Zhou Mei, Taiwo Kayode, Wang Han, Ntihuga Jean-Nepomuscene, Angenent Largus T, Usack Joseph G
Environmental Biotechnology Group, Department of Geosciences, University of Tübingen, Schnarrenbergstr. 94-96, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Georgia, 100 Cedar Street, Athens, GA, 30602, USA.
Bioresour Bioprocess. 2024 May 7;11(1):47. doi: 10.1186/s40643-024-00756-6.
Integrating hydrothermal treatment processes and anaerobic digestion (AD) is promising for maximizing resource recovery from biomass and organic waste. The process water generated during hydrothermal treatment contains high concentrations of organic matter, which can be converted into biogas using AD. However, process water also contains various compounds that inhibit the AD process. Fingerprinting these inhibitors and identifying suitable mitigation strategies and detoxification methods is necessary to optimize the integration of these two technologies. By examining the existing literature, we were able to: (1) compare the methane yields and organics removal efficiency during AD of various hydrothermal treatment process water; (2) catalog the main AD inhibitors found in hydrothermal treatment process water; (3) identify recalcitrant components limiting AD performance; and (4) evaluate approaches to detoxify specific inhibitors and degrade recalcitrant components. Common inhibitors in process water are organic acids (at high concentrations), total ammonia nitrogen (TAN), oxygenated organics, and N-heterocyclic compounds. Feedstock composition is the primary determinant of organic acid and TAN formation (carbohydrates-rich and protein-rich feedstocks, respectively). In contrast, processing conditions (e.g., temperature, pressure, reaction duration) influence the formation extent of oxygenated organics and N-heterocyclic compounds. Struvite precipitation and zeolite adsorption are the most widely used approaches to eliminate TAN inhibition. In contrast, powdered and granular activated carbon and ozonation are the preferred methods to remove toxic substances before AD treatment. Currently, ozonation is the most effective approach to reduce the toxicity and recalcitrance of N and O-heterocyclic compounds during AD. Microaeration methods, which disrupt the AD microbiome less than ozone, might be more practical for nitrifying TAN and degrading recalcitrant compounds, but further research in this area is necessary.
将水热处理工艺与厌氧消化(AD)相结合,有望实现从生物质和有机废物中最大限度地回收资源。水热处理过程中产生的工艺水含有高浓度的有机物,可通过厌氧消化转化为沼气。然而,工艺水还含有各种抑制厌氧消化过程的化合物。识别这些抑制剂并确定合适的缓解策略和解毒方法,对于优化这两种技术的整合至关重要。通过查阅现有文献,我们能够:(1)比较各种水热处理工艺水在厌氧消化过程中的甲烷产量和有机物去除效率;(2)梳理水热处理工艺水中发现的主要厌氧消化抑制剂;(3)识别限制厌氧消化性能的难降解成分;(4)评估针对特定抑制剂进行解毒和降解难降解成分的方法。工艺水中常见的抑制剂包括(高浓度的)有机酸、总氨氮(TAN)、含氧有机物和N-杂环化合物。原料组成是有机酸和总氨氮形成的主要决定因素(分别为富含碳水化合物和富含蛋白质的原料)。相比之下,加工条件(如温度、压力、反应持续时间)会影响含氧有机物和N-杂环化合物的形成程度。鸟粪石沉淀和沸石吸附是消除总氨氮抑制作用最广泛使用的方法。相比之下,粉末状和颗粒状活性炭以及臭氧氧化是厌氧消化处理前去除有毒物质的首选方法。目前,臭氧氧化是降低厌氧消化过程中N和O-杂环化合物毒性和难降解性最有效的方法。微曝气方法对厌氧消化微生物群落的破坏小于臭氧,可能在硝化总氨氮和降解难降解化合物方面更具实用性,但该领域仍需进一步研究。