Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jenvman

Research article

Basic and procedural requirements for energy potential from biogas of T

sewage treatment plants
Miguel E.M. Udaeta, Guilherme A. de S. Medeiros, Vinícius O. da Silva∗, Luiz C.R. Galvão
GEPEA/EPUSP – Energy Group of the Department of Energy and Electrical Automation Engineering of the Polytechnic School, University of São Paulo, Av. Professor
Luciano Gualberto, Travessa 3, n° 158, Prédio da Engenharia Elétrica, São Paulo, Brazil

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The objective of this study is to evaluate the potential for electricity generation in the State of São Paulo (SP)
Biogas from the sewage treatment. A sewage treatment plant (STP) with domain in the production of biogas from
Power generation wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is the basis for this case study. The basic premise is that the very generation
Sewage treatment of electricity in STPs is advantageous for companies in the sanitation sector in Brazil, resulting in cost reductions
Sustainability
of the treatment process. Gains at the end of the process are found in two levels, namely: (i) economic, by
Distributed generation
generating 165% of electricity from biogas burning in relation to the expend; (ii) energy, by adding a new
sustainable and storable energy source equivalent to 4% of natural gas offered in the State of SP and 0,5% of
electricity produced from biogas burning in relation to electricity consumption. In conclusion, the potential of
electricity production linked to the biogas at STPs is capable of supply its domestic demand and export the
surplus to other segments of the state and national economy.

1. Introduction
The growth of the urban population implies a 40% increase in the
demand for municipal services of water and sewage by 2030 (Liu et al.,
2012). Currently, about 73% of urban households in developing
countries have access to piped water and 68% have access to sanitation,
While in developed countries the coverage of these services is universal
(UNICEF, 2018). The growing Brazilian urbanization, which began in
the 1960s when the urban population surpassed the rural population,
and in the last six decades changed the way of life (IBGE, 2011; IBGE,
2018), being inevitable the increase of the production of waste and
urban sewage (Chiu et al., 2015). As a result, increased 30% the pro-
duction of urban waste in last decade, totalized more than 218 thou-
sand tonnes per day (ABRELPE, 2003; ABRELPE, 2015). In this context,
to manage properly the solid waste through basic sanitation has been a
major challenge to the public authority (Figueiredo, 2012) and, at the
same time, produce electricity.
Among national services of basic sanitation, sewage system is the
one with the lowest municipal coverage. According to results of the
National Sanitation Plan (PLANSAB) carried out in 2008, 2495 muni-
cipalities (44.8% of Brazilian municipalities) did not have a sewer
network. The absence of sewer network affected, mainly, municipalities
with less than 50 thousand inhabitants, population stratum that has
many municipalities predominantly rural and with dispersed
population, which makes it difficult to offer collection services and final
disposal of sewage. According to IBGE, 70.4% of Brazilian munici-
palities had less than twenty thousand inhabitants in 2010, which
emphasizes the need to expand the attendance of these services for the
population residing in more dispersed households (Biasotto, 2010;
IBGE, 2011). Overall, most of these residues produced in households
are biodegradable (Righi et al., 2013) and can be used for bioenergy,
such as biological methods applied to wastewater treatment plants
(WWTP), which convert a part (∼50%) of wastewater pollution into
sludge, which can be used to produce biogas to generate and cover a
substantial part of the energy consumption of a WWTP (Jenicek et al.,
2012).
Biogas can be produced in Sewage Treatment Plants (STP) (IHU,
2014). The sewage contains carbonaceous components would need to
be removed as pollutants, as by traditional anaerobic digestion (AD)
(Zhou et al., 2013), which has the capacity of energy recovery by
conversion of volatile solids into biogas, reduction of odors, elimination
of pathogens and reduction of mass of solids (Anjum et al., 2018). The
use of biogas in STPs attracts interest, as it is a low-cost fuel for power.
Its composition depends on the raw material and AD conditions, but
this fuel is mainly a gas mixture rich in CH4 (55–60%) and CO2
(38–40%), with traces of differents gases (H2S, NH3, H2, N2, O2, CO),
and volatile organic compounds (VOC), all of them are contaminants
(Chen et al., 2015; Joppert et al., 2018). About CH4, which is one of

