Effect of phase separation on anaerobic digestion of kitchen waste
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The anaerobic digestion of kitchen waste was studied in both batch and continuous modes. The effect of increasing loading rates on pollutant removal and biogas production was investigated for single-phase digestion and two-phase digestion systems. The anaerobic biodegradability of the kitchen waste obtained from the batch study was 83.5%. Single-stage digestion of kitchen waste was subjected to varying organic loading rates (OLR) ranging from 1.5 kg volatile solids (VS) m –3 d –1 to 5.5 kg VS m –3 d –1 , with a common hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 15 d. The optimum performance of the system was observed at an OLR of 4.5 kg VS m –3 d –1 in terms of pollutant removal efficiency and biogas production. The removal rates for chemical oxygen demand (COD) and VS at this optimal OLR were 81% and 79%, respectively. Maximum production of the methane was 0.288 m 3 /kg of VS added. Beyond the optimal OLR, the volatile fatty acids concentration increased and reached its maximum value (9.2 g/L) at the higher loading rate tested (5.5 kg VS m –3 d –1 ). Anaerobic digestion of the kitchen waste was carried out in a two-stage reactor with different loading rates of 4, 6, and 8 kg VS m –3 d –1 . The retention time given to both hydrolysis and methanogenesis phases was 5 d, for a total HRT of 10 d. Best performances were observed in the third run with the OLR of 8 kg VS m –3 d –1 . High removal efficiencies for COD and VS were found as 92% and 94%, respectively. A total of 0.22 m 3 of methane was produced by 1 kg of VS added. Responses to the fluctuations in the loading rates were sudden and many times unfavourable in the single-stage system, while the fluctuations were suppressed or overcome at a faster rate in the two-stage reactor, without creating too many problems. Comparison of the overall performance showed that phase-separated digesters or the two-stage digesters may offer the best choice for high efficiency, concerning pollutant removal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".