Technical Challenges and Optimization of Biogas Plants

Zohaib Ur Rehman Afridi[1],*, Naseha Wafa Qammar[2]

Abstract

Countries with a large agricultural sector have enor- biogas plants. The problems in basic infrastructure
mous potential for energy production using biogas such as leakages due to gas pressure, inadequate
technology. This paper analyses the situation in removal of digestate, no mechanism for scum avoid-
Pakistan as a representative example. Although ance, and steel corrosion were identified, and solu-
many biogas plants were installed, only very slow tions were proposed. Moreover, organizational
growth in the biogas sector can be observed. Since structures for renewable energy, critical flaws in
the last three decades the country is facing a severe plant design, operational challenges, and updated
energy shortfall. To overcome this challenge, energy technology aspects to attain maximum and sustain-
from organic waste is one of the best possible solu- able growth in biogas sector are discussed, which
tion. This study reviews the key technical challenges could help the countries in the region to enhance
associated with the operation and sustainability of their biogas production.
Keywords: Biogas, Biogas Plant, Renewable energy, Sustainable energy, Technical challenges
Received: March 05, 2020; revised: May 12, 2020; accepted: June 25, 2020
DOI: 10.1002/cben.202000005

1 Introduction Thus, despite of having huge biogas potential, the biogas tech-
nology shows a declining trend in terms of installation and reli-
Access to energy is vital for economic growth and social devel- ance. Similarly, other countries in the region have limited to no
opment. Globally, the pressure to meet the energy demand focus on developing and implementing biogas technology. This
despite the rapid fossil fuel depletion has led to the exploration study highlights the key issues faced in the biogas sector in
of opportunities in the renewable energy sector. In addition, Pakistan, which is representative for similar problems in other
burning fossil fuels and their impact on the global environment developing countries since all mentioned countries have similar
has gained widespread attention in policy and scientific do- plant design and operational conditions.
mains [1]. As the developed countries are realizing sustainable
development, the focus from fossil fuels is shifting to renewable
resources such as solar, wind, geothermal, bioenergy, etc. In the 1.1 Energy Overview of Pakistan
past two decades, great progress has been made in biogas and
bioenergy technology [2]. The total primary commercial energy supply in 2017–2018 was
Developing countries in the Asian region such as Pakistan, 79.58 Mtoe (million tons of oil equivalent). According to energy
Afghanistan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and India are energy stressed. year book of Pakistan (2017), the oil import bill was $ 9.1 billion
Pakistan has been under energy stress for the last three decades. and a major portion of the energy was supplied by the oil and gas
A growing population and a wide gap between the demand industry with 34.4 and 37.9 %, respectively (Fig. 1) [101].
and supply of energy has resulted in severe load shedding ses-
sions throughout the country. The country’s extreme demand-
supply gap in the last three decades led to a stagnant economic
growth. While previous studies focused on the challenges faced
—————
[1]
Dr. Zohaib Ur Rehman Afridi
in the renewable energy sector as a whole [3–5], and on biogas U.S.-Pakistan Center for Advanced Studies in Energy, Energy
in specific developed and underdeveloped regions [6–8], there Management and Sustainability, University of Engineering and
is no recent, comprehensive assessment of the technical bar- Technology, 25100 Peshawar, Pakistan.
riers faced in Pakistan, which is resisting the wider uptake of E-Mail: Zohaib.rehman@uetpeshawar.edu.pk
biogas technology. Pakistan has the sixth largest agriculture [2]
Naseha Wafa Qammar
sector, but unfortunately, the biogas technology initiatives have City University of Science & Information Technology, Department
mostly failed due to various design and technical challenges. of Electrical Engineering, 25100 Peshawar, Pakistan.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 1
These are not the final page numbers! &&
Figure 1. Pakistan’s Primary Energy Supply Mix 2017.
Figure 2. Electricity generation in Pakistan 2017.
In total, the oil and gas supplies account for 79.2 % Mtoe.
Similarly, hydroelectricity supplied 10.10 Mtoe (12.7 %), coal where anaerobic digestion (AD) of organic waste take place
6.44 Mtoe (8.1 %), LPG (liquid petroleum gas) 1.03 Mtoe and biogas is produced (Fig. 3). The end product is a mixture
(1.3 %), and imported LNG (liquid natural gas) 4.45 Mtoe of methane and carbon dioxide gas along with traces of hydro-
(5.6 %). Most of the imported oil is for electricity generation gen sulfide gas.
and transportation. It is worth mentioning that due to high oil The lower cost and smaller footprint of biogas plants gives
and gas import bills, the government has initiated the import them an edge over competing renewable energy sources
of LNG as an alternative since 2015, which is expected to lower [11, 12]. In general, biogas is a mixture of 40–60 % methane
the burden on the national exchequer. To improve this posi- (CH4), 60–40 % carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen (H2), traces
tion, Pakistan will have to strive for the energy self-sufficiency of hydrogen sulfide (H2S), nitrogen (N2), ammonia (NH3),
[9]. oxygen (O2), carbon monoxide (CO), and volatile organic com-
Fig. 2 shows the current shares of sources used for electricity pounds (VOCs) [13]. Biogas technology meets four of the sus-
generation. The total installed capacity of electricity generation tainable development goals (SDGs) defined by the United
is 29,944 MW including hydroelectricity (26.1 %), oil (32.1 %), Nations (Fig. 4) [14–16]: #3 – good health and well-being; #5 –
gas (33.6 %), nuclear (5.7 %), renewables (2.2 %), and coal gender equality; #7 – affordable and clean energy; #13 – climate
(0.2 %). Recently, renewables sour-
ces (biomass, solar photovoltaic,
and biogas) have also been explored
and they contribute around 2.2 % to
the current energy mix of Pakistan.
However, the contribution of
biogas into the energy grid is negli-
gible. The percentage is quite low
due to consistent failure of biogas
plants in the country. In the past,
many biogas plants were installed
by the government as well as
non-governmental organizations
(NGOs), but they could not sustain
due to design and technological
challenges faced by the plant opera-
tors.

