Date post: | 03-Jun-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | hyae-cinth-ochotorena |
View: | 219 times |
Download: | 0 times |
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 1/78
MUNICIPAL ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS AS
REGIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY
FACILITIES
For:
Larry Krom
Research a! De"e#o$me%
Foc&s o Eer'y Ree(a)#e Eer'y Pro'ram
P*O* Bo+ ,-.
S$r/' Gree0 WI 121--
By:
Da/e# 3/%omer a! Prasoo A!h/4ar/
Mar5&e%%e U/"ers/%y
De$ar%me% o6 C/"/# a! E"/rome%a# E'/eer/'
Wa%er 7&a#/%y Ce%er
P*O* Bo+ 8--8
M/#(a&4ee0 WI 1298
May, 2005
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 2/78
E;ECUTI<E SUMMARY
Anaerobic co-digestion is defined as the microbiological production of methane from a
mixture of various wastes. he mixing of wastes can result in both synergistic and
antagonistic interactions that influence methane production. !uccessful application of co-
digestion therefore re"uires careful management.
Many municipal wastewater treatment plants have existing anaerobic digesters that may
be used to co-digest high-strength wastes with municipal wastewater solids. #f used for
co-digestion, then the municipal digesters could become regional renewable energy
facilities.
$our high-strength wastes were studied in an effort to determine appropriate operating
conditions for co-digestion, and to perform a simple economic analysis. Municipal
wastewater solids from !outh !hore %astewater reatment &lant '!!%%&(, )a*
+ree*, %# were co-digested with high strength waste from the following facilities 'with
the range of waste +) in parentheses(
Miller /rewery beer filter '000 1 000 mg34(
4esaffre east fermentation '60,000 150,000 mg34(
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts fermentation '70,000 to 80,000 mg34(
&andl9s :estaurant food '200,000 to 500,000 mg34(
i
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 3/78
he food waste was pretreated using the :othenberg %et %aste :ecovery !ystem
mar*eted by ;cology, 44+ of <lendale, %#.
he pro=ect consisted of three phases. $irst, the high-strength wastes were tested for
biochemical methane potential '/M&( and also tested using anaerobic toxicity assays
'AAs(. !econd, bench scale digesters were operated in the laboratory. $inally, a full-
scale demonstration was performed by feeding wastes to the anaerobic digesters at the
!!%%&.
/M& esting. he average maximum /M& values were as follows 'ml +>6 per gram
+)(
Miller /rewery 6?
4esaffre east 22@6
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts 86
&andl9s :estaurant 677
he maximum theoretical /M& for any waste is 85 ml +>6 per gram +) assuming all
the +) is converted to methane. he abnormally high values for 4asaffre east and
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastes indicates that they stimulate methane production
from bac*ground +) present in the biomass, which was digested sludge from the
!!%%&. he +) in Miller /rewery and &andl9s :estaurant waste is essentially
completely convertible to methane.
ii
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 4/78
AA esting. At the loadings tested 'typically 0 to 2 g +)34(, the wastes do not pose
toxicity challenges. An unanticipated result was that doses of 4esaffre east +orporation,
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts, and Miller /rewery wastewaters actually caused
methane production rates to significantly increase by as much as ?5 to 20.
/ench-!cale igester esting. $ourteen bench scale, fill-and-draw anaerobic digesters
were operated. ;ach 2-liter digester was fed a different blend of one high strength waste
and municipal wastewater solids '@0 primary sludge and 0 v3v thic*ened waste
activated sludge from !!%%&(. ;ach digester was completely mixed and operated at a
?5-day solids residence time '!:( at @B?o +. #t was determined that 4asaffre east and
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewaters can be successfully co-digested with
municipal wastewater solids at all blend ratios tested 'from 20 to 70 v3v wastewater in
municipal wastewater sludge(. !imilarly, the food waste can be successfully co-digested
at all blend ratios tested 'from to ?? v3v food waste in municipal wastewater sludge(.
he Miller brewery wastewater was not successfully digested by itself in the fill-and-
draw digester utiliCedD however, it was successfully digested when blended with
municipal wastewater solids. Although the brewery wastewater was not successfully
digested alone, it is amenable to anaerobic treatment. #f it is treated alone, then it is
recommended that reactor configurations other than a fill-and-draw digester should be
considered.
iii
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 5/78
All the wastes utiliCed in bench-scale testing had metals concentrations below the
%isconsin epartment of Eatural :esources high "uality limits for biosolids to be land
applied and will not limit the land application of digested biosolids.
$ull-!cale emonstration esting. A full-scale demonstration test was performed by
feeding !outheastern %isconsin &roducts and &andl9s :estaurant wastes to the anaerobic
digesters at the !!%%& at the same time municipal wastewater solids were also being
fed. here was a @0 increase in biogas production when !outheastern %isconsin
&roducts wastewater was co-digested. he waste constituted ? of the total +) loading
to the digesters. herefore, the biogas production increase was not due to additional
+), but may have been due to a synergistic effect resulting from the presence of
bioavailable nutrients 'e.g., iron( re"uired for microbial growth. he additional biogas
can be employed to produce ?,00 *w-hr3day of electricity worth over F200,000 per
year using an existing biogas-powered electric generator set at the treatment plant.
&andl9s :estaurant food waste was also delivered to the digesters at the !!%%&.
>owever, due to the relatively large solid particles 'approximately 20 of solids greater
than 6.@-mm nominal diameter(, the food waste solids could have damaged pumps and
appurtenances. herefore, the &andl9s food waste was discharged to the primary clarifiers
at the plant. he solids that settle in the primary clarifier are screened and pumped to the
anaerobic digesters. 4aboratory settleability testing and sieve analyses data were used to
estimate that @ of the food waste +) would be conveyed to the anaerobic digesters
at !!%%&. #t is estimated that the waste produced by &andl9s :estaurant can be
iv
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 6/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 7/78
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
he support of the following organiCations is greatly appreciated
$ocus on ;nergy, :enewable ;nergy &rogram
;cology, 44+, <lendale, %isconsin
Mar"uette Gniversity, Milwau*ee, %isconsin
Gnited %ater !ervices, #nc., Milwau*ee, %isconsin
4asaffre east, #nc., Milwau*ee, %isconsin
Miller /rewing, Milwau*ee, %isconsin
&andl9s :estaurant, /ayside, %isconsin
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts, )a* +ree*, %isconsin
vi
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 8/78
TABLE OF CONTENTS
E;ECUTI<E SUMMARY==================*******=====*===*** /
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS==========================******=* "/
LIST
OF
TABLES
===============================** /+LIST OF FIGURES=============================*=**** +
C>APTER 8: INTRODUCTION==========================** 8
?.? Anaerobic igestionHHHHHHHHHHH...HHHHHHHHHHHHH.H..?.2 Aanaerobic +o-igestionHHHHHHHHH...HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH?. Municipal Anaerobic igesters as :egional :enewable ;nergy $acilitiesHHHH.H..
?6
C>APTER 9: BIOC>EMICAL MET>ANE POTENTIAL ?BMP@ AND ANAEROBIC TO;ICITY
ASSAYS ?ATA@ OF >IG> STRENGT> INDUSTRIAL WASTES=======*=* -
2.? #ntroductionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.2.? Materials and MethodsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...H.
2.2.? /M&HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..2.2.2 AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..
2.2 :esults and iscussionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH......HH......?.? /M&HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..?.2 AAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
2.6 +onclusionsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHH....H
788???2?2202
C>APTER 2: BENC>SCALE TESTING OF ANAEROBIC CODIGESTION =========** 9.
.? #ntroductionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHH.2 /ench-!cale igester escriptionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...H...H. !ampling and AnalysesHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..H.HHHHHHH.6 :esults and iscussionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHH...
.6.? Average !eed /iomass and $eed +haracteristicsHHHHHHHH..HHHHHH......6.2 igester 4oadings3>ydraulic :etention imeHHHHHHHHH..HHHHHHH...6. p> and Al*alinityHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.6.6 Iolatile !olid estructionHHHHHHHHHHHH...HHHHHHHHH...HH..6.5 /iogas3Methane HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHH.
.5 +onclusionsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
2@28?2265@860
C>APTER : FULLSCALE CODIGESTION TESTING AT SOUT> S>ORE WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT========================*
6.? #ntroductionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..HHH.....6.2 !outh !hore %astewater reatment &lant '!!%%&(HHHHHHHHHHHHHH..6. Anaerobic igesters at !!%%&HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..HHH...H
6.6 !outheastern %isconsin east %astewater '!;%%%(HHHHHH...HHHHHHH.6.5 &andl9s :estaurant $ood %aste HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH6.5.? !ettleability estingHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...H..6.5.2 !ieve AnalysisHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.....6. ;conomic AnalysisHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH6..? !outheastern %isconsin east %astewater '!;%%%(HHHHHHHHHHHH6..2 &andl9s :estaurant $ood %asteHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH6.@ +onclusionsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...HHHHHHH
6262626
6667505?525655
vii
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 9/78
C>APTER 1: O<ERALL CONCLUSIONS AND R ECOMMENDATIONS======***===*=
5.? /M& and AA estingHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
5.2 /ench-!cale +o-igestion estingHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
5. $ull-!cale +o-igestion estingHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
R EFERENCES================================***
BIBLIOGRAP>Y================================
1
58
0
?
6
viii
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 10/78
LIST OF TABLES
able 2.? /M& Miller /rewery %astewaterHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHH ?
@able 2.2 /M& 4esaffre east +orporation %astewaterHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHH.. ?
@able 2. /M& !outheastern %isconsin &roducts %astewaterHHHHHHHHH...HHHHH.. ?
7able 2.6 /M& &andl9s :estaurant $ood %asteHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...HHHHH. ?
7able 2.5 )verall /M& :esultsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHHHHHHH. ?
8able 2. AA Miller /rewery %astewaterHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HH...HHHH.. 2
6able 2.@ AA 4esaffre east +orporation %astewaterHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHHHH.. 2
6able 2.7 AA !outheastern %isconsin &roducts %astewaterHHHHHH..HHHHHHHH.. 2
6able .? +ombinations of Municipal %astewater !olids and >igh-!trength %aste $ed toigestersHHH...H.HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...
2
8able .2 !ampling !cheduleHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHHH..H..
0able . <as +hromatographic +onditions for Methane AnalysisHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
?
able .6 Average +haracteristics of &! and %A! in Municipal %astewater !olids HHHH..H.
able .5 Average +haracteristics of >igh-!trength %astesHHHHHHHHHHH...HHHH..
able . /lend of Municipal !ludge and >igh !trength %aste and I! 4oading :atesHHHH...
6able .@ Average p> of >igh-!trength %astes HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.HHH.
able .7 Average p> and Al*alinity of ;ffluent from igestersHHHHHHHHHHHHH...
able .8 otal !olids, Iolatile !olids of the ;ffluent and Iolatile !olids estructionHHHH.H
@able .?0 /iogas &roduction, :ate of /iogas &roduction and &ercentage Methane in Assays HH
8able 6.? Average !;%%% Addition ate and AmountHHHHH.HHHHHHHHH.H... 6
5able 6.2 Average +haracteristics of !;%%% HHHHHHHHHHH..HHHHHH..HH 6
ix
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 11/78
5able 6. /iogas and Methane &roduction /efore and After !;%%% +o-igestionHHHH.. 6
@able 6.6 &andl9s :estaurant $ood %aste +haracteristicsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.H 6
8
able 6.5 &andlt9s $ood %aste and %isconsin 4and Application 4imit Metals+oncentrationsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHable 6. !ieve Analysis :esults for $ood %aste !olidsHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..
