Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jece

Pilot-UASB reactor tests for anaerobic valorisation of high-loaded liquid T

substrates in friulian mountain area
M. Mainardis , D. Goi
⁎

Department Polytechnic of Engineering and Architecture, University of Udine, Via del Cotonificio 108, 33100, Udine, Italy

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: This work was focused on the start-up of a pilot-UASB reactor, to valorise high-loaded liquid substrates available
UASB reactor in the mountain area of Friuli-Venezia Giulia region; technical and economic convenience of full-scale UASB
Energy recovery reactor activation, treating condensate pulp and paper wastewater, was evaluated. Leachate, obtained from
Pilot plant organic fraction of municipal solid waste, and cheese whey were studied as well, as alternative feeds for UASB
Cheese whey
reactor, given the availability of these substrate in the analysed area. The results of the pilot tests highlighted a
OFMSW leachate
Pulp and paper wastewater
good adaptation of granular biomass to diluted cheese whey (1:50 v/v), with stable operations (mean COD
removal of 84.6%), while lower COD abatements were obtained on condensate water (mean 53.6%) and, mostly,
OFMSW leachate (mean 37.0%). Organic loading rate could be progressively increased in a following step, as for
cheese whey, augmenting CH4 production (mean obtained yield of 0.149 m3 CH4/kg CODremoved). Condensate
water tests were useful to plan the revamping of full-scale UASB reactor: the approximated energy saving in the
aerobic line was evaluated as 101.3 kW (2,430 kW h/d). As for OFMSW, it was concluded that alternative dif-
ferent liquid-solid separation methods to percolation, such as mechanical pressing, should be preferred, to in-
crease influent COD (mean obtained value of 750 mg/L), given also the low amount of available waste in the
analysed territory (4142 t/year), improving potential energy recovery.

1. Introduction reactor, where highly concentrated granular sludge is located at the

Energy demand is globally rising, due to population increase and
industrial activities augment; solid and liquid organic waste manage-
ment, including food waste, yard waste, animal manure, waste acti-
vated sludge and agricultural waste, is particularly critical [1]. Anae-
robic digestion (AD) is a proven sustainable technology, alone or after
physicochemical pre-treatments [2], able to turn organic wastes into
bioenergy; AD is characterized by low greenhouse gases emissions and
lower price [3], if compared to traditional fossil fuel technologies.
Biogas, produced from AD processes, is characterized by a high calorific
value (17–25 MJ/m3), and can be burnt in internal combustion engines,
producing electricity [1].
Up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor has become pop-
ular in last decades for industrial wastewater treatment, and was spe-
cifically used to treat industrial wastewater, characterized by sub-
stantial biodegradability (high BOD/COD ratio) [4]; UASB reactor
belongs to high-rate anaerobic reactors, developed in the ‘80 s; UASB
reactor introduction allowed to uncouple biomass retention and liquid
retention, reducing Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT) to values lower
than 24 h [5]. UASB reactor configuration consists of a simple vertical
bottom and a three phase (liquid-gas-solid) separator is positioned at
the top of the reactor [6]. Wastewater is fed at the base and flows
upwards, and anaerobic reactions take place, by conversion of the or-
ganic matter into biogas.
UASB reactor can be applied to treat different industrial wastewater
streams; in the analysed wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), UASB
reactor (actually inactive) was originally aimed at treating a specific
pulp and paper wastewater stream (condensate water), coming from
lignin-sulphonate concentration process. However, from a preliminary
study, other potential substrates, amenable to be anaerobically va-
lorised, were identified in the analysed territory, namely cheese whey,
coming from local dairies, and leachate (obtained from organic fraction
of municipal solid waste, OFMSW).
Cheese whey, in particular, is the main sub-product generated in
dairies: worldwide, more than 40 million tons of whey are generated
[7]. Whey characteristics, specifically produced volume and physico-
chemical properties, strongly depend on the desired dairy product [8];
whey is generally characterized by extreme BOD (27–60 g/L) and COD
(50–102 g/L) concentration [7], as well as high nutrient content [9],
pushing for anaerobic valorisation of this substrate. In the mountain

⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mainardis.matia@spes.uniud.it (M. Mainardis), daniele.goi@uniud.it (D. Goi).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2019.103348
Received 6 June 2019; Received in revised form 14 July 2019; Accepted 7 August 2019
Available online 08 August 2019
2213-3437/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Mainardis and D. Goi
area of Friuli-Venezia Giulia region, a number of small dairies is present
[10]; the main strategy for whey valorisation is actually reuse as animal
feeding [10], even if this implicates tough transport costs, due to the
substantial absence of breeding farms in the analysed area.
There is a strong interest in AD application to pulp and paper sector,
to recover energy in biogas form, in particular from high-loaded
streams; advanced systems, such as BIOPAQ© IC (Paques) and Biobed
EGSB reactor from Biothane (Veolia Water) apply high organic loading
rates, up to 40 kg COD/m3d, by using tall reactors, effluent recycling,
efficient strategies for three-phase separator [11]. Condensate water is
one of the three pulp and paper streams entering the analysed WWTP
and originates from lignin-sulphonate concentration process; it is
characterized by a high soluble COD (sCOD) concentration, in the range
of 3–4 g/L, low alkalinity and nutrients amount, scarcity of solid matter
and significant sulphate and sulphide concentrations. Condensate
water, in addition, is characterized by a mesophilic temperature (about
35 °C), optimum for an anaerobic valorisation, because there is no need
of external heating.
Another available substrate in the area, as mentioned above, is the
organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW), separately col-
lected from household and commercial facilities. The use of OFMSW as
a substrate for AD has become very popular in the last decade [12], also
in co-digestion processes [13]. Implementing AD of food waste can
reduce the amount of organic waste transported to landfills, lowering
greenhouse gas emissions [14]. AD of OFMSW is nowadays a mature
technology, with over 560 plants for power generation reported
worldwide, with a combined capacity of over 7.3 TW h/year [15]. Li-
quid-solid separation of OFMSW was studied in literature to obtain a
highly-biodegradable liquid substrate from raw solid waste, able to give
high methane yields with fast kinetics, while residual solid fraction can
be easily composted [16–18].
Literature studies highlighted that UASB reactor and its variations,
including internal circulation (IC) and expanded granular sludge bed
(EGSB) reactors, are negatively impacted by high suspended solids
concentrations, that increase residence times [19]. On the other hand, if
compared to other solutions, UASB reactor is characterized by a sim-
plicity in construction, low space requirements, low operational costs
and high organics removal efficiency [20]. In particular, if compared to
continuously stirred tank reactors (CSTR), UASB reactor requires a
smaller size, reducing investment costs, and does not require mechan-
ical stirring [21]. UASB reactor has been successfully applied for
treating soluble wastewaters, while high ammonia nitrogen con-
centration in the influent stream was shown to prevent granulation
[22].
Odour nuisance is a problem that affects public health, because it is
capable of diffusing diseases and nuisance to the population [23], and
should be taken into account when implementing or upgrading AD
systems, as in the present study. Compounds that are known to create
odour are volatile organic compounds (VOC), ammonia, hydrogen
sulphide [24]. The increasing interest in odour at European level sti-
mulated the development of measuring techniques, that can both be
based on dynamic dilution olfactometry (applied also in the actual
study), able to give a quantitative response to odours, but also on
commercial electric nose systems [25]. Given the strong interest in
odour emission from wastewater treatment, and in particular AD, an
odour measuring campaign was planned and executed during the actual
pilot tests.
The present study was aimed at analysing the energy saving that
could be obtained from full-scale UASB reactor reactivation, treating
condensate pulp and paper wastewater, in the analysed wastewater
treatment plant (143,000 population equivalent, PE), evaluating pos-
sible operating problems that could arise in the start-up phase.
Furthermore, the possibility of anaerobically treating diluted cheese
whey and OFMSW leachate through UASB reactor was investigated, as
2
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348
potential alternative substrates to condensate water, considering the
actual amount of wastes in the local territory. A pilot-UASB reactor,
simulating full-scale UASB reactor, was projected and run on each se-
lected substrate. Meaningful suggestions were obtained for further
studies on the field, and useful data were obtained for plant managing
company to plan UASB reactor upgrading. An odour measuring cam-
paign was conducted, to analyse the impact of the anaerobic treatment
of selected substrates in smell nuisance production.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Inoculum and substrates
Granular sludge, used as inoculum in continuous UASB reactor tests,
was obtained from a full-scale IC bioreactor, treating pulp and paper
wastewater (Castelfranco Veneto, Italy).
Cheese whey samples were collected from two distinct dairies; a
mixture of first (50%) and second (50%) whey was used for continuous
tests. Given the physicochemical characterization results of the ana-
lysed whey, reported in [16], whey was diluted with tap water (1:50 v/
v), to obtain a COD concentration easily treatable by anaerobic bio-
mass. A sufficient whey volume was collected from selected dairies to
feed the pilot-plant for 1 week.
Condensate pulp and paper wastewater was obtained from the
analysed WWTP influent line and loaded into the influent storage tank
of the pilot-UASB reactor.
OFMSW was collected from a local municipal canteen, manually
selected to remove non-biodegradable materials, such as plastics or
bones, grinded and treated in the percolation bed without delay. The
percolation bed was used to separate liquid and solid fraction of
OFMSW, extracting liquid leachate from residual bagasse (as done in
[16,17]). A defined protocol was adopted for percolation tests: 20 kg of
selected waste were grinded (final diameter of waste=12 mm) and put
in the leaching bed (Fig. 1) on a porous tissue; then, tap water was
added until filling the bed in 5 L aliquots. The tissue kept the water in
contact with the solid waste, allowing soluble compounds extraction.
The leachate slowly percolated in a dedicated chamber, located in the
lower part of the bed; it was extracted every hour using a manual tap
and put in the influent storage tank of pilot-UASB reactor. The proce-
dure was repeated until about 300 L of leachate were collected. Waste-
to-water ratio was calculated to be about 15:1.
Fig. 1. OFMSW leaching bed, used for continuous UASB reactor tests.
M. Mainardis and D. Goi Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348

