Bioresource Technology 100 (2009) 15551560

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Bioresource Technology
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biortech

Improvement of activated sludge stabilisation and lterability during anaerobic digestion by fruit and vegetable waste addition
Lahdheb Habiba *, Bouallagui Hassib, Hamdi Moktar
Laboratory of Microbial Ecology and Technology, National Institute of Applied Science and Technology, BP 676, Tunis, Tunisie 1080, Tunisia

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
Anaerobic co-digestion of fruit and vegetable waste (FVW) and activated sludge (AS) was investigated using anaerobic sequencing batch reactors (ASBRs). The effects of AS:FVW ratio and the organic loading rate (OLR) on digesters performances were examined. The mixtures having AS:FVW ratios of 100:00, 65:35, 35:65, by a total solid (TS) basis were operated at an hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 20 d. However, 30:70, 20:80, 15:85, 10:90 and 0:100 ratios were tested at an HRT of 10 d. To investigate effects of aerobic and anaerobic digestion on the sludge lterability, specic resistance to ltration (R) was also determined. Increasing FVW proportions in the feedstock signicantly improved the biogas production yield. The reactor that was fed with a 30:70 ratio showed the highest VS removal and biogas production yield of 88% and 0.57 L g1 VS added, respectively. The lterability results showed that the anaerobic efuent was characterised by a slightly better lterability efciency of 1.6 1016 m kg1 than 1.74 1016 m kg1 of aerobic efuent. However, FVW addition improved the anaerobic co-digestion efuent lterability (5.52 1014 m kg1). 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 16 June 2008 Received in revised form 9 September 2008 Accepted 10 September 2008 Available online 5 November 2008 Keywords: Anaerobic co-digestion Activated sludge Fruit and vegetable waste Sequencing batch reactor Filterability

1. Introduction In the last few years, the number of municipal wastewater treatment plants (MWWTP) in Tunisia was increased signicantly which results in the production of large quantities of activated sludge (AS) that should undergo stabilisation. Aerobic stabilisation of AS has been shown to cause poorer dewatering properties and at the same time, increases the biopolymer content in solution (Murthy, 1998) . For this reason, anaerobic digestion process of sludge is often employed to reduce the mass of solids, reduce their pathogen content and lead to an energy recovery bonus in the form of methane gas production (Dinsdale et al., 2000). The rate-limiting step for anaerobic digestion of AS is the hydrolysis step (Bougrier et al., 2007). Anaerobic digestion of AS is both slow and incomplete because the individual cell membranes are not signicantly degraded in conventional mesophilic anaerobic digestion (Borowski and Szopa, 2007). Except for the resistant to biodegradation, the low C/N ratio of AS in order of 6/116/1 is also regarded as a serious problem to the anaerobic digestion (Stroot et al., 2001). It should range from 20 to 30 in order to ensure sufcient nitrogen supply for cell production and the degradation of the carbon present in the process, and in order to avoid at the same time excess nitrogen, which could lead to toxic ammonium concentrations (Fricke et al., 2007).
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +216 22524406; fax: +216 71704329. E-mail address: hassibbouallagui@yahoo.fr (L. Habiba). 0960-8524/$ - see front matter 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2008.09.019

The co-digestion of AS with a substrates containing high level of C/N, like FVW, to overcome the difculties of treating AS and to adjust its unbalanced nutrients constitutes an interesting solution. In fact, the large quantities of FVW generated from markets are another type of residue that is characterised by easy biodegradable organic matter content with high C/N ratio and water content (>80%) (Bouallagui et al., 2003). Treatment of this organic fraction is currently carried out through aerobic composting or anaerobic digestion. But anaerobic digestion seems to be a more attractive method for the treatment of this waste (Sharma et al., 2000). However, one of the problems most frequently found during biological processing of the FVW is the high C/N ratio of these residues. So, co-digestion of AS and FVW reduces also the FVW anaerobic digestion limitations. Co-digestion is the term used to describe the combined treatment of several wastes with complementary characteristics, being dag and one of the main advantages of anaerobic technology (Ag Sponza, 2005). Co-digestion of organic wastes is a technology that is increasingly being applied for simultaneous treatment of several solid and liquid organic wastes. The main advantages of this technology are improved methane yield because of the supply of additional nutrients from the co-digestates and more efcient use of equipment and cost-sharing by processing multiple waste streams in a single facility (Alatriste et al., 2006). This paper reports the results of the single-stage anaerobic codigestion of AS and FVW. The effect of AS:FVW ratio on the reactors performances and the anaerobic sludge lterability was examined.

