Advertisement

Biogas generation from by-products of edible oil processing: a review of opportunities, challenges and strategies

  • Charles RashamaEmail author
  • Grace Ijoma
  • Tonderayi Matambo
Review Article
  • 3 Downloads

Abstract

Edible oil processing by-products can be used to produce a renewable fuel called biogas through anaerobic digestion technology. In this process, the physicochemical characteristics of the substrates dictate the process conditions, stability and microbial profile. All these, in turn, affect the overall digester design and operational efficiency. Most edible oil processing by-products tend to exhibit comparatively similar physicochemical properties, allowing for echo studies to be conducted on them. Naturally, residual fats and oils in edible oil by-products should induce high methane production potential. However, this does not occur without certain drawbacks. In this work, a review is conducted on biogas systems that use edible oil processing by-products as substrates for anaerobic digestion. Anaerobic digestion opportunities and challenges associated with these substrates are identified by analysis of factors that affect anaerobic digestion. The factors are scrutinised under different sub-headings, viz., substrate physicochemical composition, process conditions and parameters. Knowledge gaps are identified. Additionally, strategies for resolving some of the highlighted challenges while leveraging opportunities identified are discussed.

Keywords

Biogas Edible oil cake Pomace Microbial inhibition Anaerobic digestion Wastewater treatment 

Abbreviations

AD

Anaerobic digestion

TS

Total solids

RBDW

Refined, bleached, deodorised and winterised

VS

Volatile solids

COD

Chemical oxygen demand

BOD

Biological oxygen demand

BMP

Biomethane potential

n.d.

