Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986

EVect of temperature on anaerobic treatment of black water

in UASB-septic tank systems
a,¤
Sari Luostarinen , Wendy Sanders b, Katarzyna Kujawa-Roeleveld b, Grietje Zeeman b

a
Department of Biological and Environmental Science, University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, FIN-40014 University of Jyväskylä, Finland
b
Sub-department of Environmental Technology, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 8129, 6700 EV Wageningen, The Netherlands

Received 16 February 2006; received in revised form 16 March 2006; accepted 21 April 2006
Available online 12 June 2006

Abstract

The eVect of northern European seasonal temperature changes and low temperature on the performance of upXow anaerobic sludge
blanket (UASB)-septic tanks treating black water was studied. Three UASB-septic tanks were monitored with diVerent operational
parameters and at diVerent temperatures. The results indicated the feasibility of the UASB-septic tank for (pre)treatment of black water
at low temperatures with respect to removal of suspended solids and dissolved organic material. Inoculum sludge had little eVect on
CODss removal, though in the start-up phase some poorly adapted inoculum disintegrated and washed out, thus requiring consideration
when designing the process. Removal of CODdis was at Wrst negative, but improved as the sludge adapted to low temperature. The UASB-
septic tank alone did not comply with Finnish or Dutch treatment requirements and should therefore be considered mainly as a pre-treat-
ment method. However, measuring the requirements as mgCOD l¡1 may not always be the best method, as the volume of the eZuent
discharged is also an important factor in the Wnal amount of COD entering the receiving water bodies.
© 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Anaerobic wastewater treatment; Black water; Domestic wastewater; Low temperature; UASB-septic tank

1. Introduction
Domestic wastewater can be divided into diVerent
streams according to their origin. Generally two streams
are distinguished: concentrated – black water from toilets
(faeces, urine and Xushing water) and diluted – grey water
from bath, wash and kitchen (Henze and Ledin, 2001).
Most of the organic material, nutrients and pathogens in
domestic wastewater are in black water (51% of COD, 91%
of nitrogen, 78% of phosphorus; Terpstra, 1999), making its
treatment of the greatest importance. Moreover, treatment
of more concentrated wastewater decreases the reactor size
needed, therefore reducing manufacturing costs and space
requirements (Lettinga et al., 2001). Recovery and reuse of
the eZuent may also be promoted if black water is sepa-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +358 14 260 1211; fax: +358 14 260 2321.
E-mail address: saluosta@bytl.jyu.W (S. Luostarinen).
rated from the more diluted streams (Otterpohl, 2001) and
house- or community-on-site treatment systems are used.
On-site treatment systems are needed in rural areas due
to special circumstances such as low population density,
and especially in developing countries, due to their cost-
eYciency and ease of use. Average characteristics of domes-
tic wastewater, black water and grey water are presented in
Table 1.
Anaerobic wastewater treatment is considered sustain-
able (Lettinga, 1996; Hammes et al., 2000) and suitable for
on-site treatment (Zeeman and Lettinga, 1999) due to its
low energy consumption, small space requirement and rela-
tively simple reactor design.
In the northern European climate, wastewater tempera-
tures change with the seasons: in the summer the tempera-
ture can increase up to 20 °C, but in the winter, temperatures
as low as 4 °C are possible. Temperature is an important
factor in anaerobic treatment of domestic wastewater: the
higher the temperature, the higher the conversion rates.

0960-8524/$ - see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.04.018
 S. Luostarinen et al. / Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986
Table 1
Average characteristics of domestic wastewater, black water and grey
water from conventional Xush toilets (Henze and Ledin, 2001)
Parameter Domestic Black Grey
(mg l¡1) wastewater water water
BOD 115–400 300–600 100–400
COD 210–740 900–1500 200–700
Total N 20–80 100–300 8–30
Total P 6–23 40–90 2–7
Slow hydrolysis and accumulation of suspended solids pres-
ent in domestic wastewater may decrease the methanogenic
activity of sludge at low temperatures, which in turn may
deteriorate the process. Suspended solids can also cause for-
mation of scum layers and sudden washout of sludge, if they
are only accumulated and not stabilised within the reactor.
Long hydraulic and sludge retention times (HRT, SRT) and
relatively low organic loading rates (OLR) are therefore
needed (Zeeman and Lettinga, 1999).
The UASB-septic tank (UASBST) is a promising alterna-
tive for house-on-site treatment of domestic wastewater.
Unlike the conventional septic tank (Polprasert et al., 1982;
Philippi et al., 1999), it is used in an upXow mode, improv-
ing the contact between wastewater and sludge, and thus
resulting in better physical removal of suspended solids and
biological removal of dissolved compounds (Zeeman et al.,
2001). As most of the organic material in the wastewater is
already removed in the UASBST, possible post-treatment
(nutrient and/or pathogen removal) becomes simpler and
the operating life of the post-treatment system (e.g. sand
Wlter) may be prolonged. Moreover, the aim of the UASBST
is not only to accumulate and to stabilise the sludge within
the reactor, but also to convert dissolved solids (Zeeman
et al., 2001). UASBST have been studied previously in tropi-
cal climate conditions (Lettinga et al., 1993), but only a few
results have been published for northern European climate
conditions (Bogte et al., 1993; Luostarinen and Rintala,
2005).
At low temperatures, biogas production in upXow reac-
tors is low and does not provide enough mixing. Poor mix-
ing can cause channelling of wastewater through the sludge
bed, thus decreasing removal eYciency, and formation of
gas pockets, which in turn may lead to incidental lifting of
large sludge aggregates and pulse-like eruption of gas from
these areas (Mahmoud et al., 2003). A suYcient upXow
velocity is, therefore, needed to mix the reactor contents
and to provide good contact between the wastewater and
the sludge (van Lier et al., 1997). If upXow velocity cannot
be increased, mechanical mixing may be needed. On the
other hand, high biogas production as well as excessively
high upXow velocity may lead to detachment of already
captured solids (Mahmoud et al., 2003).
In this study, the eVect of northern European seasonal
temperature changes and low temperature on the perfor-
mance of UASBST treating black water was studied. For
this, the 1st year operation of a UASBST system operated at
981
seasonal temperatures was compared to the present results,
obtained after 13 years of operation. In addition, results
from a UASBST at a constant 15 °C inoculated with sludge
from the above-mentioned system and from a UASBST at a
constant 25 °C with no inoculation were used as compari-
sons.
2. Methods
2.1. Reactor
Experiments were conducted at the Experimental Hall
of the Sub-Department of Environmental Technology
at Wageningen University, the Netherlands, using three
UASBST treating black water (Figs. 1 and 2). The 1.2 m3
UASBST monitored in the 1st and 13th years of operation
(Fig. 1) was located in an underground concrete cellar out-
side the Experimental Hall and was made of steel plate with
internal structures made of PVC. The Xow to the system
varied somewhat, since it received black water from 1 to 2
persons during the 1st year of operation and from 3–4 per-
sons during the 13th year (one quantum per person per day
including one portion of faeces and Wve portions of urine
with six portions of Xush). The system was originally inocu-
lated (1st year) with 100 l of granular methanogenic sludge
from a paper mill and was nearly full of sludge at the begin-
ning of the 13th year of operation. Black water from three
conventional Xush toilets was chopped with a shredding
pump before feeding to the reactor through an interceptor
tank with a volume of 18 l. When the tank was full, 12 l of
black water was pumped into the reactor. EZuent was col-
lected into a tank from which it was pumped further to a
local wastewater treatment plant.
The second UASBST (volume 0.2 m3; Fig. 2) was inocu-
lated with 80 l of sludge from the 1.2 m3 system. The 1st
year operation of the 0.2 m3 system was performed at a
constant temperature of 15 °C. The third UASBST was simi-
lar in construction but received no inoculation and was
started-up at a constant temperature of 20 °C. The tempera-
ture was increased to 25 °C after 17 weeks from the start-up
(henceforth the system will be referred to with constant
25 °C). The Xow to the two 0.2 m3 systems was exactly one
quantum of black water per person per day, Xush volume of
the vacuum toilet being approximately 1 l. The black water
was Wrst collected into a 10 l equalisation tank, from which
it was pumped with a shredding pump to a pressure release
vessel on top and transported by gravity to the bottom of
the system.
2.2. Analyses
The performance of the 1.2 m3 UASBST was monitored
for 52 weeks during the 1st year and for 13 weeks during
the 13th year of operation, while the two 0.2 m3 UASBST
were monitored for 51 (15 °C) and 47 (25 °C) weeks from
the start-up. Grab samples of inXuent and eZuent were
analysed for total COD, suspended solids COD and dis-
982 S. Luostarinen et al. / Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986

gas

influent
6
2

1 A
4
water

B
5
3

C effluent
slud ge
wwtp

Fig. 1. The 1.2 m3 UASB-septic tank. 1: automatic sampler for inXuent; 2: interceptor tank; 3: taps (A, B, C); 4: thermometer; 5: eZuent bucket; 6: gas
meter.

CODss as a fraction retained by the Wlter. Temperature

of the 1.2 m3 UASBST was measured with a thermometer
placed on the side of the reactor. CO2 was removed from
the biogas with 3% NaOH and methane production was
monitored with gas meters. In addition to regular analyses,
the composition of the black water treated was controlled
by asking people to mark their contributions to lists as they
used the toilets.

3. Results

The 1.2 m3 UASBST was started-up in January 1988.

Fig. 2. The 0.2 m3 UASB-septic tank. VT: vacuum toilet; VP: vacuum
pump; ET: equalisation tank; WP: shredding pump; GSL: gas–liquid
separator.
solved COD (CODt, CODss, CODdis; Jirka and Carter,
1975), with CODdis deWned as a fraction that passed
through a 0.45 m Wlter (Schleicher & Schuell ME25) and
During the 1st year of operation, the temperature of the
black water ranged from 5 to 17 °C. Overall results were
presented in Bogte et al. (1993) but for the present study,
the detailed results (Bogte et al., 1989) were used and
divided into warm (wastewater temperature >14 °C) and
cold (<14 °C) seasons (Table 2). The results from the pres-
ent monitoring period in the 13th year of operation were
compared to the 1st year, though they were only from the
warm season (14–19 °C). Additional comparisons were
made using results from two 0.2 m3 UASBST during their
1st year of operation at constant 15 and 25 °C.

Table 2
Temperature range, average hydraulic retention time and organic loading rate in the 1.2 m3 UASB-septic tank (UASBST) in the 1st and 13th year of
operation and in two 0.2 m3 UASB-septic tanks at constant 15 and 25 °C
Reactor Study Temp (°C) HRT (d) OLR Inoculum
(kgCOD m¡3 d¡1)
1.2 m3 UASBST 1st year 5–17 4.3 0.43 100 l of granular sludge from a paper mill
1.2 m3 UASBST 13th year 14–19 4.1 0.89 –
0.2 m3 UASBST 15 °C 15 29 0.33 80 l of sludge from the 1.2 m3 UASBST
0.2 m3 UASBST 25 °C 20–25 29 0.42 No inoculum
 S. Luostarinen et al. / Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986 983

Table 3
Comparison between the results from the 1st and the 13th year of 1.2 m3 UASB-septic tank (UASBST) operation and the two 0.2 m3 UASB-septic tanks at
constant 15 and 25 °C
1.2 m3 UASBST 0.2 m3 UASBST
1st year 5–13 °C 1st year 14–17 °C 13th year 14–19 °C 15 °C 25 °C
Inf EV R EV R Inf EV R Inf EV R Inf EV R
CODt 1716 602 65 1155 33 2897 865 70 9503 3699 61 12311 2733 78
(261) (185) (332) (1199) (417) (6460) (366) (7782) (491)
CODss 1201 204 83 460 59 2428 718 71 8070 1621 80 10311 2147 79
(222) (62) (151) (1220) (388)
CODdis 515 465 10 588 ¡24 269 127 53 1433 2086 ¡31 2001 980 51
(64) (89) (124) (107) (33.5) (479) (449) (1209) (495)
The unit for COD values in inXuents (inf) and eZuents (eV) is mg l¡1 and for removals (R) %. Standard deviations are in parenthesis.

During the 1st year of operation, HRT of the 1.2 m3
UASBST was 4.3 d and OLR 0.426 kgCOD m¡3 d¡1 (Table
2). However, in the 13th year of operation, OLR was nearly
double at the same HRT due to the fact that more people
were using the toilets and the toilets had lower Xush volume
(10 l in the 1st year and 6 l in the 13th), thus resulting in a
more concentrated inXuent (Table 3). In the 1st year, both
CODss and CODdis removal were better in the cold than in
the warm period. However, in the warm period of the 13th
year, CODss removal had improved to the level of the 1st
year cold period and CODdis removal was also constantly
higher at approximately 53% (Table 3).
The two 0.2 m3 UASBST at constant 15 and 25 °C had
similar HRTs of 29 d and OLRs of 0.33 and 0.42 kgCOD-
m¡3 d¡1, respectively (Table 2), due to slightly diVering
inXuent COD compositions (Table 3). Since low Xush vol-
umes were used, the inXuents were considerably more con-
centrated than those of the 1.2 m3 UASBST. The COD
removals at constant 15 °C were lower than at 25 °C and
comparable to the results of the 1st year of the 1.2 m3
system, while at 25 °C the removals were higher and
similar to the results from the 13th year of the 1.2 m3 sys-
tem (Table 3).
In Fig. 3, the temperature proWle, CODss and CODdis
removals, and biogas production are presented for all the
reactors and study periods (the 1st and 13th year of the
1.2 m3 UASBST and the two 0.2 m3 UASBST). The 1st year
operations of the 1.2 m3 and the two 0.2 m3 UASBST were
fairly similar to each other. With respect to CODdis removal,
especially, the 1st year of the 1.2 m3 and the 0.2 m3, constant
15 °C systems were similar, taking nearly 40 weeks to reach
positive removal. In the 0.2 m3, constant 25 °C system,
CODdis removal increased earlier and then resembled that
of the 13th year of the 1.2 m3 UASBST. Also, the increase in
biogas production took some time during all three 1st year
operations, while in the 13th year of the 1.2 m3 system it was
high throughout the warm period. CODss removal was the
lowest in the warm period of the 1st year of 1.2 m3 UASBST
operation, decreasing to as low as 40%, while in the 13th
year and in the two 0.2 m3 systems the removals were com-
parable to each other (approximately 75–80%).
The mass balance, as percentage of the average CODt of
inXuent, of the 1st year of the 1.2 m3 UASBST further clari-
Wes the diVerences between cold and warm periods (Fig. 4).
During the cold period, most of the COD removed was
accumulated as solids (little CODss wash out) and only very
little COD was converted to methane, also indicated by the
signiWcant amount of CODdis washed out of the reactor
with eZuent. In the warm period, however, conversion of
COD was enhanced and methane production increased,
accompanied by decreased CODss removal. The 13th year
warm period showed similar methane production and
amount of washed out CODss as the 1st year warm period.
However, washed out CODdis was decreased and a higher
amount of COD was accumulated. Mass balance of the
0.2 m3 UASBST at constant 15 °C (Fig. 4) resembled those
of the 1.2 m3 system warm periods with similar methane
production and some wash-out of solids. CODdis removal
was lower than in the 13th year of the 1.2 m3 system, but
similar to its 1st year. The 0.2 m3 UASBST at constant 25 °C
showed enhanced methane production and somewhat
lower washout of COD with high accumulation.
4. Discussion
The results indicate the feasibility (eYcient removal of
suspended solids and dissolved organic matter) of the
UASBST for (pre)treatment of black water at the low tem-
peratures of the northern European climate. During colder
periods (<14 °C), there was indication of the system working
more as a settler accumulating CODss without further con-
version. Even then, the UASBST was considered more
eYcient than a conventional septic tank due to the upXow
mode Wltering the wastewater through the sludge bed instead
of mere settling in horizontal Xow tanks. During the warmer
periods (>14 °C), CODdis removal, biogas production and
conversion of the accumulated solids were also improved.
Laboratory experiments at 10 °C have, however, shown that
a two-phase UASBST treating synthetic black water can
remove above 90% of CODt and BOD7, and 70% of CODdis
(Luostarinen and Rintala, 2005), indicating that high biolog-
ical conversions can also be achieved during the cold periods.
During the cold period of the 1st year of operation, the
1.2 m3 UASBST worked mainly as a settler with no biogas
production or CODdis removal. However, in the warm
period, hydrolysis of accumulated solids apparently started
984 S. Luostarinen et al. / Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986

20 30
25
15
Temp (°C)

Temp (°C)
20
10 15
10
5
5
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

100 100
CODss removal (%)

CODss removal (%)

80 80

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

100 100
CODdis removal (%)

CODdis removal (%)

80 80
60 60
40 40
20 20
0 0
-20 -20
-40 -40
-60 -60
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.32 0.32
BG (gCOD gCOD-1)

0.28
BG (gCOD gCOD-1)

0.28
0.24 0.24
0.2 0.2
0.16 0.16
0.12 0.12
0.08 0.08
0.04 0.04
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time (weeks) Time (weeks)

Fig. 3. Temperature proWles, CODss and CODdis removals, and biogas production (BG) in the 1.2 m3 UASB-septic tanks during the 1st (䊐) and the 13th
(䉬) year of operation and in the two 0.2 m3 UASB-septic tanks at constant 15 °C (£) and 25 °C (䉭).

100%
CH4
80%
Total CODss in
60% effluent
Total CODdis in
40% effluent
Total
20%
accumulated/wasted

0%
1 2 3 4 5
3
Fig. 4. Mass balances, as percentage of the average CODt of inXuent, of the 1.2 m UASBST during the cold (1) and warm (2) period of the 1st year opera-
tion, and the warm period of the 13th year operation (3), and the 0.2 m3 UASBST at constant 15 °C (4) and 25 °C (5).

and dissolved compounds were formed with no or partial removal, which may have been due to disintegration and
removal (negative CODdis removal). The beginning of bio- washout of granular sludge or incomplete hydrolysis and
gas production was accompanied by a decline in CODss washout of the resulting small, possibly colloidal particles.
 S. Luostarinen et al. / Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986
Moreover, the CODss washout may have been caused by a
high scum-forming potential of the sludge (Halalsheh,
2002). When biogas production exceeded hydrolysis,
CODdis removal became positive and eventually the accu-
mulated small particles were also hydrolysed or the scum-
forming potential decreased with sludge stabilisation,
restoring CODss removal to its earlier level.
No such washout of CODss occurred in the 0.2 m3, con-
stant 15 °C system, though it was inoculated with sludge
from the 1.2 m3 UASBST, taken in a cold period (January).
Moreover, its biogas production was comparable to that of
the 1st year warm period of the 1.2 m3 system, achieving
simultaneous high removal of CODss. Apparently, accumu-
lated and unstabilised solids and scum-forming potential
had nothing to do with the CODss removal of the 1.2 m3
system, but the decline was due to the granular inoculum
used. As the granules, originally adapted to high OLR, were
subjected to low OLR and low temperature, their inner
core apparently no longer received VFA and therefore died
and eventually disintegrated (Aiyuk and Verstraete, 2004).
The resulting particulate material was initially retained
inside the system but later washed out as the biogas pro-
duction started in the warm period, thus causing the decline
in CODss removal. As the 0.2 m3, constant 15 °C UASBST
was inoculated with sludge from the 1.2 m3 system, already
adapted to black water and low temperature, no decline in
CODss removal was observed during biogas production.
When comparing the two warm periods of the 1.2 m3
UASBST, biogas production started earlier in the 13th year
than in the 1st year of operation, indicating the development
of a more temperature-adapted sludge in the reactor over
the years. In addition, CODss removal did not decline to
under 60%, further indicating that the washout in the 1st
year was due to the inoculum. Moreover, neither tempera-
ture nor inoculum sludge seem to have had a signiWcant
eVect on CODss removal. Removal of CODdis also improved
to an average of 53% throughout the 13th year warm period
as compared to reaching positive removal only by the end of
it in the 1st year. Similar improvement of sludge adaptation
to low temperature has also been shown in a two-phase
UASBST treating synthetic black water, as CODdis removal
increased from 54% at 20 °C to 70% at 15 and 10 °C (Luos-
tarinen and Rintala, 2005).
The main reason for treatment of domestic wastewater is
to reduce the concentration of harmful compounds in the
eZuent. In the Netherlands, the requirements for eZuent
quality in decentralised wastewater treatment (house- or
community-on-site) are divided into four diVerent classes
(IBA Manual, 2001; Table 4) and in Finland into two cate-
gories (Lehtovuori, 2003; Table 4) according to diVerent
vulnerabilities of the eZuent discharge areas. In the Nether-
lands, some areas are very vulnerable, e.g. due to a nature
reserve or an important groundwater resource area, and
require eZuent quality of class 3a or 3 b. In Finland, all
areas are considered vulnerable or very vulnerable due to
the many waterways and groundwater reserves and can be
compared to classes 3a and 3b of the Dutch requirements.
985
Table 4
Minimum requirements for eZuent quality in diVerent areas in the
Netherlands (IBA Manual, 2001) and in Finland (Lehtovuori, 2003)
Country Parameter Class 1 Class 2 Class 3a Class 3b
(mg l¡1)
The Netherlands COD 750 300 200 200
N 60 60
P 4
Finland BOD7 83 42
N 82 70
P 5.5 2.8
Class 3b is required in the most vulnerable areas.
EZuent quality of the 1.2 m3 UASBST complied with the
class 1 Dutch requirements, meant for combined domestic
wastewater, during its 1st year of operation but not in the
13th year of operation. Moreover, the eZuents of the 0.2 m3
UASBST were too concentrated to meet any of the require-
ment classes. However, if eZuent volume is considered, the
0.2 m3 systems produced the smallest volume and the 1st
year 1.2 m3 system the largest. Therefore, the amount of
COD discharged per Xush would be 10 times the eZuent
COD (10 l Xush) for the 1.2 m3 system in the 1st year, 6
times the eZuent COD (6 l Xush) for the 13th year, and the
eZuent COD as such (approximately 1 l Xush) for the two
0.2 m3 systems, resulting in 6020, 11550, 5190, 3699, and
2733 mgCODt Xush¡1, respectively, showing that the
impact of the 0.2 m3 systems on the receiving water bodies
was actually the lowest. Therefore, measuring the treatment
requirements as mgCOD l¡1 may not be the best possible
way to ensure low environmental impact.
To achieve the Dutch class 1 or 2 requirements with
the UASBST eZuents, CODss removal needed the most
improvement. Elmitwalli et al. (1999) treated raw domestic
wastewater in UASB systems at 13 °C with HRT of 8 h and
achieved 79% (§12) removal eYciency for suspended solids.
In anaerobic hybrid reactors with vertical sheets of reticu-
lated polyurethane foam in the upper part of the reactor, the
removal eYciency reached 89% (§10). The conclusion was
that the use of sheets in the anaerobic hybrid reactor signi-
Wcantly increased CODss removal compared to the UASB
reactor. Similarly, an option for improved CODss removal is
the introduction of vertical sheets to UASBST, turning them
into upXow-hybrid septic tanks (Elmitwalli et al., 2003). On
the other hand, most eZuents from UASBST will not be dis-
charged directly, but will be post-treated to remove residual
COD and to remove or to recover nutrients. In the latter
case, the eZuent should be judged on its suitability for nutri-
ent recovery: the more concentrated the eZuent, the more
suitable it is (Hammes et al., 2000). As to the Finnish
requirements, no anaerobic process would suYce alone due
to the strict nutrient removal criteria (Lehtovuori, 2003).
5. Conclusions
• Temperature has no signiWcant eVect on CODss removal
in UASBST treating black water.
986 S. Luostarinen et al. / Bioresource Technology 98 (2007) 980–986
• Inoculum sludge has little eVect on CODss removal,
though in the start-up phase some poorly adapted inocu-
lum may disintegrate and wash out, thus requiring con-
sideration when designing the process.
• Removal of CODdis may at Wrst be negative, but will
improve as the sludge is adapted to low temperature.
• UASBST alone may not meet the treatment requirements
for wastewaters in rural areas without post-treatment to
remove residual COD and to remove or to recover nutri-
ents.
• Measuring treatment requirements as mgCOD l¡1 may
not always be the best method, as the volume of the
eZuent discharged is also an important factor in the
Wnal amount of COD entering the receiving water bod-
ies.
Acknowledgements
We gratefully acknowledge RTD project CORETECH
for Wnancing the study. We would also like to thank the
Finnish Foundation of Soil and Water Technology
(MVTT) and NUFFIC (Netherlands Organisation for
International Cooperation in Higher Education) for
supporting Ms Luostarinen’s stay in the Netherlands.
References
Aiyuk, S., Verstraete, W., 2004. Sedimentological evolution in an UASB
treating SYNTHES, a new representative synthetic sewage, at low
loading rates. Biores. Technol. 93, 269–278.
Bogte, J.J., Breure, A.M., van Andel, J.G., Lettinga, G., 1989. Kleinschalige
anaerobe zuivering van huishoudelijk afwalwater – Praktijkproef met
drie UASB-reaktoren. Eindrapport. RIVM report number 738518005
(in Dutch).
Bogte, J.J., Breure, A.M., van Andel, J.G., Lettinga, G., 1993. Anaerobic
treatment of domestic wastewater in small scale UASB reactors. Water
Sci. Technol. 27 (9), 75–82.
Elmitwalli, T.A., Zaandvoort, M., Zeeman, G., Bruning, H., Lettinga, G.,
1999. Low temperature treatment of domestic sewage in upXow anaer-
obic sludge blanket and anaerobic hybrid reactors. Water Sci. Technol.
39 (5), 177–185.
Elmitwalli, T., Sayed, S., Groendijk, L., van Lier, J., Zeeman, G., Lettinga,
G., 2003. Decentralised treatment of concentrated sewage at low tem-
perature in a two-step anaerobic system: two upXow-hybrid septic
tanks. Water Sci. Technol. 48 (6), 219–226.
Halalsheh, M.M., 2002. Anaerobic Pre-treatment of Strong Sewage,
A Proper Solution for Jordan. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University,
The Netherlands.
Hammes, F., Kalogo, Y., Verstraete, W., 2000. Anaerobic digestion tech-
nologies for closing the domestic water, carbon and nutrient cycles.
Water Sci. Technol. 41 (3), 203–211.
Henze, M., Ledin, A., 2001. Types, characteristics and quantities of classic,
combined wastewaters. In: Lens, P., Zeeman, G., Lettinga, G. (Eds.),
Decentralised Sanitation and Reuse IWA Publishing, UK, pp. 57–72.
IBA Manual, 2001. NL: Individual treatment of wastewater. Individuele
Behandeling Afvalwater. Van Hall Institute Business Centre (in Dutch).
Jirka, A., Carter, M.J., 1975. Micro semi-automated analysis of surface and
waste waters for chemical oxygen demand. Analyt. Chem. 47, 1397–1401.
Lehtovuori, P., 2003. Instructions for wastewater treatment in rural areas
of Hauho, Lammi, Luopioinen, Pälkäne and Tuulos. Regional Envi-
ronmental Publications 320. Häme Regional Environmental Centre (in
Finnish).
Lettinga, G., 1996. Sustainable integrated biological wastewater treatment.
Water Sci. Technol. 33 (3), 85–98.
Lettinga, G., de Man, A., van der Last, A.R.M., Wiegant, W., van Knip-
penberg, K., Frijns, J., van Buuren, J.C.L., 1993. Anaerobic treatment
of domestic sewage and wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 27 (9), 67–73.
Lettinga, G., van Lier, J.B., van Buuren, J.C.L., Zeeman, G., 2001. Sustain-
able development in pollution control and the role of anaerobic diges-
tion. Water Sci. Technol. 44 (6), 181–188.
Luostarinen, S., Rintala, J., 2005. Anaerobic on-site treatment of black
water and dairy parlour wastewater in UASB-septic tanks at low tem-
peratures. Water Res. 39, 436–448.
Mahmoud, N., Zeeman, G., Gijzen, H., Lettinga, G., 2003. Solids removal
in upXow anaerobic reactors, a review. Biores. Technol. 90, 1–9.
Otterpohl, R., 2001. Design of highly eYcient source control sanitation
and practical experiences. In: Lens, P., Zeeman, G., Lettinga, G. (Eds.),
Decentralised Sanitation and Reuse IWA Publishing, UK, pp. 164–180.
Philippi, L.S., da Costa, R.H.R., Sezerino, P.H., 1999. Domestic eZuent
treatment through integrated system of septic tank and root zone.
Water Sci. Technol. 40 (3), 125–131.
Polprasert, C., Rajput, V.S., Donaldson, D., Viraraghavan, T., 1982. Septic
tank and septic systems. Environ. Sanit. Rev., 7–8.
Terpstra, P.J.M., 1999. Sustainable water usage systems: models for the
sustainable utilization of domestic water in urban areas. Water Sci.
Technol. 39 (5), 65–72.
van Lier, J.B., Rebac, S., Lettinga, G., 1997. High-rate anaerobic wastewa-
ter treatment under psychrophilic and thermophilic conditions. Water.
Sci. Technol. 35 (10), 199–206.
Zeeman, G., Lettinga, G., 1999. The role of anaerobic digestion of domes-
tic sewage in closing the water and nutrient cycle at community level.
Water Sci. Technol. 39 (5), 187–194.
Zeeman, G., Kujawa-Roeleveld, K., Lettinga, G., 2001. Anaerobic treat-
ment systems for high-strength domestic waste(water) streams. In:
Lens, P., Zeeman, G., Lettinga, G. (Eds.), Decentralised Sanitation and
Reuse IWA Publishing, UK, pp. 218–234.