Wat. Sci. Tech. Vol. 24. No. 1, pp. 53--60, 1991.

0273-1223/91 $0·00 + ·SO

Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved. Copyright© 1991 lA WPRC

COFFEE INDUSTRY WASTES

B. Gathuo*, P. Rantala** and R. MaaWi***
*Department of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Helsinki
University of Technology, 02150 Espoo, Finland
**Air-Ix Consulting Engineers, P.O. Box 453, SF-33101 Tampere,
Finland
***Forest Products Department, Helsinki University of Technology, 02150
Espoo, Finland

ABSTRACT

Over 120 000 tons coffee is processed per year in Kenya. More than 1200 coffee
factories produce a pollution loading equivalent to a staggering population
equivalent of over 240 000 000. The coffee industry is therefore the most
important industrial polluter in rural Kenya. Pulp, husks and wastewaters are
produced. Husks can be directly used as fuel. Wet pulp could be composted and
then used as a soil conditioner. Wastewaters have a high BOD5 sometimes even
exceeding 9000 mg/1. In India and Central American countries, anaerobic lagoons
are ·mainly used for the treatment of these wastewaters. In Kenya water re-use
combined with land disposal with zero discharge has been recommended. However,
in all these methods, the desired environmental soundness is rarely achieved.
Anaerobic digestion with biogas production is potentially attractive. Fuel
generated could be used for drying coffee. About 10 000 GJ of energy is
required to dry 1 ton of coffee. The potential yield of biogas from one ton of
pulp can be estimated as 131m3 • This is equivalent to 100 litres of petrol in
fuel value.

KEY WORDS

Coffee wastes, anaerobic treatment, biogas production, land disposal, water

recirculation.

INTRODUCTION

Coffee is the leading cashcrop in Kenya. Over 120 000 tonnes is processed
annually (KPCU, 1989). Coffee is grown in the districts around Mt. Kenya,
Machakos, Mt. Elgon, Kisii and the Taita Hills. These are high altitude, high
potential growing areas. The total area under coffee is about 90 000 hectares.
f
The co-operatives control about 65 % while large estates control 35 %. The
trend is to increase the co-operative (small farmer) hectarage under the crop.
Estates have their own pulping factories while the co-operatives have each a
number of factories located at convenient points for the small farmers to
d(~liver their coffee. There are over 1200 factories in Kenya.

The coffee factories are located near watercourses which are pollute~ serious-
ly by the processing during the coffee season. A survey of several r~vers and
streams between Nairobi and Thika during the processing season indicated gross
pollution. Every river and stream surveyed was anaerobic and BOD5 values grea-
ter than 10 mg/1 and even up to 100 mg/1 were recorded (Director, Ministry of
Water Development 1975).

53
54 B. GA THUO et a/.

Coffee processing wastewater is rich in organic matter. A BOD 5 of 9600 mg/1 has
been reported from wastewater from a factory with water recirculation (Thitai,
1980). Decomposting coffee waste is unsightly, smells and reduces the oxygen
content of the recipient. The wastewaters also cause eutrophication. This kind
of river water is expensive to treat for potable water due to necessity of
additional treatment units. Increase in alum consumption has been observed in
water supplies during the processing season (Thitai 1980). The unpleasant
smell of coffee wastes persists even after water has been treated. There are
also some toxic chemicals like copper and pesticides in coffee industry
wastewaters.
This paper highlights the environmental problems of coffee industry. It focuses on
the present situation in Kenya and gives some information from other coffee
producing countries. It also discusses possible further improvements to
further reduce the environmental impacts of coffee industry wastewaters.

COFFEE PROCESSING

Dry Method

In this method, cherry is picked and dried in the sun. The removal and separa-
tion of the pulp is accomplished later on in a single operation at the dehul-
ling mills.This is afairly simple process but coffee produced by this method
is of lower quality. Only about 5 % of Kenya coffee (called Mbuni) is produced
by this method (Nyaga, 1989).

Wet Method

In this method, cherry is fed into a pulper where the pulp is separated from
the parchment. Pulp is sent to waste while the parchment is fermented and
mucilage removed. Fermented parchment is thoroughly washed and soaked in water
before drying. About 10 000 GJ of energy is required to dry 1 ton of clean
coffee (Rolz, 1980).

Figure 1. Wet coffee processing method.

