogas. Available online: https://www.biogas.org/edcom/webfvb.nsf/id/DE-biowaste-to-biogas_eng/$file/biowaste-to-biogas.pdf.
21. Fritsche, W., and Laplace, F. (2002). Mikrobiologie, Spektrum Akad. Verl.
22. Munk, K., Dersch, P., Eikmanns, B., Eikmanns, M., Fischer, R., Jahn, D., Jahn, M., Nethe-Jaenchen, R., Requena, N., and Schultzem, B. (2008). Mikrobiologie: Taschenlehrbuch Biologie, Thieme.
23. Kaltschmitt, M., Hartmann, H., and Hofbauer, H. (2016). Energie aus Biomasse: Grundlagen, Techniken und Verfahren, Springer Vieweg.10.1007/978-3-662-47438-9 ↗
24. Kämpfer, P., and Weißenfels, W.D. (2012). Biologische Behandlung Organischer Abfälle, Springer. [1st ed.].
25. Mähnert, P. (2021, March 05). Kinetik der Biogasproduktion aus Nachwachsenden Rohstoffen und Gülle. Available online: https://edoc.hu-berlin.de/bitstream/handle/18452/16303/maehnert.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y.
26. Microbial community ability to adapt to altered temperature conditions influences operating stability in anaerobic digestion10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.408 ↗
27. A comprehensive review on operating parameters and different pretreatment methodologies for anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.091 ↗
28. The impact of mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion on biogas production
29. BMJV (2021, January 29). Verordnung über die Verwertung von Bioabfällen auf landwirtschaftlich, forstwirtschaftlich und gärtnerisch genutzten Böden (Bioabfallverordnung): BioAbfV. Available online: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/bioabfv/BioAbfV.pdf.
30. The activity of anaerobic biomass in thermophilic and mesophilic digesters at different loading rates10.2166/wst.2000.0168 ↗
31. Effect of temperature increase from 55 to 65 °C on performance and microbial population dynamics of an anaerobic reactor treating cattle manure10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00526-1 ↗
32. Biomethanation under psychrophilic conditions: A review10.1016/S0960-8524(02)00205-5 ↗
33. Psychrophilic and mesophilic anaerobic digestion of brewery effluent: A comparative study10.1016/j.watres.2006.04.044 ↗
34. LfU (2020, May 11). Biogashandbuch Bayern. Available online: https://www.lfu.bayern.de/energie/biogashandbuch/index.htm.
35. Effenberger, M., Kaiser, F., Metzner, T., and Gronauer, A. (2008). Sicherung der Prozessstabilität in Landwirtschaftlichen Biogasanlagen, Information Bayerische Landesanstalt für Landwirtschaft.