2.2. Analytical methods Table 1

Results of selected substrates characterization.
Liquid substrates characterization was performed according to Substrate tCOD (g/L) sCOD (g/L) VS (% w/ TS (% w/ pH
Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater [26]; the w) w)
analysed parameters were total COD (tCOD), soluble COD (sCOD), total
Diluted cheese whey 1.87 1.31 0.12 0.14 5.8
solids (TS), volatile solids (VS), pH. For condensate water tests, a dee-
Condensate water 3.57 3.57 – 0.018 4.0
pening campaign was made, to analyse some meaningful parameters; OFMSW leachate 0.75 0.70 0.05 0.06 5.2
the selected parameters were greases and oils, VFA (formic, acetic,
propionic, butanoic, iso-butanoic, valerianic, iso-valerianic acid), total
sulphur (composed of organic sulphur, sulphide, sulphite and sulphate). 2.4. Full-scale wastewater treatment plant
Volatile fatty acid (VFA) concentration was determined by gas-chro-
matography with mass spectrometer (Agilent 6890 Plus/5973 N) The analysed WWTP (143,000 PE) was a predominantly industrial
equipped with capillary column (Agilent HP-5MS). plant, treating four different influent streams: three of them, namely
Odour measure was performed following dynamic olfactometry condensate water, bleaching water and process water, came from the
technique, according to current Italian law reference (UNI EN neighbouring pulp and paper factory (total load 128,000 PE), while the
13,725:2004) [27]. The air samples were withdrawn using a vacuum residual fraction (about 15,000 PE) was composed of municipal was-
pump from three different positions: influent storage tank, biogas tewater. The wastewater treatment process consisted of municipal
headspace (three-phase separator) and effluent surnatant. The air wastewater pre-treatment (screening, sand and oil removal), UASB re-
samples were stored in plastic bags, transported to the olfactometry actor treatment of condensate water (as previously mentioned, actually
laboratory and analysed without delay. For each substrate, all the inactive), biological activated sludge treatment of wastewater streams
analysis were done in triplicate and mean values were reported in the mixture, tertiary physicochemical treatment of coagulation-flocculation
following. (to remove residual non-biodegradable COD and solid matter).

2.3. Pilot-UASB reactor tests

The pilot-UASB reactor (Fig. 2) was composed of an influent storage
tank (1,000 L volume), a pre-acidificator, where the influent was con-
ditioned (pH correction to the set point value of 6.7 and heating to the
mesophilic temperature of 35 °C) and UASB reactor column, where
granular sludge was charged and anaerobic reactions took place. A soda
solution was used for pH correction. Biogas was extracted from the
three-phase separator, located in the upper part of UASB reactor
column, and was measured in a flow cell (μFlow, Bioprocess). For
successive energy considerations, it was hypothesized that CH4 fraction
in biogas was 70%, considering also historical data from full-scale UASB
reactor operations. The whole anaerobic system (pre-acidificator and
UASB reactor column) was heated with hot water by means of a re-
circulation pump (set-point temperature value of 35 °C). The influent
storage tank and the pre-acidificator were continuously mixed to
homogenise wastewater characteristics, avoiding stratification. Peri-
staltic pumps (Watson-Marlow) were used to charge the pre-acidificator
and successively the UASB reactor column.
For condensate water and OFMSW leachate tests, a fraction of the
treated effluent (about 50%) was recirculated to the pre-acidificator, to
reduce soda consumption for pH correction and to properly simulate
full-scale UASB reactor, where effluent recycling was actually applied.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Physicochemical characterization
The results of physicochemical characterization of selected sub-
strates were summarized in Table 1, and highlighted the higher COD
and VS concentration of condensate water, if compared to diluted
cheese whey and OFMSW leachate. All the analysed substrates had an
acidic pH, more pronounced in condensate water, rather than OFMSW
leachate and diluted cheese whey.
Raw cheese whey was characterized, as expected, by a very high
COD concentration of 93.4 g/L, similar to reported literature findings
[7,10,28,29], coupled with high TS (7.0% w/w) and VS (6.0% w/w)
content; whey dilution for start-up of the pilot-UASB reactor appeared a
good solution, to avoid solid matter accumulation and biomass over-
load. Condensate water was shown to have a significant sCOD con-
centration, compatible to UASB reactor treatment without the need for
dilution, together with very low solid matter concentration (favourable
for high-rate anaerobic treatment). OFMSW leachate was similarly poor
in solid matter concentration, but was characterized also by a low
tCOD, due to the limited extraction of soluble material that was ob-
tained in the leaching bed.

Fig. 2. Pilot-UASB reactor scheme.

