A Novel Approach for Anaerobic Treatment of Food Waste under \nPsychrophilic Temperature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food waste (FW) has become a significant concern because it can cause serious environmental pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and hence investigating advanced methods to recycle \nfood waste into energy and materials is of immense importance. Food waste has a high energy potential and excellent biodegradability, and high-water content. As a result, food waste can be treated by anaerobic technology that allows efficient energy recovery and reduces the environment's carbon footprint. However, in cold regions like Canada, mesophilic anaerobic treatment (30–35°C) can be energy intensive. Therefore, in this study, a novel approach has been established to treat food waste at a lower operating temperature. The objective of the study is to develop a sustainable system to treat food waste at a lower ambient \ntemperature since climatic conditions in Canada are more suited for psychrophilic (1-20°C) temperatures rather than mesophilic (30–35°C) anaerobic treatment. Low temperature has a negative impact on cellular processes during anaerobic treatment, making \nsubstrates unavailable to microbes. Hence, this study introduced a novel biogas recirculation strategy to overcome the thermodynamic constraints at lower temperatures. Food waste was collected exclusively from the residential area of downtown Montreal near the \nConcordia campus for three months. The collected food waste sample was tested under anaerobic treatment conditions over a time period of 30 days to determine the biomethane generation \npotential of food waste at mesophilic (30–35ºC) and psychrophilic (<20ºC) temperatures. In order to investigate the feasibility of the anaerobic treatment potential of food waste under psychrophilic \ntemperature and evaluate the efficiency of the biogas recirculation technique for enhanced biomethane production and system stability, batch tests were carried out on food waste in different trials. The anaerobic treatment potential of food waste under mesophilic conditions was examined for comparison. The impact of different substrate-to-inoculum ratios (0.5, 0.75, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 4.0) and six different total solid percentages (5%, 10%, 12%, 15%, 18%, 20%) under mesophilic (30–35ºC) and psychrophilic (1-20ºC) temperatures were investigated for evaluating the optimum conditions for anaerobic treatment of food waste. Additionally, to evaluate the effect of particle size distribution on methane yield, food waste samples were generated using two different particle size \ndistributions: (1) majority of particle sizes less than 2mm and (2) majority of particle sizes larger than 2mm. \nMethane concentrations in the produced biogas were found to be 69%-94% under mesophilic anaerobic treatment, and methane concentration was observed between 68%-93% under \npsychrophilic anaerobic treatment with methane recirculation which was close to mesophilic treatment. The COD removal efficiency was found to be between 40% and 79% at mesophilic anaerobic treatment, while the removal of COD ranged from 34% to 82% for psychrophilic anaerobic treatment with biogas recirculation. A maximum reduction of 91% in volatile solids(VS) was observed under mesophilic anaerobic treatment, whereas the highest VS reduction was found to be 92% after psychrophilic anaerobic treatment with biogas recirculation. Furthermore, a larger particle diameter has no major impact on methane production. Thus, the biogas recirculation approach eliminates the need for energy-intensive mechanical particle size reduction. In conclusion, the biogas recirculation technique at psychrophilic conditions has demonstrated improved methane generation and resulted in higher VS reduction and COD removal efficiency comparable to the results obtained from the mesophilic anaerobic treatment. It is evident that applying anaerobic digestion systems with biogas recirculation under psychrophilic conditions could have significant potential in providing economically feasible and energy-efficient options for treating food waste in cold regions. However, further study will be required to develop a comprehensive guideline in this field.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".