Overview of Anaerobic Treatment: Thermophilic and Propionate Implications ‐ Keynote Address—Association of Environmental Engineering and Science Professors—78th Annual Water Environment Federation Technical Exposition and Conference, Washington, D.C., Oct. 29–Nov. 2, 2005

Difficulties in achieving low propionate concentrations in anaerobically treated effluents are frequently reported in the literature (Ahring, 1994; Kugelman and Guida, 1989; Rimkus et al., 1982), especially at thermophilic temperatures, with concentrations as high as 1000 to 9600 mg/L sometimes produced. This paper will detail the effect of several variables on the performance of both mesophilic and thermophilic regimes. Studies concerning the effect of the following four important factors on performance are included: reactor configuration, inorganic nutrient supplementation, substrate characteristics, and the unique role of microbial consortia proximity in enhancing performance. Reactor configuration modifications, essential nutrient additions, and the importance of close microbial proximity were all found to contribute to improvement in thermophilic anaerobic digestion in all the studies. It was found that, in substrates that shunt significant amounts of the electron donor through propionate, performance was critically related to reactor optimization, with propionate removal efficiency considerably improved using intact upflow anaerobic sludge blanket granules, less so in a homogenized granule slurry blanket, and noticeably reduced even more when the completely stirred reactor configuration of homogenized granules was used. The critical importance of extremely close microbial consortia proximity in maintaining hydrogen intermediates at very low levels to efficiently convert propionate to hydrogen and acetate was demonstrated. Compared to mesophilic digestion, thermophilic digestion manifested elevated levels of propionate, except in the nonmixed reactors, which had close microbial consortia proximity. The reactor configuration with the best results was the anaerobic digestion elutriated phased treatment (ADEPT) scheme, in which the raw sludge was elutriated of its fermenting volatile fatty acids, as they are generated in a short 5- to 8-day solids retention time (SRT) in one reactor and the elutriate then metabolized by passing up through a methanogenic granule or slurry blanket (with its close microbial consortia proximity) in a separate reactor with a 20- to 50-day SRT. Loading rates and performance of the ADEPT reactor configuration were superior to the standard continuously stirred tank reactor, and ADEPT thermophilic temperatures allowed higher organic loading rates without high propionate concentrations in the effluent.

[1]  Mustafa Öztürk Conversion of acetate, propionate and butyrate to methane under thermophilic conditions in batch reactors , 1991 .

[2]  Richard E. Speece,et al.  Anaerobic Biotechnology for Industrial Wastewaters , 1996 .

[3]  R. Speece,et al.  Effect of process configuration and substrate complexity on the performance of anaerobic processes. , 2001, Water Research.

[4]  A. Noyola,et al.  Effect of trace metals on the anaerobic degradation of volatile fatty acids in molasses stillage , 1995 .

[5]  Jules B. van Lier,et al.  Effect of temperature on the anaerobic thermophilic conversion of volatile fatty acids by dispersed and granular sludge. , 1996 .

[6]  Mustafa Öztürk Degradation of acetate, propionate, and butyrate under shock temperature , 1993 .

[7]  W. Bae,et al.  Improved Anaerobic Process Efficiency Using Mesophilic and Thermophilic Elutriated Phased Treatment , 2004 .

[8]  T. Emery Iron metabolism in humans and plants. , 1982, American Scientist.

[9]  Shiro Nagai,et al.  Inhibition of the Fermentation of Propionate to Methane by Hydrogen, Acetate, and Propionate , 1990, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[10]  Joseph B Farrell,et al.  Laboratory Evaluation of Thermophilic‐Anaerobic Digestion to Produce Class A Biosolids. 1. Stabilization Performance of a Continuous‐Flow Reactor at Low Residence Time , 2005, Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation.

[11]  B. Ahring,et al.  Effects of hydrogen and formate on the degradation of propionate and butyrate in thermophilic granules from an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor , 1993, Applied and environmental microbiology.

[12]  G Lettinga,et al.  Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of high strength wastewaters , 1985, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[13]  M. Takashima,et al.  Mineral requirements for methane fermentation , 1990 .

[14]  I. J. Kugelman,et al.  Comparative evaluation of mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Phase 2. Steady state studies. Research report, September 1983-August 1987 , 1989 .

[15]  Gatze Lettinga,et al.  High rate thermophilic anaerobic wastewater treatment in compartmentalized upflow reactors , 1994 .

[16]  T. Ellis,et al.  Effect of Varying Solids Concentration and Organic Loading on the Performance of Temperature Phased Anaerobic Digestion Process , 2002, Water environment research.

[17]  E. J. Cook,et al.  Full-scale thermophilic digestion at the west-southwest sewage treatment works, Chicago, Illinois , 1982 .

[18]  Perry L. McCarty,et al.  Anaerobic wastewater treatment , 1986 .

[19]  M. P. Bryant,et al.  SOME NUTRITIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PREDOMINANT CULTURABLE RUMINAL BACTERIA , 1962, Journal of bacteriology.

[20]  Irini Angelidaki,et al.  Improving thermophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure , 1999 .

[21]  J. Andrews,et al.  Review paper the thermophilic anaerobic digestion process , 1977 .

[22]  John F. Andrews,et al.  The thermophilic anaerobic digestion process , 1977 .

[23]  K. Wuhrmann,et al.  Product inhibition in sludge digestion , 1977, Microbial Ecology.

[24]  Roger Brown Effect of temperature , 1996 .

[25]  Steve Reusser,et al.  Laboratory‐Scale Comparison of Anaerobic‐Digestion Alternatives , 2004, Water environment research : a research publication of the Water Environment Federation.

[26]  G. Zellner,et al.  Start-up and operation of a propionate-degrading fluidized-bed reactor , 1992, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology.

[27]  Birgitte Kiær Ahring,et al.  Status on science and application of thermophilic anaerobic digestion , 1994 .

[28]  R. Speece,et al.  Comparative process stability and efficiency of anaerobic digestion; mesophilic vs. thermophilic. , 2002, Water research.