The parchment is then transported to a dehulling mill where it is finally

graded and sold for consumption. 95 % of Kenya coffee is processed by this
expensive method (Nyaga, 89), which is complicated but ensures high quality
coffee. However, it produces large amounts of wastes.
 Coffee industry wastes 55
s PROCESS WASTES

n A factory producing 1 ton/d of clean coffee produces wastewaters equivalent to

d domestic sewage of about 2000 people. In Kenya over 120 000 tons represents a
f population equivalent of about 240 000 000. Figure 2 presents the rough mass
n balance of coffee processing.
t
e
y

n
~

:>
RIPE Ct-ERRY

5.5 TONS - WET PA:ICESS II'G

1
CLEAN

COFFEE
TOO
/
I I
PULP HJS<S
2. TONS 200 J::G

(
WASTEWATER (22.5 M 1 )

80 KG 000 '
130 KG COO

--

Figure 2. Mass balance of a factory (modifled from Adam and Dougan

1980).

The wastes produced can be divided into liquid and solid phase. The wastewater
characteristics are described in the table 1 below. The volume of water produ-
ced varies greetly depending on the recirculation. If there is no reci;:culati-
on, the amount of water consumed per ton of clean coffee may vary from 60 up
to 90 m3 • With reci1·culation this figure can drop down to 10-25 m3 •

Table 1. Wastewater characteristics

BOD5 (mg/l) COD(mg/1) T.S.(mg/1)

~ulping Waters ( 1)
( 2)
1800-9000
860-2400
2950-14625
1390-3900
6200-11000
3600-5000 I
Fermentation and ( 1) 1200-3000 1650-2800 1950-4800
Washing Waters ( 2) 1400-3900 850-1750 2200-4600

(1) with recirculation

(2) without recirculation

Table 2 gives the characteristics of the solid wastes generated in the wet
processing method when producing coffee Arabica qua1i ty. All figures are
presented in percentages.
56 B. GATHUO eta/.
Table 2. Chemical composition of solid wastes.(After Bressani and Braham, 1980) In
fo
(p
% Pulp Husks an
In
Moisture 76.7 0 th
Dry matter 23.3 100 an
of
Ether extracts 0.48 1.7 ae
Crude Fibre 3.4 13.2 Ir
Crude Protein 2.1 11.3
Ash 1.5 6.8
Nitrogen-Free Extract 15.8 N.A
Tannins 1.80 - 8. 56 N.A
Total Pectic substances 6.5 N.A
Non-reducing sugars 2.0 N.A
Reducing Sugars 12.4 N.A
Chlorogenic Acid 2.6 N.A
Caffeine 1.3 N.A
Total Caffeic Acids 1.6 N.A

N.A. Not available

WASTE TREATMENT METHODS

Solid Wastes

Dry husks from wet and dry processing are not considered as a serious problem
because of their direct fuel value. Attempts have been made to compost husk
also for soil conditioning (Nyaga, 1989).

However, wet processed pulp has a high moisture content (Table 2). In Kenya,
pulp is usually left in heaps in the factory compound. This causes odour and
is a breeding site for flies. Moreover, the drainage from the heaps can pollute
nearby watercourses. Pulp compost contains about 3.5 % nitrogen and can be used
as a soil conditioner (Adam and Dougan, 1980). However, application of pulp as F
a manure without proper composting increases soil acidity. Other studies,
suggesting use of coffee pulp as animal feed supplement, indicate good
possibilities, although high crude fibre content is a major limitation
(Bressani and Braham, 1980). Other uses for pulp, e.g. for the production of A
ethylalcohol, are not economical (Krishnamoorthy Bhat and Deepak Singh, 1975). c
s
Wastewaters q
r:
Coffee wastes are biodegradable. Most of the conventional systems incorporating
the necessary pH control and nutrient balancing could be utilized (Brandon 'I
1949, Mathew 1978, Anderson 1977, Pahren and Saenz 1961, Loehr 1974). However, (
there are economic rather than technological constraints that limit their f
application.
I
Conventional wastewater treatment methods, like activated sludge, oxidation
ditches and rotating biological disks, have proved to be effective (Anderson
1977), but the investment and operational costs are high. Biological filters ')
have been shown to be effective in the treatment of coffee wastewaters when
the effluent is diluted to a BOD of about 300 mg/1 (Brandon, 1949). However,
those methods have rarely been adopted. Stabilization ponds are a simple and
effective treatment technique, which can be used where land is available. At a
loading rate of 100 kg BOD 5 /ha, nearly one hectare of land would be required to
treat effluent from 1 ton of processed coffee. However, by employing anaerobic
and facultative. ponds in series, a reduction in land requirements could be
achieved.
Anaerobic Lagoons

Anaerobic lagoons have a low surface-area-to-volume ratio and can be used to

treat large flows of strong wastes, usually in conjunction with aerobic
treatment.
 Coffee industry wastes 57
In India, anaerobic lagoons followed by an aeration stage have been recommended
for large pulping factories (processing about 1 ton/day). For smaller farmers,
(production capacity of less than 400 kg/day) anaerobic lagoons followed by
anaerobic contact filters have been recommended (Coffee Board of India, 1989).
In Nicaragua and most of the Central American countries, anaerobic ponds are
the main treatment facilities available. Those are generally in poor condition
.- and form breeding places for mosquitoes (Wasser, 1986). However, BOD reduction
of 70-90 % with a retention time of 10 days has been reported. After the
aeration stage over 90 % of BOD and COD reduction was reported (Coffee Research
Institute of India, 1988).

