Elsevier

Bioresource Technology

Volume 274, February 2019, Pages 533-540
Bioresource Technology

Process intensification of anaerobic digestion: Influence on mixing and process performance

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.12.011Get rights and content

Highlights

  • P/V (W/m3) does not capture AD’s varying sensitivity to specific power input.

  • Proposal for an alternative specific power input criterion of P/MS (W/kgTS).

  • Optimal P/MS increases exponentially with solids concentration.

Abstract

The adoption of process intensification to anaerobic digestion can present significant complications for digester mixing and process performance. This work investigated how increasing the solids concentration of the digester sludge influenced the process at various mixing energy inputs. Based on the results, adequate mixing is defined qualitatively as the input of sufficient energy to mobilize the reactor contents without producing significant regions of inhibitory shear force. However, the quantitative definition is dependent on the solids concentration of the sludge. But, the existing design criterion of specific mixing power input based on fluid volume (W/m3) does not represent it well. Therefore, a new design criterion of specific mixing power input based on total solids in the sludge (W/kgTS) is proposed to achieve maximum biogas production using optimum power input. The relationship has its limitations, but it represents a significant step forward in the design and operation of improved digester mixing systems.

Introduction

Wastewater utilities are amongst the largest users of anaerobic digestion, as it is a dominant wastewater sludge management practice. The process operates by periodically decanting sludge produced from wastewater treatment into a digester containing a slurry of anaerobic microbes and previously degraded sludge. The microbes degrade the organic fraction of the incoming sludge to produce stabilized biosolids that can safely be disposed of. Additionally, the process produces biogas, which is rich in methane and carbon dioxide, the former being valuable as a renewable energy source (Tchobanoglous et al., 2003, WEF and ASCE, 2010, WEF, 2012). Anaerobic digestion has been used for an appreciable time and is largely well understood (Appels et al., 2008). The major limitation of anaerobic digestion is the low growth rate of the methane forming microbes (Gerardi, 2003). Also, a minimum solids retention time of 10+ days is required to ensure stable digester operation (Appels et al., 2008). However, it is not uncommon to find 15+ days of solids retention time being used as prescribed by regulatory authorities.

The numerous responsibilities held by water utilities limit the opportunity and frequency of large capital expenditure projects for increasing supply and treatment capacity. This limitation has seen them increasingly turn to process intensification, which may be defined in this context as ‘processing more with less’, i.e., making better use of the existing infrastructure. As a consequence of the long retention times required, most process intensification measures designed for capacity expansion focus on increasing the solids concentration within the digester rather than increasing the process reaction rate. This is commonly achieved through increased dewatering of the incoming sludge or decoupling the solids and hydraulic retention time in a process known as recuperative thickening (Batstone et al., 2015). However, increasing the solids concentration changes the rheological properties of the sludge and makes it behave as a non-Newtonian fluid for solids concentration above 2.5% w/w when a hypothesized yield stress develops (Eshtiaghi et al., 2013). The changing rheology presents a significant issue for digester mixing, as it increases the resistance to flow thereby changing the sludge flow patterns and potentially promoting the growth of stagnant or “dead” regions. Karim et al. (2005) also reported that the influence of mixing became more apparent at higher solids loadings. Although the need for implementing new approaches to mixing thickened sludge has been recognized for a while, wastewater industry was extremely cautious and had displayed a strong desire not to be the first in adopting new technologies and processes (Speight, 2015).

Digester mixing is important for ensuring process effectiveness (Kariyama et al., 2018, Lindmark et al., 2014b), but it remains poorly understood, with a definition of adequate digester mixing yet to be found (WEF & ASCE, 2010). A review of mixing specific power input (P/V) used in various studies demonstrates the lack of standardization between experimental work (Table 1), which has limited the detailed understanding of how mixing influences the digestion process (Lindmark et al., 2014b). The outcome is that there is a significant challenge on how to investigate the influence of mixing power input on digester performance and effectively translate the results between experimental work and the full-scale digester operation.

This work aims to study how anaerobic digestion performance responds to increases in sludge total solids concentrations at various mixing specific power inputs. The intent is that the lessons learnt from this work will help to focus the scope of future research or provide a starting point for digester optimization. As such, this work used three quantitative specific mixing power inputs indicative of those used in existing wastewater treatment and two solids concentrations of feed sludge in a batch digester, whereby the sludge samples were initially fed and monitored over 21 days to see how the process unfolded.