3
M. Mainardis and D. Goi
Table 2
Operational parameters for pilot-UASB reactor tests.
Substrate Influent flowrate (L/d) OLR (kg COD/m3d)
Diluted cheese whey 36 0.81
Condensate water 259 12.1
OFMSW leachate 259 3.0
3.2. Continuous UASB reactor tests
The operating conditions adopted for each substrate (flowrate, or-
ganic loading rate, OLR, HRT, up-flow velocity, effluent recycle) in
continuous UASB reactor tests were summarized in Table 2.
It was noticed that an adaptation period of about 1.5–2 weeks was
needed, to pass from one substrate to another. The operating para-
meters for diluted cheese whey treatment were similar to what reported
in [16], where a lab-scale UASB reactor was used to treat the same
substrate, applying a similar OLR of 0.88 kg COD/m3d. Calculated HRT
for condensate water tests was consistent with the project value of full-
scale UASB reactor (5.0 h), and up-flow velocity was similar to what
reported in [30]. As for OFMSW leachate, instead, the same influent
flowrate and HRT as those applied in condensate water tests was ap-
plied, but calculated OLR was significantly lower, due to the low COD
concentration of the leachate.
The mean obtained results from each set of tests (influent and ef-
fluent COD concentration, COD removal, CH4 production) were sum-
marized in Table 3; the tests were conducted on each substrate for
about 1 month, after the initial adaptation period of about 1.5–2 weeks.
A good COD removal (mean value of 84.6%) and an optimum
system stability were highlighted in cheese whey tests. The results
confirmed a good adaptation of granular biomass to cheese whey. In
literature it was shown that high-velocity anaerobic treatment of cheese
whey reduces biomass granulation, with a tendency to excessive pro-
duction of viscous exopolymeric substances, that reduce sludge settle-
ability and stimulate biomass washout [31]. Some washout of granular
biomass was actually observed in the starting phase of the pilot-UASB
reactor, increasing the start-up time to more than 3 weeks. A punctual
monitoring of the plant was successively done, to prevent other pro-
blems.
Long HRT was proved to be required to anaerobically treat un-
diluted cheese whey, due to the instability problems that can arise in
continuous operations [29], so dilution or co-digestion with other
substrates, having complementary characteristics, can be a more fea-
sible option. Furthermore, the notorious lack of alkalinity of cheese
whey can lead to VFA accumulation, due to the fact that the process
rate-limiting step is the methanogenic phase [32]. Other possible so-
lutions, apart from whey dilution, could be two-phase systems, that
typically result in safer operations, or alkali addition [32]. A significant
pH reduction was observed during the actual tests in the pre-acid-
ificator, when treating cheese whey: soda supplementation allowed to
continuously correct pH.
An excellent COD abatement (95–97%) was reported in [29], where
UASB reactor was used to treat undiluted cheese whey, applying a high
OLR (up to 24.6 g COD/L d), together with HRT of 2.1–2.5 d (com-
parable to actual HRT). Moreover, a high methane content in biogas of
77% and a higher methane yield than the present one, up to 0.424 Nm3
CH4/kg COD, were obtained.
Table 3
Results from continuous UASB reactor tests.
Substrate Influent COD concentration (g/L) Effluent COD concentration (g/L)
Diluted cheese whey 1.31 ± 0.49 0.18 ± 0.09
Condensate water 3.25 ± 0.39 1.53 ± 0.55
OFMSW leachate 0.75 ± 0.16 0.47 ± 0.13
4
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348
HRT (h) Up-flow velocity (m/h) Effluent recycling
40 0.055 No
6.0 0.40 Yes
6.0 0.40 Yes
A progressive reduction of whey dilution could be performed in a
successive phase of the work, to increase OLR and augment biogas
production. The possibility of implementing high-rate anaerobic re-
actors at dairy level should be further deepened, because of the huge
transport and management costs sustained by the analysed dairies; in
fact, actually cheese whey is transported for hundreds of km, and is
finally used as cattle feed [10]. Pilot-tests should be planned and exe-
cuted at dairy scale as a successive phase of the work, to further analyse
the limits of the system, in terms of OLR and HRT, as well as to evaluate
biogas contribution to energy costs reduction.
As for condensate water tests results, despite of the fact that gran-
ular biomass was already adapted to pulp and paper wastewater
treatment, a moderate COD reduction was obtained (mean value of
53.6%), significantly lower than that expected; as a consequence, a
deepening analytical campaign was planned and conducted (Section
3.3) to explain these outcomes.
A comparison with literature findings on UASB reactor tests of pulp
and paper wastewater can be fruitful: UASB reactor tests reported in
[33], where bagasse wash wastewater was treated, were shown to ob-
tain a higher COD reduction (80–85%) than that of the present work,
similar to the values reported in the project of the analysed WWTP
(80%); this high efficiency was coupled with a higher methane yield
(520 L/kg CODremoved) than the actual one. Bagasse wash wastewater
was characterized by an acidic pH (4.5–5.5), VFA concentration of 500-
3,500 mg/L, sCOD of 2,000–7,000 mg/L and suspended solids of 400-
1,000 mg/L; these physicochemical characteristics were very similar to
those of actual condensate water (Table 1), indicating a general high
methane potential of pulp and paper streams, due to the good sCOD and
VFA concentration. In [34], UASB reactor treatment of kraft pulp syn-
thetic wastewater was studied; the influent stream was characterized by
a higher pH (6.8–7.2) than condensate water, together with a lower
COD concentration (1,400 mg/L); a longer HRT of 40 h was applied, if
compared to the present study, and a good COD removal (in the range
of 75–85%), similar to what claimed in [33], was obtained.
As for OFMSW leachate, as shown in Table 2, a general low COD
concentration was obtained in the leachate after percolation process
(mean value of 751 mg/L), that affected in a negative way UASB reactor
performances: this negative outcome was probably related to the high
adopted water-to-waste ratio of 15:1 (limited amount of available
OFMSW), together with the necessity of continuously feeding UASB
reactor. Water to waste ratio, in fact, was much higher than that used in
the previous laboratory tests, reported in [16]: COD concentration of
the obtained leachate was lower than optimum range for high-rate
anaerobic systems. Thus, the low obtained COD removal (mean value of
37.0%) in continuous tests could be easily explained.
Different solutions were proposed and tested in literature to extract
liquid fraction from OFMSW. In [18], a semi-continuous reactor
treating press water, produced from mechanical solid-liquid separation
of OFMSW, was operated for 5 months, and OLR was progressively
COD removal (%) Methane yield (m3 CH4/kg CODremoved)
84.7 ± 8.3 0.149
53.6 ± 9.8 0.115
37.0 ± 16.5 0.135
M. Mainardis and D. Goi Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348