PULP
SCREEN

COMPOST

WASHING CHANNEL COFFEE

m WASHING
k WATER

'
d
e
d
s Figure 3. Full recirculation of coffee wastewater combined with land disposal.
'
d
n
f About 90 m3 of water is required to process 1 ton of clean coffee. About 80 %
of the water is discharged as wastewater into watercourses. It has been later
shown that less water will be used if pulping water is recirculated. The
quality of coffee is not impaired. With recirculation, only 22.5 m3 is required
per ton of coffee (Agaard, 1961).
g
n The current coffee waste disposal regulation in Kenya is contained in Kenya
Gazette Notice No. 827 of 19th March 1976 of the Water Act (Cap 372). All
r factories are required to install water recirculation systems and should use
about 22. 5 m3 of water per ton clean coffee. None of this water should be .,.·~

n
n
s
returned directly into watercourses but should be disposed on land.

The method applied in Kenya has many advantages:

I
n
1 Less water is used for processing, releasing more water for other uses.
d
a 2 Less wastewater is produced.
0
c 3 Less space is required for treatment. (About 80 m long seepage pits were
·e required for 15.7 tons of clean parchment coffee (Agaard, 1961)).
4 More skills for the factory operators are not required.

5 The running costs are affordable.

0
c However, investigations carried out to establish compliance with this
regulation indicated that there is still a big number of factories that have
58 B. GATHUO eta/.
no recirculation system and hence cannot have sufficient number ot pits to
contain the wastewater ( Weru, 1989). The required method should not be
considered completely environmentally sound because of the following reasons:

1 The detained water forms breeding places for mosquitoes.

2 Risk of accumulation of toxic chemicals from coffee wastes in the soil.

3 Even with recirculation system, it is extremely difficult to retain the

wastes on the land due to slopy sites.

4 Runoff often transports the wastes into the streams.

5 This method does not provide for the treatment and disposal of pulp.

Anaerobic Digestion

Anaerobic digestion combines waste treatment with fuel generation. Anaerobic

reactors have been widely used in sewage works to reduce and stabilize solids.
The biogas is used as a source of energy.

Anaerobic digesters have been tried in Kenya for treatment of coffee wastes
(Anon, 1967). Investigations done with fresh pulp as feed indicated a maximum
gasyieldof 1.21 volume per volume per day. The retention time was 60 days and
the biogas contained 58 % methane. Precomposted pulp produced higher methane
concentrations (78 %), but less gas was produced (Calzade et al, 1981). Other Tl
experiments done with pulp juice as feed in a two-phase system, yielded 0.652 fE
1 gas g" 1 volatile solids degraded. The retention time was 8 days in the 1!
methanogenic phase. 73% of biogas was methane (Calzade et al, 1984). tl

W<
Laboratory Studies eJ
Wi
A preliminary investigation was designed to provide information on the C<
biodegradability of coffee wastes using single-phase anaerobic reactors at d:
37•c.Effluent from a cowdung-biogas plant was used as inoculum. Feeding was with
hi
0.01 g feed g" 1 inoculum. This was increased progressively daily by 0.01 g feed
lc
g- 1 inoculum.

Days

0 4 6 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
9
X
Cc
B
ec
\X s:
pH 6 \X rc
nc
5

4
\_._X-x-x-x-x-x p:
a
r•
2000 Gas production
H•
-Pulp t
-+- Husks
1500 -x- Waste water
--- Inoculum '/'.
+
t
w
s
ml 1000
I
..-..-+-+-+-+
+-+-+
500 ---4"1, ---, I
X~ ,+--+-~
!-.-·---~......... / '-~)r'"-..
0 4
x-x
6
'x..::.,._ -----
10
------ 18 20 22

Days

Figure 4. Gas production day" 1 by different wastes.

Top,pH measurements from wastewater effluent.
 Coffee industry wastes 59

10
~
,//""'
'E
0 __.....+ +-+
/+
8 8
g +

....
....0
..
3:
.....,
6
-coo
-+-BOO 5
~ 4
""
:!;
0
:>

~
c:"'
. 2
i
:!

--
3
w
0 2 3 4 6 7 6 9 10 II 12

Days

Figure 5. Coffee wastewater effluent characteristics.

