Biogas production from anaerobic sludge digestion plays a central role for wastewater treatment plants to become more energy-efficient or even energy-neutral. Dedicated configurations have been developed to maximize the diversion of soluble and suspended organic matter to sludge streams for energy production through anaerobic digestion, such as A-stage treatment or chemically enhanced primary treatment (CEPT) instead of primary clarifiers. Still, it remains to be investigated to what extent these different treatment steps affect the sludge characteristics and digestibility, which may also impact the economic feasibility of the integrated systems. In this study, a detailed characterization has been performed for sludge obtained from primary clarification (primary sludge), A-stage treatment (A-sludge) and CEPT. The characteristics of all sludges differed significantly from each other. The organic compounds in primary sludge consisted mainly of 40% of carbohydrates, 23% of lipids, and 21% of proteins. A-sludge was characterized by a high amount of proteins (40%) and a moderate amount of carbohydrates (23%), and lipids (16%), while in CEPT sludge, organic compounds were mainly 26% of proteins, 18% of carbohydrates, 18% of lignin, and 12% of lipids. The highest methane yield was obtained from anaerobic digestion of primary sludge (347 ± 16 mL CH₄/g VS) and A-sludge (333 ± 6 mL CH₄/g VS), while it was lower for CEPT sludge (245 ± 5 mL CH₄/g VS). Furthermore, an economic evaluation has been carried out for the three systems, considering energy consumption and recovery, as well as effluent quality and chemical costs. Energy consumption of A-stage was the highest among the three configurations due to aeration energy demand, while CEPT had the highest operational costs due to chemical use. Energy surplus was the highest by the use of CEPT, resulting from the highest fraction of recovered organic matter. By considering the effluent quality of the three systems, CEPT had the highest benefits, followed by A-stage. Integration of CEPT or A-stage, instead of primary clarification in existing wastewater treatment plants, would potentially improve the effluent quality and energy recovery.

Energy-rich sludge can be obtained from primary clarifiers preceding biological reactors. Alternatively, the incoming wastewater can be sent to a very-high-loaded activated sludge system, i.e., a so-called A-stage. However, the effects of applying an A-stage instead of a primary clarifier, on the subsequent sludge digestion for long-term operation is still unknown. In this study, biogas production and permeate quality, and filterability characteristics were investigated in a lab-scale anaerobic membrane bioreactor for primary sludge and A-stage sludge (A-sludge) treatment. A higher specific methane yield was obtained from digestion of A-sludge compared to primary sludge. Similarly, specific methanogenic activity was higher when the anaerobic membrane bioreactor was fed with A-sludge compared to primary sludge. Plant-wide mass balance analysis indicated that about 35% of the organic matter in wastewater was recovered as methane by including an A-stage, compared to about 20% with a primary clarifier.

Excess sewage sludge in wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) is regarded the key energy source for achieving energy neutral WWTPs. The anaerobic digestion process transforms sludge-organic matter into methane, which subsequently can be used for heat and electricity production. Conventional anaerobic digesters (ADs) have been used for sludge treatment for many decades, requiring high energy and providing poor effluent quality. Anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) technology exhibits a promising option for treatment of high solids concentration streams including sludge. AnMBRs result in an increase in digestion efficiency and enhancement in effluent quality at small footprints. AnMBRs have the potential to reduce capital and operational costs, and produce more energy in comparison to conventional ADs. Thus, energy neutral or positive operation can be achieved with AnMBRs. Besides, nutrient recovery or direct use of permeate will become more feasible in AnMBRs compared to use of sludge supernatant in ADs. However, membrane fouling can limit the feasibility of AnMBRs for sludge treatment, which requires further research. This review paper critically evaluates the current status of AnMBR technology for municipal sludge treatment discussing the effect of different factors on treatment and membrane filtration performances. Furthermore, future research opportunities to enhance applicability of this technology are addressed. (Figure presented.).