Advertisement

Anaerobic Digestion of Secondary Tannery Sludge: Optimisation of Initial pH and Temperature and Evaluation of Kinetics

  • A. B. MpofuEmail author
  • P. J. Welz
  • O. O. Oyekola
Original Paper
  • 31 Downloads

Abstract

The feasibility of retrofitting and operating a low cost anaerobic mesophilic batch reactor for the reduction of secondary tannery sludge (STNS) produced in tannery wastewater treatment plants at varying initial reactor pH (pHin) using acclimated inoculum was demonstrated using the bio-methane potential test protocol. Temperature had a significant effect on process indicators whilst the effect of pHin was negated by the STNS’ high alkalinity and its buffering capacity offered by ammonia/ammonium speciation, eliminating the need for pH control during digestion. Furthermore, there was an insignificant and significant variation in the biodegradability (Bo) and gas yields of STNS, respectively. This nullified the need for reactor heating if gas yields were not prioritised. Nonetheless, optimum conditions (35.5–37.0 °C and pHin 6.5) yielded 200–217 mL biogas/gVS (≈ 55% CH4), 108–118 mL CH4/gVS and 69–74% VS, 54–57% TS and 47–48% COD reduction. Cumulative CH4 generations were accurately modelled using the modified Gompertz, Logistic, First order, Cone (0.828 ≤ Adj R2 ≤ 0.986) and process kinetics were determined. However, the correlations between kinetics and process parameters were mostly non-monotonic. The positive effect of temperature on A (r = 0.84) coincided with a decrease in methanogenesis rate (k) and ratio of hydrolysis and methanogenesis (K/µm) at optimum pHin signifying an inhibited steady state reactor condition.

Keywords

Anaerobic digestion Secondary tannery sludge Optimisation Temperature Influent pH Kinetics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the Water Research Commission (WRC) for funding this project and the NATSURV K5/2490 project team. Any opinion, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and therefore the WRC does not accept any liability in this regard thereto.

