Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identification of Most Affected Impact Categories of Wastewater-Based Biogas Production and Use

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
EcoDesign for Sustainable Products, Services and Social Systems II

  • 48 Accesses

Abstract

With the increasing deployment of renewable energy technologies, the current research tends to focus not only on ways to increase systems efficiencies but also on assessing the benefits of their use objectively, as much as the impact of their drawbacks on the environment. One of these technologies is biogas production that has been implemented and developed in many countries for a long time, while it is still starting in others. One of the factors that hinder the spread of this technology is greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions during the production and use of biogas from wastewater. Most of the existing studies consider the emissions from some processes but ignore biogas environmental impact. The diversity of the methods used to estimate emissions based on available resources and other factors also led to an important variation in the results making an overview of the state of the art of emissions from biogas from wastewater necessary for future research and practice. In this context, a systematic review was carried to identify and explain the existing research concerning the emissions from production and use of biogas from wastewater and the quantities of emissions and their impact on the environment. Scopus and Web of Science were chosen as paper search databases because of the amount and quality of papers they include and the wideness of the screening options. After several screening processes, 73 papers in English ranging from 2010 to 2021 were selected. Most of the experimental case studies were from Europe. There were reviews and theoretical studies from developing countries. Results show that most of the direct emissions (methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O)) result from the aerobic treatments of wastewater and anaerobic digester leakages, but those can be avoided in the case of regular maintenance. The most affected impact categories of the biogas deployment are human health, global warming, and climate change. The findings regarding this topic provide more awareness for engineers and system designers to conceive biogas systems with the least impact on the environment and give an insight into the importance of considering the options to mitigate GHG emissions in wastewater treatment plants equipped with biogas and energy generation for policy making in the countries who did not start implementing it yet.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alayi R, Shamel A, Kasaeian A, Harasii H (2016) The role of biogas to sustainable development (aspects environmental, security and economic).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahrs E, Angenendt E (2019) Status quo and perspectives of biogas production for energy and material utilization. GCB Bioenergy 11(1):9–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bani Shahabadi M, Yerushalmi L, Haghighat F (2010) Estimation of greenhouse gas generation in wastewater treatment plants - Model development and application. Chemosphere 78(9):1085–1092

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bekchanov M, Mondal MAH, de Alwis A, Mirzabaev A (2019) Why adoption is slow despite promising potential of biogas technology for improving energy security and mitigating climate change in Sri Lanka? Renew Sustain Energy Rev 105:378–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhardwaj S (2017) A review: advantages and disadvantages of biogas. Int Res J Eng Technol 04(10):890–893

    Google Scholar 

  • Blanco D, Collado S, Laca A, Díaz M (2016) Life cycle assessment of introducing an anaerobic digester in a municipal wastewater treatment plant in Spain. Water Sci Technol 73(4):835–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Briner RB, Denyer D (2012) Systematic review and evidence synthesis as a practice and scholarship tool, Oxford Handb. Evidence-Based Manag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corominas L (2020) The application of life cycle assessment (LCA) to wastewater treatment: A best practice guide and critical review. Water Res 184:116058

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cozma P, Ghinea C, MÇŽmÇŽligÇŽ I, Wukovits W, Friedl A, Gavrilescu M (2013) Environmental impact assessment of high pressure water scrubbing biogas upgrading technology. Clean Soil Air Water 41(9):917–927

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Daelman MRJ, van Voorthuizen EM, van Dongen UGJM, Volcke EIP, van Loosdrecht MCM (2012) Methane emission during municipal wastewater treatment. Water Res. 46(11):3657–3670

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Danny Harvey LD (2001) Climatic change, pp. 493–497

    Google Scholar 

  • De Haas DW, Pepperell C, Foley J (2014) Perspectives on greenhouse gas emission estimates based on Australian wastewater treatment plant operating data. Water Sci Technol 69(3):451–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delre A, Mønster J, Scheutz C (2017) Greenhouse gas emission quantification from wastewater treatment plants, using a tracer gas dispersion method. Sci Total Environ 605–606:258–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delre A, Mønster J, Samuelsson J, Fredenslund AM, Scheutz C (2018) Emission quantification using the tracer gas dispersion method: The influence of instrument, tracer gas species and source simulation. Sci Total Environ 634:59–66