1556

L. Habiba et al. / Bioresource Technology 100 (2009) 15551560

2. Methods 2.1. Characteristics of the substrates used The AS was taken from a local wastewater treatment plant of Cherguia (Tunis) treating domestic and industrial wastewaters. It is composed of settled suspended biomass. The FVW were collected from the group market of Tunis. Before being mixed with AS, FVW must undergo some pre-treatments. They were shredded to small particles and homogenised to facilitate digestion. Both types of wastes as collected were analyzed for various parameters such as: pH, TS, total volatile solids (VS), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Total Carbon (TC), total Chemical Oxygen Demand (CODt) and Total Nitrogen (TN). The tested mixtures ratios of AS:FVW were 100:0, 65:35, 35:65, 30:70, 20:80, 15:85, 10:90 and 0:100 on TS basis. These mixtures were analyzed for the most of the parameters mentioned below. The characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Table 1 showed that the TS and VS content were the lowest in pure AS and the highest in the FVW. Total COD values in all mixtures indicated that organic content were very high. As the FVW addition increased, the C/N of the feed mixture gradually increased from 10 to 30 and ranged within the C/N ratio (2030) required for stable and better biological conversions reported by others on the anaerobic digestion (Hong-Wie and David, 2007). The low C/N of the AS implies a large source of nitrogen, mainly in the form of proteins from lysed cells. The carbon and nitrogen content analysis show a complementary of the tow types of wastes. 2.2. Digesters design Experiments were carried out in high anaerobic sequencing batch reactors (ASBR) (R1, R2, R3, R4, R5, R6, R7 and R8) with a 2 litres capacity (Fig. 1). The reactors were operated under mesophilic condition (35 C). The temperature was controlled by a thermostatically regulated water bath. Mixing in the reactors was done by a system of magnetic stirring. Each digester was initially inoculated with anaerobic sludge obtained from an active mesophilic digester of fruit and vegetable wastes treatment plant (Bouallagui et al, 2007). The ASBR was operated with cycles including the following four discrete steps: (i) ll (15 min): 100 mL or 200 mL of different mixtures of wastes were added to the reactors at the beginning of a cycle, (ii) react (21 h): during this phase, the reactors were stirred and organic matter was converted to energy and new cells, (iii) settle (2 h and 30 min): settling started when the react phase was nished, (iv) draw off (15 min): at the end of the settling period, the volume of liquid added at the beginning of the cycle was drawn off from the reactors. 2.3. Analytical methods TS, VS, TSS, pH, COD, pH, alkalinity and total volatile fatty acids (TVFA) were determined according to the APHA standard methods
Table 1 Characteristics of raw substrates and co-substrates mixtures AS 100% Mixtures ratios 65:35 pH TS (%) VS (g L1) TSS (g L1) CODt (g L1) TC (% MS) TN (%MS) C/N 6.98 0.1 0.57 0.01 4.49 0.1 4.4 0.13 27 0.8 52 2 5.4 0.2 10 0.3 6.25 0.12 0.67 0.01 5.87 0.17 5.44 0.2 40.3 0.7 59 1.5 4.21 0.1 14 0.3 35:65 5.66 0.11 1.1 0.03 8.42 0.3 6.4 0.3 51.7 1.6 65 1.8 3.2 0.1 20.5 0.7 30:70 5.32 0.05 1.2 0.02 9.71 0.24 6.6 0.2 53.6 1.8 66 2.1 3 0.1 22 0.4 20:80

(8) (9)

(5)

(6)

(1)

(2) (4) (3) (7)

Fig. 1. Schematic of the experimental ASBR system: (1) ASBR, (2) water bath and heating recirculation, (3) magnetic stirrer, (4) feedstock, (5) feeding pump, (6) discharge pump, (7) efuent stock, (8) sampling valve and (9) biogas collector.

