Waste and Biomass Valorization

, Volume 7, Issue 4, pp 799–805 | Cite as

Energy Recovery and Treatment of Winery Wastes by a Compact Anaerobic Digester

  • Nikolaidou Eleutheria
  • Iossifidou Maria
  • Tataki Vasiliki
  • Eftaxias Alexandros
  • Aivasidis Alexandros
  • Diamantis VasileiosEmail author
Original Paper


The objective of this study was to examine the process of aqueous extraction of organics and phenolics from winery wastes (grape marc and wine lees) and the anaerobic digestion of the extracts using a pilot-scale anaerobic digester. Samples of grape marc and wine lees were extracted with tap water under controlled laboratory conditions at different solid/liquid ratios 1:3, 1:5 and 1:10 (w/w). The extracts were characterized in terms of organic matter composition, and phenolic content. Following this, a 3 m3 stirred tank digester, inoculated with anaerobic granular sludge, was installed and operated at the premises of a winery using original grape marc and wine lees extracts. The recovered extracts were characterized by a high chemical oxygen demand (COD = 20–30 kg m3) and low concentration of phenolics (<100 mg L−1). They displayed high anaerobic degradability with a biogas yield of 0.50 m3 kg−1 COD, a methane content of 72 % and an effluent COD concentration between 0.6 and 1.6 g L−1. Based on a preliminary design and cost analysis it was demonstrated that for a medium sized winery (1000 tn grapes per season) a 40 m3 compact anaerobic digester suffices, while the payback period is around 6–7 years. Aqueous extraction of organics from winery wastes enables the recovery of readily degradable COD with low phenolic content. Generation of biogas from the recovered extracts was highly efficient using a compact anaerobic digester.


Winery wastes Grape marc extract Anaerobic digestion Biogas Wine lees 



The project was co-financed by the European Union (European Regional Development Fund—ERDF) and Greek national funds through the Operational Program “Competitiveness and Entrepreneurship” of the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF)—National Action—Support of New Enterprises and SMEs (Contract Nr. 3NEW_B_2012). “Stelios Kechris domain” contribution to the implementation of the project was more than significant, providing the study with wastewater streams and additional equipment needed.