increased from 10.7 to 27.7 kg COD/m3d (higher than actual OLR); Table 5
biogas production was in the range of 647-696 m3/t VS d, with CH4 Results of analytical campaign on condensate water and UASB reactor treated
content in biogas of around 65%. Press water was characterized by an effluent.
acidic pH of 4.3, a very high COD concentration of 213.4 g/L and a Parameter Influent Effluent Increase/
significant sCOD concentration of 100.1 g/L, together with VS content concentration (mg/ concentration (mg/ reduction (%)
of 117.7 g/L; if compared to the analysed leachate (Table 1), the gen- L) L)
eral higher suitability of press water for AD process emerged.
Greases and oils 14 13 −7.1%
In [35], the effects of leaching parameters on soluble compounds TKN 2.5 5.0 +100%
extraction from OFMSW were evaluated, and it was concluded that it Formic acid <1 28 –
was possible to extract 80% of soluble substances in about 30 min, using Acetic acid 1,440 2,450 +70.1%
Propionic acid 28 <1 –
lower water-to-waste ratios (2:1 and 3:1) than those applied in the
Butanoic acid 2 <1 –
actual tests, confirming again the feasibility of this system only at la- Iso-butanoic acid 18 <1 –
boratory scale. Moreover, it was stated that increasing the temperature Valeric acid <1 <1 –
of water added to the leaching bed allowed to significantly augment Iso-valeric acid 1 <1 –
nitrogen and phosphorous concentration in the obtained leachate [35].
UASB reactor has been studied also as second phase of two-stage
anaerobic digestion of OFMSW; in particular, in [36], a series of leach A significant presence of organic sulphur was highlighted in the
bed reactors (LBR) was used prior to UASB reactor. The high-rate UASB influent, accounting for more than 50% of total sulphur. Inorganic
reactor allowed to achieve an optimum COD removal, up to 95%, and a sulphur, instead, was mostly present as sulphate in the influent stream,
smooth production of biogas. However, in a mountain area, such as the but a moderate sulphite concentration was found as well. The obtained
analysed one, the implementation of two-stage reactors appears cum- data on condensate water in this analytical campaign were coherent
bersome at full-scale, given the needed investment cost and the huge with historical process data available in the analysed WWTP.
technical requirements to run the reactor. In the UASB reactor effluent a significant degradation of organic
Given the difficulties to obtain a high efficiency percolation process sulphur arose: this high abatement (91%) was coupled with sulphate
at pilot scale, it could be concluded that mechanical separation would concentration augment (+11.8%). Moreover, an increase in sulphite
be a more feasible process, when scaling up the system, to obtain a high concentration was found in the treated effluent, highlighting some re-
COD in the liquid fraction, and consequently feed UASB reactor with an duction of other S forms. Finally, a meaningful outcome could be that
optimum OLR. Actually, there exist in North-east of Italy some ex- globally a 28% reduction of sulphur concentration was measured after
amples of full-scale systems where OFMSW is first mechanically sepa- UASB reactor process, indicating significant generation of H2S in the
rated into a liquid fraction, used in co-digestion with excess sewage gaseous phase, that should be properly removed before biogas com-
sludge, and a residual solid fraction, characterized by a lower mass and bustion, to prevent downstream equipment damage and environmental
volume, that is sent to composting process. This good approach could poisoning [38].
be extended also to the analysed area and has to be evaluated in a The results of the other detailed physicochemical analysis, re-
subsequent work. Moreover, the impact of solid-liquid percolation on garding VFA, TKN and greases and oils, were reported in Table 5. The
composting process should be analysed. very low N content of condensate water was highlighted and was co-
The simplicity of UASB reactor pushes for its wider application, in herent with the results reported in [16]: nutrient addition should be
particular in developing countries, and the results obtained in the planned in full-scale continuous operations, to achieve optimum mi-
present work can be a first step for increasing the diffusion of this croorganism activity, for example through NH3 supplementation. A
technology, as a sustainable decentralized solution for the treatment of very high acetic acid concentration arose in raw condensate water,
both domestic wastewater and liquid leachate, obtained from OFMSW highlighting a strong methane production potential [39]; however, in
[6]; the application of UASB reactor can be particularly interesting for the effluent VFA concentration unexpectedly increased, probably due to
rural and little communities, due to its simple construction and easy an unbalanced process, where acidogenesis was faster than methano-
operations [6], and energy produced from biogas can be used to pro- genesis (VFA accumulation took place). This observation was consistent
duced heat or electricity. with the moderate COD reduction observed in continuous tests (Section
3.2). Finally, a reduction in the concentration of more complex VFA,
such as propionic and butanoic acid, was observed in the treated ef-
3.3. Analytical campaign on condensate water fluent, indicating degradation of large molecules in smaller ones.

Sulphur fractioning was executed on condensate water, given the

3.4. Energy analysis
high concentration of sulphur compounds commonly encountered in
this stream, that can affect downstream biogas purification; the results
A simplified analysis of the energy saving that could be obtained
were reported in Table 4. It should be reminded that, in anaerobic
with UASB reactor reactivation in the analysed WWTP treating con-
environment, sulphur compounds can be converted to hydrogen sul-
densate water was done, considering mean hydraulic and load char-
phide (H2S) [37].
acteristics of the four influent streams (condensate water, bleaching
water, process water, municipal wastewater), and the results were re-
Table 4
ported in Table 6: it was seen that condensate water accounted for
Results of sulphur fractioning on condensate water and UASB reactor treated
effluent.
about 4% of the total influent flow, but its COD load was up to 24% of
total WWTP load, due to its very high COD concentration. Considering
Parameter Influent concentration Effluent concentration Variation (%) flowrate, the main contributors to total influent flow were bleaching
(mg S/L) (mg S/L)
and process water, while, given the low COD concentration of process
Sulphide 0.0 1.0 – water, bleaching water alone contributed to more than 60% of total
Sulphite 7.9 23.3 +195% COD load.
Sulphate 37.2 41.6 +11.8% For energy saving estimations (Table 7), it was considered an op-
Organic sulphur 53.0 4.5 −91.5%
timum COD removal of 80% in UASB reactor treatment of condensate
Total sulphur 98.1 70.4 −28.2%
water, that could be obtained after reactor start-up: COD concentration
in the wastewater mixture entering biological treatment would