(1995). The volume of biogas product was measured daily using a gas-meter and its composition was estimated using an ORSAT apparatus (Bouallagui et al, 2003). The biogas volume was expressed at Standard Temperature and Pressure (STP). TC was measured by catalytic oxidation on a TOC Euroglace analyser. TN was estimated by Kjeldhal method. Specic resistance to ltration (R) test known as the Buchner funnel test is one of the most commonly employed test for the evaluation of wastewater sludge dewaterability or lterability (Movahedian Attar et al., 2005; Chang et al., 2001; Lee and Liu, 2000). The (R) test was performed using an 8 cm diameter whatman lter paper at an applied vacuum pressure of 0.8 bar. For ltration studies, the entire suspension from the sample was carefully transferred to the Buchner funnel and the experiments were carried out at a constant vacuum pressure. The volume of ltrate collected in the measuring cylinder was monitored visually and recorded every 1 min. The experiments were stopped after the liquid disappeared from the top surface of the lter cake. The volume of ltrate was recorded as a function of time. Specic resistance to ltration (R) was determined using a plot of ltration time/ltrate volume (t/V) vs. ltrate volume (V). Using the slope of the line, R was calculated from the following formula (Pollice et al., 2007):

t=V lRw=2A2 PV lRm=AP

1

where R is the specic resistance to ltration (m kg ), P is the pressure of ltration (bar), l is the viscosity of ltrate (Pa s), V the volume of ltrate (m3), t the ltration time (s), w the weight of dry solids per volume of ltrate (kg m3), A the area of the lter paper (m2), and Rm the resistance on the medium (m1). For com-

FVW 100% 15:85 4.64 0.06 2.3 0.04 17.83 0.41 16.1 0.4 59.3 1.6 69 2.3 2.51 0.1 27.5 0.8 0:90 4.64 0.1 3.5 0.13 27.39 0.68 28.7 1 61.2 1.9 70 2.1 2.34 0.1 30 0.8 5.04 0.15 6.8 0.1 56.1 0.5 47.7 0.9 65 1.6 72 2 2 0.1 36 1.2

4.87 0.14 1.8 0.05 14.85 0.29 11.6 0.2 57.4 2.1 68 2 2.68 0.1 25.5 1

L. Habiba et al. / Bioresource Technology 100 (2009) 15551560

1557

pressible sludge, ignoring Rm which is very small as compared to the resistance on the sludge cake, Eq. (1) was reduced to:

a
Daily biogas production rate ( L d-1)

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

t =V lRw=2A2 PV bV

Taking the slope of the line as b, R was calculated from the formula:

R 2A2 P =lwb

In order to study the effect of the aerobic digestion of AS on the efuent lterability and compare this lterability with the efuent stemming from anaerobic digestion and co-digestion, the aerobic digestion of AS was carried out during 48 h in a reactor of 2 litres capacity. The reactor was operated with an aeration rate of 0.5 vvm and a biomass concentration in order of 4.8 g L1. 2.4. Statistical analysis In order to determine whether the observed differences between digesters performances were signicantly different, data were subjected to the ANOVA tests (StatSoft Inc, 1997). Differences between AS/FVW ratios effects (p and p1) were compared with 0.05. 3. Results and discussion 3.1. Biogas production at different AS:FVW ratios As shown in Fig. 2, daily biogas production by digestions of AS alone and the co-digested wastes varied between 0.131 L d1 and 2.4 L d1 (STP) depending to the substrate composition. The extent of biogas production increased with the addition of FVW. From all mixtures ratios, the 00:100 (AS:FVW) ratio yields the maximum biogas rate because it contains high organic content. The methane content was relatively the same for the different applied AS:FVW ratios, it varied between 58% and 60% (Table 2). The average specic biogas production (Litre of biogas produced per g of volatile solids added or Litre of biogas produced per g of volatile solids removal) was determined at the steady state (4th HRT) for all digestion processes. During all the experiments, when pure AS was used, only 0.29 L g1VS added of specic biogas production with a methane content of 58% was generated. However, this production can be considered as important because anaerobic digestion of AS alone was characterised by a problem of low biogas production that was generally low than 0.2 L g1 VS added (Bolzonella et al., 2005). Bolzonella et al. (2005) examined the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of AS worked with an HRT in a range of 2040 days and an organic loading rate of 1 kg VS.m3 d1. The specic biogas production was in the range of 0.070.18 L g1 VS added. By addition of FVW to AS, the specic biogas production increased considerably from 0.29 (specic methane production of 0.16 L CH4 g1VS added) to 0.57 L g1VS added (specic methane production of 0.34 L CH4 g1VS added) corresponding to both AS:FVW ratios of 35:65 and 30:70. However, the increase of the FVW fraction more than 70% in the feedstock leads to a slight decreasing of the specic biogas production. The ANOVA analysis of the data indicated that digesters performances enhancement were statistically signicant (p < 0.05) (Table 2). The addition of the FVW to AS improves the specic biogas yield. This could be due to the better nutrients balance in feedstock, positive synergism and the correct activity of micro-organism in the digestion medium. This data for the co-digestion may be compared with earlier works. For example, the methane yield obtained by Dinsdale et al. (2000) from AS and FVW anaerobic co-digestion operated in the two-stage tubular digesters with an AS:FVW ratio of 75:25 was 0.25 L g1VS added. Heo et al. (2003)

