Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 1321–1331 | Cite as

Effect of substituting organic fraction of municipal solid waste with fruit and vegetable wastes on anaerobic digestion

  • Ahmad Reza Salehiyoun
  • Mohammad SharifiEmail author
  • Francesco Di Maria
  • Hamid Zilouei
  • Mortaza Aghbashlo


The potential of replacing fruit and vegetable wastes (FVW) as remarkable sources of environmentally offensive biomass in metropolises with organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) on biogas production was investigated. Components of OFMSW as a source separated MSW were prepared in 5 categories of fat and protein, starch, cellulose, fruit, and vegetable waste. Experiments were carried out in four FVW/OFMSW replacement ratios (wet basis) of 0, 15, 30 and 45% at two total solid (TS) concentrations of 8% and 15% at 37 °C. Main results indicated that co-digestion is favorable at lower TS content (8% TS) and higher FVW/OFMSW ratios up to 30%. Although methane yield did not improve significantly for these substitution ratios, the concentration of methane in the biogas enhanced up to 68% and about 92% of volatile solids’ removal achieved. Kinetics study, based on lag phase of Gompetz model, indicated process rapidity increased proportionally to the FVW replacement ratios. Dedication up to 30% of feedstock capacity of ongoing OFMSW biogas plants in metropolises with FVW can suggest more revenue for plants through lowering HRT, increasing biodegradability of substrate, removing undesirable gas and supplying water needed for anaerobic digestion.


Organic fraction of municipal solid waste Fruit and vegetable wastes Waste composition Biomethane potential Kinetic study 