5
M. Mainardis and D. Goi Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348

Table 6
Mean hydraulic and chemical characteristics of WWTP influent streams.
Stream Flowrate (m3/h) Flowrate (% of total) COD concentration (mg/L) COD load (kg/d) COD load (% of total)

Condensate water 48 3.9 3566 4,108 23.9

Bleaching water 510 41.9 846 10,355 60.2
Process water 478 39.2 156 1,790 10.4
Municipal wastewater 182 15.0 214 935 5.5
Total 1,218 100.0 588a 17,188 100.0

a
=mean COD concentration of the mixture.

Table 7
Simplified energy saving estimation obtained after UASB reactor reactivation.
Stream COD concentration (mg/L) COD load (kg/d) Aeration flowrate (Nm3/h) Energy consumption for aeration (kW)

Mix without UASB reactor 588 17,188 7,542 528.0

Mix with UASB reactor 476 13,900 6,096 426.7

Table 8
Results of odour measure campaign on selected substrates.
Substrate Influent tank concentration (ou/m3) Effluent concentration (ou/m3) Biogas concentration (ou/m3)

Diluted cheese whey 59 500 5533

Condensate water 4,900 23,300 84,333
OFMSW leachate 4,200 11,700 93,000

decrease from 588 mg/L to 476 mg/L (-19.1%), and COD load would
decrease in the same proportion. In the analysed WWTP, specific energy
consumption of air diffusion system in activated sludge basins was
evaluated to be around 0.070 kW h/Nm3 air: consequently, the energy
saving that could be obtained after UASB reactor section reactivation
was estimated as 101.3 kW (2,430 kW h/d), corresponding to an eco-
nomic saving of about 365 €/d (considering the mean energy cost of
0.15 €/kWh, actually sustained by the plant managing company). The
reduction in sludge production (disposal cost of about 100 €/t), coupled
with electric and thermal energy production in co-generative unit,
fuelled with biogas, would further enhance the positive energy balance.
It should be reminded that energy expense is a major factor in activated
sludge treatment: due to the presence of multiple biological species that
form the activated sludge, the process requires a continuous aeration of
the mixed liquor to supply sufficient oxygen to the biomass [40], so the
reduction of air supply significantly reduces WWTP operating costs.
3.5. Odour analysis campaign
Odour analysis campaign results were summarized in Table 8; it
appeared evident that the high cheese whey dilution reduced smell
nuisance production from this substrate by two orders of magnitude in
the influent tank and by one order of magnitude in the biogas line, if
compared to the other substrates. Condensate water produced a higher
odour concentration than OFMSW leachate in the influent tank, prob-
ably due to its high VFA concentration, while in the biogas line odour
production was more intense from OFMSW leachate, rather than con-
densate water.
In literature, VFA concentration was used as an indicator to quantify
odour production potential from a given substrate, particularly when
treating animal manure [41], so the high VFA concentration of con-
densate water (Section 3.3) could be related to its high odour produc-
tion. Moreover, in condensate water H2S production, from reduction of
other sulphur species (Section 3.3), contributed to increase odour
production: H2S was considered in literature as a significant odorant
specie, in particular in sewer networks [42].
A high efficiency odour removal system should be planned, to avoid
excessive smell nuisance to WWTP workers and local population;
however, in the studied WWTP a high efficiency chemical scrubbing
system was installed, able to abate odour concentration with high ef-
ficiency; furthermore, this system was properly dimensioned to treat
also the exhaust air flow from UASB reactor section.
4. Conclusions
A pilot-UASB reactor was installed in a medium potentiality was-
tewater treatment plant, to evaluate the technical feasibility of UASB
reactor reactivation treating condensate pulp and paper water, in terms
of COD removal efficiency and energy saving in the biological line.
Different high-loaded liquid substrates from the original stream were
tested as well, to verify their suitability for UASB reactor anaerobic
treatment. A good and stable COD removal (mean 84.6%) was observed
on diluted cheese whey (1:50 v/v), with moderate methane production,
while lower COD removal was obtained on condensate pulp and paper
wastewater and OFMSW leachate. A progressive increase in OLR, with
dilution reduction, could allow to increase methane yield in a succes-
sive phase, as for cheese whey treatment. As for condensate water, it
was observed that a high VFA concentration was present in UASB re-
actor effluent, underlining a strong system instability, with prevalence
of acidogenesis phase on methanogenesis. The reactivation of UASB
reactor full-scale unit, however, could allow, as shown in the simplified
energy analysis, to significantly reduce the COD load on the aerobic
basins, reducing oxygen consumption and energy expenses. Finally, as
for OFMSW leachate, a low COD concentration was obtained after or-
ganic waste percolation, that consequently affected in a negative way
the results of continuous tests. It was suggested that, for scaling up the
system, a mechanical solid-liquid separation method, such as mechan-
ical pressing, should be preferred to obtain a high-loaded biodegradable
substrate, amenable to be treated in UASB reactor.
Declaration of Competing Interest
None
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Friuli-Venezia Giulia region (PAR FSC
2007-2013- LR 47/78, Action line 3.1.1, “UASB pre-treatment to