Time (days)

Daily biogas production rate ( L d-1)

4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Time (days)
Fig. 2. Biogas production vs. different AS:FVW mixtures: (a): at HRT 20 d, () [R1 (100:0)], (h) [R2 (65:35)] and (..N..) [R3 (35:65)], (b): at HRT 10 d, (..s..) [R4 ) [R5 (20:80)], (d) [R6 (15:85)], (4) [R7 (10:90)] and (-j-) [R8 (30:70)], ( (00:100)].

examined the co-digestion of AS with food waste (FW). A maximum specic methane production of 0.37 L CH4 g1VS added were obtained with a methane content of 63% and a AS:FW ratio of 50:50. Fu et al. (2006) have also reported the similar results for the anaerobic co-digestion of AS with the kitchen garbage (KG). The specic methane productions of 0.350.37 L CH4 g1VS added were found with a methane content of 61.8%67.4% with an AS:KG ratio of 50:50. 3.2. VS reduction at different AS:FVW ratios VS is an important parameter for measuring biodegradation, which directly indicates the metabolic status of some of the most delicate microbial groups in the anaerobic system (Elango et al., 2007). The VS destruction results for the various co-digested substrates showed that the lowest VS removal of 55% was obtained with the digester treating 100% sludge. Considering the characteristics of this substrate and its poor biodegradability it is possible to explain this result (Borowski and Szopa, 2007). However, this reduction can be considered signicant. In fact, Ghosh (1991) reported that anaerobic digestion of AS showed only 3045% reduction in VS during anaerobic digestion. The total VS removal was about 6588% for the different applied AS:FVW ratios, reecting the positive effect of the addition of FVW. The vegetable wastes showed excellent digestibility; they seemed to accelerate the digestion process as well as to increase the degree of the anaerobic degradation of the sludge (Edelmann et al., 2000).

1558 Table 2 Digesters operated conditions and performance R1 Mixture ratios (AS:FVW) OLR (g L1 d1) HRT (d) VS inlet (g L1) VS outlet (g L1) VS removal (%) Biogas production rate (L d1) Biogas yield (L g1 added VS) Biogas yield (L g1 removal VS) Methane (%) TVFA (mg L1) Alkalinity (mg L1) VFA/Alkalinity pH TSS in efuent (g L1) TSS in reactor (g L1) 100:00 0.26 0.05 20 4.49 0.01 2 0.08 55.4 1.6 0.131 0.001 0. 29 0.03 0.52 0.04 58 1 480 7.2 1488 56 0.32 0.02 7.51 0.13 1.49 0.03 11.31 0.4 R2 65:35 0.3 0.07 20 5.87 0.03 1.98 0.02 65.1 1.6 p1 = 0.002 0.283 0.02 p1 = 0.000 0.47 0.03 p1 = 0.002 0.72 0.02 p1 = 0.0022 59 0.5 560 30 2698 60 0.2 0.02 p1 = 0.0022 7.39 0.11 0.85 0.01 8.35 0.4

L. Habiba et al. / Bioresource Technology 100 (2009) 15551560

R3 35:65 0.43 0.01 20 8.42 0.09 1.36 0.11 83.8 1.5 p1 = 0.000032 0.480 0.03 p1 = 0.000 0.569 0.02 p1 = 0.0002 0.67 0.02 p1 = 0.0065 60 1 640 20 3864 60 0.16 0.01 p1 = 0.0065 7.31 0.1 1.12 0.04 9.35 0.2

R4 30:70 1.03 0.05 10 9.71 0.09 1.17 0.03 88 1.6 p1 = 0.000037 1.11 0.05 p1 = 0.000 0.57 0.02 p1 = 0.0009 0.64 0.02 p1 = 0.014 59 1.5 690 40 4871 140 0.14 0.01 p1 = 0.014 7.27 0.14 0.62 0.01 11.68 0.2

R5 20:80 1.55 0.06 10 14.85 0.2 2.11 0.08 85.7 1.3 p1 = 0.000037 1.33 0.05 p1 = 0.000 0.44 0.01 p1 = 0.0011 0.52 0.01 p1 = 1.000 60 1.5 800 40 8309 210 0.09 0.01 p1 = 1.000 7.25 0.03 1.03 0.05 11.09 0.4

