www.ijesci.

org InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013
188
StudyonBiochemicalMethanePotentialand
EngineeringApplicationofSludge
DehydratedWaterthroughHydrothermal
DryingTreatment
MengDawei
1
,JiangZili
2
,MuHongyan
*3
andKunioYoshikawa
4

FirstFourDepartmentofEnvironmentalScienceandTechnology,TokyoInstituteofTechnology,Yokoha
ma2268502,Japan
ThirdDepartmentofEnvironmentalEngineering,BMEICO.,LTD,Beijing100027,China
1
mengdawei@bmei.net.cn;
2
jiangzili@bmei.net.cn;
*3
third.muhongyan@bmei.net.cn;
4
Four.yoshikawa.k.aa@m.titech.ac.jp

Abstract
The Hohhot sewage sludge dehydrated water
(SDW)throughhydrothermaldryingtreatmentwasstudiedin
this paper, which was evaluated by Biochemical Methane
Potential(BMP)testaswellastheguidanceforanbiochemical
methane potentialproject. The results showed that under 35
degree, after continuous 21 days fermentation, the sludge
dehydrated water performed the maximum cumulative gas
production (9450mL) with the concentration of 20gCOD/L.
Withtheincreaseofconcentrationofsludgedehydratedwa
ter, both unit biogas production and methane conversion
raterose at first and then fell, and it achieved
499.8mL/Gcodwhich was the maximum of 10gCOD/L slur
ry.According to the optimal results of commercial project in
Hohhot, the efficiency of 20gCOD/L sample, 83.42 tons of
sludge dehydrated water if all the loading of COD was de
graded were calculated to produce 342m
3
methane, corres
pondingtotheheatfrom239.5kgstandardcoal,whichcould
beusedforrecycling.
Keywords
Hydrothermal Drying; Sludge Dehydrated Water; Biochemical
MethanePotential;Methane
I nt r oduc t i on
As a new applied technology in the sludge treatment
area, hydrothermal drying technology for sludge has
attracted much attention both at home and abroad in
recent years, with advantages such asdecrement of
sludge volume, enhancement of anaerobic digestion
potential,nontoxic,green,andrecycling,etc.However,
therearealargemassofrawsludgeproducedwithout
stable processing each year, and it was seriously dis
rupted in betweensludge treatment and wastewater
treatment. Sludge contains cytoplasm, colloid, and
macromolecularorganism,etc.soithastobethekeyto
the cell disruption technology to improve sludge de
wateringperformance.
Hydrothermaldryingtechnologyholdsthecapabilities,
for instance, it can break up microbiological flocks,
rupturecells,anddissolvesolidorganicsorresolvable
macromolecular organism to molecule organism,
change the characteristics of sludge moisture funda
mentally, improve the anaerobic digestion perfor
mance of sludge, and enhance the efficiency of anae
robic digestion as well asmethaneproduction. As the
residual product, sludge dehydratedwateris also get
ting much attention for its high concentration of or
ganics and nutrition, which has a high resources po
tential. Smallscale and largescale sludge experiment
havebeenperformedbymeansofhydrothermaldrying
technology, and the result showedthat the optimum
reaction temperature was 190 and the optimum
reaction time was 30 minutes . With these optimum
operatingconditions,themoisturecontentofthesolid
residue was reduced to less than 40% by the hydro
thermal treatment followed by the mechanical dehy
dration, and the moisture content of the solid residue
could be reduced to 20% and 10% by 24 hours and 48
hours of natural drying, respectively. Meanwhile it
would be a huge resourcerecycling potential through
componentanalysisofsludgedehydratedwater.
The sewage sludge dehydrated water was studied as
theobjectofthisexperiment,whichwasresearchedon
its feasibility of methane production, and to get the
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013 www.ijesci.org
189
betterreactionconditions.Atthesametime,itwases
sentialtoinvestigatetechnicalfeasibilityandeconomic
andrationalresearchforthistechnicalroute,inorderto
improve the hydrothermal drying technical chain of
sludge,toachieveclosedcycle treatment of both waste
water and sludge through hydrothermal drying me
thod, and to achieve the maximum of the recycle of
resource,in combination with some engineering
projectsofbiochemicalmethanepotentialfromsludge
dehydratedwater.
Ex per i ment
Materials
1)SludgeDehydratedWater
In this study, the sludge dehydrated water(SDW)
was derived from the sludge ofHohhot sewage
treatment plant (20% of total solid), which was the
residual fluid after hydrothermal drying treatment
(Table1).ItcouldbeseenthatthisSDWhadabet
ter biodegradabilityto be used as the substrate (or
zymotic fluid) of methane production, which had
theratioofBOD5/CODcr0.38.
TABLE1CHARACTERISTICSOFTHESDW
pH
SS
/mgL
1

