IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v49y2015icp21-28.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Anaerobic methanogenesis of fresh leachate from municipal solid waste: A brief review on current progress

Author

Listed:
  • Luo, Jinghuan
  • Qian, Guangren
  • Liu, Jianyong
  • Xu, Zhi Ping

Abstract

Municipal solid waste (MSW) fresh leachate (FL), a kind of high-strength organic wastewater, can severely deteriorate receiving environment, or can also be potentially reclaimed for biomethane production. The present paper aims to briefly overview the current progress on the anaerobic biomethanation of MSW FL, particularly on organic removal and methanogenesis by various bio-processes under their respective feeding characteristic and operational condition. The summarized results show that 60–96% of chemical oxygen demand (COD) could be generally removed and the typical methane production ranged between 0.3 and 0.4m3/kg CODremoved for the leachate with BOD/COD ratio >0.4 under the feeding COD of 5000–100,100mg/l and the organic loading rate of 0.70–79kg COD/(m3d). UASB, EGSB, ABR and AFBR present the best performances, revealing highly concentrated biomass inside the reactor to be an essential prerequisite. When compared to other easily biodegradable waste leachates, FL is much more suitable for methanogenesis. But this bio-process will always be affected by CaCO3 precipitation, NH3-N/sulfate inhibition, or low temperature depression. This review thus indicates that combining pollution control with renewable energy recovery could be achievable by anaerobic processes for FL treatment.

Suggested Citation

  • Luo, Jinghuan & Qian, Guangren & Liu, Jianyong & Xu, Zhi Ping, 2015. "Anaerobic methanogenesis of fresh leachate from municipal solid waste: A brief review on current progress," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 21-28.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:49:y:2015:i:c:p:21-28
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032115003238
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Parawira, W. & Murto, M. & Zvauya, R. & Mattiasson, B., 2006. "Comparative performance of a UASB reactor and an anaerobic packed-bed reactor when treating potato waste leachate," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 893-903.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. de Castro, Thiago Morais & Arantes, Eudes José & de Mendonça Costa, Mônica Sarolli Silva & Gotardo, Jackeline Tatiane & Passig, Fernando Hermes & de Carvalho, Karina Querne & Gomes, Simone Damasceno, 2021. "Anaerobic co-digestion of industrial waste landfill leachate and glycerin in a continuous anaerobic bioreactor with a fixed-structured bed (ABFSB): Effects of volumetric organic loading rate and alkal," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1436-1446.
    2. Vincenzo Torretta & Navarro Ferronato & Ioannis A. Katsoyiannis & Athanasia K. Tolkou & Michela Airoldi, 2016. "Novel and Conventional Technologies for Landfill Leachates Treatment: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-39, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ahmadi, Ehsan & Yousefzadeh, Samira & Mokammel, Adel & Miri, Mohammad & Ansari, Mohsen & Arfaeinia, Hossein & Badi, Mojtaba Yegane & Ghaffari, Hamid Reza & Rezaei, Soheila & Mahvi, Amir Hossein, 2020. "Kinetic study and performance evaluation of an integrated two-phase fixed-film baffled bioreactor for bioenergy recovery from wastewater and bio-wasted sludge," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    2. Mohammed Ali Musa & Syazwani Idrus, 2021. "Physical and Biological Treatment Technologies of Slaughterhouse Wastewater: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, April.
    3. Collins, B.A. & Birzer, C.H. & Harris, P.W. & Kidd, S.P. & McCabe, B.K. & Medwell, P.R., 2023. "Two-phase anaerobic digestion in leach bed reactors coupled to anaerobic filters: A review and the potential of biochar filters," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    4. Jurek Häner & Tobias Weide & Alexander Naßmacher & Roberto Eloy Hernández Regalado & Christof Wetter & Elmar Brügging, 2022. "Anaerobic Digestion of Pig Slurry in Fixed-Bed and Expanded Granular Sludge Bed Reactors," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-17, June.
    5. Singh, S.P. & Prerna, Pandey, 2009. "Review of recent advances in anaerobic packed-bed biogas reactors," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(6-7), pages 1569-1575, August.
    6. Srisowmeya, G. & Chakravarthy, M. & Nandhini Devi, G., 2020. "Critical considerations in two-stage anaerobic digestion of food waste – A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Fernando Canul Bacab & Elda España Gamboa & Juan Enrique Ruiz Espinoza & Rosa M Leal-Bautista & Raúl Tapia Tussell & Jorge Domínguez Maldonado & Blondy Canto Canché & Liliana Alzate-Gaviria, 2020. "Two Phase Anaerobic Digestion System of Municipal Solid Waste by Utilizing Microaeration and Granular Activated Carbon," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Ahmed, Yunus & Yaakob, Zahira & Akhtar, Parul & Sopian, Kamaruzzaman, 2015. "Production of biogas and performance evaluation of existing treatment processes in palm oil mill effluent (POME)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1260-1278.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:49:y:2015:i:c:p:21-28. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.