R6 15:85 1.87 0.08 10 17.83 0.3 2.75 0.1 83.7 1.7 p1 = 0.000024 1.76 0.08 p1 = 0.000 0.49 0.03 p1 = 0.0017 0.57 0.03 p1 = 0.17 59 1 850 30 8906 150 0.09 0.006 p1 = 0.17 7.2 0.09 2.65 0.13 15.11 0.3

R7 10:90 2.86 0.02 10 27.39 0.4 4.07 0.16 85.1 1.8 p1 = 0.000022 2.28 0.03 p1 = 0.000 0.41 0.02 p1 = 0.0044 0.48 0.02 p1 = 0.23 60 1 928 30 12031 180 0.07 0.005 p1 = 0.23 7.130.13 2.9 0.1 16.03 0.4

R8 0:100 3.45 0.1 10 34.3 0.5 6.44 0.4 81.2 1.4 p1 = 0.00002 2.4 0.05 p1 = 0.000 0.35 0.03 0.43 0.02 58 0.5 2400 50 5800 200 0.41 0.04 6.95 0.05 3.2 0.2 16.5 0.4

P 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

p: Indicated the statistical difference between all digesters performances (R1R7). p1: Indicated the statistical difference between digesters R1 and one of other digesters (R2R7).

The higher degradation efciency of VS of 88% was obtained for the 30:70 ratio. It was associated with the higher specic biogas production. The material balances in the systems presented in the Table 3 showed that biogas production represents between 53% and 88.8% of removed VS. The better mass balances were obtained with R3. It is very likely that the high degradation efciency in the codigestion was due to an improved ratio of nutrients and better availability of the organic substances, which facilate their assimilation by anaerobic ora and increases the degree of degradation (Krupp et al, 2005). The results of VS reduction in this work are better than those obtained by Fu et al. (2006) (51.1%56.4%); Heo et al. (2003) (53.7%) and Dinsdale et al. (2000) (40%). 3.3. pH, total VFA and alkalinity As showing in Table 2, the measured parameters reected the changing conditions in the reactors as the composition of the sub-

Table 3 Material balances in the digesters R1 HRT (d) VS removal/litre of digester (g L1 d1) Weight of CH4 (g L1 d1) Weight of CO2 (g L1 d1) Weight of biogas (g L1 d1) Weight of VFA (g L1 d1) Weight of biogas + VFA (g d1) Mass balance (%) Mass balance Biogas/VS (%) 20 0.144 R2 20 0.195 R3 20 0.36 R4 10 0.906 R5 10 1.328 R6 10 1.565 R7 10 2.433 R8 10 2.8

0.027 0.054 0.081 0.024 0.105

0.059 0.113 0.173 0.028 0.201

0.102 0.188 0.291 0.032 0.323

0.234 0.448 0.683 0.069 0.752

0.285 0.523 0.809 0.08 0.889

0.371 0.709 1.08 0.085 1.165

0.489 0.896 1.385 0.092 1.477

0.49 0.99 1.48 0.24 1.72

73.2 56.5

103.2 88.8

89.7 80.9

82.9 75.3

66.9 60.9

74.4 69

60.7 56.9

61.6 53

strate was changed and the OLR was increased. Due to the acidity of FVW, the pH of the inuent dropped from 6.98 of pure AS to 4.64 in the 10:90 (AS:FVW) mixture (Table 1). However, the pH in the efuent varied between 7.13 and 7.51 indicating the process stability and the optimal activity of methanogenic bacteria. This result showed that the co-digestion systems were well buffered. The concentration of TVFA has been found to be a very good indicator of the metabolic status of an anaerobic degradation process (Fernndez et al., 2005; Bjrnsson et al., 2000). The average of TVFA level increases from 480 to 2400 mg L1 as organic feeding rates is increased, which is signicantly inuenced by the addition of FVW. Throughout the all co-digestion process, levels of TVFA at steady-state were very low. These values indicated a high stability of the reactors after an initial transitory increase in TVFA which is typical for start-up of an anaerobic process when the balance of the hydrolytic bacteria, fermentative bacteria and methanogens has not stabilised yet (Hartmann and Ahring, 2005). This stability was conrmed by the presence of stable pH and alkalinity of the reactors. The average values of TVFA reported in this work were lowest than those reported by Dinsdale et al. (2000), between 18001330 mg L1, in the efuent of a successful methanogenic reactor treating FVW with AS as a co-substrate. The average values of partial alkalinity ranged between 1488 and 12031 mg L1. Previously, laboratory studies on mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic organic wastes digestion reported a range of 20004000 mg L1 partial alkalinity as being typical for properly operating digesters (Sharma et al., 2000; Chen et al., 2007). Except the values obtained for the digesters R2 and R3 which fall within this range, all values are higher than the reported values. Higher levels of partial alkalinity were also found by Mshandete et al. (2004) indicating that higher levels of partial alkalinity are possible. One of the criteria for judging digester stability is the VFA:alkalinity ratio. There are three critical values for this (Callaghan et al., 2002): <0.4 digester should be stable; 0.40.8 some instability will occur; >0.8 signicant instability. As showing in Fig. 3, When the AS or the FVW were being digested separately, the ratio was often in the 0.40.8 range. This implying there was the potential for instability which can more explain the lowest results for the biogas

