Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-021-01540-9

REVIEW

A Critical Review of Challenges Faced by Converting Food Waste

to Bioenergy Through Anaerobic Digestion and Hydrothermal
Liquefaction
Yanna Liang1 

Received: 30 June 2020 / Accepted: 31 July 2021 / Published online: 4 August 2021
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2021

Abstract
The conventional approaches for handling food waste has been incineration, composting, landfilling, and anaerobic digestion
for producing biogas. In light of organic waste bans and newly discovered presence of per- and polyfluorinated substances
(PFAS) in food, food packaging materials, and compost, this review provides a critical summary of what has been investigated
and reported and what needs to be considered when choosing suitable pathways for food waste. In addition to the fundamental
principles inherent to anaerobic digestion and hydrothermal liquefaction, challenges for each process are identified followed
by discussion of potential solutions to resolve the bottlenecks.
Graphic Abstract

Keywords  Food waste · Anaerobic digestion · Dissolved methane · Hydrothermal liquefaction · Per- and polyfluorinated
substances (PFAS)

Statement of Novelty Thus, the novelty of this review article lies in the fact that
critical challenges in valorizing real-world food waste to
Although a few review papers provided either comprehen- products were identified and potential solutions were dis-
sive or specific coverage of food waste conversion, there cussed in detail. Specifically, this review manuscript aimed
is an urgent need to reevaluate existing technologies and to draw attention to: (1) feedstock preparation in terms of
explore new ones given the highly diverse nature of food fractionation and prevention of contamination; (2) potential
waste and emerging issues related to this waste material. In issues related to conventional conversion pathways, such
particular, articles reviewing challenges faced in the field as methane in anaerobic digestor effluent and bottlenecks
application of various technologies are significantly lacking. inherently tied to hydrothermal liquefaction; and (3) emerg-
ing contaminants, for instance per- and polyfluorinated sub-
* Yanna Liang
[email protected]
stances (PFAS) in food packaging materials.

1
Department of Environmental and Sustainable Engineering,
University at Albany, SUNY, 1400 Washington Avenue,
Albany, NY 12222, USA

13
Vol.:(0123456789)

782 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

Introduction Feedstock Fractionation

In recent years, food waste has become a serious emerg- Definition and Current Status of Food Waste
ing problem due to at least three factors: the enormous and
increasing quantity, issues related to conventional ways of Different organizations, such as Food and Agriculture
disposal, and new concerns tied to this type of waste. The Organization of the United Nations, European Commission,
author is fully aware of reviews published on food waste and World Resources Institute, define food waste differently
recently. These reviews considered different aspects related [1]. Different definition leads to different calculation of food
to food waste. Topics covered include, but not limited to: waste generation. But globally speaking, it is estimated that
food waste management from the point of understanding around 1.3 billion tons of food waste is generated each year
the food-energy-water nexus [1]; pretreatment and anaerobic [5] and the total amount is predicted to be 2.5 billion tons
digestion of food waste for production of methane, hydrogen, by 2025 [2]. In the US, food waste is food not used for its
and ethanol [2–4]; utilization of food waste for producing intended purpose, no longer fit for human or animal con-
large quantity commodity chemicals (biogas, biodiesel, bio- sumption, and sent for disposal. These food wastes include
char), consumer chemicals (health supplements and deter- byproducts from food and beverage processing that cannot
gents), specialty or performance chemicals (e.g., cosmet- be recycled or reused [17]. In the US, the aggregate disposal
ics, coatings, adhesives, and foods), niche chemicals (e.g., rate of food waste is estimated to be 0.615 pounds/person/
chitosan, glucose, phosphate, carbohydrates and free amino day. Annually, this translates to over 35.5 million tons of
nitrogen) [5]. In addition to these chemicals, other products, food waste generation [18]. According to the US Environ-
such as: butanol, volatile fatty acids, electricity, biofertilizer, mental Protection Agency (EPA), a total of 35.2 million
animal feed, and biopolymers were also reviewed [6–9]. tons of food waste went to landfills in 2013. This amount
Specific to biopolymers, such as polyhydroxyalkanoates is 57.5% of total food waste generated in that year [17]. In
(PHA), different types of food waste, for instance whey, 2017, around 75.3% of food waste was landfilled [19]. These
waste oil, spent coffee grounds, sugar industry waste and wastes are generated by commercial, institutional, industrial,
legume waste were reviewed for producing PHA by differ- and residential settings and are considered as the organic
ent microorganisms, either wild or engineered strains [10]. fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW). These wastes
Besides these addressing valorization of food waste from are the focus of this review.
a global and comprehensive perspective, other review papers In view of greenhouse gas emission from organics-laden
evaluated this topic for different regions, such as South and food waste at landfills, in 2015, the US Department of Agri-
Southeast Asia [11] or targeting specific food waste, such culture (USDA) and EPA adopted a domestic goal of a 50%
as meat, poultry and fish processing industries [12] or fruit reduction of food loss and waste by 2030 [20]. In order to
waste (banana peels, pineapple wastes, grape romance, accomplish this goal, the EPA defined a Food Recovery
orange peels, melon peels) [13, 14]; a single product from Hierarchy that prioritizes waste source reduction, feeding
food waste: biofertilizer [15] or one conversion technology, hungry people, and feeding animals [21], and has provided
for instance gasification followed by syngas fermentation funding for food waste reduction programs and incentives
[16]. [22]. At state levels, several states have either developed
Although these reviews provided either encyclopedia or are in the process of developing structures for organic
or specific coverage of food waste, there is an urgent need waste bans. These states include California, Connecticut,
to reevaluate existing technologies and explore new ones Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
given the highly diverse nature of food waste and emerging New York [23].
issues related to this waste material. In particular, articles
reviewing challenges faced in the field application of various Fractionation Approaches
technologies are significantly lacking. Therefore, the objec-
tive of this review article is to fill the knowledge gaps unad- To divert food waste from landfills, the first step is to
dressed by researchers and practitioners. Specifically, this separate these wastes from MSW (Fig. 1). As reviewed
review focused on: (1) feedstock preparation: fractionation by Badgett and Milbrandt [23], in 2014, there were 198
and prevention of contamination; (2) conversion pathways, communities in the US that provided curbside food waste
especially problems associated with anaerobic digestion collection. In 2019, the number increased to 326. The top
and hydrothermal liquefaction pathway; and (3) emerging five states with the most communities practicing curbside
contaminants, such as per- and polyfluorinated substances collection are California, Washington, Minnesota, Illinois,
(PFAS) in food waste. and Vermont. In terms of household numbers with access

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 783

Fig. 1  The overall process diagram for converting food waste to fuels and commodities

to curbside collection, the top five states are California, 230 ­m3 biogas containing methane at 70% (v/v) and 80 kg
Washington, New York, Texas, and Colorado. of humus.
New York City (NYC) has an ambitious goal of sending
zero waste to landfills by 2030 [24]. Organics, including Bottlenecks on Fractionation
food scraps, food-soiled paper, and yard waste comprise
34% of total MSW and the amount has been increasing Even though the anaerobic fermentation was performed suc-
over the years. In 2013, a pilot curbside organics collection cessfully, problems encountered in this study [25] included:
program served approximately 3500 households in Staten (1) unstable feed composition. Percentage change of food
Island. By the end of 2017, this service reached more than waste in MSW forced adjustment of the organic loading
3.3 million New Yorkers. Among the collected organics, rate for the anaerobic digestion; and (2) mechanical sorting
yard waste at 60% was the major component, followed by of MSW for enriching organics was difficult. On the one
food scraps at 31%. Contamination is consisted of mainly hand, substantial amounts of inert and organics (39.6% of
misplaced recyclables: organics not accepted in the pro- the total) were rejected and sent to elsewhere for processing.
gram, for instance diapers, textiles and construction wood; On the other hand, undesired items caused serious clogging
plastic bags, food wrappers; and a variety of inorganic problems in the conveying line, hoppers, and reactor bot-
materials. After the contaminants are mechanically sorted toms. Reasonably, these problems will show up in any food
out, the remaining material is generally composted or sent waste fractionation practices. Thus, innovative approaches
to waste-to-energy facilities. for separating food waste from MSW and rejecting undesired
Processing sorted food waste for energy production was components are urgently needed. Alternatively, diverting
reported at a 5 ton/day pilot scale in South Korea [25]. food waste from MSW or sorting food waste at the source
Steps involved in the food waste to biogas were shredding is an even better solution. This solution, however, requires
the plastic wastes containing the food waste; screening cooperation of all food waste generators. To this end, edu-
through a 50-mm drum screen for rejecting coarse and cating the general public and raising the awareness of issues
light fractions, such as pieces of plastic bags, cloth and brought forth by food waste need to be initiated.
wood; and removing metals by a magnetic separator. The
separated food waste was then fed to two-stage anaerobic
digestion. The residence time in the first and second reac- Conversion Pathways
tor was 5 days and 15 days, respectively. At an organic
loading rate of 7.9 kg volatile solids/m 3/day, the volatile As mentioned above, the majority of food waste is either
solid reduction efficiency was 70%. A total of 3.6 tons disposed at landfills, incinerated, or composted. While land-
pre-sorted MSW containing 2.9 tons of food waste led to filling and incineration do not enjoy good public acceptance,

13

784 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

composting does. This is primarily due to the generation of and alcohols. These structurally simple compounds are then
a material that can be used in agricultural contexts either converted by hydrogen producing acetogens to form acetate,
to facilitate plant growth or improve soil quality. However, ­H2, and C
­ O2, a process termed acetogenesis. Methanogen-
detailed life cycle analysis (LCA) revealed that among the esis, conducted by methanogens, further utilize the H
­ 2, ­CO2,
four processes evaluated: waste to energy as the baseline and acetate to produce ­CH4 [30].
business as usual, composting through enclosed tunnel, com-
posting using enclosed windrow, and anaerobic digestion Problems Associated with AD
(AD) of food waste followed by composting of the residual
waste, the two composting schemes are not good for the Converting food waste to biogas has been reviewed in detail
environment [26]. For the studied town of Brookhaven, a by several researchers [2–4] and is thus, not discussed fur-
suburban New York municipality, among the four processes ther here. But one emerging issue of greenhouse gas (GHG)
investigated, source separation of food waste, treating it by emission from digesters needs to be highlighted. This emis-
AD, and composting the AD residuals was considered the sion has two outlets. First, fugitive emission of GHG. Based
best way to reduce the overall environmental burdens. The on downwind gas measurements at a municipal WWTP,
authors did mention that the benefits of composting may be methane emissions corresponded to 2.07–32.7% of methane
underestimated since some aspects of compost use in the generated in the plant. Under steady conditions, the loss of
models, such as weed suppression, increased soil produc- ­CH4 was found to be 2.1–4.4% of the gas generated. But up
tivity, and water conservation were excluded. Irrespective to 32.7% of CH4 generation could be lost during periods of
of the conclusions made by this study, it is crucial to con- operational difficulties, for example release from pressure
sider the overall environmental effect of any technologies for valves accompanying a foaming event [31].
treating food waste. Since composting has been practiced at Second, methane dissolved in the effluent leaving anaero-
commercial scales, the following section only covers bio- bic digesters has emerged as a key concern for mainstream
chemical and thermochemical conversion pathways. anaerobic processes [32]. For effluent from anaerobic mem-
brane bioreactors (AnMBR), the average dissolved meth-
Biochemical Conversion: Anaerobic Digestion ane concentration was 1.5 times oversaturation relative to
Henry’s law. At 15 °C, the dissolved methane in the perme-
Current Status and General Working Principle ate from AnMBR was 40–50% of total methane generated
from the system. This large loss of methane to the effluent is
AD commercialized in the US since the late 1970s [27], is an due to higher methane solubility at lower temperatures and
attractive waste treatment practice [28]. Currently, the U.S. oversaturation [33]. Methane oversaturation has also been
has more than 2116 active anaerobic digesters that produce observed in non-membrane conventional anaerobic digesters
biogas [29]. The USDA estimated that additional 11,000 [34–36]. If not captured, the dissolved methane will eventu-
biogas systems could be deployed in the US and bring the ally end up in the atmosphere.
total number of sites to 8241 on dairy and swine farms, 3681
at Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs), and 1086 at land- Approaches for Recovering or Removing Methane from AD
fills [27]. As stated in the Biogas Opportunity Roadmap, Effluent
biogas systems offer at least six benefits, such as creating
additional revenues; providing a renewable and sustainable Considering the significant mass of methane in AD effluent,
source of energy; driving economic growth, especially in various approaches have been reported either for recovering
rural areas; cutting methane emissions from uncontrolled methane or for removing this gas from the effluent. At the
sources; protecting the environment by preventing release recovering side, a hollow-fiber degassing membrane module
of greenhouse gases; and enhancing resilient communities was used for degasifying methane in the liquid outlet of an
nationwide. upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactor [37]. Under
Through numerous scientific studies and practical 35 °C and a hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 10 h, the aver-
applications at various scales, the AD process, despite its age dissolved methane concentration was 15 mg chemical
complexity of dealing with mixed feedstocks and mixed oxygen demand (COD)/L from an initial 63 mg COD/L.
microbial communities, has been understood well. In gen- Correspondingly, total methane recovery efficiency was
eral, there are four stages involved in AD: hydrolysis, aci- increased from 89 to 97%. At 15 °C, the average dissolved
dogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis. The first two methane concentration was 14 mg COD/L from a begin-
stages are performed by hydrolytic and acidogenic bacteria ning 104 mg COD/L. The methane recovery efficiency was
to hydrolyze the complex substrates (carbohydrates, lipids, from 71 to 97%. Due to invasion of air, however, methane
proteins, etc.) to simple monomers (sugars, fatty acids, content in the collected gas was around 20%. Later on, the
amino acids, etc.) and further to C ­ O2, ­H2, organic acids, same group of researchers reported a collection efficiency

