Abstract
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is commonly used for the stabilization of agro-food wastes and recovery of energy as methane. Since AD removes organic C but not nutrients (N and P), additional processes to remove them are usually applied to meet the stringent effluent criteria. However, in the past years, there was a shift from the removal to the recovery of nutrients as a result of increasing concerns regarding limited natural resources and the importance given to the sustainable treatment technologies. Recovering N and P from anaerobically pretreated agro-food wastes as easily transportable and marketable products has gained increasing importance to meet both regulatory requirements and increase revenue. For this reason, this review paper gives a critical comparison of the available and emerging technologies for N and P recovery from AD residues.
Introduction
Anaerobic digestion is the most widely applied technology for the treatment of agro-food industry waste, given its proven operational reliability and the obtaining of methane as a source of renewable energy, which generally allows amortizing the initial investment costs (Ren et al., 2017). However, it has the drawback of generating an effluent (digestate) that has a high amount of solids and nutrients (N and P) that do not meet the characteristics required by the regulations to be discharged directly to water courses. During anaerobic digestion hydrolysis takes place and organic matter, ammonia, phosphate, potassium, magnesium, calcium, and sulfur are released to the bulk liquid. Organic matter is mainly converted into methane while both ammonia and phosphate are not consumed during the process (Amini et al., 2017; Ma et al., 2018; Mai et al., 2018).
Phosphate is a key compound in fertilizers and its annual demand is increasing in line with the increase in the world's population. Therefore, it is necessary to guarantee its availability in the future to maintain an adequate production of food. Since the main source of phosphorus is the phosphate rock which burn time ranges from 50 to 400 years, there is now a growing interest in the technical and economic feasibility of large scale systems for phosphorus recovery from agro/industrial digestates (Cordell et al., 2011; Bradford-Hartke et al., 2012; Reijnders, 2014). Although phosphorus recovery and reuse is of great importance to reduce phosphate rock dependency and also to avoid pollution of water resources, P recovery is barely carried out currently due to the higher production costs of recovered P compared to those of mined P (Egle et al., 2016; Peng et al., 2018). Nevertheless, if the social and environmental benefits of P recovery are quantified, the economic balance turns in favor of P recovery (Molinos-Senante et al., 2011; Mayer et al., 2016; Corbala-Robles et al., 2018). Contrary to phosphorus, N can be considered as a renewable resource but its conversion into fertilizer by means of the Haber-Bosch process requires a high amount of energy, with its cost dependent on the price and supply of natural gas (Zarebska et al., 2015). As in the case of phosphorous, ammonia market price makes not advisable its recovery from digestates but the scenario changes if nitrogen pollution costs are taken into account (Sutton et al., 2011; Alitalo et al., 2012; Peng et al., 2018).
The most economical option to manage digestates is their direct application as fertilizer to agricultural lands which also allows conserving their nutrients and reducing the requirement of chemical fertilizers (Alburquerque et al., 2012; Möller and Müller, 2012). Nevertheless, there is a surplus of nutrients in areas with intensive agro-livestock activities and limited agricultural land as a result of excess digestate production (Hjorth et al., 2011). Therefore, transport of nutrient surplus over long distances is necessary to avoid environmental problems related to nutrient overdoses (Fuchs and Drosg, 2013; Svehla et al., 2017). Since this strategy implies high operating costs, other ways to manage digestates should be chosen (Sheets et al., 2015). The separation of digestate into a liquid fraction rich in inorganic N and a solid fraction rich in phosphorus is generally applied in order to partly solve problems related to high costs of transport (Figure 1). The solid fraction can be used to produce compost or transported longer distances as a concentrated fertilizer since this fraction suppose only the 25–35% of the original digestate but contains 60–80% of its dry matter and almost all its phosphorus. However, only 20–25% of the initial nitrogen is retained in the solid fraction (Holm-Nielsen et al., 2009; Romero-Güiza et al., 2016). Another alternative is to burn the solid fraction in order to recover the nutrients from the ashes (Amann et al., 2018; Gorazda et al., 2018). This alternative, although very attractive in terms of volume reduction of solids, implies high operating costs that makes difficult its application on an industrial scale only interesting in countries where sewage sludge incineration is mandatory (Egle et al., 2016).
Figure 1
Although the liquid fraction from separated digestate has a low nutrient concentration that cannot be economically transported for use as a fertilizer, its concentration levels precludes the direct discharge. Therefore, in order to avoid that transport costs penalize the ex-situ use of nutrients, it is necessary to carry out their further separation, which can be achieved by concentrating the liquid stream itself or by converting the nutrients into solid compounds and making a subsequent solid-liquid separation. In this way, liquid streams generated containing high nitrogen and phosphorous concentrations could be easily transported and could be sold and make a profit (Meixner et al., 2015). An alternative to these traditional systems of direct nutrients recovery is their valorization through the generation of energy by means of their in-situ combustion using the own infrastructure for burning the biogas. This can be applied for the case of NH by its transfer to the gaseous phase in the form of NH3 or its conversion to N2O (Gao et al., 2014) (Figure 2).
Figure 2
Nutrient accumulation
The economic feasibility of using the nutrients, contained in the liquid fraction of the digestates, as a fertilizer is conditioned by transportation costs. Therefore, it is important to apply to the digestate technologies that allow the concentration of nutrients in order to reduce transport costs. There are different technologies based on chemical, physical and biological processes to carry out this concentration (Sengupta et al., 2015) (Table 1). Most of them were already applied to the anaerobic sludge digester supernatant of municipal WWTPs or to effluents of anaerobic digesters treating industrial wastewater but few applications related to agro-industrial effluents are reported (Desmidt et al., 2015). According to data show in Table 1, fertilizers sale would not cover their production which would indicate nutrient recovery is not economically feasible. Moreover, most of times the products obtained have only a local market due to administrative restrictions and their sale prices are lower than those of commercial fertilizers (Xu et al., 2018). However, the economical balance should also take into account costs related the environmental impact caused by nutrients disposal. For example, nitrogen pollution costs the European Union between 70 and 100 billion euros/year (Sutton et al., 2011). Besides, the implementation of P-recovery systems in WWTPs could avoid the scaling problem caused by struvite. This is the case of the Amsterdam West WWTP whose operating costs were reduced by €500,000 euros/year after the installation of a struvite crystallizer (Waternet, 2017). In any case, nutrient recovery driver is more related to the legislation of each country than to the economic feasibility of the process.