5
0
5
?able 6.@ !ynopsis of the /iogas &roduction and ;nergy !avings uring !;%%% +o-
igestionHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.... 5
5
LIST OF FIGURES
$igure 2.? /M& Miller /rewery %astewaterHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.. ?$igure 2.2 /M& 4esaffre east +orporation %astewater HHHHHHHHHHHHH ?6$igure 2. /M& !outheastern %isconsin &roducts %astewaterHHHHHHH.HHHH. ?5$igure 2.6 /M& $ood %asteHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH ?
$igure 2.5 AA Miller /rewery %astewaterHHHHHHHHHHH.HHHH...HH... 2?$igure 2. AA 4esaffre east +orporation %astewaterHHHH..HHHHHHHHH. 22$igure 2.@ AA !outheastern %isconsin &roducts %astewaterHHHHHHHH.HH.. 2$igure 2.7 :ate of Methane &roduction versus %astewater ose ' v3v(HH..HHHHH.. 25$igure .? +ontrol Anaerobic /ench-!cale igester ':J?( and ifferent /lends of M%!
and M/%% ':J2, :J and :J6(HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..27
$igure .2 +ontrol Anaerobic /ench-!cale igester ':J?( and ifferent /lends of M%!
and 4%% ':J5, :J and :J@(HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...27
$igure . +ontrol Anaerobic /ench-!cale igester ':J?( and ifferent /lends of M%!
and !;%%% ':J7, :J8 and :J?0(HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH...27
$igure .6 +ontrol Anaerobic /ench-!cale igester ':J??( and ifferent /lends of M%!
and $% ':J?2, :J? and :J?6(HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 27
$igure 6.? /iogas &roduction from $ull-!cale +o-igestion of !;%%%HHHHHH 67
x
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 12/78
xi
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 13/78
C>APTER 8: INTRODUCTION
8*8 ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
Anaerobic digestion 'A( is one of the standard technologies for stabiliCing wastes. A
is the biological decomposition of organic matter in the absence of molecular oxygen.
he A process produces biogas principally composed of methane '+> 6( and carbon
dioxide '+)2( and the undegraded solids and li"uids '4us* and Moser, ?88(. Anaerobic
processes can either occur naturally or in a controlled environment such as a biogas plant.
epending on the waste feedstoc* and the system design, biogas is typically 55 to 70
percent methaneD the remaining composition is primarily carbon dioxide, with trace
"uantities of potentially corrosive hydrogen sulfide and water vapor.
he process of anaerobic digestion can be considered to consist of three steps. he first
step is the decomposition 'hydrolysis( of complex organic matter. his step brea*s down
the organic material to smaller molecules such as sugars. he second step is the
conversion of smaller molecules to organic acids. $inally, the acids are converted to
biogas containing methane '!peece, ?885(.
&rocess temperature affects the rate of digestion and is often maintained in the
mesophillic range '0 to 7o+ or 85 to ?05o $(. #t is also possible to operate in the
thermophillic range '50 to 5@ o+ or ?22to ?o $ 'Metcalf and ;ddy, 200(. here are
usually two reasons why the mesophilic and thermophilic temperatures are preferred over
lower temperatures. $irst, a higher loading rate of organic materials can be processed and
?
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 14/78
increased rates of biogas production typically result. !econd, higher temperatures increase
the destruction rate of pathogens present in raw sanitary wastes.
/enefits of A technology are listed below '!peece, ?885(.
%aste reatment /enefits
•• Eatural waste treatment process
••+an re"uire less land than aerobic wastewater treatment, composting or landfilling
••:educes disposed waste volume and weight of solid waste to be landfilled
•
;nergy /enefits
••+an be a net energy producing process
••<enerates a renewable fuel
•
;conomic /enefits
••#s sometimes more cost-effective than other treatment options, such as aerobic
wastewater treatment
he ma=or applications of A are in the stabiliCation of concentrated sludges produced
from the treatment of municipal wastewater. >owever, the wastes that can be treated by
A cover a wide range and include sewage sludge, agricultural wastes, municipal solid
wastes and industrial wastes 'Metcalf and ;ddy, 200(.
Many industries with organic waste streams use an A process as a pretreatment step to
lower sludge disposal costs and reduce the cost of overall treatment. !ome industries
using A for wastewater treatment are listed below '!peece, ?885(.
2
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 15/78
• $ood process such as vegetable canning, mil* and cheese manufacture, slaughterhouse
wastes and potato processing wastes
• rin* industry, breweries, soft drin*s, distilleries, coffee and fruit =uices production
• #ndustrial products, paper and board, rubber, chemicals, starch and pharmaceuticals
1.2 ANAEROBIC CODIGESTION
#n typical applications, an anaerobic digester is designed and operated to treat waste from
one facility only, such as a food production facility, soft drin* bottling plant, or municipal
wastewater treatment plant. Co-digestion is a modification of this typical application.
Ahring et al. (1992) and others have described co-digestion as a waste treatment
method in which different wastes or wastewaters are mixed and treated together.
The term “co-fermentation” is snonmo!sl !sed for “co-digestion”. When various
wastes are mixed and co-digested, both snergistic and antagonistic outcomes are
possible. "!ccessf!l com#inations of different t$es of wastes and wastewater
re%!ire careful management. $or example, wastes low in nutrients or al*alinity can be
mixed with wastes with high concentrations of these re"uired constituents to increase
overall biogas production. The potential advantages of co-digestion are $resented
#elow (&ra!n' 22).
&otential Advantages of +o-igestion
• #mproved nutrient balance and digestion
• ;"ualiCation of particulate, floating, settling, and acidifying wastes through dilution
by manure, sewage sludge, or other wastes
• Additional biogas production
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 16/78
8*2 MUNICIPAL ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS AS REGIONAL RENEWABLE
ENERGY FACILITIES
%astewater and solid waste management is a challenge faced by communities around the
world. :apid population growth, urbaniCation, and the associated population density
increase are factors that increase the waste disposal challenge. Methods of solid waste
management include recycling of paper, metal, and plastic, incineration and sanitary
landfilling. #n the case of incineration, perceived air pollution and high capital cost are
potential disadvantages. ypically, a large fraction of solid waste is disposed of in
landfills. >owever, in some communities, landfills are approaching capacity. #n addition,
landfills are not designed to maximiCe the rate of methane generation for renewable
energy. #n comparison, anaerobic digestion systems achieve more rapid methane
generation.
&opulation growth and urbaniCation along with industrialiCation have also helped to
increase world energy demand. +onventional non-renewable sources of energy are
limited. !ome researchers predict that petroleum deposits will be depleted in the next few
decades and coal deposits will be depleted within ?50-200 years '!mil, 200(. /esides
this, the environmental damage 'e.g., global warming, mercury pollution( caused by
improper combustion of fossil fuels is a matter of concern. >ence, it is prudent to develop
energy from a variety of sources, including sources of renewable energy.
6
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 17/78
#n this regard, solid waste and industrial wastewater are potential energy sources worth
considering. Many industries dispose of solid wastes in landfills, or discharge high-
strength wastewater to sewers. #f handled through landfills and sewers, the waste
materials are wasted since they are not typically used as feedstoc*s to produce renewable
energy. #f sludge or wastes are disposed of in a landfill, then wastes ta*e up landfill
space, may lead to future groundwater pollution and may not be used to produce energy.
/iological treatment of wastewater and solid waste using anaerobic treatment may be
used to increase renewable energy production. #n this process, wastes are converted to
biogas 'an energy source( and stabiliCed biosolids.
Many of %isconsin9s municipal wastewater treatment plants li*e Milwau*ee, !outh
Milwau*ee, /roo*field, %au*esha, :acine, !heboygan, /urlington, %atertown, %est
/end, Eew 4ondon, Madison, :ichland +enter, %alworth +ounty, +hilton,
elafield3>artland, <rafton, Kiel, &lymouth, and &ort %ashington use anaerobic
digesters to biologically convert municipal wastewater solids to biogas that contains
methane. he methane is often used as a renewable energy source to generate electricity,
run e"uipment, heat the digesters, and heat buildings. he digesters are often very large
and could, under the correct conditions, treat other high-strength industrial byproducts
and economically produce more methane. herefore, existing municipal anaerobic
digesters could become regional renewable energy facilities.
5
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 18/78
:eports of co-digestion have recently become more numerous, and there have been
several applications or research pro=ects regarding co-digestion of municipal wastewater
solids, agricultural wastes, animal wastes, olive oil, pig slurry, swine manure, cattle
manure, paper mill sludge, and municipal solid waste 'Angelida*i et al., ?88@D +arrieri et
al., ?88D +ecchi et al., ?88D i &alma et al., ?888D <avala et al., ?88D <avala et al.,
?888D >amCawi et al., ?887D Mc<rady, ?888D Mavinic et al., ?887D :intala and Laervinen,
?88D !osnows*i et al., 200( . >owever, anaerobic co-digestion of municipal wastewater
solids with high strength wastewater and food waste has not been widely practiced in the
Gnited !tates due to lac* of information regarding implementation, correct operating
conditions, experience and costs.
#n order to determine appropriate operating conditions and experience for co-digestion of
different high strength wastewaters, a practical demonstration pro=ect was performed and
is reported herein. Municipal wastewater solids from the !outh !hore %astewater
reatment &lant '!!%%&(, )a* +ree*, %# were co-digested with high strength
wastewater from #-house beer filters from Miller /rewery, fermentation waste from
4esaffre east production facility, fermentation waste from !outheastern %isconsin
&roducts and $ood %astes from &andl9s :estaurant. he wastes were selected base upon
their high +), probable anaerobic degradability, and generation in proximity of the
!!%%&. #nformation regarding these facilities is presented below.
Miller /rewing +ompany
88 %. >ighland /lvd.
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 19/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 20/78
C>APTER 9: BIOC>EMICAL MET>ANE POTENTIAL ?BMP@ ANDANAEROBIC TO;ICITY ASSAYS ?ATA@ OF >IG>STRENGT>
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
9*8 INTRODUCTION
/atch anaerobic bioassay techni"ues have been developed by others as simple and
inexpensive procedures to monitor relative biodegradability and possible toxicity of
wastes to be treated by A. he biochemical methane potential '/M&( and anaerobic
toxicity assay 'AA( are relatively simple bioassays that can be conducted in laboratories
without the need for sophisticated e"uipment ')wen et al ., ?8@8(.
he /M& is a measure of sample biodegradability ')wen et al ., ?8@8(. Lust as the
biochemical oxygen demand '/)( assay indicates how much organic pollution can be
degraded in an aerobic process, the /M& is a measure of what fraction of a given wastes9
+) can be removed anaerobically and what volume of methane can be produced when
treating that waste '!peece, ?88(. he assay provides a simple means to monitor relative
anaerobic biodegradability of substrates. Gses of the /M& are as follows '!peece, ?885(.
7
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 21/78
• Assaying the concentration of organic pollutants in a wastewater which can be
anaerobically converted to methane '+>6(
• ;valuating potential anaerobic process efficiency
• Measuring residual organic pollution amenable to further anaerobic treatment
• esting for non-biodegradable chemical oxygen demand '+)( remaining after
treatment
he AA was developed to determine any toxic effect of a substance on the organisms
that convert acetate to methane ')wen et al., ?8@8(. hese organisms are typically
considered to be the microbes most sensitive to toxicants in the mixed microbial culture
that achieves methane production from complex substrates.
he significant difference between the /M& and AA assays is that the AA is
supplemented with a high concentration of acetate as well as varying wastewater
concentrations, whereas no acetate is added to the /M& system. he total amount of
biogas production is most important in the /M& test, whereas the initial rate of gas
production is of primary interest in the AA test '!peece, ?88(.
he /M& assay was conducted on all of the wastes used for co-digestion. he AA assay
was conducted on #-house beer filter waste from Miller /rewery, fermentation waste
from 4esaffre east +orporation and fermentation waste from !outheastern %isconsin
&roducts.
