This document examines greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater treatment systems. It analyzes methane and nitrous oxide emissions from sludge samples taken from different points in a wastewater treatment plant under varying conditions of temperature and oxygen. Experimental results showed that the rate of methane emission increased with the presence of glucose, nutrients, and volatile fatty acids, and was well correlated with increasing sludge temperature. Methane production and emission rates were highest for digestion sludge and lowest for septic sludge. An inverse relationship was found between methane emission rates and oxygen levels in the sludge samples. Nitrous oxide emissions were not detected.
This document examines greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater treatment systems. It analyzes methane and nitrous oxide emissions from sludge samples taken from different points in a wastewater treatment plant under varying conditions of temperature and oxygen. Experimental results showed that the rate of methane emission increased with the presence of glucose, nutrients, and volatile fatty acids, and was well correlated with increasing sludge temperature. Methane production and emission rates were highest for digestion sludge and lowest for septic sludge. An inverse relationship was found between methane emission rates and oxygen levels in the sludge samples. Nitrous oxide emissions were not detected.
This document examines greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater treatment systems. It analyzes methane and nitrous oxide emissions from sludge samples taken from different points in a wastewater treatment plant under varying conditions of temperature and oxygen. Experimental results showed that the rate of methane emission increased with the presence of glucose, nutrients, and volatile fatty acids, and was well correlated with increasing sludge temperature. Methane production and emission rates were highest for digestion sludge and lowest for septic sludge. An inverse relationship was found between methane emission rates and oxygen levels in the sludge samples. Nitrous oxide emissions were not detected.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Wastewater Treatment System
Rohini Prasad Devkota Central Department of Environmental Science, Tribhuvan University, Kathmandu, epal Correspondin! e"mail# rohinidev$ota%yahoo&com Abstract: 'esides its !reat potential in controllin! (ater pollution from different sources, (aste (ater treatment system !enerates si!nificant amount of !reenhouse !ases& )ence, reducin! the emission of !reenhouse !ases from the (aste(ater treatment plants is the ma*or concern& The correct understandin! and estimation of the !reenhouse !ases emitted from different points of the plan is essential to tac$le this challen!e& This research has attempted to evaluate and +uantify the !reenhouse !ases, mainly methane and nitrous o,ide, emissions from the (aste(ater treatment system under varyin! conditions of temperature and o,y!en& The slud!e samples (ere collected from the septic tan$, aeration tan$, denitrification tan$ and di!estion tan$ to e,amine the emission of !reenhouse !ases from the samples (ith and (ithout nutrients and volatile fatty acids-./01& To e,amine the effect of temperatures on the emission of !reenhouse !ases, e,periments (ere desi!ned under different temperatures by $eepin! reactors at 23
C, 453
C, 463
C, 753
C, 773
C and 653
C& Similarly, e,periments (ere carried out at 773
C under different amount of o,y!en supply -5, 5&1, 5&2, 1&5 and 4&5 m!891 to e,amine the role of o,y!en in !reenhouse !ases emission& E,perimental results sho(ed that the rate of emission of C)2 !as from the slud!e sample (as enhanced (ith the presence of !lucose, nutrients and ./0& :ate of C)2 production (as (ell correlated (ith slud!e temperature& ;t (as similar for all slud!e samples ta$en from different points of the treatment plant& :ate of production (as found hi!hest for di!estion slud!e and least fir septic slud!e& C)2 production (as started earlier and found fastest from the di!estion slud!e& 0n inverse relationship (as found bet(een the rate of C)2 emission and the