• Energy Research

This presentation will provide an overview on role of anaerobic digestion in microalgae biorefineries intended to recover value-added bio-based products and bioenergy from waste streams. Firstly, the results of several research studies conducted at bench and pilot-scale microalgae biorefineries treating industrial and urban wastewater will be summarised. Then, the sustainability of these processes according to environmental and social life cycle assessments will be presented. As will be seen, value-added products as natural pigments (phycobiliproteins and carotenoids) could be recovered along with biogas from extracted biomass, providing economic and environmental benefits. However, there are still social barriers to be tackled by means of education and regulation to enhance social acceptance and steer the implementation of a circular bioeconomy. This research has received funding from MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and “ERDF A way of making Europe’’ under the projects AL4BIO (RTI2018-099495-B-C21) and Cyan2Bio (PID2021-126564OB-C32). M. Bellver acknowledges her grant PRE2019-091552 funded by MCIN/AEI/ 10.13039/501100011033 and “ESF Investing in your future”. E. Ruales acknowledges her grant 2020 FISDUR 00592 funded by AGAUR (Generalitat de Catalunya).

In this study the environmental impact of the anaerobic digestion (AD) of sewage sludge within an activated sludge wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) was investigated. Three alternative AD systems (mesophilic, thermophilic, and temperature-phased anaerobic digestion (TPAD)) were compared to determine which system may have the best environmental performance. Two life cycle assessments (LCA) were performed considering: (i) the whole WWTP (for a functional unit (FU) of 1 m3 of treated wastewater), and (ii) the sludge line (SL) alone (for FU of 1 m3 of produced methane). The data for the LCA were obtained from previous laboratory experimental work in combination with full-scale WWTP and literature. According to the results, the WWTP with TPAD outperforms those with mesophilic and thermophilic AD in most analyzed impact categories (i.e., Human toxicity, Ionizing radiation, Metal and Fossil depletion, Agricultural land occupation, Terrestrial acidification, Freshwater eutrophication, and Ozone depletion), except for Climate change where the WWTP with mesophilic AD performed better than with TPAD by 7%. In the case of the SL alone, the production of heat and electricity (here accounted for as avoided environmental impacts) led to credits in most of the analyzed impact categories except for Human toxicity where credits did not balance out the impacts caused by the wastewater treatment system. The best AD alternative was thermophilic concerning all environmental impact categories, besides Climate change and Human toxicity. Differences between both LCA results may be attributed to the FU.

Microalgal biomass harvesting by inducing spontaneous flocculation (bioflocculation) sets an attractive approach, since neither chemicals nor energy are needed. Indeed, bioflocculation may be promoted by recycling part of the harvested microalgal biomass to the photobioreactor in order to increase the predominance of rapidly settling microalgae species. The aim of the present study was to improve the recovery of microalgal biomass produced in wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds (HRAPs) by recycling part of the harvested microalgal biomass. The recirculation of 2% and 10% (dry weight) of the HRAPs microalgal biomass was tested over one year in an experimental HRAP treating real urban wastewater. Results indicated that biomass recycling had a positive effect on the harvesting efficiency, obtaining higher biomass recovery in the HRAP with recycling (R-HRAP) (92-94%) than in the control HRAP without recycling (C-HRAP) (75-89%). Microalgal biomass production was similar in both systems, ranging between 3.3 and 25.8 g TSS/m2d, depending on the weather conditions. Concerning the microalgae species, Chlorella sp. was dominant overall the experimental period in both HRAPs (abundance >60%). However, when the recycling rate was increased to 10%, Chlorella sp. dominance decreased from 97.6 to 88.1%; while increasing the abundance of rapidly settling species such as Stigeoclonium sp. (16.8%, only present in the HRAP with biomass recycling) and diatoms (from 0.7 to 7.3%). Concerning the secondary treatment of the HRAPs, high removals of COD (80%) and N-NH4+ (97%) were found in both HRAPs. Moreover, by increasing the biomass recovery in the R-HRAP the effluent total suspended solids (TSS) concentration was decreased to less than 35 mg/L, meeting effluent quality requirements for discharge. This study shows that microalgal biomass recycling (10% dry weight) increases biomass recovery up to 94% by selecting the most rapidly settling microalgae species without compromising the biomass production and improving the wastewater treatment in terms of TSS removal.

This review aims to provide an overview of household biogas digester implementation in rural areas of Latin America. It considers the history of household digesters in Latin America, including technical, environmental, social and economic aspects. Several successful experiences have been promoted during the last decade, including the creation of the Network for Biodigesters in Latin America and the Caribbean (RedBioLAC) that provides a forum to coordinate implementation and research programmes throughout the continent. Although the potential of this technology is well demonstrated, some barriers are identified, such as the need for technical improvements, lack of social acceptance and high investment costs. Thus, further efforts should be undertaken to overcome these barriers and improve the technical performance, social acceptance, economic benefits and environmental impact in order to enhance its wide-spread dissemination in energy poor communities. Peer Reviewed

Hydrothermal pretreatment of five lignocellulosic substrates (i.e. wheat straw, rice straw, biomass sorghum, corn stover and Douglas fir bark) were conducted in the presence of CO2 as a catalyst. To maximize disintegration and conversion into bioenergy (methane and hydrogen), pretreatment temperatures and subsequent pressures varied with a range of 26-175 °C, and 25-102 bars, respectively. Among lignin, cellulose and hemicelluloses, hydrothermal pretreatment caused the highest reduction (23-42%) in hemicelluloses while delignification was limited to only 0-12%. These reductions in structural integrity resulted in 20-30% faster hydrolysis rates during anaerobic digestion for the pretreated substrates of straws, sorghum, and corn stover while Douglas fir bark yielded 172% faster hydrolysis/digestion due to its highly refractory nature in the control. Furans and phenolic compounds formed in the pretreated hydrolyzates were below the inhibitory levels for methane and hydrogen production which had a range of 98-340 ml CH4/g volatile solids (VS) and 5-26 ml H2/g VS, respectively. Results indicated that hydrothermal pretreatment is able to accelerate the rate of biodegradation without generating high levels of inhibitory compounds while showing no discernible effect on ultimate biodegradation.

Abstract The aim of this research was to improve the anaerobic digestion of cow and guinea pig manure in low-cost unheated tubular digesters implemented at high altitude, by comparing different operating conditions and codigesting both manures. Additionally, the effect of the greenhouse on process temperature was investigated. The study was carried out in a pilot plant with 3 full-scale digesters located at the Peruvian Andes (2800 m.a.s.l.). In terms of biogas production, the codigestion ( 0.08 m biogas 3 m digester − 3 d − 1 ) outperformed guinea pig manure digestion ( 0.03 m biogas 3 m digester − 3 d − 1 ), but did not improve cow manure digestion ( 0.12 m biogas 3 m digester − 3 d − 1 ), which may be due to the characteristics of guinea pig manure. Therefore, codigestion with other local organic wastes, such as cheese whey, should be explored. The temperature measured inside the digester greenhouse (15–60 °C) was always higher than ambient temperature (10–30 °C); however the liquor temperature remained fairly constant (around 20 °C), suggesting that the greenhouse effect on process temperature was doubtful. Taking into account that the greenhouse increases implementation costs, it would be worth comparing process performance with and without greenhouse in a future study.