TP
/mgL
1

NH3N
/mgL
1

CODcr
/mgL
1

BOD5
/mgL
1
6.75 1.384 0.101 1.8 41.82 15.73
2)Inoculatedsludge(IS)
Inoculatedsludgewascollectedfromtheanaerobic
digester of Beijing sewage treatment plant, which
wasaddedtoglucosewith5000mg/Ldosageforone
weekdomestication.
Facilities
In this experiment, the anaerobic methaneproducing
systemwithsimpleglassbottleswasadoptedtosimu
late anaerobic fermentation process, in order to pro
vide data support for future engineering application.
TheapparatuswasinstalledasFig.1shownbelow,and
thenitsleakproofnesswasinspected.
2.5LCSTR(continuousstirredtankreactor)tankswere
used as anaerobic reactors. Certain volume of SDW
wasaddedintoeachbottle,dilutedwithdistilledwater
to 1.5L, then inoculated with flocculent anaerobic
sludge respectivelyaccording to theinoculationquan
tityofCODSDS:VSSIS=4:1,andintheendfillednitrogen
gasfor3minutestoeliminateoxygeninside.Thebiogas
producedbyanaerobicfermentationwasmeasuredby
gasflowmeter.

FIG.1EXPERIMENTALDEVICEOFBIOCHEMICALMETHANEPOTENTIAL
Methods
1)BiochemicalMethanePotentialtest
Table 1 showed that the concentration of COD and
ammonia nitrogen is relatively high for methano
gens normal growth, and it was essential for the
SDWwithgradientdilution.Anaerobicbottleswere
numberedconsecutivelyfromNo.1toNo.6,among
whichNo.1~No.4werethezymoticfluidswith1,2,4,
8 times dilution of the raw SDW, similarly,
No.5~No.6 were the comparisonsample (CP., con
taining375mLrawfluidand1125mLdistilledwater)
andtheblankone(BK.,containing1500mLdistilled
waterand125mLinoculatedsludge).
TABLE2CHARACTERISTICSOFTHESDW
No. COD/gL
1