No data

OFC

Organic fraction composition

HRT

Hydraulic retention time

OLR

Organic loading rate

SRT

Solids retention time

VFA

Volatile fatty acids

POME

Palm oil mill effluent

OMWW

Olive mill waste water

OMSW

Olive mill solid waste

FA

Fatty acid

LCFA

Long-chain fatty acids

SCFA

Short-chain fatty acids

AnCod

Anaerobic codigestion

ORP

Oxidation/reduction potential

EGSB

Expanded granular suspended bed

LPM

Liquid poultry manure

FOG

Fats, oils and grease

UASB

Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket

IASB

Inverted anaerobic sludge blanket

UASFF

Upflow anaerobic sludge fixed film

CSTR

Continuously stirred tank reactor

TAN

Total ammonia nitrogen

TCOD

Total chemical oxygen demand

CW

Cheese whey

AMPTSII

Automatic methane potential testing system version II

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the University of South Africa (UNISA) through the Institute for the Development of Energy for African Sustainability (IDEAS). The authors are grateful to UNISA for the resources provided to enable this work to be conducted.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    International Finance Corporation (2015) Environmental, health and safety guidelines for vegetable oil production and processing. In: World Bank Gr. www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/topics_ext_content/ifc_external_corporate_site/sustainability-at-ifc/publications/publications_policy_ehs_vegetable_oil. Accessed 23 Aug 2018
  2. 2.
    Steffen Robertson & Kirsten Inc Consulting Engineers (1989) Waste-water management in the edible oil industry. PretoriaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McDermott G (1976) Liquid waste treatment in the vegetable oil processing industry - U.S practices. J Am Oil Chem Soc 53:446–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Muezzinoglu A, Azbar N, Bayram A et al (2004) A review of waste management options in olive oil production. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol 34:209–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    von Sperling M, Chernicharo CAL (2005) Biological wastewater treatment in warm climate regions, 1st edn. IWA Publishing, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Muzaffar AM, Hussain A, Verma C (2016) Design considerations and operational performance of anaerobic digester: a review. Cogent Eng 3:1–20Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Olisa YP, Kotingo KW (2014) Utilization of palm empty fruit bunch (PEFB) as solid fuel for steam boiler. Eur J Eng Technol 2:1–7Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Asthana AK (2009) Biomass as fuel in small boilers. 1–52Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Skenjana A, van Ryssen JBJ, van Niekerk WA (2006) In vitro digestibility and in situ degradability of avocado meal and macadamia waste products in sheep. South African J Anim Sci 36:78–81Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vânia de Sousa LA, Leilane Rocha BD, Joao Batista L et al (2016) Cottonseed oil in diets for growing broilers. Rev Bras Zootec 45:208–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rodrigues CEC, Navarro SLB (2016) Macadamia oil extraction methods and uses for the defatted meal byproduct. Trends Food Sci Technol 54:148–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Gleidson Giordano PC, Silva RVMM, Pires AJV et al (2016) Cottonseed cake in substitution of soybean meal in diets for finishing lambs. Small Rumin Res 137:183–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Woolf A, Wong M, Eyres L et al (2009) Avocado Oil. In: Moreau AR, Kamal-Eldin A (eds) Gourmet and health-promoting specialty oils. AOCS Press, Urbana-Illinos, pp 73–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ahmad A, Ghufran R, Zularisam AW (2011) Bioenergy from anaerobic degradation of lipids in palm oil mill effluent. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 10:353–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rodríguez L, Preston TR (1996) Use of effluent from low-cost plastic biodigesters as fertilizer for duck weed ponds. Livest Res Rural Dev 8:1–9Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thenabadu M (2015) Anaerobic digestion of food and market waste; waste characterisation, biomethane potential and bio reactor design: a case study in Sri Lanka. University of GavileGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seadi TA, Rutz D, Prassl H et al (2008) Biogas handbook. University of Southern Denmark Esbjerg, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Balasubramanian PR, Bai RK (1994) Biogas-plant effluent as an organic fertiliser in fish polyculture. Bioresour Technol 50:189–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Azbar N, Keskin T, Yuruyen A (2008) Enhancement of biogas production from olive mill effluent (OME) by co-digestion. Biomass Bioenergy 32:1195–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tamkin A, Martin J, Castano J et al (2015) Impact of organic loading rates on the performance of variable temperature biodigesters. Ecol Eng 78:87–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Arikan OA, Walter M, Lansing S (2015) Effect of temperature on methane production from field-scale anaerobic digesters treating dairy manure. Waste Manag 43:108–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Noike T, Lay J-J, Li Y-Y (1997) Influences of pH and moisture content on the methane production in high-solids sludge digestion. Water Res 31:1518–1524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ohimain EI, Izah SC (2016) A review of biogas production from palm oil mill effluents using different configurations of bioreactors. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70:242–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ng WJ, Maspolim Y, Zhou Y et al (2015) Comparison of single-stage and two-phase anaerobic sludge digestion systems—performance and microbial community dynamics. Chemosphere 140:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Oliveira F, Doelle K (2015) Anaerobic digestion of food waste to produce biogas: a comparison of bioreactors to increase methane content—a review. J Food Process Technol 06:8–10Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Champagne P, Li C, Anderson BC (2015) Enhanced biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of municipal wastewater treatment sludge and fat, oil and grease (FOG) by a modified two-stage thermophilic digester system with selected thermo-chemical pre-treatment. Renew Energy 83:474–482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chipasa KB (2001) Limits of physicochemical treatment of wastewater in the vegetable oil refining industry. Pol J Environ Stud 10:141–147Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Borja R, Banks CJ (1994) Kinetics of methane production from palm oil mill effluent in an immobilised cell bioreactor using saponite as support medium. Bioresour Technol 48:209–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Boubaker F, Cheikh Ridha B (2007) Anaerobic co-digestion of olive mill wastewater with olive mill solid waste in a tubular digester at mesophilic temperature. Bioresour Technol 98:769–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hrudey SE (1981) Activated sludge response to emulsified lipid loading. Water Res 15:361–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Boyer MJ (1984) Current pollution control practices in the United States. J Am Oil Chem Soc 61:297–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Cappello S, Denaro R, Yakinov M (2010) Vegetable oil wastes. In: Timmis K (ed) Handbook of hydrocarbon and lipid microbiology. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, Messina, pp 2394–2399Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Borja R, Banks CJ, Sánchez E (1996) Anaerobic treatment of palm oil mill effluent in a two-stage up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) system. J Biotechnol 45:125–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Pandey A, Ramachandran S, Singh SK et al (2007) Oil cakes and their biotechnological applications—a review. Bioresour Technol 98:2000–2009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kornaros M, Dareioti MA, Dokianakis SN et al (2009) Biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of agroindustrial wastewaters under mesophilic conditions in a two-stage process. Desalination 248:891–906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Omil F, Garrido JM, Arrojo B, Méndez R (2003) Anaerobic filter reactor performance for the treatment of complex dairy wastewater at industrial scale. Water Res 37:4099–4108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kovacs E, Roland W, Maroti G et al (2013) Biogas production from protein-rich biomass: fed-batch anaerobic fermentation of casein and of pig blood and associated changes in microbial community composition. PLoS One 8:1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cail RG, Barford JP (1985) Mesophilic semi-continuous anaerobic digestion of palm oil mill effluent. Biomass 7:287–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ng WJ, Chin KK, Wong KK (1987) Energy yields from anaerobic digestion of palm oil mill effluent. Biol Wastes 19:257–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Prabhudessai V, Ganguly A, Mutnuri S (2013) Biochemical methane potential of agro wastes. J Energy 2013:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ofoefule AU, Uzodinma EO, Eze JI et al (2008) Effect of some organic wastes on the biogas yield from carbonated soft drink sludge. Sci Res Essay 3:401–405Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Alves MM, Pereira MA, Sousa DZ et al (2009) Waste lipids to energy: how to optimize methane production from long-chain fatty acids (LCFA). Microb Biotechnol 2:538–550CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Antonopoulou G, Stamatelatou K, Lyberatos G (2010) Exploitation of rapeseed and sunflower residues for methane generation through anaerobic digestion: the effect of pretreatment. Chem Eng Trans 20:253–258Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Martínez EJ, Fierro J, Sánchez ME, Gómez X (2012) Anaerobic co-digestion of FOG and sewage sludge: study of the process by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 75:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Costagli G, Betti M (2015) Avocado oil extraction processes: method for cold-pressed high quality edible oil production versus traditional production. J Agric Eng XLVI:115–122Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lanfranchi M, Giannetto C, De Pascale A (2016) Economic analysis and energy valorization of by-products of the olive oil process: “Valdemone DOP” extra virgin olive oil. Renew Sust Energ Rev 57:1227–1236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Subramaniam V, Hashim Z (2018) Charting the water footprint for Malaysian crude palm oil. J Clean Prod 178:675–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Requejo-Tapia LC (1999) International trends in fresh avocado and avocado oil production and seasonal variation of fatty acids in New Zealand-grown cv. Massey University, HassGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ros E (2010) Health benefits of nut consumption. Nutrients 2:652–682CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Carvajal-Zarrabal O, Nolasco-Hipolito C, Aguilar-Uscanga MG et al (2014) Avocado oil supplementation modifies cardiovascular risk profile markers in a rat model of sucrose-induced metabolic changes. Dis Markers 2014:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Cmolik J, Pokorny J (2000) Physical refining of edible oils. Eur J Lipid Sci Technol 102:472–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Orive M, Cebrian M, Zufia J (2016) Techno-economic anaerobic co-digestion feasibility study for two-phase olive oil mill pomace and pig slurry. Renew Energy 97:532–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Borja R, Rincón B, Sánchez E et al (2008) Effect of the organic loading rate on the performance of anaerobic acidogenic fermentation of two-phase olive mill solid residue. Waste Manag 28:870–877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Aǧdaǧ ON (2011) Biodegradation of olive-mill pomace mixed with organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Biodegradation 22:931–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Borja R, Rincón B, González JM et al (2008) Influence of organic loading rate and hydraulic retention time on the performance, stability and microbial communities of one-stage anaerobic digestion of two-phase olive mill solid residue. Biochem Eng J 40:253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Kolesárová N, Hutňan M, Špalková V, Lazor M (2013) Anaerobic treatment of rapeseed meal. Chem Pap 67:1569–1576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    De Castro AM , Castilho L dos R, Freire DMG (2016) Characterization of babassu, canola, castor seed and sunflower residual cakes for use as raw materials for fermentation processes. Ind Crop Prod 83:140–148Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Atandia E, Rahmana S (2012) The impact of organic loading and canola meal oil content on dairy manure co-digestion for biogas production. Am J Biomass Bioenergy 1:1–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Azbar N, Yonar T (2004) Comparative evaluation of a laboratory and full-scale treatment alternatives for the vegetable oil refining industry wastewater (VORW). Process Biochem 39:869–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations Webpage www.fao.org/faostat/en visited on 8 January 2019
  61. 61.