  1. 1.
    Bettini, O.: EU-27 wine annual report and statistics 2015. USDA foreign agricultural service, GAIN Report IT1512. (2015) (
  2. 2.
    Wadhwa, M., Bakshi, M.P.S.: Utilization of fruit and vegetable wastes as livestock feed and as substrates for generation of other value-added products. Food and Agriculture Organization, RAP Publication 2013/04 ( (2013)
  3. 3.
    Oliveira, M., Duarte, E.: Integrated approach to winery waste: waste generation and data consolidation. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng 10, 168–176 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barcia, M.T., Pertuzatti, P.B., Gómez-Alonso, S., Godoy, H.T., HermosínGutiérrez, I.: Phenolic composition of grape and winemaking by-products of Brazilian hybrid cultivars BRS Violeta and BRS Lorena. Food Chem. 159, 95–105 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Keyser, M., Witthuhn, R.C., Witthuhn, L., Ronquest, C., Britz, T.J.: Treatment of winery effluent with upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB)- granular sludge enriched with Enterobacter sakazaki. Biotechnol. Lett. 25, 1893–1898 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Corbin, K., Hsieh, Y.S.Y., Betts, N.S., Byrt, C.S., Henderson, M., Stork, J., DeBolt, S., Fincher, G.B., Burton, R.A.: Grape marc as a source of carbohydrates for bioethanol: chemical composition, pre-treatment and saccharification. Bioresour. Technol. 193, 76–83 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deng, Q., Penner, M.H., Zhao, Y.: Chemical composition of dietary fiber and polyphenols of five different varieties of wine grape pomace skins. Food Res. Int. 44, 2712–2720 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bustamante, M.A., Moral, R., Paredes, C., Pιrez-Espinosa, A., Moreno-Caselles, J., Pιrez-Murcia, M.D.: Agrochemical characterization of the solid byproducts and residues from the winery and distillery industry. Waste Manage. 28, 372–380 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pérez-Serradilla, J.A., Luque de Castro, M.D.: Role of lees in wine production: a review. Food Chem. 111, 447–456 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malandra, L., Wolfaardt, G., Zietsman, A., Viljoen-Bloom, M.: Microbiology of a biological contactor for winery wastewater treatment. Water Res. 37, 4125–4134 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shepherd, H.L., Grismer, M.E., Tchobanoglous, G.: Treatment of high-strength winery wastewater using a subsurface-flow constructed wetland. Water Environ. Res. 73, 394–403 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rivas, B., Torrado, A., Moldes, A.B., Domνnguez, J.M.: Tartaric acid recovery from distilled lees and use of the residual solid as an economic nutrient for Lactobacillus. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54, 7904–7911 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Salgado, J.M., Rodrνguez, N., Cortιs, S., Domνnguez, J.M.: Improving downstream processes to recover tartaric acid, tartrate and nutrients from vinasses and formulation of inexpensive fermentative broths for xylitol production. J. Sci. Food Agric. 90, 2168–2177 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ferrer, J., Paez, G., Marmol, Z., Ramones, E., Chandler, C., Marin, M., Ferrer, A.: Agronomic use of biotechnologically processed grape wastes. Biores. Technol. 76, 39–44 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ioannou, L.A., Puma, G.L., Fatta-Kassinos, D.: Treatment of winery wastewater by physicochemical, biological and advanced processes: a review. J. Hazard. Mater. 286, 343–368 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Basset, N., López-Palau, S., Dosta, J., Mata-Álvarez, J.: Comparison of aerobic granulation and anaerobic membrane bioreactor technologies for winery wastewater treatment. Water Sci. Technol. 69, 320–327 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chai, S., Guo, J., Chai, Y., Cai, J., Gao, L.: Anaerobic treatment of winery wastewater in moving bed biofilm reactors. Desalin. Water Treat. 52, 1841–1849 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Da Ros, C., Cavinato, C., Cecchi, F., Bolzonella, D.: Anaerobic co-digestion of winery waste and waste activated sludge: assessment of process feasibility. Water Sci. Technol. 69, 269–277 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jasko, J., Skripsts, E., Bubrovskis, V.: Biogas production of wine making waste in anaerobic fermentation process. In: Malinovska and Osadcuks (eds) Proceedings 11th international conference engineering for rural development, Latvia University of Agriculture, 575–579 (2012)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fountoulakis, M.S., Drakopoulou, S., Terzakis, S., Georgaki, E., Manios, T.: Potential for methane production from typical Mediterranean agro-industrial by-products. Biomass Bioenergy 32, 155–161 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fabbri, A., Bonifazi, G., Serranti, S.: Micro-scale energy valorization of grape marcs in winery production plants. Waste Manag. 36, 156–165 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dinuccio, E., Balsari, P., Gioelli, F., Menardo, S.: Evaluation of the biogas productivity potential of some Italian agro-industrial biomasses. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 3780–3783 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spanghero, M., Salem, A.Z.M., Robinson, P.H.: Chemical composition, including secondary metabolites, and rumen fermentability of seeds and pulp of Californian (USA) and Italian grape pomaces. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 152, 243–255 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    APHA: Standard methods for examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association WWA, Washington (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dubois, M., Gilles, K.A., Hamilton, J.K., Rebers, P.A., Smith, F.: Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal. Chem. 28, 350–356 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Madrid, J., Martínez-Teruel, A., Hernández, F., Megías, M.D.: A comparative study on the determination of lactic acid in silage juice by colorimetric, high-performance liquid chromatography and enzymatic methods. J. Sci. Food Agric. 79, 1722–1726 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diamantis, V., Melidis, P., Aivasidis, A.: Continuous determination of volatile products in anaerobic fermenters by on-line capillary gas chromatography. Anal. Chim. Acta 573–574, 189–194 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Toscano, G., Riva, G., Duca, D., Pedretti, E.F., Corinaldesi, F., Rossini, G.: Analysis of the characteristics of the residues of the wine production chain finalized to their industrial and energy recovery. Biomass Bioenergy 55, 260–267 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Negro, C., Tommasi, L., Miceli, A.: Phenolic compounds and antioxidant activity from red grape marc extracts. Bioresour. Technol. 87, 41–44 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Da Ros, C., Cavinato, C., Pavan, P., Bolzonella, D.: Winery waste recycling through anaerobic co-digestion with waste activated sludge. Waste Manag. 34, 2028–2035 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Apelblat, A., Manzurola, E.: Solubility of oxalic, malonic, succinic, adipic, maleic, malic, citric, and tartaric acids in water from 278.15 to 338.15 K. J. Chem. Thermodyn. 19, 317–320 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Reis, L.G., Chaves, A.V., Williams, S.R.O., Moate, P.J.: Comparison of enantiomers of organic acids for their effects on methane production in vitro. Anim. Prod. Sci. 54, 1345–1349 (2014)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Moletta, R.: Winery and distillery wastewater treatment by anaerobic digestion. Water Sci. Technol. 51(1), 137–144 (2005)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Boonsawang, P., Rerngnarong, A., Tongurai, C., Chaiprapat, S.: Effect of nitrogen and phosphorus on the performance of acidogenic and methanogenic reactors for treatment of biodiesel wastewater. Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol. 36, 643–649 (2014)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ramakrishnan, A., Surampalli, R.Y.: Performance of anaerobic hybrid reactors for the treatment of complex phenolic wastewaters with biogas recirculation. Bioresour. Technol. 129, 26–32 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Diamantis, V., Erguder, T.H., Aivasidis, A., Verstraete, A., Voudrias, E.: Wastewater disposal to landfill sites: a synergistic solution for centralized management of olive mill wastewater and enhanced production of landfill gas. J. Environ. Manag. 128, 427–434 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikolaidou Eleutheria
    • 1
  • Iossifidou Maria
    • 1
  • Tataki Vasiliki
    • 2
  • Eftaxias Alexandros
    • 2
  • Aivasidis Alexandros
    • 2
  • Diamantis Vasileios
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Hydromanagement Ltd.ThessaloníkiGreece
  2. 2.Laboratory of Wastewater Management and Treatment Technologies, Department of Environmental EngineeringDemocritus University of ThraceXanthiGreece

Personalised recommendations