Table 1
| Process | Products | Production costs (Euro/Ton) | Market price* (Euro/Ton) | Transport feasibility** (km) | Recovery efficiency (%) | Bottlenecks |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P-precipitation from liquid phase | Struvite (MgNH4PO4) | 270–410[1]270[2] 760–1,270[3] 280–1,110[4] 560–2,060[5] 780[6] | 480 | 1,090 | 85–99[7] | High consumption of reagents to fit pH |
| Calcium phosphate (Ca3(PO4)2·nH2O) | 170–290*** | 390–660 | 95–98[8] | |||
| K-struvite (KMgPO4·6 H2O) | 420 | 950 | 80–90[9] | |||
| Newberite (MgHPO4·3H2O) | 590 | 1,340 | ≈100[10] | |||
| P-recovery from sludge ash | Calcium phosphate (Ca3(PO4)2·nH2O) | 450–750[3] | 170–290*** | 390–660 | 70–100[3] | High consumption of reagents to extract P from ashes High energy consumption (if sludge incineration is not mandatory) |
| Phosphoric acid (H3PO4) | 1,420[3] | 600 | 1,360 | |||
| White Phosphorus (P4) | 3,000[3] | 1,900 | 4,320 | |||
| Membrane: filtration | Slurry concentrate | 34.8–41.8[11] 77.6[12]**** | 6.1[9] | 14 | N: 47–65[11] P: 43–75[11] N: ≈70[12] P: ≈55[12] P: 80–100[13] | Membrane excessive operational costs Membrane clogging and fouling |
| Ion exchange/precipitation | Struvite (MgNH4PO4) | 3,670[3] | 480 | 1,090 | 90[14] | Need of pretreatment to remove suspended solids in order to avoid clogging of the exchange column |
| Stripping/Absorption | Ammonium sulfate ((NH4)2SO4) | 280–660[2] 400–780[9] | 230 | 160***** | 70[2] 80–90[9] | High energy requirements High consumption of reagents Scaling and fouling of packing material |
| Bioaccumulation: algal biomass | Algal biomass (C106H181O45N16P) | 500–1,200[15] 1,300–5,000[16] 12,600[17] | 120 | 60****** | P: 70–100[18] | High requirement of implantation area Dilution often required |
Processes for nitrogen and phosphorous recovery.
Desmidt et al. (2012);
De Vrieze et al. (2016);
Egle et al. (2016);
(Schaum, 2007);
Sikosana et al. (2017);
Sarvajayakesavalu et al. (2018);
Peng et al. (2018);
Vanotti et al. (2007);
Vaneeckhaute et al. (2017);
Vanotti et al. (2017);
Bolzonella et al. (2018);
De Vrieze et al. (2019);
Gerardo et al. (2015);
Williams et al. (2015);
Fasaei et al. (2018);
Norsker et al. (2011);
Acién et al. (2012);
Xu et al. (2018).
Price of the different fertilizers were calculated based on the price of their individual components (Dockhorn, 2009);
Transport feasibility was calculated as the ratio price of product (euro/ton)/Transport cost (euro/ton·km), assuming a transport cost of 0.44 euro/ton·km (Adapted from Spielmann et al., 2007);
Market price of calcium phosphate was calculated taking into a P content of 9–15% (Xu et al., 2018);
A concentration factor of 5 was supposed according to Bolzonella et al. (2018);
Value calculated considering a product concentration of 30% (Vaneeckhaute et al., 2017);
Value calculated considering a product concentration of 22% (Fasaei et al., 2018).
Full scale applications of physical technologies such as evaporation, membranes or air stripping showed this kind of technologies are highly expensive (5.4–7.0 Euros/m3 digestate; Bolzonella et al., 2018) due to the high energy and material input requirements which also entails a negative environmental balance (Bradford-Hartke et al., 2015). Therefore, in order to improve economy of the recovery processes and decrease their environmental impact, the use of biological methods alone, such as bioaccumulation, or combined with chemical precipitation is preferable (Barbera et al., 2018; Xu et al., 2018).
Bioaccumulation
The application of heterotrophic microorganisms, such polyphosphate-accumulating organisms, to carry out the bioaccumulation of nutrients is not viable due the low ratio COD/nutrients of digestates. Therefore, the use of autotrophic organisms such as microalgae seems to be a more suitable option. These organisms are able to remove both nitrogen and phosphorus via assimilation for biomass growth without oxygen consumption (Equation 1) (Park and Craggs, 2011; Rusten and Sahu, 2011; Chen et al., 2013; Posadas et al., 2015). Application of microalgae for wastewater treatment is generally carried out in open raceway ponds due to their low capital costs compared to photobioreactors (Shoener et al., 2014). These microalgae ponds have large footprint and, then, their possible implementation is conditioned by the availability of land. Another disadvantage of the microalgae application relies on their poor settling properties, which increase the operating costs related to their harvesting and dewatering (Fasaei et al., 2018). Despite these disadvantages, operating costs are still lower than those of other technologies (Xu et al., 2018). Moreover, microalgae can be used to upgrade the quality of biogas generated during the anaerobic process (Meier et al., 2015) or sold as high-protein animal feed (Shilton et al., 2012).
Chemical Precipitation
One of the most widely studied P recovery technologies is struvite (MgNH4PO4·6H2O) precipitation, which is a simple method for the simultaneous removal of ammonium and phosphate from aqueous waste streams (Kataki et al., 2016a,b; Li et al., 2019). Struvite can precipitate in a wide range of pH values but, its optimum pH range is from 7.5 to 9.0 (Miles and Ellis, 2001; Nelson et al., 2003; Rahman et al., 2014) while pH values of anaerobic digestates streams have generally values between 7.0 and 8.2 (Wu et al., 2001; Marti et al., 2010; Lahav et al., 2013). In the range of the optimal pH value for struvite formation the phosphorous specie present in the liquid media is HPO and not PO. This supposition is also supported by the decrease of the pH value observed during the precipitation process (Equation 2):
Struvite formation requires equimolar amounts of Mg2+, NH, and PO. Generally, Mg2+ content in anaerobic digestates is lesser than phosphate and ammonium concentration (Kataki et al., 2016b). Then, if the final of objective of the process is to obtain a maximum efficiency of phosphorus recovery, Mg2+ should be added to the effluent of the anaerobic digester (Sheets et al., 2015). Besides, the reaction of struvite precipitation causes a release of protons, as shown in Equation (2), which could cause a pH drop. Consequently, an alkali source must be added to maintain the pH in a suitable range for struvite precipitation.
