scholarly journals Smart Approaches to Food Waste Final Disposal

Author(s):  
Franco Cecchi ◽  
Cristina Cavinato

Food waste, among the organic wastes, is one of the most promising substrates to be used as a renewable resource. Wide availability of food waste and the high greenhouse gas impacts derived from its inappropriate disposal, boost research through food waste valorization. Several innovative technologies are applied nowadays, mainly focused on bioenergy and bioresource recovery, within a circular economy approach. Nevertheless, food waste treatment should be evaluated in terms of sustainability and considering the availability of an optimized separate collection and a suitable treatment facility. Anaerobic codigestion of waste-activated sludge with food waste is a way to fully utilize available anaerobic digestion plants, increasing biogas production, energy, and nutrient recovery and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Codigestion implementation in Europe is explored and discussed in this paper, taking into account different food waste collection approaches in relation to anaerobic digestion treatment and confirming the sustainability of the anaerobic process based on case studies. Household food waste disposal implementation is also analyzed, and the results show that such a waste management system is able to reduce GHG emissions due to transport reduction and increase wastewater treatment performance.

2012 ◽  
Vol 485 ◽  
pp. 306-309
Author(s):  
Li Hong Wang ◽  
Qun Hui Wang ◽  
Wei Wei Cai

Solid-state anaerobic digestion (SSAD) of distiller’s grains (DG) and kitchen waste (KW) for biogas was investigated. Six DG to KW ratios of 10/1, 8/1, 6/1, 4/1, 1/0, and 0/1 was used. The results showed that in 48 digestion days the co-digestion with DG to KW ratio of 8:1 obtained the highest methane yield of 159.74mL/gTS, TS and VS reductions of 58.7% and 71.8%, hemicellulase, cellulose and lignin reductions of 46.7%, 45.4% and 4.0%. Compared to mono-digestions of DG or KW, co-digestion of DG and FW had a good synergistic effect. It indicated that SSAD of cellulosic-based waste and food waste could be one of the options for efficient biogas production and waste treatment


2015 ◽  
Vol 73 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-143 ◽  
Author(s):  
H.-T. Liu ◽  
X.-J. Kong ◽  
G.-D. Zheng ◽  
C.-C. Chen

Sewage sludge is a considerable source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission in the field of organic solid waste treatment and disposal. In this case study, total GHG emissions from sludge anaerobic digestion, including direct and indirect emissions as well as replaceable emission reduction due to biogas being reused instead of natural gas, were quantified respectively. The results indicated that no GHG generation needed to be considered during the anaerobic digestion process. Indirect emissions were mainly from electricity and fossil fuel consumption on-site and sludge transportation. Overall, the total GHG emission owing to relative subtraction from anaerobic digestion rather than landfill, and replaceable GHG reduction caused by reuse of its product of biogas, were quantified to be 0.7214 (northern China) or 0.7384 (southern China) MgCO2 MgWS−1 (wet sludge).


2008 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Lieffering ◽  
Paul Newton ◽  
Jürgen H. Thiele

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from New Zealand dairy farms are significant, representing nearly 35% of New Zealand’s total agricultural emissions. Although there is an urgent need for New Zealand to reduce agricultural GHG emissions in order to meet its Kyoto Protocol obligations, there are, as yet, few viable options for reducing farming related emissions while maintaining productivity. In addition to GHG emissions, dairy farms are also the source of other emissions, most importantly effluent from milking sheds and feed pads. It has been suggested that anaerobic digestion for biogas and energy production could be used to deal more effectively with dairy effluent while at the same time addressing concerns about farm energy supply. Dairy farms have a high demand for electricity, with a 300-cow farm consuming nearly 40 000 kWh per year. However, because only ~10% of the manure produced by the cows can be collected (e.g. primarily at milking times), a maximum of only ~16 000 kWh of electricity per year can be produced from the effluent alone. This means that anaerobic digestion/electricity generation schemes are currently economic only for farms with more than 1000 cows. A solution for smaller farms is to co-digest the effluent with unutilised pasture sourced on the farm, thereby increasing biogas production and making the system economically viable. A possible source of unutilised grass is the residual pasture left by the cows immediately after grazing. This residual can be substantial in the spring–early summer, when cow numbers (demand) can be less than the pasture growth rates (supply). The cutting of ungrazed grass (topping) is also a useful management tool that has been shown to increase pasture quality and milk production, especially over the late spring–summer. In this paper, we compare the energy and GHG balances of a conventional farm using a lagoon effluent system to one using anaerobic digestion supplemented by unutilised pasture collected by topping to treat effluent and generate electricity. For a hypothetical 300-cow, 100-ha farm, topping all paddocks from 1800 to 1600 kg DM/ha four times per year over the spring–summer would result in 80 tonnes of DM being collected, which when digested to biogas would yield 50 000 kWh (180 GJ) of electricity. This is in addition to the 16 000 kWh from the effluent digestion. About 90 GJ of diesel would be used to carry out the topping, emitting ~0.06 t CO2e/ha. In contrast, the anaerobic/topping system would offset/avoid 0.74 t CO2e/ha of GHG emissions: 0.6 t CO2e/ha of avoided CH4 emissions from the lagoon and 0.14 t CO2e/ha from biogas electricity offsetting grid electricity GHGs. For the average dairy farm, the net reduction in emissions of 0.68 CO2e/ha would equate to nearly 14% of the direct and indirect emissions from farming activities and if implemented on a national scale, could decrease GHG emissions nearly 1.4 million t CO2e or ~10% of New Zealand’s Kyoto Protocol obligations while at the same time better manage dairy farm effluent, enhance on-farm and national energy security and increase milk production through better quality pastures.