∗
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: udaeta@pea.usp.br (M.E.M. Udaeta), guilherme.medeiros.eng@gmail.com (G.A. de S. Medeiros), vinicius.oliveira.silva@usp.br (V.O. da Silva).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.12.110
Received 31 August 2018; Received in revised form 26 December 2018; Accepted 28 December 2018
0301-4797/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.E.M. Udaeta et al.
those responsible for the greenhouse gas (GHG) effect, with global
warming potential twenty four higher than CO2 (IPCC, 2006). In the
case of WWTP systems, the organic matter used in AD to produce Biogas
is the sludge. The sludge is a solid product generated in WWTP and
STPs, along with coarse solids, sand and foam, representing the largest
share among them and being the substrate, which should receive
greater importance in relation to its treatment, called treatment of solid
phase, also including its fine array (Coelho et al., 2006).
In view of the great Brazilian deficiency, related to the municipal
service of treatment of water and sewage. The growth of the sanitation
system in Brazil is inevitable, along with high energy costs that com-
panies have with sewage treatment, makes reuse of liquid waste in-
creasingly in vogue in the Brazilian scenario. This scenario is not unique
to Brazil, since there are more stringent legislation and increased
WWTP ans STP in several in developing countries (Tyagi et al., 2014;
Lippert et al., 2018), which arise to deal with the large annual volume
of waste produced, such as in China that are generated annually over 50
billion tons of sewage slude (Chen et al., 2019) and 170 million tonnes
of municipal solid waste with an increase of 8–10% per year (Xin-Gang
et al., 2016). However, this growth is also present in developed coun-
tries, such as the European Union area, which will have an expected
increase of 30% between 2015 and 2020, only from sewage slude, that
actually is generated 10 millions tons per year of sewage slude and
more than 2.5 billion tons of waste per year (Kelessidis and Stasinakis,
2012; Eurostat, 2017).
About energy consumption in STP and WWT, the electricity cost are
between 5 and 30% of total operational costs. In development countries
is higher and can go up to 40%, in which often contribute unsustainable
operate of some utilities (Liu et al., 2012).
China annually consumes the equivalent to the energy consumption
of developed countries in 1990 in the same sector (Zhang et al., 2017).
However, Chinese consumption decreased from 0.29 to 0.27 kWh/m³
(Tao and Chengwen, 2012), higher than the Japanese consumption of
0.26 kWh/m³ and the US of 0.20 kWh/m³, but lower than in countries
such as Netherlands (0.36 kWh/m³), Spain (0.53 kWh/m³), Singapore
(0.56 kWh/m³), United Kingdom (0.62 kWh/m³) and Germany
(0.64 kWh/m³) (GWRC, 2011). There is a study that shows that it is
possible to reduce the spanish consumption by 0.332 and 0.171 kWh/
m³ for small and medium plants, if they operate with the same effi-
ciencies as the large plants, avoiding emission of 116 and 62 g of CO2/
m3, repectively (Hernández-Sancho et al., 2011). Another evaluation
suggests that there is a viable energy saving potential of 5–25% (Brandt
et al., 2010), its saves 34–168 TWh/y in the sector (Liu et al., 2012). On
the other hand, energy consumption varies with the type of technology
used. A large facilities (about 380,000 m3/day) in the USA are: (i)
0.177 kWh/m3 with treated for trickling filter; (ii) 0.272 kWh/m3 for
activated sludge; (iii) 0.314 kWh/m3 for advanced treatment; and (iv)
0.412 kWh/m3 for advanced treatment with nitrification (Liu et al.,
2012).
In Brazil, the treatment, collection and/or distribution of water and
sewage segment represents 2.6% of electricity consumption of all
country and within the public sector this consumption represents 30.8%
or 10.4 TWh.y−1 (MME, 2007; MME, 2011), annual emissions of about
0.33 million tons of CO2-equivalent GHG (mt CO2e) (Ferreira et al.,
2017). This is one of the reasons why National Energy Efficiency Plan
(PNEE 2010–2030) elected the sanitation sector as one of its priority
areas (MME, 2011). Beyond that, the energy and health sector benefit
due to distributed generation offer because the independence of fossil
energy source occurs and promotes economy in the sewage treatment
process, which increases the viability of basic sanitation services im-
plementation. However, the desired result depends on the location,
design and operation of the utilities (Zhou et al., 2013).
Study proposition consists of evaluating the potential for electricity
generation of biogas from domestic STP in the State of São Paulo (SP)
through up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor (UASB). To reach the
proposed general objective, the following specific objectives for STPs
381
Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387
from SP were defined: (i) quantify biomethane generation; (ii) calculate
available energy; and (iii) estimate the reduction in energy consump-
tion with the use of biogas.
2. Biogas around the world
2.1. Use of biogas
The use of biogas presents application versatility besides being a
renewable energy resource, since CH4 can be used for fossil fuel re-
placement both in heat and electricity generation and as vehicular fuel
(Weiland, 2010; Chen et al., 2015; Joppert et al., 2018; Paolini et al.,
2018). The use of biogas has been growing in several regions of the
world (IEA, 2010; Neamt et al., 2012; Jenicek et al., 2013; Sadecka
et al., 2013; Halaby et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2019), showing benefits of
the application of heat and electricity combined generation systems
(Jende et al., 2015; Scarlat et al., 2018). In USA, biogas capture occurs
in several ways, with the use of cattle manure or in landfills (USEPA,
2017). In several large WWTP, the biogas produced is used for elec-
tricity generation (IRENA, 2016).
Most of the biogas in European Union is used as fuel for electricity
generation, cogeneration and residential heating. The leading countries
in biogas production in EU are Germany, United Kingdom, Italy and
Czech Republic (IRENA, 2016). Biogas contribution for national con-
sumption of natural gas (NG) is very diversified in about 4%, average,
but it reached 12% in Germany, followed by Czech Republic with 9.5%
(Appunn, 2016; Eurostat, 2017), countries with great NG participation
in its electrical matrix (BP, 2018).
In developing countries, biogas is produced mainly in small do-
mestic digesters for cooking or even lighting, unlike other developed
countries, which also have large scale power plants for the purpose of
electricity generation and biogas heating (IEA, 2010; Rakitijaona,
2013). Several programs to stimulate biogas production were devel-
oped for the creation of biogas domestic systems, providing an alter-
native fuel for cooking and reducing firewood consumption as well as
deforestation.
In this area, Asia countries stand out (China, Thailand, India, Nepal,
Vietnam, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Pakistan) (Virendra and Vijay,
2010). Nepal has one of the largest biogas programs in the world, with
more than 330,000 biogas domestic power plants installed by Biogas
Support Program and fuel supply for cooking purposes (REN21 2015).
In India, the National Biogas and Manure Management Program pro-
motes the construction of family size biogas plants for cooking fuel
production and organic manure (MNRE, 2015). In Vietnam, the Biogas
Program for Animal Breeding Sector started in 2003 with the purpose of
developing twenty biogas commercial power plants (Rakitijaona,
2013). In Bangladesh, the National Biogas and Manure Program was
inaugurated in 2006 for rural areas and outside the electricity dis-
tribution network, mainly to generate cooking gas. In China, the
Medium and Long-term Development Plan for Renewable Energy sti-
mulated the development of modern biogas plants for power generation
purposes. Besides that, Macau (China) has published a document en-
titled “Environmental Protection Planning of Macau (2010–2020)”, one
of the main focuses on planning a sustainable food waste treatment and
introducing technologies and strategies for the reutilization of sewage
sludge. Currently, sewage sludge and food waste are combusted to-
gether with municipal solid waste (MSW) with electricity generated
during the incineration process (Chiu et al., 2015).
In Africa, the Biogas Partnership Program was designed to develop
national biogas programs in five African countries (Burkina Faso,
Ethiopia, Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda) for the construction of do-
mestic digesters to provide access to electricity (ABPP, 2017).
In Latin America, several small biogas plants linked to domestic and
agricultural waste were installed and provided to rural families, in
addition to plants using biogas extracted from several landfills (Vögeli
et al., 2014). The Biodigesters for Latin America and the Caribbean
M.E.M. Udaeta et al.
Network (RedBioLAC) promotes small biodigesters development in
Bolivia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Nicaragua and Peru. Large scale
biogas plants were built to use effluents of palm oil plants and big farms
in Colombia, Honduras and Argentina (Virendra and Vijay, 2010). In
Brazil, the biogas participation in the electrical matrix is still not very
expressive, totaling only 0.08% (EPE, 2018). Currently, there are 126
biogas power plants, with 119 MW of installed capacity, which is pro-
duced 1.373 Nm³/day by different substrates (Coelho, 2017). Among
the agricultural waste, the vinasse (residue from ethanol production)
utilization stands out for biogas production (Ruffato-Ferreira et al.,
2017; SEM, 2018). Another way that has been applied is the use of
swine manure from livestock activities for biogas production (Meyer
et al., 2017).
Ways of using biogas depend on, among other things, gas con-
centration that composes it. Through burning, methane is used for
power generation, which makes it the biogas element that has the
highest added value. This way, the higher the concentration of me-
thane, the higher the added value of biogas (Machado, 2016). When the
concentration of methane exceeds 95%, biogas is now called bio-
methane. Purified biogas not only helps in reduction in GHG emissions
but also has other environmental benefits (Sahota et al., 2018), such as
capturing potential CH4 emissions or producing energy that substitutes
fossil fuels (Venkatesh and Elmi, 2013). In Fig. 1 it is possible to see the
ways of using biogas in function of concentration of methane.
2.2. Biogas production in STPs
Biogas production in water and landfill treatment plants is ex-
panding in several countries, linked for use as vehicle and injected into
NG grid (Scarlat et al., 2018), which impacted the global installed ca-
pacity of a biogas electricity plant from just over 2.5 GW in 2000 to
16 GW in 2016, driven mainly by European installations representing
more than 60% (IRENA, 2016). The energy in sewage there can po-
tentially be 1.7 kWh/m3 (Zhou et al., 2013). To increase biogas pro-
duction, a pretreatment to improve AD is important, such as the dis-
integration of sludge to improve digestibility, which leads to an
increase in biogas generation of 19–32% (Hephzibah et al., 2016).
Others alternatives include thermophilic operation and co-digestion
with other organic wastes (Bravo and Ferrer, 2011) or just by con-
trolling the temperature of the AD (Gao et al., 2015).
One of the systems for obtaining biogas most known and used in
urban plants is the sewage treatment that uses biodigesters. A biodi-
gester is a reactor in which the chemical reactions have biological
Fig. 1. Biogas use (Machado, 2016).
382
Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387
Fig. 2. Biodigester structure (ICLEI, 2010).
origin. The biogas produced after being purified is burnt in flares or
used in cogenerate groups, thus producing electrical energy and
thermal energy. In Fig. 2, it is possible to verify biodigester basic
structures.
There are several types of digesters, the most used are: (i) Marine;
(ii) Indian; (iii) Chinese; and (iv) AFBR/UASB (França Junior 2008;
ICLEI, 2010). They will be described below:
(i) Marine biodigester: It is a horizontal model and it has the width
larger than the depth, its sun exposure area is large, therefore the
biogas production is higher. Its dome is made of malleable plastic,
as PVC, which inflates with the gas production, like a balloon. It
can be built buried or not. The load box is made of masonry.
Therefore, it can be wider, avoiding clogging. The dome can be
removed, which helps in cleaning. The disadvantage of this model
is the cost of the dome (Gaspar, 2003; França Junior 2008; ICLEI,
2010);
(ii) Chinese biodigester: Built in masonry, single piece model.
Developed in China, where properties were small, and, because of
that, this model is buried to takes up little space. This model has
cheaper cost compared to the others, since the dome is made in
masonry. It also suffers little temperature variation (Gaspar, 2003;
Frigo et al., 2015)
(iii) Indian biodigester: Its dome is usually made of iron or fiber and it
moves up and down according to biogas production. In this type of
biodigester, the fermentation process happens faster because it
utilizes ground temperature, which is slightly variable, favoring
bacteria action. It takes up little space and its construction can be
underground. Besides that, it exempts the use of reinforcements as
concrete beams. If the dome is made of iron, it is necessary to paint
it with antioxidant. Because it is a biodigester that is underground,
care must be taken to avoid infiltration in the water table. There
are biodigesters made of concrete, or metal, covered with fenced
canvas, which must have two ways out with two valves, in which
organic remnants are dumped (Gaspar, 2003; Frigo et al., 2015);
(iv) AFBR/UASB biodigester: systems of STP that operates with
Anaerobic Fluidized Bed Reactor (AFBR), also known as Up-flow
Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor (UASB), are very used for ef-
fluent treatments, treating it biologically and based on organic
matter stabilization process. AFBR is a compact unit basically
consisting of one vertical flow tank with sedimentation and AD
overlapping chambers that do not require any type of com-
plementary energy (França Junior 2008; ICLEI, 2010).
Biodigesters use is very common in several countries (Venkatesh
and Elmi, 2013). In Europe have been widely used as an effective
technology to treat effluents and organic, urban and industrial waste,
and to enable energy use of generated biogas (Eurostat, 2015). In
M.E.M. Udaeta et al. Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387

Germany, electricity produced from biogas is sold at much more at-

Total cost/electricity produced

tractive prices than those paid for energy from non-renewable sources
(ICLEI, 2010). Usually, in these developed countries, the biogas gen-
erated in STPs and in landfills is used for electricity production, process
heat or building heating, vehicular fuel, among other uses (Venkatesh
and Elmi, 2013). When the weather is cold, biogas is used even for the
biodigesters internal heating, aiming to provide ideal temperatures for

(USD/kWh)
microorganisms' activity.

0.1224
0.245
In Brazil, biodigesters use is small and restricted to few applications
compared to other countries (ICLEI, 2010). In Petrópolis, for example, a

–
biodigester was built to treat sewage generated, approximately, by 500
inhabitants, where generated biogas is used to nourish the stove in the

Investment/installed power
house of a local resident. Other examples of biogas use from urban solid
waste are Bandeirante landfill plant, located in SP, with 20 MW of in-
stalled capacity and potential to generate 170 GWh/y, enough elec-
tricity to supply a city of 400 thousand inhabitants (CETESB, 2004;

(USD/kW)
Figueiredo, 2011). Other examples of thermoelectric landfill plants are:
Termoverde with 29.5 MW, São João with 24.64 MW, Estre with

2195
359
5.7 MW, Tecipar with 4.3 MW, Ambient with 1.5 MW and Energ-Biog of

–
30 kW of installed power in State of SP (SEM, 2016); Nova Iguaçu

Maturity

Unusual
landfill, in Rio de Janeiro, first of the world to receive UN's permission

Begin
Usual
to sell carbon credits to the Dutch government. In the STPs, studies
carried out by SABESP in Barueri STP in partnership with CENBIO and

Electrical Efficiency
by COPASA in Arrudas STP stand out.

2.3. Technologies for energy use of biogas Comparing technologies to biogas uses (Costa, 2006; ICLEI, 2010; Costa, 2011; MAM, 2011; PEI, 2013; Capstone, 2018; MAM, 2018).

26–38

26–33
34–40
Biogas energy conversion is only possible if we resort to several (%)
technologies developed for this purpose. Biogas energy conversion is
understood as a process that turns chemical energy contained in its
Exhaust Temperature

molecules into mechanical energy through a process of controlled

combustion (Costa, 2011). This mechanical energy activates a gen-
erator that converts it to electricity and the combustion gases are used
to provide heat, this system is named combined heat and power (CHP),
451–574

270–280
480–510

see Fig. S5a in the supplementary material, and if a thermally driven

(°C)

chiller is coupled to the system, it will be named combined cooling,

heating and power (CCHP), see Fig. S5b in the supplementary material
(Chen et al., 2016). Some of the main equipment used in plants for
Average emissions

energy use of biogas are turbines, micro-turbines and engines as high-

lighted below (França Junior 2008):
< 250
35–50
(ppm)

(i) Gas turbines: Gas turbines are thermal equipment that perform the
<9

energy conversion of a fuel into power. The main feature of this

equipment is the production of exhaust gases in high volume and
NOx emissions

high temperature, see Table 1, which makes it very suitable for

complementary energy uses of interest, improving thermal effi-
ciency of the set;
Yes

Yes
Yes

(ii) Gas micro-turbines: The term “micro-turbine” refers to a small size

Income (%)

and weight system consisting basically in: compressor, combustion

chamber, turbine and electrical generator with power less than
20–30

24–28
30–34

1.000 kW. It can be readily combined in multiples to meet specific

load requirements. Besides that, their lower combustion tempera-
Potential (MW)

ture results in lower NOx emissions, see Table 1;

(iii) Internal combustion engines (gas engine): Alternative engines, also
0.05–150

0.03–20
0.03–1

called internal combustion engines, can be used in some cogen-

eration systems in the tertiary sector and in small industries/
companies to meet the proposed objectives. By the other hand,
these engines also have applications in systems of emergency
Small and medium size gas

power production and in isolated locations. In general, their use is

Available technologies

more recommended in situations in which the thermal needs are

not so significant or when energy consumption suffers variation
over the time, see Table 1.
Micro-turbines
turbines

Gas engine

The three models can be seen in Fig. S6 of the supplementary ma-

Table 1

terial. Gas engines have more efficiency while gas turbines have more
global efficiency of power and heat conversion (Costa, 2011). However,

383
M.E.M. Udaeta et al.
the technology that emits less NOx and, therefore, has less environ-
mental impact is the micro-turbine (ICLEI, 2010; Capstone, 2018). A
systematic analysis of the WWTP and STP shows that the use of internal
combustion engines (gas engine) technology to generate power and
heat is more usual, because the technology presents the lowest cost of
investment and operation in relation to the installed power and the
energy produced (ICLEI, 2010; Bravo and Ferrer, 2011; Sadecka et al.,
2012; Coelho, 2017). On the other hand, the application of micro-tur-
bines for electricity and heat generation appears on a reduced scale
(Pöschl et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2017). In the case of gas turbines, they
are not used, they require large volumes of gas and have great power,
and their use is linked to the direct use of NG. Therefore, in terms of
degree of application maturity has a small and medium size gas tur-
bine < micro-turbine < gas engine.
3. Methods
3.1. Study site delimitation
The Brazilian region that presents a huge potential for biogas gen-
eration is the state of SP, consisting of 645 municipalities, a population
of 45.3 million inhabitants (IBGE, 2018), in which 39.5 million are
served by sewage collection service and 17 STP (Galvão Junior et al.
2015). Besides that, the state presents the best regional and national
indexes, see Table 2, but still insufficient when compared to OECD
countries indexes (WB, 2018).
The study was based on features of Barueri STP, the largest in Latin
America and that serves 65% of metropolitan region of SP. The treat-
ment operation of this STP occurs through AFBR/UASB reactors and
Activated Sludge with a mixture completed with diffused air. Currently,
part of the biogas produced in the STP is burned in a boiler and the
generated CO2 from CH4 is injected in the biodigesters (Costa, 2006).
Biogas composition in Barueri STP is presented in Table S1 of Supple-
mentary Materials.
3.2. Calculating the CH4 flow
According to (Sperling and Chernicharo, 2005), there is a relation
between sewage production per capita and the monthly income, see Fig.
S1 of Suplementary Materials. The sewage quantification in a liquid
body can be made indirectly from Equation (1) using the BOD para-
meter. It represents the amount of oxygen required to stabilize, from a
biochemical process, the organic matter.
BOD = [32. 9 + 1. 25 × NMS]
Where NMS is a number of minimum salaries per capita (IBGE, 2018).
The total emission of kg of CH4 per year can be estimated from Equation
(2) (IPCC, 2006).
CH 4 = [(TOW − S) × EF]j
Where TOW is a total organic waste in residual waters per year, kg of
BOD per year; S is the organic component removed as sludge per year,
kg of BOD per year; and EFj is the emission factor, kg of CH4 per kg of
BOD.
Emission factor (EFj) for residual waters treatment is a function of
the maximum potential of CH4 produced (B0) and the methane cor-
rection factor (MCFj), exemplified in Equation (3) (IPCC, 2006).
Table 2
Comparing SP with other regions (Galvão Junior et al. 2015).
Local Urban population served with treated Urban population served with
water network sewage network
State of SP 98.8% 89.2%
Southeast region 97.2% 71.6%
Brazil 87.6% 46.1%
Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387
EFj = MCFj × B0 (3)
Where MCFj is the methane correction factor for every type of sewage
treatment; and B0 is the maximum capacity of CH4 production (kg of
CH4 per kg of BOD). If specific data of the country is not available, a
default value of B0, 0,6 kg of CH4 per kg of BOD, can be used. Table S2
of Supplementary Materials includes MCF values according to (IPCC,
2006). The total quantity of degradable organic material in residual
waters (TOW) is a function of human population and BOD generation
per capita. It is expressed in terms of BOD (kg.year−1).
TOW = 10−3 × 365 × BOD × Pop (4)
Where TOW is the total organic waste in residual waters in the in-
ventory year, kg BOD per year; Pop is the region population (IBGE,
2018); and BOD is calculated in Equation (1). Three most used sewage
treatments in SABESP are: Optional Pond, Anaerobic Pond and Anae-
robic Reactor (AFBR). For each case, there is a form of calculating S as
shown by Equation (5) for BOD removal (van Haandel and Lettinga,
1994):
S = TOW × Θ−0.68 (5)
Where S is the organic component removed from sludge per year (kg
BOD/year); and Ɵ is the hydraulic mean of the retention time, hours,
being 8 h the hydraulic retention time in AFBRs.
3.3. Conversion of biogas into electricity
From Equation (6) we can convert CH4 values (kg/year) into CH4Q
(m³/year):
CH4 [kg /year ]
CH4 [m3/ year ] =
δCH4 (6)
Where δCH4 is the CH4 density (kg/m3). Obtaining the biogas flow (m³/
year), where Qbiogas is given by Equation (7).
QCH4
QBiogas =
CCH4 (7)
Where CCH4 is the mean volumetric concentration of CH4 in biogas,
according to Table S1. By having the value of the total amount of biogas
estimated, it is possible to calculate electricity generation (E. E.)
through biogas burning as fuel in equipments of power generation. For
that, Equation (8) is used.
E . E . =QBiogas x PCIBiogas x ŋgenerator x 0.000278 (8)
(1)
Where PCIBiogas is the lower calorific value of biogas (kJ.m−³), based on
Table S1; ŋgenerator is the electronic income of conversion technology
(%); and 0.000278 is the conversion factor of kJ for kWh. According to
(Costa, 2006), electric conversion efficiency ŋ has a medium value of
30%.
(2)
4. Discussion and systematization of results
4.1. Methane and energy production
CH4 volume produced in all STPs of the State of SP, assuming AFBR
treatment, was of 267.8 MMm³/year, value 3% lower than estimated by
RCGI (2017) for the same area. Its volume to 4% of NG supply of the
Volume of generated residential Volume of collected residential sewage
sewage that is treated that is treated
56.3% 77.0%
45.2% 71.0%
42.0% 78.0%
384
M.E.M. Udaeta et al.
Table 3
NG supply in SP and biomethane volume produced by STPs.
NG annual supply of the CH4 volume produced by STPs Participation (%)
State of SP (MMm3/year) of the State of SP (MMm3/year)
7128.45 267.8 4.0
Table 4
Energy generated by STPs and consumption of SP (SEM, 2018).
Electricity annual production Electricity annual Participation (%)
from biogas burning (GWh) consumption (GWh)
762.8 145,000 0.5
Table 5
STPs energy consumption (Galvão Junior et al. 2015).
Year Electricity total consumption in the sewage systems (MWh/year)
2016 461,295
state (MME, 2018) as shown in Table 3. The potential to generate
electricity was estimated in 762.8 GWh/year, which represents 0,5% of
electricity annual consumption of the State of SP, see Table 4. Other
important biomethane sources in State of SP are landfills (1210 MMm³/
year), livestock waste (66.4 MMm³/year) and waste of ethanol pro-
duction (1353 MMm³/year) (RCGI, 2017), see Fig. S3 of Suplementary
Materials.
4.2. Energy consumption
Electricity annual consumption in sewage systems was obtained in
Galvão Junior et al. (2015). The result has consolidated in Table 5.
Since the average power generation available from STPs of the State of
SP was estimated in 762,849 MWh/year (65% of CH4 in biogas) and the
monthly average consumptions of energy in STPs were measured in
461,295 kWh/month, it is possible to conclude that the energy coming
from the CH4 generated in STPs with AFBR corresponds to approxi-
mately 165% of monthly average consumption of the units. This way,
this value represents an interesting alternative energy use of biogas
generated in the STPs that use AFBR reactors, resulting in direct eco-
nomic benefit for the sanitation company.
However, there are several studies that demonstrate that energy
production in STPs and WWTPs is often insufficient to meet domestic
demand, i.e.: (i) STPs in Malaysia produce 6.6% of the electricity
consumed because the methane produced is flared to mitigate GHG and
its potential remains untapped (David et al., 2014); (ii) a small STP in
Italy, can produce 371 tons/year of biogas and 809,710 kWh/year of
electricity or 25% of the total electric power installed for the sewage
treatment plant's requirements (Montorsi et al., 2018); (iii) Electricity
obtained from biogas of the sewage sludge produced
(14,031–36,267 m³/month) at WWTP in Poland cover 100% of the
overall energy demand of the treatment plant (Sadecka et al., 2012);
(iv) a Sewage treatment in Hong Kong used a CCHP system increased an
electricity produced in 7,806 MWh/year while the power consumption
is 1340 MWh/year (Wang et al., 2014).
5. Conclusion
The results presented, although they can be estimated from the on-
site sampling in the treatment plants, for example, bring the order of
magnitude of biomethane generation, which can be captured in sewage
treatment processes and used for energy purposes. In addition to pos-
sibilities of economic gains for the STPs, since they present potential of
electricity generation higher than their consumption, becoming a
385
Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387
strategic resource for the energy system of SP and bringing flexibility
and security for the system through diversification of the state electrical
matrix and replacement of NG and electricity of other federation states.
There are also environmental gains with the reduction of CH4 and sa-
nitary emissions, because it generates incentives for basic sanitation
and sewage treatment expansion in the State of SP.
Acknowledgment
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de
Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES). To
CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e
Tecnológico) for the scholarship. To students of the class “PEA5765 –
Tópicos Avançados em Sistemas Energéticos para um Desenvolvimento
Limpo”.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.12.110.
References
ABPP, 2017. Africa Biogas Partnership Programme. The Africa Biogas Partnership
Programme. Available at: https://www.africabiogas.org/countries/, Accessed date:
20 November 2017.
ABRELPE, 2003. Panorama Dos Resíduos Sólidos No Brasil 2003, São Paulo. Available at:
http://abrelpe.org.br/panorama/.
ABRELPE, 2015. Panorama Dos Resíduos Sólidos No Brasill 2015, São Paulo. Available
at: http://abrelpe.org.br/panorama/.
Anjum, M., et al., 2018. Visible light photocatalytic disintegration of waste activated
sludge for enhancing biogas production. J. Environ. Manag. 216, 120–127. Available
at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.07.064.
Appunn, K., 2016. Bioenergy in Germany – facts and figures on development, support and
investment. Clean Energy Wire Available at: https://www.cleanenergywire.org/
factsheets/bioenergy-germany-facts-and-figures-development-support-and-
investment, Accessed date: 8 March 2018.
Biasotto, R., 2010. Desenvolvimento Urbano e Planejamento Territorial – O Caso
Brasileiro - contexto Recente. In: Seminário Internacional de Ordenamento
Territorial. Santiago de Chile, pp. 26. Available at: http://www.ibam.org.br/media/
arquivos/seminario_intenacional_ot_chile_rosane_final.pdf.
BP, 2018. BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2018, London.
Brandt, M.J., Middleton, R.A., Wang, S., 2010. Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A
Compendium of Best Practices and Case Studies. Available at: http://edepot.wur.nl/
175846.
Bravo, L., Ferrer, I., 2011. Life Cycle Assessment of an intensive sewage treatment plant in
Barcelona (Spain) with focus on energy aspects. Water Sci. Technol. 64 (2), 440–447.
Capstone, 2018. Capstone Turbine Corporation. Available at: https://www.
capstoneturbine.com/products/, Accessed date: 1 December 2018.
CETESB, 2004. Bandeirantes landfill thermoelectric plant reduces CO2 emissions to at-
mosphere [Termelétrica do Aterro Bandeirantes reduz emissão de CO2 para atmos-
fera]. Available at: https://cetesb.sp.gov.br/biogas/2004/03/25/termeletrica-do-
aterro-bandeirantes-reduz-emissao-de-co2-para-atmosfera/, Accessed date: 25
November 2018.
Chen, X.Y., et al., 2015. Membrane gas separation technologies for biogas upgrading. RSC
Adv. 5 (31), 24399–24448. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA00666J.
Chen, Y., et al., 2016. Study on energy and economic benefits of converting a combined
heating and power system to a tri-generation system for sewage treatment plants in
subtropical area. Appl. Therm. Eng. 94, 24–39. Available at: https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.10.078.
Chen, G., et al., 2019. Environmental, energy, and economic analysis of integrated
treatment of municipal solid waste and sewage sludge: a case study in China. Sci.
Total Environ. 647, 1433–1443. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.
2018.08.104.
Chiu, S. l. H., et al., 2015. Life cycle assessment of waste treatment strategy for sewage
sludge and food waste in Macau: perspectives on environmental and energy pro-
duction performance. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess. 21 (2), 176–189.
Coelho, J.M., 2017. Impacts of Biogas and Biomethane Participation in the Braseileira
Matrix [Impactos da Participação do Biogás e do Biometano na Matriz Braseileira],
São Paulo. Available at: http://www.epe.gov.br/sites-pt/publicacoes-dados-
abertos/publicacoes/PublicacoesArquivos/publicacao-244/topico-257/EPE_IV
FORUM BIOGAS_JOSE MAURO_2017_1710.pdf.
Coelho, S.T., et al., 2006. A conversão da fonte renovável biogás em energia [A conversão
da fonte renovável biogás em energia]. In: V Congresso Brasileiro de Planejamento
Energético (CBPE), pp. 1–11.
Costa, D.F. da, 2006. Electricity Generation from Biogas from Sewage Treatment
[Geração de energia elétrica a partir do biogás do tratamento de esgoto]. In:
Dissertação (Mestrado – Programa Interunidades de Pós-Graduação em Energia).
IEE/EPUSP/FEA/IF da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
M.E.M. Udaeta et al.
Costa, R.J.R. da, 2011. Production and application of biogas [Produção e aplicação de
biogás]. In: Dissertação (Mestrado) - Instituto Politécnico de Coimbra. Instituto
Superior de Engenharia de Coimbra, Coimbra Available at: http://files.isec.pt/
DOCUMENTOS/SERVICOS/BIBLIO/teses/Tese_Mest_Rita-Costa.pdf.
David, H., Palanisamy, K., Normanbhay, S., 2014. Pre-treatment of sewage sludge to
enhance biogas production to generate green energy for reduction of carbon footprint
in sewage treatment plant (STP). In: International Conference and Utility Exhibition
2014 on Green Energy for Sustainable Development (ICUE 2014). Pattaya City, pp. 5.
EPE, 2018. Brazilian energy balance 2018: Year 2017 [Balanço energético nacional 2018:
Ano base 2017], Rio de Janeiro. Available at: http://epe.gov.br/sites-pt/
publicacoes-dados-abertos/publicacoes/PublicacoesArquivos/publicacao-303/
topico-419/BEN2018.pdf.
Eurostat, 2015. Sewage Sludge Production and Disposal from Urban Wastewater. (in dry
substance).
Eurostat, 2017. European Statistics. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat, Accessed
date: 20 April 2018.
Ferreira, A.L., et al., 2017. Emissões dos setores de energia, processos industriais e uso de
produtos: Período 1970-2015. Available at: http://seeg.eco.br/wp-content/uploads/
2017/09/Relatorios-Seeg-2017-Energia-final.pdf.
Figueiredo, N.J.V. de, 2011. Utilização de biogás de aterro sanitário para geração de
energia elétrica - estudo de caso. In: Dissertação (Mestrado) – Programa de Pós-
Graduação em Energia. EP/FEA/IEE/IF da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo.
Figueiredo, J.C., 2012. Estimation of biogas production and energy potential of municipal
solid waste in Minas Gerais [Estimativa de produção de biogás e potencial energético
dos resíduos sólidos urbanos em Minas Gerais]. In: Dissertação (Mestrado) - Instituto
de Geociências. Universidade Federal de Minas Geriais (UFMG) Available at: http://
www.bibliotecadigital.ufmg.br/dspace/handle/1843/LGSA-96NQGK.
Frigo, K.D.D.A., et al., 2015. Biodigesters: their models and applications [Biodigestores:
seus modelos e aplicações]. Acta Iguaçu 4 (1), 57–65.
França Junior, A.T. de, 2008. Análise do Aproveitamento Energético do Biogás Produzido
numa Estação de Tratamento de Esgoto. In: Dissertação (Mestrado) - Universidade
Estadual Paulista. Faculdade de Engenharia de Ilha Solteira.
Galvão Junior, A. de C., Custódio, A.M.B., Monteiro, M.A., 2015. Idleness of sanitary
sewage Networks in Brazil [Ociosidade das Redes de esgotamento sanitário no
Brasil]. In: Sistema Nacional de Informações sobre Saneamento (SNIS). Ministério das
Cidades, Brasil Available at: http://www.tratabrasil.org.br/datafiles/estudos/
ociosidade/relatorio-completo.pdf.
Gao, D., et al., 2015. Sewage treatment by an UAFB – EGSB biosystem with energy re-
covery and autotrophic nitrogen removal under different temperatures. Bioresour.
Technol. 181, 26–31. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.01.037.
Gaspar, R.M.B.L., 2003. Use of biodigesters in small and medium rural properties with
emphasis on value aggregation: a case study in the region of Toledo-PR [Utilização de
biodigestores em pequenas e médias propriedades rurais com ênfase na agregação de
valor: um estudo de caso. In: Dissertação (Mestrado em Planejamento e Estratégia
Organizacional). Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina Available at: https://core.
ac.uk/download/pdf/30366655.pdf.
GWRC, 2011. An energy and carbon footprint neutral urban water cycle by 2030. In:
Workshop on Water and Energy. Singapore.
Halaby, A., Ghoneim, W., Helal, A., 2017. Sensitivity analysis and comparative studies for
energy sustainability in sewage treatment. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 19,
42–50. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seta.2016.11.004.
Hephzibah, D., Kumaran, P., Saifuddin, N.M., 2016. Influence of continuous flow mi-
crowave pre-treatment on anaerobic digestion of secondary thickened sludge for
sustainable energy recovery in sewage treatment plant. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ.
Sci. 32, 012004.
Hernández-Sancho, F., Molinos-Senante, M., Sala-Garrido, R., 2011. Energy efficiency in
Spanish wastewater treatment plants: a non-radial DEA approach. Sci. Total Environ.
409 (14), 2693–2699. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2011.04.
018.
IBGE, 2011. In: Atlas de saneamento: 2011, Rio de Janeiro: IBGE, Diretoria de
Geociências, Available at: https://biblioteca.ibge.gov.br/index.php/biblioteca-
catalogo?view=detalhes&id=253096.
IBGE, 2018. Overview [Panorama]. Available at: https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas-
novoportal/sociais/populacao.html, Accessed date: 20 May 2018.
ICLEI, 2010. Manual para aproveitamento de biogás: volume dois, efluentes urbanos. In:
São Paulo: ICLEI - Governos Locais Pela Sustentabilidade. Secretariado para América
Latina e Caribe, Escritório de projetos no Brasil.
IEA, 2010. World Energy Outlook 2010, Paris.
IHU, 2014. Use of biogas as an energy source. In: Interview with Joachim Werner Zang
[Aproveitamento do biogás como fonte de energia. Entrevista com Joachim Werner
Zang]. Instituto Humanitas Unisinos, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos –
Unisinos, São Leopoldo Available at: http://www.ihu.unisinos.br/entrevistas/
534328-biogas-como-solucao-para-os-residuos-solidos-entrevista-especial-com-
joachim-werner-zang, Accessed date: 21 May 2018.
IPCC, 2006. Chapter 6: wastewater treatment and discharge. In: 2006 IPCC Guidelines for
National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), IPCC/OECD/IEA, Paris, France, pp. 28.
IRENA, 2016. Renewable Capacity Statistics 2016, Masdar City. Available at: https://
www.connaissancedesenergies.org/sites/default/files/pdf-actualites/irena_re_
capacity_statistics_2016.pdf.
Jende, O., et al., 2015. Anaerobic digestion technologies with relevance for Brazil: sub-
strates, digesters and use of biogas [Tecnologias de digestão anaeróbia com
relevância para o Brasil: substratos, digestores e uso de biogás], Brasília. Available
at: https://www.giz.de/en/downloads/probiogas-tecnologias-biogas.pdf.
Jenicek, P., et al., 2012. Potentials and limits of anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge:
energy self-sufficient municipal wastewater treatment plant? Water Sci. Technol. 66
386
Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387
(6), 1277–1281.
Jenicek, P., et al., 2013. Energy self-sufficient sewage wastewater treatment plants: is
optimized anaerobic sludge digestion the key? Water Sci. Technol. 68 (8),
1739–1743.
Joppert, C.L., et al., 2018. A short-cut model for predicting biomethane availability after
biogas upgrading. J. Clean. Prod. 200, 148–160. Available at: https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.269.
Kelessidis, A., Stasinakis, A.S., 2012. Comparative Study of the Methods Used for Treat-
Ment and Final Disposal of Sewage Sludge in European Countries, Waste Mana. pp.
1186–1195.
Kim, S., Sung, T., Kim, K.C., 2017. Thermodynamic performance analysis of a biogas-
fuelled micro-gas turbine with a bottoming waste treatment plants. Energies 10
(275), 1–22.
Lippert, T., et al., 2018. Energy-positive sewage sludge pre-treatment with a novel ul-
trasonic flatbed reactor at low energy input. Bioresour. Technol. 264, 298–305.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.073.
Liu, F., et al., 2012. A Primer on Energy Efficiency for Municipal Water and Wastewater
Utilities, Washington. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/pt/
256321468331014545/pdf/682800ESMAP0WP0WWU0TR0010120Resized.pdf.
Machado, G.B., 2016. Ways of using biogas [Formas de uso do biogás]. Portal do Biogás
Available at: https://www.portaldobiogas.com/formas-de-uso-do-biogas/, Accessed
date: 11 June 2018.
MAM, 2011. Biogas Engine E 2842 LE 322 Technical Data for 60%-CH4 , 40%-CO2.
Available at: http://powercan200.pl/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/1106_
E2842LE322_bio-eng.pdf.
MAM, 2018. Turbomachinery. MAM Energiy Solutions: Future in the making Available at:
https://turbomachinery.man-es.com/products/gas-turbines, Accessed date: 1
December 2018.
Meyer, B.E., Ribeiro, J.E., Pombo, V., 2017. Análise de viabilidade técnica de um sistema
de produção de biogás a partir da digestão anaeróbia de dejetos suínos.
Departamento Acadêmico de Engenharia Química da Universidade Tecnológica
Federal do Paraná, Campus Ponta Grossa.
MME, 2007. National Energy Plan 2030: Thermoelectric Generation - Biomass [Plano
Nacional de Energia 2030: Geração Termelétrica – Biomassa], Brasília. Available at:
http://www.mme.gov.br/documents/10584/1139260/08.+Biomassa+%28PDF
%29/0a02b482-db1a-4dbe-9388-baadbc168ae7?version=1.1.
MME, 2011. National energy efficiency plan: basic Assumptions and guidelines [plano
Nacional de eficiência energética: Premissas e Diretrizes básicas], brasília. Available
at: http://www.mme.gov.br/documents/10584/1432134/Plano+Nacional
+Eficiência+Energética+%28PDF%29/74cc9843-cda5-4427-b623-b8d094ebf863?
version=1.1.
MME, 2018. Boletim mensal de acompanhamento da indústria de gás natural - Destaques
de março de 2018, Brasília. Available at: http://www.mme.gov.br/documents/
1138769/0/Boletim_Gas_Natural_nr_133_MAR_18.pdf/32de0096-12d2-49f8-a9d4-
a878ba919a59.
MNRE, 2015. Renewable Energy for Rural Applications, Annual Report 2013-2014.
Available at: http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/annual-report/2013-2014/EN/rerp.
html.
Montorsi, L., Milani, M., Venturelli, M., 2018. Economic assessment of an integrated
waste to energy system for an urban sewage treatment plant: a numerical approach.
Energy 158, 105–110. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.06.026.
Neamt, I., Ionel, I., Florescu, C., 2012. Sewage sludge to energy: possible strategies for
timisoara water treatment plant. Rev. Chim. 63 (7), 739–742.
Paolini, V., et al., 2018. Characterisation and cleaning of biogas from sewage sludge for
biomethane production. J. Environ. Manag. 217, 288–296. Available at: https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.03.113.
PEI, 2013. Gas turbine technical data. Available at: https://www.powerengineeringint.
com/content/dam/pei/print-articles/2013/04/gas-steam-specs.pdf.
Pöschl, M., Ward, S., Owende, P., 2010. Evaluation of energy efficiency of various biogas
production and utilization pathways. Appl. Energy 87, 3305–3321.
Rakitijaona, L., 2013. Domestic Biogas Development in Developing Countries, Paris.
Available at: http://www.enea-consulting.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/
Open-Ideas-Domestic-biogas-projects-in-developing-countries.pdf.
RCGI, 2017. Potential for producing biomethane in São Paulo represents 46% of the
State's demand for natural gas [Potencial de produção de biometano em São Paulo
representa 46% da demanda do Estado por gás natural]. Res. Centre Gas Inonv
Available at: https://www.rcgi.poli.usp.br/potential-for-producing-biomethane-in-
sao-paulo-represents-46-of-the-states-demand-for-natural-gas/, Accessed date: 24
May 2018.
REN21, 2015. Renewables 2015 Global Status Report. REN21 secretariat, Paris Available
at: http://www.ren21.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/REN12-GSR2015_
Onlinebook_low1.pdf.
Righi, S., et al., 2013. Life cycle assessment of management systems for sewage sludge and
food waste: centralized and decentralized approaches. J. Clean. Prod. 44, 8–17.
Ruffato-Ferreira, V., et al., 2017. A foundation for the strategic long-term planning of the
renewable energy sector in Brazil: hydroelectricity and wind energy in the face of
climate change scenarios. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 72, 1124–1137. Available at:
http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364032116306748.
Sadecka, Z., Weiss, E., Myszograj, S., 2012. Processing of sewage sludge with energy
recovery in a wastewater treatment plant. Environ. Protect. Eng. 38 (3), 97–105.
Sadecka, Z., et al., 2013. Green energy from biogas in a polish-German sewage treatment
plant. Energy Sources, Part A Recovery, Util. Environ. Eff. 35 (13), 1249–1255.
Sahota, S., et al., 2018. Review of trends in biogas upgradation technologies and future
perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 1 (January), 79–88. Available at: http://
linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2589014X18300021.
Scarlat, N., Dallemand, J.-F., Fahl, F., 2018. Biogas : developments and perspectives in
M.E.M. Udaeta et al.
europe. Renew. Energy 129, 457–472. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2018.03.006.
SEM, 2016. Largest thermoelectric plant for biogas from urban solid waste in Brazil is
inaugurated in the State of São Paulo [Maior termelétrica movida a biogás de
resíduos sólidos urbanos do Brasil é inaugurada no Estado de São Paulo]. Secretaria
de Energia e Mineração do Governo do Estado de São Paulo Available at: http://
www.energia.sp.gov.br/2016/09/maior-termeletrica-movida-biogas-de-residuos-
solidos-urbanos-do-brasil-e-inaugurada-no-estado-de-sao-paulo/, Accessed date: 25
November 2018.
SEM, 2018. Electricity in the state [A energia elétrica no estado]. São Paulo state
Secretary of Energy and mining. Available at: http://www.energia.sp.gov.br/
energia-eletrica/energia-eletrica-no-estado, Accessed date: 24 May 2018.
Sperling, M. von, Chernicharo, C.A. de L., 2005. Biological Wastewater Treatment in
Warm Climate Regions, second ed. IWA Publishing, London.
Tao, X., Chengwen, W., 2012. Energy consumption in wastewater treatment plants in
China. In: World Congress on Water, Climate and Energy, pp. 1–6.
Tyagi, V.K., et al., 2014. Ultrasonic treatment of waste sludge: a review on mechanisms
and applications. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 1220–1288.
UNICEF, 2018. UNICEF data. Water an sanitation overview. Available at: https://data.
unicef.org/topic/water-and-sanitation/drinking-water/, Accessed date: 30 November
2018.
USEPA, 2017. AgSTAR: Biogas Recovery in the Agriculture Sector. United States en-
vironmental Protection Agency Available at: https://www.epa.gov/agstar, Accessed
date: 10 June 2018.
van Haandel, A.C., Lettinga, G., 1994. Anaerobic Sewage Treatment: A Practical Guide for
Regions with a Hot Climate Illustrate. J. Wiley.
Venkatesh, G., Elmi, R.A., 2013. Economic-environmental analysis of handling biogas
387
Journal of Environmental Management 236 (2019) 380–387
from sewage sludge digesters in WWTPs (wastewater treatment plants) for energy
recovery: case study of Bekkelaget WWTP in Oslo (Norway). Energy 58, 220–235.
Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.05.025.
Virendra, R.M.K., Vijay, V.K., 2010. Evaluation of existing low cost gas bottling Systems
for vehicles use Adaption in developing economies, Hauz Khas New Delhi. Available
at: http://www.valorgas.soton.ac.uk/Deliverables/120825_VALORGAS_241334_D5-
2_rev[0].pdf.
Vögeli, Y., et al., 2014. Anaerobic Digestion of Biowaste in Developing Countries:
Practical Information and Case Studies, Dübendorf. Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic
Science and Technology (Eawag), Switzerland Available at: https://www.eawag.ch/
fileadmin/Domain1/Abteilungen/sandec/publikationen/SWM/Anaerobic_
Digestion/biowaste.pdf.
Wang, Z., et al., 2014. Analysis of energy utilization on digestion biogas tri-generation in
sewage treatment works. In: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering. Springer-Verlag,
Berlin Heidelberg, pp. 27–35.
WB, 2018. The world bank data. Available at: https://data.worldbank.org/country/
brazil?view=chart, Accessed date: 10 May 2018.
Weiland, P., 2010. Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol. 85, 849–860.
Xin-Gang, Z., et al., 2016. Technology, cost, a performance of waste-to-energy incinera-
tion industry in China. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 55, 115–130. Available at:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.137.
Zhang, Q., et al., 2017. Analysis of typical energy saving technology in the sewage
treatment plant. Energy Procedia 142, 1230–1237. Available at: https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.egypro.2017.12.511.
Zhou, Y., et al., 2013. Energy utilization in sewage treatment – a review with compar-
isons. J. Water Climate Change 4 (1), 1–10.