.................................................................................................................

1
1. .............................................................................................................. 3
1.1 ........................................................................ 3
1.1.1 ............................................................................. 6
1.2 .............................................................................. 8
1.2.1 ........................................................... 8
1.2.1.1 ....................................................................................................... 8
1.2.1.2 ..................................................................................... 9
1.2.1.3 .................................................................................. 9
1.2.1.4 ................................................................................................... 10
1.2.1.5 ................................................................ 10
1.2.2 ............................................. 12
1.2.2.1 ....................................................................... 12
1.2.2.2 ....................................................................... 12
1.2.2.3 .................................................................. 13
1.2.3 ............................................................. 13
1.2.3.1 ........................................... 14
1.2.3.2 - ................................................. 14
1.2.3.3 ...................................................................... 15
1.2.3.4 .................................................................. 15
1.3 ............................................................... 15
1.3.1 ............................................. 18
1.3.2
....................................................................................................... 19
1.3.3 ................................................. 24
1.4 ................................................... 24
1.4.1 ................................................................... 25
1.4.2 ................................................................... 25
1.4.3 .............................................................. 26
1.4.3.1 ......................................... 26
1.4.3.2 ................................................................................. 27
1.4.3.3 ..................................... 28
1.4.4 ................................................................................. 29
2. ............................ 30
2.1 ............................................................................................................. 30
2.2 .......................... 31
2.2.1 .................................................................................................... 34
2.2.2 () .................................................................. 34
2.2.3 ............................................................................. 35
2.2.4 ............................................................................................ 35
2.3 .......................................................................... 36
2.4
................................................................................................. 38
2.4.1 .............................................................................................. 38
2.4.2 pH ................................................................................................................ 40
2.4.3 ....................................................................................... 40
2.4.4 ............................................................................................ 41
I


2.4.5 C/N ............... 41
2.5 .......................................................... 42
3. ........................................... 46
3.1 .................................................................... 46
3.2 ................................................................................ 48
4. ....................................................................................... 49
4.1 ....................... 49
4.2 ................ 49
4.3 ...................... 50
4.4 ....................................... 54
4.6 ................................................................................ 55
4.6.1 pH ......................................................................................... 55
4.6.2 (Total Solids) ....................................................................... 55
4.6.3 (Volatile Solids) ............................................................... 57
4.6.4 () .......................................................... 58
4.6.5 (H3-) .............................................. 59
4.6.6 ............................... 60
4.6.7 ................................ 61
4.6.8 (COD) ........................... 63
4.6.9 ................................................................................... 65
5. .............................................................. 66
5.1 ............................................................................................................. 66
5.2 ................................................................................ 67
5.3 ............................................................................... 70
5.4 ............................................................................................... 74
5.5 .......................................................................................... 74
5.6 ................................................................................... 75
5.7 (COD) ............................................ 76
5.8 pH ................................................................................. 76
6. .............................................................................................. 78
7. .................................................... 79
....................................................................................................... 80
............................................................................................................90

II

1. 27 (Faostat, 2003) ............................................................. 4
2.
27 -
(Nielsen and Oleskowicz-Popiel, 2008) ..................................... 5
3.
1999 2005 (GWh), (European Commission, 2008) .......................................... 7
4.
(United States Department of agriculture, 1992; Burton and Turner, 2003;
Jones, 1981: cited by , 2005) ................................................................. 11
5.
................................................................................................ 20
6.
..................................................................................... 22
7.
(Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003) .................................................................................. 35
8.
(Madigan et al., 2003) .................................................................................................. 37
9.
/ ................ 66
10. ................. 66
11. A, B, C D ........................ 67
12. A, B, C D.......................... 70
13. .................................................................... 74
14. ..................... 74
15. ............................................................. 75
16. . 76
17. pH ......................................................................................... 77

III

1. (1000 )
1999/2000-2002/2003 (IOOC, 2004) .................................................................... 17
2. (1000 )
1999/2000-2002/2003 (IOOC, 2004) ................... 17
3.
(Ahring, 2003;
Largus et al., 2004; Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003) ................................................... 32
4. (Ahring, 2003) ........... 33
5.
(Wiegel, 1990) ........................................................................................... 39
6. ..................................... 53
7. A, B, C........................ 68
8. D .................................... 69
9. A, B, C D.
...................... 69
10. A B ...................... 71
11. C D ...................... 72
12. .............................. 73

IV

1. ()
(, 2005) .............................................................................................................. 23
2. , (, 2005)............... 23
3.
, ()
Methanobrevibacter ruminantum, ( 0.7 m) ()
Methanobacterium AZ, ( 1 m) () Methanospirillium
hungatii, ( 0.4 m) () Methanosarcina barkeri,
( 1.7 m) (Madigan et al, 2003) ...................................... 36
4.
. ,

............................................................................................... 51
5. . ,
........................... 52
6.
.............................................................................................. 54
7. ................................................................................................... 55
8. () ()............... 56
9. ........................................................................... 57
10. E () ()..... 59
11. .
,
.................................................................................................... 61
12. ,
........................................................................................................ 62
13.
....................................................................................................................... 63
14. (), () .......... 64

, ,
,
, .

. ,
(CH4>60%),

. ,
.


. ,
/: i) 100/0 ( 1, 2) ii) 80/20
(

1,

2)

iii)

60/40

C1,

C2)

iv)

30/70

( D1, D2),
. - .

, 900 ml .
,
,

.

.


.

.
1


,


... .
. .

, . . , ...
,
,
,
.
...
. .
.
. ,
..,
. .. . .

,

,
. . ,
,
, .
.
. ,
...
(COD).

,
(...).
, ,
, .
, .
2

1.
1.1

,

,
.


.
,
95% ,
m3 (Erguder et al., 2000; Bas Jimenez, 2000),
27 -
, 1500 ( 1).

:

[1000 ]

[1000 ]

2051
2695
672
57
1397
1544
250
950
19383
13035
600
723
7000
6314
371
792
184
18
3862
5483
1443
2812
580
451
6700
1619
10378

3125
6332
931
498
2877
13466
340
1365
15020
26858
1000
4059
1758
9272
436
1073
85
73
11153
18112
2348
6589
1300
534
25250
1823
4851

.-27

91364

160530

[1000 ...]

[106 ]

[106 ]

1310
1721
429
36
892
986
160
607
12379
8324
383
462
4470
4032
237
506
118
11
2466
3502
922
1796
370
288
4279
1034
6628

261
529
78
42
240
1124
28
114
1254
2242
83
339
147
774
36
90
7
6
931
1512
196
550
109
45
2107
152
405

29
38
9
1
20
22
4
13
272
183
8
10
98
89
5
11
3
0
54
77
20
40
8
6
94
23
146

6
12
2
1
5
25
1
3
28
49
2
7
3
17
1
2
0
0
20
33
4
12
2
1
46
3
9

35
50
11
2
25
47
5
16
300
232
10
17
101
106
6
13
3
0
74
110
24
52
10
7
140
26
155

58348

13399

1284

295

1577

[1000 ...]

[106 ]

1. 27 - (Faostat, 2003)


, ,
,
, ,
, ,

().

, ,
.
, ,
,
. 12000
/ ,
70000
2010 (Persson, 2007).


. ,

31568 ( 2)

[106 ]

[106 m3]

[106 m3]

[PJ]
1577
31568
20519
827
: 40.3 MJ/m3 , 1 Mtoe=44.8 PJ
% : 65%

[Mtoe]
18.5

2.
27 -
(Nielsen and Oleskowicz-Popiel, 2008)

1.1.1
, 2007,
,
, 2020: i) , 20%,
ii) , 20%, iii)

20% iv) 10%
(Eurostat, 2009). ,
,
.

,
,
- ,
. ,
: i) ,
85.67 GWh
64.56 GWh ii) ,
134.8 GWh
112.5 GWh ( , 2008).
,
2005 6406 GWh,
122 GWh (1.9%) ( 3)

1999

2005

(%)

122

3756

4693

3%

149

324

10%

37

1266

56%

3942

6406

6%

8.6%

10.1%

3.
1999 2005 (GWh), (European Commission, 2008)

1.2
, ,
.
28%
,
(-, 2006).
,
.
,
.

,

.

1.2.1

, ,
,
.
2-5
, .
: i) ii) iii)
iv) v) .
1.2.1.1

85-90%
(, 1998).


1.2.1.2

.
, .
,
, , , , (
) . , ,

(, 2006).

: 1)
(BOD), 2) (COD), 3) (VS), 4)
(TOC).
(Fixed Solids, FS) (Volatile
Solids, VS) (Total Solids, TS).
(FS)

. (VS)
,
(Chynoweth et al., 1998).
,
,
(Merkel, 1981).

1.2.1.3

, ,
, ,
.


1.2.1.4
: Na+, Ca+, Mg+, Cl-, SO4-, CO3=.

, .
, .

1.2.1.5

, .
4,
.

10

4.
(United States Department of agriculture, 1992; Burton and Turner, 2003;
Jones, 1981: cited by , 2005)

New Castle

Salmonella spp.
Leptospira pomona
Bacillus anthracis
Mycobacterium tuberculosis
Mycobacterium avium
Mycobacterium paratuberculosis
Brucella abortus
Brucella melitensis
Brucella suis
Listeria monocytogenes
Clostridium tetani
Pasteurella tularensis
Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae
Escherichia coli
Coxiella burnetti
spp.

Coccidoides immitus
Histoplasma capsulatum
Microsporum & trichophyton

Eimeria spp.
Balatidium coli
Toxoplasma spp.

Ascaris lumbricoides
Sarcocystis spp.

11

1.2.2
, , ,

, ,
.

1.2.2.1

: ,
, (TS).

.

(Martzopoulos and
Nielsen, 1980).

: i) ii) iii)
iv)
v)

1.2.2.2

pH ,

pH

,
(Mu et al., 2006).
,
, .
.

12



pH. pH ,
.


. .
.

, .
(PO4-3, HPO4-2, H2PO4-, H3PO4)
,
(, 2006).

1.2.2.3

(BOD)
(COD).

. COD BOD
. COD
BOD
.
1/2000/95
,
BOD COD
: BOD5 1200 mg/l COD 4500 mg/l.

1.2.3

, (
10746/04, 2004),
(
13


,
, 2000).

,
:

-

1.2.3.1

, ,
, ,
(, ).
,

.

1.2.3.2 -

,

,
(Martzopoulos, 1979).
,
.
(,
1998; Baird et al., 2004):

14


, ,
,


( )
- (belt system)
,

1.2.3.3

(EPA, 2000):

1.2.3.4

-
.
,
. ,
, ,
.

1.3
,

( ),
.

15


850
, 8.5
(Niaounakis and Halvadakis, 2006).
95%
(Erguder et. al., 2000).
,
405600 ( 1 2), (IOOC, 2004).
,
,
.

.


.
( ),
,
( 20%) :
( 30%) ,
, olive mill waste water
(OMW OMWW) ( 50%), (Niaounakis and Halvadakis, 2006).
,
.

: i) ,
ii) iii)
.
P, K Ca (, 2007).
,
.
,
.
,
, .
16

1. (1000 )
1999/2000-2002/2003 (IOOC, 2004)

2. (1000 )
1999/2000-2002/2003 (IOOC, 2004)

17

.
,

. ,
,
, .

1.3.1
83-94% , 4-16%
(, , , ,
) 0.4-2.5%
(Cabrera et. al., 1996).
, 80%
(, , ) 20%
( ), (, 2007).
,
: i) ( , ,
) ii) ( , ) iii)
(
), ( , 1999).
, ,
,
, ,
,
.
1.6-4% w/v
,
. ,

18


: , , , ,
(Niaounakis and Halvadakis, 2006).


,
.
,
, ,
, , , .. .
3,4-
4-,
(, 2007).

.

,
, 43%
85% (Borja et. al., 1995; Alburquerque et.
al., 2004; .., 2005).

1.3.2

m3 (Bas Jimenez, 2000), 50%
.
,
,
.
(Azbar, 2004;
Borja et. al., 2006):

,

19


,
COD/BOD5 2.5 5
pH 3 6
( 80 g/l)

5
.

5.

Al-Malah

Sierra et.

Galiatsatou

Azbar et.

Eroglou

et. al.,

al., 2001

et. al., 2002

al., 2004

et. al.,

2000

2004

pH

4.52

4.5-6.0

4.9-6.5

3.0-5.9

4.86

BOD (g/l)

13.25

35-100

15-120

23-100

17.88

COD (g/l)

320

40-195

30-150

40-220

72.20

(g/l)

3.12

3-24

1.5-2.4

0.002-80

0.13

2-8

(%)
, (g/l)

0.3-23

1.3

1.0-23

1.0-1.5

- (%)

1.0-102.5

TS (g/l)

42.24
3.48

SS (g/l)
N (g/l)

5.0-15

0.5-2.0 %

0.3-1.2

P (g/l)

0.3-1.1

K (g/l)

2.7-7.2

7.81

Ca (g/l)

0.12-0.75

0.55

Na (g/l)

0.04-0.90

0.41

Mg (g/l)

0.10-0.40

0.28

20

. ,
:
(, ), ( 1)
( ), ( 2):
i)
ii)
,
.

,
(LesageMeessen et. al., 2001).

6.

21


6.

lt / tn

400-600
%

pH

BOD (g/l)
COD (g/l)

85-110

3
500-1500
500-1400
1000-1200

50-70
50

900-1500
80-110

4.5+0.3
4.5-5.0

4.5-5.0

4.8+0.3
4.5-5.0

40

4.7-5.2
40

50

33
103.4+19.5
50

0.9

40
78.2+13.6
3
27.6+5.1
0.9

1.5

0.9
62.1+15.8
1.5

0.63

1.0
3.8+1.5
0.63

4.5-5.0
90
90-100
65.7+27.1
125

TS (g/l)
TS (%)
TSS (g/l)
SS (%)

120-130
44.4+13.8
12
2.7+1.1
0.1

VS (g/l)
(%)

0.1
33.6+12.3
4.5

(g/l)
(%)

2-8
2.5+0.7
1.7
1.0-2.4

(mg/l)

(mg/l)
(%)

43.7+33.9
1.8

/ (%)
(g/l)
(%)

2-5
0.03-10
6.3+10.1
1.5

/ (%)
(%)

1
1.0-1.5

0.5
463.6

1079.3

0.3

78.8+39.6
0.3

0.37

0.28
0.5-2.3
12.2+13.3
0.37
0.37
1.0

Rossi and Malpei,

1996
Sierra et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Mulinacci et. al.,
2001
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Aktas et. al., 2001
Azbar et. al., 2004
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004

,
1994
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Azbar et. al., 2004
Aktas et. al., 2001
Caputo et. al.,
2003
Azbar et. al., 2004
Azbar et. al., 2004

22

1. ()
(, 2005)

2. , (, 2005)

23

1.3.3

, .

.
(, 2007):
58% ,

20%
12%
10% , ..
, .

.

.
,

: i) ,
(Le Tutour and Gudon, 1992; Pueli et al., 2004;
Skerget et al., 2004) ii) ( .., 1994) iii)
(Ramos-Cormenzana et al., 1995) iv) (, 2007)
v) (Gelegenis et al., 2007).
.

1.4

,
, ,
.
24



, ,
,
. ,
.

, .

1.4.1
,
.

. (,
1990):

1.4.2

(, 1990):

25

1.4.3

, ,

.
, ,

.

: (
) .
1.4.3.1

,

.
.
,
.
(, 1998). ,
.
,

.


, COD 1 gr/lt
(Rozzi and Malpei, 1996). , ,
,
50% ,

26



(, 2007). ,

.
,
,
(Lanciotti et al., 2005; Jaouani et al., 2003; Pinto et al., 2003; D
Annibale et al., 2004; Fadil et al., 2003; Garcia et al., 2000; Assas et al., 2002; Cereti
et al., 2004; Fountoulakis et al., 2002; Piperidou et al., 2000; Aggelis et al., 2003),
.
1.4.3.2

.
,
:
I.

II. ,
.
,
,
.
,
,
,
.
,
. ,
,
.

27



, C/N 25-30, 4065%, pH 6-8 5% (Huang et. al., 2004).

:





,

,


,

1.4.3.3

, ,
.
,
,

28


,
(Gunaseelan, 1997; Van Starkenburg, 1997).
,

pH, , C/N,

.

(Ahring,

2003;

Largus et al., 2004; Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003):

1)
2) ()
3)
4)
.

1.4.4
,
, , .
,
, ,
, ,
,
,
.
,
,

.

29

2.

2.1
,
,

.
, ,
(Li and Fang, 2007).
,
(Malina and Pohland, 1992):
I. ,

II.
III.
IV.
V. ,
VI.
,
, (Lettinga et al., 1999):
I. ,


II.

III. ,
,

30

2.2

,
.

3. ( I)
, ,
, ( I)
, , ,
.

II (Hydrogen-producing acetogenic bacteria).
,
. , ,
IV (Homoacetogenic bacteria) ,
, V (Acetate
oxidazing bacteria)
.
VI (Acid synthesizing bacteria),

(Angelidaki and
Schmidt, 2003).
,

( III).

31

(, , )
I

(, ,
I )
I

II

VI

2 ,CO2
IV

III

C4, CO2

I.
II.
(Hydrogen-producing acetogenic
bacteria)
III. [()
(aceticlastic), ()


(hydrogen utilizers)]

IV.

(Homoacetogenic bacteria)
V.
(Acetate oxidazing bacteria)
VI. (Acid
synthesizing bacteria)

3.
(Ahring, 2003;
Largus et al., 2004; Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003)

32


4 70%
, 30%
.
.

51%

19%

19%

30%

11%

70%

30%

4. (Ahring, 2003)

(Ahring,

2003;

Largus et al., 2004; Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003):

1)
2) ()
3)
4)

33

2.2.1

(, , )
(, ).

, , . ,

(Reith et al., 2003; Angelidaki and Schmidt,
2003).
, ,
(Miyamoto, 1997). ,
,

.

, ,
, .
(Duff and
Murray, 1996).

(Reith et al., 2003). , Yu and Fang (2000)

.

2.2.2 ()

(, )
( ), ,
( , ),
(Bitton, 1994).

34

2.2.3
,

.
pH . ,
IV (Homoacetogenic bacteria) ,
(Largus et al., 2004).

2.2.4

.
: i)
(aceticlastic), Methanosaeta
Methanosarcina ii)
(hydrogen utilizers),
. Methanosarcina,
, ,
(Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003).
7 .

7.
(Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003)

CO2 + 4H2
4HCOO- + 2H2O
4CO + 2H2O
4CH3OH
4CH3NH3+ + 2H2O
2(CH3)2NH2+ + 2H2O
4(CH3)3NH+ + 6H2O
CH3COO- + H+

CH4 + 2H2O
CH4 + 3CO2 + 2H2O
CH4 + 3CO2
3CH4 + CO2 + 2H2O
3CH4 + CO2 + 4NH4+
3CH4 + CO2 + 2NH4+
9CH4 + 3CO2 + 4NH4+
CH4 + CO2

G (KJ/mole CH4)
-130.4
-119.5
-185.5
-103
-74
-74
-74
-32.5

35

2.3

(Kates et al., 1993).
,
.

( 3). 8
.

()

()

()

()

3.
, ()
Methanobrevibacter ruminantum, ( 0.7 m) ()
Methanobacterium AZ, ( 1 m) () Methanospirillium
hungatii, ( 0.4 m) () Methanosarcina barkeri,
( 1.7 m) (Madigan et al, 2003)

36


8.
(Madigan et al., 2003)

Methanobacterium
Methanobrevibacter
Methanosphaera
Methanothermus

8
7
2
2

Methanothermobacter

2 + CO2,
2 + CO2,
+ 2
2 + CO2,
S0
2 + CO2,

Methanococcus

Methanothermococcus
Methanocaldococcus
Methanotorris

1
4
1

Methanomicrobium
Methanogenium
Methanospirillium
Methanoplanus

1
4
1
3

ethanocorpusculum

Methanoculleus

Methanofollis
Methanolacinia

2
1

Methanosarcina

Methanolobus

Methanohalobium
Methanococcoides
Methanohalophilus

1
2
3

Methanosaeta
Methanosalsum

2
1

Methanobacteriales*

Methanococcales
2+CO2, ,
+ CO2
2+CO2,
2 + CO2
2+CO2

Methanomicrobiales
2+CO2,
2+CO2,
2+CO2,
2+CO2,
2+CO2, ,

2+CO2, ,

2+CO2,
2+CO2,

Methanosarcinales
2+CO2, ,
,
,
,
,
, ,

, ,

Methapyrales
Methanopyrus

2+CO2

37

2.4

,
, pH, , C/N
.

2.4.1

5C 110

C (Ferry, 1993). ,

,
(Levin et al., 2004; Kashyap et al., 2003):
I. , 25 C
II. , 25-40 C
III. , 40-65 C
IV. ,
65 C

.
, .
,
.
. 5
.
,
,

(Tchobanoglous et al., 2003).

38

(C)
5.
(Wiegel, 1990)

,
,

(Angelidaki and Schmidt, 2003).
,
10-25 C (Vartak et al.,
1997). ,
,
.
35 C,
. ,
35 C (Reith et al., 2003).
,
,
(Bourque et al., 2008). ,

, ,
(Zupancic and Ros,
2003).

39



(Nozhevnikova
et al., 1999),
.

2.4.2 pH
pH .

pH 6 8, pH
6.8 7.5 (Lettinga and Haandel, 1993; Sorensen, 1996). p 6
(Bitton,
1994). pH
. ,
,
,
.
,

pH.

Methanobacterium

thermoalcaliphilum, pH 9
(Blotevogel et al., 1985). ,
pH
(Duval and Goodwin, 2000; Horn et al., 2003; Maestrojuan and Boone,
1991; Williams and Crawford, 1985).

2.4.3
,

. ,
, .

40


,
, , , , , , ,
.
(Stronach et al, 1986).

2.4.4

,
, .

.
, pH
.
, ,
pH . , ,
(Bitton, 1994).

(Wang et al., 1999)
(Ahring et al., 1995; Pind, et al., 2003).

(Lin, 1992).
Ni > Cu > Cd > Cr > Pb (Mueller and Steiner, 1992).


200 mg/lt.

2.4.5 C/N

,
.
.

41


, C/N 20/1 30/1 (Hawkes, 1980).
,
.

2.5
,
(Teira-Esmatges and Flotats, 2003)
(Sutton and Richert,
2004).
,
, pH
.
,

(Bujoczek, 2001; Kotsopoulos et al., 2008).

,
.
, ,
.


(Li and Sung, 2002).

,

.
Marques (2001),
, 35 C,
UASB. 70-80%
, 65-75%
. pH

42



.
Kaparaju and Rintala (2005), ,
,
35 C, CSTR.
. ,
/ 80/20,
0,30-0,33 m3/kg VS.
,
,

:
I.

(Beccari et. al., 1996)

II.

.
,
C/N . 20/1
C/N (Dalis et. al., 1996),

III. ,

IV.

-.

. ,

,

43


V.

,
(Gelegenis et al., 2007).


.
Boubaker and Ridha (2007),
, .
.
0.67 6.67 g COD/lt ,
(HRT) 12, 24 36 .
, 0.95 lt /lt
,
4.67 g COD/lt
(HRT) 12 . ,

0.67 g COD/lt (HRT) 36
.
Angelidaki et al. (2002),
, UASB.
10 70 g COD/lt ,
pH 7.5.
, 75% ,
: 65% 35%
.
Gelegenis et al. (2007),

, .
,
.
, 0%, 25%, 35% 50% (v/v)
. 35 C.

44



,

50% v/v.

45

3.
3.1

, 405600 (IOOC,
2004).
.

,
pH .
, ,
.
:





,
.
,

.

.

, ,
(Gelegenis et al., 2007; Kimchie et al., 1998;
Sanchez et al., 1995).

46



,
,
.
,
,

. ,
.
,
,
,
. ,

(Boari et al., 1984). ,
pH ,

.
, ,
, ,
. , C/N ,

.
,
.

47

3.2
,
,

. ,
,
(, 1998): i)
ii)
iii) iv)
v)
.
,

. ,

/:

i)

100/0

( 1, 2) ii) 80/20 ( 1, 2) iii) 60/40 (

C1,C2) iv) 30/70 ( D1, D2),
-.
,
.
,


, .

48

4.
4.1
...
,
, 2008.

,
.

4.2
11/09/2008 1/11/2008

.
11-12/09/2008

13/09/2008

.
14/09/2008
15-16/09/2008

35 C .

17/09/2008
18-19/09/2008

.
20/09/2008

50/50 .
1/11/2008

49

4.3
,
( 4):
I. (),
,

0.60*0.70*0.90 m.
,

.
()
II. (A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2, D1, D2),
900 ml o
III. , 4 cm,
IV. , 6 mm,

V. ()
VI. ,
VII. ,

50

4.
. ,


( 5):
I. () 36 40 lt ,

II. 1 lt,
() 36 40 lt.

51


, .
, ,

. ,

.
, ,

.
6
.

5. . ,

52

6.

53

4.4
,
( ),
, 900 ml .
,
35 C .
,
() 1 mm,
. ,

, (VS).

(), -
, ,
,

( 6). ,
.
,
, .

.

6.

54

4.6

, .

4.6.1 pH
pH Portable pH/mV/ C
Meter HANNA Instruments HI8424, 7.

7.

4.6.2 (Total Solids)

Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater
(APHA, 2005).
:

55



Kern & Sohn Gmb4, Type ABJ 120-4M, 4
( 8)
Memmert Edelstahl, Type 10 40 ( 8)

8. () ()
,
(TS) : i) 103
105 C ii) iii)
iv)
70 gr v)
103
105 C 24 vi) 24 ,
.
(TS) :

( - ) * 100
% O (TS) =
( - )

56


:
= +
=
= +

4.6.3 (Volatile Solids)

Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater
(APHA, 2005). :

Kern & Sohn Gmb4, Type ABJ 120-4M, 4


Nabertherm L51R ( 9)

9.
,
(VS) : i) ,
,
550 C ii)
550 C iii)
.
57


(VS) :

( - ) * 100
% (VS) =
( - )
:
= +
=
= +
550 C

4.6.4 ()
Kjeldahl
Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater
(APHA, 2005). :
Velp, UDK 132 ( 10)
Kjeldahl
Buchi HI 430 ( 10)
:

2%


0,05

10

,
:
,
, ,
Kjeldahl,
.
58



:

%

* N* * 100
1000 *

:
= ml
= 0,05
= 14
= gr

10. E () ()

4.6.5 (H3-)
Kjeldahl
Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater
(APHA, 2005).

59


:
Velp, UDK 132
Kjeldahl
:
2%
0,1
10

,
:
pH 9,5 NaOH 10N
Kjeldahl.
:

ppm (mg/lt) =

* * * 1000

:
= ml
= 0,1
= 14
= ml
,
.

4.6.6
,

.
.

60


, ,
.
,
.
. 11
,
.

11. .
,

4.6.7

NaOH (3% ..), (Alvarez et al., 2006).

, ,
( 12).
61


, NaOH,

.

.
,
. 13
.

12. ,

62

13.

4.6.8 (COD)

Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater (APHA, 2005).
Cr3+
.

63


:
Winlab Data Line Photometer ( 14)

Hach ( 14)
:

14. (), ()
COD
100-1500 mg/l,
,
.
,
:
,
, , ,

64


2 ml . ,

2 148 C.
45
620 nm. ,
.

4.6.9
-
, ,
,
, .
, ,
(, 1995).
10%, .

,
. One Way ANOVA (
),
. ,

,
(Armstrong and Hilton, 2004; Burke, 1997; Ramirez, 2000).

,
,
,
/.

65

5.
5.1

, ,

.
- ,

/ : i) 100/0 ii) 80/20 iii) 60/40 iv) 30/70

A, B, C, D.
1 2 ( 9).
9.
/

/
100/0
80/20
60/40
30/70

1
1
C1
D1

2
2
C2
D2

, , 10.
10.

pH
(TS), g/l
(VS), g/l
(TKN), mg/l
, mg/l
(NH3-N),
mg/l
COD (g-O2/l)

A
(100/0)

B
(80/20)

C
(60/40)

D
(30/70)

7.43 + 0.01
16.29 + 0.10
12.00 + 0.05
1366 + 7
759 + 2
607 + 5

7.20 + 0.02
16.48 + 0.12
12.29 + 0.07
1316 + 20
756 + 10
560 + 10

6.99 + 0.02
16.21 + 0.08
12.46 + 0.01
1141 + 21
721 + 7
420 + 14

6.72 + 0.03
14.20 + 0.09
11.93 + 0.02
777 + 30
544 + 20
233 + 15

13.02 + 0.19
14.97 + 0.13
16.50 +0. 19

( + )

20.87 +0.16

66

5.2

7, 8. 7, 8,
,
0 750 ml. ,
- ,
10% ( 1
).
B C, ,
,
. ,
D ( 9).
A
2410 2430 ml, B C
3710 3750 ml 5760 5860 ml
D 50 ml ( 11).
,
,
4 .
11. A, B, C D

, ml

A
(100/0)

B
(80/20)

C
(60/40)

D
(30/70)

2420 + 10
3730 + 20
5810 + 50
50 + 0

( + )

C (39 ),
(34 ). ,
31 .

67

7. A, B, C
68

8. D

9. A, B, C D.

69

5.3
10
11.
.
- ,
10% ( 2
).
, A1, A2
2072 2100 ml 1, 2
3008 3030 ml. C1, C2
4794 4886 ml. ,
D1, D2 (29 25 ml
) ,
(
12).
, ,
5 .
12. A, B, C D

, ml
(%)

A
(100/0)

B
(80/20)

C
(60/40)

D
(30/70)

2086 + 14
3019 + 11
4840 + 46
27 + 2
86.20 + 0.22 80.94 + 0.73 83.30 + 0.70
54.00 + 4

( + )

12,
A, B, C D.
,
.
,
.
.
. ,

70


B, C ,
.
D, .

10. A B

71

11. C D

72

12.
73

5.4
,
14.20 16.48 g/l, ,
, 8.62
13.79 g/l ( 13).
13.

A
B
C
D
, g/l
(100/0)
(80/20)
(60/40)
(30/70)
16.29 + 0.10 16.48 + 0.12 16.21 + 0.08 14.20 + 0.09

10.81 + 0.13 10.71 + 0.11 8.62 + 0.06 13.79 + 0.05



( + )

13,
C. C1, C2
A1, A1, B1, B2,
D1, D2.

5.5
,
11.93 12.47 g/l. ,
,
10% ( 3
).
, 6.62 11.59 g/l ( 14).
14.

A
B
C
D
, g/l
(100/0)
(80/20)
(60/40)
(30/70)
12.00 + 0.05 12.29 + 0.07 12.46 + 0.01 11.93 + 0.02

7.96 + 0.05
7.99 + 0.03
6.62 + 0.02 11.59 + 0.05


33.67 + 0.15 34.98 + 0.13 46.87 + 0.12 2.85 + 0.25
(%)

( + )

74


(VS)

. , C1 C2,
,
(
46.87%).

5.6

233 607 mg/l.
,

.
/

i)

100/0

( 1, 2) ii) 80/20 ( 1, 2) iii) 60/40 (

C1, C2) iv) 30/70 ( D1, D2),
( ) 15.
15.

, mg/l

A
(100/0)

B
(80/20)

C
(60/40)

D
(30/70)

607 + 5

560 + 10

420 + 14

233 + 15

653 + 10

607 + 12

560 + 8

243 + 3

( + )

. 15,

C, D,
.

75

5.7 (COD)
, (COD),
13.02 20.87 g/l. , COD
8.75 20.67 g/l ( 16).
16.

COD, g/l

A
(100/0)

B
(80/20)

C
(60/40)

D
(30/70)

13.02 + 0.19 14.97 + 0.13 16.50 + 0.19 20.87 + 0.16

8.75 + 0.10 9.97 + 0.12 9.65 + 0.09 20.67 + 0.06


32.82 + 0.48 33.39 + 0.69 41.52 + 0.48 0.96 + 0.15
(%)

( + )

16, COD,
, A, B, C, D 32.82%, 33.39%,
41.52% 0.96%. , A, B
C COD.

,
.

5.8 pH
17,
pH
6.72 7.43.
pH 6 8 (Sorensen, 1996).

76


17. pH

pH

A
(100/0)

B
(80/20)

C
(60/40)

D
(30/70)

7.43 + 0.01

7.20 + 0.02

6.99 + 0.02

6.72 + 0.03

7.69 + 0.02

7.42 + 0.03

7.19 + 0.04

6.83 + 0.03

( + )

pH
6.83 7.69. pH
,
/ .

77

6.

(batch digesters) ,
:

. pH
, ,
pH
.

(2420 ml
, 3730 ml , 5810 ml C),

D1 D2 ( D
50 ml ),
,
.


C,
/ 60/40.

78

7.


, :



,


,
.

,

,
,

. ,





.

79

Aggelis, G., Iconomou, D., Christou, M., Bokas, D., Kotzailias, S., Christou, G.,
Tsagou, V., Papanikolaou, S., 2003. Phenolic removal in a model olive oil mill
wastewater using Pleurotus ostreatus in bioreactor cultures and biological evaluation
of the process. Water Research 37, 38973904.
Ahring, B. K., 2003. Perspectives for Anaerobic Digestion. Advances in Biochemical
Engineering/Biotechnology 81, 1-27, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Ahring, B. K., Sandberg, M., Angelidaki, I., 1995. Volatile fatty acids as indicators
of process imbalance in anaerobic digestors. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 43, 559-565.
Aktas, E. S., Imre, S., Ersoy, L., 2001. Characterization and lime treatment of olive
mill wastewater. Wat. Res. 35 (9), 2336-2340.
Alburquerque, J., Gonzalvez, J., Garcia, D., Gegarra, J., 2004. Agrochemical
characterisation of << alperujo >>, a solid by-product of the two-phase centrifugation
method for olive oil extraction. Bioresource Technology 91, 195.
Al-Malah, K., Azzam, M. O. J., Abu-Lail, N. I., 2000. Olive mills effluent (OME)
wastewater post-treatment using activated clay. Separation and Purification
Technology 20, 225234.
lvarez, J. A., Ruiz, I., Gomez, M., Presas, J., Soto, M., 2006. Start-up alternatives
and performance of an UASB pilot plant treating diluted municipal wastewater at low
temperature. Bioresource Technology 97(14), 1640-1649.
Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B. K., Deng, H., Schmidt, J. E., 2002. Anaerobic digestion
of olive oil mill effluents together with swine manure in UASB reactors. Water
Science and Technology 45 (10), 213218.
Angelidaki, I., Schmidt, J. E., 2003. The anaerobic process, Chapter 3, Anaerobic
Microbiology. Environment & Resourses DTU.
Angenent, L. T., Karim, K., Al-Dahhan, M. H., Wrenn, B. A., DomguezEspinosa, R., 2004. Production of bioenergy and biochemicals from industrial and
agricultural wastewater. TRENDS in Biotechnology 22 (9).
APHA (American Public Health Association), 2005. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, Washington, DC, USA.
Armstrong, R., Hilton, A., 2004. The use of Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) in
applied microbiology. Microbiologist, 18-21.

80


Assas, N., Ayed, L., Marouani, L., Hamdi, M., 2002. Decolorization of fresh and
stored-black olive mill wastewaters by Geotrichum candidum. Process Biochemistry
38, 361-365.
Azbar, N., Bayram, A., Filibeli, A., Muezzinoglu, A., Sengul, F., Ozer, A., 2004. A
Review of Waste Management Options in Olive Oil Production. Critical Reviews in
Environmental Science and Technology 34, 209247.
Baird, C., Humenik, F., Rice, M., Classen, J., Liehr, S., Zering, K.,

Van

Heugten, E., 2004. Belt system for manure removal. Project report for Attorney
General Agreements Initiative.
Bas Jimenez, F. J., Colinet Carmona, M. J., LoboGarcia, J., 2000. The Olive Tree
as an Energy Source in the Mediterranean Area: Andalusia, in: Proceedings of the
First World Conference on Biomass for Energy and Industry, Seville, June 59, pp.
393395.
Beccari, M., Bonemazzi, F., Majone, M., Riccardi, C., 1996. Interaction between
acidogenesis and methanogenesis in the anaerobic treatment of olive-oil mill
effluents. Water Res. 30 (1), 183189.
Bitton, G., 1994. Wastewater microbiology, Wiley-Liss, New York.
Blotevogel, K. H., Fischer, U., Mocha, M. and Jansen, S., 1985. Methanobacterium
thermoalcaliphilum spec. nov., a new moderately alkiliphilic and thermophilic
autotrophic methanogen. Arch. Microbiol. 142, 211-217.
Boari, G., Brunetty, A., Passino, R., Rozzi, A., 1984. Anaerobic digestion of olive
mill wastewaters. Agricultural Wastes 10, 161175.
Borja, R., Martin, A., Alonso, V., Garcia, I., Banks, C. J., 1995. Influence of
different aerobic pretreatments on the kinetics of anaerobic-digestion of olive oil mill
waste-water. Water Research 29, 489-495.
Borja, R., Rincon, B., Raposo, F., 2006. Anaerobic biodegradation of two-phase
olive mill solid wastes and liquid effluents: kinetic studies and process performance.
J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 81, 1450-1462.
Boubaker, F., Ridha, B. C., 2007. Anaerobic co-digestion of olive mill wastewater
with olive mill solid waste in a tubular digester at mesophilic temperature.
Bioresource Technology 98, 769774.
Bourque, J. S., Guiot, S. R., Tartakovsky, B., 2008. Methane Production in an
UASB Reactor Operated Under Periodic MesophilicThermophilic Conditions.
Biotechnol. Bioeng. 100, 11151121.
81


Bujoczek, G., 2001. Influence of ammonia and other abiotic factors on microbial
activity and pathogen inactivation duration processing of high-solid residues. Doctor
of philosophy. The University of Manitoba, Canada, 9-26.
Burke, S., 1997. Scientific Data Management 1 (1), 32-38.
Burton, C. H., Turner, C., 2003. Manure Management: Treatment strategies for
sustainable agriculture, 2nd edition. Silsoe Research Institute.
Cabrera, F., Lopez, R., Martinez-Bordiu, A., Dupuy de Lome, E., Murillo, J. M.,
1996. Land Treatment of Olive Oil Mill Wastewater. lnternational Biodeterioration &
Biodegradation, 215-225.
Caputo, A. C., Scacchia, F., Pelagagge, P. M., 2003. Disposal of by-products in
olive oil industry: waste-to-energy solutions. Applied Thermal Engineering 23, 197
214.
Cereti, C. F., Rossini, F., Federici, F., Quaratino, D., Vassilev, N., Fenice, M.,
2004. Reuse of microbially treated olive mill wastewater as fertiliser for wheat
(Triticum durum Desf.). Bioresource Technology 91, 135140.
Chynoweth, D. P., Wilkie, A. C., Owens, J. M., 1998. Anaerobic processing of
piggery wastes: A review. ASAE International Meeting.
Dalis, D., Anagnostidis, K., Lopez, A., Letsiou, I., Hartmann, L., 1996. Anaerobic
digestion of total raw olive-oil wastewater in a two-stage pilot-plant (up-flow and
fixed-bed bioreactors). Bioresource Technol. 57, 237243.
DAnnibale, A., Ricci, M., Quaratino, D., Federici, F., Fenice, M., 2004. Panus
tigrinus efficiently removes phenols, color and organic load from olive-mill
wastewater. Research in Microbiology 155, 596603.
Duff S. J. B., Murray W. D., 1996. Bioconversion of forest products industry waste
cellulosics to fuel ethanol: a review. Bioresource Technology 55, 1-33.
Duval, B., Goodwin, S., 2000. Methane production and release from two new
England Peatlands. Int. Microbiol. 3, 8995.
Environment Protection Agency (EPA), 2000. Alternative Systems for Piggery
Effluent Treatment A report. FSA Environmental, Queensland. Report No. 5492/1,
Pig Waste Report Final 20000407, 3 July 2000.
Erguder, T. H., Guven, E., Demirer, G. N., 2000. Anaerobic treatment of olive mill
wastes in batch reactors. Process Biochemistry 36, 243248.

82


Eroglu, E., Gunduz, U., Yucel, M., Turker, L., Eroglu, I., 2004. Photobiological
hydrogen production by using olive mill wastewater as a sole substrate source.
International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29, 163 171.
European Commission, 2008. Promotion and growth of renewable energy sources
and systems Country Profiles.
Eurostat, 2009. Panorama of energy/ Energy statistics to support EU policies and
solutions.
Fadil, K., Chahlaoui, A., Ouahbi, A., Zaid, A., Borja, R., 2003. Aerobic
biodegradation and detoxification of wastewaters from the olive oil industry.
International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 51, 37 41.
Faostat - http://faostat.fao.org Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations, FAO Statistical Databases.
Ferry J. G., 1993. Methanogenesis: Ecology, Physiology, Biochemistry and
Genetics. Chapman & Hall Microbiology Series.
Fountoulakis, M. S., Dokianakis, S. N., Kornaros, M. E., Aggelis, G. G.,
Lyberatos, G., 2002. Removal of phenolics in olive mill wastewaters using the whiterot fungus Pleurotus ostreatus. Water Research 36, 47354744.
Galiatsatou, P., Metaxas, M., Arapoglou, D., Kasselouri-Rigopoulou, V., 2002.
Treatment of olive mill waste water with activated carbons from agricultural byproducts. Waste Management 22, 803812.
Garca, I. G., Jimenez Pena, P. R., Bonilla Venceslada, J. L., Martn, A. M.,
Martn Santos, M. A., Ramos Gomez, E., 2000. Removal of phenol compounds
from olive mill wastewater using Phanerochaete chrysosporium, Aspergillus niger,
Aspergillus terreus and Geotrichum candidum. Process Biochemistry 35, 751758.
Gelegenis, J., Georgakakis, D., Angelidaki, I., Christopoulou, N., Goumenaki,
M., 2007. Optimization of biogas production from olive-oil mill wastewater, by
codigesting with diluted poultry-manure. Applied Energy 84, 646663.
Gunaseelan, V. N., 1997. Anaerobic digestion of biomass for methane production: a
review. Biomass and Bioenergy 13, 83-114.
Hawkes, D. L., 1980. Factors affecting net energy production from mesophilic
anaerobic digestion. In: Stratford, D. A., Wheatley, B. I., Hughes, D. E., Editors,
Anaerobic Digestion, pp. 131150.

83


Horn, M. A., Matthies, C., Kusel, K., Schramm, A., Drake, H. L., 2003.
Hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis by moderately acid-tolerant methanogens of a
methane-emitting acidic peat. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69 (1), 7483.
Huang, G. F., Wong, J. W. C., Wu, Q. T., Nagar, B. B., 2004. Effect of C/N on
composting of pig manure with sawdust. Waste Management 24, 805-813.
IOOC, International Olive Oil Council, 2004. http://www.internationaloliveoil.org.
Jaouani, A., Sayadi, S., Vanthournhout, M., Penninckx, M. J., 2003. Potent fungi
for decolourisation of olive oil mill wastewaters. Enzyme and Microbial Technology
33, 802809.
Jones, P. W., 1981. Waste and Animal Health. In Training Day Agriculture &
Waste, The Inst. Of Public Health Engineers, Reading.
Kaparaju, P., Rintala, J., 2005. Anaerobic co-digestion of potato tuber and its
industrial by-products with pig manure. Resources, Conservation and Recycling 43,
175188.
Kashyap, D. R., Dadhich, K. S., Sharma, S. K., 2003. Biomethanation under
psychrophilic conditions: a review. Bioresource Technology 87, 147153.
Kates, M., Kushner, D. J., Matheson, A. T., 1993. The Biochemistry of Archaea
(Archaebacteria). New comprehensive biochemistry, Volume 26.
Kimchie, S., Lumbroso, R. E., Gller, Z., Abramovitch, D., Shelef, G., 1998. An
integrative treatment process for piggery wastes based on anaerobic digestion. In.
Tilchie, A., Rozzi, A. (Eds.), Proceeding pf the Fifth International Symposium on
Anaerobic Digestion. Monduzzi Editore S.p.A., Bologna, Italy, pp. 635-639.
Kotsopoulos T. A., Karamanlis X., Dotas D., Martzopoulos G. G., 2008. The
impact of different natural zeolite concentrations on the methane production in
thermophilic anaerobic digestion of pig waste. Biosystems Engineering, 99(1),
105-111.
Lanciotti, R., Gianotti, A., Baldi, D., Angrisani, R., Suzzi, G., Mastrocola, D.,
Guerzoni, M. E., 2005. Use of Yarrowia lipolytica strains for the treatment of olive
mill wastewater. Bioresource Technology 96, 317322.
Lesage-Meessen, L., Navarro, D., Maunier, S., Sigoillot, J-C., Lorquin, J.,
Delattre, M., Simon, J-L., Asther, M., Labat, M., 2001. Simple phenolic content in
olive oil residues as a function of extraction systems. Food Chemistry 75, 501507.

84


Lettinga, G., Haandel, A. C., 1993. Anaerobic digestion for energy production and
environmental protection, in Renewable energy; Sources for fuels and electricity, T.
B. Johansson, et al., Editors. Island press, California: London, pp. 817-839.
Lettinga, G., Hulshoff-Pol, L. W., Zeeman, G., 1999. Lecture notes: Biological
Wastewater Treatment; Part I Anaerobic Wastewater Treatment. Wageningen
University and Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Le Tutour, B., Guedon, D., 1992. Antioxidative activities of Olea europaea leaves
and related phenolic compounds. Phytochemistry 31, 1173.
Levin, D. B., Pitt, L., Love, M., 2004. Biohydrogen production: prospects and
limitations to practical application. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 29,
173 185.
Li, C., Fang, H. H. P., 2007. Fermentative hydrogen production from wastewater and
solid wastes by mixed cultures. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and
Technology 37, 1-39.
Lin, C. Y., 1992. Effect of heavy metals on volatile fatty acid degradation in
anaerobic digestion. Water Research, 26 (22), 177-183.
Liu, T., Sung, S., 2002. Ammonia inhibition on thermophilic aceticlastic
methanogens. Water Sci Technol. 45, 113-120.
Madigan, T. M., Martinko, J. M., Parker, J., 2003. Biology of Microorganisms.
Tenth Edition. Pearson Education International.
Maestrojuan, G., Boone, D., 1991. Characterization of Methanosarcina barkeri MST
and 227, Methanosarcina mazei S-6T, and Methanosarcina vacuolata Z-761T. Int. J.
Syst. Bacteriol. 41 (2), 267274.
Malina, J. F., Pohland, F. G., 1992. Design of Anaerobic Processes for the
Treatment of Industrial and Municipal Wastes. Water Quality Management Library,
Technomic Publ., Lancaster.
Marques, I. P., 2001. Anaerobic digestion treatment of olive mill wastewater for
effluent re-use in irrigation. Desalination 137, 233-239.
Martzopoulos, G. G., 1979. Flow properties of cattle slurry applied to row cops.
Ph.D. University of Reading.
Martzopoulos, G. G., Nielsen, V. C., 1980. A comparison of three types of slurry
sampling device. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 25 (3), 279-285.
Merkel, J. A., 1981. Managing livestock wastes. Avi Publishing Company, INC,
Westport, pp. 66-67.
85


Miyamoto, K., 1997. <Renewable Biological Systems for Alternative Sustainable
Energy Production>, FAO.
Mu, Y., Wang, G., Yu, H. Q., 2006. Response surface methodological analysis on
biohydrogen production by enriched anaerobic cultures, Enzyme and Microbial
Technology 38, 905913.
Mueller, R. F., Steiner, A., 1992. Inhibition of anaerobic digestion caused by heavy
metals. Water Science and Technology 26 (3-4), 835-846.
Mulinacci, N., Romani, A., Galardi, C., Pinelli, P., Giaccherini, C., Vincieri,
F. F., 2001. Polyphenolic Content in Olive Oil Waste Waters and Related Olive
Samples. J. Agric. Food Chem. 49 (8), 35093514.
Niaounakis, M., Halvadakis, C. P., 2006. Olive Processing Waste Management, 5:
Literature Review and Patent Survey, 2nd Edition.
Nielsen, J. B. H., Oleskowicz-Popiel, P., 2008. The Future of Biogas in Europe:
Visions and Targets until 2020. AEBIOM Workshop - European Parliament Brussels.
Nozhevnikova, A. N., Kotsyurbenko, O. R., Parshina, S. N., 1999. Anaerobic
manure treatment under extreme temperature conditions. Water Science and
Technology 40 (1), 215-221.
Persson, M., 2007. Biogas a renewable fuel for the transport sector for the present
and the future SGC.
Pind, P. F., Angelidaki I., Ahring B. K., 2003. Dynamics of the anaerobic process:
effects of volatile fatty acids. Biotechnol Bioeng. 82 (7), 791-801.
Pinto, G., Pollio, A., Previtera, L., Stanzione, M., Temussi, F., 2003. Removal of
low molecular weight phenols from olive oil mill wastewater using microalgae.
Biotechnology Letters 25: 16571659.
Piperidou, C. I., Chaidou, C. I., Stalikas, C. D., Soulti, K., George A. Pilidis,
G. A., Balis, C., 2000. Bioremediation of Olive Oil Mill Wastewater: Chemical
Alterations Induced by Azotobacter vinelandii. J. Agric. Food Chem. 48 (5),
1941-1948.
Pueli, C., Quintini, A., Agalias, A., Skaltsounis, A. L., 2004. Olive oil and its main
phenolic micronutrient prevent inflammation-induced bone loss in the ovariectomised
rat. British Journal of Nutrition 92, 119.

86


Ramirez, B. L., 2000. The effects of time and temperature on the fate of pathogens
and indicator bacteria during municipal wastewater sludge-mesophilic anaerobic
digestion, air-drying and composting. Doctor of philosophy. University of Texas at
Austin, 99-101.
Ramos-Cormenzana, A., Monteoliva-Sanchez, M., Lopez, M. J., 1995.
Bioremediation of Alpechin. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation 249268.
Reith, J. H., Wijffels, R. H., Barten, H., 2003. Bio-methane & Bio-hydrogen. Status
and perspectives of biological methane and hydrogen production. Dutch Biological
Hydrogen Foundation.
Rozzi, A., Malpei, F., 1996. Treatment and Disposal of Olive Mill Effluents.
International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation (1996) 135-144.
Sanchez, E., Milan, Z., Borja, R., Weiland, P., Rodriquez, X., 1995. Piggery waste
treatment by anaerobic digestion and nutrient removal by ionic exchange. Resources
Conservation and Recycling 15, 235-244.
Sierra, J., Marti, E., Montserrat, G., Cruanas, R., Garau, M. A., 2001.
Characterisation and evolution of a soil affected by olive oil mill wastewater disposal.
The Science of the Total Environment 279, 207-214.
Skerget, M., Kotnik, P., Hadolin, M., Hras, A. R., Simonic, M., Knez, Z., 2004.
Phenols, proanthocyanidins, flavones and flavonols in some plant materials and their
antioxidant activities. Food Chem. 89, 191.
Sorensen A. H., 1996. Microbial characterization of methanogenic reactors. Ph.D.
Thesis. Copenhagen, Denmark.
Stronach, S. M., Rudd, T., Lester, J. N., 1986. Anaerobic digestion process in
industrial wastewater treatment, Springer Verlag, Berlin.
Sutton, A. L., Richert, B. T., 2004. Nutrition and feed management strategies to
reduce nutrient excretions and odors from swine manure. Water Sci Technol. 49(5-6),
397-404.
Tchobanoglous, G., Burton, F. L., Stensel, H. D., 2003. Wastewater Engineering:
Treatment and Reuse (Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.). Fourth Edition. New York: McGrawHill.
Teira-Esmatges, M. R., Flotats, X., 2003. A method for livestock waste
management planning in NE Spain. Waste Management 23, 917932.

87


United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 1992. Agriculture wastes and
water, air and animal resources. In agricultural waste management field handbook,
Chapter 3.
Van Starkenburg, W., 1997. Anaerobic treatment of wastewater: state of the art.
Mikrobiologiya 66 (5), 705715.
Vartak, D. R., Engler, C. R., McFarland, M. J., Ricke, S. C., 1997. Attached-film
media performance in psychrophilic anaerobic treatment of dairy cattle wastewater.
Bioresource Technology 62, 79-84.
Wang, Q., Kuninobu, M., Ogawa, H. I., Kato, Y., 1999. Degradation of volatile
fatty acids in highly efficient anaerobic digestion. Biomass and Bioenergy 16 (6),
407-416.
Wiegel, J., 1990. Temperature spans for growth: hypothesis and discussion. FEMS
Microbiol. Rev. 75, 155170.
Williams, R., Crawford, R., 1985. Methanogenic bacteria, including an acid-tolerant
strain, from peatlands. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 50 (6), 15421544.
Yu, H. Q., Fang, H. H. P., 2000. Thermophilic acidification of dairy wastewater.
Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 54, 439-444.
Zupancic, G. D., Ros, M., 2003. Heat and energy requirements in thermophilic
anaerobic sludge digestion. Renewable Energy 28, 22552267.
, . ., 2006. . ,
.
, ., 1998.
& . , .
-, 2000. . .
,
, 2000.
91/676/ .
, . ., 2005. . , .
, . ., 2007. : & ,
(4 ), .
, . ., 2005.

. . ,
.
88

.,

1990.

( ). .
, . ., 2003.
. , .
, ., 2006. . :
-, .
, ., , ., , ., , ., ,
., , ., 2005.

<< >>, 31/3-2/4 , .

, . ., , ., 1999.
. .
, 14.
- , ., , ., 1994.
.
,
. , . 19-24.
, 10746/04, 2004. 2593
, .
, 2008. - .
1/2000/95. .
, . 343.
, ., , ., , ., 1994.
: .
,
. , . 26-34.
, . ., 1995.
( ). : University Studio Press, .

89


1. - ,

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

A
B
C
D
Total

Mean

Std. Deviation

CV%

Std. Error

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Minimum

Maximum

2
2
2
2
8

2420,0000
3730,0000
5810,0000
50,0000
3002,5000

14,14214
28,28427
70,71068
0,00000
2234,20647

0,58%
0,76%
1,22%
0,00%

10,00000
20,00000
50,00000
0,00000
789,91127

2292,9380
3475,8759
5174,6898
50,0000
1134,6566

2547,0620
3984,1241
6445,3102
50,0000
4870,3434

2410,00
3710,00
5760,00
50,00
50,00

2430,00
3750,00
5860,00
50,00
5860,00

: O 10%, .

90

 2. - ,

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

A
B
C
D
Total

Mean

Std. Deviation

CV%

Std. Error

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Minimum

Maximum

2
2
2
2
8

2086,5000
3019,0000
4839,5000
26,5000
2492,8750

20,50610
15,55635
64,34672
2,12132
1854,26200

0,98%
0,52%
1,33%
8,00%

14,50000
11,00000
45,50000
1,50000
655,58062

1902,2600
2879,2317
4261,3677
7,4407
942,6732

2270,7400
3158,7683
5417,6323
45,5593
4043,0768

2072,00
3008,00
4794,00
25,00
25,00

2101,00
3030,00
4885,00
28,00
4885,00

: O 10%, .

91

 3. A, B, C, D
VS
95% Confidence Interval for Mean

A
B
C
D
Total

Mean

Std. Deviation

CV%

Std. Error

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Minimum

Maximum

2
2
2
2
8

12,0000
12,2900
12,4600
11,9300
12,1700

0,07071
0,09899
0,01414
0,02828
0,23476

0,59%
0,81%
0,11%
0,24%
1,93%

0,05000
0,07000
0,01000
0,02000
0,08300

11,3647
11,4006
12,3329
11,6759
11,9737

12,6353
13,1794
12,5871
12,1841
12,3663

11,95
12,22
12,45
11,91
11,91

12,05
12,36
12,47
11,95
12,47

: O 10%,
A, B, C, D .

92

 4. (One Way ANOVA)

,
A, B, C, D

Post Hoc Tests

Multiple Comparisons
Dependent
Variable: biogas
95% Confidence Interval

Tukey HSD

(I)
met
1

LSD

(J)
met
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3

Mean
Difference
(I-J)
-1310,0000*
-3390,0000*
2370,00000*
1310,00000*
-2080,0000*
3680,00000*
3390,00000*
2080,00000*
5760,00000*
-2370,0000*
-3680,0000*
-5760,0000*
-1310,0000*
-3390,0000*
2370,00000*
1310,00000*
-2080,0000*
3680,00000*
3390,00000*
2080,00000*
5760,00000*
-2370,0000*
-3680,0000*
-5760,0000*

Std.
Error
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983

Sig.
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000

Upper Bound
-1467,6636
-3547,6636
2212,3364
1152,3364
-2237,6636
3522,3364
3232,3364
1922,3364
5602,3364
-2527,6636
-3837,6636
-5917,6636
-1417,5313
-3497,5313
2262,4687
1202,4687
-2187,5313
3572,4687
3282,4687
1972,4687
5652,4687
-2477,5313
-3787,5313
-5867,5313

Lower Bound
-1152,3364
-3232,3364
2527,6636
1467,6636
-1922,3364
3837,6636
3547,6636
2237,6636
5917,6636
-2212,3364
-3522,3364
-5602,3364
-1202,4687
-3282,4687
2477,5313
1417,5313
-1972,4687
3787,5313
3497,5313
2187,5313
5867,5313
-2262,4687
-3572,4687
-5652,4687

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

93

Multiple Comparisons
Dependent
Variable: biogas
95% Confidence Interval
(I)
met
1

Bonferroni

(J)
met
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3

Mean
Difference
(I-J)
-1310,0000*
-3390,0000*
2370,00000*
1310,00000*
-2080,0000*
3680,00000*
3390,00000*
2080,00000*
5760,00000*
-2370,0000*
-3680,0000*
-5760,0000*

Std. Error
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983
38,72983

Sig.
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000

Upper Bound
-1497,8787
-3577,8787
2182,1213
1122,1213
-2267,8787
3492,1213
3202,1213
1892,1213
5572,1213
-2557,8787
-3867,8787
-5947,8787

Lower Bound
-1122,1213
-3202,1213
2557,8787
1497,8787
-1892,1213
3867,8787
3577,8787
2267,8787
5947,8787
-2182,1213
-3492,1213
-5572,1213

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Homogeneous Subsets

Tukey HSD

Duncan

met
4
1
2
3
Sig.
4
1
2
3
Sig.

N
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

biogas
Subset for alpha = .05
1
2
3
50,0000
2420,0000
3730,0000
1,000
50,0000

1,000

1,000

5810,0000
1,000

2420,0000
3730,0000
1,000

1,000

1,000

5810,0000
1,000

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 2,000.

94

 5. (One Way ANOVA)

,
A, B, C, D

Post Hoc Tests

Multiple Comparisons
Dependent
Variable:
methane
95% Confidence Interval

Tukey HSD

(I)
met
1

LSD

(J)
met
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3

Mean
Difference
(I-J)
-932,50000*
-2753,0000*
2060,00000*
932,50000*
-1820,5000*
2992,50000*
2753,00000*
1820,50000*
4813,00000*
-2060,0000*
-2992,5000*
-4813,0000*
-932,50000*
-2753,0000*
2060,00000*
932,50000*
-1820,5000*
2992,50000*
2753,00000*
1820,50000*
4813,00000*
-2060,0000*
-2992,5000*
-4813,0000*

Std. Error
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807

Sig.
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000

Upper Bound
-1073,6287
-2894,1287
1918,8713
791,3713
-1961,6287
2851,3713
2611,8713
1679,3713
4671,8713
-2201,1287
-3133,6287
-4954,1287
-1028,7540
-2849,2540
1963,7460
836,2460
-1916,7540
2896,2460
2656,7460
1724,2460
4716,7460
-2156,2540
-3088,7540
-4909,2540

Lower Bound
-791,3713
-2611,8713
2201,1287
1073,6287
-1679,3713
3133,6287
2894,1287
1961,6287
4954,1287
-1918,8713
-2851,3713
-4671,8713
-836,2460
-2656,7460
2156,2540
1028,7540
-1724,2460
3088,7540
2849,2540
1916,7540
4909,2540
-1963,7460
-2896,2460
-4716,7460

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

95

Multiple Comparisons
Dependent
Variable:
methane
95% Confidence Interval
(I)
met
1

Bonferroni

(J)
met
2
3
4
1
3
4
1
2
4
1
2
3

Mean
Difference
(I-J)
-932,50000*
-2753,0000*
2060,00000*
932,50000*
-1820,5000*
2992,50000*
2753,00000*
1820,50000*
4813,00000*
-2060,0000*
-2992,5000*
-4813,0000*

Std. Error
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807
34,66807

Sig.
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000
0,000

Upper Bound
-1100,6751
-2921,1751
1891,8249
764,3249
-1988,6751
2824,3249
2584,8249
1652,3249
4644,8249
-2228,1751
-3160,6751
-4981,1751

Lower Bound
-764,3249
-2584,8249
2228,1751
1100,6751
-1652,3249
3160,6751
2921,1751
1988,6751
4981,1751
-1891,8249
-2824,3249
-4644,8249

*. The mean difference is significant at the .05 level.

Homogeneous Subsets

Tukey HSD

Duncan

met
4
1
2
3
Sig.
4
1
2
3
Sig.

N
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2

methane
Subset for alpha = .05
1
2
3
26,5000
2086,5000
3019,0000
1,000
26,5000

1,000

1,000

4839,5000
1,000

2086,5000
3019,0000
1,000

1,000

1,000

4839,5000
1,000

Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 2,000.

96