1 41.82
2 20.91
3 10.45
4 5.23
The alkalescency of the zymotic fluid was adjusted
topHof7.5~8.0bymeansof3mol/LNaOHsolution,
andreactorsinstalledasshowninFig.1,wereplaced
in constant temperature incubator with
35degreesCelsius[15].Littlewaterwasaddedinto6
graduated cylinders in order to make the liquid
level coincide with zero graduation, and two
records of methane yield at 8:00 and 16:00 every
daywerekeptwithslowlyvibratinganaerobicbot
tlesforabout30minonetime,inordertoavoidthe
emergency of partial acidification. After the com
pletion of methane production, pH values were
testedforallofzymoticfluids.
2)SludgeHydrothermalDryingpretreatment
Thisprojectcouldreducethewatercontent(WC)of
www.ijesci.org InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013
190
sludge from 80% to 20% through hydrothermal
dryingmethod.Atfirst,wetsludgewasaddedinto
steam reaction kettle, where heat was exchanged
with saturated steam at 190 for 30min. Then, the
sludge after hydrothermal drying with 85% water
content,hadsuchliquidityastogravitationallyflow
into pressofiner for mechanical dehydration, in ad
dition,theSDWwasthetestsample.
AnalysismethodandInstrument
Cumulative biogas yield and daily biogas yield of
SDWwerecalculatedbythevolumeofalkalineeffluent.
CODcrwastestedbythepotassiumdichromatemethod,
usingHACHDR/890waterqualityanalyzer.Ammonia
nitrogen was measured by the sodiums reagent spec
trophotometry method, using HACH IL500 au
toanalyzer.The value of pH was tested by Laser
PHS3C, and suspended solid (SS) and BOD5 were
testedbymeansofstandardmethods.
Resul t s and Di sc ussi on
Biochemical Methane Potential of Sludge Dehydrated
Water
1)CumulativeBiogasYieldandDailyBiogasYield
The main propose was to investigatebiochemical
methane potential of the SDW, by keeping records
of alkali liquor volume regularly, calculating cu
mulativeanddailybiogasyield.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000

C
u
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e

b
i
o
g
a
s

y
i
e
l
d
/
m
L
Time/d
40gCOD/L (No.1)
20gCOD/L (No.2)
10gCOD/L (No.3)
5gCOD/L (No.4)
CP. (No.5)
BK. (No.6)

FIG.2CUMULATIVEMETHANEPRODUCTIONWITHDIFFERENTCODOF
SLUDGEDEHYDRATEDWATER
Cumulative biogas yield with different COD load
ings of SDW was shown in Fig.2. At the beginning
of 6 days, all except compared and blank samples
hadhigher biogas yield, the order of which was
No.2>No.1>No.3>No.4. The rate of biogas produc
tion began to slow down for the first time after 6
daysfermentation.However, the yield of No.2 sam
ple rapidly increased again after 10 days, reaching
the maximum of790mL, 39.8% larger than the
second one (NO.3). The ultimate order ofcumula
tivebiogasyieldwasNo.2>No.3>No.1>No.4.
Intheinitiatingstageoffermentation,No.1sample
had the top speed of biogas production but with
normal cumulative biogas production. The reason
might be with too high concentration of ammonia
nitrogen(1800mg/L)andthenearlyneutralzymotic
fluid in the end, inhibition effect occurred after 6
days fermentation to methanogens rather than aci
dification generated by acetic acid bacteria, which
ledtothelowbiogasproductionefficiency(6750mL
cumulative biogas yield). No.2 sample had a rapid
speed at the beginning, but stagnated during
6th~10thdays,andthencameuptosignificantbio
gas efficiency again. It might because the mixed
anaerobic fermentation bacteria could better adapt
to this zymotic fluid with the organic loading con
ditions, which could breed in abundance and coo
peratewithmethanogenstoconvertorganismfrom
thezymoticfluid.Themethaneproducingcurveof
No.3samplewassimilartoNo.1,bothofwhichap
peared dead time from 6th to 10th, then produced
biogasagain,andultimatelyreached5825mLinthe
17thday.
Therefore, No.2 sample havingthe top speed of
biogas production in the initiating stage as well as
the largest biogas yield, achieved biogas summit
again after merely 3 days, and was significantly
better than No.3 and No.1 samples account of bio
gas production efficiency and cumulative biogas
production, which presentedimportant references
forreasonableadjustmenttotheorganicloadingof
zymoticfluidinengineeringapplication.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900

D
a
i
l
y

b
i
o
g
a
s

y
i
e
l
d
/
m
L

d
-
1
Time/d
40gCOD/L (No.1) 20gCOD/L (No.2)
10gCOD/L (No.3) 5gCOD/L (No.4)
CP. (No.5) BK. (No.6)

FIG.3DAILYMETHANEPRODUCTIONWITHDIFFERENTCODOFSLUDGE
DEHYDRATEDWATER(SDW)
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013 www.ijesci.org
191
As it was seen in Fig.3thatthe daily biogas produc
tion of No.1 sample had the maximum production
during initial 6 days (gas peak period: I), and then
quicklydroppedtoanendinthe11thday.No.2and
No.3samplesquicklyachievedeachbiogassummit
initially, gradually stopped to produce after 6 days
(lag period: II), then achieved their second biogas
producing peaks during III period, and gradually
reduced after the 14th day (ending period: IV).
BiogassummitsoccurredinNo.4sampleinthefirst
6daysaswell,inwhichbiogaswasyieldedsteadily
during period of II, then eliminated after the 10th
day.
Li considered that microbial community mainly
consumedEPS(extracellularpolymericsubstances)
for their own growth at the initial anaerobic diges
tionperiod,andthentheoutputofcumulativebio
gas and daily biogas dropped gradually with the
decrease of EPS. In addition,hydrolytic enzyme
produced from anaerobic bacterium could dissolve
intracellular macromolecules out of microbial cell
wall tosupply new substrates for methanogens. So
thermal hydrolysis method could obviously acce
lerate this hydrolytic process and raise biogas pro
ductionfinally.
2)UnitbiogasProduction
After anaerobic biogas productioncame into stable,
unit biogas production and the percentage of me
thane conversion were shown in Fig.4. Unit biogas
production represented the volume of produced
methane when per COD of zymotic fluid was de
gradedafterfermentation.Underthecircumstances
of 35 degree Celsius and 101.3kPa, there would be
395mL pure methane produced when 1gCOD was
degraded, somethane conversionratemeantthe per
centage of the value of COD converted to methane
againstthetotalvalueofCOD.
Theunitbiogaswascalculatedasfollows:
u =
0
0
1uuu
(C
0
-C
1
) v
0

G(mL/g)unitbiogas;
G0(mL)cumulativemethaneproduction;
C0(mg/L)CODvalueofSDWbeforefermentation;
C1(mg/L)CODvalueofSDWafterfermentation;
V0(L)volumeofSDW(0.3L).
The results showed that with the increase of zy
motic fluid concentration, both unit biogas yield
and methane conversion rate presented first in
creased and then decreased trend, and the maxi
mumobtainedfromNo.3samplehasoccurred(unit
biogas yield: 449.8mL/gCOD and methane conver
sion rate: 95.7%). The order of zymotic fluids ac
cording to unit biogas yield was:
No.3>No.2>No.4>No.1, which might because the
concentration of450mg/L ammonia nitrogen had
beenfarbelowthelimitsofsignificantinhibitionof
anaerobic microorganism (1500~3000mg/L).The
methanogens withthe highest activities could con
vert the low molecular organic matter (e.g. acetic
acid, ethanol) to methane, which had been pro
duced by hydrolytic bacterium. When the concen
trationofzymoticfluidexceededNo.3orevenNo.4,
with the increased concentration of ammonia ni
trogen, the activities of both acidforming bacte
rium and methanogens were inhibited. However,
No.4 sample might be its lower concentration, or
ganic matters from zymotic fluid had been con
sumedbymostanaerobicmicrobesfortheirgrowth
and metabolism, and the shortchain fatty acids
producingmethane might be in short supply.
Meanwhile, with the rapid increase of concentra
tionoforganicmattersinzymoticfluid,unitbiogas
yield appeared plummet trend, which indicated
that methanogens activities had beeninhibitedob
viouslybyammonianitrogen.
0
100
200
300
400
500
40 20 10

Unit gas prod.
conv. rate
Concentration/gCODL
-1
U
n
i
t

b
i
o
g
a
s

y
i
e
l
d
/
m
L

g
C
O
D
-
1
5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
M
e
t
h
a
n
e

c
o
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n

r
a
t
e
/
%

FIG.4UNITBIOGASPRODUCTIONANDMETHANECONVERSIONOFSLUDGE
DEHYDRATEDWATER(SDW)
3) Comparative Analysis for Biochemical Methane
Potential
Several biogas yield results of anaerobic tests were
listed in Table 3 with similar points of anaerobic
materials, reaction temperature for methanogens,
biogas producing time, and pH range. Because of
the different pretreatment methods as well as spe
cific operating conditionsduring the experiment,it
turnedoutdifferentbiogasyieldandmethanecon
www.ijesci.org InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013
192
versionraterespectively.
Hu statedthat methane yield (average methane
content 69%) was 50mL/g VS for the mixture of
bluealgaeandanaerobicgranularsludge(ratio6:1).
Wang did research on sewage sludge anaerobic di
gestibility by means of thermal hydrolysis pre
treatment (170 and 30 minutes) and achieved
biogas production rate of 250mL/g COD. Rao
adopted three adding rate (5%, 7%, and 10%) in
turn during biogas production for 75 days, and
achieved the methane yield of 0.12~0.14m
3
CH4/kg
CODaftersteadyanaerobicoperation.Aboveall,it
hadanobviousadvantageofthesewagesludgefor
methane production after thermal hydrolysis pre
treatmentcomparedtoothermeans.
TABLE3CONTRASTOFBIOCHEMICALMETHANEPOTENTIALWITHSIMI
LARANAEROBICTESTS
Name Type
Time
/d
BiogasYield
/mLg
1
COD
Conv.
Rate/%
Hu batch 103.4 20.4
Wang batch 20 250 44.6
No.3
1)
batch 20 449.8 74.01
Rao semicont. 75 >260
2)

1)No.3:thesamplewiththeconcentrationof10COD/Linthispaper;
2)Biogasyieldwasthemeanvalueaftersteadyanaerobicoperation.
4)CODandpHofinletandoutlet
TheSDWchangesofCODandpHbeforeandafter
fermentation were shown inTable 4. With the in
crease of zymotic fluids concentration, COD de
gradation rate reduced gradually, and the pH after
fermentationbasedsteadilyinweakacidconditions.
It might because too high COD concentration had
significantly restrained the acidforming bacterium
activities, however, the neutral conditions were
suitable for methanogens growth. Thus, when syn
trophicacetogens converted volatile fatty acids
(VFAs, propionic acid, butyricacid,and pentatonic
acid)andethanoltoaceticacid,methanogenscould
convert them to methane. Moreover, due tothe pH
value after fermentation was higher than its origi
nal value, it indicated again the limitation of
theSDWfermentation, and more research would be
madeonhowtoimproveadaptabilityandactivities
ofacidformingbacteriumforhighconcentrationof
CODzymoticfluid.
TABLE4CONTRASTOFCODANDPHBEFOREANDAFTERMETHANEPRO
DUCTION
No
COD/gL
1
pH
Original Final Original Final
1 41.82 25.09 8.82 7.2
2 20.91 4.41 8.87 6.9
3 10.45 1.82 8.86 6.86
4 5.23 0.78 8.9 6.64
In view of unit biogas yield and methane conver
sion rate, No.3 sample had the optimal results for
449.8mL/gCOD. In consideration of cumulative
biogas production and daily biogas production,
No.2 sample had the optimal results for 9450mL
and the most times of peak values.It would be 1.5
timeswaterconsumptionadditionalfortheoriginal
zymotic fluid dilutedto No.3 than that to No.2.
However,inviewofwaterconsumption,operation
costs, and maximal methane production in engi
neeringprojects,theorganicloadingofNo.2sample
wasoptimumvalue.

FIG.5PROCESSFLOWDIAGRAMOFMETHANEPRODUCTIONFROMSLUDGE
InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013 www.ijesci.org
193
EngineeringofDesignandApplication
1)TechnologicalProcess
By the implementation of the laboratory experi
mentonmethaneproductionpotentialfromsludge
hydrothermaldryingabove,theoptimalconditions
were determined, and a technical route applied to
engineering project was developed. The technolo
gicalprocessofmethaneproductionfromSDWwas
shown in Fig.5, and aerobic processing unit was
connected subsequently todischarge after reaching
thestandards.
Hydrolytic acidification & EGSB treatment tech
nology wereadopted for the anaerobic process of
this project. SDW firstly passed through grid drain
in order to remove sundries, then entered into col
lector well. The effluent from collector well as well
as partial reflux sewage from aerobic pondflowed
into the preacidification tank (or regulation tank)
to make stable water quality and quantity, where
preacidification reaction occurred.The outlet flow
fromregulationtankwaspumpedintodistribution
reservoir, and heat was exchanged with hot steam,
the temperature of which then could rise to
35degree Celsius. The effluent from distribution
reservoirwaspumpedintoEGSBreactor,wherethe
organicmattersofSDWwereconvertedtomethane
with anaerobic microorganism (e.g. methanogens).
Then, the effluent passed through threephase se
parator, in which granular sludge was retained in
distribution reservoir and mingled with inflow to
pass through the EGSB reactor again. After anae
robicdigestion,outletgotintotheaerobictreatment
system subsequently. As well,the methane pro
duced from EGSB reactor could be applied to heat
recyclingafterrefining.
The Material and Energy Balance of Sludge Hydro
thermalDryingTreatmentSystem
In consideration of the unit of methane production
fromSDWasthepartialofthismodificationproject,it
was necessary to investigate the material and energy
balance inthe whole process, in order to reflect the
technical feasibility and advantages of Hydrothermal
Drying&RotaryKiln Incineration sludge treatment
method.Accordingtotheoptimalresults,theefficiency
of 10gCOD/L and 20gCOD/L sampleboth with 83.42
tons of SDW, if all the loading of COD was degraded,
were calculated to produce 210m
3
and 342m
3
methane,
respectively;separatelycorresponding to the heat from
110kgand239.5kgstandardcoal,whichcouldbeused
forrecycling
Concl usi ons
With the increase of zymotic fluid concentration, both
unit biogas yield and methane conversion rate pre
sentedatfirstincreasedandthendecreasedtrend,and
the maximum obtained from No.3 sample has oc
curred(unitbiogasyield:449.8mL/gCODandmethane
conversion rate: 74.1%).After biogas production,No.3
sample had the maximum of unit biogas yield
(449.8mL/gCOD)andmethaneconversionrate(74.1%),
both exceeding to those of No.2 sample
(381.8mL/gCODand62.84%).
It would be 1.5 times water consumption additionalto
theoriginalzymoticfluiddilutingtoNo.3thanthatto
No.2, however, in view of water consumption, opera
tion costs, and maximal methane production in engi
neering projects, the organic loading of No.2 sample
wasoptimumvalue.
Bycarryingoutthelaboratoryexperimentonmethane
productionpotentialfromsludgehydrothermaldrying,
methane production unit from SDWinengineering
processwasdesigned.Accordingtotheoptimalresults,
the efficiency of 10gCOD/L and 20gCOD/L sample
both with83.42 tons of SDW, if all the loading of COD
was degraded, were calculated to produce 210m
3
and
342m
3
methane, respectively;separatelycorresponding
