Anaerobic Co-Digestion of table olive debittering & washing Effluent, cattle manure and pig manure in batch and high volume laboratory anaerobic digesters: Effect of temperature

Is phytoremediation without biomass valorization sustainable? — Comparative LCA of landfilling vs. anaerobic co-digestion

“…• Given that the co-digestion process is normally optimized for animal waste and the biomass from phytoremediation would only be processed once a year, a 30% reduction in biogas yield from the methanogenic potential was considered to reflect the potential issues of microorganisms adapting to new feedstock (Zarkadas and Pilidis, 2011). • To contemplate the variability of the local and meteorological conditions, a 50% reduction in biomass yield was tested in line with the production reported by McEwen and Johnston (1985).…”

Table Olive Wastewater: Problem, Treatments and Future Strategy. A Review

“…Co-digestion with other substrates with different characteristics would allow to compensate toxicity and nutrient imbalance and to improve synergetic effects between the microorganisms (Zarkadas and Pilidis, 2011). For instance, batch experiments carried out with different mixtures of table olive de-bittering and washing effluents (DWE) with cattle manure (CM) and pig manure (PM) resulted in ultimate methane yields of between 250 and 300 mL CH 4 /g Volatile Solids added at a mesophilic temperature of 35°C and between 270 and 350 mL CH 4 /g Volatile Solids added at a thermophilic temperature 55°C.…”

“…In these cases, no inhibition was observed since there was a small lag-adaptation of 3 days at the beginning of the process. In addition, no volatile fatty acid accumulation was observed, showing that the reactors were not operating under stress-overloading conditions (Zarkadas and Pilidis, 2011). …”

Anaerobic Processes

“…Oilseed rape residues combined with cattle slurry or vegetable waste stabilized digestion and provided energy self-sufficiency for the farms examined with additional biodiesel produced for selling Heaven et al (2011) Seaweed with pig slurry Less methane and excess hydrogen sulfide produced than with other available co-substrates Peu et al (2011) Olive debittering and washing effluent with cattle or pig manure Increased methane production by 50%; reduced phenols and total organic carbon by 30% and 50%, respectively Zarkadas and Pilidis (2011) Swine manure with winery wastewater Maximum methane yield of 348 mL/g COD; codigestion process was efficient and desirable Riaño et al (2011) Food waste with piggery wastewater Improved biogas productivity and reactor stability Zhang et al (2011c) Pig manure with grass silage 1:1 ratio of substrates produced greatest methane yield and shortest lag phase Xie et al (2011b) Swine manure with herbal extraction residues Maximum methane yield of 294 mL/g VS produced from 50% herbal extraction residue Li et al (2011f) Sewage sludge with food waste 44% VS removal; 1.2 m 3 /m 3 reactord methane produced Municipal primary sludge with thickened waste activated sludge Reduction in critical flux by 30-50% compared to thickened waste activated sludge alone Pileggi et al (2011) Waste activated sludge with trapped fats, oils and greases from dissolved air flotation Increasing grease dose caused biomass acclimation to fat-rich co-substrate, increased long chain fatty acid degradation, and reduced the inhibitory effect of long chain fatty acids Silvestre et al (2011) Waste activated sludge with food waste Combined process stream optimized digestion of short chain fatty acids Feng et al (2011)…”