The costs of struvite precipitation are strongly dependent on the magnesium and alkali sources used. These costs may contribute to up to 75% of overall production costs (Dockhorn, 2009). In the literature, the use of high grade magnesium sources, such as MgCl2, MgSO4, MgO, or Mg(OH)2 has been reported (Kataki et al., 2016b). Nevertheless, the utilization of these high grade and expensive magnesium sources can lead to high operating costs compromising the viability of the process. In this sense, the use of low cost magnesium sources, such as industrial grade MgO or Mg(OH)2, seawater or bittern can significantly reduce the cost of struvite precipitation. In this regard, the cost of phosphorus precipitation by conventional processes, adding aluminum, or iron salts, is between 2,000 and 3,000 Euros/t-P precipitated (Dockhorn, 2009). In struvite precipitation, the cost of the addition of an external magnesium source has been estimated between 700 and 4,000 Euros/t-P precipitated. Indeed, the struvite precipitation cost by adding MgCl2 and NaOH is around of 4,000 Euros/t-P precipitated (Carballa et al., 2009); whilst that the cost for struvite precipitation by using MgSO4 is estimated around 2,000 Euros/t-P precipitated (Etter et al., 2011; Sakthivel et al., 2012). Similar struvite operating cost has been determined by using magnesium dosing by electro-dissolution (Hug and Udert, 2013). On the other hand, Señoráns et al. (2011) reported that the operating cost of struvite precipitation at industrial scale was around to 2,900 Euros/t-P precipitated. These authors have used seawater as magnesium source, in fact, the chemical cost was mainly due to the alkali requirements. Meanwhile, Crutchik et al. (2017) estimated that the chemical costs associated with the use of an industrial Mg(OH)2 as magnesium and alkali sources for struvite precipitation at industrial scale was around to 1,000 Euros/t-P precipitated.
Moreover, the presence of other ions in solution such as calcium or carbonate can interfere with struvite precipitation by competing for magnesium and/or phosphate to form other precipitates species such as calcium phosphates or calcium/magnesium carbonate species. These ions can negatively affect the precipitation of struvite, decreasing the availability of the ions involved in struvite precipitation, and also affecting the purity of the produced struvite (Le Corre et al., 2005; Hosni et al., 2007; Song et al., 2007; Huchzermeier and Tao, 2012; Desmidt et al., 2013). In general, the formation of calcium and/or magnesium phosphates depends mainly on operational pH and wastewater characteristics (Jaffer et al., 2002; Le Corre et al., 2005; Pastor et al., 2008; Moerman et al., 2009). In this regard, struvite precipitation is more affected by the presence of calcium at low phosphate concentrations (< 40 mg PO-P/L) than at high phosphate concentrations (>60 mg PO-P/L) (Desmidt et al., 2013).
Some authors found that the presence of calcium could not affect the precipitation of struvite under certain conditions (Wang et al., 2006; Moerman et al., 2009; Huchzermeier and Tao, 2012). Most of these studies concluded that the molar ratio of Ca2+:PO is a determinative parameter to promote struvite precipitation rather than calcium phosphates formation, Ca2+:PO molar ratio should be < 0.5 to obtain an efficient precipitation in terms of phosphorus recovery and struvite purity. However, most of the aforementioned results are restricted to the experimental conditions in which they were specifically determined. Moreover, Stratful et al. (2001) and Crutchik and Garrido (2011) indicated that a high ammonium concentration could be highly beneficial to the reaction of struvite precipitation, so to obtain a relatively pure solid phase in terms of struvite purity. In this regard, it could be possible to obtain a high purity in terms of struvite, instead of precipitates of calcium phosphates in high ammonium wastewater.
The main drawback to carry out struvite precipitation for recovering ammonia and phosphate is the high costs of chemical compounds needed to obtain an adequate pH of struvite precipitation, and consequently to obtain an efficient nutrients recovery (Çelen et al., 2009; Ryu and Lee, 2010). This fact is due to the high buffer capacity of the anaerobic digester effluent caused by NH3/NH and H2CO3/HCO/CO equilibria. In this sense, the use of biological processes, which involve reactions with HCO and/or ammonium consumption or pH changes, could be considered an attractive pretreatment to reduce the consumption of reagents during phosphorus recovery (Mañas et al., 2011; Johansson et al., 2017; Simoes et al., 2018). For example, the previous application of nitrification (Equation 3) or partial nitrification-anammox processes (Equation 4) would decrease the amount of NaOH required up to 50 and 89%, respectively, and, in the last case, struvite recovery would be economically profitable (Campos et al., 2017). It should be taken into account that the liquid fraction of digestate has a temperature around 30°C and a low amount of organic matter which are propitious conditions to carry out these autotrophic processes.
Another strategy to reduce alkali requirements during phosphorous recovery is the application of low-rate aeration to promote CO2 stripping (Desmidt et al., 2012; Vanotti and Szogi, 2015). Due to the consequent pH rise, a fraction of ammonia ion is converted into NH3 which can be directly recovery from liquid bulk by means of gas-permeable membranes. Complete ammonia removal causes phosphates precipitate mainly as newberyte (MgHPO4·3H2O) instead of struvite (Vanotti et al., 2017).
Nitrogen valorization as Energy Source
As it happens with organic compounds, the potential energy available in chemical bonds of the ammonia molecule exceeds significantly the electricity requirements of the applied treatments (Garrido et al., 2013). Therefore, in the same way that organic matter is removed from agroindustrial effluents by means of anaerobic digestion in order to obtain energy in form of CH4, ammonia could be hydrolyzed to generate H2, or oxidized, directly or via N2O, into N2, obtaining renewable energy. This could be an attractive option compared to removal alternatives such as nitrification-denitrification and partial nitrification-anammox processes that always implies the supply of energy to convert NH3 into N2 (Flotats et al., 2009; Morales et al., 2015).
Ammonia Hydrolysis
Ammonia present in the effluents of the anaerobic sludge digesters can be also considered as a source of hydrogen. NH3 can be converted into N2 and H2 by a catalytic reaction in gas phase after its stripping from the liquid phase (Babson et al., 2013) or its electrolysis directly in liquid phase (Bonnin et al., 2008; Gwak et al., 2016; Zhang et al., 2017). Electrolysis seems a more viable way to obtain hydrogen since it can be carried out at ambient temperature in contrast to the catalytic reaction that needs temperatures around 800–900°C. Theoretically, the electrolysis of ammonia consumes 1.55 W h/g H2 (Table 2) (Boggs and Botte, 2009). However, the present energy consumption for different ammonia electrolysis systems, which depends on the used catalyst, support material, and electrolytic cell configuration, is around 15 W·h/g H2, that is, 1.34 kW·h/Nm3 H2generated (Bonnin et al., 2008; Botte and Feickert, 2012).