1.2 Benefits of Biogas

Technology

Recent literature reports that there

is a huge potential to use biogas
technology for rural as well as ur-
ban energy supply [10]. Commonly
known as ‘‘biogas plant’’ or ‘‘biogas
digester’’ are anaerobic digesters, Figure 3. Schematic of the anaerobic digestion process.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 2
These are not the final page numbers! &&
 landfill waste and produces biogas for cooking, heating, and
electricity production. Furthermore, the digestate is utilized as
natural fertilizer [38–40].
Thus, it is imperative to fill this gap. This paper aims to pro-
vide technical information for sustainable operation of the bio-
gas plants in Pakistan and reviews the most current research,
summarizes the emerging trends, offers new perspectives and/
or needs for further research.

1.3 Overview of Biogas Technology in Pakistan

Figure 4. Biogas linked to sustainable development. In the early 1950’s, individual attempts were made towards the
production of biogas in Pakistan. The residential biogas model
action. In addition, sustainable development benefits of the (RBM) was adapted by Pakistani users in 1959, using farmyard
technology are listed in Tab. 1. manure to build a biogas plant. In order to develop the biogas
AD technology provides a solution to poverty uplift, health technology, the government of Pakistan formed a national
and hygiene in rural areas, and environmental problems body (known then as the Pakistan Council for Appropriate
[35–37]. Fig. 5 represents the anaerobic digestion process pro- Technology (PCAT), later renamed as the Pakistan Council of
ducing biogas for sustainable energy. It reduces the amount of Renewable Energy Technologies (PCRET)) in 1974. It was
tasked to identify and propose technical solutions for alternate
Table 1. Socio-economic benefits of biogas technology. energy sources. The overall approach was to build decentral-
ized biogas plants in villages or households. The development
Formal Benefits of biogas via anaerobic digestion Ref. of biogas sector in Pakistan is shown in Fig. 6.

1. Enhancement in efficient productivity [17, 18]

2. Improvement of medical conditions of user [19–21] 2 Methodology

3. Decrease in costs of conventional energy sources [22–26] A comprehensive technical evaluation, design comparison, and
4. Reduced expenditures for chemical fertilizer [27–30] synthesis of the reported barriers mentioned in the existing liter-
ature is a critical factor for a comprehensive understanding of the
5. Increased opportunity for (small scale) animal [31, 32] biogas technology. The analysis of the literature, extraction of rel-
husbandry
evant cases, and re-interpretation can provide valuable knowl-
6. Enhancement of agricultural yields [33, 34] edge on different theoretical and practical perspectives [41].
In this review study, the data was initially gathered by inter-
7. Increase in income of family members [12, 35]
viewing the focal person at the PCRET, along with reviewing
reports of previous biogas projects
installed by local and international
NGOs as well as finance division
reports. Lastly, a field survey was
conducted to investigate the techni-
cal challenges faced by the plant
owners and operators. Thirty bio-
gas plants in Faisalabad, Punjab
province, Pakistan, were visited
during the project period.
It is important to mention that
there are few methodological limi-
tations in this review paper. Firstly,
the literature review is limited to
scientific articles related to Paki-
stan, Nepal, and China. The focus
was to address the technology
experience of regional countries
only. Global advancements in bio-
gas technology have been ad-
dressed for future perspectives.
However, journal articles represent
Figure 5. Anaerobic digestion process for sustainable development the high content of scholarly litera-