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 785

of 41–60% using similar membrane degasification [38]. Euryarchaeota, ANME has three distinct clusters, ANME-
Methane in the recovered gas was around 52%, similar to 1, ANME-2, and ANME-3. These clusters are distantly
50% in the AD headspace. The dissolved methane concen- or closely related to the orders of Methanosarcinales and
tration was 51 mg COD/L, which is equivalent to 13 mg Methanomicrobiales.
­CH4/L. Although technically this membrane degasification Three mechanisms have been proposed for ANME to
seems promising, energy required for this membrane process oxidize methane anaerobically with assistance from nearby
needs to be calculated carefully to ensure a positive energy bacteria. The first one is acetogenesis. Under this mecha-
balance. nism, there are two hypotheses. The first one hypothesizes
Besides energy intensive membrane degasification, aer- that methane oxidizing archaea uses two molecules of
ation either by biogas or air could be an option. Biogas- methane to produce H ­ 2 and acetic acid which are subse-
assisted mixing was reported to lead to a methane recovery quently consumed by sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB) [61].
efficiency of 53.6% at 20 °C and 57.4% at 33 °C [39]. Com- The second hypothesis is reverse aceticlastic methanogen-
pared to biogas, air could be used to strip methane out of esis. In this case, methane oxidizing archaea produces ace-
and add oxygen into the effluent [40]. With air provided, the tate from ­CO2 and methane and SRB consume the formed
off gas from a closed vessel can be captured. It needs to be product [62, 63]. The second mechanism, methylogenesis,
noted that this aeration is not selective. While methane is hypothesizes that methane is activated as it binds to coen-
stripped, ­CO2 and other gases in the effluent will partition to zyme M (CoM) and releases electrons for ATP synthesis
the gas phase, too and dilute methane in the recovered gas. in ANME. The produced methyl sulfide from methane oxi-
This off gas could be burned together with biogas to generate dizing and C ­ O2 reducing archaea are transferred to SRB.
heat and electricity. This simple approach could lead to low The third mechanism, reverse methanogenesis, has been
methane concentration in the effluent, the associated cost, investigated intensively and accepted broadly. This theory
however, needs to be computed to demonstrate its benefit. assumes that the initial step of methane oxidation is pri-
In addition to physical separation and recovery, meth- marily a reversal of the terminal reaction in methanogen-
ane in the effluent could be utilized by biological processes. esis which yields methane and the heterodisulfide (CoM-
Microorganisms play key roles in the global methane cycle. S-S-CoB) from the reduction of methyl-coenzyme M
It is estimated that approximately 300 teragrams (Tg) of (CoM-S-CH3) with coenzyme B (H-S-CoB) [64]. Methyl
methane are produced annually through methanogenesis. coenzyme M reductase (Mcr) is the enzyme responsible
Before this huge amount of methane diffuses into oxic envi- for this step. Under this mechanism, based on the elec-
ronments, 90% of that is consumed by methane oxidizers tron acceptors, ANME is divided into three categories:
[41]. As a highly reduced molecule, methane can be oxi- sulfate dependent, nitrate dependent, or iron/manganese
dized either aerobically or anaerobically [42]. While the dependent.
aerobic pathway involving methane monooxygenase enzyme AOM by ANME has been believed to be mediated by
has been well understood [43], anaerobic oxidation of meth- a consortium of ANME archaea and sulfate or nitrate or
ane (AOM) remains as one of the most controversial, sci- iron/manganese-reducing bacteria [47, 65, 66]. Recently,
entifically intriguing, and technically challenging subjects however, a new hypothesis was proposed that some
of microbial ecology [44]. AOM was initially identified in ANME groups might mediate AOM alone. This hypoth-
marine sediments and water columns more than 30 years esis is supported by: (1) without any bacterial partner,
ago and was estimated to consume > 50–90% of methane ANME archaea have been found alone as single cells or as
released from methanogenesis in the ocean [45, 46]. monospecific aggregations [67–70]; (2) ANME-1 archaea
There are two groups of microbes that can perform especially seem to be less dependent on the activity of a
AOM. The first group is nitrite-dependent anaerobic meth- closely associated bacterial partner [69, 71]; (3) ANME-2
ane oxidizing bacteria (AMOB). These bacteria, closely can perform AOM and reduce sulfate to disulfide which is
related to Candidatus Methylomirabilis oxyfera, a member then taken up by SRB and disproportionated to sulfide and
of the uncultured NC phylum [47], have been found in sulphate in a 7:1 ratio [72]; and (4) ANME-2d is capable
many environments including freshwater lakes [48, 49], of independent AOM using nitrate as the terminal electron
rivers [50], wetlands [51–56], and marine ecosystems acceptor [41].
[57, 58]. Ca. Methylomirabilis oxyfera is able to oxidize The benefit of AOM lies in the fact that methane can be
methane using nitric oxide as the source of molecular removed from digester effluent while either nitrite, nitrate,
oxygen via the complete aerobic pathway starting with or sulfate can be depleted, too in the coupled process
particulate methane monooxygenase (pMMO) [59, 60]. simultaneously, thus producing treated water ready for
The second group is generally referred to as anaerobic discharge. To get a better idea on how this could be used
methanotrophic archaea (ANME). Under the phylum of in reality for treating digester effluent, readers are referred
to these reviews and research papers [41, 47, 73–83].

13

786 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

Thermochemical Conversion monomers which can be reacted further to form a variety

of compounds similar to those listed above for glucose.
Working Principles and Current Status Lignin is a complex compound with a high molecular
weight and an even more random structure than hemicel-
Thermochemical processes typically include gasification, lulose. During HTL, lignin is degraded to its three most
combustion, pyrolysis, and hydrothermal liquefaction prevalent monomers: p-coumaryl alcohol, coniferyl alco-
(HTL). While the first two approaches transform feedstock hol, and sinapyl alcohol as well as other chemicals result-
materials to various gases, the latter two strategies are ing from further degradation of these monomers [94].
used mainly to produce liquid transportation fuels. During For the purpose of producing biocrude, HTL has been
pyrolysis and liquefaction, oil molecules that are commonly investigated to liquefy several biomass materials, such
referred to as bio-oil or bio-crude are generated in addition as: swine manure [95], wood flour [96], sugar beet pulp
to gaseous products and solid char. Compared to solid fuels [97], garbage [98], microalgae [99], and microalgal resi-
and syngas, biocrude presents several advantages: (1) higher due after lipid extraction [100]. Compared with a higher
energy density; (2) easier to transport and store than gaseous heating value (HHV) of 10 to 20 MJ/kg and an oxygen
products; (3) potential to be used as fuel oil substitute; and content of 30 to 50% of the processed feedstocks, the oil
(4) usable in engine, turbine, and burner applications [84]. produced generally has a HHV of 30 to 36 MJ/kg and an
Fast or slow pyrolysis works well with biomass hav- oxygen content of 10 to 20% [101]. The reported oil yield,
ing moisture content of less than 40%. Higher water con- however, varies broadly from 12 to 75% depending on the
tent requires higher heat of vaporization for this process. feedstock tested.
In contrast, HTL can handle biomass with high moisture For HTL, yield of biocrude can be affected by several
contents in the range of 75–95% [85]. HTL, also referred to factors. As a thermal process, temperature has been rec-
as thermochemical liquefaction or subcritical water lique- ognized as the most important one. At temperatures lower
faction, benefits from the characteristics of hot compressed than 280 °C, incomplete decomposition of individual feed-
water, which is highly reactive near its critical point (374 °C, stock components suppresses the biocrude yield. At too
22.0 MPa) [86]. During liquefaction, a series of reactions high a temperature, above 350 °C, however, oil yield is
occurs in three steps: hydrolysis, depolymerization, and also lowered. This is due to: first, increased gas formation
repolymerization/self-condensation [87]. as secondary decomposition and Bourdard gas reactions
Generally, lipids are transformed to fatty acids, proteins become active at high temperatures [102]; second, recom-
are turned to nitrogen heterocycles, pyrroles, and indoles bination of free radicals leads to formation of char. Thus,
while carbohydrates are converted to cyclic ketones and temperature for HTL of wet biomass materials has been
phenols [88]. For lignocellulosic materials, given the com- recommended to be 300–350 °C [85].
plicated structures of the components, the reactions are even Besides temperature, catalysts have been proven to play
more complex. Cellulose, as a linear polymer of glucose significant roles in increasing oil yield and improving oil
connected by β-1,4–glycosidic bonds, possesses strong quality. Various catalysts, such as organic acid (formic
intra- and inter-molecular hydrogen bonds [89, 90]. As a acid, acetic acid), alkaline (potassium hydroxide), sodium
result, crystalline cellulose is resistant to swelling in water carbonate, and metals have been tested for different bio-
under normal conditions. But in subcritical or supercriti- mass feedstocks. The exact effect from different catalysts
cal water, the two types of bonds are broken. Glucose and varies significantly for the same tested material [91, 103].
oligomers are released as a consequence. The freed sugars In addition to temperature and catalysts, feedstock par-
are then going through a series of degradation and lead to ticle size may also influence oil yield considering the fact
the formation of many compounds [91], such as: acetalde- that small particles having larger surface areas may have
hyde, acetic acid, acetone, acrylic acid, 1,2,4-benzenetriol, better accessibility to water for achieving higher degree of
dihydroxyacetone, erythrose, formic acid, fructose, furfural, reaction. However, as sub/supercritical water overcomes
glycealdehyde, glycoaldehyde, glycolic acid, 5-hydroxym- the heat transfer limitation in HTL, particle size is sug-
ethylfurfural, lactic acid, levoglucosan, and pyruvaldehyde. gested to be a minor factor [104]. A particle size between
Different from cellulose, hemicellulose is composed of 4 and 10 mm is suitable for HTL. This size requirement
several sugar monomers, such as xylose, mannose, glu- eliminates the need for costly grinding. Additionally, from
cose, galactose, and others [92]. Hemicellulose does not all reported studies, biomass heating rate, residence time,
have a crystalline structure and is much more susceptible pressure, and the presence of a reducing gas (hydrogen
to degradation and hydrolysis compared to cellulose due and/or carbon monoxide) are all secondary parameters.
to the presence of side chains and the lack of repeating Their effects are either minor or negligible for oil yield
β-1,4–glycosidic bonds [93]. Under hydrothermal con- [85].
dition, this polymer is hydrolyzed to its corresponding

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 787

HTL of Food Waste recoveries than did the latter at 350 °C for 60 min for all
three feedstocks, especially the polysaccharides [109]. When
Through HTL, as other wet wastes, food waste could be ternary mixtures were fed to the HTL reactors, the biocrude
converted to biocrude. The resulting biocrude could be yield ranged from 25 to 55%. The energy recovery was
upgraded to renewable diesel and aviation kerosene. If all between 47 and 75% depending on the exact composition
to kerosene, then 3.8% of kerosene-type jet fuel produced of the mixtures. This study also revealed that reactions did
in 2016 could be from the food waste generated in the con- occur between molecules derived from different feedstocks
terminous US [105]. Although the potential impact is not in the mixture.
negligible, at the time of writing, only a few studies have Posmanik et al. investigated the feasibility of coupling
evaluated HTL of food waste from different perspectives. HTL of binary and ternary model compounds with anaerobic
The publications are categorized into three groups. First, digestion. The AD is used to convert carbon in the aqueous
characterization of the resulting products from HTL of food phase to methane. While higher HTL temperatures favored
waste. Analysis of biocrude produced from meat, cheese, oil production, the anaerobic degradability of the aqueous
or fruits was revealed the presence of thousands of heter- phase correlated negatively to HTL temperature. This is
oatom compounds in each biocrude sample [106]. The aque- probably due to the presence of recalcitrant or inhibitory
ous byproducts derived from HTL of food industry waste, products formed during HTL at high temperatures [110].
municipal waste, and yeast and algae cultivated on wastewa- The same group of researchers also evaluated HTL of car-
ter were evaluated in detail. Both organic and inorganic spe- bohydrate rich food waste from university dining hall with
cies in these aqueous streams were profiled and quantified or without an acid or base. It was concluded that oil yield is
using state-of-the-art technologies [107]. The solid products, associated with different chemical pathways and dehydra-
the hydro-char derived from HTL of dairy waste, waste from tion reactions were enhanced by acidification through acid
WWTP, dining halls, fruit and alcohol manufacturing and addition [111].
olive oil production were characterized [108]. Compared to homogeneous catalysts, heterogeneous ones,
Second, food waste, both pure and mixed were inves- such as C ­ eZrO3 was demonstrated to have better perfor-
tigated under different HTL conditions (Table 1). Model mance in terms of energy balance and economics, especially
food waste molecules, such as potato starch, casein, and when the catalyst’s lifetime is considered [112]. Compared
sunflower oil were investigated by fast and isothermal HTL. to non-catalytic and N ­ a2CO3-catalyzed HTL of synthetic
The former at 600 °C for 1 min led to higher biocrude energy institutional food waste, ­CeZrO3 gave higher biocrude yield,

Table 1  Comparison of food waste conversion by HTL

Feedstock Tem- Residence Catalyst (%) Carbon yield Biocrude yield Biocrude Energy TOC of aque- Reference
perature time (min) in biocrude (%) HHV (MJ/ recovery ous phase
(°C) (%) kg) (%) (ppm)

Synthetic insti- 300 60 CeZrO3 53 1.59 × of non- 31.2 38.8 13800 [109]
tutional food catalytic
waste Na2CO3 39 1.12 × of non- 24.2 21.3 24200
catalytic
No 38.8 35.6 27.6 12500
Carbohydrate 300 60 5 M ­H3PO4 43 NA 32.5 NA NA [107]
rich from din- 1 M NaOH 33 NA 35.4 NA NA
ing hall
NO 18 NA 34.8 NA NA
Potato starch 600 1 NO NA 18.6 37 46 NA [106]
350 30 13 36.3 38
Casin 600 1 23 36.8 43
350 30 20 33.2 38
Sunflower oil 600 1 91 43.5 95
350 30 89 42.3 86
Ternary mixtures 600 1 25–55 NA 47–75
Institutional food 360 40 NO NA 46.9 38.15 72.2 NA [111]
waste
Blackcurrant 300 60 NO NA 27 NA NA NA [110]
pomace

13

788 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

energy recovery as well as an aqueous phase that contained to a byproduct having high concentration of COD, high
approximately half of the organic carbon detected in those nitrogen, and phosphorous concentrations. Third, perform-
derived from ­Na2CO3 catalyzed reactions. In addition, ing HTL under continuous operation mode suffers multiple
­CeZrO3 nanopowder was shown to be stable and had mini- problems, such as feed material pumpability; equipment
mal leaching to the aqueous phase. The reusability was stud- capital cost, especially at modular or small scales; operation
ied using a model compound of pentanal. Even though the and maintenance cost, in particular for communities where
catalyst can be reused between runs without calcination and trained professionals are hard to find to operate small food
regeneration, it is unclear how C
­ eZrO3 would be used when waste HTL reactors requiring high pressure.
actual food waste is processed. In this case, the solid catalyst
would end up in the char. Whether this catalyst embedded in
char can still be reused would be highly questionable. PFAS in Food Waste
Third, two studies have attempted to model HTL of food
waste. Deniel et al. used monomeric and polymeric model PFAS in Diet
molecules to model the behavior of wet organic residues dur-
ing HTL [113]. With real wet waste, − 8.0 to + 4.8 wt.% of Concentration of PFAS in food waste, although not reported
experimental yields were observed. The authors pointed out so far, should be highly dependent on the source of food and
that a model protein instead of a model amino acid or native water used for preparation and/or cooking. A detailed review
extracts of the biomass should be used to obtain better rep- of literature between May 2011 and October 2016 revealed
resentativeness and accuracy of the model. In another study, that the main route of human exposure to these compounds
Aierzhati et al. developed a predictive model to accurately is dietary intake [126]. This conclusion is based on stud-
determine biocrude oil yield from different food wastes. This ies conducted mainly in European countries: Germany, the
regression model was developed using R software using data Netherlands, France, Spain, Sweden, Italy, Greece, Finland,
generated from hydrothermally treating three groups: high and Greenland. Among all of these, four studies performed
liquid, high protein, and high carbohydrate at temperatures in four European countries (Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy,
ranging from 280 to 360 °C for 10–60 min. The response and Norway) are noteworthy. These four investigated 14
of biocrude yield can be calculated from content of protein, PFAS in 20 vegetable species [127], 21 PFAS in 50 selected
lipid, and carbohydrate, HTL temperature, and residence pooled samples representing 15 food commodities [128], 12
time. This model was also able to predict previously pub- PFAS in fruits, cereals, sweets, and salt [129], and 7 PFAS
lished data with a ­R2 of 94.3% [114]. from the PERFOOD EU project [130]. In south Korea, 16
PFAS in 397 food items were evaluated [131]. For another
Bottlenecks for HTL of Food Waste four countries: Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Spain, and Serbia, 21
PFAS were quantified in 283 foodstuff representing the diet
HTL has been investigated extensively for biomass materi- in South America, western Asia, Mediterranean area, and
als, such as wood, short-rotation woody crops, agricultural southeastern Europe [132]. According to the recommenda-
wastes, short-rotation herbaceous crops, animal wastes tions by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued
[85, 115–117], microalgae [118–120], and sewage sludge in 2012 on the maximum dietary intakes of PFOS and PFOA
[121–125]. Compared to these feedstocks, research on HTL [133], it was concluded that for nonoccupationally exposed
of food waste is much less. Based on the few studies sum- populations, human health risks would not be of concern.
marized in Table 1, it is reasonable to perceive that HTL This could be true for the very limited countries for which
of food waste will face the same challenges as those for recent data are available. However, considering the relatively
other biomass materials. Some critical bottlenecks need high concentrations of PFAS detected in fish and other sea-
to be addressed before HTL could be used at commercial food, it was cautioned that certain risks could be high for
levels for food waste conversion. First, the carbon yield in individuals consuming great amounts of fish and shellfish
biocrude needs to be improved. This issue is due to relatively [126].
low biocrude yield and less than optimal separation between This conclusion is in line with results disclosed by ear-
solid and liquid and liquid and liquid. To solve this problem, lier studies. For example, an analysis of 252 food samples
the HTL process must be optimized followed by efficient (UK-produced and imported) showed that all 11 of the
separation steps. By doing so, organic-soluble compounds targeted PFAS were detected in 75 individual food items.
can be maximally partitioned to the water insoluble phase The highest levels found were 63 µg total PFAS/kg with
resulting in higher biocrude yield and less organics lost in 59 µg/kg for perfluorooctanesulphonic acid (PFOS) in an
the aqueous phase. Second, disposal of the aqueous stream. eel sample, and 40 µg/kg PFOS out of 62 µg total PFAS/
Under general HTL condition, the aqueous stream derived kg in a whitebait sample [134]. Similarly, PFAS have been
from HTL contains 20–50% of feed carbon [107]. This leads detected in Canadian diet, such as meat, fish, fast food,

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 789

and popcorn [135]. Studies by the same Canadian research PFAS in Food Packaging or Contacting Materials
group later revealed that conventional way for cooking
fish, either baking, broiling, or frying was no effective to The unique properties of PFAS being water- and grease-
reduce PFAS content in these food [136]. repelling have led to their extensive use in food packaging
In addition to studies related to food, uptake of PFAS and contacting materials (FPCM). FPCM include boxes
by vegetables has been investigated mainly from the per- for fries and pizzas; wrappers for sandwich, burgers, des-
spective of food chain or possible human consumption. sert and bread; microwave popcorn bags; paper cups, etc.
For this purpose, edible plants, such as carrots, potatoes [142]. In most finished FPCM, PFAS concentrations were
(direct contact with soil), and cucumbers (no direct con- typically found in the range of 1.0 − 1.5% per fiber dry
tact with soil) were grown on soil amended with sewage weight [143]. As a result of phase-out of PFOS and its
sludge spiked with PFOA and PFOS [137]. It was found precursors by 3 M [144], PFAS used in FPCM nowadays
that PFOA had higher transfer factors than PFOS for these are mainly acrylate polymers with fluorotelomer or sulfon-
three plants. In particular, the vegetative compartments amido alcohol side chains or perfluoropolyether perfluo-
of cucumber (stalks and leaves) had the highest transfer ropolyether- based polymers (PFPEs), a shift from PFOS
factor of 0.88 for PFOA, 0.17 For PFOS. Lettuce and precursors, such as N-ethyl perfluorooctane sulfonamido
tomato were studied in a similar fashion by growing in alcohol-based phosphate diesters (SamPAPs) [145, 146].
industrially impacted biosolids-amended soil [138]. The PFAS migrating from FPCM to food has been reported.
soil was not spiked. But the amendment rates were gen- For example, results from the popcorn bag experiments
erally above typical agronomic application rate. Results demonstrated that fluorotelomer in the 3–4 mg/kg range
from this study showed that preferential uptake of per- was found in food as a result of migration of these chemi-
fluorinated carboxylic acids (PFCAs) over perfluorinated cals [147]. The same researchers also reported that the
sulfonic acids (PFSAs) and accumulation of shorter chain fluorotelomer migration from paper could be significantly
PFAAs over longer chain PFAAs. Perfluorobutanoic acid enhanced by high temperatures and emulsifier-containing
(PFBA) had the highest bioaccumulation factor (BAF) oil [148]. In view of the potential migration of PFAS from
of 56.8 in lettuce and perfluoroheptanoic acid (PFPeA) FPCM to food, several states in the United States have
had the highest of 17.1 in tomato. In another study [139], implemented bans on the use of these chemicals in food
the same research group grew radish, celery, tomato, and packaging and the Danish Ministry of the Environment
sugar snap pea in three kinds of soil: industrially impacted and Food has established a total fluorine indicator value
biosolids-amended soil, municipal biosolids-amended soil, of 0.1 μg/cm2 in food packaging [143].
and control soil. In edible portion of the crops grown in PFAS in FPCM are counted as the major source of these
the first type of soil, PFOA had the highest concentration compounds detected in finished compost samples. In one
of 67 ng/g in radish root; PFBA, 232 ng/g in celery shoot; study, for composts that included food packaging, the
and PFBA, 150 ng/g in pea fruit. loads of 17 perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) ranged from 28.7
The Minnesota Department of Health conducted a simi- to 75.9 μg/kg of OFMSW. For those without food packag-
lar study by measuring PFAS in garden produce exposed to ing, the content of these PFAAs was 2.38 to 7.60 μg/kg.
PFAS contaminated drinking water [140]. PFBA is the pri- Thus, apparently, food packaging was the main source of
mary PFAS present in water followed by PFPeA. Although PFAS identified in these samples [149].
PFBA, PFOA, and PFOS appeared in 100% soil samples at The PFAS concentrations detected in these compost
higher concentrations than other PFASs, only PFBA was samples, however, are lower than the screening standards
found in plants. set by Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection
Apart from food, PFAS in drinking water has been a (DEP) on March 22, 2019. Maine DEP’s memorandum
critical issue. As reported by a 2017 paper, across the requires that sludge/biosolids program licensees and
US, hundreds of sites have been contaminated by PFASs sludge/biosolids composting facilities to test their mate-
and more than 6 million Americans are consuming water rials for PFAS. The screening standards are: 2.5 μg of
containing PFOS and PFOA exceeding the US EPA’s PFOA/kg, 5.2 μg of PFOS/kg, or 1,900 μg of PFBS/kg
provisional guidelines for these two chemicals, a maxi- [150]. Thus, it appears that the PFAS-containing compost
mum combined 70 ng/L [141]. Very recently, according can be safely land applied under the current regulatory
to test results published by Environmental Working Group atmosphere. Whether this remains true in the future, how-
(EWG), out of tap water samples from 44 places in 31 ever, is uncertain given the rapidly growing knowledge
states and the District of Columbia, only one location had of PFAS and stricter regulations toward these chemicals.
no detectable PFAS, and only two other locations had
PFAS below 1 ppt (https://​w ww.​ewg.​o rg/​resea​rch/​n atio​
nal-​pfas-​testi​ng/).

13

790 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

Challenges Related to PFAS in Food Waste supercriticial water. Compared to PFOS, PFHxS had slight
reactivity in pure water at 350 °C. At 380 °C, the decomposi-
Due to the highly recalcitrant nature of PFAS, only few tech- tion to fluoride and sulfate became more significant. Simi-
nologies are able to remove or degrade these compounds. lar to PFOS, the addition of iron dramatically accelerated
The top approach that has been investigated extensively PFHxS decomposition at both temperatures [196].
and reported numerous times is sorption. A broad range A recent study also confirmed PFOS degradation under
of sorbents, such as activated carbon (AC), ion exchange HTL conditions. Screening a wide ranges of amendments
resin, minerals, carbon nanotubes, biochar, and molecu- including acids, bases, strong oxidants, and metals revealed
larly imprinted polymers have been tested for use in PFAS that NaOH, ­NaBH4 and K ­ 2FeO4, each at 1 mol/L, gave the
removal from surface water, drinking water, leachate, and highest rate of defluorination of PFOS (50 mg/L) in water
wastewater [151–156]. Besides sorption, other reported at 350 °C for 90 min. The most reactive amendments, irre-
techniques include: (1) coagulation and flocculation. Vari- spective of their type, all shifted the solution pH to be ≥ 9,
ous coagulants, such as aluminum salts [157], ferric salts thus suggesting base-promoted mechanism [197]. PFOA was
[157], specialty coagulants [158], and electrocoagulation demonstrated to be more unstable than PFOS in hydrother-
[159, 160] have been investigated; (2) membrane filtra- mal water. The degradation rate was > 99% at 250 °C for
tion. Within this category, reverse osmosis [161, 162], 30 min without any amendments.
nanofiltration [163–165], microfiltration [166], and elec- Although HTL shows great promise in destructing pure
trodialysis [162] have been studied at lab scales for ex situ PFAS in water either with or without an amendment, it is
PFAS treatment; (3) chemical reactions. Within this group, unclear whether: (1) this approach can destroy other PFAS or
ozone-based systems [167, 168], sonochemical [169–172] PFAS mixtures rather than PFOA and PFOS; (2) this method
and electrochemical [173–177] have been tested at pilot can degrade PFAS mixtures at ng/L or ng/kg concentrations
scales. Other approaches, for instance alkaline metal reduc- in food waste; and (3) how the optimal conditions for PFAS
tion, doped zero valence iron, plasma, photolysis [178, 179], degradation intersect with other goals of HTL of food waste,
activated persulfate, hydrogen peroxide based systems, and such as biocrude yield.
solvated electrons have all been studied at laboratory levels
[151]; and (4) biodegradation. Both anaerobic and aerobic
microbial systems have been tested for degrading PFAS.
While PFAS precursors are reported to be transformed Conclusion
by microbial activities [180–187], PFOA is demonstrated
to be microbiologically inert [188] by one research group In light of detection of emerging contaminants, such as
and degradable by other researchers [189, 190]. Similarly, PFAS in food waste, more states implementing organic
whether PFOS can be biodegraded or not is also highly waste bans, stricter environmental regulations, and pub-
debated [191–193]. Very recently, both PFOA and PFOS lic pressure demanding better approach for handling food
at 0.1 mg/L and 100 mg/L, are reported to be degradable waste, it is more urgent than ever before that researchers,
by pure and enrichment cultures of Acidimicrobium sp. regulators, and practitioners should work together to address
strain A6 (A6), an autotroph that oxidizes ammonium to these challenges. On the one hand, conventional approaches
nitrite while reducing ferric iron. This process, however, used at commercial levels, such as incineration, composting,
is very slow. Removal of up to 60% of PFOA and PFOS and AD need to be re-evaluated to assess their suitability
was observed during 100 day incubations [194]. Thus, for in dealing with food waste. On the other hand, innovative
composting and AD of food waste, assuming biodegradation and out-of-the-box methodologies need to be proposed and
could take place, the percentage of degradation within the tested to transform food waste into commodities that are
respective residence time would not be much. valuable. Only when food waste is utilized in positive ways,
Different from biodegradation, hydrothermal reactions treated as a resource rather than garbage, can this waste and
did show promise for destruction of PFAS. While PFOS had the problems associated with its disposal be truly resolved.
little reactivity in pure subcritical water, amendment of iron
powder (< 53 µm) at 53.6 g/L decreased PFOS concentration Acknowledgements  This material is based upon work supported by the
U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renew-
from 372 µM (186 mg/L) to < 2.2 µM after 6 h at 350 °C. No able Energy (EERE) under the Bioenergy Technology Office Award
PFCAs were detected. The authors concluded that the added Number DE-EE0008932.
iron provided surface for PFOS sorption. The sorbed PFOS
was then decomposed with the increase of temperature with Declarations 
the release of fluoride ion [195]. The same researchers also
reported degradation of perfluorohexanesulfonate (PFHxS), Conflict of interest  The author declares no conflict of interest to dis-
a bioaccumulative analogue to PFOS in subcritical and close.

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 791

References 17. Office BT. Biofuels and bioproducts from wet and gaseous waste
streams: challenges and opportunities. DOE, EERE. Jan 2017
18. Thyberg, K.L., Tonjes, D.J., Gurevitch, J.: Quantification of food
1. Kibler, K.M., Reinhart, D., Hawkins, C., Motlagh, A.M., Wright,
waste disposal in the United States: a meta-analysis. Environ. Sci.
J.: Food waste and the food-energy-water nexus: a review of
Technol. 49(24), 13946–13953 (2015). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1021/​
food waste management alternatives. Waste Manage. 74, 52–62
acs.​est.​5b038​80
(2018). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​wasman.​2018.​01.​014
19. EPA. Advancing sustainable materials management: 2017 fact
2. Karthikeyan, O.P., Trably, E., Mehariya, S., Bernet, N., Wong,
sheet. Nov 2019
J.W., Carrere, H.: Pretreatment of food waste for methane and
20. EPA. United States 2030 food loss and waste reduction goal. US
hydrogen recovery: a review. Biores. Technol. 249, 1025–1039
Environ Prot Agency (2017) www.​epa.​gov/​susta​inable-​manag​
(2018)
ement-​food/​united-​states-​2030-​food-​loss-​and-​waste-​reduc​tion-​
3. Ren, Y., Yu, M., Wu, C., Wang, Q., Gao, M., Huang, Q., et al.:
goal#​goal
A comprehensive review on food waste anaerobic digestion:
21. EPA. Food recovery hierarchy. US Environ Prot Agency (2017)
research updates and tendencies. Biores. Technol. 247, 1069–
www.e​ pa.g​ ov/s​ ustai​ nable-m ​ anage​ ment-f​ ood/f​ ood-r​ ecove​ ry-h​ iera​
1076 (2018). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2017.​09.​109
rchy
4. Uçkun Kiran, E., Trzcinski, A.P., Ng, W.J., Liu, Y.: Bioconver-
22. EPA. Wasted food programs and resources across the United
sion of food waste to energy: a review. Fuel 134, 389–399 (2014).
States. US Environ Prot Agency (2017) www.​epa.​gov/​susta​
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​fuel.​2014.​05.​074
inable- ​ m anag​e ment- ​ food/​ wasted- ​ food- ​ p rogr​a ms- ​ a nd-​ r esou​
5. Xiong, X., Yu, I.K.M., Tsang, D.C.W., Bolan, N.S., Sik Ok, Y.,
rces-​across-​united-​states#1
Igalavithana, A.D., et al.: Value-added chemicals from food sup-
23. Badgett, A., Milbrandt, A.: A summary of standards and prac-
ply chain wastes: state-of-the-art review and future prospects.
tices for wet waste streams used in waste-to-energy technologies
Chem. Eng. J. 375, 121983 (2019). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cej.​
in the United States. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 117, 109425
2019.​121983
(2020)
6. Strazzera, G., Battista, F., Garcia, N.H., Frison, N., Bolzonella,
24. NYC. Waste characterization https://​dsny.​cityo​fnewy​ork.​us/​wp-​
D.: Volatile fatty acids production from food wastes for biore-
conten​ t/u​ pload​ s/2​ 018/0​ 4/2​ 017-W
​ aste-C​ harac​ teriz​ ation-S​ tudy.p​ df
finery platforms: a review. J. Environ. Manage. 226, 278–288
(2017)
(2018). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jenvm​an.​2018.​08.​039
25. Lee, J.P., Lee, J.S., Park, S.C.: Two-phase methanization of food
7. Zhou, M., Yan, B., Wong, J.W., Zhang, Y.: Enhanced volatile
wastes in pilot scale. In: Davison, B.H., Finkelstein, M. (eds.)
fatty acids production from anaerobic fermentation of food
Twentieth symposium on biotechnology for fuels and chemicals,
waste: a mini-review focusing on acidogenic metabolic pathways.
pp. 585–93. Humana Press, Totowa (1999)
Biores. Technol. 248, 68–78 (2018)
26. Thyberg, K.L., Tonjes, D.J.: The environmental impacts of alter-
8. Dahiya, S., Kumar, A.N., Shanthi Sravan, J., Chatterjee, S.,
native food waste treatment technologies in the US. J. Clean.
Sarkar, O., Mohan, S.V.: Food waste biorefinery: sustainable
Prod. 158, 101–8 (2017). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2017.​
strategy for circular bioeconomy. Biores. Technol. 248, 2–12
04.​169
(2018). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2017.​07.​176
27. USDA. Biogas opportunities roadmap: voluntary actions to
9. Ma, Y., Liu, Y.: Turning food waste to energy and resources
reduce methane emissions and increase energy independent
towards a great environmental and economic sustainability: an
(2014)
innovative integrated biological approach. Biotechnol. Adv.
28. Chen, Y., Cheng, J.J., Creamer, K.S.: Inhibition of anaerobic
37(7), 107414 (2019). https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.b​ iotec​ hadv.2​ 019.​
digestion process: a review. Biores. Technol. 99(10), 4044–4064
06.​013
(2008). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2007.​01.​057
10. Nielsen, C., Rahman, A., Rehman, A.U., Walsh, M.K., Miller,
29. Council, Ab.: Current and potential biogas production.https://​
C.D.: Food waste conversion to microbial polyhydroxyal-
www.​ameri​canbi​ogasc​ounci​lorg/​pdf/​bioga​s101p​df (2015)
kanoates. Microb. Biotechnol. 10(6), 1338–1352 (2017)
30. Pilli, S., Bhunia, P., Yan, S., LeBlanc, R., Tyagi, R., Surampalli,
11. Ong, K.L., Kaur, G., Pensupa, N., Uisan, K., Lin, C.S.K.: Trends
R.: Ultrasonic pretreatment of sludge: a review. Ultrason. Sono-
in food waste valorization for the production of chemicals, mate-
chem. 18(1), 1–18 (2011)
rials and fuels: case study South and Southeast Asia. Biores.
31. Yoshida, H., Mønster, J., Scheutz, C.: Plant-integrated measure-
Technol. 248, 100–112 (2018). https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.b​ iorte​ ch.​
ment of greenhouse gas emissions from a municipal wastewater
2017.​06.​076
treatment plant. Water Res. 61, 108–118 (2014). https://​doi.​org/​
12. Jayathilakan, K., Sultana, K., Radhakrishna, K., Bawa, A.: Utili-
10.​1016/j.​watres.​2014.​05.​014
zation of byproducts and waste materials from meat, poultry and
32. Smith, A.L., Stadler, L.B., Cao, L., Love, N.G., Raskin, L., Sker-
fish processing industries: a review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 49(3),
los, S.J.: Navigating wastewater energy recovery strategies: a life
278–293 (2012)
cycle comparison of anaerobic membrane bioreactor and conven-
13. Wang, W., Xu, Y., Wang, X., Zhang, B., Tian, W., Zhang, J.:
tional treatment systems with anaerobic digestion. Environ. Sci.
Hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae over transition metal
Technol. 48(10), 5972–5981 (2014)
supported TiO2 catalyst. Biores. Technol. 250, 474–480 (2018).
33. Smith, A.L., Skerlos, S.J., Raskin, L.: Psychrophilic anaerobic
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2017.​11.​051
membrane bioreactor treatment of domestic wastewater. Water
14. Upadhyay, A., Lama, J.P., Tawata, S.: Utilization of pineapple
Res. 47(4), 1655–1665 (2013). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​watres.​
waste: a review. J. Food Sci. Technol. Nepal 6, 10–18 (2010)
2012.​12.​028
15. Du, C., Abdullah, J.J., Greetham, D., Fu, D., Yu, M., Ren, L.,
34. Hartley, K., Lant, P.: Eliminating non-renewable CO2 emissions
et al.: Valorization of food waste into biofertiliser and its field
from sewage treatment: an anaerobic migrating bed reactor pilot
application. J. Clean. Prod. 187, 273–284 (2018). https://d​ oi.o​ rg/​
plant study. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 95(3), 384–398 (2006)
10.​1016/j.​jclep​ro.​2018.​03.​211
35. Singh, K.S., Harada, H., Viraraghavan, T.: Low-strength waste-
16. Wainaina, S., Horváth, I.S., Taherzadeh, M.J.: Biochemicals from
water treatment by a UASB reactor. Biores. Technol. 55(3),
food waste and recalcitrant biomass via syngas fermentation: a
187–194 (1996)
review. Biores. Technol. 248, 113–121 (2018). https://​doi.​org/​
36. Pauss, A., Andre, G., Perrier, M., Guiot, S.R.: Liquid-to-gas mass
10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2017.​06.​075
transfer in anaerobic processes: inevitable transfer limitations

13

792 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

of methane and hydrogen in the biomethanation process. Appl. methane-oxidising bacteria in natural freshwater wetland soils.
Environ. Microbiol. 56(6), 1636–1644 (1990) Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 99(1), 349–57 (2015)
37. Bandara, W.M., Satoh, H., Sasakawa, M., Nakahara, Y., Taka- 53. Shen, L.-d, Liu, S., He, Z.-f, Lian, X., Huang, Q., He, Y.-f,
hashi, M., Okabe, S.: Removal of residual dissolved methane et al.: Depth-specific distribution and importance of nitrite-
gas in an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating low- dependent anaerobic ammonium and methane-oxidising bacte-
strength wastewater at low temperature with degassing mem- ria in an urban wetland. Soil Biol. Biochem. 83, 43–51 (2015).
brane. Water Res. 45(11), 3533–3540 (2011) https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​soilb​io.​2015.​01.​010
38. Bandara, W.M., Kindaichi, T., Satoh, H., Sasakawa, M., Naka- 54. Shen, L.-d, Liu, S., Huang, Q., Lian, X., He, Z.-f, Geng, S.,
hara, Y., Takahashi, M., et al.: Anaerobic treatment of municipal et  al.: Evidence for the cooccurrence of nitrite-dependent
wastewater at ambient temperature: analysis of archaeal com- anaerobic ammonium and methane oxidation processes in a
munity structure and recovery of dissolved methane. Water Res. flooded paddy field. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 80(24), 7611–9
46(17), 5756–5764 (2012) (2014)
39. Giménez, J., Martí, N., Ferrer, J., Seco, A.: Methane recov- 55. Wang, Y., Zhu, G., Harhangi, H.R., Zhu, B., Jetten, M.S., Yin,
ery efficiency in a submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactor C., et al.: Co-occurrence and distribution of nitrite-dependent
(SAnMBR) treating sulphate-rich urban wastewater: evaluation anaerobic ammonium and methane-oxidizing bacteria in a paddy
of methane losses with the effluent. Biores. Technol. 118, 67–72 soil. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 336(2), 79–88 (2012)
(2012) 56. Zhu, G., Zhou, L., Wang, Y., Wang, S., Guo, J., Long, X.E., et al.:
40. McCarty, P.L., Bae, J., Kim, J.: Domestic wastewater treatment as Biogeographical distribution of denitrifying anaerobic methane
a net energy producer–can this be achieved? ACS Publications, oxidizing bacteria in Chinese wetland ecosystems. Environ.
Washington (2011) Microbiol. Rep. 7(1), 128–138 (2015)
41. Haroon, M.F., Hu, S., Shi, Y., Imelfort, M., Keller, J., Hugen- 57. Li-dong, S., Qun, Z., Shuai, L., Ping, D., Jiang-ning, Z., Dong-
holtz, P., et  al.: Anaerobic oxidation of methane coupled to qing, C., et al.: Molecular evidence for nitrite-dependent anaero-
nitrate reduction in a novel archaeal lineage. Nature 500(7464), bic methane-oxidising bacteria in the Jiaojiang Estuary of the
567 (2013) East Sea (China). Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 98(11), 5029–
42. Stein, L.Y., Roy, R., Dunfield, P.F.: Aerobic methanotrophy and 5038 (2014)
nitrification processes and connections. eLS. Wiley, Chichester 58. Chen, J., Zhou, Z.-C., Gu, J.-D.: Occurrence and diversity of
(2012) nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxidation bacteria in the
43. Zhu, J., Wang, Q., Yuan, M., Tan, G.-Y.A., Sun, F., Wang, C., sediments of the South China Sea revealed by amplification of
et al.: Microbiology and potential applications of aerobic meth- both 16S rRNA and pmoA genes. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
ane oxidation coupled to denitrification (AME-D) process: a 98(12), 5685–5696 (2014)
review. Water Res. 90, 203–15 (2016). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ 59. Ettwig, K.F., Butler, M.K., Le Paslier, D., Pelletier, E., Man-
watres.​2015.​12.​020 genot, S., Kuypers, M.M., et al.: Nitrite-driven anaerobic meth-
44. Caldwell, S.L., Laidler, J.R., Brewer, E.A., Eberly, J.O., Sand- ane oxidation by oxygenic bacteria. Nature 464(7288), 543–548
borgh, S.C., Colwell, F.S.: Anaerobic oxidation of methane: (2010)
mechanisms, bioenergetics, and the ecology of associated micro- 60. Luesken, F.A., Zhu, B., van Alen, T.A., Butler, M.K., Diaz, M.R.,
organisms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42(18), 6791–6799 (2008). Song, B., et al.: pmoA primers for detection of anaerobic metha-
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1021/​es800​120b notrophs. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. (2011). https://​doi.​org/​10.​
45. Knittel, K., Boetius, A.: Anaerobic oxidation of methane: pro- 1128/​AEM.​02960-​10
gress with an unknown process. Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 63(1), 61. Valentine, D.L., Reeburgh, W.S.: New perspectives on anaerobic
311–334 (2009). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1146/​annur ​ev.​micro.​61.​ methane oxidation. Environ. Microbiol. 2(5), 477–484 (2000)
080706.​093130 62. Zehnder, A.J., Brock, T.D.: Anaerobic methane oxidation: occur-
46. Borrel, G., Jézéquel, D., Biderre-Petit, C., Morel-Desrosiers, N., rence and ecology. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 39(1), 194–204
Morel, J.-P., Peyret, P., et al.: Production and consumption of (1980)
methane in freshwater lake ecosystems. Res. Microbiol. 162(9), 63. Hoehler, T.M., Alperin, M.J., Albert, D.B., Martens, C.S.: Field
832–847 (2011) and laboratory studies of methane oxidation in an anoxic marine
47. Raghoebarsing, A.A., Pol, A., Van de Pas-Schoonen, K.T., sediment: evidence for a methanogen-sulfate reducer consortium.
Smolders, A.J., Ettwig, K.F., Rijpstra, W.I.C., et al.: A microbial Global Biogeochem. Cycles 8(4), 451–463 (1994)
consortium couples anaerobic methane oxidation to denitrifica- 64. Thauer, R.K.: Biochemistry of methanogenesis: a tribute to
tion. Nature 440(7086), 918 (2006) Marjory Stephenson: 1998 Marjory Stephenson prize lecture.
48. Deutzmann, J.S., Schink, B.: Anaerobic oxidation of methane Microbiology 144(9), 2377–2406 (1998)
in sediments of lake constance, an oligotrophic freshwater lake. 65. Schreiber, L., Holler, T., Knittel, K., Meyerdierks, A., Amann,
Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 77(13), 4429–4436 (2011) R.: Identification of the dominant sulfate-reducing bacterial part-
49. Kojima, H., Tsutsumi, M., Ishikawa, K., Iwata, T., Mußmann, M., ner of anaerobic methanotrophs of the ANME-2 clade. Environ.
Fukui, M.: Distribution of putative denitrifying methane oxidiz- Microbiol. 12(8), 2327–2340 (2010)
ing bacteria in sediment of a freshwater lake Lake Biwa. Syst. 66. Beal, E.J., House, C.H., Orphan, V.J.: Manganese-and iron-
Appl. Microbiol. 35(4), 233–238 (2012) dependent marine methane oxidation. Science 325(5937), 184–
50. Shen, L.-d, Liu, S., Zhu, Q., Li, X.-y, Cai, C., Cheng, D.-q, et al.: 187 (2009)
Distribution and diversity of nitrite-dependent anaerobic meth- 67. Knittel, K., Boetius, A., Lemke, A., Eilers, H., Lochte, K.,
ane-oxidising bacteria in the sediments of the Qiantang River. Pfannkuche, O., et al.: Activity, distribution, and diversity of sul-
Microbial Ecology. 67(2), 341–9 (2014) fate reducers and other bacteria in sediments above gas hydrate
51. Hu, B.-l, Shen, L.-d, Lian, X., Zhu, Q., Liu, S., Huang, Q., et al.: (Cascadia Margin, Oregon). Geomicrobiol. J. 20(4), 269–294
Evidence for nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxidation as a (2003)
previously overlooked microbial methane sink in wetlands. Proc. 68. Orphan, V.J., House, C.H., Hinrichs, K.-U., McKeegan, K.D.,
Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 111(12), 4495–500 (2014) DeLong, E.F.: Methane-consuming archaea revealed by directly
52. Shen, L.-d, Huang, Q., He, Z.-f, Lian, X., Liu, S., He, Y.-f, coupled isotopic and phylogenetic analysis. Science 293(5529),
et  al.: Vertical distribution of nitrite-dependent anaerobic 484–487 (2001)

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 793

69. Orphan, V.J., House, C.H., Hinrichs, K.-U., McKeegan, K.D., 86. Jena, U., Das, K.C., Kastner, J.R.: Effect of operating conditions
DeLong, E.F.: Multiple archaeal groups mediate methane oxida- of thermochemical liquefaction on biocrude production from
tion in anoxic cold seep sediments. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA Spirulina platensis. Biores. Technol. 102(10), 6221–6229 (2011)
99(11), 7663–7668 (2002) 87. Yin, S., Dolan, R., Harris, M., Tan, Z.: Subcritical hydrother-
70. Treude, T., Krüger, K., Boetius, A., Jorgensen, B.: Environmental mal liquefaction of cattle manure to bio-oil: effects of conver-
control on anaerobic oxidation of methane in gassy sediments sion parameters on bio-oil yield and characterization of bio-oil.
of Eckernförde Bay (German Baltic). Limnol. Oceanogr. 50(6), Biores. Technol. 101(10), 3657–64 (2010)
1771–1786 (2005) 88. Biller, P., Ross, A.B.: Potential yields and properties of oil from
71. Lösekann, T., Knittel, K., Nadalig, T., Fuchs, B., Niemann, H., the hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae with different bio-
Boetius, A., et al.: Diversity and abundance of aerobic and anaer- chemical content. Biores. Technol. 102(1), 215–25 (2011)
obic methane oxidizers at the Haakon Mosby mud volcano Bar- 89. Liang, Y., Yesuf, J., Schmitt, S., Bender, K., Bozzola, J.: Study
ents sea. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73(10), 3348–3362 (2007) of cellulases from a newly-isolated thermophilic and cellulolytic
72. Milucka J, Ferdelman TG, Polerecky L, Franzke D, Wegener G, Brevibacillus sp. strain JXL. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 36,
Schmid M, et al: Zero-valent sulphur is a key intermediate in 961–70 (2009)
marine methane oxidation. Nature. 491(7425), 541–546 (2012) 90. Liang, Y., Feng, Z., Yesuf, J., Blackburn, J.W.: Optimization
http://​www.​nature.​com/​nature/​journ​al/​v491/​n7425/​abs/​natur​ of growth medium and enzyme assay conditions for crude cel-
e11656.​html#​suppl​ement​ary-​infor​mation lulases produced by a novel thermophilic and cellulolytic bacte-
73. Modin, O., Fukushi, K., Yamamoto, K.: Denitrification with rium, Anoxybacillus sp. 527. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 160,
methane as external carbon source. Water Res. 41(12), 2726– 1841–52 (2010)
2738 (2007) 91. Bi, Z., Zhang, J., Peterson, E., Zhu, Z., Xia, C., Liang, Y., et al.:
74. Islas-Lima, S., Thalasso, F., Gomez-Hernandez, J.: Evidence of Biocrude from pretreated sorghum bagasse through catalytic
anoxic methane oxidation coupled to denitrification. Water Res. hydrothermal liquefaction. Fuel 188, 112–120 (2017). https://​
38(1), 13–16 (2004) doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​fuel.​2016.​10.​039
75. Zhu, B., Sánchez, J., van Alen, T.A., Sanabria, J., Jetten, M.S., 92. Zhu, Y., Lee, Y., Elander, R.T.: Dilute-acid pretreatment of corn
Ettwig, K.F., et al.: Combined anaerobic ammonium and meth- stover using a high-solids percolation reactor. Appl. Biochem.
ane oxidation for nitrogen and methane removal. Portland Press Biotechnol. 117(2), 103–114 (2004)
Limited, London (2011) 93. Wyman, C.E., Decker, S.R., Himmel, M.E., Brady, J.W., Sko-
76. Rice, E.W., Baird, R.B., Eaton, A.D. (eds.): Standard methods pec, C.E., Viikari, L.: Hydrolysis of cellulose and hemicellulose.
for the examination of water and wastewater. Standard methods Polysaccharides: structural diversity and functional versatility.
for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Sci Res 1, 1023–62 (2005)
Health Association, Washington (2017) 94. Brebu, M., Vasile, C.: Thermal degradation of lignin—a review.
77. Luesken, F.A., van Alen, T.A., van der Biezen, E., Frijters, C., Cellul. Chem. Technol. 44(9), 353 (2010)
Toonen, G., Kampman, C., et al.: Diversity and enrichment of 95. He, B.J., Zhang, Y., Yin, Y., Funk, T.L., Riskowski, G.L.: Operat-
nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxidizing bacteria from ing temperature and retention time effects on the thermochemical
wastewater sludge. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 92(4), 845 conversion process of swine manure. Trans. ASAE Am. Soc.
(2011) Agric. Eng. 43(6), 1821–1826 (2000)
78. Wegener, G., Krukenberg, V., Ruff, S.E., Kellermann, M.Y., 96. White, D.H., Wolf, D.: Direct biomass liquefaction by an
Knittel, K.: Metabolic capabilities of microorganisms involved extruder-feeder system. Chem. Eng. Commun. 135(1), 1–19
in and associated with the anaerobic oxidation of methane. Front. (1995). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​00986​44950​89363​35
Microbiol. (2016). https://​doi.​org/​10.​3389/​fmicb.​2016.​00046 97. Goudnaan, F., van de Beld, B., Boerefijn, F.R., Bos, G.M., Naber,
79. Lee, H.-S., Tang, Y., Rittmann, B.E., Zhao, H.-P.: Anaerobic J.E., van der Wal, S., et al.: Thermal efficiency of the HTU® pro-
oxidation of methane coupled to denitrification: fundamentals, cess for biomass liquefaction. In: Bridgwater, A.V. (ed.) Progress
challenges, and potential. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. in thermochemical biomass conversion, pp. 1312–25. Blackwell
48(19–21), 1067–1093 (2018) Science Ltd, Oxford (2008)
80. Wang, D., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Ngo, H.H., Lian, Y., Zhao, J., et al.: 98. Minowa, T., Murakami, M., Dote, Y., Ogi, T., Yokoyama, S.-y:
Is denitrifying anaerobic methane oxidation-centered technolo- Oil production from garbage by thermochemical liquefaction.
gies a solution for the sustainable operation of wastewater treat- Biomass Bioenergy 8(2), 117–20 (1995)
ment plants? Biores. Technol. 234, 456–465 (2017). https://​doi.​ 99. Minowa, T., Yokoyama, S.-y, Kishimoto, M., Okakura, T.: Oil
org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2017.​02.​059 production from algal cells of Dunaliella tertiolecta by direct
81. Liu, T., Hu, S., Guo, J.: Enhancing mainstream nitrogen removal thermochemical liquefaction. Fuel 74(12), 1735–8 (1995).
by employing nitrate/nitrite-dependent anaerobic methane oxida- https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​0016-​2361(95)​80001-X
tion processes. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 39(5), 732–745 (2019) 100. Shuping, Z., Yulong, W., Mingde, Y., Kaleem, I., Chun, L., Tong,
82. Welte, C.U., Rasigraf, O., Vaksmaa, A., Versantvoort, W., J.: Production and characterization of bio-oil from hydrothermal
Arshad, A., Op den Camp, H.J., et al.: Nitrate-and nitrite-depend- liquefaction of microalgae Dunaliella tertiolecta cake. Energy
ent anaerobic oxidation of methane. Environ. Microbiol. Rep. 35(12), 5406–11 (2010)
8(6), 941–55 (2016) 101. Peterson, A.A., Vogel, F., Lachance, R.P., Froling, M., Antal,
83. Costa, C., Dijkema, C., Friedrich, M., Garcia-Encina, P., Fer- M.J., Jr., Tester, J.W.: Thermochemical biofuel production in
nandez-Polanco, F., Stams, A.: Denitrification with methane as hydrothermal media: a review of sub-and supercritical water
electron donor in oxygen-limited bioreactors. Appl. Microbiol. technologies. Energy Environ. Sci. 1(1), 32–65 (2008)
Biotechnol. 53(6), 754–762 (2000) 102. Abu El-Rub, Z., Bramer, E.A., Brem, G.: Review of catalysts
84. Jena, U., Das, K.C.: Comparative evaluation of thermochemical for tar elimination in biomass gasification processes. Ind. Eng.
liquefaction and pyrolysis for bio-oil production from microal- Chem. Res. 43(22), 6911–6919 (2004)
gae. Energy Fuels 25(11), 5472–82 (2011) 103. Wainaina, S., Parchami, M., Mahboubi, A., Horváth, I.S., Taher-
85. Akhtar, J., Amin, N.A.S.: A review on process conditions for zadeh, M.J.: Food waste-derived volatile fatty acids platform
optimum bio-oil yield in hydrothermal liquefaction of biomass. using an immersed membrane bioreactor. Biores. Technol. 274,
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 15(3), 1615–24 (2011) 329–334 (2019). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2018.​11.​104

13

794 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

104. Zhang, B., von Keitz, M., Valentas, K.: Thermochemical liq- 120. Guo, Y., Yeh, T., Song, W., Xu, D., Wang, S.: A review of bio-
uefaction of high-diversity grassland perennials. J. Anal. Appl. oil production from hydrothermal liquefaction of algae. Renew.
Pyrol. 84(1), 18–24 (2009) Sustain. Energy Rev. 48, 776–790 (2015)
105. Skaggs, R.L., Coleman, A.M., Seiple, T.E., Milbrandt, A.R.: 121. Qian, L., Wang, S., Savage, P.E.: Hydrothermal liquefaction
Waste-to-energy biofuel production potential for selected of sewage sludge under isothermal and fast conditions. Biores.
feedstocks in the conterminous United States. Renew. Sustain. Technol. 232, 27–34 (2017)
Energy Rev. 82, 2640–2651 (2018) 122. Snowden-Swan, L.J., Zhu, Y., Jones, S.B., Elliott, D.C., Schmidt,
106. Kostyukevich, Y., Vlaskin, M., Borisova, L., Zherebker, A., A.J., Hallen, R.T., et al.: Hydrothermal liquefaction and upgrad-
Perminova, I., Kononikhin, A., et al.: Investigation of bio-oil ing of municipal wastewater treatment plant sludge: a pre-
produced by hydrothermal liquefaction of food waste using liminary techno-economic analysis, rev. 1. Pacific Northwest
ultrahigh resolution Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance National Lab, Richland (2016)
mass spectrometry. Eur. J. Mass Spectrom. 24(1), 116–123 123. Jarvis, J.M., Albrecht, K.O., Billing, J.M., Schmidt, A.J., Hallen,
(2018) R.T., Schaub, T.M.: Assessment of hydrotreatment for hydrother-
107. Maddi, B., Panisko, E., Wietsma, T., Lemmon, T., Swita, M., mal liquefaction biocrudes from sewage sludge, microalgae, and
Albrecht, K., et  al.: Quantitative characterization of aque- pine feedstocks. Energy Fuels 32(8), 8483–8493 (2018)
ous byproducts from hydrothermal liquefaction of municipal 124. Liu, R., Tian, W., Kong, S., Meng, Y., Wang, H., Zhang, J.:
wastes, food industry wastes, and biomass grown on waste. Effects of inorganic and organic acid pretreatments on the hydro-
ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 5(3), 2205–2214 (2017) thermal liquefaction of municipal secondary sludge. Energy Con-
108. Cantero-Tubilla, B., Cantero, D.A., Martinez, C.M., Tester, vers. Manage. 174, 661–667 (2018)
J.W., Walker, L.P., Posmanik, R.: Characterization of the solid 125. Kapusta, K.: Effect of ultrasound pretreatment of municipal sew-
products from hydrothermal liquefaction of waste feedstocks age sludge on characteristics of bio-oil from hydrothermal lique-
from food and agricultural industries. J. Supercrit. Fluids 133, faction process. Waste Manage. 78, 183–190 (2018). https://​doi.​
665–673 (2018). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​supflu.​2017.​07.​009 org/​10.​1016/j.​wasman.​2018.​05.​043
109. Gollakota, A., Savage, P.E.: Hydrothermal liquefaction of 126. Domingo, J.L., Nadal, M.: Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances
model food waste biomolecules and ternary mixtures under (PFASs) in food and human dietary intake: a review of the recent
isothermal and fast conditions. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 6(7), scientific literature. J. Agric. Food Chem. 65(3), 533–543 (2017)
9018–9027 (2018) 127. Herzke, D., Huber, S., Bervoets, L., D’Hollander, W., Hajslova,
110. Posmanik, R., Labatut, R.A., Kim, A.H., Usack, J.G., Tester, J., Pulkrabova, J., et al.: Perfluorinated alkylated substances in
J.W., Angenent, L.T.: Coupling hydrothermal liquefaction vegetables collected in four European countries; occurrence and
and anaerobic digestion for energy valorization from model human exposure estimations. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 20(11),
biomass feedstocks. Biores. Technol. 233, 134–143 (2017). 7930–7939 (2013)
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ech.​2017.​02.​095 128. Hlouskova, V., Hradkova, P., Poustka, J., Brambilla, G., De
111. Posmanik, R., Martinez, C.M., Cantero-Tubilla, B., Cantero, Filipps, S.P., D’Hollander, W., et al.: Occurrence of perfluoro-
D.A., Sills, D., Cocero, M.J., et al.: Acid and alkali catalyzed alkyl substances (PFASs) in various food items of animal origin
hydrothermal liquefaction of dairy manure digestate and food collected in four European countries. Food Addit. Contam. A.
waste. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 6(2), 2724–2732 (2018) 30(11), 1918–1932 (2013)
112. Maag, A.R., Paulsen, A.D., Amundsen, T.J., Yelvington, P.E., 129. D’Hollander, W., Herzke, D., Huber, S., Hajslova, J., Pulkrabova,
Tompsett, G.A., Timko, M.T.: Catalytic hydrothermal liquefac- J., Brambilla, G., et al.: Occurrence of perfluorinated alkylated
tion of food waste using CeZrOx. Energies 11(3), 564 (2018) substances in cereals, salt, sweets and fruit items collected in four
113. Déniel, M., Haarlemmer, G., Roubaud, A., Weiss-Hortala, European countries. Chemosphere 129, 179–185 (2015)
E., Fages, J.: Modelling and predictive study of hydrothermal 130. Klenow, S., Heinemeyer, G., Brambilla, G., Dellatte, E., Her-
liquefaction: application to food processing residues. Waste zke, D., de Voogt, P.: Dietary exposure to selected perfluoroalkyl
Biomass Valor. 8(6), 2087–2107 (2017) acids (PFAAs) in four European regions. Food Addit. Contam.
114. Aierzhati, A., Stablein, M.J., Wu, N.E., Kuo, C.-T., Si, B., A. 30(12), 2141–2151 (2013)
Kang, X., et  al.: Experimental and model enhancement of 131. Heo, J.-J., Lee, J.-W., Kim, S.-K., Oh, J.-E.: Foodstuff analy-
food waste hydrothermal liquefaction with combined effects ses show that seafood and water are major perfluoroalkyl acids
of biochemical composition and reaction conditions. Biores. (PFAAs) sources to humans in Korea. J. Hazard. Mater. 279,
Technol. 284, 139–147 (2019). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​biort​ 402–409 (2014)
ech.​2019.​03.​076 132. Pérez, F., Llorca, M., Köck-Schulmeyer, M., Škrbić, B., Oliveira,
115. Xiu, S., Shahbazi, A.: Bio-oil production and upgrading research: L.S., da Boit, M.K., et al.: Assessment of perfluoroalkyl sub-
a review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 16(7), 4406–4414 (2012). stances in food items at global scale. Environ. Res. 135, 181–189
https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​rser.​2012.​04.​028 (2014)
116. Toor, S.S., Rosendahl, L., Rudolf, A.: Hydrothermal liquefaction 133. Authority EFS: Perfluoroalkylated substances in food: occur-
of biomass: a review of subcritical water technologies. Energy rence and dietary exposure. EFSA J. 10(6), 2743 (2012)
36(5), 2328–2342 (2011) 134. Clarke, D., Bailey, V., Routledge, A., Lloyd, A., Hird, S., Mor-
117. Dimitriadis, A., Bezergianni, S.: Hydrothermal liquefaction of timer, D., et al.: Dietary intake estimate for perfluorooctanesul-
various biomass and waste feedstocks for biocrude production: a phonic acid (PFOS) and other perfluorocompounds (PFCs) in
state of the art review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 68, 113–125 UK retail foods following determination using standard addition
(2017). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​rser.​2016.​09.​120 LC–MS/MS. Food Addit. Contam. 27(4), 530–545 (2010)
118. Barreiro, D.L., Prins, W., Ronsse, F., Brilman, W.: Hydrothermal 135. Tittlemier, S.A., Pepper, K., Seymour, C., Moisey, J., Bronson,
liquefaction (HTL) of microalgae for biofuel production: state R., Cao, X.-L., et al.: Dietary exposure of Canadians to perfluori-
of the art review and future prospects. Biomass Bioenerg. 53, nated carboxylates and perfluorooctane sulfonate via consump-
113–127 (2013) tion of meat, fish, fast foods, and food items prepared in their
119. Tian, C., Li, B., Liu, Z., Zhang, Y., Lu, H.: Hydrothermal lique- packaging. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55(8), 3203–3210 (2007)
faction for algal biorefinery: a critical review. Renew. Sustain. 136. Bhavsar, S.P., Zhang, X., Guo, R., Braekevelt, E., Petro, S.,
Energy Rev. 38, 933–950 (2014) Gandhi, N., et al.: Cooking fish is not effective in reducing

13
Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796 795

exposure to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances. a critical review. J. Environ. Manage. 204, 757–764 (2017).
Environ. Int. 66, 107–114 (2014). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jenvm​an.​2017.​08.​016
envint.​2014.​01.​024 153. McCleaf, P., Englund, S., Östlund, A., Lindegren, K., Wiberg,
137. Lechner, M., Knapp, H.: Carryover of perfluorooctanoic acid K., Ahrens, L.: Removal efficiency of multiple poly- and per-
(PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) from soil to plant fluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in drinking water using granu-
and distribution to the different plant compartments studied in lar activated carbon (GAC) and anion exchange (AE) column
cultures of carrots (Daucus carota ssp. Sativus), potatoes (Sola- tests. Water Res. 120, 77–87 (2017). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​
num tuberosum), and cucumbers (Cucumis sativus). J. Agric. watres.​2017.​04.​057
Food Chem. 59(20), 11011–8 (2011) 154. ITRC.: Remediation technologies and methods for per and pol-
138. Blaine, A.C., Rich, C.D., Hundal, L.S., Lau, C., Mills, M.A., yfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).https://​www.​pfas-​1itrc​weborg/​
Harris, K.M., et al.: Uptake of perfluoroalkyl acids into edible wp-​conte​nt/​uploa​ds/​2018/​03/​pfas_​fact_​sheet_​remed​iation_​3_​
crops via land applied biosolids: field and greenhouse studies. 15_​18pdf (2018)
Environ. Sci. Technol. 47(24), 14062–14069 (2013) 155. Zhang, D., Zhang, W., Liang, Y.: Adsorption of perfluoroalkyl
139. Blaine, A.C., Rich, C.D., Sedlacko, E.M., Hundal, L.S., Kumar, and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) from aqueous solu-
K., Lau, C., et al.: Perfluoroalkyl acid distribution in various tion—a review. Sci. Total Environ. 694, 133606 (2019)
plant compartments of edible crops grown in biosolids-amended 156. Zhang, D., He, Q., Wang, M., Zhang, W., Liang, Y.: Sorption
soils. Environ. Sci. Technol. 48(14), 7858–7865 (2014) of perfluoroalkylated substances (PFASs) onto granular acti-
140. Scher, D.P., Kelly, J.E., Huset, C.A., Barry, K.M., Hoffbeck, vated carbon and biochar. Environ. Technol. (2019). https://​
R.W., Yingling, V.L., et al.: Occurrence of perfluoroalkyl sub- doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09593​330.​2019.​16807​44
stances (PFAS) in garden produce at homes with a history of 157. Bao, Y., Niu, J., Xu, Z., Gao, D., Shi, J., Sun, X., et  al.:
PFAS-contaminated drinking water. Chemosphere 196, 548–555 Removal of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooc-
(2018) tanoate (PFOA) from water by coagulation: mechanisms and
141. Xiao, F.: Emerging poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances in the influencing factors. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 434, 59–64 (2014)
aquatic environment: a review of current literature. Water Res. 158. Birk, G., Alden, D., Stuart, R.: Ex situ treatments of aqueous
124, 482–495 (2017). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​watres.​2017.​07.​ film-forming foam impacted water. American Chemical Soci-
024 ety, Washington (2016)
142. Schaider, L.A., Balan, S.A., Blum, A., Andrews, D.Q., Strynar, 159. Yang, B., Han, Y., Deng, Y., Li, Y., Zhuo, Q., Wu, J.: Highly
M.J., Dickinson, M.E., et al.: Fluorinated compounds in US efficient removal of perfluorooctanoic acid from aqueous solu-
fast food packaging. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 4(3), 105–111 tion by H2O2-enhanced electrocoagulation-electroflotation
(2017) technique. Emerging Contaminants. 2(1), 49–55 (2016)
143. Schultes, L., Peaslee, G.F., Brockman, J.D., Majumdar, A., 160. Lin, H., Wang, Y., Niu, J., Yue, Z., Huang, Q.: Efficient sorp-
McGuinness, S.R., Wilkinson, J.T., et al.: Total fluorine meas- tion and removal of perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs) from aque-
urements in food packaging: how do current methods perform? ous solution by metal hydroxides generated in situ by elec-
Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 6(2), 73–78 (2019) trocoagulation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49(17), 10562–10569
144. Yeung, L.W., Robinson, S.J., Koschorreck, J., Mabury, S.A.: Part (2015)
II. A temporal study of PFOS and its precursors in human plasma 161. Tang, C.Y., Fu, Q.S., Robertson, A., Criddle, C.S., Leckie, J.O.:
from two German cities in 1982–2009. Environ. Sci. Technol. Use of reverse osmosis membranes to remove perfluorooctane
47(8), 3875–82 (2013) sulfonate (PFOS) from semiconductor wastewater. Environ. Sci.
145. Trier, X., Granby, K., Christensen, J.H.: Polyfluorinated sur- Technol. 40(23), 7343–7349 (2006)
factants (PFS) in paper and board coatings for food packaging. 162. Flores, C., Ventura, F., Martin-Alonso, J., Caixach, J.: Occur-
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 18(7), 1108–1120 (2011) rence of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooc-
146. Trier, X., Nielsen, N.J., Christensen, J.H.: Structural isomers of tanoate (PFOA) in N.E. Spanish surface waters and their removal
polyfluorinated di-and tri-alkylated phosphate ester surfactants in a drinking water treatment plant that combines conventional
present in industrial blends and in microwave popcorn bags. and advanced treatments in parallel lines. Sci. Total Environ.
Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 18(8), 1422–1432 (2011) 461–462, 618–26 (2013). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​scito​tenv.​
147. Begley, T., White, K., Honigfort, P., Twaroski, M., Neches, R., 2013.​05.​026
Walker, R.: Perfluorochemicals: potential sources of and migra- 163. Tang, C.Y., Fu, Q.S., Criddle, C.S., Leckie, J.O.: Effect of flux
tion from food packaging. Food Addit. Contam. 22(10), 1023– (transmembrane pressure) and membrane properties on fouling
1031 (2005) and rejection of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes
148. Begley, T., Hsu, W., Noonan, G., Diachenko, G.: Migration of treating perfluorooctane sulfonate containing wastewater. Envi-
fluorochemical paper additives from food-contact paper into ron. Sci. Technol. 41(6), 2008–2014 (2007)
foods and food simulants. Food Addit. Contam. 25(3), 384–390 164. Steinle-Darling, E., Reinhard, M.: Nanofiltration for trace organic
(2008) contaminant removal: structure, solution, and membrane foul-
149. Choi, Y.J., Kim Lazcano, R., Yousefi, P., Trim, H., Lee, L.S.: ing effects on the rejection of perfluorochemicals. Environ. Sci.
Perfluoroalkyl acid characterization in US municipal organic Technol. 42(14), 5292–5297 (2008)
solid waste composts. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 6(6), 372–377 165. Loi-Brügger, A., Panglisch, S., Hoffmann, G., Buchta, P., Gim-
(2019) bel, R., Nacke, C.-J.: Removal of trace organic substances from
150. Maine Department of Environmental Protection. https://​www.​ river bank filtrate–performance study of RO and NF membranes.
maine.g​ ov/d​ ep/s​ pills/t​ opics/p​ fas/M
​ aine-P
​ FAS-S
​ creen​ ing-L
​ evels-​ Water Science and Technology: Water Supply. 8(1), 85–92
Rev-6.​28.​21.​pdf (2008)
151. Ross, I., McDonough, J., Miles, J., Storch, P., Thelakkat Kochu- 166. Tsai, Y.-T., Yu-Chen Lin, A., Weng, Y.-H., Li, K.-C.: Treatment
narayanan, P., Kalve, E., et al.: A review of emerging technolo- of perfluorinated chemicals by electro-microfiltration. Environ.
gies for remediation of PFASs. Remediat. J. 28(2), 101–126 Sci. Technol. 44(20), 7914–7920 (2010)
(2018) 167. Eberle, D., Ball, R., Boving, T.B.: Impact of ISCO treatment on
152. Kucharzyk, K.H., Darlington, R., Benotti, M., Deeb, R., Haw- PFAA co-contaminants at a former fire training area. Environ.
ley, E.: Novel treatment technologies for PFAS compounds: Sci. Technol. 51(9), 5127–5136 (2017)

13

796 Waste and Biomass Valorization (2022) 13:781–796

168. Huang, J., Wang, X., Pan, Z., Li, X., Ling, Y., Li, L.: Efficient 184. Wang, N., Szostek, B., Buck, R.C., Folsom, P.W., Sulecki, L.M.,
degradation of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) by photocatalytic Gannon, J.T.: 8–2 Fluorotelomer alcohol aerobic soil biodegrada-
ozonation. Chem. Eng. J. 296, 329–334 (2016) tion: pathways, metabolites, and metabolite yields. Chemosphere
169. Vecitis, C.D., Park, H., Cheng, J., Mader, B.T., Hoffmann, M.R.: 75(8), 1089–1096 (2009). https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.c​ hemos​ phere.​
Kinetics and mechanism of the sonolytic conversion of the aque- 2009.​01.​033
ous perfluorinated surfactants, perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), and 185. Wang, N., Szostek, B., Folsom, P.W., Sulecki, L.M., Capka, V.,
perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) into inorganic products. J. Buck, R.C., et al.: Aerobic biotransformation of 14C-labeled 8–2
Phys. Chem. A 112(18), 4261–4270 (2008) telomer B alcohol by activated sludge from a domestic sewage
170. Lee, Y.-C., Chen, M.-J., Huang, C.-P., Kuo, J., Lo, S.-L.: Effi- treatment plant. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39(2), 531–538 (2005)
cient sonochemical degradation of perfluorooctanoic acid using 186. Zhao, L., Folsom, P.W., Wolstenholme, B.W., Sun, H., Wang,
periodate. Ultrason. Sonochem. 31, 499–505 (2016) N., Buck, R.C.: 6:2 Fluorotelomer alcohol biotransformation in
171. Hao, F., Guo, W., Wang, A., Leng, Y., Li, H.: Intensification of an aerobic river sediment system. Chemosphere 90(2), 203–209
sonochemical degradation of ammonium perfluorooctanoate by (2013). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chemo​sphere.​2012.​06.​035
persulfate oxidant. Ultrason. Sonochem. 21(2), 554–558 (2014) 187. Harding-Marjanovic, K.C., Houtz, E.F., Yi, S., Field, J.A.,
172. Lin, J.-C., Hu, C.-Y., Lo, S.-L.: Effect of surfactants on the deg- Sedlak, D.L., Alvarez-Cohen, L.: Aerobic biotransformation
radation of perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) by ultrasonic (US) of fluorotelomer thioether amido sulfonate (Lodyne) in AFFF-
treatment. Ultrason. Sonochem. 28, 130–135 (2016) amended microcosms. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49(13), 7666–7674
173. Zhuo, Q., Li, X., Yan, F., Yang, B., Deng, S., Huang, J., et al.: (2015)
Electrochemical oxidation of 1H, 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorooctane 188. Liou, J.S.C., Szostek, B., DeRito, C.M., Madsen, E.L.: Investigat-
sulfonic acid (6:2 FTS) on DSA electrode: operating parameters ing the biodegradability of perfluorooctanoic acid. Chemosphere
and mechanism. J. Environ. Sci. 26(8), 1733–1739 (2014) 80(2), 176–183 (2010). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chemo​sphere.​
174. Gomez-Ruiz, B., Gómez-Lavín, S., Diban, N., Boiteux, V., Colin, 2010.​03.​009
A., Dauchy, X., et al.: Efficient electrochemical degradation of 189. Yi, L., Chai, L., Xie, Y., Peng, Q., Peng, Q.: Isolation, identifica-
poly-and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) from the effluents tion, and degradation performance of a PFOA-degrading strain.
of an industrial wastewater treatment plant. Chem. Eng. J. 322, Genet. Mol. Res. (2016). https://​doi.​org/​10.​4238/​gmr.​15028​043
196–204 (2017) 190. Yi, L., Peng, Q., Liu, D., Zhou, L., Tang, C., Zhou, Y., et al.:
175. Schaefer, C.E., Andaya, C., Burant, A., Condee, C.W., Urtiaga, Enhanced degradation of perfluorooctanoic acid by a genome
A., Strathmann, T.J., et al.: Electrochemical treatment of per- shuffling-modified Pseudomonas parafulva YAB-1. Environ.
fluorooctanoic acid and perfluorooctane sulfonate: insights into Technol. (2018). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​09593​330.​2018.​14669​
mechanisms and application to groundwater treatment. Chem. 18
Eng. J. 317, 424–432 (2017) 191. Kwon, B.G.: Reply to comment on “biodegradation of perfluo-
176. Schaefer, C.E., Andaya, C., Urtiaga, A., McKenzie, E.R., Hig- rooctanesulfonate (PFOS) as an emerging contaminant.” Chem-
gins, C.P.: Electrochemical treatment of perfluorooctanoic acid osphere 138, 1039–1044 (2015). https://d​ oi.o​ rg/1​ 0.1​ 016/j.c​ hemo​
(PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) in groundwa- sphere.​2015.​03.​021
ter impacted by aqueous film forming foams (AFFFs). J. Hazard. 192. Kwon, B.G., Lim, H.-J., Na, S.-H., Choi, B.-I., Shin, D.-S.,
Mater. 295, 170–175 (2015) Chung, S.-Y.: Biodegradation of perfluorooctanesulfonate
177. Trautmann, A., Schell, H., Schmidt, K., Mangold, K.-M., (PFOS) as an emerging contaminant. Chemosphere 109, 221–
Tiehm, A.: Electrochemical degradation of perfluoroalkyl and 225 (2014). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chemo​sphere.​2014.​01.​072
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs) in groundwater. Water Sci. 193. Avendaño, S.M., Zhong, G., Liu, J.: Comment on “biodegrada-
Technol. 71(10), 1569–1575 (2015) tion of perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS) as an emerging contami-
178. Chen, J., Zhang, P., Zhang, L.: Photocatalytic decomposition of nant.” Chemosphere 138, 1037–1038 (2015)
environmentally persistent perfluorooctanoic acid. Chem. Lett. 194. Huang, S., Jaffé, P.R.: Defluorination of perfluorooctanoic Acid
35(2), 230–231 (2006) (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) by Acidimicro-
179. Zhang, C., Qu, Y., Zhao, X., Zhou, Q.: Photoinduced reductive bium sp. strain A6. Environ. Sci. Technol. 53(19), 11410–9
decomposition of perflurooctanoic acid in water: effect of tem- (2019)
perature and ionic strength. CLEAN Soil Air Water 43(2), 223–8 195. Hori, H., Nagaoka, Y., Yamamoto, A., Sano, T., Yamashita, N.,
(2015) Taniyasu, S., et al.: Efficient decomposition of environmentally
180. Liu, J., Mejia, A.S.: Microbial degradation of polyfluoroalkyl persistent perfluorooctanesulfonate and related fluorochemicals
chemicals in the environment: a review. Environ. Int. 61, 98–114 using zerovalent iron in subcritical water. Environ. Sci. Technol.
(2013). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​envint.​2013.​08.​022 40(3), 1049–1054 (2006)
181. Wang, N., Buck, R.C., Szostek, B., Sulecki, L.M., Wolstenholme, 196. Hori, H., Nagaoka, Y., Sano, T., Kutsuna, S.: Iron-induced
B.W.: 5:3 Polyfluorinated acid aerobic biotransformation in acti- decomposition of perfluorohexanesulfonate in sub-and super-
vated sludge via novel “one-carbon removal pathways.” Chem- critical water. Chemosphere 70(5), 800–806 (2008)
osphere 87(5), 527–534 (2012). https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​chemo​ 197. Wu, B., Hao, S., Choi, Y., Higgins, C.P., Deeb, R., Strathmann,
sphere.​2011.​12.​056 T.J.: Rapid destruction and defluorination of perfluorooctanesul-
182. Wang, N., Liu, J., Buck, R.C., Korzeniowski, S.H., Wolsten- fonate by alkaline hydrothermal reaction. Environ. Sci. Technol.
holme, B.W., Folsom, P.W., et al.: 6:2 Fluorotelomer sulfonate Lett. 6(10), 630–636 (2019)
aerobic biotransformation in activated sludge of waste water
treatment plants. Chemosphere 82(6), 853–858 (2011) Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
183. Wang, N., Szostek, B., Buck, R.C., Folsom, P.W., Sulecki, L.M., jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Capka, V., et al.: Fluorotelomer alcohol biodegradation direct
evidence that perfluorinated carbon chains breakdown. Environ.
Sci. Technol. 39(19), 7516–7528 (2005)

13