Table 2
| Reaction | Stoichiometry | E° |
|---|---|---|
| Anode | 2 NH3 + 6 OH− → N2 + 6 H2O + 6 e− | −0.770 V |
| Cathode | 2 H2O + 2 e− → H2 + 2 OH− | −0.829 V |
| Overall | 2 NH3 → N2 + 3 H2 | −0.059 V |
Electrochemical reactions for the ammonia electrolysis process.
The electrolysis process requires that ammonia is present at its unionized form (NH3). This implies that the pH value of the effluent should be increased up to 12.0. Taking into account the stoichiometry of the overall ammonia electrolysis reaction and considering that HCO is the counter anion of NH, a consumption of 59.5 mol NaOH/Nm3 H2generated can be calculated. Then, operating costs due to NaOH and energy required make that the production of 1 Nm3 of H2 costs 1.12 Euros which is more expensive than 0.26–0.35 Euros reported for other technologies as steam reformed of natural gas, electrolysis with conventional electricity or steam reforming of biomethane (Bonnin et al., 2008). Since most part of these operating costs are related to pH fitting, the electrolysis process could be also carry out with NH. However, the metal of the anode is oxidized and combined with the counter anion of NH4+, causing the electrode corrosion on the anode (Goshome et al., 2016).
Ammonia Combustion
NH3 oxidation into nitrogen gas and water is an exothermic reaction (Equation 5) that could be used to generate energy without CO2 emissions (Degnan, 2018). NH3 can be directly oxidized in the bulk liquid by means of electrochemical fuel cells (Rees and Compton, 2011) or burned together to methane to generate power (Valera-Medina et al., 2017). This last option would have two drawbacks: (1) the increase of NOx during combustion which can be avoid by using suitable burners designs (Okafor et al., 2018) or catalyzers (Hinokuma et al., 2018); (2) the energy required for gas stripping which is generally higher than that energy recovered (van Eekert et al., 2012). Moreover, costs associated to pH fitting made no economically viable these processes to valorize ammonia from the liquid fraction of digestates.
N2O Combustion
Recently, Scherson et al. (2013) introduced a new N removal process called CANDO (Coupled Aerobic-anoxic Nitrous Decomposition Operation) which involves three steps: (1) biological conversion of NH to NO; (2) biological or chemical partial anoxic reduction of NO to N2O; and (3) N2O conversion to N2 with energy recovery. Then, from steps 1 and 2 ammonia is converted to N2O, which is used in step 3 as a co-oxidant for CH4 combustion or decomposed over a metal oxide catalyst to recover energy. Compared to the conventional nitrification-denitrification processes commonly used to remove ammonia, the CANDO process allows reducing the requirements of organic matter consumed during denitrification and utilizing N2O as a renewable energy source. Combustion of CH4 with N2O releases roughly 30% more heat than using O2 (equations 6 and 7), and, mitigates the release of N2O to the atmosphere. However, an overall energy balance shows this process is less efficient than the partial nitrification-anammox process (Figure 3). This is due to the fact that this last process is totally autotrophic and only requires the oxidation of 50% ammonia into nitrite, which supposes more available organic matter to produce methane and a low oxygen requirementi during ammonia oxidation.
Steps 1 and 3 of the CANDO process have been already applied at full scale while step 2 (anoxic reduction of NO to N2O) is still under study (Scherson et al., 2013, 2014; Myung et al., 2015). In these research works, two ways of producing nitrous oxide from nitrite are proposed: (1) abiotic reduction by Fe (II) with conversions over 90% and; (2) partial heterotrophic denitrification with 62–70% NO-N converted to N2O-N when COD/N fed ratios of 3–4 are applied in the anoxic stage (Weißbach et al., 2018a,c). Later, N2O obtained can be recovered (3,700 ppmv) by a micro porous hollow fiber membrane contactor with efficiencies around 77 % (Weißbach et al., 2018b).
Figure 3
Conclusions
If the importance of the recovery of nutrients from the digestates is evaluated only in terms of the current economic value of nitrogen and phosphorus in the market, it is not attractive and, in many cases, nutrients removal is more profitable than their recovery. However, this perspective will change in the future if the economic damages of the environmental impacts due to pollution caused by the inappropriate use of the digestates and the increase in prices that the production of chemical fertilizers will suffer are included.
Many of the technologies used to carry out nutrient recovery involve high reagent and/or energy requirements, which can lead to a negative net environmental impact. In this regard, biological technologies should be applied alone or combined with chemical technologies in order to generate synergistic effects that reduce the energy and reagent needs.
Statements
Author contributions
JC, AM-C, and ÁV wrote the manuscript with input from all authors. ÓF, JP, and MB searched for the most recent references on the topic and provided critical feedback. DC and AP performed the calculations.
Funding
This work was funded by the Chilean Government through the project FONDECYT 1180650 and CONICYT/FONDAP/15130015 and by the Spanish Government through TREASURE (CTQ2017-83225-C2-1-R) and GRANDSEA (CTM2014-55397-JIN) projects.
Acknowledgments
JC belongs to Center UAI Earth and the authors from the USC belong to CRETUS (AGRUP2015/02) and the Galician Competitive Research Group (GRC ED431C 2017/29). All these programs are co-funded by FEDER. MB belongs to UPLAguas Group and acknowledges to LABMAI of Engineering Faculty, FDD-UPLA of DGI (c.c. 18105). DC acknowledges the support of Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1
AciénF. G.FernándezJ. M.MagánJ. J.MolinaE. (2012). Production cost of a real microalgae production plant and strategies to reduce it. Biotechnol. Adv.30, 1344–1353. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2012.02.005
2
AlburquerqueJ. A.de la FuenteC.BernalM. P. (2012). Chemical properties of anaerobic digestates affecting C and N dynamics in amended soils. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 160, 15–22. 10.1016/j.agee.2011.03.007
3
AlitaloA.KyroA.AuraE. (2012). Ammonia stripping of biologically treated liquid manure. J. Environ. Qual. 41:273. 10.2134/jeq2011.0286
4
AmannA.ZoboliO.KrampeJ.RechbergerH.ZessnerM.EgleL. (2018). Environmental impacts of phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 130, 127–139. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.11.002
5
AminiA.Aponte-MoralesV.WangM.DilbeckM.LahavO.ZhangQ.et al. (2017). Cost-effective treatment of swine wastes through recovery of energy and nutrients. Waste Manage. 69, 508–517. 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.08.041
6
BabsonD. M.BellmanK.PrakashS.FennellD. E. (2013). Anaerobic digestion for methane generation and ammonia reforming for hydrogen production: a thermodynamic energy balance of a model system to demonstrate net energy feasibility. Biomass Bioenergy56, 493–505. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2013.05.024
7
BarberaE.BertuccoA.KumarS. (2018). Nutrients recovery and recycling in algae processing for biofuels production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 90, 28–42. 10.1016/j.rser.2018.03.004
8
BoggsB. K.BotteG. G. (2009). On-board hydrogen storage and production: an application of ammonia electrolysis. J. Power Sources192, 573–581. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2009.03.018
9
BolzonellaD.FatoneF.GottardoM.FrisonN. (2018). Nutrients recovery from anaerobic digestate of agro-waste: techno-economic assessment of full scale applications. J. Environ. Manage. 216, 111–119. 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.08.026
10
BonninE. P.BiddingerE. J.BotteG. G. (2008). Effect of catalyst on electrolysis of ammonia effluents. J. Power Sources182, 284–290. 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.03.046
11
BotteG. G.FeickertC. A. (2012). Electro Decomposition of Ammonia Into Hydrogen for Fuel Cell Use (No. ERDC/CERL-TR-12-1). Washington, DC: Construction Engineering Research Laboratory Reports and Publications.