    B.K B, M.P S (2005) Prospects of biodiesel production from vegetable oils in India. Renew Sust Energ Rev 9:363–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pichler M (2015) Legal dispossession: state strategies and selectivities in the expansion of Indonesian palm oil and agrofuel. Dev Chang 46:508–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Dewayanto N, Isha R, Ridzuan M (2014) Use of palm oil decanter cake as a new substrate for the production of bio-oil by vacuum pyrolysis. Energy Convers Manag 86:226–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Toscano P, Montemurro F (2012) Olive mill by-products management. In: Olive germplasm—the olive cultivation, table olive and olive oil industry in Italy. pp 1–384Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Woolf A, Wong M, Eyres L et al (2009) Avocado oil. In: Moreau AR, Kamal-Eldin A (eds) Gourmet and health-promoting specialty oils. AOCS Press, Urbana-Illinos, pp 73–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Li Y, Zhu J, Zheng Y, Xu F (2014) Solid-state anaerobic co-digestion of hay and soybean processing waste for biogas production. Bioresour Technol 154:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Yu H-Q, Hu Z-H, Hong T-Q, Gu G-W (2002) Performance of an anaerobic filter treating soybean processing wastewater with and without effluent recycle. Process Biochem 38:507–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ibrahim A, Cheah S, Ma AN et al (1984) Thermophilic anaerobic contact digestion of palm oil mill effluent. Water Sci Technol 17:155–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Fezzani B, Cheikh R Ben (2007) Thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of olive mill wastewater with olive mill solid wastes in a tubular digester. Chem Eng J 132:195–203Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Beccari M, Majone M, Papini MP, Torrisi L (2001) Enhancement of anaerobic treatability of olive oil mill effluents by addition of ca(OH)2 and bentonite without intermediate solid / liquid separation. Water Sci Technol 43:275–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    González-González A, Cuadros F (2015) Effect of aerobic pretreatment on anaerobic digestion of olive mill wastewater (OMWW): an ecoefficient treatment. Food Bioprod Process 95:339–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Jekayinfa SO, Scholz V (2013) Laboratory scale preparation of biogas from cassava tubers, cassava peels, and palm kernel oil residues. Energy Sources, Part A Recover Util Environ Eff 35:2022–2032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Razuan R, Chen Q, Zhang X et al (2010) Pyrolysis and combustion of oil palm stone and palm kernel cake in fixed-bed reactors. Bioresour Technol 101:4622–4629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Miranda T, Arranz JI, Montero I et al (2012) Characterization and combustion of olive pomace and forest residue pellets. Fuel Process Technol 103:91–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Özveren U, Özdoğan ZS (2013) Investigation of the slow pyrolysis kinetics of olive oil pomace using thermo-gravimetric analysis coupled with mass spectrometry. Biomass Bioenergy 58:168–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Raposo F, Borja R, Rincon B, Jimenez AM (2008) Assessment of process control parameters in the biochemical methane potential of sunflower oil cake. Biomass Bioenergy 32:1235–1244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Araujo VKA, De Almeida S, De Oliveira SB et al (2017) Anaerobic digestion using residue of soybean processing: biogas production and its potential to generate energy. In: 18th International Scientific Conference on Electric Power Engineering, EPE 2017. IEEE, pp 2–5Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tay T, Ucar S, Karagöz S (2009) Preparation and characterization of activated carbon from waste biomass. J Hazard Mater 165:481–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Demirer GN, Isci A (2007) Biogas production potential from cotton wastes. Renew Energy 32:750–757CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Pütün E, Uzun BB, Pütün AE (2006) Fixed-bed catalytic pyrolysis of cotton-seed cake: effects of pyrolysis temperature, natural zeolite content and sweeping gas flow rate. Bioresour Technol 97:701–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Agrawalla A, Kumar S, Singh RK (2011) Pyrolysis of groundnut de-oiled cake and characterization of the liquid product. Bioresour Technol 102:10711–10716CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Biogas B (2018) Out of biogas from different types of substrates. In: Inf. Sheet. http://www.biteco-energy.com/biogas-yield/. Accessed 5 Jun 2018
  83. 83.
    Kim H (2003) The optimisation of food waste addition as a co-substrate in anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge. Waste Manag Res 21:515–526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Carvalho F, Prazeres AR, Rivas J (2013) Cheese whey wastewater: characterization and treatment. Sci Total Environ 445–446:385–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Costa JC, Gonçalves PR, Nobre A, Alves MM (2012) Biomethanation potential of macroalgae Ulva spp. and Gracilaria spp. and in co-digestion with waste activated sludge. Bioresour Technol 114:320–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Freitas TB, Felix TL, Pedreira MS et al (2017) Effects of increasing palm kernel cake inclusion in supplements fed to grazing lambs on growth performance, carcass characteristics, and fatty acid profile. Anim Feed Sci Technol 226:71–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Bezerra LS, Barbosa AM, Carvalho GGP et al (2016) Meat quality of lambs fed diets with peanut cake. Meat Sci 121:88–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Balogun AM, Fagbenro OA (1995) Use of macadamia presscake as a protein feedstuff in practical diets for tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus (L.). Acquacult Res 26:371–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jitngarmkusol S, Tananuwong K, Hongsuwankul J (2008) Chemical compositions, functional properties, and microstructure of defatted macadamia flours. Food Chem 110:23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Rotta EM, De Morais DR, Batoqui P et al (2016) Use of avocado peel (Persea americana) in tea formulation: a functional product containing phenolic compounds with antioxidant activity. Acta Sci Technol 38:23–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Olaeta JA, Schwartz M, Undurraga P, Contreras S (2007) Use of hass avocado (Persea americana Mill.) seed as a processed product. In: Proceedings VI World Avocado Congress. pp 1–8Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bouallagui H, Ben Cheikh R, Marouani L, Hamdi M (2003) Mesophilic biogas production from fruit and vegetable waste in a tubular digester. Bioresour Technol 86:85–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Abbassi-Guendouz A, Brockmann D, Trably E et al (2012) Total solids content drives high solid anaerobic digestion via mass transfer limitation. Bioresour Technol 111:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    de Mes TZD Stams A.J.M, Reith JH, Zeeman G (2003). Industrial scale garage-type dry fermentation of municipal solid waste to biogas. In: Reith JH, Wijfells RH Barten H (eds). Biomethane and biohydrogen—status and perspectives of biological methane and hydrogen production. Dutch Biological Hydrogen Foundation.The Hague. pp 58–102Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Jiang C, Qi R, Hao L et al (2018) Monitoring foaming potential in anaerobic digesters. Waste Manag 75:280–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Hernández-Berriel MC, Márquez-Benavides L, González-Pérez DJ, Buenrostro-Delgado O (2008) The effect of moisture regimes on the anaerobic degradation of municipal solid waste from Metepec (México). Waste Manag 