8
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 22/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 23/78
chromatography with a flame ioniCation detector '<owMac <+(, an 7ft. x .?26 in. o.d.
stainless steel column pac*ed with ?!&-?000 on 0370 +arbopac* / '!upelco, #nc.
/ellefonte, &A( and a nitrogen carrier flow of 20 ml3min at an oven temperature of 0o+.
he numerical data are presented herein as the average cumulative volume of gas
production from triplicate bottles.
9*9*9 ATA
he AA protocol of )wen et al. '?8@8( was used to determine the extent to which each
of the high strength wastes might inhibit methane production by aceticlastic
methanogens.
$or the Miller /rewing +ompany AA, studies were run at four organic loadings of 0.5,
?, 2, and 2.5 g+)34. $or 4esaffre east +orporation wastes, the four organic loadings
were 0.5, ?, 2, 2.5 g+)34, and for !outheastern %isconsin &roducts waste the loading
were 0.6, ?.2, ?.7, 2.6 g+)34. +alcium acetate was also added to provide an initial
concentration of ?0,000 mg34 in the bottles. his is a non-limiting substrate concentration
for aceticlastic methanogenic organisms. herefore, any decrease in the rate of biogas
production measured was due to the wastewater toxicity and not due to lac* of acetate
needed by the anaerobic microorganisms. Also to ensure that p> was approximately @,
al*alinity in the form of sodium bicarbonate 'Ea>+)( was added to all the systems at
the concentration of 5g3l. A control bottle receiving no waste was also prepared.
??
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 24/78
All systems were run in triplicate. hus, 8 serum bottles were prepared for AA tests.
/ottles were sparged with 0 +)2 3@0 E2 gas to establish anaerobic conditions, then
sealed with rubber septa. AA bottles were placed on a sha*er table '+25K+ #ncubator
!ha*er, Eew /runswic* !cientific, ;dison, EL, G!A( at 5o + and ?50 rpm. otal biogas
production was measured daily over a period of approximately 0 days using 50-ml or
?00-m4 wetted barrel glass syringes, and biogas methane content was determined by gas
chromatography with a flame ioniCation detector '<owMac <+(, an 7ft. x .?26 in. o.d.
stainless steel column pac*ed with ?!&-?000 on 0370 +arbopac* / '!upelco, #nc.
/ellefonte, &A( and a nitrogen carrier flow of 20 ml3min at an oven temperature of 0
o
+.
he data are presented as the average initial rate of methane production from triplicate
bottles.
9*2 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
9*2*8 BMP
<as production in /M& serum bottles for Miller /rewing wastewater, 4esaffre east
+orporation wastewater, !outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewater and &andl9s
:estaurant food waste was monitored for 2, 0, 2 and days respectively. +umulative
methane production in /M& assays for the different wastes is illustrated in $igures 2.?
through 2.6. he +) of wastes used from /M& assays are as follows Miller /rewery
wastewater '5,00mg3l(, 4esaffre east +orporation wastewater '6@,00 mg3l(,
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewater '7,000 mg3l(, and &andl9s :estaurant food
waste '2,700 mg3l(.
?2
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 25/78
$igure 2.? /M& Miller /rewery %astewater
?
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 26/78
$igure 2.2 /M& 4asaffre east +orporation %astewater
?6
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 27/78
$igure 2. /M& !outheastern %isconsin &roducts %astewater
?5
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 28/78
$igure 2.6 /M& $ood %aste
?
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 29/78
Methane production was observed at all the concentration of wastes tested 'see $igures
2.? through 2.6(. he total amount of methane produced and the maximum specific
methane production rates at the various organic loadings are summariCed in able 2.?
through 2.6.
able 2.? /M& Miller /rewery %astewater
4oadings'g +)3l(
Iol.%%'ml(
Methane'ml(
/M&'ml+>63g+)(
/iogas +>6
Max. Methane production rate
'ml3d(
/iomassI! 'g(
Max. !pecificmethane production
rate 'ml +>63gI!- d(
0.0 0 ?B0 EA 6@ 6
0.67 5.6
0.5 6 60B? 608 52
?.0 8 50B 77 5 ?0
2.0 2 75B2 628 2 ?6
2.5 ?08B 62@ 5 ?@
Avg. 6? 57
!td. ?8
able 2.2 /M& 4esaffre east +orporation %astewater
4oadings
'g +)3l(
Iol.%%'ml(
Methane
'ml(
/M&
'ml+>63g+)(
/iogas
+>6
Max. Methane production rate
'ml3d(
/iomass
I! 'g(
Max. !pecificmethane production
rate 'ml +>63gI!- d(
0.0 0 65B6 EA ? 2
0.? 58.0
0.5 0.6 7B 200 5
?.0 0.8 ?62B? 2@2 0 ?7
2.0 ?.7 2??B? ?87 ? 25
2.5 2.2 ?B 2@??
Avg. 22@6 0
!td. 7
?@
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 30/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 31/78
able 2.5 )verall /M& :esults
Charac%er/s%/csM/##er
Bre(/'
Lesa66re
Yeas%
SE WI
Pro!&c%sFoo! (as%e
/M& 'ml+>63g+)( 6?±
?8 22@6±
7 86±
656 677±
22/iogas +>6 57± 0± 8±? 7±2
Max. +>6 &roduction rate'ml3day(
?@ ?@ ?8
I! /iomass 'g( 0.67 0.? 0.8 0.56
Max. !p. +>6 &roduction rate'ml+>63g I!-day(
5.6 58.0 6.0 5.2
According to stoichiometric relationships, 85 ml of methane at 5o+ is e"uivalent to ? g
of +) removed from wastewater if the +) is removed via methane production only.
>owever, measured values sometimes vary slightly from that of the stoichiometric
relationship due to biomass growth, sulfate reduction, hydrogen gas generation,
experimental inaccuracies and other factors. Ma=or variation from stoichiometric
relationships should be closely scrutiniCed, and indicate the existence of uni"ue
mechanisms or experimental error.
:egarding the values observed and reported herein, the /M&s for 4esaffre east
+orporation and !outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewaters are abnormally high 'i.e.,
greater than 800 m43g +)(. )n the other hand, the average /M& values for Miller
/rewery and &andl9s :estaurant wastes are within 22 of the theoretical /M&. he
abnormally high /M& values for the two yeast-containing wastewaters may be due to the
presence of supplementary nutrients 'e.g, iron( in the yeast wastewaters tested. #n
addition, the presence of complexing agents that render the metals more soluble and
bioavailable could cause an increase in biogas production. herefore, nutrients and3or
complexing agents may have stimulated fermentation of residual +) in the seed
?8
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 32/78
biomass slurry employed in the tests. #t is *nown that the addition of trace nutrients, such
as nic*el, cobalt, and iron, can greatly increase methane production rates in nutrient
limited systems, including some municipal digesters '!peece, ?877(. >owever, further
study is re"uired to determine conclusively that trace nutrients in the yeast wastes caused
the extremely high /M& values.
9*2*9 ATA
he results of AA trials for Miller /rewery wastewater, 4esaffre east +orporation
wastewater, and !outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewater are presented in $igures
2.5 through 2.@ respectively. <as production in serum bottles for Miller /rewing
wastewater, 4esaffre east +orporation %astewater, !outheastern %isconsin &roducts
%astewater and food waste was monitored for 2, 0, 2 and days respectively. he
results of AA tests are presented in $igures 2.5 through 2.@. he total amount of
methane produced and the rates of methane production for the wastes are presented in
ables 2. through 2.7.
20
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 33/78
$igure 2.5 AA Miller /rewery %aste
2?
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 34/78
$igure 2. AA 4asaffre east +orporation %astewater
22
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 35/78
$igure 2.@ AA !outheastern %isconsin &roducts %astewater
2
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 36/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 37/78
production rate increased approximately 70 when 4asaffre yeast wastewater was added
at doses of more than 7 volume per volume 'v3v( 'see $igure 2.7(. !imilarly, as
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewater dose increased from Cero to 60 v3v, the
methane production rate increased 60. #n addition, methane production rate also
increased with increasing Miller /rewery wastewater doses as high as 2 v3v. >owever
a dose of 60 Miller /rewery wastewater caused a decrease in methane production 'see
$igure 2.7(.
(
1(
2(
)(
*(
+(
,(
( + 1( 1+ 2( 2+ )( )+ *( *+
% Wastewater
-&.. /0.. "1.0..
$igure 2.7 :ate of Methane &roduction versus %astewater ose ' v3v(
M/%% 'Miller /rewery %astewater(4%%' 4asaffre east %astewater(!;%%% '!outheastern %isconsin east %astewater(
9* CONCLUSIONS
25
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 38/78
Anaerobic bioassay techni"ues '/M& and AA( were used to determine that the four
high strength wastes, namely #-house beer filters from Miller /rewery, fermentation
waste from 4esaffre yeast production facility, fermentation waste from !outheastern
%isconsin &roducts and $ood %astes from &andl9s :estaurant, were amenable to
anaerobic treatment and demonstrated no discernable toxicity to anaerobic
microorganisms at the concentrations studied. #nterestingly, 4esaffre east +orporation
wastewater and !outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewater demonstrated abnormally
high /M& values. hese values suggest that the two wastes stimulated methane
production from bac*ground +) present in the biomass used in the test, which was
digested sludge from the !!%%&. #n addition, doses of 4asaffre, !outheastern
%isconsin &roducts, and Miller /rewery wastewaters caused methane production rates to
increase by as much as 20 to 70 in systems containing a non-limiting concentration of
acetate 'i.e., AA assays(. he unanticipated stimulatory effects of the wastewaters may
be due to the presence and bioavailability of trace nutrients. he microbes that convert
substrates to methane re"uire nutrients, such as nic*el, cobalt, and iron. he addition of
these nutrients in bioavailable forms and3or the addition of complexing agents that render
the metal nutrients bioavailable often leads to an increase in methane production rate in
nutrient limited systems. Additional research to investigate this stimulatory affect of yeast
production waste is warranted. #t may be that yeast wastes can be used as additives to
significantly increase biogas production in many anaerobic digesters.
2
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 39/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 40/78
Eote that NM%!O is an acronym for municipal wastewater solids.
27
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 41/78
2*9 BENC>SCALE DIGESTER DESCRIPTION
$ourteen different digesters were constructed '2.5 4 glass vessels( and seeded with 2 4 of
digested sludge 'from !outh !hore %astewater reatment &lant(. ;ach digester was fitted
with a rubber stopper and a gas collection bag. ;ach had a magnetic stir bar inside and
was placed on a stirrer so that complete mixing was achieved 'see $igures .? through
.6(. he different combinations of high-strength waste and municipal wastewater solids
fed to each digester are shown in able .?. Municipal wastewater solids were a mix of
0 thic*ened waste activated sludge '%A!( and @0 primary sludge '&!( by volume
from the !!%%&.
able .? +ombinations of Municipal %astewater !olids and >igh-!trength %aste $edto igesters
D/'es%er
>/'h S%re'%h Was%e M&/c/$a# Was%e(a%er S#&!'e
<o#&me Fe!
?m#!@
<o#&me Fe!
?m#!@
? 0 0 ?00 ?
2 20 M/%% 2@ 70 ?0
70 M/%% ?0 20 2@6 ?00 M/%% ? 0 0
5 70 4%% ?0 20 2@
0 4%% 70 60 5
@ 20 4%% 2@ 70 ?0
7 70 !;%%% ?0 20 2@
8 0 !;%%% 70 60 5
?0 20 !;%%% 2@ 70 ?0
?? 0 0 ?00 ?