12
Bradford-HartkeZ.LaneJ.LantP.LeslieG. (2015). Environmental benefits and burdens of Phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 8611–8622. 10.1021/es505102v
13
Bradford-HartkeZ.LantP.LeslieG. (2012). Phosphorus recovery from centralised municipal water recycling plants. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 90, 78–85. 10.1016/j.cherd.2011.08.006
14
CamposJ. L.Mosquera-CorralA.Val del RíoA.PedrousoA.Gutiérrez-PichelA.BelmonteM.et al. (2017). Energy and resources recovery in waste water treatment plants in Environmental Science and Engineering Volume 9 Environment and Energy Management: Ethics, Laws and Policies, eds CaprioS.TechatoK.UpadhyeS.GurjarB. RGovilJ. N. (Houston, TX: Studium Press LLC), 60–78.
15
CarballaM.MoermanW.De WindtW.GrootaerdH.VerstraeteW. (2009). Strategies to optimize phosphate removal from industrial anaerobic effluents by magnesium ammonium phosphate (MAP) production. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 84, 63–68. 10.1002/jctb.2006
16
ÇelenI.BuchananJ. R.BurnsR. T.RobinsonR. B.RamanD.R. (2009). Using a chemical equilibrium model to predict amendments required to precipitate phosphorus as struvite in liquid swine manure. Water Res. 41, 1689–1696. 10.1016/j.watres.2007.01.018
17
ChenL.WeiJ.WangW.WangC. (2013). Combination of microalgae cultivation with membrane processes for the treatment of municipal wastewater. Wat. Sci. Technol. 68, 2374–2381. 10.2166/wst.2013.509
18
Corbala-RoblesL.SastafianaW. N. D.Van lindenV.VolckeE. I. P.SchaubroeckT. (2018). Life cycle assessment of biological pig manure treatment versus direct land application – a trade-off story. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 131, 86–98. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.12.010
19
CordellD.RosemarinA.SchroderJ. J.SmitA. L. (2011). Towards global phosphorus security: a systems framework for phosphorus recovery and reuse options. Chemosphere84, 747–758. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2011.02.032
20
CrutchikD.GarridoJ. M. (2011). Struvite crystallization versus amorphous magnesium and calcium phosphate precipitation during the treatment of a saline industrial wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 64, 2460–2467. 10.2166/wst.2011.836
21
CrutchikD.MoralesN.Vázquez-PadínJ. R.GarridoJ. M. (2017). Enhancement of struvite pellets crystallization in a full-scale plant using an industrial magnesium product. Water Sci. Technol. 75, 609–618. 10.2166/wst.2016.527
22
De VriezeJ.ColicaG.PintucciC.SarliJPedizziC.WilleghemsG.et al. (2019). Resource recovery from pig manure via an integrated approach: a technical and economic assessment for full-scale applications. Bioresour. Technol. 272, 582–593. 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.10.024
23
De VriezeJ.SmetD.KlokJ.ColsenJ.AngenentL. T.VlaeminckS. E. (2016). Thermophilic sludge digestion improves energy balance and nutrient recovery potential in full-scale municipal wastewater treatment plants. Bioresour. Technol. 218, 1237–1245. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.06.119
24
DegnanT. (2018). Catalytic combustion of ammonia begins to look more interesting. Focus Catal. 6:1. 10.1016/j.focat.2018.05.001
25
DesmidtE.GhyselbrechtK.MonballiuA.RabaevK.VerstraeteW.MeesschaertB. D. (2013). Factors influencing urease driven struvite precipitation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 110, 150–157. 10.1016/j.seppur.2013.03.010
26
DesmidtE.GhyselbrechtK.VerstraeteA. M. W.MeesschaertB. D. (2012). Evaluation and thermodynamic calculation of ureolytic magnesium ammonium phosphate precipitation from UASB effluent at pilot scale. Water Sci. Technol. 65:11. 10.2166/wst.2012.092
27
DesmidtE.GhyselbrechtK.ZhangY.PinoyL.van der BruggenB.VerstraeteW.et al. (2015). Global phosphorus scarcity and full-scale P-recovery techniques: a review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 336–384. 10.1080/10643389.2013.866531
28
DockhornT. (2009). About the economy of phosphorus recovery in International Conference on Nutrient Recovery from Wastewater Streams (London: IWA Publishing).