28:S14–S20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Murtagh JE (1999) Molasses as a feedstock for alcohol production. In: Jacques K, Lyons TP, Kessal D (eds) The alcohol textbook, 3rd edn. Nottingham University Press, Nottingham, pp 89–96Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    Tekin AR, Dalgiç AC (2000) Biogas production from olive pomace. Resour Conserv Recycl 30:301–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Blackall LL, Harbers AE, Hayward AC, Greenfield PF (1991) Activated sludge foams: effects of environmental variables on organism growth and foam formation. Environ Technol 12:241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Bouallagui H, Haouari O, Touhami Y et al (2004) Effect of temperature on the performance of an anaerobic tubular reactor treating fruit and vegetable waste. Process Biochem 39:2143–2148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Ganidi N, Tyrrel S, Cartmell E (2009) Anaerobic digestion foaming causes – a review. Bioresour Technol 100:5546–5554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Buswell AM, Mueller HF (1952) Mechanism of methane fermentation. Ind Eng Chem 44:550–552CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Achinas S, Euverink GJW (2016) Theoretical analysis of biogas potential prediction from agricultural waste. Resour Technol 2:143–147Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Raposo F, Fernández-Cegrí V, de la Rubia MA et al (2011) Biochemical methane potential (BMP) of solid organic substrates: evaluation of anaerobic biodegradability using data from an international interlaboratory study. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 86:1088–1098CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Yejian Z, Yan L, Chi L et al (2008) Startup and operation of anaerobic EGSB reactor treating palm oil mill effluent. J Environ Sci 20:658–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Gonçalves MR, Costa JC, Marques IP, Alves MM (2012) Strategies for lipids and phenolics degradation in the anaerobic treatment of olive mill wastewater. Water Res 46:1684–1692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Zheng Y, Li Y (2018) Physicochemical and functional properties of coconut (Cocos nucifera L) cake dietary fibres: effects of cellulase hydrolysis, acid treatment and particle size distribution. Food Chem 257:135–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Yahaya M, Takahashi J, Matsuoka S, Kibon A (1999) Effect of supplementary feeding of cotton seed cake on feed intake, water consumption and work output of work bulls in Borno state, Nigeria. Anim Feed Sci Technol 79:137–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Chrenková M, Čerešňáková Z, Weisbjerg MR et al (2014) Characterization of proteins in feeds according to the CNCPS and comparison to in situ parameters. Czech J Anim Sci 59:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Lee DH, Behera SK, Kim JW, Park H-S (2009) Methane production potential of leachate generated from Korean food waste recycling facilities: a lab-scale study. Waste Manag 29:876–882CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Guermoud N, Ouadjnia F, Abdelmalek F et al (2009) Municipal solid waste in Mostaganem city (Western Algeria). Waste Manag 29:896–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Pavlostathis S, Giraldo-Gomez E (1991) Kinetics of anaerobic treatment. Water Sci Technol 24:35–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Appels L, Baeyens J, Degrève J, Dewil R (2008) Principles and potential of the anaerobic digestion of waste-activated sludge. Prog Energy Combust Sci 34:755–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Kwietniewska E, Tys J (2014) Process characteristics, inhibition factors and methane yields of anaerobic digestion process, with particular focus on microalgal biomass fermentation. Renew Sust Energ Rev 34:491–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Rajeshwari KV, Balakrishnan M, Kansal A et al (2000) State-of-the-art of anaerobic digestion technology for industrial wastewater treatment. Renew Sust Energ Rev 4:135–156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Steinbüchel A (2005) Non-biodegradable biopolymers from renewable resources: perspectives and impacts. Curr Opin Biotechnol 16:607–613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Aggett PJ (2018) Population reference intakes and micronutrient bioavailability: a European perspective. Am J Clin Nutr 91:1433S–1437SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Grace I (2016) Enzyme production and activities of lignocellulolytic fungi cultivated on agricultural residues. University of South AfricaGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Beccari M, Carucci G, Majone M, Torrisi L (1999) Role of lipids and phenolic compounds in the anaerobic treatment of olive oil mill effluents. Environ Technol 20:105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Hwu C (1997) Enhancing anaerobic treatment of wastewaters containing oleic acid. Wageningen Agricultural UniversityGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Novak JT, Carlson DA (1970) The kinetics of anaerobic long chain fatty acid degradation. Water Pollut Control Fed J 42:1932–1943Google Scholar
  122. 122.
    Nunn WD (1986) A molecular view of fatty acid catabolism in Escherichia coli. Microbiol Rev 50:179–192Google Scholar
  123. 123.
    Wang Y, Zhang Y, Wang J, Meng L (2009) Effects of volatile fatty acid concentrations on methane yield and methanogenic bacteria. Biomass Bioenergy 33:848–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Rasit N, Idris A, Harun R, Wan AB, Karim Ghani WA (2015) Effects of lipid inhibition on biogas production of anaerobic digestion from oily effluents and sludges: an overview. Renew Sust Energ Rev 45:351–358CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Lalman JA, Bagley DM (2001) Anaerobic degradation and methanogenic inhibitory effects of oleic and stearic acids. Water Res 35:2975–2983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Ma J, Zhao Q-B, Laurens LLM et al (2015) Mechanism, kinetics and microbiology of inhibition caused by long-chain fatty acids in anaerobic digestion of algal biomass. Biotechnol Biofuels 8:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Ziels RM, Karlsson A, Beck D et al (2016) Microbial community adaptation influences long-chain fatty acid conversion during anaerobic codigestion of fats, oils, and grease with municipal sludge. Water Res 103:372–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Okudoh V, Trois C, Workneh T, Schmidt S (2014) The potential of cassava biomass and applicable technologies for sustainable biogas production in South Africa: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 39:1035–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Kumar KV, Sridevi V, Rani K et al (2013) A review on production of biogas, fundamentals, applications & its recent enhancing techniques. Chem Eng 57:14073–14079Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Battista F, Fino D, Ruggeri B (2014) Polyphenols concentration’s effect on the biogas production by wastes derived from olive oil production. Chem Eng Trans 38:373–378Google Scholar
