Bioresource Technology 52 (1995) 25-32
© 1995 Elsevier Science Limited
0960-8524(94)00148-0
ELSEVIER
MODELLING OF GAS PRESSURE EFFECTS ON ANAEROBIC
DIGESTION
V. A. Vavilin,* V. B. Vasiliev & S. V. R y t o v
Water Problems Institute of Russian Academy of Sciences, Novo-Basmannaja str. 10, PO Box 524, 107078 Moscow, Russia
(Received 25 July 1994; revised version received 30 November 1994; accepted 5 December 1994)
Abstract
The model of anaerobic digestion described earlier by
the authors was used for analysis of a pressure change
as a method of avoiding a gas component toxicity. The
model, cafibrated for laboratory-scale reactors, showed
that an increase in pressure reduced ammonia inhibi-
tion during simulated cattle-manure digestion. A
decrease in pressure reduced free hydrogen sulfide
inhibition during a sulfate overload of an anaerobic
digestion of a synthetic feedstock.
Key words: Anaerobic digestion, gas component tox-
icity, pressure effect, simulation model.
INTRODUCTION
Gas production and composition are the parameters
sensitive to unbalance of anaerobic digesters. The
response time depends on the head-space volume,
rate of gas production and the gas solubility. The
properties of the gas phase show more variation with
respect to time than do those of the liquid phase
(Andrews & Graef, 1971; Hawkes et al., 1994). The
liquid phase has more buffering capacity than the
gas phase.
Three causes of digester imbalance can be sug-
gested: overloading, toxic substrates and sudden
changes in the digester environment. Andrews and
Graef (1971) suggested raising the digester pH by
scrubbing some of the carbon dioxide from recircu-
iated gas to avoid the effect of an overload. To avoid
hydrogen sulfide toxicity, Olsson and Schleischer
(1994) removed sulfide outside the reactor using the
biogas. Kapp (1992) showed that in thermophilic
sludge-digestion increasing the total pressure avoi-
ded free-ammonia toxicity.
Two types of model of anaerobic digestion can be
mentioned, one where the processes are controlled
by the hydrogen partial-pressure in the reactor
(McCarty & Mosey, 1991), and one where the vola-
tile fatty acids in the liquid phase of the reactor
control the process (Angelidaki et al., 1993). It is
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
25
Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved
0960-8524/95/$9.5(I
usually assumed that the total gas pressure in the
reactor is equal to 1 atm (Costello et al., 1993).
A universal basic model of anaerobic conversion
of complex organic material, (METHANE), was
developed by the authors (Vasiliev et al., 1993; Vavi-
lin et al., 1994a). This model was used for
descriptions of the reactions focused on ammonia
and hydrogen sulfide inhibition, with cattle manure
and an acetate-sulfate synthetic substrate (Vavilin et
al., 1994b; 1995). In the present paper, to clarify
pressure change as a method of avoiding gas-compo-
nent toxicity, the (METHANE) model is used for
descriptions of the manure and synthetic acetate-
sulfate substrate digestion.
METHODS
A system of differential equations for three groups
of variables is written in accordance with the mate-
rial balances.
1. Equations describing the dynamics of the sus-
pended organic matter (Bi bacteria; Xk suspended
solids) in the anaerobic reactor:
V'I~i=qFBFi--qBxBi+ V" PBi (1)
V'Xk =qFX~k --qBxXk + V" p ~ (2)
where Bvi (i=1,2,...,7) and XFk (k=l,2,3)=influent
concentrations of active bacteria and suspended sol-
ids; qF and qn=rates of input and discharge of the
waste and excess-sludge mixture; Psi and pxk=rates
of biomass growth and substrate transformation,
respectively, and V=reactor volume.
2. Equations describing the dynamics of soluble
components in the anaerobic system:
V'Sj=qv'(SFj-Sj)+V'psi+Qj (3)
where j=1,2,...,12; psi=rate of soluble substrate
transformation, Qj=rate of mass exchange between
the gaseous phase and the liquid phase.
3. The balance equation for the gaseous phase:
Vg ~PF,--Q,-- ~PF,--~O, "~T (4)
2
26 V. A. Vavilin, V. B. Vasiliev, S. V. Rytov
where n = 1, 2 ..... 7 (methane, carbon dioxide, hydro-
gen sulfide, hydrogen, ammonia, water vapour, inert
gas); Vg=gaseous phase volume; R=universal gas
constant; Tk=absolute temperature; q~=gas flux
coming into the gaseous phase; PF,,=partial pressure
of gas components in the influent wastewater;
Pv=total gas pressure in the gaseous phase;
Q,,=mass exchange function between liquid and gas
for each gaseous component. The rate of mass
exchange between the liquid and gaseous phases was
described according to Andrews and Graef (1971).
Detailed information about the model has
been reported (Vasiliev et al., 1993; Vavilin et al.,
1994a) and the main features of the new version,
(METHANE 2.2), are as follows.
1. Hydrolysis, acidogenesis and methanogenesis