2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (8) ◽  
pp. 1365-1372 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeong-Ik Oh ◽  
Jechan Lee ◽  
Kun-Yi Andrew Lin ◽  
Eilhann E Kwon ◽  
Yiu Fai Tsang

In many countries, the uncontrolled generation of large amounts of food waste has resulted in severe environmental issues. Among various treatment methods that have been proposed, anaerobic digestion to produce biogas from food waste is a proven and environmentally friendly route for simultaneous food waste treatment and energy recovery. In this study, we suggest an effective methane fermentation of food waste by mixing wood chips with feedstock to minimize the sludge generation in the process. The food waste generated in an apartment complex in the Republic of Korea was used as biogas feedstock. The use of wood chips in the process increased the production of methane and hydrogen. At the food waste to wood chip ratio of 0.5, 20 ml g−1 of methane and 13.9 ml g−1 of hydrogen were produced for 15 days at 35°C. The results of this study suggest the successful application of wood chips to the anaerobic digestion of food waste for producing biogas.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. 1804 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Morales-Polo ◽  
María del Mar Cledera-Castro ◽  
B. Yolanda Moratilla Soria

Discharge of waste in general, and food waste, in particular, is considered one of the major environmental problems today, as waste generation increases continuously, reaching values of 32% of all food produced worldwide. There are many different options that can be applied to the management and evaluation of waste treatment, and Anaerobic Digestion seems to be one of the most suitable solutions because of its benefits, including renewable energy generation in form of biogas. Moreover, if FW (food waste) is digested in anaerobic digesters from Waste Water Treatment Plants, a common solution is provided for both residues. Furthermore, co-digestion of food waste and sewage sludge provides benefits in terms of anaerobic process stability enhancing the buffer capacity of ammonia (for example) and biogas formation, which can be increased up to 80% when compared with monodigestion. The present paper reviews food waste anaerobic digestion from its generation, characteristics and different options for its management, and it does focus specifically on the anaerobic digestion and co-digestion process, stages, limiting rates and parameters, utilizing numerous experiences, strictly related to food waste. Pre-treatments are also considered as they are important and innovative for enhancing biogas production and its methane yield. The paper shows an extensive collection of pre-treatments, its basics, improving factors, and numerical data of biogas formation improvements that are related both to substrate modification and to the synergistic effect of co-digestion, which could lead to an increase of methane production from 11% to 180%.


Author(s):  
Kai Schumüller ◽  
Dirk Weichgrebe ◽  
Stephan Köster

AbstractTo tap the organic waste generated onboard cruise ships is a very promising approach to reduce their adverse impact on the maritime environment. Biogas produced by means of onboard anaerobic digestion offers a complementary energy source for ships’ operation. This report comprises a detailed presentation of the results gained from comprehensive investigations on the gas yield from onboard substrates such as food waste, sewage sludge and screening solids. Each person onboard generates a total average of about 9 kg of organic waste per day. The performed analyses of substrates and anaerobic digestion tests revealed an accumulated methane yield of around 159 L per person per day. The anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and food waste (50:50 VS) emerged as particularly effective and led to an increased biogas yield by 24%, compared to the mono-fermentation. In the best case, onboard biogas production can provide an energetic output of 82 W/P, on average covering 3.3 to 4.1% of the total energy demand of a cruise ship.