  131. 131.
    Tsagaraki E, Lazarides HN, Petrotos KB (2007) Olive mill wastewater treatment. In: Oreopoulou V, Russ W (eds) Utilization of by-products and treatment of waste in the food industry, eds. Springer, Boston, pp 133–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    Chantho P, Musikavong C, Suttinun O (2016) Removal of phenolic compounds from palm oil mill effluent by thermophilic Bacillus thermoleovorans strain A2 and their effect on anaerobic digestion. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 115:293–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Satyanarayan S, Ramakant S (2010) Biogas production enhancement by soya sludge amendment in cattle dung digesters. Biomass Bioenergy 34:1278–1282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Khoufi S, Louhichi A, Sayadi S (2015) Optimization of anaerobic co-digestion of olive mill wastewater and liquid poultry manure in batch condition and semi-continuous jet-loop reactor. Bioresour Technol 182:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Beccari M, Bonemazzi F, Majone M, Riccardi C (1996) Interaction between acidogenesis and methanogenesis in the anaerobic treatment of olive oil mill effluents. Water Res 30:183–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    Chen SF, Yakunin AF, Kuznetsova E, Busso D, Pufan R, Proudfoot M, Kim R, Kim SH (2004) Structural and functional characterization of a novel phosphodiesterase from Methanococcus jannaschii. J Biol Chem 279:31854–31862CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Diekert G, Konheiser U, Piechulla K, Thauer RK (1981) Nickel requirement and factor F430 content of methanogenic bacteria. J Bacteriol 148:459–464Google Scholar
  138. 138.
    Zhang Y, Zhang Z, Suzuki K, Maekawa T (2003) Uptake and mass balance of trace metals for methane producing bacteria. Biomass Bioenergy 25:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Abdelsalam E, Samer M, Hassan HE et al (2015) Effect of CoCl2, NiCl2 AND FeCl3 additives on biogas and methane production. Misr J Agric Eng 32:843–862Google Scholar
  140. 140.
    Roussel J, Fermoso FG, Collins G et al (2018) Trace element supplementation as a management tool for anaerobic digester operation: benefits and risks In: eBook. http://wio.iwaponline.com/lookup/doi/10.2166/9781780409429. Accessed 26 Aug 2018
  141. 141.
    Thanh PM, Ketheesan B, Yan Z, Stuckey D (2016) Trace metal speciation and bioavailability in anaerobic digestion: a review. Biotechnol Adv 34:122–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Chen JL, Ortiz R, Steele TWJ, Stuckey DC (2014) Toxicants inhibiting anaerobic digestion: a review. Biotechnol Adv 32:1523–1534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Romero-Güiza MS, Vila J, Mata-Alvarez J et al (2016) The role of additives on anaerobic digestion: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 58:1486–1499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Mata-Alvarez J, Dosta J, Romero-Güiza MS et al (2014) A critical review on anaerobic co-digestion achievements between 2010 and 2013. Renew Sust Energ Rev 36:412–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Meyer-Kohlstock D, Haupt T, Heldt E et al (2016) Biochar as additive in biogas-production from bio-waste. Energies 9Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Wilkie A, Goto M, Bordeaux FM, Smith PH (1986) Enhancement of anaerobic methanogenesis from napiergrass by addition of micronutrients. Biomass 11:135–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Gopinathan C, Prajapati S, Rohira H (2015) Supplementing pineapple pulp waste with urea and metal ions enhances biogas production. IOSR J Environ Sci Ver I 9:2319–2399Google Scholar
  148. 148.
    Molaey R, Bayrakdar A, Sürmeli RÖ, Çalli B (2018) Anaerobic digestion of chicken manure: mitigating process inhibition at high ammonia concentrations by selenium supplementation. Biomass Bioenergy 108:439–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Nordell E, Hansson AB, Karlsson M (2013) Zeolites relieve inhibitory stress from high concentrations of long chain fatty acids. Waste Manag 33:2659–2663CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Borja R, Rincón B, Raposo F et al (2004) Mesophilic anaerobic digestion in a fluidised-bed reactor of wastewater from the production of protein isolates from chickpea flour. Process Biochem 39:1913–1921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Borja R, Bank C (1995) Comparison of an anaerobic filter and an anaerobic fluidized bed reactor treating palm oil mill effluent. Process Biochem 30:511–521CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  152. 152.
    Carballa M, Regueiro L, Lema JM (2015) Microbial management of anaerobic digestion: exploiting the microbiome-functionality nexus. Curr Opin Biotechnol 33:103–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Tale VP, Maki JS, Zitomer DH (2015) Bioaugmentation of overloaded anaerobic digesters restores function and archaeal community. Water Res 70:138–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Schauer-Gimenez AE, Zitomer DH, Maki JS, Struble CA (2010) Bioaugmentation for improved recovery of anaerobic digesters after toxicant exposure. Water Res 44:3555–3564CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Gollakota KG, Meher KK (1988) Effect of particle size, temperature, loading rate and stirring on biogas production from castor cake (oil expelled). Biol Wastes 24:243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Dhaked RK, Singh P, Singh L (2010) Biomethanation under psychrophilic conditions. Waste Manag 30:2490–2496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    McKeown RM, Hughes D, Collins G et al (2012) Low-temperature anaerobic digestion for wastewater treatment. Curr Opin Biotechnol 23:444–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Petropoulos E, Dolfing J, Davenport RJ et al (2017) Developing cold-adapted biomass for the anaerobic treatment of domestic wastewater at low temperatures (4, 8 and 15 °C) with inocula from cold environments. Water Res 112:100–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  159. 159.
    Hwu C-S, Van Lier JB, Lettinga G (1998) Physicochemical and biological performance of expanded granular sludge bed reactors treating long-chain fatty acids. Process Biochem 33:75–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  160. 160.
    Hwu C-S, Lettinga G (1997) Acute toxicity of oleate to acetate-utilizing methanogens in mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic sludges. Enzym Microb Technol 21:297–301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Prasad RD (2012) Empirical study on factors affecting biogas production. ISRN Renew Energy 2012:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  162. 162.
    Oleskowicz-Popiel P, Jankowska E, Chwiałkowska J, Stodolny M (2015) Effect of pH and retention time on volatile fatty acids production during mixed culture fermentation. Bioresour Technol 190:274–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Horiuchi JI, Shimizu T, Tada K et al (2002) Selective production of organic acids in anaerobic acid reactor by pH control. Bioresour Technol 82:209–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Hwang MH, Jang NJ, Hyun SH, Kim IS (2004) Anaerobic bio-hydrogen production from ethanol fermentation: the role of pH. J Biotechnol 111:297–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  165. 165.