?2 ?? $% ?5 78 ??7
? 5 $% @ 85 ?2
?6 $% 6 8@ ?28
All digesters were operated in a temperature-controlled room at @±?o+. ;ach was a
batch fed, completely mixed stirred tan* reactor '+M!:( operated for at least 2.
months . ;very day, ? m4 of digester content was removed and immediately replaced
28
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 42/78
with an e"uivalent volume of digester feed. #n addition, al*alinity in the form of sodium
bicarbonate 'Ea>+)( was added to the feed at a concentration of 2.5 g3l. he solids
retention time '!:( and the hydraulic retention time '>:( for all the digesters were
maintained at ?5 days. his !: was employed because the full-scale digesters at the
!!%%& operated at an >: of approximately ?5 days.
he sampling schedule of fre"uently measured parameters is shown in able .2. #n
addition, the concentrations of the following constituents were measured three times for
each waste arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nic*el,
selenium, Cinc, waste +), total K=eldahl nitrogen 'KE(, ammonia, total phosphorus
and potassium. Metals measurements were performed since land application of digested
biosolids is regulated in %isconsin, in part, based upon the concentration of these
constituents.
able .2 !ampling !chedule
Parame%ers Meas&reme% Fre5&ecy
emperature aily
p> 'effluent( aily
/iogas production volume aily
+>6 in headspace )nce every one to two wee*s
#nfluent solid content '!, I!( hree times a wee*
;ffluent solid content '!, I!( hree times a wee*
Al*alinity '&A, #A( hree times a wee*
;ffluent !+) )nce a wee*
;very seven to fifteen days, assays were performed to determine digester biogas
production rate. A 50-m4 ali"uot was removed from each digester before digester
feeding and placed in a serum bottle '?0-ml total volume(, sparged with gas '03@0
+)23E2 volume per volume blend( to help establish anaerobic conditions, sealed, and
0
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 43/78
placed on a sha*er table in a 5+ incubator. /iogas production from these bottles was
measured daily over approximately 20 days with a 50- or ?00-ml glass syringe.
2*2 SAMPLING AND ANALYSES
emperature was measured with a thermometer placed in the temperature-controlled
room. !ample p> was measured using a p> probe and meter ')rion Model @20A(. he
percentage of methane present in the biogas was measured using a gas chromatograph.
able . shows the gas chromatograph conditions. he total and volatile solids
concentration of the samples was determined by standard methods 2560 / and 2560 ;
'A&>A et. al, ?887(.
able . <as +hromatographic +onditions for Methane Analysis+hromatograph <owMac <+ata Ac"uisition ;P +hrom with &entium &+#n=ector &ac*ed column in=ector, emperatureQ200o++olumn '&ac*ed +olumn( !upelco, +arbopac* ?-?725, 0370 +arbopac* +30.
+arbowax 20M30.? >&)6
)ven ?50o
+etector $lame ioniCation detector at 200 o++arrier <as Gltra high purity >elium 50 ml3min.
Al*alinity in wastewater results from the presence of hydroxides R)>-S, carbonates
R+)2-S, and bicarbonates R>+)
-S and other salts of wea* acids. +alcium and magnesium
bicarbonates are most common. /orates, silicates, and phosphates can also contribute to
the al*alinity. he al*alinity in wastewater helps to resist a decrease in p> caused by
addition of acids 'Metcalf and ;ddy, 200(. itration and buffer intensity curves can
show the relative magnitudes of bicarbonate and volatile acids 'IA(, but the development
of such curves is tedious for routine operation. herefore, titration to two endpoints is
?
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 44/78
more attractive. itration from the original sample p> to p> 5.@5, or partial al*alinity
'&A(, results in an al*alinity that corresponds roughly to bicarbonate al*alinity. itration
from p> 5.@5 to 6., or intermediate al*alinity '#A(, approximates the IA al*alinity.
!uccessful digester operation depends on maintenance of ade"uate bicarbonate buffering
and avoidance of excessive IA concentrationD the IA-to-al*alinity ratio 'IA Al*alinity
or #A &A( has been used to monitor anaerobic digestion of municipal sludge ':ipley et
al., ?87(. he al*alinity titrations were conducted as per standard method 220/ 'A&>A
et. al., ?887(.
!oluble chemical oxygen demand '!+)( was measured by placing 20 ml of effluent in
a centrifuge tube, centrifuging for 0 minutes and then filtering the centrate through a
0.65-Tm cellulose nitrate membrane filter. he filtrate was then used for the +) test as
per standard method 5220A 'A&>A et. al, ?887(.
2* RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
2**8 A<ERAGE SEED BIOMASS AND FEED C>ARACTERISTICS
All igesters were seeded with sludge from the anaerobic digesters at the !!%%&.
igesters ? through ?0 were started using sludge having ! and I! concentrations of
6.7 and 27.0 g3l, respectively. igesters ?? through ?6 were started later with sludge
having ! and I! concentrations of 6?.2 and 25.7 g3l, respectively.
he characteristics of &! and %A! from !!%%& and the individual high-strength
wastes used during bench-scale studies are presented in ables .6 and .5, respectively.
+ontrol digesters 'igester ? and ??( were not fed industrial waste, but only fed a
2
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 45/78
mixture of @0 &! and 0 %A!, which is referred to herein as municipal wastewater
solids.
able .6 Average +haracteristics of &! and %A! in Municipal %astewater !olids
$>? 2@ TS ?'#@?89@ <S ?'#@?89@ <S? 89@
PS8 5.7B0.2 62B?2 ?B8 @5B5PS9 .2B0. 5B?2 2B@ @B?0WAS8 .2B0.? 7B5 5B6 2B7WAS9 .0B0.2 8B 5B2@ 58B6
&!? and %A!? were used for digesters ? to ?0 and &!2 and %A!2 were used for digesters ?? to ?6.
nQ number of samples
able .5 Average +haracteristics of >igh-!trength %astes
Charac%er/s%/cs MBWW LYWW SEWYWW FW
To%a# So#/!s ?'#@ 6B 'nQ 76( ?B2 'nQ@6( ?B2 'nQ5( 267B7
<o#a%/#e So#/!s ?'#@ ?B? 'nQ 76( B2 'nQ@6( ?6B2 'nQ5( 2?@B@
<o#a%/#e 67B27 58B 77B 77B
COD ?m'#@ 6270B?@70 6500B870 7500B20 62700B?600
N>2N ?m'#@ [email protected] 270B267 55B2 560B2780
Or' N ?m'#@ 75.5B5. 2?70B6.8 @?5B6 68600B?700
TKN ?m'#@ 86B7 26@0B250 @@0 B@6 56800B?8800
TP ?m'#@ ? B5.0 5B?7 ?0B6? ?00B6?7
C! ?H'#@ 6.00B.8 0.@B?2.@ U U6.?V
Cr ?H'#@ U?0 8.@B?2? U?0 U.C& ?H'#@ ?67B65.@ 526B8?.5 0B22 U6@V
P) ?H'#@ 5.B82.6 280B25 U5 U2V
N/ ?H'#@ U @B2@5 U U2V
3 ?H'#@ @2B55 60B@@ ?B27 @B
K ?H'#@ 22600B?5800 0@00B@@60 28000B?000 ??600B??@00
>' ?H'#@ 0.5B0.82 U0. U0. U0.0
As ?H'#@ [email protected] [email protected] U0.2 U0.06
Se ?H'#@ U2 U2 0.@B?.?5 U0.0
Mo ?H'#@ 8.@B7.@6 5.@B@.@? U0.2 0.@B?.?5
Three samples were measured to determine COD, TKN, ammonia TP and the metals concentrations.
:egarding metal concentrations, none of the wastes tested contained metals at
concentrations greater than the %isconsin epartment of Eatural :esources high "uality
limits for biosolids to be land applied. herefore, it is probable that land application of
residuals would not be problematic. >owever, it should be pointed out that the
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 46/78
concentration of metals in the residuals could theoretically increase due to sorption onto
the surface of sludge solids.
2**9 DIGESTER LOADINGS >YDRAULIC RETENTION TIME
igesters ? and ?? 'receiving only municipal wastewater solids( were maintained as
controls and were operated for 2@ days '?7.6 !:s( and ?06 days '.8 !:s(,
respectively. igesters 2 through 6 'receiving M/%%( and igesters 5 through @
'receiving 4%%( were operated for 20 days '?.@ !:s(. igesters 7 through ?0
'receiving !;%%%( were operated for @? days '6.@ !:s(. igesters ?2 through ?6
'receiving $%( were operated for ?06 days '.8 !:s(. 4oading rates and the blend of
municipal wastewater solids and different high strength wastes fed are presented in able
..
able . /lend of M%! and >igh !trength %aste and I! 4oading :ates
D/'es%er Was%eWas%eMWS Days o6
O$era%/o
Loa!/' Ra%e
m# '<S#! #)<S6%2!
? M%! 03?00 03? 2@ ?.52B0.6 0.?0B0.0
2 M/%% 20370 2@3?0
20
?.27B0.6? 0.07B0.0
M/%% 70320 ?032@ 0.@B0.?0 0.02B0.0?
6 M/%% ?0030 ?30 0.07B0.06 0.005B0.002
5 4%% 70320 ?032@
20
2.2B0.?6 0.?6B0.0?
4%% 0360 7035 [email protected]? 0.?B0.0?
@ 4%% 20370 2@3?0 [email protected]? 0.??B0.0
7 !;%%% 70320 ?032@
@0
?.0B0.?? 0.0B0.0?
8 !;%%% 0360 7035 ?.?2B0.?2 [email protected]?
?0 !;%%% 20370 2@3?0 ?.0B0.20 0.07B0.0??? M%! 03?00 03?
?06
?.?B0.2 [email protected]
?2 $% ??378 ?53??7 ?.?2B0.28 [email protected]
? $% 5385 @3?2 ?.?0B0.27 [email protected]
?6 $% 38@ 63?28 ?.08B0.28 [email protected]
6
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 47/78
he feeding of bench-scale digesters was not based on volatile solid loading rates per se,
but on hydraulic retention time '>:(. All the digesters employed an >: of ?5 days.
he results obtained from igesters ? and ?? are useful to ma*e comparisons with the
results obtained from other digesters. he percentage of $% fed to igesters ?2, ? and
?6 are low compared to the percentage of high-strength waste fed to other reactors
because the +) and I! of the $% were relatively high 'refer to able .5(.
2**2 $> AND ALKALINITY
Gnacclimated methane-producing organisms re"uire a neutral environment 'p> .7 to
7.5( in order to produce methane '!peece, ?885(. Acid-forming bacteria often grow
faster than methane forming organisms. Acid-producing bacteria may produce acid faster
than methane-producing microorganisms can consume it, and excess acid can build up in
the system, causing a drop in the p> which inhibits the activity of methane-forming
bacteria. #n case of low p>, methane production may stop entirely.
o help ensure proper p>, al*alinity in the form of Ea>+) was added to all the
digesters at a concentration of 2.5 g3l. Most digesters were stable as far as p> was
concerned, but igesters 7 and 8 had average p> values less than .7 and high average
#A3&A ratios irrespective of addition of Ea>+). he standard deviation of p> and
#A&A values were also high. here were periods when the digesters p> values were
above .7 and methane production was not inhibited by low p>. #t appears that these
digesters acclimated to the relatively low p> since their methane production rates were
5
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 48/78
relatively high. ables .@ and .7 show the p> of the wastes as well as the temperature,
p>, and al*alinity '&A, #A and total al*alinity 'A(( of digester effluent, respectively.
able .@ Average p> of >igh-!trength %astes
Was%es $> ?2@
M/%% 5.0±0.20
4%% 5.8±0.?0
!;%%% .?±0.20
$% 6.±0.0
able .7 Average p>, and Al*alinity of ;ffluent from igesters
D/'es%er Was%eDays o6
O$era%/o$>
PA
m'# as
CaCO2
IA
m'# as
CaCO2
TA
m'# as
CaCO2
IAPA
? M%! 2@ @.0±0.? 2507±655 ?72?±27 628±8?7 0.@±0.2?