6
M. Mainardis and D. Goi
optimize energy recovery and smell nuisance reduction”, grant number
0797). The authors would like to thank CAFC S.p.A. for technical and
financial support and LOD S.r.l. for executing odour analysis campaign.
The authors also acknowledge Friuli-Venezia Giulia facilities,
namely Artelatte (Ovaro, Ud) and Val Tagliamento (Enemonzo, Ud)
dairies, Mosaico pulp and paper factory and Tolmezzo municipal can-
teen.
References
[1] L. Zhang, K.C. Loh, J. Zhang, Enhanced biogas production from anaerobic digestion
of solid organic wastes: current status and prospects, Bioresour. Technol. Reports 5
(2019) 280–296, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2018.07.005.
[2] M. Simonetti, G. Rossi, V. Cabbai, D. Goi, Tests on the effect of ultrasonic treatment
on two different activated sludge waste, Environ. Prot. Eng. 40 (1) (2014) 23,
https://doi.org/10.5277/epe140102.
[3] Y. Li, Y. Chen, J. Wu, Enhancement of methane production in anaerobic digestion
process: A review, Appl. Energy 240 (2019) 120–137, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2019.01.243.
[4] T. Abbasi, S.A. Abbasi, Formation and impact of granules in fostering clean energy
production and wastewater treatment in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB)
reactors, Renew. Sustain. En. Rev. 16 (3) (2012) 1696–1708, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.rser.2011.11.017.
[5] M.A. Latif, R. Ghufran, Z.A. Wahid, A. Ahmad, Integrated application of upflow
anaerobic sludge blanket reactor for the treatment of wastewaters, Water Res. 45
(16) (2011) 4683–4699, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.05.049.
[6] J.R. Adhikari, S.P. Lohani, Design, installation, operation and experimentation of
septic tank- UASB reactor wastewater system, Renew. En. 143 (2019) 1406–1415,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.04.059.
[7] A.R. Prazeres, F. Carvalho, J. Rivas, Cheese whey management: a review, J.
Environ. Manage. 110 (2012) 48–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2012.05.
018.
[8] L. Treu, P. Tsapekos, M. Peprah, S. Campanaro, A. Giacomini, V. Corich,
P.G. Kougias, I. Angelidaki, Microbial profiling during anaerobic digestion of cheese
whey in reactors operated at different conditions, Bioresour. Technol. 275 (2019)
375–385, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.12.084.
[9] J.P. Kushwaha, V.C. Srivastava, I.D. Mall, Sequential batch reactor for dairy was-
tewater treatment: parametric optimization; kinetics and waste sludge disposal, J.
Environ. Chem. Eng. 1 (4) (2013) 1036–1043, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2013.
08.018.
[10] M. Mainardis, S. Flaibani, M. Trigatti, D. Goi, Techno-economic feasibility of
anaerobic digestion of cheese whey in small Italian dairies and effect of ultrasound
pre-treatment on methane yield, J. Environ. Manage. 246 (2019) 557–563, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.06.014.
[11] T. Meyer, E.A. Edwards, Anaerobic digestion of pulp and paper mill wastewater and
sludge, Water Res. 65 (2014) 321–349, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.07.
022.
[12] J. Mata-Alvarez, Biomethanization of the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid
Waste, IWA, 2003.
[13] V. Cabbai, N. De Bortoli, D. Goi, Pilot plant experience on anaerobic codigestion of
source selected OFMSW and sewage sludge, Waste Manage. 49 (1) (2016) 47–54,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.12.014.
[14] D. Kondusamy, A.S. Kalamdhad, Pre-treatment and anaerobic digestion of food
waste for high rate methane production – a review, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2 (3)
(2014) 1821–1830, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2014.07.024.
[15] IEA, Task 37 Biogas Country Overview 37 International Energy Agency Bioenergy
Task, 2014.
[16] M. Mainardis, V. Cabbai, G. Zannier, D. Visintini, D. Goi, Characterization and BMP
tests of liquid substrates for high-rate anaerobic digestion, Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q.
31 (2018) 509–518, https://doi.org/10.15255/CABEQ.2017.1083.
[17] R. Campuzano, S. Gonzalez- Martinez, Extraction of soluble substances from organic
solid municipal waste to increase methane production, Bioresour. Technol. 178
(2015) 247–253, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.08.042.
[18] S.E. Nayono, J. Winter, C. Gallert, Anaerobic digestion of pressed off leachate from
the organic fraction of municipal solid waste, Waste Manage. 30 (10) (2010)
1828–1833, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.09.019.
[19] M.J. Cooney, K. Rong, K.M. Lamichhane, Cross comparative analysis of liquid phase
anaerobic digestion, J. Water Process Eng. 29 (2019) 100765, , https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jwpe.2019.02.005.
[20] D. Karadag, O.E. Koroglu, B. Ozkaya, M. Cakmakci, S. Heaven, C. Banks, A. Serna-
Maza, Anaerobic granular reactors for the treatment of dairy wastewater: A review,
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 7 (2019) 103348
Int. J. Dairy Technol. 68 (4) (2015) 459–470, https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.
12252.
[21] C. Rico, J.A. Montes, J.L. Rico, Evaluation of different types of anaerobic seed