L. Habiba et al. / Bioresource Technology 100 (2009) 15551560

1559

a
VFA/Alcalinity ratio

0.8 0.7

a
TSS in effluent (g L-1)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60

5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0

Time (days)

b
VFA/Alcalinity ratio

0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4

Time (days)

b
TSS in effluent (g L-1)

20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

0.3 0.2 0.1 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Time (days)
Fig. 3. VFA/Alkalinity ratio variation for different AS:FVW mixtures: (a): at HRT 20 d, () [R1(100:0)], (h) [R2 (65:35)] and (..N..) [R3 (35:65)], (b): at HRT 10 d, ) [R5 (20:80)], (d) [R6 (15:85)], (4) [R7 (10:90)] and (..s..) [R4 (30:70)], ( (-j-) [R8 (00:100)].

Time (days)
Fig. 4. TSS in the efuents (a): at HRT 20 d, () [R1(100:0)], (h) [R2 (65:35)] ) [R5 (20:80)], and (..N..) [R3 (35:65)], (b): at HRT 10 d, (..s..) [R4 (30:70)], ( (d) [R6 (15:85)], (4) [R7 (10:90)] and (-j-) [R8 (00:100)].

yield. When FVW was being added to the feed, the VFA:alkalinity ratio did not rise above the critical value of 0.4 even during the initial transitory period witch characterised by a high VFA:alkalinity ratio. So, co-digestion of AS and organic waste is benecial not just for increasing gas production but also for stabilising the digestion process. 3.4. Sludge production and lterability As illustrate in the Fig. 4, generally at the beginning of the experiments, the highest and uctuating TSS values in the efuent are observed. This should be attributed to transitory decient reactors operation accompanied by leaching of suspended solids, organic matter and even of bacteria to the efuent. In fact, when biomass settling was incomplete, there was a gradient in solids concentration along the reactor height. TSS content could thus have been higher in the efuent. However, at the steady-state thanks to the biomass acclimation and stability, TSS values decreased and tended to be stable. The average TSS concentration in the efuents, at the steady-state, ranged between 0.62 g L1 and 3.21 g L1 (Table 2). This data indicates that the additions of FVW with a ratio ranged from 65:35 to 20:80 improved the sludge settling and than lowest TSS were recorded in the digesters efuent. Above this FVW content (15:8500:100) the TSS tended to increase again, showing a poor sludge settling at high OLR. This can be explained by the high quantity of brous prevent from FVW. The average TSS in the digesters ranged from 8.35 to 16.5 g L1 (Table 2). These TSS values were almost lowest for the reactors R1, R2, R3, R4 and R5. This data conrm the good settling sludge mentioned above for these reactors. However, the TSS concentration in the reactors R6R8 were higher. This was mainly caused by the higher OLR. This also explains the few large solids losses observed during efuent drawdown and the poor settling in these reactors.

Different biomass concentrations in the sludge bed at different mixture ratios seen to affect efuent quality. So, they had an impact on the reactors performances. To investigate the effects of aerobic and anaerobic digestion on the sludge lterability, specic resistance to ltration (R) was determined. Results showed that the lowest specic resistance was obtained with the raw waste in the average value of 8.45 1013 m kg1. Src and Cetin (1989) reported that specic resistance of AS varies generally between 0.98 101312 1013 m kg1. Higher specic resistances of 1.74 1016 and 1.6 1016 m kg1 are obtained for sludge stemming from the aerobic and anaerobic stabilisation of the AS alone, respectively. However, the anaerobic co-digestion of the AS with the FVS improves the lterability by reducing the specic resistance to 5.18 10145.52 1014 m kg1. Particle size distribution is known as one of the parameters describing the lterability behaviour of sludge (Mikkelsen, 2001).The specic resistance is mainly affected by the presence of bacterial extacellular polymers substances (EPS) (Src and Cetin, 1989). EPS in activated sludge occur as a capsule surrounding the bacterial cell wall which enhances occulation with larger ocs (Rosenberger and Kraume, 2002). The ocs arrange themselves so as to leave large pores that would offer little resistance to ow during ltration. After aerobic and anaerobic treatment, a deterioration of the sludge lterability can be explained mostly by the reduction of the particle size. During, both aerobic and anaerobic digestion, the changes in the structure of ocs have apparently made the ocs more reduced and the content of ne particles increases. As the particle size got smaller and dispersed solids concentration in-