29
EgleL.RechbergerH.KrampeJ.ZessnerM. (2016). Phosphorus recovery from municipal wastewater: an integrated comparative technological, environmental and economic assessment of P recovery technologies. Sci. Total Environ. 571, 522–542. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.07.019
30
EtterB.TilleyE.KhadkaR.UdertK. M. (2011). Low-cost struvite production using source-separated urine in Nepal. Water Res. 45, 852–862. 10.1016/j.watres.2010.10.007
31
FasaeiF.BitterJ. H.SlegersP. M.van BoxtelA. J. B. (2018). Techno-economic evaluation of microalgae harvesting and dewatering systems. Algal Res. 31, 347–362. 10.1016/j.algal.2017.11.038
32
FlotatsX.BonmatíA.FernándezB.MagríA. (2009). Manure treatment technologies: on-farm versus centralized strategies. NE Spain as case study. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 5519–5526. 10.1016/j.biortech.2008.12.050
33
FuchsW.DrosgB. (2013). Assessment of the state of the art of technologies for the processing of digestate residue from anaerobic digesters. Water Sci. Technol. 67, 1984–1993. 10.2166/wst.2013.075
34
GaoH.SchersonY. D.WellsG. F. (2014). Towards energy neutral wastewater treatment: methodology and state of the art. Environ. Sci. Process. Impact16,1223–124610.1039/C4EM00069B
35
GarridoJ. M.Fdz-PolancoM.Fdz-PolancoF. (2013). Working with energy and mass balances: a conceptual framework to understand the limits of municipal wastewater treatment. Water Sci. Technol.67, 2294–2301. 10.2166/wst.2013.124
36
GerardoM. L.AljohaniN. H. M.Oatley-RadcliffeD. L.LovittR. W. (2015). Moving towards sustainable resources: recovery and fractionation of nutrients from dairy manure digestate using membranes. Water Res. 80, 80–89. 10.1016/j.watres.2015.05.016
37
GorazdaK.TarkoB.WerleS.WzorekZ. (2018). Sewage sludge as a fuel and raw material for phosphorus recovery: combined process of gasification and P extraction. Waste Manage. 73, 404–415. 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.032
38
GoshomeK.YamadaT.MiyaokaH.IchikawaT.KojimaY. (2016). High compressed hydrogen production via direct electrolysis of liquid ammonia. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy41, 14529–14534. 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.06.137
39
GwakJ.ChounM.LeeJ. (2016). Alkaline ammonia electrolysis on electrodeposited platinum for controllable hydrogen production. ChemSusChem9, 403–408. 10.1002/cssc.201501046
40
HinokumaS.KiritoshiS.KawabataY.ArakiK.MatsukiS.SatoT.et al. (2018). Catalytic ammonia combustion properties and operando characterization of copper oxides supported on aluminum silicates and silicon oxides. J. Catal. 361, 267–277. 10.1016/j.jcat.2018.03.008
41
HjorthM.ChristensenK. V.ChristensenM. L.SommerS. G. (2011). Solid–liquid separation of animal slurry in theory and practice in Sustainable Agriculture, Vol. 2, eds LichtfouseE.HamelinM.NavarreteM.DebaekeP. (Dordrecht: Springer), 953–986.
42
Holm-NielsenJ. B.Al SeadiT.Oleskowicz-PopielP. (2009). The future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 5478–5484. 10.1016/j.biortech.2008.12.046
43
HosniK.MoussaS. B.AmorB. (2007). Conditions influencing the removal of phosphate from synthetic wastewater: influence of the ionic composition. Desalination206, 279–285. 10.1016/j.desal.2006.03.570
44
HuchzermeierM. P.TaoW. (2012). Overcoming challenges to struvite recovery from anaerobically digested dairy manure. Water Environ. Res. 84, 34–41. 10.2175/106143011X13183708018887
45
HugA.UdertK. M. (2013). Struvite precipitation from urine with electrochemical magnesium dosage. Water Res. 47, 289–299. 10.1016/j.watres.2012.09.036
46
JafferY.ClarkT. A.PearceP.ParsonsS. A. (2002). Potential phosphorus recovery by struvite formation. Water Res. 36, 1834–1842. 10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00391-8
47
JohanssonS.RuscalledaM.ColprimJ. (2017). Phosphorus recovery through biologically induced precipitation by partial nitritation-anammox granular biomass. Chem. Eng. J. 327, 881–888. 10.1016/j.cej.2017.06.129
48
KatakiS.WestH.ClarkeM.BaruahD. C. (2016a). Phosphorus recovery as struvite from farm, municipal and industrial waste: feedstock suitability, methods and pre-treatments. Waste Manage. 49, 437–454. 10.1016/j.wasman.2016.01.003
49
KatakiS.WestH.ClarkeM.BaruahD. C. (2016b). Phosphorus recovery as struvite: recent concerns for use of seed, alternative Mg source, nitrogen conservation and fertilizer potential. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 107, 142–156. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.12.009
50
LahavO.TelzhenskyM.ZewuhnA.GendelY.GerthJ.CalmanoW.et al. (2013). Struvite recovery from municipal-wastewater sludge centrifuge supernatant using seawater NF concentrate as a cheap Mg (II) source. Sep. Purif. Technol. 108, 103–110. 10.1016/j.seppur.2013.02.002
51
Le CorreK. S.Valsami-JonesE.HobbsP.ParsonS. A. (2005). Impact of calcium on struvite crystal size, shape and purity. J. Cryst. Growth283, 514–522. 10.1016/j.jcrysgro.2005.06.012
52
LiB.BoiarkinaI.YuW.HuangH. M.MunirT.WangG. Q.et al. (2019). Phosphorous recovery through struvite crystallization: challenges for future design. Sci. Total Environ. 648, 1244–1256. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.07.166
53
MaH.GuoY.QinY.LiY. Y. (2018). Nutrient recovery technologies integrated with energy recovery by waste biomass anaerobic digestion. Bioresour. Technol. 269, 520–531. 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.08.114
54
MaiD. T.KunachevaC.StuckeyD. C. (2018). A review of posttreatment technologies for anaerobic effluents for discharge and recycling of wastewater. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 167–209. 10.1080/10643389.2018.1443667
55
MañasA.BiscansB.SpérandioM. (2011). Biologically induced phosphorus precipitation in aerobic granular sludge process. Water Res. 45, 3776–3786. 10.1016/j.watres.2011.04.031
56
MartiN.PastorL.BouzasA.FerrerJ.SecoA. (2010). Phosphorus recovery by struvite crystallization in WWTPs: influence of the sludge treatment line operation. Water Res. 44, 2371–2379. 10.1016/j.watres.2009.12.043
57
MayerB. K.BakerL. A.BoyerT. H.DrechselP.GiffordM.HanjraM. A.et al. (2016). Total value of phosphorus recovery. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 6606–6620. 10.1021/acs.est.6b01239
58
MeierL.PérezR.AzócarL.RivasM.JeisonD. (2015). Photosynthetic CO2 uptake by microalgae: an attractive tool for biogas upgrading. Biomass Bioenergy73, 102–109. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.10.032
59
MeixnerK.FuchsW.ValkovaT.SvardalK.LodererC.NeureiterM.et al. (2015). Effect of precipitating agents on centrifugation and ultrafiltration performance of thin stillage digestate. Sep. Purif. Technol. 145, 154–160. 10.1016/j.seppur.2015.03.003
60
MilesA.EllisT. G. (2001). Struvite precipitation potential for nutrient recovery from anaerobically treated wastes. Wat. Sci. Tech. 43, 259–266. 10.2166/wst.2001.0690
61
MoermanW.CarballaM.VandekerckhoveA.DeryckedD.VerstraeteW. (2009). Phosphate removal in agro-industry: pilot- and full-scale operational considerations of struvite crystallization. Water Res. 43, 1887–1892. 10.1016/j.watres.2009.02.007
62
Molinos-SenanteM.Hernández-SanchoF.Sala-GarridoR.Garrido-BaserbaM. (2011). Economic feasibility study for phosphorus recovery processes. Ambio40, 408–416. 10.1007/s13280-010-0101-9
63
MöllerK.MüllerT. (2012). Effects of anaerobic digestion on digestate nutrient availability and crop growth: a review. Eng. Life. Sci. 12, 242–257. 10.1002/elsc.201100085
64
MoralesN.del RíoÁ. V.Vázquez-PadínJ. R.MéndezR.Mosquera-CorralA.CamposJ. L. (2015). Integration of the Anammox process to the rejection water and main stream lines of WWTPs. Chemosphere140, 99–105. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2015.03.058
65
MyungJ.WangZ.YuanT.ZhangP.Van NostrandJ. D.ZhouJ.et al. (2015). Production of nitrous oxide from nitrite in stable Type II methanotrophic enrichments. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 10969–10975. 10.1021/acs.est.5b03385
66
NelsonN. O.MikkelsenR. L.HesterbergD. L. (2003). Struvite precipitation in anaerobic swine lagoon liquid: effect of pH and Mg: P ratio and determination of rate constant. Bioresour. Technol. 89, 229–236. 10.1016/S0960-8524(03)00076-2
67
NorskerN. H.BarbosaM. J.VermuëM. H.WijffelsR. H. (2011). Microalgal production- A close look at the economics. Biotechnol. Adv. 29, 24–27. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.08.005
68
OkaforE. C.SomarathneK. K. A.HayakawaA.KudoT.KurataO.IkiN.et al. (2018). Towards the development of an efficient low-NOx ammonia combustor for a micro gas turbine. Proc. Combust. Inst.10.1016/j.proci.2018.07.083. [Epub ahead of print].
69
ParkJ. B. K.CraggsR. J. (2011). Nutrient removal in wastewater treatment high rate algal ponds with carbon dioxide addition. Water Sci. Technol. 63, 1758–1764. 10.2166/wst.2011.114
70
PastorL.ManginD.BaratR.SecoA. (2008). A pilot-scale study of struvite precipitation in a stirred tank reactor: conditions influencing the process. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 6285–6291. 10.1016/j.biortech.2007.12.003
71
PengL.DaiH.WuY.PengY.LuX. (2018). A comprehensive review of phosphorus recovery from wastewater by crystallization processes. Chemosphere197, 768–781. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2018.01.098
72
PosadasE.del Mar MoralesM.GomezC.AciénF. G.MuñozR. (2015). Influence of pH and CO2 source on the performance of microalgae-based secondary domestic wastewater treatment in outdoors pilot raceways. Chem. Eng. J. 265, 239–248. 10.1016/j.cej.2014.12.059
73
RahmanMd. M.SallehM. A. M.RashidU.AhsanA.HossainM. M.RaC. S.et al. (2014). Production of slow release crystal fertilizer from wastewaters through struvite crystallization - A review. Arabian J. Chem. 7, 139–155. 10.1016/j.arabjc.2013.10.007
74
ReesN. V.ComptonR. G. (2011). Carbon-free energy: a review of ammonia-and hydrazine-based electrochemical fuel cells. Energ. Environ. Sci. 4, 1255–1260. 10.1039/c0ee00809e
75
ReijndersL. (2014). Phosphorus resources, their depletion and conservation, a review. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 93, 32–49. 10.1016/j.resconrec.2014.09.006
76
RenY.YuM.WuC.WangQ.GaoM.HuangQ.et al. (2017). A comprehensive review on food waste anaerobic digestion: research updates and tendencies. Bioresour. Technol. 247, 1069–1076. 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.109
77
Romero-GüizaM. S.Mata-AlvarezJ.Chimenos RiveraJ. M.GarciaS. A. (2016). Nutrient recovery technologies for anaerobic digestion systems: an overview. Rev. ION29, 7–26. 10.18273/revion.v29n1-2016001
78
RustenB.SahuA. K. (2011). Microalgae growth for nutrient recovery from sludge liquor and production of renewable bioenergy. Water Sci. Technol. 64, 1195–1201. 10.2166/wst.2011.722
79
RyuH. D.LeeS. I. (2010). Application of struvite precipitation as a pretreatment in treating swine wastewater. Process Biochem. 45, 563–572. 10.1016/j.procbio.2009.12.002
80
SakthivelS. R.TilleyE.UdertK. M. (2012). Wood ash as a magnesium source for phosphorus recovery from source-separated urine. Sci. Total Environ. 419,68–75. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.12.065
81
SarvajayakesavaluS.LuY.WithersP. J. A.PavinatoP. S.PanG.ChareonsudjaiP. (2018). Phosphorus recovery: a need for an integrated approach. Ecosyst. Health Sustain.4, 48–57. 10.1080/20964129.2018.1460122
82
SchaumC. A. (2007). Verfahren für eine zukünftige Klärschlammbehandlung-Klärschlammkonditionierung und Rückgewinnung von Phosphor aun Klärschlammasche. Schriftenreihe WAR, TU Darmstadt.
83
SchersonY. D.WellsG. F.WooS. G.LeeJ.ParkJ.CantwellB. J.et al. (2013). Nitrogen removal with energy recovery through N2O decomposition. Energ. Environ. Sci. 6, 241–248. 10.1039/C2EE22487A
84
SchersonY. D.WooS. G.CriddleC. S. (2014). Production of nitrous oxide from anaerobic digester centrate and its use as a co-oxidant of biogas to enhance energy recovery. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48, 5612–5619. 10.1021/es501009j
85
SenguptaS.NawazT.BeaudryJ. (2015). Nitrogen and phosphorus recovery from wastewater. Curr. Pollut. Rep. 1, 155–166. 10.1007/s40726-015-0013-1
86
SeñoránsL.BarrosS.GarcíaG.GarridoJ. M. (2011). Phosphorus recovery by struvite crystallization in a wastewater from a frozen fish factory. Tecnología del Agua (in Spanish)335, 26–35.