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 3
These are not the final page numbers! &&
Figure 6. Timeline of biogas sector in Pakistan.

ture and address a wider scientific audience [42]. Next, Scopus The number of livestock animals from 2015 to 2017 is listed
database was used to retrieve the analyzed publications instead in Tab. 2. There is a huge potential for rural energy support by
of other databases. We are aware of advantages and limitations utilizing biogas technology. The authors of [49] assumed that
of different databases [43, 44]. The Scopus database was chosen 1 m3 of biogas can yield up to 2.5 kWh electricity. Subsequently,
for the extraction of publications as it covers a wider range of 1 m3 of biogas can be produced from approximately 20 kg of
journals than Web of Science [45]. Google Scholar was not used animal manure. Based on livestock data, 32.98 million m3d–1
because of a lack of screening for journals’ quality and inclu- biogas could be captured. The manure biogas potential (MBP)
sion of non-SCI (Science Citation Index) articles. Lastly, the (m3) can be estimated by [50]:
keywords and respective combinations used for the extraction
of publications, such as ‘failure’, ‘barriers’, ‘technical chal- MBP ¼ Mi bi (1)
lenges’, ‘bottlenecks’, and ‘hurdles’, could be our limitation as
there is a possibility that some authors do not use these key- where Mi is the amount of livestock manure (kg) produced
words and we may have missed some publications. Overall, from livestock i, and bi is the livestock manure biogas conver-
these limitations also appear in other literature reviews sion parameter. Mi was calculated according to the method
[45–47]. reported by [50].

3 Analysis
Table 2. Estimated livestock population in Pakistan (million)
Pakistan being an agricultural country has the potential to pro- [99, 100].
duce biogas from the agriculture sector, where livestock and
cattle farming is commonly practiced and people are self- Species 2015–16* 2016–17* 2017–18*
employed. It is estimated that around 8 million families are an Goat 70.3 72.2 74.1
integral part in livestock raising. And around 35 % of their
daily income is generated from livestock and agriculture farm- Buffalo 36.6 37.7 38.8
ing [48]. According to the livestock census report of Pakistan, Sheep 29.8 30.1 30.5
from 1996 to 2006 [99, 100], the populations of cattle and buf-
falos increased by 44 % and 34 % respectively. In 2017, livestock Camels 1.0 1.1 1.1
contributed 58.92 % to the agriculture and 11.11 % to the gross Cattle 42.8 44.4 46.1
domestic product (GDP). It recorded a growth of 3.76 % com-
Horses 0.4 0.4 0.4
pared to 2.99 % during the corresponding period in 2016. In
year 2017–2018 a total of 196.3 million livestock animals pro- Asses 5.1 5.2 5.3
duced 1282 million kg of dung, which is large enough to be uti-
Total 186 191.1 196.3
lized in bio-digesters for biogas production.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 4
These are not the final page numbers! &&
 X
n No. of installations
Mi ¼ Qi di mi (2)
1700
i

where Qi is the total number of livestock, di the excretion coef-

ficient (i.e., 20 kg d–1), and mi the animal husbandry period.
The inventory span is 365 d and the slaughter date varies, but
here, a husbandry period of 140 d was considered.
In the year 2000, the biogas support program (BSP) was ini-
tiated by the government of Pakistan. 10 000 biogas plants were 300
planned to be installed. However, only 1200 biogas units were 155
80
50
successfully completed [51]. The reasons for such a low num-
ber are technical and financial concerns. Later, PCRET started Azad Kashmir Punjab KP Sindh Baluchistan
a 5-year public sector development program (PSDP) project,
Development and Promotion of Biogas Technology for Meeting Figure 7. Biogas plants installed by PCRET from 2008–2013.
Domestic Fuel Needs of Rural Areas and Production of Bio-
fertilizer, and from 2008–2013 installed 2285 biogas plants in considered to be failures, but in the late 1990s appeared to be
different provinces of Pakistan (Fig. 7). As illustrated, the high- technically sound and are generally functioning well [52]. The
est number of biogas plants were installed in the Punjab prov- growth indicator shows that the number of biogas plants
ince because it is rich in agriculture resources. However, the remains small with a meagre number of a few hundred being
last reported installation was in 2013. Baluchistan, being the constructed each year. This contradicts the claim of successful
largest province of Pakistan, had a mere 80 installations due to program implementation.
poor livestock conditions. It is important to mention that the Yasar et al. [53] reviewed other domestic biogas designs
data presented here is from 2013. The reason being that no including fixed dome, floating dome, and fermentation cham-
new initiative by the government of Pakistan has been reported ber, but their digester design is very similar. Nevertheless, there
after that due to challenges faced in technical, financial, and are certain design limitations inhibiting the sustainability of the
policy matters. Here we report the most recent data obtained plant. The design of the biogas plants adopted by PCRET is
from the government institution. illustrated in Fig. 8. A critical analysis of design defects is dis-
cussed in the following sections along with recommendations.