36. Amon, T., Behrendt, U.P., and Daniel-Gromke, J. (2013). Leitfaden Biogas: Von der Gewinnung zur Nutzung, FNR.
37. Explicit temperature-based model for anaerobic digestion: Application in domestic wastewater treatment in a UASB reactor10.1016/j.biortech.2013.01.174 ↗
38. Comparison of mesophilic and thermophilic dry anaerobic digestion of OFMSW: Kinetic analysis10.1016/j.cej.2013.07.066 ↗
39. Seasonal changes in the concentrations of airborne bacteria emitted from a large wastewater treatment plant10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.07.008 ↗
40. Bioelectrochemical enhancement of methane production in low temperature anaerobic digestion at 10 °C10.1016/j.watres.2016.04.020 ↗
41. Chala, B., Oechsner, H., and Müller, J. (2019). Introducing temperature as variable parameter into kinetic models for anaerobic fermentation of coffee husk, pulp and mucilage. Appl. Sci., 9.10.3390/app9030412 ↗
42. Kumar, A., and Samadder, S.R. (2020). Performance evaluation of anaerobic digestion technology for energy recovery from organic fraction of municipal solid waste: A review. Energy, 197.10.1016/j.energy.2020.117253 ↗
43. Jaimes-Estévez, J., Zafra, G., Martí-Herrero, J., Pelaz, G., Morán, A., Puentes, A., Gomez, C., Castro, L.d.P., and Escalante Hernández, H. (2021). Psychrophilic Full scale tubular digester operating over eight years: Complete performance evaluation and microbiological population. Energies, 14.10.3390/en14010151 ↗
44. Lanko, I., Flores, L., Garfí, M., Todt, V., Posada, J.A., Jenicek, P., and Ferrer, I. (2020). Life cycle assessment of the mesophilic, thermophilic, and temperature-phased anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge. Water, 12.10.3390/w12113140 ↗
45. Pasalari, H., Gholami, M., Rezaee, A., Esrafili, A., and Farzadkia, M. (2021). Perspectives on microbial community in anaerobic digestion with emphasis on environmental parameters: A systematic review. Chemosphere, 270.10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.128618 ↗
46. Mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of waste activated sludge and source sorted biowaste in pilot- and full-scale reactors10.1016/j.renene.2012.12.044 ↗
47. Study of biodegradability of organic fraction of municipal solids waste10.1016/j.egypro.2012.05.203 ↗
48. Municipal solid waste as a valuable renewable energy resource: A worldwide opportunity of energy recovery by using waste-to-energy technologies10.1016/j.egypro.2017.09.618 ↗
49. Psychrophilic anaerobic digestion of semi-dry mixed municipal food waste: For North American context10.1016/j.psep.2016.10.014 ↗
50. Challenge of psychrophilic anaerobic wastewater treatment10.1016/S0167-7799(01)01701-2 ↗
51. Starting-up low temperature dry anaerobic digestion of cow feces and wheat straw10.1016/j.renene.2015.11.066 ↗
52. In-storage psychrophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure: Acclimation of the microbial community10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.05.031 ↗
53. Specific methanogenic activity test for anaerobic degradation of influents10.1007/s13201-015-0305-z ↗
54. Effect of operating temperature on anaerobic digestion of the Brazilian waterweed Egeria densa and its microbial community10.1016/j.anaerobe.2017.03.014 ↗
55. Gaby, J.C., Zamanzadeh, M., and Horn, S.J. (2017). The effect of temperature and retention time on methane production and microbial community composition in staged anaerobic digesters fed with food waste. Biotechnol. Biofuels, 10.10.1186/s13068-017-0989-4 ↗
56. McAteer, P.G., Christine Trego, A., Thorn, C., Mahony, T., Abram, F., and O’Flaherty, V. (2020). Reactor configuration influences microbial community structure during high-rate, low-temperature anaerobic treatment of dairy wastewater. Bioresour. Technol., 307.10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123221 ↗
57. Comparison of dry and wet digestion for solid waste10.2166/wst.2003.0210 ↗
58. Effects of low-temperature dry anaerobic digestion on methane production and pathogen reduction in dairy cow manure10.1007/s13762-019-02291-w ↗
59. Kern, M., and Raussen, T. (2014). Biogas-Atlas, Witzenhausen-Institut für Abfall, Umwelt und Energie GmbH. 1. Aufl.
60. Manure management practices on biogas and non-biogas pig farms in developing countries–using livestock farms in Vietnam as an example10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.006 ↗
61. Daniel-Gromke, J. (2017). Anlagenbestand Biogas und Biomethan-Biogaserzeugung und-nutzung in Deutschland: (FKZ 37EV 16 111 0), DBFZ Deutsches Biomasseforschungszentrum Gemeinnützige GmbH.
62. (2020, May 11). Fachverband Biogas. Branchenzahlen 2018 und Prognose der Branchenentwicklung 2019, Available online: https://www.biogas.org/edcom/webfvb.nsf/id/de_branchenzahlen.
63. Völler, K. (2021, January 26). Branchenbarometer Biomethan 2020. Available online: https://www.dena.de/fileadmin/dena/Publikationen/PDFs/2020/Brachenbarometer_Biomethan_2020.pdf.