amounts of o,y!en present in the slud!e sample& )o(ever, 4< emission (as not detected at all& Keywords: =ethane, 0naerobic, Temperature, utrients, >aste(ater, Slud!e 1. Introduction >ater scarcity and (ater pollution are serious environmental problems in many the urban areas& The rapidly increasin! population in the urban areas of developin! countries has added to the scarcity of (ater& The inappropriate mana!ement of domestic se(a!e and industrial dischar!e has e,acerbated the (ater pollution& This situation has necessitated (ater treatment system and different techni+ues are in practice for the treatment of (aste (ater& These systems are, no(, proven to be effective means not only in meetin! the demand of (ater for different purposes, but also in restorin! the de!raded a+uatic ecosystem and environment& >ide ran!es of (aste(ater treatment systems are available to maintain the chemical, physical, and biolo!ical inte!rity of (ater& ?hysical, chemical, and biolo!ical units have been developed and are applied for the treatment of (aste(ater& The (aste(ater treatment systems are not totally environmentally friendly as they !enerate various !reenhouse !ases -@)@s1& @)@s li$e C< 4 , C) 2 and 4 < are released from different components of the treatment system& There has been !radual increase in the trend of these C) 2 and 4 < !ases emission from 1AA8 to 4552 -/i!ure11& Bournal of the ;nstitute of En!ineerin!, .ol& 8, o& 1, pp& 178C187 D TUT08;<E8?CU 0ll ri!hts reserved& ?rinted in epal /a,# A77"1"6646875
TUTA/IO/P!U 17A Journal of the Institute of the Engineering Figure 1: Greenhouse gas emissions from waste and wastewater treatment systems. Source: IPCC annual report !""#$ The study has focused on evaluatin! and +uantifyin! !reenhouse !ases emission from the (aste(ater treatment slud!e& The aim of study is to evaluate and +uantify the @)@ emissions from it& This study mainly focuses on the role of nutrients -< 7 " , ) 2 E 1, !lucose and ./0, temperature and o,y!en on the @)@ emissions from (aste(ater treatment slud!e& ". #ethods and #ateria$s Slud!e samples (ere collected from septic tan$, aeration tan$, denitrification tan$ and di!estion tan$ of the (aste(ater treatment system (hich is sho(n schematically in /i! 4& F5 Slud!e samples of 655 ml (ere ta$en from 2 and !lucose, ) 2 E , < 7 " and volatile fatty acids -./01 (ere added to e,amine their effect in the emission of !reenhouse !ases& E,periments (ere carried out under different sets of temperatures and o,y!en levels& The effects of temperature and o,y!en in the emission of @)@s from the (aste(ater slud!e can be done only in those places (here (e can control these parameters& The +uantity of methane and nitrous o,ide emitted from these slud!e samples (ere measured by usin! @as Chromato!raph -@C1 (ith thermal conductivity detector& 1,400 1,450 1,500 1,550 1,600 1,650 1,700 1,750 1,800 Years C H 4
( G g / y e a r ) 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 N 2 O
( G g / y e a r ) CH4 N2O 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 1 9 9 8 1 9 9 9 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 0 0 4 Years C H 4
( G g / y e a r ) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 N 2 O
( G g / y e a r ) CH4 N2O Greenhouse Gas Emissions from %astewater &reatment System 185 9e!ends# /lo( process Sample collection points Figure 2: 'loc( diagram of the system indicating the sampling points %. Resu$ts and Discussion %.1 &&ect o& Te'(erature on )*)s 'ission &ro' Denitri&ication +$ud,e The measured rates of produced C) 2 methane from the denitrification tan$ (ith and (ithout ./0 are presented in Table 1& The ?" value obtained from hypothesis testin! at A6 G confidential level and : 4 obtained from re!ression analysis are also !iven in Table 1& The emission rate of C) 2 from denitrification slud!e sample (as found hi!h in the slud!e temperature increase and the effect of ./0 contain at 45 o C& ;n this temperature the ratio of the rate of emission of C) 2 from the slud!e sample that contained ./0 came to be almost 165G more than that from the slud!e alone& ;n other temperatures, this ratio is almost e+ual to 1& ;t can be seen in /i!& 7 in (hich methane emission rate (as plotted a!ainst temperature& The optimum temperature for C) 2 emission from denitrification slud!e (as above 77 o C& 'oth rate of C) 2 emission and C) 2 production -from dry (ei!ht1 increases (ith increase in temperature of denitrification slud!e& Tab$e 1: =ethane production rates and dry (ei!ht of denitrification slud!e (ith and (ithout ./0 at different temperatures Temperature 0ctivities C)2 Emission -m!898d1 ? " value : 4 C)2 production from dry (ei!ht -m! C)28!d( slud!e1 23C Slud!e 5 C C C Slud!e E ./0 5 C C C 453C Slud!e F&5 5&55555514F 5&A8 F6 Septic tan$ in household level ?rimary clarifier Denitrification tan$ 0eration tan$ Secondary clarifier Di!estion tan$ +a'($e !o$$ection Points Effluent ;nfluent Screen Thic$ener 'elt process Slud!e removal ;ncineration 181 Journal of the Institute of the Engineering Slud!e E ./0 F&7 5&55577 5&A4 158 463C Slud!e A&2 5&572 5&8A 17F Slud!e E ./0 A&7 5&4A5 5&A4 165 753C Slud!e 15&2 5&555127 5&A2 122 Slud!e E ./0 11&F 5&8A 5&AF 187 773C Slud!e 11&7 5&5147 5&87 87 Slud!e E ./0 14&4 5&7A 5&87 8F 653C Slud!e 14&4 5&142 5&8A 121 Slud!e E ./0 14&1 5&577156 5&76 177 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 4 20 25 30 37 50 Temperatre (!C) C H 4
( m g / " / # )
$"#ge $"#ge % &'( Figure 3: )ethane production rate from the denitrification sludge at different temperatures ;n all the e,periments C) 2 emissions too$ place from slud!e samples ta$en from denitrification tan$ (hile 4 < emission could not be traced at all& There is a positive relationship bet(een C) 2 emission and temperature& The emission of C) 2 !as from the slud!e is slo( at lo(er temperature and becomes faster (ith the increase in temperature& ;t should be due to slo(er microbial activities at lo(er temperatures & ;t is due to the fact that at hi!her temperature, biolo!ical activities that affect C) 2 emission increase -Hhu et al&, 455F1& This findin! is in conformity (ith that of -9inIs,45511 conclusion i&e& temperature affects chemical reaction and biolo!ical activities& -@upta et al, 455F1 stated that there (as a si!nificant correlation of solid manure (ith respect to ambient temperature and conse+uent C) 2 emission& ;n this study also similar results (ere obtained re!ardin! the effect of temperature on @)@s emission& ;n similar, C) 2 (as found emitted but the 4 < emission could not be detected as in those e,periments (ithout ./0& The results sho( that, the rate of C) 2 emission increases from the combination of slud!e E./0 (ith temperature, althou!h there (as a sli!ht decrease in the emission at 65 o C than that of 77 o C& The total amounts of C) 2 emitted at the end of the e,periment for the setup at different temperature (ere e+ual& The rate of C) 2 emissions from slud!e (as optimum from 753C and 653C& This findin! is in conformity (ith Hinder et al& -1A821 conclusion optimum temperature for mesophiles bacteria is 75 " 253C& Greenhouse Gas Emissions from %astewater &reatment System 184 %." )reenhouse )as 'ission &ro' Di&&erent +$ud,e +a'($es at "-. ! T(o slud!e samples (ere ta$en from each of the 0eration tan$, Di!estion tan$, Denitrification tan$ and Septic tan$ sample points at 453
C& The coefficient of re!ression is more than A5G in every case e,cept Jslud!e E./0I combination in (hich it assumes a value sli!htly lo(er than A5G& The tests carried out at A6G confidential level also sho(ed that there is a si!nificant relationship bet(een C) 2 production and time in days& The rate of C) 2 production is hi!her from the slud!e that contains nutrients than the slud!e (ithout nutrients -/i!ures 2, 6, F, and 71&& y ) 11*08+ , 252*77 - 2 ) 0*9891 y ) 7*3149+ , 153*64 - 2 )0*9744 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 T.me (#) C H 4
( m g / " ) (erat./0 (erat./0 %&'( Figure 4: Effect of *F+ on C,- production from aeration sludge at !".C The emission rate of C) 2 of the slud!e sample ta$en form aeration tan$ came to be 7&7 m!8 9 per day -: 4 K 5&A8, ?" value K 5&5551A41 (hereas it came to be 11&5 m!8l per day (hen the slud!e containin! ./0 -: 4 K 5&A6, ?" value K 5&55554A1& The C) 2 production (as found to be 7F m! per ! d( for slud!e alone (hile this value came to be 118 m! per ! d( slud!e for the slud!e containin! ./0& ot only the rate of production but also the amount of C) 2 production (as found hi!h (hen there (as nutrient in the slud!e& ;n the same (ay, it (as found that production of C) 2 started from slud!e as (ell as Jslud!e E ./0I samples ta$en from 0eration tan$ almost at same days -after 45 days1 and continued till 28 days, after (hich production (as almost stabiliLed& y) 6*055+, 137*34 - 2 ) 0*9877 y) 6*675+, 69*633 - 2 ) 0*9564 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 T.me (#) C H 4
( m g / ") 1e0.tr.2.3at./0 s"#ge 1e0.tr.2.3at./0 s"#ge %&'( Figure 5: Effect of *F+ on methane production from denitrification sludge at !".C 187 Journal of the Institute of the Engineering Similarly the emission rate of C) 2 of the slud!e sample ta$en form denitrification tan$ came to be F&7 m!8 9 per day and -: 4 K 5&A8, ?" value K 5&555514F1 (hereas it came to be F&F m!89 per day (hen the slud!e contains ./0 -: 4 K 5&A6, ?" value K 5&555771& The methane production from the samples ta$en from Denitrification tan$ (as found to be F6 m! per ! d( for slud!e alone (hile this value came to be 158 m! per ! d( slud!e for the slud!e containin! ./0& ;n this case the rate of production (as found some(hat comparable in both cases but the amount of C) 2 production (ere found hi!her (hen there (as nutrient in the slud!e& 9i$e(ise, C) 2 production started from denitrification slud!e and the combination of Jdenitrification slud!e E ./0I samples in different days i&e& C) 2 (as emitted from the slud!e sample after 45 days (hile emission too$ place after 12 days from the start of the e,periment (hen there (as ./0 in the slud!e& The emission of C) 2 continued up to 28 days and F7 days for Mslud!e sampleN and Mslud!e E ./0 sampleN respectively& y )11*382+ %85*626 - 2 )0*8477 y )10*751+ , 9*6922 - 2 )0*9558 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 0 10 20 30 40 50 T.me (#) C H 4
( m g / " ) 1.gest./0 s"#ge 1.gest./0 s"#ge%&'( Figure 6: Effect of *F+ on methane production from digestion sludge at !".C The emission rate of C) 2 of the slud!e sample ta$en form di!estion tan$ came to be 15&7 m!8 9 per day and -: 4 K 5&A6, ?" value K 5&52141 (hereas it came to be 11&7 m!89 per day, (hen the slud!e contains ./0 -: 4 K 5&82, ?" value K 5&5511& The C) 2 production from the samples (as found to be 17 m! per ! d( for slud!e alone (hile this value came to be 17 m! per ! d( slud!e for the slud!e containin! ./0& ;n this case the amount of C) 2 production (as found lo( in both cases& ;n the same (ay, C) 2 production occurred from both the slud!e and Mslud!e E ./0N samples of di!estion tan$ after 7 days and continued up to 2F days& 0fter 2F days the production became almost nil -Lero1& y )4*6868+ , 20*131 - 2 )0*9356 y )9*3358+ , 14*089 - 2 )0*9537 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 T.me(#) C H 4
( m g / " ) $ept.3 $ept.3 %&'( Figure 7: Effect of *F+ on methane production from septic sludge at !".C Greenhouse Gas Emissions from %astewater &reatment System 182 9i$e(ise, the emission rate of C) 2 of the slud!e sample ta$en form septic tan$ came to be 2&7 m!8 9 per day -: 4 K 5&A7, ?" value K 5&F251& This value came to be A&7 m!89 per day (hen the slud!e contains ./0 -: 4 K 5&A6, ?" value K 5&7F51& The C) 2 production (as found to be 2 m! per ! d( for slud!e alone (hile this value came to be F m! per ! d( slud!e for the slud!e containin! ./0& The rate of methane production (as found hi!her (hen there (as nutrient in the slud!e& Similarly, C) 2 production had started from the slud!e of the Septic tan$ (ith and (ithout ./0 almost at the same days -after 45 days1 and continued up to 2F days& Emission of !ases ceased after 2F days& Start of methane production (as found fastest from the di!estion slud!e& :ate of production after the start of emission (as found hi!hest for di!estion slud!e and least for septic slud!e& The rates of emission of C) 2 from different slud!e and dry (ei!ht slud!e at ./0 combination are !iven in Table 4& Tab$e ": @)@s emission and dry (ei!ht of different slud!e sample points& 0ctivities C)2 Emission -m!898d1 ?" value : 4 C)2 production from dry (ei!ht -m!C)28!d( slud!e1 0eration slud!e 7&7 5&5551A4 5&A7 7F 0eration slud!e E ./0 11&5 5&55554A 5&A8 118 Denitrification slud!e F&5 5&555514F 5&A8 F6 Denitrification slud!e E ./0 F&F 5&55577 5&A6 158 Di!estion slud!e 15&7 5&F25 5&AF 14 Di!estion slud!e E ./0 11&7 5&551 5&8A 17 Septic slud!e 2&F 5&5214 5&A7 2 Septic slud!e E ./0 A&7 5&7F5 5&A6 F The optimum temperature, presence of acetic acid " hydro!en, and anaerobic conditions favour methano!enic process for methane production -Chen, et al, 455F1& 0eration and denitrification slud!e are e,posed to atmospheric air durin! the (aste(ater treatment process& The concentrations of or!anic matter in the slud!e are lo(er compared to di!estion and septic slud!e& 0lso, di!estion and septic slud!e have anaerobic condition favourin! for more methane production& )o(ever, septic slud!e sample (as used (ith lon!er stora!e time& This may be the reason for less si!nificant methane production rate& itrification and denitrification are p) sensitive and their rates decline si!nificantly at p) values belo( F&8 and optimal in the ran!e of 7&6"8&5 -=etcalf and Eddy et al&, 45541& )o(ever, the !eneral trend is that as the p) decrease, the rate of nitrification -Shammas, 1A8F1& ;t sho(s that p) does not affect the nitrification and denitrification processes in this research& ;t can, therefore, be concluded that there is no effect of p) on 4 < production inside the reactors& %.% &&ect o& o/y,en on )*)s e'ission &ro' s$ud,e To e,amine the effect of o,y!en on !reenhouse !as emissions from the di!estion slud!e of the (aste(ater treatment plants, e,periments (ere carried out under different levels of o,y!en& :eactors (ere setup at 77 3C (ith 655 ml of di!estion slud!e& The rate of C) 2 emission, ?"value and : 4 form the di!estion slud!e thus obtained are !iven in Table 7& The amount of o,y!en supplied to the slud!e reactors, rate of C) 2 emission, ?"value : 4 , 186 Journal of the Institute of the Engineering and dry (ei!ht are sho(n in Table 7& ;t sho(s that C) 2 production from dry (ei!ht di!estion slud!e (as almost e+ual at different level of < 4 concentration& Tab$e %: Emission rate of methane and dry (ei!ht of slud!e under different levels of o,y!en on the slud!e at 773C 0ctivities 0mount of o,y!en -m!891 C)2 Emission -m!898d1 ? "value :4 C)2 production from dry (ei!ht -m! C)28!d( slud!e1 Di!estion slud!e 5 45&8 5&55822 5&8A 74 Di!estion slud!e 5&1 18&8 5&51A78 5&AF 48 Di!estion slud!e 5&2 18&4 5&51872 5&81 4A Di!estion slud!e 1&5 18&5 5&11AA2 5&81 4F Di!estion slud!e 4&5 17&8 5&56711 5&87 46 /i!& 8 sho(s the methane emission rate under different amounts -5, 5&1, 5&2, 1&5, and 4&5 m!891 of o,y!en supplied to the sample& ;t can be clearly seen from the fi!ure that rate of methane emission decreases (ith increased amount of o,y!en present in the slud!e& 17 18 19 20 21 0 0*5 1 1*5 2 2*5 O 2 (mg/") C H 4
( m g / " / # ) Figure /: )ethane production rate from different le0el of 1! at 23.C Durin! the e,periments, C) 2 emitted from the reactor could be measured& )o(ever, 4 < emission could not be detected& The measured C) 2 from each e,periment (as plotted to e,amine the trend of emission and rate of emission in each level of o,y!en supplied -/i!& 81& ;t (as found that the production of C) 2 started after 4 days and continued up to 46 days& These rates (ere 45&8, 18&8, 18&4, 18&5, and 17&8 m!89 per day respectively for the slud!e samples (ith o,y!en supply of 5, 5&1, 5&2, 1&5 and 4&5 m!89& ;t sho(s that hi!her the presence of o,y!en in the slud!e, lo(er the methane production from the slud!e& This hypothesis is also supported from the total amount of C) 2 produced from slud!e samples& The total amounts of C) 2 produced (ere respectively 685, 671, 676, 2A6, and 656 m! 89 from for 5, 5&1, 5&2, 1&5, and 4&5 m!89 of < 4 supplied& =oller et al& -45521 also found that the total amount of methane production (as less for the case (here o,y!en supplied (as more& ;n terms of dry (ei!ht, methane production (as 74, 48, 4A, 4F, and 46 m! C) 2 per !ram of d( of slud!e& This research and that if the o,y!en level is lo( in the slud!e, the production of C) 2 is hi!h and vice versa& ;t is because of the fact that by lac$in! sufficient o,y!en to consume the carbon content of the or!anic compound of the (aste, anaerobes !et rid of the e,cess carbon by Greenhouse Gas Emissions from %astewater &reatment System 18F combinin! (ith hydro!en thus resultin! into more C) 2 & >eLerna$ et al& -1AF71 also pointed out that !eneration of methane ta$es place in the absence of o,y!en, i&e&, anaerobic decomposition of or!anic matter in the (aste(ater emits methane& De!radation of or!anic compounds to C< 4 by aerobic decomposition and to C) 2 and C< 4 throu!h anaerobic de!radation (ill lead to emissions of C) 2 and C< 4 =oller et al&, -45521 also support the e,perimental results of this study& Therefore, it concludes that rate of methane production is si!nificantly affected (ith o,y!en level and the relation is inverse& 0. !onc$usion =ethane production (as enhanced (hen there (as !lucose or nutrients or ./0 in the slud!e& ;f the slud!e contains both nutrients -< 7 " and ) 2 E 1 and ./0 the rate of emission is further enhanced& :ate of methane production (as more (hen the slud!e temperature is hi!h& ;t is due to fact that at hi!her temperature, microbial activities that affect methane emission increase& ;t is applicable for all slud!e samples ta$en from different points of the treatment plant& The optimum temperature for methane production is hi!her than 773C& 0n inverse relationship (as found bet(een the rate of emission of methane and the concentration of o,y!en in the slud!e& /urther, the presence of o,y!en decelerated the rate of methane production& :ate of production (as found hi!hest for di!estion slud!e& Acknowledgements The author (ould li$e to e,press his profound !ratitude to his supervisor 4r. ,en( 5u66erding for the help, and valuable su!!estions& The author has earned valuable $no(led!e in term of technical and practical aspect from him durin! his study period in UESC<";)E, ;nstitute for >ater Education& The author ta$es this opportunity to e,press his heartfelt !ratitude to his Prof. 4r. Piet 5ens for his encoura!ement and valuable su!!estions durin! the research (or$& The author than$s and appreciates to laboratory staffs for their sincere help and ma$in! the laboratory (or$s interestin!& Deepest sense of !ratitude !oes to his brother 4r. 5a7mi Prasad 4e0(ota for his encoura!ement and love, and for pushin! the author up in this sta!e of education& R1R2!+ O1P Cai =, 9iu B and >ei Q& 4552& Enhance biohydro!en production from se(a!e slud!e (ith al$aline pretreatment, En0ironmental Science and &echnology. %3: 71A6"7454 O4P Chen Q, Bian! S, Quan ), 0hou R and @u @& 455F& )ydrolysis and acidification of (aste activated slud!e at different p), Journal of Power Sources& 14-# 8A7"A54 O7P @upta ?K, Bha 0K, Koul S, Sharma ?, ?radan ., @upta ., Sharma C, Sin!h & 455F& =ethane and itrous o,ide emission from the bovine manure mana!ement practices in ;ndia& En0ironmental Pollution& 114# 41A "442& O2P ;?CC 4556& 0nnual :eport -0vailable# http#88yosemite&epa&!ov8oar 8!lobal(armin!&nsf1 O6P 9ay BB, 9i QQ and oi$e T& 1AA7& influences of p) and moisture contain on the methane production in hi!h solid slud!e di!estion, %ater 8esources %1# 1618"1642 OFP 9in S& 4551& >ater and >aste(ater Calculation =anual, =c@ra(" )ill, e( Qor$, US0 187 Journal of the Institute of the Engineering O7P =etcalf and Eddy& 4554& >aste(ater En!ineerin!# Collection and ?umpin! of (aste(ater, =c@ra(")ill, e( Qor$ US0 O8P =oller )', Sommer S@ and 0hirn! 'K 4552& 'iolo!ical de!radation and !reenhouse !as emission durin! per stora!e of li+uid animal manure, Journal En0ironmental 9uality& %%# 47"7F OAP itrification, +pplied )icro6iology& 15# 1411"1416 O15P Shammas K)& 1A8F& ;nteractions of temperature p) and biomass on the nitrification process, Journal %ater Pollution Control Federation& 54# 157F"1521 O11P >eLerna$ CT and @annon BB& 1AF7& <,y!en"itro!en :elationships in 0utotrophic O14P Hhu , Krishan$umar ', Hhao 9, Sun 9, =iLuochi =, ;namori Q& 455F& Effect of plant harvest on methane emission fro the t(o constructed (etlands desi!ned for the treatment of (aste(ater, Journal of En0ironmental )anagement, in press -online available Dec& 455F, (((&sciencedirect&com1 O17P Hinder S), 0n!uish T, Cardell SC& 1A82& Effects of Temperature on =etho!enesis in a Thermophilic -683C1 0naerobic Di!ester, +pplied and En0ironmental )icro6iology& 06# 8585"817