87
SheetsJ. P.YangL.GeX.WangZ.LiY. (2015). Beyond land application: emerging technologies for the treatment and reuse of anaerobically digested agricultural and food waste. Waste Manage. 44, 94–115. 10.1016/j.wasman.2015.07.037
88
ShiltonA. N.PowellN.GuieysseB. (2012). Plant based phosphorus recovery from wastewatervia algae and macrophytes. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 23, 884–889. 10.1016/j.copbio.2012.07.002
89
ShoenerB. D.BradleyI. M.CusickR. D.GuestJ. S. (2014). Energy positive domestic wastewater treatment: the roles of anaerobic and phototrophic technologies. Environ. Sci. Process Impacts16, 1204–1222. 10.1039/C3EM00711A
90
SikosanaM. K. L. N.RandallD. G.von BlottnitzH. (2017). A technological and economic exploration of phosphate recovery from centralised sewage treatment in a transitioning economy context. Water SA43, 343–353. 10.4314/wsa.v43i2.17
91
SimoesF.ValeP.StephensonT.SoaresA. (2018). The role of pH on the biological struvite production in digested sludge dewatering liquors. Sci. Rep. 8:7225. 10.1038/s41598-018-25431-7
92
SongY.YuanP.ZhengB.PengJ.YuanF.GaoY. (2007). Nutrients removal and recovery by crystallization of magnesium ammonium phosphate from synthetic swine wastewater. Chemosphere69, 319–324. 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2007.06.001
93
SpielmannM.BauerC.DonesR.TuchschmidM. (2007). Transport Services. Ecoinvent report No. 14.Dübendorf: Swiss Centre for Life Inventories.
94
StratfulI.ScrimshawM. D.LesterJ. N. (2001). Conditions influencing the precipitation of magnesium ammonium phosphate. Water Res. 35, 4191–4199. 10.1016/S0043-1354(01)00143-9
95
SuttonM. A.OenemaO.ErismanJ. W.LeipA.van GrinsvenH.WiniwarterW. (2011). Too much of a good thing. Nature472, 159–161. 10.1038/472159a
96
SvehlaP.RadechovskaH.PacekL.MichalP.HancA.TlustosP. (2017). Nitrification in a completely stirred tank reactor treating the liquid phase of digestate: the way towards rational use of nitrogen. Waste Manage. 64, 96–106. 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.03.041
97
Valera-MedinaA.MarshR.RunyonJ.PughD.BeasleyP.HughesT.et al. (2017). Ammonia–methane combustion in tangential swirl burners for gas turbine power generation. Appl. Energy185, 1362–1371. 10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.02.073
98
van EekertM. H. A.WeijmaJ.VerdoesN.de BuisonjeF. E.ReitsmaB. A. H.van den BulkJ. (2012). Explorative Research on Innovative Nitrogen Recovery. Amersfoort: STOWA
99
VaneeckhauteC.LebufV.MichelsE.BeliaE.VanrolleghemP. A.TackF. M. G.et al. (2017). Nutrient recovery from digestate: systematic technology review and product classification. Waste Biomass Valorization8, 21–40. 10.1007/s12649-016-9642-x
100
VanottiM. B.DubeP. J.SzogiA. A.García-GonzálezM. C. (2017). Recovery of ammonia and phosphate minerals from swine wastewater using gas-permeable membranes. Water Res. 112, 137–146. 10.1016/j.watres.2017.01.045
101
VanottiM. B.SzogiA. A. (2015). Systems and Methods for Reducing Ammonia Emissions From Liquid Effluents and for Recovering Ammonia. U.S. Patent No. 9,005,333. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
102
VanottiM. B.SzogiA. A.HuntP. G.MillnerP. D.HumenikF. J. (2007). Development of environmentally superior treatment system to replace anaerobic swine lagoons in the USA. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 3184–3194. 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.07.009
103
WangJ.BurkenJ. G.ZhangX. Q. (2006). Effect of seeding materials and mixing strength on struvite precipitation. Water Environ. Res. 78, 125–132. 10.2175/106143005X89580
104
Waternet (2017). Oral presentation. Enhanced sewage sludge treatment with struvite recovery. Struvite as phosphate fertilize in Big Phosphorus Conference (Manchester).
105
WeißbachM.DrewesJ. E.KochK. (2018a). Application of the oxidation reduction potential (ORP) for process control and monitoring nitrite in a coupled aerobic-anoxic nitrous decomposition operation (CANDO). Chem. Eng. J. 343, 484–491. 10.1016/j.cej.2018.03.038
106
WeißbachM.GosslerF.DrewesJ. E.KochK. (2018b). Separation of nitrous oxide from aqueous solutions applying a micro porous hollow fiber membrane contactor for energy recovery. Sep. Purif. Technol.195, 271–280. 10.1016/j.seppur.2017.12.016
107
WeißbachM.ThielP.DrewesJ. E.KochK. (2018c). Nitrogen removal and intentional nitrous oxide production from reject water in a coupled nitritation/nitrous denitritation system under real feed-stream conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 255, 58–66. 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.01.080
108
WilliamsA. T.ZitomerD. H.MayerB. K. (2015). Ion exchange-precipitation for nutrient recovery from dilute wastewater. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 1, 832–838. 10.1039/C5EW00142K
109
WuQ.BishopP. L.KeenerT. C.StallardJ.StileL. (2001). Sludge digestion enhancement and nutrient removal from anaerobic supernatant by Mg(OH)2 application. Water Sci. Technol. 44, 161–166. 10.2166/wst.2001.0039
110
XuF.KhalafA.SheetsJ.GeX.KeenerH.LiY. (2018). Phosphorus removal and recovery from anaerobic digestion residues in Advances in Bioenergy, Vol. 3, eds LiY.YeX. (Cleveland, OH: Academic Press), 77–136.
111
ZarebskaA.Romero NietoD.ChristensenK. V.Fjerbæk SøtoftL.NorddahlB. (2015). Ammonium fertilizers production from manure: a critical review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 1469–1521. 10.1080/10643389.2014.955630
112
ZhangH.WangY.WuZ.LeungD. Y. (2017). An ammonia electrolytic cell with NiCu/C as anode catalyst for hydrogen production. Energy Proc.142, 1539–1544. 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.12.605
Summary
Keywords
ammonia combustion, ammonia hydrolysis, bioaccumulation, CANDO process, environmental benefit, nutrient recovery, phosphorus precipitation
Citation
Campos JL, Crutchik D, Franchi Ó, Pavissich JP, Belmonte M, Pedrouso A, Mosquera-Corral A and Val del Río Á (2019) Nitrogen and Phosphorus Recovery From Anaerobically Pretreated Agro-Food Wastes: A Review. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2:91. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2018.00091
Received
07 October 2018
Accepted
20 December 2018
Published
11 January 2019
Volume
2 - 2018
Edited by
Airton Kunz, Embrapa Suínos e Aves, Brazil
Reviewed by
Ariel A. Szogi, Agricultural Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, United States; Victor Riau, Institut de Recerca i Tecnologia Agroalimentàries (IRTA), Spain
Updates
Copyright
© 2019 Campos, Crutchik, Franchi, Pavissich, Belmonte, Pedrouso, Mosquera-Corral and Val del Río.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: José Luis Campos jluis.campos@uai.cl
This article was submitted to Waste Management in Agroecosystems, a section of the journal Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.