Toxicants inhibiting anaerobic digestion: A review

Chen, Jian Lin; Ortiz, Raphael; Steele, Terry W. J.; Stuckey, David C.

doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2014.10.005

Cited by 461 publications

(221 citation statements)

References 145 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

205

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This result is closely related to the recommended value suggested by Flotats et al (2001), Liu et al (2011) and Su et al (2016), who considered that the ORP optimum for an anaerobic process should be less than -270 mV; however, a high redox potential (10.56 V) is a direct inhibition value (Chen et al, 2014).…”

Section: Oxide-reduction Potential (Orp)supporting

confidence: 85%

Pig faeces digestion as compared to anaerobic co-digestion using waste waters sludge or bovine ruminal gastric content treatments

Canepa¹,

Olan²,

Olivier³

et al. 2017

Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anaerobic co-digestion improves the pig faeces digestion process. This work presents anaerobic digestion of pig faeces (C) as compared to 2 co-substrates: Sludge (L) from waste waters and bovine ruminal gastric content (R). Pig faeces used were generated in a local farm at the Juarez Autonomous University of Tabasco (UJAT), with a total population of 148 animals. Analytical determinations were made on the substrate and co-substrates. Each treatment was performed in triplicate (9 experimental units), for 18 weeks. C+R co-digestion had the highest removal of chemical oxygen demand (COD) with 90%. Biogas production (0.012 L day Results obtained showed that co-digestion of C+L was better with regards to the quality of biogas from low hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) concentrations (70.33±6.36 ppm). The use of anaerobic co-digestion systems represents an alternative treatment for faeces generated in pig farms and other kinds of wastes to reduce the potential source of infection produced by these types of waste.

show abstract

Section: Oxide-reduction Potential (Orp)supporting

confidence: 85%

Pig faeces digestion as compared to anaerobic co-digestion using waste waters sludge or bovine ruminal gastric content treatments

Canepa¹,

Olan²,

Olivier³

et al. 2017

Afr. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hydrogen sulfide, produced by degradation of sulfur containing amino acids or dissimilarity sulfate reduction using sulfate present in the initial substrate, is highly toxic to microorganisms, as it forms an inactive protein, metal complexation, and interferes with key metabolic enzymes in the cells (Karhadkar et al, 1987;Zandvoort et al, 2006;Chen et al, 2014). Therefore, the experiment on sulfide inhibition was conducted (Figure 7) and the calculated IC 50 was in the range of the reported values of 125-250 mg/L (Koster et al, 1986;Oleszkiewicz et al, 1989;Chen et al, 2008).…”

Section: Importance Of Te Supplementation On Ad Of Fwmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhanced Anaerobic Digestion of Food Waste by Supplementing Trace Elements: Role of Selenium (VI) and Iron (II)

Ariunbaatar

Esposito

Yeh

et al. 2016

Front. Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper discusses the potential to enhance the anaerobic digestion of food waste FW by supplementing trace elements (Fe, Co, Ni, Zn, Mn, Cu, Se, and Mo) individually as well as in cocktails. A series of batch experiments on the biomethane potential of synthetic food waste were performed with low (FW-A) and high (FW-B) trace element background concentrations prepared in, respectively, Delft (The Netherlands) and Tampa (Florida, USA). The most effective trace elements for FW-A were Fe with an increase of 39.2 (±0.6)% of biomethane production, followed by Se (34.1 ± 5.6% increase), Ni (26.4 ± 0.2% increase) and Co (23.8 ± 0.2% increase). For FW-B supplementing these trace elements did not result in enhancement of the biomethane production, except for Se. FW-B had a Se concentration of 1.3 (±0. 5) µ g/gTS, while it was below the detection limit for FW-A. Regardless of the FW source, Se resulted in 30-35% increase of biomethane production at a concentration range of 25-50 µg/L (0.32-0.63 µM). Volatile fatty acids analysis revealed that TE supplementation enhances their consumption, thus yielding a higher biomethane production. Moreover, additional experiments on sulfide inhibition showed the enhancing effects of trace elements on the anaerobic digestion of food waste were not related with sulfide toxicity, but with the enzymatic reactions and/or microbial biomass aggregation.

show abstract

“…Heavy metals are not biodegradable and they tend to accumulate in living organisms until toxic or carcinogenic concentrations (Fu and Wang 2011). The toxicity of heavy metals is related to their ability to disrupt enzyme functions and structures by binding with thiol and other groups on proteins or by replacing the natural existing metal cofactors in enzyme's prosthetic groups (Colussi et al 2009;Chen et al 2008Chen et al , 2014 (Fig. 2).…”

Section: Heavy Metals Occurrence and Toxicitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Methanogens, sulphate and heavy metals: a complex system

Paulo

Stams

Sousa

2015

Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a well-established technology used for the treatment of wastes and wastewaters with high organic content. During AD organic matter is converted stepwise to methanecontaining biogas-a renewable energy carrier. Methane production occurs in the last AD step and relies on methanogens, which are rather sensitive to some contaminants commonly found in wastewaters (e.g. heavy metals), or easily outcompeted by other groups of microorganisms (e.g. sulphate reducing bacteria, SRB). This review gives an overview of previous research and pilot-scale studies that shed some light on the effects of sulphate and heavy metals on methanogenesis. Despite the numerous studies on this subject, comparison is not always possible due to differences in the experimental conditions used and parameters explained. An overview of the possible benefits of methanogens and SRB co-habitation is also covered. Small amounts of sulphide produced by SRB can precipitate with metals, neutralising the negative effects of sulphide accumulation and free heavy metals on methanogenesis. Knowledge on how to untangle and balance sulphate reduction and methanogenesis is crucial to take advantage of the potential for the utilisation of biogenic sulphide as a metal detoxification agent with minimal loss in methane production in anaerobic digesters.

show abstract

Toxicants inhibiting anaerobic digestion: A review

Cited by 461 publications

References 145 publications

Pig faeces digestion as compared to anaerobic co-digestion using waste waters sludge or bovine ruminal gastric content treatments

Pig faeces digestion as compared to anaerobic co-digestion using waste waters sludge or bovine ruminal gastric content treatments

Enhanced Anaerobic Digestion of Food Waste by Supplementing Trace Elements: Role of Selenium (VI) and Iron (II)

Methanogens, sulphate and heavy metals: a complex system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About