We acknowledge Mohammad Ali Salehiyoun and Ehsan Savand-Romi for sample procurement and Enrico Sogolini for technical assistance. The financial support provided by the University of Tehran, Iran is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. 1.
    Shareefdeen Z, Elkamel A, Tse S (2015) Review of current technologies used in municipal solid waste-to-energy facilities in Canada. Clean Technol Environ Policy 17:1837–1846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Khoshand A, Kamalan H, Rezaei H (2018) Application of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) to assess options of energy recovery from municipal solid waste: a case study in Tehran, Iran. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 20:1689–1700. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alibardi L, Cossu R (2015) Composition variability of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste and effects on hydrogen and methane production potentials. Waste Manag 36:147–155. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nabavi-Pelesaraei A, Bayat R, Hosseinzadeh-Bandbafha H et al (2017) Prognostication of energy use and environmental impacts for recycle system of municipal solid waste management. J Clean Prod 154:602–613. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Scano EA, Asquer C, Pistis A et al (2014) Biogas from anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes: experimental results on pilot-scale and preliminary performance evaluation of a full-scale power plant. Energy Convers Manag 77:22–30. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang L, Shen F, Yuan H et al (2014) Anaerobic co-digestion of kitchen waste and fruit/vegetable waste: lab-scale and pilot-scale studies. Waste Manag 34:2627–2633. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bouallagui H, Touhami Y, Ben Cheikh R, Hamdi M (2005) Bioreactor performance in anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes. Process Biochem 40:989–995CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Arun Khardenavis A, Yuan Wang J, Jern Ng W, Purohit HJ (2013) Management of various organic fractions of municipal solid waste via recourse to VFA and biogas generation. Environ Technol (United Kingdom) 34:2085–2097. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karthikeyan OP, Visvanathan C (2013) Bio-energy recovery from high-solid organic substrates by dry anaerobic bio-conversion processes: a review. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 12:257–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mata-Alvarez J, Dosta J, Romero-Güiza MS et al (2014) A critical review on anaerobic co-digestion achievements between 2010 and 2013. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 36:412–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shen F, Yuan H, Pang Y et al (2013) Performances of anaerobic co-digestion of fruit & vegetable waste (FVW) and food waste (FW): single-phase vs. two-phase. Bioresour Technol 144:80–85. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Anjum M, Khalid A, Mahmood T, Arshad M (2012) Anaerobic co-digestion of municipal solid organic waste with melon residues to enhance biodegradability and biogas production. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 14:388–395. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hansen TL, la Cour Jansen J, Spliid H et al (2007) Composition of source-sorted municipal organic waste collected in Danish cities. Waste Manag 27:510–518. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pavi S, Kramer LE, Gomes LP, Miranda LAS (2017) Biogas production from co-digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste and fruit and vegetable waste. Bioresour Technol 228:362–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Capson-Tojo G, Trably E, Rouez M et al (2017) Dry anaerobic digestion of food waste and cardboard at different substrate loads, solid contents and co-digestion proportions. Bioresour Technol 233:166–175. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    El-Mashad HM, Zhang R (2010) Biogas production from co-digestion of dairy manure and food waste. Bioresour Technol 101:4021–4028. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI) (2006) Fermentation of organic materials—characterization of the substrate, sampling, collection of material data, fermentation tests. VDI-Richtlinien 4630:92. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rice EW, Baird RB, Eaton AD (2017) Standard method for the examination of water and wastewater, 23rd edn. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment FederationGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    ISO 1871 (2009) Food and feed products—general guidelines for the determination of nitrogen by the Kjeldahl method. Int Organ Stand 2:7Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Drosg B (2013) Process monitoring in biogas plants. IEA Bioenergy, Task 37 Br:30. on 15 March 2017Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zhao C, Yan H, Liu Y et al (2016) Bio-energy conversion performance, biodegradability, and kinetic analysis of different fruit residues during discontinuous anaerobic digestion. Waste Manag 52:295–301. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nielfa A, Cano R, Vinot M et al (2015) Anaerobic digestion modeling of the main components of organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Process Saf Environ Prot 94:180–187. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Riber C, Petersen C, Christensen TH (2009) Chemical composition of material fractions in Danish household waste. Waste Manag 29:1251–1257. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hanc A, Novak P, Dvorak M et al (2011) Composition and parameters of household bio-waste in four seasons. Waste Manag 31:1450–1460. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boni MR, Sbaffoni S, Tuccinardi L (2013) The influence of slaughterhouse waste on fermentative H2 production from food waste: preliminary results. Waste Manag 33:1362–1371. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Das S, Bhattacharyya BK (2013) Municipal solid waste characteristics and management in Kolkata, India. In: 19th international conference on industrial engineering and engineering management: engineering economics management, pp 1399–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Campuzano R, González-Martínez S (2016) Characteristics of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste and methane production: a review. Waste Manag 54:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fonoll X, Astals S, Dosta J, Mata-Alvarez J (2016) Impact of paper and cardboard suppression on OFMSW anaerobic digestion. Waste Manag 56:100–105. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Forster-Carneiro T, Pérez M, Romero LI, Sales D (2007) Dry-thermophilic anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of the municipal solid waste: focusing on the inoculum sources. Bioresour Technol 98:3195–3203. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cecchi F, Mata-Alvarez J, Marcomini A, Pavan P (1991) First order and step-diffusional kinetic models in simulating the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of complex substrates. Bioresour Technol 36:261–269. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dong L, Zhenhong Y, Yongming S (2010) Semi-dry mesophilic anaerobic digestion of water sorted organic fraction of municipal solid waste (WS-OFMSW). Bioresour Technol 101:2722–2728. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wang X, Yang G, Feng Y et al (2012) Optimizing feeding composition and carbon-nitrogen ratios for improved methane yield during anaerobic co-digestion of dairy, chicken manure and wheat straw. Bioresour Technol 120:78–83. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Jiang Y, Heaven S, Banks CJ (2012) Strategies for stable anaerobic digestion of vegetable waste. Renew Energy 44:206–214. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Di Maria F, Sordi A, Cirulli G et al (2014) Co-treatment of fruit and vegetable waste in sludge digesters. An analysis of the relationship among bio-methane generation, process stability and digestate phytotoxicity. Waste Manag 34:1603–1608. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Safar KM, Bux MR, Aslam UM, Muhammad BK, Ahmed MS (2019) Analysis of the feasibility of fruit and vegetable wastes for methane yield using different substrate to inoculum ratios at Hyderabad, Sindh, Pakistan. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 21(2):365–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Xu F, Wang ZW, Tang L, Li Y (2014) A mass diffusion-based interpretation of the effect of total solids content on solid-state anaerobic digestion of cellulosic biomass. Bioresour Technol 167:178–185. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Di Maria F, Sordi A, Cirulli G, Micale C (2015) Amount of energy recoverable from an existing sludge digester with the co-digestion with fruit and vegetable waste at reduced retention time. Appl Energy 150:9–14. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Dhanalakshmi Sridevi V, Rema T, Srinivasan SV (2015) Studies on biogas production from vegetable market wastes in a two-phase anaerobic reactor. Clean Technol Environ Policy 17:1689–1697. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Khoshnevisan B, Tsapekos P, Alvarado-Morales M, Angelidaki I (2018) Process performance and modelling of anaerobic digestion using source-sorted organic household waste. Bioresour Technol 247:486–495. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ghanimeh S, Abou Khalil C, Ibrahim E (2018) Anaerobic digestion of food waste with aerobic post-treatment: effect of fruit and vegetable content. Waste Manag Res 36:965–974. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hills DJ (1979) Effects of carbon: nitrogen ratio on anaerobic digestion of dairy manure. Agric Wastes 1:267–278. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hartmann H, Ahring BK (2006) Strategies for the anaerobic digestion of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste: an overview. Water Sci Technol 53:7–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zhang Y, Xu L, Liang YG, Yang S, Liu XH (2019) Evaluation of semi-dry mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of corn stover and vegetable waste by a single-phase process. Waste Biomass Valor 10(5):1159–1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Alkanok G, Demirel B, Onay TT (2014) Determination of biogas generation potential as a renewable energy source from supermarket wastes. Waste Manag 34:134–140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kafle GK, Kim SH (2013) Anaerobic treatment of apple waste with swine manure for biogas production: batch and continuous operation. Appl Energy 103:61–72. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2019
corrected publication 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ahmad Reza Salehiyoun
    • 1
  • Mohammad Sharifi
    • 1
    Email author
  • Francesco Di Maria
    • 2
  • Hamid Zilouei
    • 3
  • Mortaza Aghbashlo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Agricultural Machinery Engineering, Faculty of Agricultural Engineering and Technology, College of Agriculture and Natural ResourcesUniversity of TehranKarajIran
  2. 2.Department of EngineeringUniversity of PerugiaPerugiaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Chemical EngineeringIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran

Personalised recommendations