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Demir O, YapıcıoÄŸlu P (2019) Investigation of GHG emission sources and reducing GHG emissions in a municipal wastewater treatment plant. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 9(5):948–964

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Doorn M (2019) W. Treatment, I. Guidelines, W. Irving, N. Greenhouse, and G. Inventories, 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Chapter 6 wastewater treatment and discharge. Wastewater Treat Disch 5:7–65

    Google Scholar 

  • Duan N, Khoshnevisan B, Lin C, Liu Z, Liu H (2020) Life cycle assessment of anaerobic digestion of pig manure coupled with different digestate treatment technologies. Environ Int 137:105522

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • E.B.Association (2017) EBA Statistical Report, Eur. Biogas Assoc.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2014) European Research Area Facts and Figures 2014 SPAIN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graneheim UH, Lindgren BM, Lundman B (2017) Methodological challenges in qualitative content analysis: A discussion paper. Nurse Educ Today 56:29–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gülsen H, Yapicioglu P (2019) Greenhouse gas emission estimation for a UASB reactor in a dairy wastewater treatment plant. Int J Glob Warm 17(4):373–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustavsson DJI, Tumlin S (2013) Carbon footprints of Scandinavian wastewater treatment plants. Water Sci Technol 68(4):887–893

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hijazi O, Munro S, Zerhusen B, Effenberger M (2016) Review of life cycle assessment for biogas production in Europe. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 54:1291–1300

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Klöpffer W (1997) Life cycle assessment: from the beginning to the current state. Environ Sci Pollut Res 4(4):223–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koutsou OP, Gatidou G, Stasinakis AS (2018) Domestic wastewater management in Greece: Greenhouse gas emissions estimation at country scale. J Clean Prod 188:851–859

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo J, Dow J (2017) Biogas production from anaerobic digestion of food waste and relevant air quality implications. J Air Waste Manag Assoc 67(9):1000–1011

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kvist T, Aryal N (2019) Methane loss from commercially operating biogas upgrading plants. Waste Manag. 87:295–300

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kyung D, Kim M, Chang J, Lee W (2015) Estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from a hybrid wastewater treatment plant. J Clean Prod 95:117–123

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lamnatou C, Nicolaï R, Chemisana D, Cristofari C, Cancellieri D (2019) Biogas production by means of an anaerobic-digestion plant in France: LCA of greenhouse-gas emissions and other environmental indicators. Sci Total Environ 670:1226–1239

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lobato LCS, Chernicharo CAL, Souza CL (2012) Estimates of methane loss and energy recovery potential in anaerobic reactors treating domestic wastewater. Water Sci Technol 66(12):2745–2753

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Maktabifard M, Zaborowska E, Makinia J (2019) Evaluating the effect of different operational strategies on the carbon footprint of wastewater treatment plants – case studies from northern Poland. Water Sci Technol 79(11):2211–2220

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Meneses-Jácome A, Osorio-Molina A, Parra-Saldívar R, Gallego-Suárez D, Velásquez-Arredondo HI, Ruiz-Colorado AA (2015) LCA applied to elucidate opportunities for biogas from wastewaters in Colombia. Water Sci Technol 71(2):211–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohtasham J (2015) Review Article-Renewable Energies. Energy Procedia 74:1289–1297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakamura M, Yuyama Y, Yamaoka M, Shimizu N (2014) Global warming impacts of the process to utilize digested slurry from methane fermentation as a fertilizer: case study of the Yamada Biomass Plant. Paddy Water Environ. 12(2):295–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nevzorova T, Kutcherov V (2019) Barriers to the wider implementation of biogas as a source of energy: A state-of-the-art review. Energy Strateg Rev 26:100414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osama Mohammed ESK (2019) Advantages and limitations of biogas technologies, 1–7, 1395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paolini V, Petracchini F, Segreto M, Tomassetti L, Naja N, Cecinato A (2018) Environmental impact of biogas: A short review of current knowledge. J Environ Sci Heal Part A Toxic/Hazardous Subst Environ Eng 53(10):899–906