2 M/%%
20
@.0±0.? 255±?? ?0±?266 6?85±2286 0.2±0.2?
M/%% @.0±0.? 2?76±??0 ??2±5 ?0±?565 0.5±0.?@
6 M/%% @.0±0.2 ?6@5±??0 72±?0?5 22±?72@ 2.2±6.78
5 4%%
20
@.2±0.2 5@±?6@ 5@5±?507 ??62±?702 ?.?5±0.57
4%% @.2±0.2 67?0±?68 505@±?600 87@±?288 ?.25±0.75
@ 4%% @.2±0.2 6057±@0? 257±57 6@±@?@ 0.8±0.5
7 !;%%%
@0
.±?.0 ?065±?76 266±??00 6@8±28? 5.7±@.60
8 !;%%% .0±0.8 755±?65 2@75±68 60±?787 7.77±??.8@
?0 !;%%% @.0±0.? 2685±@82 ?8±52? 6?8?±?278 0.7±0.08
?? M%!
?06
@.6±0.2 587±?26 2277±62 72@0±?6 0.60±0.?2
?2 $% @.5±0.2 7275±?67 @±?86? ?20?7±20 0.6@±0.0
? $% @.±0.2 @@@±?52@ 7±77 ??5?±2222 0.5?±0.?0
?6 $% @.5±0.2 @5@±?@28 ?67±@0 ?0506±?7?5 0.68±0.6
#A &A values for the bench scale digesters are above 0.5. Eotably, igesters 7 and 8
that received !;%%% had #A &A ratios above 5.0. hese digesters also had low
average p> values. he high #A&A ratios and low p> values may be due to high organic
loading rate ')4:( resulting from the high +) of the !;%%% and the relatively
high volume of waste in the feed. he average temperature of all digesters was @ B ?+.
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 49/78
2** <OLATILE SOLIDS DESTRUCTION
#n general, volatile solid destruction is used to measure the performance of municipal
anaerobic digesters. At mesophilic conditions in full-scale appplicaitons, 60 volatile
solid destruction is a reasonable value in the municipal sludge digestion process 'e 4a
:ubia et al., 2002(.
ables .6 and .5 present the solid concentrations in &!, %A! and the different high
strength wastes used for co-digestion. able .8 presents total solids and volatile solids
concentrations of digester effluents and volatile solid destruction achieved in each
digester during the steady-state period 'i.e., after 65 days had passed(.
able .8 otal !olids, Iolatile !olids of the ;ffluent and Iolatile !olid estruction
D/'es%er Was%eWas%eMWS E66#&e% So#/! <S Des%r&c%/o
D&r/' S%ea!y
S%a%e ?@ m# TS ?@ <S ?@ <S
? M%! 03?00 03? ?.8±0.6 ?.0±0.2 56±6 ±?
2 M/%% 20370 2@3?0 ?.@±0.6 0.8±0.2 52± 5±@
M/%% 70320 ?032@ ?.2± 0.6 0.±0.2 65±@ 5?±8
6 M/%% ?0030 ?30 0.7±0.6 0.2±0.2 ?±?2 -56±6?
5 4%% 70320 ?032@ .±0.6 ?.7±0. 68± 6±6
4%% 0360 7035 .±0. ?.7±0. 56±2 60±5
@ 4%% 20370 2@3?0 2.±0. ?.2±0.2 5?±6 56±
7 !;%%% 70320 ?032@ ?.@±0.@ ?.?±0. 6± 5±?
8 !;%%% 0360 7035 ?.8±0.5 ?.?±0. 2±6 5?±?
?0 !;%%% 20370 2@3?0 ?.@±0.5 ?.0±0. 55±2 2±?
?? M%! 03?00 03? 2.2±0. 0.@±0.2 5±? 57±7
?2 $% ??378 ?53??7 .6±0.6 ?.5±0.2 65± ?±6
? $% 5385 @3?2 .?±0.6 ?.±0. 62±6 52±@
?6 $% 38@ 63?28 2.8±0. ?.?±0.2 8± 5±
@
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 50/78
#f 60 volatile solid reduction is considered to be an acceptable value in the performance
of municipal sludge digestion 'e 4a :ubia et al., 2002( then all digesters except for
igester 6 demonstrated good I! destruction. igester 6 which received ?00 Miller
/rewery wastewater demonstrated a negative I! destruction value, meaning that there
was an increase in I!, ostensibly due to growth of biomass. he digester also had a low
p> and produced very little methane. herefore, methane production in the system was
inhibited.
igestion of ?00 Miller /rewery wastewater was not successful in the fill-and-draw
digester configuration employed. >owever, co-digestion of Miller /rewery wastewater
and 20 v3v or more of municipal wastewater solids lead to acceptable solids destruction
and biogas production. herefore, Miller /rewery wastewater can be successfully treated
in a fill-and-draw digester if it is co-digested with approximately 20 v3v or more of
municipal wastewater solids.
#t should be noted that ?00 Miller /rewery wastewater is not intrinsically a poor
candidate for anaerobic treatment without co-digestion of municipal wastewater solids.
>owever, the fill-and-draw digester configuration employed is typically not appropriate
for the comparatively low, mostly soluble +) present in the Miller /rewery wastewater
since no form of biomass immobiliCation is utiliCed. As demonstrated by /M& results in
+hapter 2, Miller /rewery wastewater may be treated anaerobically without co-digestion,
but other reactor configurations, such as a fluidiCed bed or upflow anaerobic sludge
blan*et would be more appropriate reactor configurations.
7
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 51/78
2**1 BIOGASMET>ANE
able .?0 presents biogas production, percentage methane, and rate of biogas production
results measured in serum bottle assays for biomass from each digester during the steady
state period. !teady state was assumed after 65 days 'i.e., !:s( had passed.
able .?0 /iogas &roduction, :ate of /iogas &roduction and &ercentage Methane inAssays
D/'es%er Was%es
Was%e
M&/c/$a#
Was%e(a%er
So#/!s
S%ea!y
S%a%e
B/o'as
Pro!&ce!
?m##!@
S%ea!y
S%a%e
C>
S%ea!y
S%a%e
Me%hae
Pro!&c%/o
Ra%e
S%ea!y
S%a%e
S$ec/6/c
Me%hae
Pro!&c%/o
Ra%e
m# ?m##!@
?m# ' <S
!ay@
? M%! 03?00 03? 75±@ ±2 5@?B 262 5@
2 M/%% 20370 2@3?0 5±228 ?± 87 B ?60 66
M/%% 70320 ?032@ 62±202 57± 25?B ??@ 62
6 M/%% ?0030 ?30 ?27±7@ 0B0 0 B 0 0
5 4%% 70320 ?032@ 827±6 ?±2 5 B 2?? ?
4%% 0360 7035 7±?5 ±2 56B ?87 0
@ 4%% 20370 2@3?0 ?0?7±626 7±2 82B 277 57
7 !;%%% 70320 ?032@ 760±60 6±2 57B 2@ 68
8 !;%%% 0360 7035 760±8 2±2 52?B 26 6@
?0 !;%%% 20370 2@3?0 560±@@ 58±? ?8B 65 2
?? M%! 03?00 03? 628±2?0 ± 2@0B ?2 8
?2 $% ??378 ?53??7 ??56±5@2 5±5 @50B @2 50
? $% 5385 @3?2 80±7@ ± 6B 255 68
?6 $% 38@ 63?28 556±?@ ?±2 7B ?0 ?
uring the steady state period, most of the co-digestion reactors produced biogas at
rates that were not statistically different from those of the control digesters. he
exceptions were igesters , 6 and ?0, which had lower biogas production rates than the
control 'igester ?(, and igesters ?2 and ?, which had higher biogas production rates
8
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 52/78
than the control 'igester ??(. he lower rates from igester and 6 are probably
because the Miller /rewery waste had a relatively low +). #n addition, the +) was
mostly soluble. Again, the fill-and-draw digester configuration employed is typically not
appropriate for low +), soluble wastes. he reason for the lower rate in igester ?0 is
un*nown.
2*1 CONCLUSIONS
All high-strength wastes tested had metals concentrations lower than the %isconsin
epartment of Eatural :esources high "uality limits for biosolids to be land applied.
herefore, most li*ely, none of the wastes will limit land application of resulting
biosolids based upon metal criteria. he 4asaffre east, !outheastern %isconsin
&roducts, and &andl9s :estaurant wastes were successfully co-digested at all blend ratios
tested 'from 20 to 70 by volume(. he !outheastern %isconsin &roducts waste did,
however, cause a decrease in digester p> 'to below .7( and an increase in #A&A ratio
'to above 5( at waste municipal wastewater solids ratios greater than 2070. >owever,
the systems acclimated to these conditions and produce methane at significant rates.
he Miller /rewery wastewater was difficult to co-digest in the fill-and-draw digesters
employed and at the ratios tested due to its relatively low and soluble +). herefore,
although the Miller /rewery waste is amenable to anaerobic digestion 'as evidenced by
/M& results of +hapter 2(, co-digestion at lower ratios of waste municipal wastewater
solids, or in a reactor configuration other than a fill-and-draw digester would be more
appropriate.
60
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 53/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 54/78
C>APTER : FULLSCALE CODIGESTION TESTING AT SOUT> S>ORE
WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
*8 INTRODUCTION
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts east %astewater '!;%%%( and &andl9s :estaurant
food waste were selected and used in full-scale co-digestion testing at the !outh !hore
%astewater reatment &lant '!!%%&(, )a* +ree*, %isconsin. hese wastes were
selected based upon their high +) and /M&, appropriate metals concentrations for
land applicaiton, successful bench-scale digester testing, and production within a 20-mile
radius from the !!%%&. ;ach waste was fed to the existing digesters at the plant along
with primary sludge. &articipants in the study included %isconsin $ocus on ;nergy,
Mar"uette Gniversity, ;cology, 44+, mar*eters of the wet waste recovery system used at
&andl9s :estaurant to mechanically shred and store the waste, as well as the Milwau*ee
Metropolitan !ewerage istrict 'MM!( and Gnited %ater !ervices, #nc. 'G%!(, the
owner and contract operator of the treatment plant, respectively. :esults of full-scale co-
digestion testing and an economic analysis are presented in this chapter.
*9 SOUT>S>ORE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ?SSWWTP@
!!%%& is located south of Milwau*ee along the 4a*e Michigan shoreline in )a*
+ree*, %isconsin, and was put into operation in ?87. he plant treats an average of 80
million gallons of wastewater each day, most of it from the southern and western portions
of the MM! service area. he facility has a pea* capacity to treat approximately 00
million gallons per day of municipal wastewater.
62
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 55/78
:aw wastewater flows through primary, secondary and disinfection treatment processes.
/iosolids are conveyed to anaerobic digesters where microorganisms stabiliCe the solids
and create biogas containing methane. his biogas is collected, and is typically used to
continuously run blowers for the activated sludge process as well as produce electricity
using an engine generator set for approximately eight hours per day. #f more biogas was
produced, then the engine generator set could be operated for more than eight hours per
day. his may help reduce energy costs at the treatment plant. !tabiliCed biosolids are
applied to farmland as a fertiliCer and soil conditioner *nown as Agri-4ife or dried to
produce a commercial soil amendment called Milorganite.