Section snippets

Inoculum and substrate

Both the inoculum (I), digester sludge, and substrate (S), primary sludge (PS), were sourced from Melbourne Water’s Eastern Treatment Plant in Bangholme, Victoria, Australia. The plant treats 330 ML/day of wastewater mainly from municipal sources with a smaller proportion from industrial sources. The sewage entering the plant undergoes grit removal before primary sedimentation that is followed by a traditional activated sludge process for nitrogen removal. The sludge from primary sedimentation

Biogas generation

Results shown in Fig. 1 depict the typical gas production data for all the conditions tested. Based on the gas production trends, the experimental duration is broken down into four key periods, delineated as P1, P2, P3, and P4 (Fig. 1B) as described by McLeod et al. (2018).

Briefly, the first period (P1) was characterized by the consumption of readily biodegradable substances in the substrate. The biogas production rate increased sharply to a high value before falling to a minimum of 23.10 

Limitations

Simplifying the design and operation of anaerobic digester mixing to a single variable has produced a few limitations that are worth noting. This relates, but is not restricted, to items such as variable feedstock rheology, experimental mode, scale, and duration as well as digester operation. Markis et al. (2016) demonstrated that even within the same treatment plant sewage sludge has varying rheology between different sources (primary, secondary, and digester). It is therefore expected that

Conclusion

Wastewater utilities are increasingly turning to process intensification to increase capacity, which given the nature of the work, requires demonstrated outcomes before implementation. This work aimed to address the limited understanding regarding the effect of varying solids concentration has on mixing power requirements for maintaining adequate digester mixing. In answering this question, the limitations of (P/V) (W/m3) as a mixing criterion were further demonstrated, and an alternative

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Eddy Santos and Nick Zisis for their help with facilitating the collection of the substrate and inoculum for this work. Additionally, without the assistance of the technical staff at RMIT, Cameron Crombie and Sandro Longano, this work would not have been possible.

Declarations of interest: None. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References (33)

Cited by (15)

  • The effects of agitation in anaerobic biodigesters operating with substrates from swine manure and rice husk

    2023, Chemical Engineering Journal
    Citation Excerpt :

    This includes the type of agitation (different types of equipment and conditions) and feedstock used (different types of substrates and feeding regime). In addition, researchers that have evaluated the effects of agitation often used the power input (PW) setup pattern [9,13] which is more focused on the geometric conditions of the biodigesters and less on the fluid characteristics. The idea of applying CFD and the mixing timing model has arisen to help future studies involving scale-up and provide another pattern to set up agitation in biodigesters.

  • Vacuum-enhanced anaerobic fermentation: Achieving process intensification, thickening and improved hydrolysis and VFA yields in a single treatment step

    2022, Water Research
    Citation Excerpt :

    In terms of VFA composition, a mixture of acetic and propionic acids provides better performance than either pure acid for enhanced biological phosphorus removal (Li et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2020). Several intensification strategies have been proposed and investigated to enhance fermentation and anaerobic digestion (McLeod et al., 2019). These strategies are typically applied outside anaerobic digesters, like in sludge pretreatment (e.g., thermal hydrolysis) or post-treatment (e.g., recuperative thickening).

  • The challenges of monitoring and manipulating anaerobic microbial communities

    2022, Bioresource Technology
    Citation Excerpt :

    Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactors produce structured granules that contain concentric spheres of different species of microbes (Gagliano et al., 2020; Nordgård et al., 2018; Trego et al., 2020). Operating temperature (Li et al., 2015), hydraulic retention time, effectiveness of mixing (McLeod et al., 2019), gas recirculation and length of intervals between feeding could all result in (potentially predictable) AD community changes that could be used to manipulate the microbial response. While all these factors might be used to manipulate the AD process, they also present potential pitfalls.

  • Detailed composition evolution of food waste in an intermittent self-agitation anaerobic digestion baffled reactor

    2021, Bioresource Technology
    Citation Excerpt :

    In particular, mixing plays an important role. Ideally, mixing must coincide with feeding to homogenize the introduced fresh feed to provide close contact among the bacteria, bacterial enzymes, and substrate (Cubas et al., 2011, Kariyama et al., 2018, McLeod et al., 2019). Mixing can be accomplished through various methods, including mechanical mixing, recirculating the digester contents, and recirculating the produced biogas to the bottom of the digester using pumps.

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text