Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T08:02:00.633Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Anaerobic digestion in Uganda: risks and opportunities for integration of waste management and agricultural systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 October 2019

A. I. McCord
Affiliation:
African Studies Program, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
S. A. Stefanos
Affiliation:
Nelson Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
V. Tumwesige
Affiliation:
W2E Uganda Ltd., Kampala, Uganda Green Heat Uganda Ltd., Kampala, Uganda School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland
D. Lsoto
Affiliation:
W2E Uganda Ltd., Kampala, Uganda
M. Kawala
Affiliation:
W2E Uganda Ltd., Kampala, Uganda
J. Mutebi
Affiliation:
W2E Uganda Ltd., Kampala, Uganda
I. Nansubuga
Affiliation:
National Water and Sewerage Corporation, Kampala, Uganda
R. A. Larson*
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Systems Engineering, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
*
Author for correspondence: R. A. Larson, E-mail: rebecca.larson@wisc.edu

Abstract

Much of the global population lacks access to basic public sanitation, energy and fertilizers. Micro-scale anaerobic digestion presents an opportunity for low-cost decentralized waste management that creates valuable co-products of renewable energy and organic fertilizer. However, field-based assessments of system performance and clearly articulated guidelines for digestate management and field application are needed. Feedstocks and effluent from seven digesters in Kampala, Uganda were monitored for standard wastewater and fertilizer metrics including indicator organisms (Escherichia coli and fecal coliform), chemical oxygen demand (COD), biological oxygen demand (BOD5), total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), total phosphorous (TP), heavy metals, pH, temperature and total solids (TS) over 2 yr. Results reveal that digester effluent does not meet standards for wastewater discharge or international safety standards for field application. Data indicate that digestate could be a suitable source of fertilizer (TKN = 1467 mg L−1, TP = 214 mg L−1) but poses issues for water quality if not managed properly (TS = 26,091 mg L−1, COD = 3471 mg L−1 and BOD5 = 246 mg L−1). While effluent from the digester contained pathogen indicator organisms (fecal coliform = 8.13 × 105 CFU/100 ml, E. coli = 3.27 × 105 CFU/100 ml), they were lower than the influent concentrations, and lower than reported concentrations in drainage canals. All digestate samples contained little to no heavy metals suggesting effective source separation. Data suggest that micro-scale biogas systems have potential to improve waste handling and meet standards associated with fertilizer application with proper post-digestion treatment.

Type
Research Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alegbeleye, OO, Singleton, I and Sant'ana, AS (2018) Sources and contamination routes of microbial pathogens to fresh produce during field cultivation: a review. Food Microbiology 73, 177208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Al-Jamal, W and Mahmoud, N (2009) Community onsite treatment of cold strong sewage in a UASB-septic tank. Bioresource Technology 100, 10611068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avery, LM, Booth, P, Campbell, C, Tompkins, D and Hough, RL (2012) Prevalence and survival of potential pathogens in source-segregated green waste compost. Science of the Total Environment 431, 128138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Avery, LM, Anchang, KY, Tumwesige, V, Strachan, N and Goude, PJ (2014) Potential for pathogen reduction in anaerobic digestion and biogas generation in Sub-Saharan Africa. Biomass & Bioenergy 70, 112124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartram, J, Lewis, K, Lenton, R and Wright, A (2005) Focusing on improved water and sanitation for health. Lancet 365, 810812.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beneragama, N, Iwasaki, M, Lateef, SA, Yamashiro, T, Ihara, I and Umetsu, K (2013) The survival of multidrug-resistant bacteria in thermophilic and mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of dairy manure and waste milk. Animal Science Journal 84, 426433.Google ScholarPubMed
Brown, VJ (2006) Biogas a bright idea for Africa. Environmental Health Perspectives 114, 301303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burch, T, Spencer, S, Borchardt, S, Larson, RA and Borchardt, MA (2018) Fate of manure-borne pathogens during anaerobic digestion and solids separation. Journal of Environmental Quality 47, 336344.Google ScholarPubMed
Bwire, G, Malimbo, M, Maskery, B, Kim, YE, Mogasale, V and Levin, A (2013) The burden of cholera in Uganda. PLoS Neglected Tropical Diseases 7(12), e2545.Google ScholarPubMed
Carden, K, Armitage, N, Winter, K, Sichone, O, Rivett, U and Kahonde, J (2007) The use and disposal of greywater in the non-sewered areas of South Africa: part 1—quantifying the greywater generated and assessing its quality. Water SA 33, 425432.Google Scholar
Chauret, C, Springthorpe, S and Sattar, S (1999) Fate of cryptosporidium oocysts, giardia cysts, and microbial indicators during wastewater treatment and anaerobic sludge digestion. Canadian Journal of Microbiology 45, 257262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dumontet, S, Dinel, H and Baloda, SB (1999) Pathogen reduction in sewage sludge by composting and other biological treatments: a review. Biological Agriculture & Horticulture 16, 409430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuhrimann, S, Winkler, MS, Schneeberger, PHH, Niwagaba, CB, Buwule, J, Babu, M, Medlicott, K, Utzinger, J and Cisse, G (2014) Health risk assessment along the wastewater and faecal sludge management and reuse chain of Kampala, Uganda: a visualization. Geospatial Health 9, 251255.Google ScholarPubMed
Fuhrimann, S, Stalder, M, Winkler, MS, Niwagaba, CB, Babu, M, Masaba, G, Kabatereine, NB, Halage, AA, Schneeberger, PHH, Utzinger, J and Cisse, G (2015) Microbial and chemical contamination of water, sediment and soil in the Nakivubo wetland area in Kampala, Uganda. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 187(7), 15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ichinari, T, Ohtsubo, A, Ozawa, T, Hasegawa, K, Teduka, K, Oguchi, T and Kiso, Y (2008) Wastewater treatment performance and sludge reduction properties of a household wastewater treatment system combined with an aerobic sludge digestion unit. Process Biochemistry 43, 722728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Isunju, JB, Schwartz, K, Schouten, MA, Johnson, WP and Van Dijk, MP (2011) Socio-economic aspects of improved sanitation in slums: a review. Public Health 125, 368376.Google ScholarPubMed
Kanyiginya, V, Kansiime, F, Kimwaga, R and Mashauri, DA (2010) Assessment of nutrient retention by Natete wetland Kampala, Uganda. Physics and Chemistry of the Earth 35, 657664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katukiza, AY, Ronteltap, M, Niwagaba, CB, Foppen, JWA, Kansiime, F and Lens, PNL (2012) Sustainable sanitation technology options for urban slums. Biotechnology Advances 30, 964978.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Katukiza, AY, Ronteltap, M, Van Der Steen, P, Foppen, JWA and Lens, PNL (2014) Quantification of microbial risks to human health caused by waterborne viruses and bacteria in an urban slum. Journal of Applied Microbiology 116, 447463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katukiza, AY, Ronteltap, M, Niwagaba, CB, Kansiime, F and Lens, PNL (2015) Grey water characterisation and pollutant loads in an urban slum. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 12(2), 423436.Google Scholar
Kearney, TE, Larkin, MJ and Levett, PN (1993) The effect of slurry storage and anaerobic-digestion on survival of pathogenic bacteria. Journal of Applied Bacteriology 74, 8693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kulabako, RN, Nalubega, M, Wozei, E and Thunvik, R (2010) Environmental health practices, constraints and possible interventions in peri-urban settlements in developing countries—a review of Kampala, Uganda. International Journal of Environmental Health Research 20, 231257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kunte, DP, Yeole, TY and Ranade, DR (2000) Inactivation of Vibrio cholerae during anaerobic digestion of human night soil. Bioresource Technology 75, 149151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larsen, HE, Munch, B and Schlundt, J (1994) Use of indicators for monitoring the reduction of pathogens in animal waste treated in biogas plants. Zentralblatt Fur Hygiene Und Umweltmedizin 195, 544555.Google ScholarPubMed
Letema, S, Van Vliet, B and Van Lier, JB (2012) Satellite sanitary systems in Kampala, Uganda. Environmental Engineering Science 29, 291296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masse, D, Gilbert, Y and Topp, E (2011) Pathogen removal in farm-scale psychrophilic anaerobic digesters processing swine manure. Bioresource Technology 102, 641646.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murray, A, Mekala, GD and Chen, X (2011) Evolving policies and the roles of public and private stakeholders in wastewater and faecal-sludge management in India, China and Ghana. Water International 36, 491504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutagmaba, M (2006) Ministry of Water and Environment Water and Sanitation Sector Performance Report. Kampala, Uganda: Government of Uganda.Google Scholar
Nabulo, G, Young, SD and Black, CR (2010) Assessing risk to human health from tropical leafy vegetables grown on contaminated urban soils. Science of the Total Environment 408, 53385351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Namazzi, J (2008) Use of inorganic fertilizers in Uganda. Uganda Strategy Support Program. International Food Policy and Research Institute & Ugandan Secretariat for the Plan for Modernization of Agriculture.Google Scholar
NETWAS (2011) Market Study on Demand for Use of Wastewater, Excreta, and Faecal Sludge and Other Related By-products. Final Report. Development Management and Training Consultants, Kampala, Uganda. http://www.ecosanres.org/pdf_files/MarketStudy-UgandaNode2011.pdf.Google Scholar
Nicholson, FA, Groves, SJ and Chambers, BJ (2005) Pathogen survival during livestock manure storage and following land application. Bioresoure Technology 96, 135143.Google ScholarPubMed
Nyenje, PM, Foppen, JW, Uhlenbrook, S, Kulabako, R and Muwanga, A (2010) Eutrophication and nutrient release in urban areas of sub-Saharan Africa—a review. Science of the Total Environment 408, 447455.Google ScholarPubMed
Nyenje, PM, Foppen, JW, Kulabako, R, Muwanga, A and Uhlenbrook, S (2013) Nutrient pollution in shallow aquifers underlying pit latrines and domestic solid waste dumps in urban slums. Journal of Environmental Management 122, 1524.Google ScholarPubMed
Nyenje, PM, Meijer, LMG, Foppen, JW, Kulabako, R and Uhlenbrook, S (2014) Phosphorus transport and retention in a channel draining an urban, tropical catchment with informal settlements. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 18, 10091025.Google Scholar
Okoboi, G and Barungi, M (2012) Constraints to fertilizer use in Uganda: insights from Uganda census of Agriculture 2008/9. Journal of Sustainable Development 5(10), 99113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okot-Okumu, J and Nyenje, R (2011) Municipal solid waste management under decentralisation in Uganda. Habitat International 35, 537543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olsen, JE and Larsen, HE (1987) Bacterial decimation times in anaerobic digestions of animal slurries. Biological Wastes 21, 153168.Google Scholar
Olsen, JE, Jorgensen, JB and Nansen, P (1985) On the reduction of Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in bovine slurry subjected to batch mesophilic or thermophilic anaerobic-digestion. Agricultural Wastes 13, 273280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OMAMO (2003) Fertilizer trade and pricing in Uganda. Agrekon 42, 310324.Google Scholar
Plymforshell, L (1995) Survival of Salmonellas and Ascaris-suum eggs in a thermophilic biogas plant. Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica 36, 7985.Google Scholar
R-CORE-TEAM (2015) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 3.2.1 ed. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.Google Scholar
Sahlstrom, L (2003) A review of survival of pathogenic bacteria in organic waste used in biogas plants. Bioresource Technology 87, 161166.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sahlstrom, L, Bagge, E, Emmoth, E, Holmqvist, A, Danielsson-Tham, ML and Albihn, A (2008) A laboratory study of survival of selected microorganisms after heat treatment of biowaste used in biogas plants. Bioresource Technology 99, 78597865.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slana, I, Pribylova, R, Kralova, A and Pavlik, I (2011) Persistence of Mycobacterium avium subsp paratuberculosis at a farm-scale biogas plant supplied with manure from paratuberculosis-affected dairy cattle. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 77, 31153119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, SR, Lang, NL, Cheung, KHM and Spanoudaki, K (2005) Factors controlling pathogen destruction during anaerobic digestion of biowastes. Waste Management 25, 417425.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Surendra, KC, Takara, D, Jasinski, J and Khanal, SK (2013) Household anaerobic digester for bioenergy production in developing countries: opportunities and challenges. Environmental Technology 34, 16711689.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szanto, GL, Letema, SC, Tukahirwa, JT, Mgana, S, Oosterveer, PJM and Van Buuren, JCL (2012) Analyzing sanitation characteristics in the urban slums of East Africa. Water Policy 14, 613624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tumwesige, V, Fulford, D and Davidson, GC (2014) Biogas appliances in Sub-Sahara Africa. Biomass & Bioenergy 70, 4050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
WHO (2006) WHO Guildelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta, and Greywater, Vol. 4. Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
WHO (2013) Progress on Sanitation and Drinking Water: 2013 Update. WHO, UNICEF.Google Scholar
Wright, JA, Cronin, A, Okotto-Okotto, J, Yang, H, Pedley, S and Gundry, SW (2013) A spatial analysis of pit latrine density and groundwater source contamination. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 185, 42614272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yongabi, KA, Harris, PL and Lewis, DM (2009) Poultry faeces management with a simple low cost plastic digester. African Journal of Biotechnology 8, 15601566.Google Scholar