2008 ◽  
Vol 57 (11) ◽  
pp. 1683-1692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Tilche ◽  
Michele Galatola

Anaerobic digestion is a well known process that (while still capable of showing new features) has experienced several waves of technological development. It was “born” as a wastewater treatment system, in the 1970s showed promise as an alternative energy source (in particular from animal waste), in the 1980s and later it became a standard for treating organic-matter-rich industrial wastewater, and more recently returned to the market for its energy recovery potential, making use of different biomasses, including energy crops. With the growing concern around global warming, this paper looks at the potential of anaerobic digestion in terms of reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The potential contribution of anaerobic digestion to GHG reduction has been computed for the 27 EU countries on the basis of their 2005 Kyoto declarations and using life cycle data. The theoretical potential contribution of anaerobic digestion to Kyoto and EU post-Kyoto targets has been calculated. Two different possible biogas applications have been considered: electricity production from manure waste, and upgraded methane production for light goods vehicles (from landfill biogas and municipal and industrial wastewater treatment sludges). The useful heat that can be produced as by-product from biogas conversion into electricity has not been taken into consideration, as its real exploitation depends on local conditions. Moreover the amount of biogas already produced via dedicated anaerobic digestion processes has also not been included in the calculations. Therefore the overall gains achievable would be even higher than those reported here. This exercise shows that biogas may considerably contribute to GHG emission reductions in particular if used as a biofuel. Results also show that its use as a biofuel may allow for true negative GHG emissions, showing a net advantage with respect to other biofuels. Considering also energy crops that will become available in the next few years as a result of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) reform, this study shows that biogas has the potential of covering almost 50% of the 2020 biofuel target of 10% of all automotive transport fuels, without implying a change in land use. Moreover, considering the achievable GHG reductions, a very large carbon emission trading “value” could support the investment needs. However, those results were obtained through a “qualitative” assessment. In order to produce robust data for decision makers, a quantitative sustainability assessment should be carried out, integrating different methodologies within a life cycle framework. The identification of the most appropriate policy for promoting the best set of options is then discussed.


2008 ◽  
Vol 58 (11) ◽  
pp. 2093-2099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Wilcock ◽  
Sandy Elliott ◽  
Neale Hudson ◽  
Stephanie Parkyn ◽  
John Quinn

New Zealand is unique in that half of its national greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory derives from agriculture - predominantly as methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O), in a 2:1 ratio. The remaining GHG emissions predominantly comprise carbon dioxide (CO2) deriving from energy and industry sources. Proposed strategies to mitigate emissions of CH4 and N2O from pastoral agriculture in New Zealand are: (1) utilising extensive and riparian afforestation of pasture to achieve CO2 uptake (carbon sequestration); (2) management of nitrogen through budgeting and/or the use of nitrification inhibitors, and minimizing soil anoxia to reduce N2O emissions; and (3) utilisation of alternative waste treatment technologies to minimise emissions of CH4. These mitigation measures have associated co-benefits and co-costs (disadvantages) for rivers, streams and lakes because they affect land use, runoff loads, and receiving water and habitat quality. Extensive afforestation results in lower specific yields (exports) of nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P), suspended sediment (SS) and faecal matter and also has benefits for stream habitat quality by improving stream temperature, dissolved oxygen and pH regimes through greater shading, and the supply of woody debris and terrestrial food resources. Riparian afforestation does not achieve the same reductions in exports as extensive afforestation but can achieve reductions in concentrations of N, P, SS and faecal organisms. Extensive afforestation of pasture leads to reduced water yields and stream flows. Both afforestation measures produce intermittent disturbances to waterways during forestry operations (logging and thinning), resulting in sediment release from channel re-stabilisation and localised flooding, including formation of debris dams at culverts. Soil and fertiliser management benefits aquatic ecosystems by reducing N exports but the use of nitrification inhibitors, viz. dicyandiamide (DCD), to achieve this may under some circumstances impair wetland function to intercept and remove nitrate from drainage water, or even add to the overall N loading to waterways. DCD is water soluble and degrades rapidly in warm soil conditions. The recommended application rate of 10 kg DCD/ha corresponds to 6 kg N/ha and may be exceeded in warm climates. Of the N2O produced by agricultural systems, approximately 30% is emitted from indirect sources, which are waterways draining agriculture. It is important therefore to focus strategies for managing N inputs to agricultural systems generally to reduce inputs to wetlands and streams where these might be reduced to N2O. Waste management options include utilizing the CH4 resource produced in farm waste treatment ponds as a source of energy, with conversion to CO2 via combustion achieving a 21-fold reduction in GHG emissions. Both of these have co-benefits for waterways as a result of reduced loadings. A conceptual model derived showing the linkages between key land management practices for greenhouse gas mitigation and key waterway values and ecosystem attributes is derived to aid resource managers making decisions affecting waterways and atmospheric GHG emissions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document