1560

L. Habiba et al. / Bioresource Technology 100 (2009) 15551560 Bouallagui, H., Rachdi, B., Hamdi, M., 2007. Anaerobic co-digestion of abattoir wastewater and the fruit and vegetable fraction of the municipal wastes. In: Proceeding of the International Conference: Technologies for Industrial Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in the Mediterranean Region, 2426 May, Jerba, Tunisia. Bouallagui, H., Ben Cheikh, R., Marouani, L., Hamdi, M., 2003. Mesopholic biogas production from fruit and vegetable waste in a tubular digester. Bioresour. Technol. 86, 8589. Bougrier, C., Delgens, J., Carrre, H., 2007. Impacts of thermal pre-treatments on the semi-continuous anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge. Biochem. Eng. J. 34, 2027. Callaghan, F.J., Wase, D.A.J., Thayanithy, K., Forster, C.F., 2002. Continuous codigestion of cattle slurry with fruit and vegetable wastes and chicken manure. Biomass Bioenerg. 27, 7177. Chang, G.R., Liu, J.C., Lee, D.J., 2001. Co-conditioning and dewatering of chemical sludge and waste activated sludge. Water Res. 35, 786794. Chen, Y., Cheng, J.J., Creamer, K.S., 2007. Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour. Technol.. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2007.01.057. Dinsdale, R.M., Premier, G.C., Hawkes, F.R., Hawkes, D.L., 2000. Two-stage anaerobic co-digestion of waste activated sludge and fruit/vegetable waste using inclined tubular digesters. Bioresour. Technol. 72, 159168. Edelmann, W., Engeli, H., Gradenecker, M., 2000. Co-digestion of organic solid waste and sludge from sewage treatment. Water Sci. Technol. 41, 213221. Elango, D., Pulikesi, M., Baskaralingam, P., Ramamurthi, V., Sivanesan, S., 2007. Production of biogas from municipal solid waste with domestic sewage. J. hazard. mater. 41, 301304. Fernndez, A., Snchez, A., Font, X., 2005. Anaerobic co-digestion of a simulated organic fraction of municipal solid wastes and fats of animal and vegetable origin. Biochem. Eng. J. 26, 2228. } ttner, A., Dichtl, N., 2007. Operating problems Fricke, K., Santen, H., Wallmann, R., Hu in anaerobic digestion plants resulting from nitrogen in MSW. Waste Manage. 27, 3043. Fu, S.T., Yu, S.L., Yan, X.J., Fu, Y., 2006. Co-digestion of waste activated sludge and kitchen garbage. Huan Jing Ke Xue 27, 14591522. Ghosh, S., 1991. Pilot-scale demonstration of 2-phase anaerobic digestion of activated-sludge. Water Sci. Technol. 23, 11791188. Hartmann, H., Ahring, B.K., 2005. Anaerobic digestion of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste: inuence of co-digestion with manure. Water Res. 39, 15431552. Heo, N.H., Park, S.C., Lee, J.S., Kang, H., Park, D.H., 2003. Single-stage anaerobic codigestion for mixture wastes of simulated Korean food waste and waste activated sludge. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 107, 567580. Hong-Wie, Y., David, E.B., 2007. Anaerobic co-digestion of algal sludge and waste paper to produce methane. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 30134. Lee, C.H., Liu, J.C., 2000. Enhanced sludge dewatering by dual polyelectrolytes conditioning. Water Res. 34, 44304436. Mikkelsen, L.H., 2001. The shear sensitivity of activated sludge Relations to lterability, rheology and surface chemistry. Colloids Surfaces A 182, 114. Movahedian Attar, H., Bina, B., Moeinian, K.H., 2005. Effects of aeration rate and detention time on thermophilic aerobic digestion of mixed sludge and its dewaterability. Int. J. Environ. Sci.Tech. 2, 105111. Krupp, M., Schubert, J., Widmann, R., 2005. Feasibility study for co-digestion of sewage sludge with OFMSW on two wastewater treatment plants in Germany. Waste Manage. 25, 393402. Mshandete, A., Kivaisi, A., Rubindamayugi, M., Mattiasson, B., 2004. Anaerobic batch co-digestion of sisal pulp and sh wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 95, 1924. Murthy, S.N., 1998. Bioocculation: implications for activated sludge properties and wastewater treatment. Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, July 23, 1998. Pollice, A., Giordano, C., Laera, G., Saturno, D., Mininni, G., 2007. Physical characteristics of the sludge in a complete retention membrane bioreactor. Water Res. 41, 18321840. Rosenberger, S., Kraume, M., 2002. Filterability of activated sludge in membrane bioreactors. Desalination 146, 373379. Sharma, V.K., Testa, C., Lastella, G., Cornacchia, G., Comparato, M.P., 2000. Inclinedplug-fow type reactor for anaerobic digestion of semi-solid waste. Appl. Energ. 65, 173185. StatSoft Inc, 1997. Statistica for Windows, Computer program manual, Tulsa. Stroot, P.G., Mcmahon, K.D., Mackie, R.D., Raskin, L., 2001. Co-digestion of municipal solid waste and biosolids under various mixing conditions I. Degester performance. Water Res. 35, 18041816. Src, G., Cetin, F.D., 1989. Effect of temperature, pH and DO concentration on ltration on lterability and compressibility of activated sludge. Water Res. 23, 13891395.