are included. The total number of particulate, solu-
ble and gaseous variables of the model is about 30.
Rates of changes in the biomass concentration (acid-
ogens, syntrophs and methanogens) take into
account bacterial growth, death and mutual trans-
formations.
2. Four versions of hydrolysis kinetics are con-
sidered for suspended solids degradation, including
the simplest first-order kinetics.
3. Dissolved and particulate organic matter is
supposed to be a mixture of carbohydrates, proteins
and lipids which have limits to fermentation. Lysis
and hydrolysis of cell biomass are taken into
account.
4. The rate of the main limiting-substrate trans-
formation by bacterial groups is presened as a
product of substrate limitation- and inhibition-func-
tions and temperature dependence. Inhibition
effects of the molecular-hydrogen pressure, pH, con-
centration of non-ionized molecules of ammonia, of
hydrogen sulfide and of propionate are considered.
It is supposed that propionate represents the whole
spectrum of volatile fatty acids other than acetate.
Thus, the acetate or the propionate paths of fermen-
tation carried out by acidogens A or acidogens P are
included. The pathway of fermentation is dependent
on the hydrogen partial-pressure.
5. A physico-chemical reaction system of pH level
with ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, carbonic acid and
volatile fatty acid buffer systems is considered. The
buffer capacity of the system can be evaluated using
bicarbonate alkalinity. The pH level can be fixed.
6. The flow-rate of biological solids through the
reactor is considered to be independent of the flow-
rate of the bulk liquid phase. Thus, the model can
be useful for analysis of high-rate digesters with sol-
ids retention.
7. Batch and continuous-flow reactors can be
analysed using the first and the second forward-inte-
gration methods with variable time-step. The user
can change the integration accuracy. In continuous-
flow system the carbon balance is calculated to
check the integration accuracy.
8. The dependence of different model variables
on such parameters as SRT, HRT and temperature
can be analysed for the steady-states of a continu-
ous-flow reactor.
9. The model was realized in a form of a user-
friendly computer program for IBM PC AT and it
allows the user, in 1 min of computer time, to see
the complex dynamic behaviour of an anaerobic
system over many days.
10. The procedure of visual model calibration is
developed. The computer program includes a library
of experimental data with different organic wastes
being treated and corresponding values of constants
and parameters. The model was able to provide a
good comparison with data examined.
11. The current values of all variables can be dis-
played on the screen in text and in graphic forms
and also printed out. Using these data it is easy to
analyse the input of particular processes like defined
buffer systems used to keep a constant pH level.
12. (METHANE 2.2) contains a ( H E L P ) proce-
dure for a description of the program features in
text and in graphic forms.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Manure digestion: ammonia toxicity
To reduce ammonia concentration to a non-critical
level, Kapp (1992) suggested raising the pressure in
a thermophilic sludge digester. Using a half-scale
pilot-plant he showed that at pressures from 2.5-3
bar the digestion succeeded. An increase in CO2
partial pressure decreased the pH value, which low-
ered the concentration of NH3.
We analysed Kapp's proposals in the case of
manure digestion using the ( M E T H A N E ) model. A
continuous-flow anaerobic system, fed on cattle
manure and adapted to a particular level of ammo-
nia, was used by Angelidaki et al. (1993) to study the
effect of a step increase in the concentration of
ammonia in the influent water. High pH levels
(7.6-8.1), together with high VFA concentrations,
were observed in the steady-state.
For the model a manure composition was repre-
sented by a mixture of soluble and insoluble
carbohydrates, proteins and lipids (70:29:1) to
obtain the suspended and dissolved solids composi-
tion and the level of ammonia equal to those in the
cattle manure digestion mentioned above. The
degradable part of the suspended solids was such as
to obtain the methane flow-rate required. The quasi-
steady-state of the model was obtained under the
conditions presented in Table 1. Some model coeffi-
cients are shown in Table 2. Following this, after a
sharp increase in influent ammonia concentration
from 2.5 to 6.0 g N/I at 0 days the system adapted to
the new conditions and reached a new steady-state
(Fig. 1). The graphs in Fig. 1 are the computer
curves, thus the scales are rough. Only the maximum
 Modelling of gas pressure effects on anaerobic digestion 27