64. Guss, H., Pertagnol, J., Hauser, E., Wern, B., Baur, F., Gärtner, S., Rettenmaier, N., and Reinhardt, G. (2016). Biogas-Quo Vadis?, Saarbrücken. Available online: https://www.ifeu.de/fileadmin/uploads/landwirtschaft/pdf/Biogas_quo_vadis_final_report_2016.pdf.
65. Scheftelowitz, M., Rensberg, N., Denysenko, V., Daniel-Gromke, J., Stinner, W., Hillebrand, K., Naumann, K., Peetz, D., Hennig, C., and Thrän, D. (2021, February 27). Stromerzeugung aus Biomasse-Vorhaben IIa Biomasse: Zwischenbericht Mai 2015; Leipzig. Available online: https://www.dbfz.de/fileadmin/eeg_monitoring/berichte/01_Monitoring_ZB_Mai_2015.pdf.
66. Barchmann, T., Pohl, M., Denysenko, V., Fischer, E., Hofmann, J., Lenhart, M., Postel, J., Liebetrau, J., Effenberger, M., and Kissel, R. (2021, February 27). Biogas-Messprogramm III, Gülzow. Available online: https://biogas.fnr.de/biogasmessprogramm-iii/.
67. VDI 4630 (2016). Fermentation of Organic Materials: Characterisation of the Substrate, Sampling, Collection of Material Data, Fermentation Tests, Verein Deutscher Ingenieure e.V.
68. DIN EN 12579 (2014). Bodenverbesserungsmittel und Kultursubstrate-Probenahme 65.080, Beuth Verlag.
69. DIN EN 13040 (2008). Bodenverbesserungsmittel und Kultursubstrate-Probenherstellung für Chemische und Physikalische Untersuchungen, Bestimmung des Trockenrückstands, des Feuchtigkeitsgehaltes und der Laborschüttdichte 65.080, Beuth Verlag.
70. DIN EN 14775 (2012). Feste Biobrennstoffe-Bestimmung des Aschegehaltes 75.160.10, Beuth Verlag.
71. DIN EN 13039 (2012). Bodenverbesserungsmittel und Kultursubstrate-Bestimmung des Gehaltes an organischer Substanz und Asche, Beuth Verlag.
72. DIN EN ISO 16948 (2015). Biogene Festbrennstoffe-Bestimmung des Gesamtgehaltes an Kohlenstoff, Wasserstoff und Stickstoff 75.160.10, Beuth Verlag.
73. Schlegel, H.G., and Barnea, J. (1977). Energy recovery from sanitary landfills-a review. Microbial Energy Conversion, Proceedings of a Seminar Sponsored by the UN Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR) and the Ministry for Research and Technology of the Federal Republic of Germany, Elsevier Science.
74. Buswell, A.M. (2020, April 12). Anaerobic Fermentations. Available online: https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/94555/ISWSB-32.pdf?sequence=1.
75. Optimizing anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) by using biomass ashes as additives10.1016/j.wasman.2020.04.047 ↗
76. Bertau, M., Simbach, B., Aubel, I., Kiehle, R., Kaiser, D., and Tröbs, R. (2020, May 23). Verbesserung der Klärschlammentwässerung durch den Abbau der Extrazellulären Polymeren Substanzen; Freiberg. Available online: https://www.dbu.de/projekt_32909/01_db_2409.html.
77. Maier, J., and Scheffknecht, G. (2020, May 23). Systematische Untersuchungen zur Rückgewinnung von Phosphor aus Klärschlamm unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Feuerungparametern. Available online: https://fachdokumente.lubw.baden-wuerttemberg.de/servlet/is/40276/BWT24004SBer.pdf?command=downloadContent&filename=BWT24004SBer.pdf&FIS=203.
78. The significance of biomass in a circular economy10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122755 ↗
79. Comparative study on plastic materials as a new source of energy10.37358/MP.19.1.5119 ↗
80. Food waste co-digestion in Germany and the United States: From lab to full-scale systems10.1016/j.resconrec.2019.05.014 ↗