to the heat from 110kg and 239.5kg standard coal,,
whichcouldbeusedforrecycling.
r ef er enc es
BrooksRB.Heattreatmentofsewagesludge[J].WaterPollu
tionControl,1970,69:9299.
DohanyosM,Zabranska J, Jenicek P, et al. The intensification
of sludge digestion by the disintegration of activated
sludgeandthethermalconditioningofdigestedsludge[J].
WaterScienceandTechnology,2000,42(9):5764.
Gong M L, Ren N Q, Xing D F, Startup of hydrogen
bioproduction reactor and ethanoltype fermentation[J].
ActaEnergiaeSolarisSinica,2005(02):244247.
HuP,YanQ,SongR,etal.Biogasproductionthroughanae
robic digestion from the mixture of blue algae and
sludge[J].ChineseJournalofEnvironmentalEngineering,
2009(3):559563.
HeSJ,WangJL,ZhaoX,Effectofammoniumconcentration
on the methanogenic activity of anaerobic granular
www.ijesci.org InternationalJournalofEnergyScience(IJES)Volume3Issue3,June2013
194
sludge[J]. Journal of Tsinghua University(Science and
Technology),2005(9):12941296.
JiangZL,MengDW,MuHY,etal.ExperimentalStudyon
Hydrothermal Drying for Sewage Sludge in LargeScale
Commercial Plan[J]. Journal of Environmental Science
andEngineering,2011,12(7):900910.
Jiang Z L, Meng D W, Mu H Y, et al. Study on the hydro
thermal drying technology of sewage sludge[J]. Science
ChinaTechnologicalSciences,2010,53(1):160163.
JomaaS,Shanableh A, Khali W, et al. Hydrothermal decom
position and oxidation of the organic component of mu
nicipalandindustrialwasteproducts[J].AdvancesinEn
vironmentalResearch,2003,7(3):647653.
Laurent J, Casellas M, Carrere H, et al. Effects of thermal
hydrolysis on activated sludge solubilization, surface
properties and heavy metals biosorption[J]. Chemical
EngineeringJournal,2011,166(3):841849.
Liu X Y, Xi D L, Sun Y S. Environmental Monitoring[M]. 3.
Beijing:HigherEducationPress,1987.
LiuXL,LiSZ,LiuJS,etal.Evaluationofhighsolidsanae
robic digestion process for converting excess sludge to
biogas[J]. Acta Scientiae Circumstantiae, 2011, (5):
955963.
MengDW,JiangZL,MuHY,etal.TheeffectofOperating
Parameters on the Hydrothermal Drying Treatment[J].
RenewableEnergy,2012,42:9094.
Neyens E, BaeyensJ. A review of thermal sludge
pretreatment processes to improve dewaterability[J].
JournalofHazardousMaterials,2003,98(13):5167.
PickworthB, Adams J, Panter K, et al. Maximising biogas in
anaerobic digestion by using engine waste heat for ther
mal hydrolysis pretreatment of sludge[J]. Water Science
andTechnology,2006,54(5):101108.
Rao B M.Effect ofAnaerobicDigestion on SludegDewatera
bility and Sludge Pretreatment Technologies[D]. Harbin
InstituteofTechnology,2008.
Ren N Q, Wang A J. Theory and application of anaerobic
biotechnology[M].Beijing:ChemicalIndustryPress,2004.
Vanvelsen A F M. Adaptation of methanogenic sludge to
high ammonianitrogen concentrations[J]. Water Re
search,1979,13(10):995999.
Wang Z J, Wang W, Xia Z, et al. Experimental study on
thermal hydrolysis and anaerobic digestion of sewage
sludge[J].ChinaWater&Wastewater,2003(09):14.
Wen Z,Shen S Z. Introducing a new technology for sludge
treatment[J].Environment,2007(12):7071.
WangZJ,WangW,ZhangXH,etal.Digestionofthermally
hydrolyzed sewage sludge by anaerobic sequencing
batch reactor[J]. Journal of Hazardous Materials,
2009,162(23):799803.
Wang Z J, Wang W. Enhancement of Sewage Sludge Anae
robic Digestibility by Thermal Hydrolysis
Pretreatment[J].EnvironmentalScience,2005(01):6871.
Yu F F, Wu J D. Toxicity Study of Ammonium on Methano
genic Bacteria in Anaerobic Granular Sludge[J]. Chemi
stry&Bioengineering,2008(4):7578.