Table 1. Simulation conditions for the cattle-manure 1400

system Methanogens A, mg/I

Chemical composition of the 0

influent water: 3800
Acetate, mg/I
suspended solids 19300.00 mg/l
dissolved OM 5400.00 mg/l
acetate 4500-00 mg/l 0
propionate 2500-00 mg/l 2500
Propionate, mg/I
,, ,p
sulfate 5"00 mgS/l
carbonate 50.00 mgC/l
sulfide 0.00 mgS/1
0
ammonia nitrogen 2500"00 mgN/l 8.2 pH
calcium 10.00 mg/l
sodium 3200.00 mg/l
phosphate 555.00 mg P/I 4
chloride 0.00 mg/l 1100
Non-ionized NH 3, mgN/I
Parameters of reactor:
volume of reactor 1.00 1
volume of gaseous phase 0.50 1 0
temperature 33"00°C 0.810 Methane
pressure 1.00 bar "-,z_._. flow rate, Ill*day
feed flow-rate 0.07 l/day
0
0.720 g-. *l *s • • s~- Methane
partial pressure, bar
Table 2. Inhibition constants used in the model simula-
tions
0
0.270
Inhibitor Organisms Substrate Carbon dioxide
partial pressure, bar
Manure Acetate/sulfate
Ammonium Methanogens A 1250/1800" 0 120 days
(mg N/l) Syntrophs 1210/1800 --
Hydrogen Methanogens A -- 29.7/65.0 Fig. 1. Time-profiles of the main model variables on
sulfide Sulfate-reducers -- 35-0/70.0 computer display for the reactor after a step-wise increase
(rag S/l) at 0 days in the influent ammonium concentration from
pH Methanogens A -- 5.15/4.85 2.5 to 6.0 g N/I and with a total gas pressure of 1 bar.
(acid zone) Sulfate-reducers -- 5.10/4.80 Symbols: experimental data (Angelidaki et al., 1993);
pH Methanogens A 8.10/8.30 -- lines: model prediction.
(alkaline Syntrophs 8"10/8-30 --
zone)
pH, which, in turn, leads to a decrease of the non-
"For ammonia and hydrogen sulfide inhibition two con-
stants are used. The first constant (K~I) means the ionized ammonia inhibition. Thus, in the manure
concentration at which the growth rate of the microorgan- system a high level of volatile fatty acids and a high
isms is reduced to half of the maximum value. The second pH occur in the steady-state conditions.
constant (KI2) corresponds to reduction of the growth rate The simulation was carried out under 3 bar of
to one-hundredth of the maximum (see Fig. 3). The pH total gas-pressure conditions (Fig. 2). The accurate
inihibition functions have 2 × 2 constants (acid and alka-
line zones). For the manure system an ammonia inhibition data computed at particular times are shown in
occurs in the alkaline zone, but for the acetate/sulfate Table 3. According to the model, increasing the par-
system hydrogen sulfide inhibition occurs in the acid zone. tial pressure of CO2 to 0.63 bar decreases the pH
- - Not applicable. value from 7.98 to 7.60, which lowers the non-ion-
ized NH3-concentration to 735.5 mg N/I and
decreases the inhibition effect substantially (Fig. 3).
value of the variable measured or computed is Using the simulations presented in Figs 1 and 2 as
screened. Table 3 contains the accurate data com- the controls, we carried out some tests of the model
puted at the stated times. for analysis of various anaerobic-system dynamics,
The ( M E T H A N E ) model was able to provide a with the following results.
good comparison with available data from a digester 1. When the pH level of 7-98, corresponding to
at 1 bar pressure. During this period, the concentra- the control at 0 days, is kept constant the non-ion-
tion of volatile fatty acids increased, pH dropped ized NH3-concentration increases to a high level and
from 7.98 to 7.75 and methane yield decreased the concentration of methanogens decreases to zero
because a high non-ionized NH3-concentration of because of NH3 toxicity (Fig. 4).
990 mg N/I inhibited the methanogens. The toxic 2. When the pH levels of 7.75 (1 bar) and 7.60 (3
influence of NH3 on methanogens causes an accu- bar) corresponding to the earlier models at 120 days
mulation of volatile fatty acids, thus decreasing the are kept constant, the simulations show (Fig. 5) that
28 V.A. Vavilin, V.B. Vasiliev, S. V. Rytov

Table 3. Computed values of some model variables for the manure continous-flow system at particular times after an
initial sharp increase in influent ammonia concentration a

Pressure Variables t=0 days t= 120 days Steady-state

(bar)
1 pH 7.98 7-75 7.75
Acidogens A, mg/I 2019.68 1546.29 1547.28
Acidogens P, mg/l 96.97 72.89 73.05
Methanogens A, mg/l 1321.77 787.03 787.37
Syntrophs, mg/1 148.28 29.92 1.03
Methanogens H, mg/I 41.04 26-30 24.54
Degradable suspended solids, mg/l 4980.43 9489.91 9472.72
Dissolved organic substance, mg/l 23.12 22.14 22-37
Acetate, mg/l 412.46 3269.38 2835.36
Propionate, mg/l 253.28 2437.24 3016.77
Carbonate, mg/I 15327.98 9247.76 9240.74
Ammonium nitrogen, mg N/! 2205.61 5784.08 5788.21
Non-ionized ammonia, mg N/I 570.60 989.48 986.85
Alkalinity, mg HCO3/I 15123-33 12422.94 8876.96
Methane partial pressure, bar 0-67 0-63 0.63
Carbon dioxide partial pressure, bar 0.25 0.26 0.26
Methane flow rate, I/(1 day) 0.80 0.45 0.44
Carbon dioxide flow rate, 1/(1day) 0.30 0.19 0.18
pH 7.98 7.60 7.60
Acidogens A, mg/l 2019.68 1705-31 1705.17
Acidogens P, mg/l 96.97 80-45 80.46
Methanogens A, mg/I 1321.77 1203.78 1204.29
Syntrophs, mg/! 148.28 149.46 149.51
Methanogens H, mg/I 41-04 36.17 36.18
Degradable suspended solids, mg/l 4980-43 7985.04 7981.03
Dissolved organic substance, mg/I 23.12 22.87 22.79
Acetate, mg/l 412.46 143.25 142.93
Propionate, mg/l 253.28 101.18 100.94
Carbonate, mg/! 15327.98 15862-54 15858.35
Ammonium nitrogen, mg N/! 2205.61 5760.76 5761.64
Non-ionized ammonia, mg N/I 570-60 735.54 733.79
Alkalinity, mg HCO3/I 15123.33 15621.81 15623-21
Methane partial pressure, bar 2.62 2.24 2-24
Carbon dioxide partial pressure, bar 0.26 0-63 0.63
Methane flow rate, I/(1 day) 0.27 0-23 0.23
Carbon dioxide flow rate, 1/(1day) 0.03 0.06 0.06
"In these computations the simple first-order kinetics of suspended solids degradation with KH=0.5 1/day was used for
hydrolysis description.

methanogenesis is going on, but for the 1 bar case
the free-NH3 level inhibits the process substantially.
3. When an NH3-inhibition process is excluded by
an increase in the constants of NH3-inhibition func-
tions (see Table 2) the system dynamics change
substantially only at 1 bar total gas pressure (Fig. 6).
Thus, increasing total gas pressure leads to
decreasing inhibition from non-ionized ammonia.
S y n t h e t i c substrate: sulfate effect
To reduce a hydrogen-sulfide concentration to non-
critical levels, Olsson and Schleischer (1994)
removed sulfide outside the reactor using the biogas.
The biogas was led to a gas washing system, where
H2S was absorbed in a scrubber liquid containing
iron. We analysed the idea of lowering the total gas
pressure to reduce H2S-concentration toxicity.
A system of anaerobic microorganisms adapted to
a low sulfate-load was studied by Parkin et al. (1990)
for a step increased concentration in the input of
sulfate. When the input sulfate concentration was
increased from 200 mg S/1 to 625 mg S/I the system
did not fail, but under the input sulfate concentra-
tion of 1250 mg S/1 the high hydrogen sulfide
concentration inhibited methanogenesis organisms.
The quasi-steady-state of the model was obtained
under the conditions shown in Table 4. After a step-
wise increase in influent sulfate concentration from
200 mg S/I to 625 mg S/I at 0 days the system adap-
ted to the new conditions, reaching a new
steady-state where methanogenesis and sulfate-
reduction were going on. However, at an influent
sulfate concentration of 1250 mg S/1 the system
failed and both sulfate-reduction and methane-pro-
duction shut down (Fig. 7).
This acetate/sulfate system was studied using the
previous model of anaerobic digestion (Vavilin et al.,
1994b). The model was able to provide a good com-
parison with data. Some model coefficients are
shown in Table 2.
 Modelling of gas pressure effects on anaerobic digestion 29

1400
,.. Methanogens A, mg/I
~. ......................

0
3594 :. - Acetate, mgll

/
0 .~__-
2456 ............. Propionate, rag/l
z"

8.1 ~- ........................... pR

4
1033 -" ........................... Non-ionized N H 3, mgN/l
:

O L0
0
0.799 Methane \
flow rate, Ill*day
-, .............................

0 o 0.5
2.8 ~ Methane
partial pressure, bar t-

................................
0
0.680 / Carbon dioxide
; partial pressure, bar 0
400 800 1200 1600 2000
KII K I2
0
120 days Non-ionized ammonia concentration (mgN/l)
Fig. 2. Time-profiles of the main model variables (solid Fig. 3. Inhibition effect of non-ionized ammonia con-
line) on computer display for the reactor after a step-wise centrations on the growth rate of methanogens.
increase at 0 days in the influent ammonium concentra-
tion from 2.5 to 6.0 g N/1 and with a total gas pressure of
3 bar. Model dynamics presented in Fig. 1 are shown as
the control (dotted line).

(A)
(a)
1400 1400
.............. Methanogens A, mg/I x~......................... Methanogens A, mgll
\

0 0
12000 12000 -
A c e t a t e , mg/l _ Acetate, mall

0 0
3000,

/
3000 Propionate, mg/l Propionate. mg/I

0 0 ............................ ~
0.1 ........................... '.pH 0.I .............................. p H

4 4
1600 1600
....................... Non-ionized NH3, mgN/l ~ . ..................... Non-ionized N H 3, mgNll

0 0
0.840 Methane 0,290 Methane
~ i ...................... flow rate, I / l , d a y " .................... flow rate, ill*day

0 0
0.800 ........ Methane 2.8 Methane
partial pressure, bar partial pressure, bar

0 / ........... . ....... . .......

0 0.663
0.270 ' - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Carbon dioxide Carbon dioxide
partial pressure, bar partial pressure, bar

0 120 days 120 days

Fig. 4. Model dynamics (solid line) when the initial pH of 7.98 (see Table 3) was kept constant at a total gas pressure
of 1 bar (A) and of 3 bar (B). Model dynamics with a variable pH in the reactor (Figs 1 and 2) are shown as the control
(dotted line).
30 V A. Vavifin, V.B. Vasiliev, S. V Rytov

(A) (B)
1400 • 1400 "~"-"--*-,~
Methanogens A, mg/I Methanogens A, mg/I

0
3594 • 428
Acetate, mg/I
/ Acetate, m8/I
/

0 0
2456 - °- . . . . . . . . . . . 260
Propionate, mg/l Propionate, m8/I

t...,

0 0
8.0- pH 8.0 pH

4 4
735
Non-ionized NH3, mgN/I Non-ionized NH3, mgN/I

1.5 Methane
flow rate, l/l.day
oY
0.460 1
Methane
flow rate, Ill*day
'~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
0 0
0.667 Methane Methane
partial pressure, bar 2.60 [" partial pressure, bar

0
0.430 Carbon dioxide 0.663 Carbon dioxide
partial pressure, bar partial pressure, bar

0 0 ,
0 120 days 0 120 days

Fig. 5. Model dynamics (solid line) when the pH was kept constant at a total gas pressure of 1 bar (pH=7.75:A) and
of 3 bar (pH=7.60: B). Model dynamics with a variable pH in the reactor (Figs 1 and 2) are shown as the control (dotted
line).

(A) (B)
1400 . . . . . . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1400 T'" Methanogens A, m8/I Methanogens A, mgll
~-.~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
/
0/ 0
, .- ................... i 420
3594 ] Acetate, mg/I Acetate, m8/I

2 Propionate, mg/I 260 Propionate, mg/I

0
pn 8.1 pH

4
1200 735
f ....................... Non-ionized NH3, mgN/I ....................... Non-ionized NH3, mgN/l

1,°
i 0
0.420 : Methane
Methane
k. . flow rate, l/l.day flow rate, Ill*day

0
0.680 Methane 2.8 Methane
partial pressure, bar partial pressure, bar

0 0
0.310 0.760 ........................... Carbon dioxide
.............................. Carbon dioxide
partial pressure, bar partial pressure, bar

0 120 days 0 120 days

Fig. 6. Model dynamics (solid line) without free ammonia inhibition at 1 bar (A) and at 3 bar (B) total gas pressures.
Model dynamics with an ammonia inhibition (Figs 1 and 2) are shown as the control (dotted line).
 Modelling of gas pressure effects on anaerobic digestion 31

500
Methanogens A. mg/I Methanotgens A, mg/I

ol \ Sulfate-red. A. mg/l
0
17 Sulfate-red. A. mg/I

o X,~. 0
1300" 1249 Sulfate. mgS/l
Sulfate, mgS/I

0 0
0.400' Biogas 0.410 - Biogas
flow rate. Ill*day flow rate. Ill,day

0 0
13000 12470:
Acetate, mg/l Acetate, mg/I

o1" Sulfide. rngS/I

[
0 OI ". . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Non-ionized H2S. mgS/l 41 ~ ~ ' ~ ' ~ , ................. Non-ionized H2S, mgS/I

o ~
6.4 " - - ~ pH 6.4 [ . . . . . . . . pH

4 4
0 200 days
Fig. 7. System failure after the step-wise increase at day
0 in the influent sulfate concentration from 200 to 1250
mg S/! and with a total gas pressure of 1 bar. Symbols:
experimental data (Parkin et al., 1990); lines: model pre-
dictions.
/ ,
'\
~ i
0 200 days
Fig. 8. Simulation of system recovery (solid line) after a
large step-wise increase at day 0 in the influent sulfate
concentration from 200 to 1250 mg S/I and with a total
gas pressure of 0"65 bar. Model dynamics at 1 bar pres-
sure (Fig. 7) are shown as the control (dotted line).

Table 4. Simulation conditions for acetate/sulfate system CONCLUSION

By changing the total gas pressure of an anaerobic
Chemical composition of the influent water digester toxicity effects can be avoided. An increase
dissolved OM 0.00 mg/l of COz partial-pressure decreases the pH value,
acetate 12500.00 mg/l
propionate 0.00 mg/i which reduces the non-ionized ammonia concentra-
sulfate 200.00 mgS/l tion. A decrease in C O 2 partial-pressure increases
carbonate 100.00 mgC/! the pH level, which lowers the non-ionized hydro-
sulfide 0.00 mgS/1 gen-sulfide concentration.
ammonia nitrogen 100.00 mgN/l
calcium 250.00 mg/l
sodium 10.00 mg/I
phosphate 5.00 mgP/l REFERENCES
Parameters of reactor:
volume of reactor 1'50 ! Andrews, J. F. & Graef, S. F. (1971). Dynamic modeling
volume of gaseous phase 0.50 1 and simulation of the anaerobic digestion process. In
temperature 33.00°C Anaerobic Biological Treatment Processes. Advances in
pressure 1.00 bar Chemistry Series, No. 105. Amer. Chemical Soc., Wash-
feed flow rate 0.04 1/day ington, 126-62.
Angelidaki, I., Ellegaard, L. & Ahring, B. K. (1993). A
mathematical model for dynamic simulation of anaero-
bic digestion of complex substrates: focusing on
In the present study the simulation was carried ammonia inhibition. Biotechnol. Bioeng., 42, 159-66.
out under 0.65 bar of total gas-pressure conditions Costello, D. J., Greenfield, P. F. & Lee, P. L. (1991).
(Fig. 8). According to the model a decreasing CO2 Dynamic modelling of a single-stage high-rate anaerobic
partial-pressure increases the pH level, which, in reactor. I. Model derivation. Water Res., 25, 847-58.
Hawkes, F. R., Guwy, A. J., Hawkes, D. L. & Rozzi, A. G.
turn, lowers the non-ionized hydrogen-sulfide con- (1994). On-line monitoring of anaerobic digestion:
centration. At these values of HzS and pH the application of device for continuous measurement of
system does not fail. bicarbonate alkalinity. In Proc. 17th Int. Syrup. on Anaer-
32 V.A. Vavilin, V.B. Vasitiev, S. V. Rytov
obic Digestion, Cape Town, 23-27 January 1994, RSA
Litho (Pty), pp. 2-11.
Kapp, H. (1992). The effect of higher pressures on the
mesophilic and the thermophilic anaerobic sludge diges-
tion. In Proc. Int. Symp. on Anaerobic Digestion of Solid
Waste, Venice, 14-17 April 1992, 85-94.
McCarty, P. L. & Mosey, F. E. (1991). Modelling of
anaerobic digestion process (a discussion of concepts).
Water Sci. Technol., 24, 17-33.
Olsson, L. E. & Schleicher, O. (1994). Anaerobic-aerobic
treatment of black liquor from an NSSC pulp mill
including a sulphur recovery plant. In Proc. 17th Int.
Syrnp. on Anaerobic Digestion, Cape Town, 23-27 Jan-
uary 1994, RSA Litho (Pty), pp. 170-9.
Parkin, C. F., Lynch, N. A., Kuo, W. C., Van Keuren, E.
L. & Bhattacharya, S. K. (1990). Interaction between
sulfate reducers and methanogens fed acetate and pro-
pionate. J. WPCF, 62, 780-8.
Vasiliev, V. B., Vavilin, V. A., Rytov, S. V. & Ponomarev,
A. V. (1993). Simulation model of anaerobic digestion
of organic matter by a microorganism consortium: basic
equations. Water Res., 20, 633-43.
Vavilin, V. A., Vasiliev, V. B., Ponomarev, A. V. & Rytov,
S. V. (1994a). Simulation model (Methane) as a tool of
effective biogas production during anaerobic conversion
of complex organic matter. Biores. Technol., 48, 1-8.
Vavilin, V. A., Vasiliev, V. B., Rytov, S. V. & Ponomarev,
A. V. (1994b). Self-oscillating coexistence of methano-
gens and sulfate-reducers under hydrogen sulfide
inhibition and the pH regulating effect. Biores. Technol.,
49, 105-19.
Vavilin, V. A., Vasiliev, V. B., Rytov, S. V. & Ponomarev,
A. V. (1995). Modelling ammonia and hydrogen sulfide
inhibition in anaerobic digestion. Water Res., 29, 827-35.