*2 ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS AT SSWWTP
!!%%& has ?2 single-stage, high-rate, anaerobic digesters. At the time of this study,
igesters ? through 5 and @ were being used to store digested biosolids, igesters and 7
were out of service, and the remaining four digesters '8 through ?2( were active.
igesters 8 through ?2 are ?25 feet in diameter and have a side water depth of 7 feet.
:ecirculation pumps direct sludge through spiral heat exchangers at each digester to
maintain sludge temperatures in the range of 80 to 85 o$ '2 to 5 o+( for mesophilic
digestion. ypically, waste heat from the blowers and engine generator set is used to heat
the digesters. %hen the ambient temperature is very low, natural gas is also used to fire
boilers providing additional heat for the digesters.
he digesters have fixed concrete covers with a gas dome, access manholes and sample
ports. ;ach of the gas domes has a pressure relief valve and a flame trap. he gas domes
6
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 56/78
collect the biogas produced in the anaerobic digestion process. igester biogas is
recirculated through compressors and forced bac* into draft tube mixers to mix digester
contents. ;xcess gas is withdrawn from the digester cover through a gas header. #n
addition, some biogas can be stored in pressuriCed storage vessels for later use.
>istorically, primary sludge '&!( and thic*ened waste activated sludge '%A!( has been
fed to the digesters. >owever, at the time of this study, &! from both !!%%& and
another treatment plant 'Lones #sland %astewater reatment &lant, Milwau*ee,
%isconsin( was fed, whereas no %A! was fed. &! from primary clarifiers was pumped
and fed, alternately, to each of the four operating digesters by automatic opening and
closing of appropriate valves. uring the study, the &! total and volatile solids
concentrations were 62B?2 and ?B8 g34, respectively. he &! p> value was 5.7B0.2.
* SOUT>EASTERN WISCONSIN YEAST WASTEWATER ?SEWYWW@
he first addition of !;%%% to the anaerobic digesters commenced on Lune @, 2006.
he !;%%% was stored in an unmixed tan* at the plant and added into the &! feed
line using a metering pump. he tan* and pump are employed in cold months to handle
waste aircraft deicing fluid from <eneral Mitchell #nternational Airport 'Milwau*ee,
%isconsin( which is seasonally co-digested 'Pitomer et al., 200?(. he used deicer is
truc*ed to the treatment plant and stored in the unmixed tan*. he waste aircraft deicing
fluid solids content is low. herefore, most of the deicer constituents are soluble and,
therefore, mixers are not present in the storage tan* since there are very few solid
66
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 57/78
particles to *eep in suspension. able 6.? presents the date and the average amount of
!;%%% added to the digesters.
he average characteristics of !;%%% added to the digesters are presented in able
6.2.
able 6.? Average !;%%% Addition ate and Amount
ateAverage !;%%% Addition
'gal3min(
@-Lune-06 2.6
8-Lune-06 6.?
?0-Lune-06 .6
??-Lune-06 2.5
?-Lune-06 6.?
?@-Lune-06 6.0?7-Lune-06 2.2
2-Lune-06 .2
26-Lune-06 5.0
25-Lune-06 2.?
8-Luly-06 .0
?0-Luly-06 2.2
able 6.2 Average +haracteristics of !;%%%
Characteristics Fre5&ecy o6meas&reme% SEWYWW
To%a# So#/!s ?'#@ 5 ?B2
<o#a%/#e So#/!s ?'#@ 5 ?6B2
<o#a%/#e 5 77B
COD ?m'#@ 75?8B25@
N>2N ?m'#@ 55B?.86
Or' N ?m'#@ @?5.B62.@7
TKN ?m'#@ @@[email protected]
TP ?m'#@ ?0.00B6?.@
C! ?H'#@ U
Cr ?H'#@ U?0
C& ?H'#@ 0.00B22.25
P) ?H'#@ U5N/ ?H'#@ U
3 ?H'#@ ?.00B2@.@?
K ?H'#@ 285500.00B?6?.@
>' ?H'#@ U0.
As ?H'#@ U0.2
Se ?H'#@ 0.@B?.?5
Mo ?H'#@ U0.2
65
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 58/78
he !;%%% contributed less than ? of the flow and ? of the total +) loading to
the digesters. /iogas production is often proportional to +) loading, assuming +)
removal efficiency does not decline. ue to the relatively low +) contribution of the
!;%%%, it was anticipated that the additional biogas would not be measurable using
the treatment plant biogas flow meters which are accurate to B5.
>owever, a significant increase in biogas production of @0 was observed when
!;%%% was co-digested. $igure 6.? presents the biogas production during and after
addition of !;%%% to the digesters. able 6. presents the biogas and methane
production at periods during and after addition of !;%%%. he average biogas
methane content during all periods was 58B?.. he average biogas production for 2
days '&eriod ? 36306 to @38306( during the addition of !;%%% to the digester was
approximately?200 standard cubic feet per minute '!+$M(, whereas the biogas
production for 65 days '&eriod @3536 to 73?8306( when !;%%% was not added to
the system was only approximately @00 !+$M 'see $igure 6.?(. he extremely large
increase in biogas production was not expected. #t was considered that the increase in
biogas production could have been due to an increase in the mass loading rate of sludge
solids. >owever, the total solids loading to the digesters was approximately 70 tons per
day during both &eriods ? and 'see $igure 6.?(. herefore, the increase in biogas
production was not a result of a significant increase in solids loading to the digesters. #n
addition, the increase in biogas production could not have been a result of the additional
+) provided by the !;%%% since it was negligible in comparison to the primary
sludge +) loading.
6
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 59/78
he unexpected increase in biogas production may have been due to the presence of trace
nutrients and3or complexing agents in the !;%%% that increased the activity of the
anaerobic microbes. )thers have reported that addition of trace nutrients, such as nic*el,
cobalt, and iron, can dramatically increase the rate of biogas production in some
anaerobic digesters that are nutrient limited '!peece, ?885(. #n addition, it is possible that
complexing agents 'i.e., ligands( can form soluble complexes with metals and render the
metals more bioavailable. he biogas production rate of biomass from many municipal
anaerobic digester has been shown to increase upon addition of bioavailable iron and
other nutrients '!peece, ?877(. he microorganisms responsible for anaerobic digestion
re"uire these and other nutrients for optimal growth. >owever, trace nutrients are
sometimes not present in optimal concentrations or are not present in bioavailable forms
that microbes can utiliCe, even in municipal digesters '!peece, ?885(. #n this regard, yeast
extract, which is similar to !;%%%, is often used in microbiology studies to provide
bioavailable nutrients.
able 6. /iogas and Methane &roduction uring and After !;%%% Addition
&eriodW Eo. of
days
/iogas production
'ft+>63tI!-d(
/iogas&roduction
'ft+>63lb I!-d(
Methane&roduction
'ft+>63tI!-d(
Methane&roduction
'ft+>63lb I!-d(
? 2 2?.0B6.0 ?.2B. ?5702.@B60.@ @.8B2.0
2 65 [email protected] 7.8B2.0 ?067?.7B26@?.0 5.2B?.2
? ?@?7@.@[email protected] 7.B?.@ ?0?2.B2026.0 5.2B?.0
W &eriod ? 2 days during which !;%%% was added to the digester '36306 to @38306(. &eriod 2 he 65 days after addition of !;%%% 'i.e., !:s( '@3836 to 73?8306(.
&eriod he ? days after &eriod 2 '73?8306 to 8320306(.
6@
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 60/78
$igure 6.? /iogas &roduction from $ull-!cale +o-igestion of !;%%%& Q tons per day!+$M Q standard cubic feet per minute
%hen !;%%% was added to the anaerobic digesters at the treatment plant, no
adverse affects were observed with regards to the operation of the storage tan*, metering
pump, or anaerobic digesters.
*1 PANDLS RESTAURANT FOOD WASTE
:egarding &andl9s food waste, treatment plant operators expressed initial concern that
large solid particles in the waste could potentially damage pumps and other e"uipment as
well as settle in the unmixed waste storage tan* and3or the digesters at the treatment
plant. #n comparison, the !;%%% did not contain significant settleable, suspended
67
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 61/78
solids and these problems were not anticipated nor observed when it was co-digested. o
preclude potential e"uipment damage, the food waste was added to the primary clarifiers
at the treatment plant, and not directly to the digesters. #t was li*ely that settleable solids
in the food waste would be removed from the bottom of the clarifier as primary sludge.
he sludge would be pumped with other primary solids through an existing sludge screen
to remove particles greater than 5 mm and then safely conveyed to the anaerobic
digesters. o explore this concept, testing including settleability and sieve analyses were
performed on the food waste.
he general data presented in ables 6.6 and 6.5 were measured for &andl9s food waste
samples collected on April ?, 2006 and March 22, 2006, respectively. he samples were
collected from the ;cology 44+ wet waste recovery system '%%:!(, a vacuum system
with grinding that collects and prepares food waste for disposal or recycling. his unit
was installed at &andl9s restaurant in /ayside, %#.
able 6.6 &andl9s :estaurant $ood %aste +haracteristics
Parame%er <a#&e
Des/%y ?K'#@ ?.027
COD ?m'#@ 62,700
TS ?@ 2
<S ? of !( 80
So#/!s re%a/e! o *.,mm scree ?( 20
68
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 62/78
able 6.5 &andl9s $ood %aste and %isconsin 4and Application 4imit Metals+oncentrations 1'mg3*g dry mass( unless otherwise stated
Me%a# Foo! Was%e <a#&eW/scos/ B/oso#/!s La! A$$#/ca%/o >/'h
7&a#/%y L/m/%s
TS ?@ 5. -W
TKN ?@ @.5 -W
To%a# P ?@ ?.? -W
C! U6.? 8
Cr U. -W
C& 26 ?500
P) U67 00
N/ 2? 620
3 ? 2700
>' U0.0 ?@
As U0.0@ 6?
Se U0.? ?00
Mo 2 @5WW
W here is presently no limit.
WW Mo has no Nhigh "ualityO limit. he normal limit is given.
*1*8 SETTLEABILITY TESTING
A ?00-gram wet sample of the food waste described in able 6.5 was mixed with tap
water to bring the total volume to ? liter. he suspension was thoroughly mixed and
allowed to settle for 0 minutes in a ?-liter graduated cylinder. A sample of the
supernatant was then removed with pipette and analyCed for +). he result was that the
settled solids 'i.e., sludge( volume was 00 ml, and the supernatant +) was ?7,600
mg3l. Approximately ? of the waste +) was in the supernatant. herefore, most of
the +) was in the sludge blan*et that would presumably end up at the bottom of the
primary clarifier. here was some floatable fat, oil, and grease observed 'about a ?-cm
layer in the graduated cylinder(.
50
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 63/78
*1*9 SIE<E ANALYSIS
A ?-liter ali"uot 'total dry solids mass Q 22 grams( of the food waste described in able
6.5 was passed through a series of standard sieves. he mass and percent of solids
retained on each sieve are reported in able 6.. he percent of food solids retained on a
6.@-mm screen is similar to that which would be retained on the primary sludge screens
at !!%%&, which have a 5-mm opening. A 5-mm sieve is not a standard siCe and,
therefore, was not available. !ludge from the primary clarifier is pumped through the
primary sludge screen at the treatment plant before entering the digesters to remove large
particles that may damage pumps or collect at the bottom of the digesters. Approximately
20 of the food particles were retained on the 6.@-mm sieve and would be retained on
the sludge screens. herefore, most of the solids would be conveyed to the digester at the
treatment plant.
able 6. !ieve Analysis :esults for $ood %aste !olidsS/e"e o$e/' s/Je ?mm@ Reco"ere! o S/e"e Re%a/e! Pass/'
91* ?.0 ?.0 88.0
8*8 ?.8 2.8 8@.?*1 @.6 ?0. 78.@
*., 8.5 ?8.7 70.2
9*2- . 2.6 @.