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paredes MG, Güereca LP, Molina LT, Noyola A (2019) Methane emissions from anaerobic sludge digesters in Mexico: On-site determination vs. IPCC Tier 1 method. Sci Total Environ. 656:468–474

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pertl A, Mostbauer P, Obersteiner G (2010) Climate balance of biogas upgrading systems. Waste Manag 30(1):92–99

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl M, Ward S, Owende P (2012a) Environmental impacts of biogas deployment - Part I: life cycle inventory for evaluation of production process emissions to air. J Clean Prod 24:168–183

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Poeschl M, Ward S, Owende P (2012b) Environmental impacts of biogas deployment - Part II: life cycle assessment of multiple production and utilization pathways. J Clean Prod 24:184–201

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rafiee A, Khalilpour KR, Prest J, Skryabin I (2021) Biogas as an energy vector. Biomass Bioenergy 144:105935

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rasi S (2009) Biogas composition and upgrading to biomethane Saija Rasi Biogas Composition and Upgrading to Biomethane

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheutz C, Fredenslund AM (2019) Total methane emission rates and losses from 23 biogas plants. Waste Manag. 97:38–46

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schmid C, Horschig T, Pfeiffer A, Szarka N, Thrän D (2019) Biogas upgrading: A review of national biomethane strategies and support policies in selected countries. Energies 12(19):3803

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Siegl S, Laaber M, Holubar P (2011) Green electricity from biomass, part I: environmental impacts of direct life cycle emissions. Waste Biomass Valorizat 2(3):267–284

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh V, Phuleria HC, Chandel MK (2017) Estimation of greenhouse gas emissions from municipal wastewater treatment systems in India. Water Environ J 31(4):537–544

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Singh AD, Upadhyay A, Shrivastava S, Vivekanand V (2020) Life-cycle assessment of sewage sludge-based large-scale biogas plant. Bioresour Technol 309

    Google Scholar 

  • Surendra KC, Takara D, Hashimoto AG, Khanal SK (2014) Biogas as a sustainable energy source for developing countries: Opportunities and challenges. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 31:846–859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabó G (2014a) The carbon footprint of a biogas power plant. Environ Eng Manag J 13(11):2867–2874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szabó G (2014b) The environmental and economic aspects of a biogas power plant. Trans Ecol Environ 186:1743–3541

    Google Scholar 

  • Tauber J, Parravicini V, Svardal K, Krampe J (2019) Quantifying methane emissions from anaerobic digesters. Water Sci Technol 80(9):1654–1661

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vasco-Correa J, Khanal S, Manandhar A, Shah A (2018) Anaerobic digestion for bioenergy production: Global status, environmental and techno-economic implications, and government policies. Bioresour Technol 247:1015–1026

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • VOSviewer (n.d.) Visualizing scientific landscapes. https://www.vosviewer.com/. Accessed 15 Sep 2021.

  • Watson W (1954) Research and development. Phys Today 7(8):6–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Study on Sound Management of Chemicals with Relevant Legal Framework (METI) in FY 2021.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Environmental Management, Division of Sustainable Energy and Environmental Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan

    Salma Chaouali, Leticia Sarmento dos Muchangos, Lisa Ito & Akihiro Tokai

Authors
  1. Salma Chaouali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leticia Sarmento dos Muchangos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lisa Ito
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Akihiro Tokai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Creative Science and Engineering, Waseda University, Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

    Shinichi Fukushige

  2. Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka, Osaka, Japan

    Hideki Kobayashi

  3. College of Science and Engineering, Ritsumeikan University, Kusatsu, Shiga, Shiga, Japan

    Eiji Yamasue

  4. Graduate School of Engineering, Osaka University, Suita, Osaka, Osaka, Japan

    Keishiro Hara

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Chaouali, S., dos Muchangos, L.S., Ito, L., Tokai, A. (2024). Identification of Most Affected Impact Categories of Wastewater-Based Biogas Production and Use. In: Fukushige, S., Kobayashi, H., Yamasue, E., Hara, K. (eds) EcoDesign for Sustainable Products, Services and Social Systems II. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3897-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation