A comparative assessment of sewage sludge valorization via anaerobic digestion and supercritical water gasification: A techno-economic case study in Norway

This study compared the performance of supercritical water gasification (SCWG) to conventional anaerobic digestion (AD) for treating sewage sludge from a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Based on plant data from a WWTP in Norway, kinetic-based process models have been developed in Aspen Plus® to investigate the energy and economic feasibility of AD and SCWG for sewage sludge (SS) treatment. The findings showed that low ambient temperatures significantly reduced the energy efficiency of the AD, while their effect on the SCWG process was negligible. At the average ambient temperature of 7 °C and SS concentration of 7 wt%, AD and SCWG achieved thermal energy self-sufficiency (TES) of 0.76 and 0.63, respectively. Under these conditions, the AD and SCWG had energy conversion efficiencies (η) of 25.8% and 46.6%, respectively. However, increasing the SS content in the SCWG to 15 wt% improved the TES to 1.22 and η to 73.2%, making it a more attractive alternative to the AD. At 7 wt% SS concentration, the AD and SCWG processes required an investment cost of $ 4.08 million and $ 6.83 million, respectively. Under the study assumptions, neither AD nor SCWG proved profitable, revealing negative net present values (NPV) and operating costs of $0.96 million and $0.92 million, respectively. • Conversion of sewage sludge into bioenergy via SCWG and AD is evaluated. • SCWG modeled using kinetic data on supercritical water reactions. • The SCWG and AD processes have negative NPVs at the set economic assumptions. • The total annualized costs of SCWG and AD processes are comparable. • The SCWG with 15 wt% sludge concentration was a viable alternative to the AD.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Water Process Engineering
Published
2024-08-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2024.106016
Citations
13
Primary Topic
Subcritical and Supercritical Water Processes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.40

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A comparative assessment of sewage sludge valorization via anaerobic digestion and supercritical water gasification: A techno-economic case study in Norway

Alemayehu Gebremedhin, Shiplu Sarker, Richard Ochieng
13 citations
Journal of Water Process Engineering
Subcritical and Supercritical Water Processes
2.40
article

A comparative assessment of sewage sludge valorization via anaerobic digestion and supercritical water gasification: A techno-economic case study in Norway

Alemayehu Gebremedhin, Shiplu Sarker, Richard Ochieng
article en
13 citations

Abstract

This study compared the performance of supercritical water gasification (SCWG) to conventional anaerobic digestion (AD) for treating sewage sludge from a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). Based on plant data from a WWTP in Norway, kinetic-based process models have been developed in Aspen Plus® to investigate the energy and economic feasibility of AD and SCWG for sewage sludge (SS) treatment. The findings showed that low ambient temperatures significantly reduced the energy efficiency of the AD, while their effect on the SCWG process was negligible. At the average ambient temperature of 7 °C and SS concentration of 7 wt%, AD and SCWG achieved thermal energy self-sufficiency (TES) of 0.76 and 0.63, respectively. Under these conditions, the AD and SCWG had energy conversion efficiencies (η) of 25.8% and 46.6%, respectively. However, increasing the SS content in the SCWG to 15 wt% improved the TES to 1.22 and η to 73.2%, making it a more attractive alternative to the AD. At 7 wt% SS concentration, the AD and SCWG processes required an investment cost of $ 4.08 million and $ 6.83 million, respectively. Under the study assumptions, neither AD nor SCWG proved profitable, revealing negative net present values (NPV) and operating costs of $0.96 million and $0.92 million, respectively. • Conversion of sewage sludge into bioenergy via SCWG and AD is evaluated. • SCWG modeled using kinetic data on supercritical water reactions. • The SCWG and AD processes have negative NPVs at the set economic assumptions. • The total annualized costs of SCWG and AD processes are comparable. • The SCWG with 15 wt% sludge concentration was a viable alternative to the AD.

Journal of Water Process EngineeringVol. 66
Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NO)
Norges Teknisk-Naturvitenskapelige Universitet
Clean water and sanitation
Openalex Percentile: Top 11%
Subcritical and Supercritical Water Processes
2.40
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.