9* ?.6 [email protected] @2.2
8*,- ?.? 27.8 @?.?
8*,- @?.? ?00 -
he &andl9s :estaurant food waste fed to the digesters represented less than of the
total +) load fed to the digesters. !ince biogas production is typically proportional to
+) load and the biogas flow meters are accurate to approximately B 5, the extra
biogas produced from food waste was below detection using existing plant gas flow
meters. >owever, the value of biogas that was generated from the waste can be estimated
as follows. &andl9s restaurant produced approximately 20 liters of food waste per day
5?
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 64/78
having an average +) concentration of 2.7 g34. he food waste biochemical methane
potential was 560 m4 of methane '5+, ? atmosphere( per gram of +) as reported in
+hapter 2. herefore, the restaurant produced 0 Kg of +) per day. #t is estimated from
settleability testing that 76 of the food +) can settle as primary sludge. #t is
estimated from sieve analysis that 70 of the food waste solids in the primary sludge
pass through the sludge screen. herefore, approximately @ of the food waste +)
may be conveyed to the digesters, assuming that ? g I! is e"uivalent to ? g +) and the
soluble +) in the food waste is negligible in comparison to the particulate +).
herefore, approximately 60 Kg of food waste +) per day may be conveyed to the
anaerobic digesters and can be theoretically converted to 70 standard cubic feet of
methane per day. his has an energy value of 70,000 /tu per day.
%hen food waste was added to the primary clarifiers at the treatment plant, no adverse
affects were observed with regards to the operation of primary clarifiers, sludge screens,
or anaerobic digesters.
*, ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
%hen high-strength wastes are not co-digested at the !!%%&, it is typical for digester
biogas to be utiliCed to continuously run blowers for the activated sludge process and run
an existing engine generator set for approximately 7 hours per day. he typical rate of
biogas production is not sufficient to run the engine generator set continuously. ;xcess
heat from the blower engines and generator set is used to heat the digesters. Gnder this
typical scenario, the blowers consume 6@5 !+$M of biogas continuously and the
generator set consumes 80 !+$M of biogas for 7 hours a day. herefore, typical biogas
52
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 65/78
utiliCation is 7@?200 standard cubic feet per day. #t should be noted that this is simply a
typical scenario, and biogas utiliCation scenarios can vary depending on how much
biogas is produced and what e"uipment is shut down for maintenance. $or example,
natural gas is purchased to run blowers if biogas production falls short of re"uirements.
#n addition, if the generator set is not operating or the ambient temperature is extremely
low, then biogas or natural gas is used to fuel boilers that heat the digesters. A typical
maximum biogas utiliCation rate is estimated assuming both the blowers and the engine
generator set are operated 26 hours per day, and this typical maximum biogas utiliCation
rate is ?26500 standard cubic feet per day. %hen co-digestion is not practiced, the
digesters produce approximately 7@?200 standard cubic feet per day of biogas. herefore,
existing e"uipment can typically utiliCe an additional @6600 standard cubic feet per day
of biogas.
#t should be noted that !!%%& operators paid F 0.0 per *w-hr of electricity during
pea* hours '?000 am to ?000 pm( and F 0.02 per *w-hr of electricity during off-pea*
hours '?000 pm to ?0.00 am( during the study. &ea* and off pea* demand charges are
also paid. he cost scenarios presented below assume electricity generated from biogas is
worth an average of F0.06 per *w-hr considering pea* and off-pea* demand charges as
well as the cost per *w-hr. #n addition, a natural gas cost of F.50 per decatherm 'where
a decatherm is e"uivalent to one million /ritish thermal units( was assumed based upon
Eew or* Mercantile ;xchange futures prices for natural gas in Lune 2006. A truc*ing
cost of F00 per 5000-gallon truc*load was paid during the full-scale testing.
5
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 66/78
he following simple economic analysis considers waste truc*ing costs and the value of
methane generated form the high-strength wastes. 4andfill tipping fees and wastewater
treatment plant user fees can be significant and vary from facility to facility. he tipping
fees and user fees have not been considered herein.
*,*8 SOUT>EASTERN WISCONSIN YEAST WASTEWATER ?SEWYWW@
he energy value of the !;%%% co-digested can initially be estimated from
biochemical methane potential results of +hapter 2. he waste can be added to the
digesters at an average rate of ?.0 gallon per minute '2 truc*loads per wee*( and had an
average +) concentration of 75. g34. he !;%%% biochemical methane potential
was 86 m4 of methane '5+, ? atmosphere( per gram of +) as reported in +hapter 2.
herefore, the !;%%% +) could be fed at an average rate of 67 Kg per day that
will theoretically be converted to ?,700 standard cubic feet of methane per day. his has
an energy value of ?.7 W ?0@ /tu per day. Assuming this is utiliCed to generate
electricity, the biogas is worth F20,2003year. #f the biogas is used in place of natural gas,
then the energy is estimated to be worth F 2,700 per year. he yearly transportation cost
to transport two truc*loads per wee* would be approximately F?,200. /ased upon the
/M& results of +hapter 2, the truc*ing cost is more than the worth of electricity
generated from the extra biogas as well as the worth of the biogas if it is used to reduce
natural gas purchase.
>owever, when the !;%%% was actually added to the digesters at the treatment plant,
the average methane production increase was nearly ?0 times greater than that predicted
56
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 67/78
by /M& results. %hen the !;%%% was added to the digesters, the biogas production
increased by 600,000 standard cubic feet per day 'see $igure 6.?(. able 6.@ presents the
digester biogas production, treatment plant biogas utiliCation, excess biogas available for
energy generation, and worth of energy generated from excess biogas from the anaerobic
digesters when !;%%% was co-digested.
able 6.@ !ynopsis of /iogas &roduction and ;nergy !avings uring !;%%% +o-igestion
!tage
igester biogas
production
'standardft3day(
igestermethane
production
'standardft3day(
Maximumreatment
plant biogasusage
'standardft3day(
;xcessGsable biogas
'standardft3day(
&otentialelectricitygeneration
from excess
biogas ? '*w-hr3day(
%orth ofelectricity
from excess
biogas
2
'F3yr(
? ?60000 875000 ?26500 2@200 ?00 2@700
8@000 575000 ?26500 0 0 0
? Assuming ? *w-hr generated per ?0,000 /tu and a maximum possible biogasutiliCation of ?26500 standard cubic feet per day2 Assuming F0.06 per *w-hr Assuming F.50 for ?0 /tu.
uring the period when !;%%% waste was added to the digester, biogas production
increasedD electricity worth in excess of F200,000 per year could be generated from the
usable additional biogas. #f the extra biogas was used to off-set natural gas purchase, then
the plant operators could save F?,800 on natural gas purchases per year. he cost to
transport 2 truc*loads per wee* of !;%%% to the treatment plant would be F?,200.
herefore, the worth of the electricity generated or natural gas saved as estimated by the
full-scale testing data, is significantly greater than the truc*ing cost.
55
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 68/78
*,*9 PANDLS RESTAURANT FOOD WASTE
he restaurant produced 0 Kg of +) per day, of which it is estimated that 60 Kg settle
in the primary clarifier, pass the sludge screen, and proceed to the anaerobic digesters.
he 60 Kg of +) is theoretically converted to @70 standard cubic feet of methane per
day. his has an energy value of 70,000 /tu per day.
he methane can be used to generate F8823year of electricity. #f the biogas is used to off-
set the purchase of natural gas, then the energy is worth F?20 per year. he yearly
transportation cost would be approximately F?500 per year. herefore, the truc*ing cost
is more than the worth of the electricity generated, whereas the truc*ing cost is slightly
less than the worth of the biogas if it is used to reduce natural gas purchase.
#t should be noted that economic benefits not considered herein may be accrued if food
waste is anaerobically digested. $or example, &andl9s :estaurant food waste is presently
disposed of in a sanitary landfill. he waste occupies landfill volume and remains as a
potential source of groundwater pollution. Anaerobic digestion with biogas utiliCation
and safe land application of biosolids may be a more economical solution based upon a
detailed life cycle cost comparison. >owever, a more detailed cost comparison is not
within the scope of this report.
*. CONCLUSIONS
/ased on the results of /M&, AA, +) and bench-scale testing as well as proximity to
the treatment plant, &andl9s food waste and !;%%% were chosen and used in full-
5
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 69/78
scale pilot tests of anaerobic co-digestion at the !!%%& in )a* +ree*, %isconsin.
uring the full-scale testing, no adverse impacts were observed regarding operation of
digesters, pumps, heat exchangers or other digestion appurtenances.
!;%%% was truc*ed to the treatment plant and stored in an existing unmixed tan*.
%hen !;%%% was added to the digesters along with primary sludge, there was a @0
increase in biogas production. he extra biogas could be used to generate electricity
worth in excess of F200,000 per year or off-set natural gas purchase worth F?,800 per
year. he yearly cost to transport 2 truc*loads per wee* of the waste to the wastewater
treatment plant would be F?,200. herefore, the worth of the electricity generated or
natural gas saved is significantly greater than the truc*ing cost.
he extremely large increase in biogas production during !;%%% co-digestion was
not anticipated based on the increased +) loading from the waste alone. #t is possible
that trace nutrients in the !;%%% stimulated microbes in the digesters to produce
more biogas from +) in the primary sludge. )thers have reported that biogas
production can significantly increase when trace nutrients are added to anaerobic
biological systems. #t is possible that !;%%% could be used as a trace nutrient
supplement to significantly increase biogas production at anaerobic digestion facilities.
>owever, additional research is re"uired to verify the trace nutrient hypothesis.
$ood waste from &andl9s :estaurant was added to the treatment plant primary clarifiers
and not directly to the anaerobic digesters. his was done to prevent potential damage to
5@
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 70/78
the existing metering pump due to particles in the food waste. #n addition, the larger
particles could adversely affect existing plant operations by settling in the unmixed
storage tan* as well as the digesters themselves. $or these reasons, the food waste was
added to the primary clarifiers where it was ostensibly incorporated into primary sludge.
he primary sludge was passed through a sludge screen with a 5-mm opening, and then
conveyed to the anaerobic digesters. he increase in biogas production due to the
addition of the food waste was estimated from /M& testing, settleability tests, and sieve
analysis to be relatively low as compared to the total treatment plant biogas production,
and could not be observed using existing gas flow meters at the treatment plant which
have an accuracy of B5. /ased upon the amount of food waste produced at &andl9s
restaurant and results of /M&, settleability, and sieve analysis it is estimated that 70
standard cubic feet per day of methane can be produced from the restaurant waste. his
could be used to generate approximately F882 per year of electricity or off-set the
purchase of F?20 per year of natural gas. he estimated cost to truc* the restaurant
waste to the treatment plant is F?500 per year. herefore, the worth of the electricity
generated is less than the truc*ing cost, whereas the worth of the natural gas saved is
greater than the truc*ing cost. #t should be noted that &andl9s :estaurant food waste is
currently disposed of in a sanitary landfill. #t is possible that anaerobic digestion with
biogas utiliCation and safe application of the stabiliCed biosolids would prove to be a
more economical approach than landfilling if detailed lifecycle cost comparison of the
options was performed.