sludge for the high rate anaerobic digestion of pig slurry in UASB reactors,
Bioresour. Technol. 238 (2017) 147–156, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.
04.014.
[22] L.W. Hulshoff Pol, W.J. de Zeeuw, Z.T.M. Velzeboer, G. Lettinga, Granulation in
UASB reactors, Water Sci. Technol. 15 (1983) 291–304.
[23] V. Orzi, B. Scaglia, S. Lonati, C. Riva, G. Boccasile, G.L. Alborali, F. Adani, The role
of biological processes in reducing both odour impact and pathogen content during
mesophilic anaerobic digestion, Sci. Total Environ. 526 (2015) 116–126, https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.04.038.
[24] D.B. Parker, J.E. Gilley, B. Woodbury, K.H. Kim, S. Bartelt-Hunt, X. Li, D. Snow,
G. Galvin, Odorous VOC emission following land application of swine manure
slurry, Atmos. Environ. 66 (2013) 91–100, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.
2012.01.001.
[25] V. Orzi, C. Riva, B. Scaglia, G. D’Imporzano, F. Tambone, F. Adani, Anaerobic di-
gestion coupled with digestate injection reduced odour emissions from soil during
manure distribution, Sci. Total Environ. 621 (2018) 168–176, https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.scitotenv.2017.11.249.
[26] APHA, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 22st ed.,
American Public Health Association, America Water Works Association, Water
Environment Federation, Washington DC, 2012.
[27] UNI, (Italian Legislation Body), Air Quality- Odour Concentration Determination
Using Dynamic Olfactometry, (2004).
[28] F. Carvalho, A.R. Prazeres, J. Rivas, Cheese whey wastewater: characterization and
treatment, Sci. Total Environ. 445–446 (2013) 385–396, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2012.12.038.
[29] T.H. Erguder, U. Tezel, E. Guven, G.N. Demirer, Anaerobic biotransformation and
methane generation potential of cheese whey in batch and UASB reactors, Waste
Manage. 21 (2001) 643–650, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0956-053X(00)00114-8.
[30] V. Del Nery, I. Alves, M.H.R.Z. Damianovic, E.C. Pires, Hydraulic and organic rates
applied to pilot scale UASB reactor for sugar cane vinasse degradation and biogas
generation, Biomass Bioenerg. 119 (2018) 411–417, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biombioe.2018.10.002.
[31] F. Malaspina, C.M. Cellamare, L. Stante, A. Tilche, Anaerobic treatment of cheese
whey with a downflow–upflow hybrid reactor, Bioresour. Technol. 55 (1996)
131–139, https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-8524(95)00187-5.
[32] C. Rico, N. Munoz, J. Fernandez, J.L. Rico, High-load anaerobic co-digestion of
cheese whey and liquid fraction of dairy manure in a one-stage UASB process: limits
in co-substrates ratio and organic loading rate, Chem. Eng. J. 262 (2015) 794–802,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.10.050.
[33] S.A. Chinnaraj, G.V. Rao, Implementation of an UASB anaerobic digester at bagasse-
based pulp and paper industry, Biomass Bioenerg. 30 (2006) 273–277, https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2005.10.007.
[34] A.P. Buzzini, E.P. Gianotti, E.C. Pires, UASB performance for bleached and
unbleached kraft pulp synthetic wastewater treatment, Chemosphere 59 (1) (2005)
55–61, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2004.09.102.
[35] R. Campuzano, S. Gonzalez-Martinez, Influence of process parameters on the ex-
traction of soluble substances from OFMSW and methane production, Waste
Manage. 62 (2017) 61–68, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.02.015.
[36] A.S. Nizami, J. Murphy, What type of digester configurations should be employed to
produce biomethane from grass silage? Renew. Sustai. En. Rev. 14 (2010)
1558–1568, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2010.02.006.
[37] Y. Chen, J.J. Cheng, K.S. Creamer, Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a re-
view, Bioresour. Technol. 99 (2008) 4044–4064, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biortech.2007.01.057.
[38] E. Surra, M.C. Nogueira, M. Bernardo, N. Lapa, I. Esteves, I. Fonseca, New ad-
sorbents from maize cob wastes and anaerobic digestate for H2S removal from
biogas, Waste Manage. 94 (2019) 136–145, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.
2019.05.048.
[39] Y. Li, Y. Chen, J. Wu, Enhancement of methane production in anaerobic digestion
process: a review, Appl. Energy 240 (2019) 120–137, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2019.01.243.
[40] M.C. Ozturk, F.M. Serrat, F. Teymour, Optimization of aeration profiles in the ac-
tivated sludge process, Chem. Eng. Sci. 139 (2016) 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ces.2015.09.007.
[41] L.H. Page, J.Q. Ni, H. Zhang, A.J. Heber, N.S. Mosier, X. Liu, H.S. Joo, P.M. Ndegwa,
J.H. Harrison, Reduction of volatile fatty acids and odor offensiveness by anaerobic
digestion and solid separation of dairy manure during manure storage, J. Environ.
Manage. 152 (2015) 91–98, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.01.024.
[42] A. Shammay, E.C. Sivret, N. Le-Minh, R.L. Fernandez, I. Evanson, R.M. Stuetz,
Review of odour abatement in sewer networks, J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 4 (4A)
(2016) 3866–3881, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2016.08.016.