creased, the passage ways of water through the cake and lter medium during ltration was clogged, the resistance to the ow of water increased and so the specic resistance to ltration increased (Src and Cetin, 1989). Deterioration of sludge dewaterability is greater in the case of aerobic processes because of much higher bacterial growth following decay as well as mechanical stress, which leads to greater disintegration and formation of ne particles. On the contrary, the disintegration of sludge during anaerobic digestion can be explained mostly by the degradation of EPS responsible for oc formation (Borowski and Szopa, 2007). After anaerobic co-digestion with the FVW, specic resistance was lower than after anaerobic digestion of AS alone. So, the presence of organic waste residues improves the lterability measured of AS in case of bres presence in this substrate forming a protective layer to the lter medium reducing so the plugging problem. 4. Conclusion It is concluded that the anaerobic co-digestion of AS with the FVW is benecial and constitutes an interesting solution to overcome the low biodegradability and the low C/N ratio of AS. This resulted to better biogas yield and a highly buffered system. Different mixture ratios were investigated. The optimum operating conditions of all the digesters were found to be a mixture of 30:70 (AS:FVW) in terms of the stability and performance. The VS removal efciency and specic biogas production in this condition achieved 88% and 0.63 L g1VS added, respectively, corresponding to an HRT of 10 d and an organic loading rate of 1.03 g VS L1 d1. The high performance and stability obtained with this mixture digestion could be due to positive synergism and an optimal balance of nutrients in the digester medium. The efuent lterability efciency was also investigated. The results show that the an anaerobic sludge obtained from anaerobic co-digestion of AS with FVW present a good lterability than that obtained from anaerobic digestion of AS alone. The presence of organic waste residues improves the lterability in case of bres presence in this substrate. Acknowledgement The authors wish to acknowledge the Ministry of Superior Education and Scientic Research and Technology, which has facilitated the carried work. References
dag , O.N., Sponza, D.T., 2005. Co-digestion of industrial sludge with municipal Ag solid wastes in anaerobic simulated landlling reactors. Process Biochem. 40, 18711879. Alatriste, M., Felipe, S., Parviz, C., Huub, H., Ahring, J., Birgitte, K., Iranpour, R., 2006. Anaerobic codigestion of municipal, farm and industrial organic wastes: a survey of recent literature. Water Environ. Res. 78, 607636. American Public Health Association/American Water Works Association/Water Environment Federation, 1995. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 19th ed., Washington DC. Bjrnsson, L., Murto, M., Mattiasson, B., 2000. Evaluation of parameters for monitoring an anaerobic co-digestion. Appl. Microbial Biotechnol. 54, 844849. Bolzonella, D., Pavan, P., Battistoni, P., Cecchi, F., 2005. Mesophilic anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge: inuence of the solid retention time in the wastewater treatment process. Process Biochem. 40, 14531460. Borowski, S., Szopa, J.S., 2007. Experiences with the dual digestion of municipal sewage sludge. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 11991207.