    Wu Y, Wang C, Zheng M et al (2017) Effect of pH on ethanol-type acidogenic fermentation of fruit and vegetable waste. Waste Manag 60:158–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Kadier A, Kalil MS, Chandrasekhar K et al (2018) Surpassing the current limitations of high purity H2 production in microbial electrolysis cell (MECs): strategies for inhibiting growth of methanogens. Bioelectrochemistry 119:211–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Buekens A (2005) Energy recovery from residual waste by means of anaerobic digestion technologies. In: The future of residual waste management in Europe. pp 1–16Google Scholar
  168. 168.
    Abebe M (2017) Characterisation peal of fruit and leaf of vegetable waste with cow dung for maximizing the biogas yield. Int J Energy Power Eng 6:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    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 120:78–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Sung S, Liu T (2003) Ammonia inhibition on thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Chemosphere 53:43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Massé DI, Rajagopal R, Singh G (2013) A critical review on inhibition of anaerobic digestion process by excess ammonia. Bioresour Technol 143:632–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Van Haandel AC (1994) Influence of the digested COD concentration of the alkalinity requirements in anaerobic digesters. Water Sci Technol 30:23–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    McCarty PL, McKinney RE (1961) Salt toxicity in anaerobic digestion. Water Pollut Control Fed J 33:399–415Google Scholar
  174. 174.
    Lane AG (1984) Laboratory scale anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable solid waste. Biomass 5:245–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Martin, A.Borja, R.Garcia, I.Fiestas, J.A (1991) Kinetics of methane production from olive mill wastewater. Process Biochem 26: 101–107Google Scholar
  176. 176.
    Martín A, Borja R, Banks CJ (1994) Kinetic model for substrate utilization and methane production during the anaerobic digestion of olive mill wastewater and condensation water waste. J Chem Technol 60:7–16Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Zhang TC, Noike T (1994) Influence of retention time on reactor performance and bacterial trophic populations in anaerobic digestion processes. Water Res 28:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  178. 178.
    Ziganshin AM, Schmidt T, Lv Z et al (2016) Reduction of the hydraulic retention time at constant high organic loading rate to reach the microbial limits of anaerobic digestion in various reactor systems. Bioresour Technol 217:62–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Sánchez E, Borja R, Travieso L et al (2005) Effect of organic loading rate on the stability, operational parameters and performance of a secondary upflow anaerobic sludge bed reactor treating piggery waste. Bioresour Technol 96:335–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  180. 180.
    Adekunle KF, Okolie JA (2015) A review of biochemical process of anaerobic digestion. Adv Biosci Biotechnol 6:205–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Suhartini S (2014) The anaerobic digestion of sugar beet pulp. SouthamptonGoogle Scholar
  182. 182.
    Hwu C, Van Beek B, Van Lier JB, Lettinga G (1997) Thermophilic high-rate anaerobic treatment of wastewater containing long-chain fatty acids: effect of washed out biomass recirculation. Biotechnol Lett 19:453–456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. 183.
    Wirth B, Reza T, Mumme J (2015) Influence of digestion temperature and organic loading rate on the continuous anaerobic treatment of process liquor from hydrothermal carbonization of sewage sludge. Bioresour Technol 198:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. 184.
    Xie T, Xie S, Sivakumar M, Nghiem LD (2017) Relationship between the synergistic/antagonistic effect of anaerobic co-digestion and organic loading. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad:1–7Google Scholar
  185. 185.
    Wheatley A, Fisher M, Grobicki W (1997) Applications of anaerobic digestion for the treatment of industrial wastewaters in Europe. Water Environ J February:39–46Google Scholar
  186. 186.
    Szewczyk KW, Bukowski J (2008) Modelling of a batch anaerobic digestion. Pol J Chem Technol 10:45–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. 187.
    Ferguson RMW, Coulon F, Villa R (2016) Organic loading rate: a promising microbial management tool in anaerobic digestion. Water Res 100:348–356CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. 188.
    Gómez X, Cuetos MJ, Cara J et al (2006) Anaerobic co-digestion of primary sludge and the fruit and vegetable fraction of the municipal solid wastes. Conditions for mixing and evaluation of the organic loading rate. Renew Energy 31:2017–2024CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Choong YY, Chou KW, Norli I (2018) Strategies for improving biogas production of palm oil mill effluent (POME) anaerobic digestion: a critical review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 82:2993–3006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Raskin L, Stroot PG, McMahon KD, Mackie RI (2001) Anaerobic codigestion of municipal solid waste and biosolids under various mixing conditions—I. Digester performance. Water Res 35:1804–1816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Ward AJ, Hobbs PJ, Holliman PJ, Jones DL (2008) Optimisation of the anaerobic digestion of agricultural resources. Bioresour Technol 99:7928–7940CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Tian L, Zou D, Yuan H et al (2015) Identifying proper agitation interval to prevent floating layers formation of corn stover and improve biogas production in anaerobic digestion. Bioresour Technol 186:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  193. 193.
    Battista F, Fino D, Mancini G, Ruggeri B (2016) Mixing in digesters used to treat high viscosity substrates: the case of olive oil production wastes. J Environ Chem Eng 4:915–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  194. 194.
    Long JH, Aziz TN, Reyes FLDL, Ducoste JJ (2012) Anaerobic codigestion of fat, oil, and grease (FOG): a review of gas production and process limitations. Process Saf Environ Prot 90:231–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  195. 195.
    Rinzema A, Alphenaar A, Lettinga G (1993) Anaerobic digestion of long-chain fatty acids in UASB and expanded granular sludge bed reactors. Process Biochem 28:527–537CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  196. 196.
    Chen Y, Cheng JJ, Creamer KS (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour Technol 99:4044–4064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  197. 197.
    Arthur Mensah K, Forster CF (2003) An examination of the effects of detergents on anaerobic digestion. Bioresour Technol 90:133–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  198. 198.
    Yenigün O, Demirel B (2013) Ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion: a review. Process Biochem 48:901–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  199. 199.
    Lin L, Xu F, Ge X, Li Y (2018) Improving the sustainability of organic waste management practices in the food-energy-water nexus: a comparative review of anaerobic digestion and composting. Renew Sust Energ Rev 89:151–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  200. 200.
    Palatsi J, Illa J, Prenafeta-Boldú FX et al (2010) Long-chain fatty acids inhibition and adaptation process in anaerobic thermophilic digestion: batch tests, microbial community structure and mathematical modelling. Bioresour Technol 101:2243–2251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  201. 201.
    Palatsi J, Laureni M, Andrés MV et al (2009) Strategies for recovering inhibition caused by long chain fatty acids on anaerobic thermophilic biogas reactors. Bioresour Technol 100:4588–4596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  202. 202.
    Palatsi J, Zonta Ž, Alves MM, Flotats X (2013) Modelling inhibitory effects of long chain fatty acids in the anaerobic digestion process. Water Res 47:1369–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  203. 203.
    Sun Y, Wang D, Yan J et al (2014) Effects of lipid concentration on anaerobic co-digestion of municipal biomass wastes. Waste Manag 34:1025–1034CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  204. 204.
    Ziels RM, Beck DAC, Stensel HD (2017) Long-chain fatty acid feeding frequency in anaerobic codigestion impacts syntrophic community structure and biokinetics. Water Res 117:218–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  205. 205.
    Hamdi M, Garcia J, Ellouz R (1992) Intergrated biological process for olive mill wastewater treatment. Bioprocess Eng 8:79–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  206. 206.
    Gell K, Van Groenigen J, Cayuela ML (2011) Residues of bioenergy production chains as soil amendments: immediate and temporal phytotoxicity. J Hazard Mater 186:2017–2025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  207. 207.
    Ganidi N, Tyrrel S, Cartmell E (2009) Anaerobic digestion foaming causes - a review. Bioresour Technol 100:5546–5554CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  208. 208.
    Kougias PG, Boe K, Angelidaki I (2015) Solutions for foaming problems in biogas reactors using natural oils or fatty acids as defoamers. Energy Fuel 29:4046–4051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  209. 209.
    Kougias PG, Boe K, O-Thong S et al (2014) Anaerobic digestion foaming in full-scale biogas plants: a survey on causes and solutions. Water Sci Technol 69:889–895CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  210. 210.
    Kougias PG, Boe K, Angelidaki I (2013) Effect of organic loading rate and feedstock composition on foaming in manure-based biogas reactors. Bioresour Technol 144:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  211. 211.
    Krishma PR, Kent CC, Wendell KH (1997) Causes and effects of foaming in anaerobic sludge digesters. Water Sci Technol 36:463–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  212. 212.
    Westland DA, Hagland E, Rothman M (1998) Foaming in anaerobic digesters caused by Microthrix parvicella. Water Sci Technol 37:51–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  213. 213.
    Lienen T, Kleyböcker A, Verstraete W, Würdemann H (2014) Foam formation in a downstream digester of a cascade running full-scale biogas plant: influence of fat, oil and grease addition and abundance of the filamentous bacterium Microthrix parvicella. Bioresour Technol 153:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  214. 214.
    Rossetti S, Tomei MC, Nielsen PH, Tandoi V (2005) “Microthrix parvicella”, a filamentous bacterium causing bulking and foaming in activated sludge systems: a review of current knowledge. FEMS Microbiol Rev 29:49–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  215. 215.
    Nielsen PH, Roslev P, Dueholm TE, Nielsen JL (2002) Microthrix parvicella, a specialized lipid consumer in anaerobic-aerobic activated sludge plants. Water Sci Technol 46:73–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  216. 216.
    Mamais D, Nikitopoulos G, Andronikou E et al (2006) Influence of the presence of long chain fatty acids (LCFAs) in the sewage on the growth of M.Parvicella in activated sludge wastewater treatment plants. Glob NEST J 8:82–88Google Scholar
  217. 217.
    Ghosh R, Bhattacherjee S (2013) A review study on anaerobic digesters with an insight to biogas production. Int J Eng Sci Invent 2:8–17Google Scholar
  218. 218.
    Elangovan C, Sekar ASS (2012) Application of upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor process for the treatment of dairy wastewater—a review. Nat Environ Pollut Technol 11:409–414Google Scholar
  219. 219.
    Qian MY et al (2016) Industrial scale garage-type dry fermentation of municipal solid waste to biogas. Bioresour Technol 217:82–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  220. 220.
    Poh PE, Chong MF (2009) Development of anaerobic digestion methods for palm oil mill effluent (POME) treatment. Bioresour Technol 100:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  221. 221.
    Ghosh S, Ombregt JP, Pipyn P (1985) Methane production from industrial wastes by two-phase anaerobic digestion. Water Res 19:1083–1088CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  222. 222.
    Weiland P (1993) One and two step anaerobic digestion of agroindustrial residues. Water Sci Technol 27:145–151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  223. 223.
    Zhu G-F, Li J-Z, Wu P et al (2008) The performance and phase separated characteristics of an anaerobic baffled reactor treating soybean protein processing wastewater. Bioresour Technol 99:8027–8033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  224. 224.
    Jeyaseelan S, Matsuo T (1995) Effects of phase separation in anaerobic digestion on different substrates. Water Sci Technol 31:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  225. 225.
    Madura RL, Walling DA, Farrell JB, Bhattacharya SK (1996) Volatile solids reduction in two phase and conventional anaerobic sludge digestion. Water Res 30:1041–1048CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  226. 226.
    Ghosh S (1987) Improved sludge gasification by two-phase anaerobic digestion. J Environ Eng 113:1265–1288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  227. 227.
    Turovskiy IS, Mathai PK (2006) Wastewater sludge processing. Wiley-Interscience, New JerseyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  228. 228.
    Braber K, Novem BV (1995) Anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste: a modern waste disposal option on the verge of breakthrough. Biomass Bioenergy 9:365–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for the Development of Energy for African Sustainability (IDEAS)University of South Africa’s College of Science, Engineering and TechnologyFloridaSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations