CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Energy Recovery from Sewage Sludge: The Case Study of Croatia

Đurđević, Dinko, Blecich, Paolo, Jurić, Željko·2019·Energies
DOI 10.3390/en12101927
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Croatia produced 21,366 tonnes of dry matter (DM) sewage sludge (SS) in 2016, a quantity expected to surpass 100,000 tonnes DM by 2024. Annual production rates for future wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) in Croatia are estimated at 5.8–7.3 Nm3/people equivalent (PE) for biogas and 20–25 kgDM/PE of sewage sludge. Biogas can be converted into 12–16 kWhel/PE of electricity and 19–24 kWhth/PE of heat, which is sufficient for 30–40% of electrical and 80–100% of thermal autonomy. The WWTP autonomy can be increased using energy recovery from sewage sludge incineration by 60% for electricity and 100% of thermal energy (10–13 kWhel/PE and 30–38 kWhth/PE). However, energy for sewage sludge drying exceeds energy recovery, unless solar drying is performed. The annual solar drying potential is estimated between 450–750 kgDM/m2 of solar drying surface. The lower heating value of dried sewage sludge is 2–3 kWh/kgDM and this energy can be used for assisting sludge drying or for energy generation and supply to WWTPs. Sewage sludge can be considered a renewable energy source and its incineration generates substantially lower greenhouse gases emissions than energy generation from fossil fuels. For the same amount of energy, sewage sludge emits 58% fewer emissions than natural gas and 80% less than hard coal and fuel oil. Moreover, this paper analysed the feasibility of sludge disposal practices by analysing three scenarios (landfilling, co-incineration, and mono-incineration). The analysis revealed that the most cost-effective sewage sludge disposal method is landfilling for 60% and co-incineration for 40% of the observed WWTPs in Croatia. The lowest CO2 emissions are obtained with landfilling and mono-incineration in 53% and 38% of the cases, respectively.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/en12101927

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Anaerobic digestion of textile waste leads to the generation of biogas.

    “The hypothesis posits that the process of anaerobic digestion of textile waste leads to the generation of biogas, as evidenced by the works [300][301][302].”

    From Recent Advances in the Remediation of Textile-Dye-Containing Wastewater: Prioritizing Human Health and Sustainable Wastewater Treatment (2024) · cites this paper as [302]

    The Introduction states that anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge produces biogas, and Section 3.3 discusses biogas from anaerobic sludge stabilization. The cited paper does not establish that the same result holds for textile waste, the feedstock specified in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Kelessidis, 2012, Comparative study of the methods used for treatment and final disposal of sewage sludge in European countries, Waste Manag., 32, 1186, 10.1016/j.wasman.2012.01.012 · DOI
  2. Campbell, 2000, Sludge management—Future issues and trends, Water Sci. Technol., 41, 1, 10.2166/wst.2000.0135 · DOI
  3. Kacprzak, 2017, Sewage sludge disposal strategies for sustainable development, Environ. Res., 156, 39, 10.1016/j.envres.2017.03.010 · DOI
  4. Yoshida, 2015, A comprehensive substance flow analysis of a municipal wastewater and sludge treatment plant, Chemosphere, 138, 874, 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.09.045 · DOI
  5. Hadi, 2015, A critical review on preparation, characterization and utilization of sludge-derived activated carbons for wastewater treatment, Chem. Eng. J., 260, 895, 10.1016/j.cej.2014.08.088 · DOI
  6. Zhang, 2018, Optimization of RDM-UF for alfalfa wastewater treatment using RSM, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 25, 1439, 10.1007/s11356-017-0588-8 · DOI
  7. Mo, 2018, A review on agro-industrial waste (AIW) derived adsorbents for water and wastewater treatment, J. Environ. Manag., 227, 395, 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.069 · DOI
  8. Mininni, 2015, EU policy on sewage sludge utilization and perspectives on new approaches of sludge management, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 22, 7361, 10.1007/s11356-014-3132-0 · DOI
  9. Thevenon, 2011, Local to regional scale industrial heavy metal pollution recorded in sediments of large freshwater lakes in central Europe (lakes Geneva and Lucerne) over the last centuries, Sci. Total Environ., 412, 239, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.09.025 · DOI
  10. Spinosa, 2011, Sustainable and Innovative Solutions for Sewage Sludge Management, Water, 3, 702, 10.3390/w3020702 · DOI
  11. Mills, 2014, Environmental & economic life cycle assessment of current & future sewage sludge to energy technologies, Waste Manag., 34, 185, 10.1016/j.wasman.2013.08.024 · DOI
  12. Blecich, 2018, Energy potential of digestate produced by anaerobic digestion in biogas power plants: the case study of Croatia, Environ. Eng. Sci., 35, 1286, 10.1089/ees.2018.0123 · DOI
  13. Fytili, 2008, Utilization of sewage sludge in EU application of old and new methods—A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 12, 116, 10.1016/j.rser.2006.05.014 · DOI
  14. Đurđević, D., Balić, D., and Jurić, Ž. (2019). Socio-Economic Aspects in Satisfying Energy Demands by Different Technologies of Heat and Electricity Generation. Tech. Gaz., 26. · DOI
  15. Stasta, 2006, Thermal processing of sewage sludge, Appl. Therm. Eng., 26, 1420, 10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2005.05.030 · DOI
  16. Cao, 2012, Sewage sludge-to-energy approaches based on anaerobic digestion and pyrolysis: Brief overview and energy efficiency assessment, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 16, 1657, 10.1016/j.rser.2011.12.014 · DOI
  17. Lumley, 2014, Techno-economic analysis of wastewater sludge gasification: A decentralized urban perspective, Bioresour. Technol., 161, 385, 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.03.040 · DOI
  18. Massarotti, 2016, Thermo-economic analysis of a novel cogeneration system for sewage sludge treatment, Energy, 115, 1560, 10.1016/j.energy.2016.07.144 · DOI
  19. Johansson, 2008, Sewage sludge handling with phosphorus utilization—Life cycle assessment of four alternatives, J. Clean. Prod., 16, 135, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2006.12.004 · DOI
  20. Praspaliauskas, 2017, A review of sludge characteristics in Lithuania’s wastewater treatment plants and perspectives of its usage in thermal processes, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 67, 899, 10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.041 · DOI
  21. Openshaw, K. (2014). Energy Values of Unprocessed Biomass, Charcoal and other Biomass Fuels and their role in Greenhouse Gas Mitigation and Energy Use. Advances in Environmental Science and Energy Planning, WSEAS Press.
  22. Fuwape, 1993, Charcoal and fuel value of agroforestry tree crops, Agrofor. Syst., 22, 175, 10.1007/BF00705232 · DOI
  23. Stucki, 2015, Hydrothermal carbonnization of sewage sludge on industrial scale: Energy efficiency, environmental effects and combustion, J. Energy Chall. Mech., 2, 38
  24. Donatello, 2013, Recycling and recovery routes for incinerated sewage sludge ash (ISSA): A review, Waste Manag., 33, 2328, 10.1016/j.wasman.2013.05.024 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Lewis, M. (1975, January 18–20). Sludge pyrolysis for energy recovery and pollution control. Proceedings of the National Conference on Municipal Treatment Plant Sludge Management, Anaheim, CA, USA.
  26. Marrero, 2004, Fate of heavy metals and radioactive metals in gasification of sewage sludge, Waste Manag., 24, 193, 10.1016/S0956-053X(03)00127-2 · DOI
  27. Luts, 2000, Co-incineration of dried sewage sludge in coal-fired power plants: A case study, Water Sci. Technol., 42, 259, 10.2166/wst.2000.0221 · DOI
  28. Bodik, 2011, Biogas Production in Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants—Current Status in EU with a Focus on the Slovak Republic, Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q., 25, 335
  29. Vouk, 2015, Possible disposal of sludge generated in the process of wastewater treatment in concrete industry, Hrvatske Vode, 23, 277
  30. Fruergaard, 2010, Energy recovery from waste incineration: Assessing the importance of district heating networks, Waste Manag., 30, 1264, 10.1016/j.wasman.2010.03.026 · DOI
  31. Eriksson, O., and Finnveden, G. (2017). Energy Recovery from Waste Incineration—The Importance of Technology Data and System Boundaries on CO2 Emissions. Energies, 10. · DOI
  32. Komilis, 2014, Effect of organic matter and moisture on the calorific value of solid wastes: An update of the Tanner diagram, Waste Manag., 34, 249, 10.1016/j.wasman.2013.09.023 · DOI
  33. Bennamoun, 2012, Solar drying of wastewater sludge: A review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., 16, 1061, 10.1016/j.rser.2011.10.005 · DOI
  34. Vouk, 2017, Use of incinerated sewage sludge ash in cement mortars: Case study in Croatia, Tech. Gaz., 24, 43
  35. Nowak, 2010, Heavy metal removal from municipal solid waste fly ash by chlorination and thermal treatment, J. Hazard. Mater., 179, 323, 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.03.008 · DOI
  36. Chen, 2016, Potential of greenhouse gas emissions from sewage sludge management: A case study of Taiwan, J. Clean. Prod., 129, 196, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.04.084 · DOI
  37. Olofsson, 2005, Driving forces for import of waste for energy recovery in Sweden, Waste Manag., 23, 3

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Đurđević, D., Blecich, P., & Jurić, Ž.
Venue
Energies
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2019-05-20
Volume
12
Issue
10
Pages
1927
ISSN
1996-1073
DOI
10.3390/en12101927
Cited by
125
References
0
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review