Treatment technologies for urban solid biowaste to create value products: a review with focus on low- and middle-income settings

190Citations
Citations of this article
697Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Treatment of biowaste, the predominant waste fraction in low- and middle-income settings, offers public health, environmental and economic benefits by converting waste into a hygienic product, diverting it from disposal sites, and providing a source of income. This article presents a comprehensive overview of 13 biowaste treatment technologies, grouped into four categories: (1) direct use (direct land application, direct animal feed, direct combustion), (2) biological treatment (composting, vermicomposting, black soldier fly treatment, anaerobic digestion, fermentation), (3) physico-chemical treatment (transesterification, densification), and (4) thermo-chemical treatment (pyrolysis, liquefaction, gasification). Based on a literature review and expert consultation, the main feedstock requirements, process conditions and treatment products are summarized, and the challenges and trends, particularly regarding the applicability of each technology in the urban low- and middle-income context, are critically discussed. An analysis of the scientific articles published from 2005 to 2015 reveals substantial differences in the amount and type of research published for each technology, a fact that can partly be explained with the development stage of the technologies. Overall, publications from case studies and field research seem disproportionately underrepresented for all technologies. One may argue that this reflects the main task of researchers—to conduct fundamental research for enhanced process understanding—but it may also be a result of the traditional embedding of the waste sector in the discipline of engineering science, where socio-economic and management aspects are seldom object of the research. More unbiased, well-structured and reproducible evidence from case studies at scale could foster the knowledge transfer to practitioners and enhance the exchange between academia, policy and practice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lohri, C. R., Diener, S., Zabaleta, I., Mertenat, A., & Zurbrügg, C. (2017, March 1). Treatment technologies for urban solid biowaste to create value products: a review with focus on low- and middle-income settings. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology. Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-017-9422-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free