The results indicate that wastewater produced maximum gas yield of 600 ml at a
feeding rate of 0. 05g g- 1 inoculum while pulp produced maximum gas yield of
1800 ml at a feeding rate of 0.19 g g- 1 inoculum (Fig.4). Pulp degraded faster
than husks (Fig.4). Wastewater effluent pH dropped from 8.2 to 3.6 (Fig.4).

wastewater gas production decreased with decrease of pH (Fig.4). Wastewater

effluent BOD and COD reduction continued until day 7. Very little reduction
was observed from then onwards (Fig. 5). From these observations it can be
concluded that pH control is critical for the performance of anaerobic
digestion of coffee wastewaters. Also, the different types of coffee wastes
have different biodegradability. Wastewater produced less gas probably due to
low content of biodegradable carbon material when compared to pulp and husks.

CONCLUSIONS

Coffee wastes are t:he most important industrial wastes in rural Kenya. For
economic rather than te-:.:hnical reasons, most conventional waste treatment
systems ars not suitable. Anaerobic lagoons followed by aeration stage can be
recom~ended but they cannot stabilize the pulp. However, coffee factories do
not often regard the treatment of their wastes as one step in the production
process. Also, d•1e to lack of motivation the wastewater treatment has not
alwaye been successful in meetir.g the discharge requirements. Process water
recirculation Gombined with land disposal has been recommended in Kenya.
P-owever, i~ has not been possible to provide adequate seepage pits and hence
there are still effluent discharges into water courses. This method does not
take into account the stabilization of pulp either. Anaerobic digestion offers
wc-ste treatment combined with fuel generation. Pulp can be d:'.gested and
stabilized into a more suitable soil conditioner.

REFERE~CES
Aagaard, H.~. (1«;61). Ci:-:-culation of water in coffee factory. Kenya Coffee,
Apri.:... 1;61.

J\drm, M. R. an:l Uo~.;gan J. ( 1980). Micr::C?biologic_~l metl:lc:>~~.f()~ __the disposal and

uti '.iz.ation of coffee p.C'ocessing wastes. Tropical Products Institute.
London.

Anderson, G.K.(l977). Farm and food wastes in treatment of industrial

effluents. Eds. A-:C.callely, C.F.Forster & D.A.Stafford, London.
60 B. GATHUO et al.
Wat. s.
Anon, 1967. Methane Plants. Kenya Coffee (3) 113-114. Printec

Brandon, T. W. ( 1949). Treatment and disposal of wastes from processing of

coffee. The East African Journal 14 179-186.

Bressani, R. and Braham J.E. (1980). Utilization of coffee pulp as animal feed.
Institute of Nutrition of Central America and Panama (INCAP), Guatemala.

Calzada, J.F. et.al, (1981). Biogas from coffee pulp. Biotechnology letters
vol. 3 No. 12 713-716.

Calzada, J.F. et.al, (1984). Biogas production from coffee pulp juice in one
and two phase systems. Agricultural wastes 9 (1983) 217-230.

Coffee Board of India ( 1989). Guidelines for coffee wastewater treatment.

Unpublished.

Coffee Research Insti'i:ute of India ( 1988). Unpublished results.

Director of Water Development, (1975). Recirculation of water combined with

land treatment as a solution to the problem of rive:::- pollution from
coffee factories.

Krishnamoorty Bhat, P. and Deepak Singh, M.B.(l975). Alcohol from coffee waste.
J. Coffee Res. ~ 71-72. A
in
K.P.C.U.,(l989). Unpublished data from Kenya Planters Co Operative Union. de
sl
Loehr, R.C.(l974). Agricultural waste management_. New York: Academic Press 576 bi
pp. sc
st
Mathew, P.K.(l978). The problem of water pollution in coffee plantation£. di
Indian coffee 42 343-344.

Nyaga, (1989). Extension Manager, K.P.C.U. Personal Co~munication.

Pahren, H.A. and Saenz, R.F.(l961). Treatment of wastes from coffee processing Ac
in Costa Rica. Robert A. Taft Sanitary Eagineering Centre. Tecnnical so
report W60-2 17 pp.

Rolz, C. ( 1980). Biotechnology in green coffee processing. Central American

Research Institute for Industry (ICAITI), Guatemala Cjty, Guatemala.
Ac
Thitai, W.N.(l980). Industrial development and environment in Kenya, 1980. tr
th
Wasser, Rick, (1986). Anaerobic treatment of coffee wastewater at farm level in su
Matagalpa, Nicaragua. Graduate dissertation. Dept. of Chemical rna
Technology, University of Twentc, Netherlands. ne
Sl
Weru, P.K. (1989). Head, Water Pollution Control Division. Ministry of Water op
Development. Personal Communication.
Th
di
la
ac
kr

s.l
Th
ha
60