This paper compares conventional and microwave hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) of human biowaste (HBW) at 160 WC, 180 WC and 200 WC as a potential technology to recover valuable carbonaceous solid fuel char and organic-rich liquor. Also discussed are the influence of HTC heating methods and temperature on HBW processing conversion into solid fuel char, i.e. yield and post-HTC management, i.e. dewaterability rates, particle size distribution and the carbon and energy properties of solid fuel char. While HTC temperatures influenced all parameters investigated, especially yield and properties of end products recovered, heating source effects were noticeable on dewatering rates, char particle sizes and HBW processing/end product recovery rate and, by extension, energy consumed. The microwave process was found to be more efficient for dewatering processed HBW and for char recovery, consuming half the energy used by the conventional HTC method despite the similarity in yields, carbon and energy properties of the recovered char. However, both processes reliably overcame the heterogeneity of HBW, converting them into non-foul end products, which were easily dewatered at <3 seconds/g total solids (TS) (c.f. 50.3 seconds/g TS
for a raw sample) to recover energy-densified chars of ≈17 MJ/kg calorific value and up to 1.4 g/l of ammonia concentration in recovered liquor.
Funding
The authors would like to thank The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundations for funding Loughborough University, UK, on the ‘Reinvent the Toilet Challenge’ project.
History
School
Architecture, Building and Civil Engineering
Published in
Water Science and Technology
Volume
75
Issue
5
Citation
AFOLABI, O.O.D. and SOHAIL (KHAN), M., 2017. Comparative evaluation of conventional and microwave hydrothermal carbonization of human biowaste for value recovery. Water Science and Technology, 75(12), pp.2852-2863.
This work is made available according to the conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence. Full details of this licence are available at: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Acceptance date
2017-03-06
Publication date
2017-03-18
Notes
This paper was accepted for publication in the journal Water Science and Technology and the definitive published version is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wst.2017.164