57
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 71/78
C>APTER 1: O<ERALL CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
he research reported herein pertains to co-digestion of three high-strength wastewaters
'i.e., Miller /rewing +ompany, 4asaffre east +orporation, and !outheastern %isconsin
&roducts wastewaters( as well as restaurant food waste with municipal wastewater solids.
$irst, biochemical methane potential '/M&( tests and anaerobic toxicity assays 'AA( of
the wastes were performed. !econd, bench-scale testing of anaerobic co-digestion was
performed for each waste. $inally, full-scale anaerobic co-digestion pilot testing of
!outheastern %isconsin &roducts wastewater and food waste was accomplished using
existing digesters at the !outh !hore %astewater reatment &lant, )a* +ree*, %isconsin.
+onclusions and recommendations based on results of these tests follows.
1*8 BMP AND ATA TESTING
:esults of /M& and AA testing indicate that all four wastes are amenable to anaerobic
digestion and, at the concentrations studied, exhibit no significant toxicity to the
aceticlastic methanogenic organisms that convert acetate to methane. An unanticipated
outcome was that doses of 4asaffre, !outheastern %isconsin &roducts, and Miller
/rewery wastewaters cause methane production rates to increase by as much as 20 to
70 in AA tests. #n addition, 4asaffre and !outheastern %isconsin &roducts
wastewaters yielded abnormally high /M& values 'i.e., greater than 800 m4 methane per
gram +)(. herefore, each of the two wastes had a synergistic effect when digested
with municipal sludge biomass, increasing methane production from bac*ground +)
present in the sludge biomass use in the test. he unanticipated synergistic effect of these
58
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 72/78
wastes may be due to the presence and bioavailability of trace nutrients, such as iron. #n
addition, the wastes may contain ligands that form complexes with trace metals and
render them more bioavailable, thus stimulating methanogenic organisms and increasing
the rate of methane production from all substrates present.
1*9 BENC>SCALE CODIGESTION TESTING
:egarding bench-scale co-digestion testing, the 4asaffre east and !outheastern
%isconsin &roducts wastewaters can be successfully co-digested with municipal
wastewater solids at all blend ratios tested 'from 20 to 70 v3v wastewater in municipal
wastewater sludge(. !imilarly, the food waste can be successfully co-digested at all blend
ratios tested 'from to ?? v3v food waste in municipal wastewater sludge(.
he Miller brewery wastewater was not successfully digested by itself in the fill-and-
draw digester configuration utiliCedD however, it was successfully digested when blended
with municipal wastewater solids. Although the Miller /rewery wastewater was not
successfully digested alone, it is amenable to anaerobic digestion, as indicated by /M&
test results. #f it is treated alone, then it is recommended that a reactor configuration other
than a fill-and-draw digester should be considered.
#t is notable that all the wastes utiliCed in bench-scale testing had metals concentrations
below the %isconsin epartment of Eatural :esources high "uality limits for biosolids to
be land applied. herefore, it is li*ely that none of the wastes will limit the land
application of digested biosolids.
0
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 73/78
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 74/78
municipal wastewater solids may lead to a sustained increase in biogas production. #n
addition, full-scale investigations regarding the use of !outheastern %isconsin &roducts
and other similar yeast production3fermentation wastes as supplements to increase biogas
production at other anaerobic digestion facilities is recommended.
$ood waste from &andl9s :estaurant was added to the treatment plant primary clarifiers
and not directly to the anaerobic digesters. his was done to prevent potential damage to
the existing e"uipment and appurtenances due to large particles in the food waste. he
increase in biogas production due to the addition of the food waste was estimated from
/M& testing, settleability tests, and sieve analysis. #t is estimated that 70 standard cubic
feet per day of methane can be produced from the restaurant waste. his could be used to
generate approximately F882 per year of electricity or off-set the purchase of F?20 per
year of natural gas. he estimated cost to truc* the restaurant waste to the treatment plant
is F?500 per year. herefore, the worth of the electricity generated is less than the
truc*ing cost, whereas the worth of the natural gas saved is greater than the truc*ing cost.
#t should be noted that &andl9s :estaurant food waste is currently disposed of in a
sanitary landfill. #t is possible that anaerobic digestion with biogas utiliCation and safe
application of the stabiliCed biosolids would prove to be a more economical approach
than landfilling if a detailed lifecycle cost comparison of the two options was performed.
#n addition, if more restaurants, mar*ets, cafeterias, and similar facilities began to
practice waste shredding and storage, then it is probable that economy-of-scale savings
2
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 75/78
could be accrued, and that anaerobic digestion of food residuals would become more
cost-effective.
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 76/78
REFERENCES
Ahring, /. K., Angelida*i, #., and Lohansen, K. '?882(. Anaerobic treatment of manure
together with industial waste. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol. 25, no. @, pp. ??-?7.
Angelida*i, #., ;llegaard, 4., and Ahiring, /.K. '?88@(. Modelling anaerobic co-digestionof manure with olive oil mill effluent. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol. , no. -@, pp. 2-2@0.
A&>A 'American &ublic >ealth Association(, A%%A 'American %aterwor*sAssociation(, and %;$ '%ater ;nvironment federation( '?887(. Standard Methods for
the Eamination of Water and Wastewater , 20th ;dition.
+arrieri, +., i &into, A., :oCCi, A., and !antori, M. '?88(. Anaerobic co-digestion ofsewage sludge and concentrated soluble wastewaters. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol. 27, no. 2, pp.
?7@-?78.
+ecchi, $., &avan, &., and Mata-AlvareC, L. '?88(. Anaerobic co-digestion of sewagesludge application to the macroalgae from the Ienice lagoon. !esources, Conser"ation
and !ec#clin$, vol. ?@, no.?, pp. 5@-.
e 4a :ubia, M.A., &ereC, M., :omero, 4.#., !ales, . '2002(. Anaerobic mesophilic andthermophilic municipal sludge digestion. Chem. %iochem. En$., vol. ?, no. , pp. ??8-?26.
i &alma, 4., Medici, $., Merli, +., and &etrucci, ;. '?888(. Anaerobic co-digestion ofsewage sludge and municipal solid waste from mar*ets experimental results. &ournal ofSolid Waste Technolo$# and Mana$ement, vol.2, no. ?, pp. ?0-?.
<avala, >., !*iadas, #., and 4yberatos, <. '?88(. Anaerobic co-digestion of agriculturalindustires9 wastewater. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol.6, no. ??, pp. @-@5.
<avala, >., !*iadas, #., and 4yberatos, <. '?888(. )n the performance of a centraliseddigestion facility receiving seasonal agroindustrial wastewaters. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol.60,no. ?, pp. 8-6.
>amCawi, E., Kennedy, K., and Mc4ean, .. '?887(. Anaerobic digestion of co-mingled municipal solid waste and sewage sludge. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol. 7, no. 2, pp.
?2@-?2.
4us*, &. and Moser, M. '?88(. Anaerobic igestion- esterday, oday and omorrow. Einth ;uropean /ioenergy +onferenceD Lune 26-2@, ?88, +openhagen, enmar*. GK&ergamon &ressD pp. 276-278.
6
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 77/78
Mavinic, . !., Koch, $. A., >all, ;. :., Abraham, K., and Eiedbala, . '?887(.Anaerobic co-digestion of combined sludges from a /E: wastewater treatment plant. En"ironmental Technolo$#., vol.?8, no.?, pp. 5-66.
Metcalf and ;ddy '200(. Wastewater En$ineerin$' Treatment and !euse, Mc<raw >ill,
/oston, MA.
)wen, %. $., !tuc*ey, . +., >ealy Lr, L. /., oung, 4. ., and Mc+arty, &. 4. '?8@8(./ioassay for monitoring biochemical methane potential and anaerobic toxicity. Water !esearch, vol. ?, pp. 675-682.
:intala, L. A., and Laervinen, K. . '?88(. $ull-scale mesophilic anaerobic co-digestionof municipal solid waste and sewage sludge methane production characteristics. Waste Mana$ement ( !esearch, vol. ?6, no. 2, pp. ?-?@0.
:ipley, 4. ;., /oyle, %. +., and +onverse, L. +. '?87(. #mproved al*alimetric
monitoring for anaerobic digestion of high-strength wastes. &ournal WPC) , vol. 57, no.5, pp. 60-6??.
!mil, I. '200(. Ener$# at the Crossroads' *lo+al Perspecti"es and ncertainties. heMassachusetts #nstitute of echnology &ress, +ambridge, MA.
!osnows*i, &., %iecCore*, A., and 4eda*owicC, !. '200(. Anaerobic co-digestion ofsewage sludge and organic fraction of municipal solid wastes. -d"ances in En"ironmental !esearch, vol. @, no., pp. 08-?.
!peece, :. ;. '?877(. A survey of municipal anaerobic sludge digesters and diagnosticactivity assays. Wat. !es., vol. 22, no. , pp. 5-@2.
!peece, :. ;. '?885(. -naero+ic %iotechnolo$# for ndustrial Wastewaters. Archae &ress, Eashville, E.
Pitomer, ., $erguson, E., Mc<rady, K., and !chilling, L. '200?(. Anaerobic co-digestionof aircraft deicing fluid and municipal wastewater sludge. Water En"ironment !esearch, vol.@, no., pp. 65 1 56.
5
8/12/2019 Municipal Anaerobic Digesters as Regional Renewable Energy
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/municipal-anaerobic-digesters-as-regional-renewable-energy 78/78
BIBLIOGRAP>Y
+ecchi, $., Iallini, <., &avan, &., /assetti, A., and Mata-AlvareC, L. '?88(. #n +ecchi, $.,Mata-AlvareC L. and &ohland $. <.';ds.(, Management of macroalgae from Ienicelagoon through anaerobic co-digestion and co-composting with municipal solid waste'M!%(.
emirer, <.E., uran, M., ;rguder, .>., eCel, G., <ueven, ;., and Ggurul, ). '2000(.Anaerobic treatibility and biogas production potential studies of different agro-industrialwastewaters in ur*ey. Proceedin$ of the /th nternational S#mposium on En"ironmental %iotechnolo$#.
;. &. A. ';nvironmental &rotection Agency( '2006(. - Plain En$lish *uide to the EP-
part 012 %iosolids !ule, ;&A 723:-8-00, %ashington, . +.
$erguson, 4.E. '?888(. -naero+ic Co3Di$estion of -ircraft Deicin$ )luid and
Microaero+ic Studies. M. !. thesis, epartment of +ivil and ;nvironmental ;ngineering,Mar"uette Gniversity, Milwau*ee, %#.
$ruteau de 4aclos, >., esbois, !. and !aint-Loly, +. '?88@(. Anaerobic digestion ofmunicipal organic waste +alorga full-scale plant in ilburg, he Eetherlands. Wat. Sci.
Tech., vol. , no. -@, pp. 65@-62.
Mc+arty, &.4. '200?(. he development of anaerobic treatment and its future, Wat. Sci.Tech., vol. 66, no. 7, pp.?68-?5.
Mc<rady, K. '?888(. -naero+ic Co3Di$estion and Phasin$ for -ircraft De3cin$ )luidTreatment . M. !. thesis, epartment of +ivil and ;nvironmental ;ngineering, Mar"uetteGniversity, Milwau*ee, %#.
Eagel, &., A. Grtubia, A., Aroca, <., +hamy, :. and Achiappacasse, M. '?888(.Methanogenic toxicity and anaerobic biodegradation of chemical products in use in a brewery. Wat. Sci. Tech., vol. 60, no. 7, pp. ?8-?@.
)lesC*iewicC, L., and Mavinic, . !. '2002(. %astewater biosolids an overview of processing, treatment, and management. &. En"iron. En$. Sci., vol. ?, pp. @5-77.