References

  1. 1.
    Swartz, C.D., Jackson-Moss, C., Rowswell, R., Mpofu, A.B., Welz, P.J.: Water and Wastewater Management in the Tanning and Leather Finishing Industry. Water Research Commission, Pretoria (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buljan, J., Král, I.: The Framework for Sustainable Leather Manufacture. UNIDO, Vienna (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mpofu, A.B.: Optimisation of the Anaerobic Treatment of Secondary Tannery Sludge for Biogas Production and Solids Reduction. Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Cape Town (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Priebe, G.P.S., Gutterres, M.: Anaerobic digestion of leather industry wastes—an alternate source of energy. J. Am. Leather Chem. Assoc. 112, 59–71 (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zhang, C., Su, H., Baeyens, J., Tan, T.: Reviewing the anaerobic digestion of food waste for biogas production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 38, 383–392 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    El-mashad, H.M., Zeeman, G., van Loon, W.K.P., Bot, G.P.A., Lettinga, G.: Effect of temperature and temperature fluctuation on thermophilic anaerobic digestion of cattle manure. Bioresour. Technol. 95, 191–201 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garcia, M.L., Angenent, L.T.: Interaction between temperature and ammonia in mesophilic digesters for animal waste treatment. Water. Res. (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2009.02.036 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deng, L., Yang, H., Liu, G., Zheng, D., Chen, Z., Liu, Y., et al.: Kinetics of temperature effects and its significance to the heating strategy for anaerobic digestion of swine wastewater. Appl. Energy (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.027 Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nozhevnikova, A.N., Nekrasova, V., Ammann, A., Zehnder, A.J.B., Wehrli, B., Holliger, C.: Influence of temperature and high acetate concentrations on methanogenensis in lake sediment slurries. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 62, 336–344 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Da Ros, C., Cavinato, C., Pavan, P.: Optimization of thermophilic anaerobic digestion of winery bio-waste by micro-nutrients augmentation. Environ. Eng. Manag. J. 14, 1535–1542 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Guo, J., Dong, R., Clemens, J., Wang, W.: Performance evaluation of a completely stirred anaerobic reactor treating pig manure at a low range of mesophilic conditions. Waste Manag. J. (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.06.015 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nachaiyasit, S., Stuckey, D.C.: Effect of low temperatures on the performance of an anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR). J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 69, 276–284 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ogiehor, I.S., Ovueni, U.J.: Effect of temperature, pH, and solids concentration on biogas production from poultry waste. Int. J. Sci Eng. Res. (2014). http://www.ijser.org
  14. 14.
    Kayhanian, M.: Ammonia inhibition in high-solids biogasification: an overview and practical solutions. Environ. Technol. 20, 355–365 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Holliger, C., Alves, M., Andrade, D., Angelidaki, I., Astals, S., Baier, U., et al.: Towards a standardization of biomethane potential tests. Water Sci. Technol. 74, 2515–2522 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bayard, R., Benbelkacem, H., Gourdon, R., Buffière, P.: Characterization of selected municipal solid waste components to estimate their biodegradability. J. Environ. Manag. 87, 1–9 (2017)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kafle, G.K., Kim, S.H., Sung, K.I.: Ensiling of fish industry waste for biogas production: a lab scale evaluation of biochemical methane potential (BMP) and kinetics. Bioresour. Technol. 127, 326–336 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bilgili, M.S., Demir, A., Varank, G.: Evaluation and modeling of biochemical methane potential (BMP) of landfilled solid waste: a pilot scale study. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 4976–4980 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Donoso-Bravo, A.,  Pérez-Elvira, S.I., Fdz-Polanco, F.: Application of simplified models for anaerobic biodegradability tests. Evaluation of pre-treatment processes. Chem. Eng. J. 160, 607–614 (2010) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pitt, R.E., Cross, T.L., Pell, A,N., Schofield, P., Doane, P.H.: Use of in vitro gas production models in ruminal kinetics. Math Biosci. (1999). http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0025556499000206
  21. 21.
    Gao, S., Zhao, M., Chen, Y., Yu, M., Ruan, W.: Tolerance response to in situ ammonia stress in a pilot-scale anaerobic digestion reactor for alleviating ammonia inhibition. Bioresour. Technol. (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.044 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guerrero, L., Chamy, R., Jeison, D., Montalvo, S., Huiliñir, C., Guerrero, L., et al.: Behavior of the anaerobic treatment of tannery wastewater at different initial pH values and sulfate concentrations. Environ. Sci. Health 48, 1073–1078 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Akyol, Ç., Demirel, B., Onay, T.T.: Recovery of methane from tannery sludge: the effect of inoculum to substrate ratio and solids content. J. Mater. Cycles Waste Manag. (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-014-0306-2 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Berardino, S., Di Martinho, A.: Co-digestion of tanning residues and sludge. In: 12th IWA sludge conference—sustainable management of water and wastewater sludge. (2009). http://repositorio.lneg.pt/handle/10400.9/596
  25. 25.
    Zupančič, G.D., Jemec, A.: Anaerobic digestion of tannery waste: semi-continuous and anaerobic sequencing batch reactor processes. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 26–33 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Carotenuto, C., Guarino, G., Morrone, B., Minale, M.: Temperature and pH effect on methane production from buffalo manure anaerobic digestion. Int, J. Heat Technol. (2016). http://www.iieta.org/sites/default/files/Journals/HTECH/IJHT.34.S2_33.pdf
  27. 27.
    Li, L., He, Q., Zhao, X., Wu, D., Wang, X., Peng, X.: Anaerobic digestion of food waste: correlation of kinetic parameters with operational conditions and process performance. Biochem. Eng. J. 130, 1–9 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Membere, E., Sallis, P.: Effect of temperature on kinetics of biogas production from macroalgae. Bioresour. Technol. (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.023 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mondal, C., Biswas, G.K.: Effect of temperature on kinetic constants in anaerobic bio-digestion. Chem. Rev. 1, 19–28 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Munk, B., Lebuhn, M.: Process diagnosis using methanogenic Archaea in maize-fed, trace element depleted fermenters. Mol. Biol.Genet. Biotechnol. 29, 22–28 (2014)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kim, M., Ahn, Y., Speece, R.E.: Comparative process stability and efficiency of anaerobic digestion; mesophilic vs thermophilic. Water Res. 36, 4369–4385 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Elaiyaraju, P., Partha, N.: Studies on biogas production by anaerobic process using agroindustrial wastes. Res. Agric. Eng. 62, 73–82 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Massé, D.I., Masse, L., Verville, A., Bilodeau, S.: The start-up of anaerobic sequencing batch reactors at 20 °C and 25 °C for the treatment of slaughterhouse wastewater. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 76, 393–400 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Trisakti, B., Irvan, M., Taslim, T.M.: Effect of temperature on methanogenesis stage of two-stage anaerobic digestion of palm oil mill effluent (POME) into biogas. IOP. Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 206, 1–8 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Sri Bala, K., Kalyanaraman, C., Umamaheswari, B., Thanasekaran, K.: Enhancement of biogas generation during co-digestion of tannery solid wastes through optimization of mix proportions of substrates. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 16, 1067–1080 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Thangamani, A., Rajakumar, S., Ramanujam, R.A.: Anaerobic co-digestion of hazardous tannery solid waste and primary sludge: biodegradation kinetics and metabolite analysis. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 12, 517–524 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thangamani, A., Rajakumar, S., Ramanujam, R.A.: Biomethanation potential of animal fleshing and primary sludge and effect of refractory fraction of volatile solids. J. Environ. Sci. Sustain. Soc. 3, 29–34 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    O’Flaherty, V., Mahony, T., O’Kennedy, R., Colleran, E.: Effect of pH on growth kinetics and sulphide toxicity thresholds of a range of methanogenic, syntrophic and sulphate-reducing bacteria. Process Biochem. 33, 555–569 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Deepanraj, B., Sivasubramanian, V., Jayaraj, S.: Experimental and kinetic study on anaerobic digestion of food waste: the effect of total solids and pH. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4935559 Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sri Bala, K., Kalyanaraman, C., Porselvam, S., Thanasekaran, K.: Optimization of inoculum to substrate ratio for bio-energy generation in co-digestion of tannery solid wastes. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy. 14, 241–250 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Amani, T., Nosrati, M., Sreekrishnan, T.R.: Anaerobic digestion from the viewpoint of microbiological, chemical, and operational aspects—a review. Environ. Rev. 278, 255–278 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringCape Peninsula University of TechnologyCape TownSouth Africa
  2. 2.Institute of Biomedical and Microbial BiotechnologyCape Peninsula University of TechnologyCape TownSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations