Paper Analysis

Jonathan Nash
8-894-276
Title: Anaerobic Digestion Performance: Separate Collected vs. Mechanical
Segregated Organic Fractions of Municipal Solid Waste as Feedstock
Place: MBT (Mechanical Biological Treatment) Plant at Silesia, Poland.

Introduction:
In recent years climate and energy crisis are ones of the most critical issues of the world.
Also, waste generation increases year by year and aggravates this problem. In the last few
decades, waste-to-energy technology has been considered as a solution for the handling
of Solid Waste, where energy production has been identified as a potential source to
replace fossil fuels in the future. As new sources of Renewable energy are studied, some
governments are implementing a CE (Circular Economy) model. The CE is a model of
production and consumption which involves sharing, reusing, recycling and repairing
existing materials and products, extending their life cycle. The main objective of this
economy model is to reduce waste to a minimum. In the last few years, the OFMSW has
been widely studied, considering the possibility of energy recovery by various
technologies. These technologies can be divided into thermal-based treatments:
gasification or pyrolysis, and biological processes, such as composting or anaerobic
digestion (AD).
Processes and Methods:
The study that took place at an MBT plant in Poland has the main goal of comparing two
methods of solid waste segregation. The two methods are, Source-segregated Organic
fraction of municipal solid waste (ss-OFMSW), and Mechanically sorted Organic Fraction
of Municipal Solid Waste (ms-OFMSW). To make the comparison, an assessment of the
Anaerobic Digestion Performance in an AD (Anaerobic Digester) will take place at the
MBT plant in Poland. Studies suggest that AD is the best of many options for the biological
treatment of OFMSW regarding the environment and the economy.
The comparison between the two processes, ss-OFMWS and ms-OFMWS should be
made to define the benefits of source segregation, which means more effort for people and
generates additional costs for the collection system.
1. The ms-OFMWS Characterization
The OFMWS was separated mechanically using screening to separate glass, stone and
ferric and non-ferric metals. The composition of the feedstock is presented in table 1.
 Table 1: Composition of the mechanically sorted organic fraction of municipal solid waste

Source: Seruga, Anaerobic Digestion Performance: Separate Collected vs. Mechanical Segregated Organic
Fractions of Municipal Solid Waste as Feedstock. Energies 2020, 13, 3768

2. The ss-OFMWS Characterization

The ss-OFMWS was sorted manually which includes plastic bags, metals, stone, etc. The
contends were sorted and shredded. The composition of the feedstock is presented in
table 2.
Table 2: The composition of the segregated at source organic fraction of municipal solid waste

Source: Seruga, Anaerobic Digestion Performance: Separate Collected vs. Mechanical Segregated Organic
Fractions of Municipal Solid Waste as Feedstock. Energies 2020, 13, 3768

3. Discussion and Results

The process of Anaerobic Digestion was evaluated at full scale in the BT Plant with both
digestions, ss-OFMWS and ms-OFMWS, and the results were compared. The composition
of the feedstocks of both digestion processes are shown in tables 1 and 2. The organic
fraction content is higher in ss-OFMWS (68.1%), in comparison with the ms-OFMWS
(48.3%), which was expected.
The evaluated parameters are:

 The Biogas Yield: Where the total volumes of biogas produced in both processes,
so based on that comparison we can obtain which method of recollection produces
the most content of biogas.

The total volumes of biogas produced were 131,390.7 m 3 for ms-OFMSW and
119,478.9 m 3 for ss-OFMSW, followed by a total input of 1256.6 tons and 1076.8
tons respectively.
Based on this information it can be found that biogas yield per ton was slightly
higher in ss-OFMSW (111.1 m 3 /ton) than for ms-OFMSW (105.3 m 3 / ton).

 The Yearly Electricity production: With the generated biogas, the main component
and the most desired is Methane. It is deemed a renewable energy, which might be
transformed into usable energy (heat or electricity).

During ss-OFMSW, a higher methane concentration was observed (58-60%)

compared to ms-OFMSW (51-53%), which affected the production of electricity in
combined hat and power (CHP) units.
The differences in the electricity production efficiency regarding the AD of ms-
OFMSW and ss-OFMSW are presented in table 3.
Table 3: Efficiency of Electricity production.

Source: Seruga, Anaerobic Digestion Performance: Separate Collected vs. Mechanical Segregated Organic
Fractions of Municipal Solid Waste as Feedstock. Energies 2020, 13, 3768

 The Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA) contents: The determination of low fatty acid
concentrations is the source of the most reliable information regarding the stability
for digestion.

The process of producing and accumulating volatile fatty acids (VFAs) could inhibit
the anaerobic digestion, wich could result in slowing the production of biogas.
For the ms-OFMSW the process of AD was stable. The acetic acid content
amounted to 0.87–1.0 g/kg, with a propionic acid concentration of between 5 and
10 mg/kg in the inlet section.
For the ss-OFMSW the AD process was also stable. The content of acetic acid
ranged from 1.0 to 1.2 g/kg; the concentration of propionic acid in the inlet section
was between 15 and 32 mg/kg. Both acid levels were higher than in ms-OFMSW,
which confirms the higher organic matter content
4. Conclusions
The performed study let us know that Anaerobic Digestion (AD) is an effective
process of ms-OFMSW and ss-OFMSW treatment. The process allows an efficient
recovery of energy from waste. The results that were obtained confirmed that the
performance of the Anaerobic Digestion with ss-OFMWS, in the full scale MBT
plant, is better in comparison to the ms-OFMSW, from the perspective of the
generation of renewable energy.
 The obtained biogas yield per ton was slightly higher in the case of ss-OFMSW
(111.1 m 3 / ton) compared to the ms-OFMSW (105.3 m 3 /ton).
 Higher methane concentration for the ss-OFMSW (58-60%) compared to ms-
OFMSW (51-53%).
 Yearly electricity production capacity was almost 700 MWh higher (3285.4 vs
3932.9 MWh) for the ss-OFMSW digestion.
 The obtained VFA concentrations from levels around 1.2 g/kg, pH values slightly
above 8.0, acidity, and alkalinity indicate the possibilities of the digester feeding
and no-risk exploitation of using either as feedstock.

The Anaerobic Digestion is a suitable method for the treatment of OFMSWs. From
the research it can be found that, compared to ms-OFMSW, ss-OFMSW brings
more benefits: Higher biogas yield and annual electricity production potential, as
well as lower pre-treatment costs. Also, the by-products of the ss-OFMSW seem to
have more organic recycling possibilities.

5. References

 Seruga, P.; Krzywonos, M.; Seruga, A.; Niedźwiecki, Ł.; Pawlak-Kruczek,

H.; Urbanowska, A. Anaerobic Digestion Performance: Separate Collected
vs. Mechanical Segregated Organic Fractions of Municipal Solid Waste as
Feedstock. Energies 2020, 13, 3768.
 Di Maria, F.; Micale, C.; Morettini, E. Impact of the Pre-Collection Phase at
Di
erent Intensities of Source
 Segregation of Bio-Waste: An Italian Case Study. Waste Manag. 2016, 53,
12–21.