3.1 Problem Analysis

3.2 Technical Challenges in Biogas Plant
At first, Chinese design-based biogas plants were imported, but Operations and Maintenance
they failed to operate due to lack of technical and design exper-
tise such as gas leakages, pressure maintenance, lack of labor, The operation and maintenance of biogas plants has been criti-
etc., which resulted in suspension of further biogas plant instal- cal for their sustainability. Many biogas plants have been aban-
lations. The biogas plants constructed in 1980s were widely doned (Fig. 9). This section fills the knowledge gap in literature

Figure 8. Biogas digester adopted by PCRET; adapted from [54].

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 5
These are not the final page numbers! &&
 leakage in a reactor was reported due to a number of issues
such as poor construction material, high biogas pressure,
unskilled labors and substandard piping and steel-based mate-
rial. Difficulties with respect to reactor leakages were cited in
studies from China [58], Nepal [56] Bangladesh [59], and Viet-
nam [60].

3.2.2 Removal of Digestate from Tank

When looking at the design, the digestate disposal mechanism

is another issue that requires design changes. Currently, the
inlet feed is mixed with water and over-mixing of water causes
loss of organic matter (OM) in the digester. On the other hand,
under-mixing of the feed causes retention of organic matter
within the digester for prolonged periods.
The amount of OM and nutrients are vital for the digestate,
which is also called ‘‘compost’’. The mature compost can be
used as alternate and efficient fertilizer [61–63]. Many develop-
Figure 9. Abandoned biogas plants in Pakistan. ing countries already use the mature digestate to improve soil
fertility. Thus, Pakistan agriculture has the potential market for
by addressing in-depth technical issues faced during the opera- digestate application [64, 65]. So far, there is no mechanism for
tion and maintenance of biogas plant. The critical operational digestate removal, but only if overflows out of the system. The
parameters possible solutions based on locally available materi- possible solution to overcome this problem is to disseminate
als are discussed. operational procedure and requirements for the water mixing
ratio to the owners or local plant operators. Similarly, inaccessi-
ble reservoirs attribute to poor use of digestate. This happens
3.2.1 Piping and Leakages when a reservoir distance is not considered and hinders the
digestate management [56]. Thus, it is recommended to install
The first component of the biogas plant is the inlet piping, pumps for timely cleaning and removal of digestate from the
which is reported to be the bottleneck in design due to poten- digester base.
tial blockage caused by the inlet feed [55]. Blockage is caused
by the slanting position of the fixed pipe. The proposed solu-
tion is to identify an optimal angle of the pipe and mixing the 3.3.3 Sustainable Operation of the Biogas Plant
feed with water for better flow.
Another major problem reported is the frequent leakages of One of the major challenges faced is the process stability dur-
biogas from the piping system. Numerous cemented and metal ing AD process. The amount of biogas depends on various
connections within the piping system cause leakages. The pipe technical aspects, namely, on the amount of oxygen, operation-
structure weakens with time if it is unused for an extended al temperature, feedstock-to-moisture ratio, solid retention
period of time. Thus, a water trap or filter should be installed time, and hydraulic retention time. According to one of the bi-
in the piping system to discharge the stored water in the sys- ogas plants performance assessment in Nepal, 37 % of the bio-
tem. Cheng et al. [56] reported that untied or slack joints can gas plants faced hurdles in the AD process and biogas produc-
most probably lead to leakage. However, leakages can be tion [60]. Similarly, in 2005, the percentage of rural households
detected and repaired using water or detergent foaming at pipe in China using multipurpose technology for biogas, accounted
corners. Longer operations of the biogas plant shall result in for only 37.3 % of total rural household users [66].
frequent failures [56]. The prime objective of digester plants is to produce biogas
Oxygen reduction potential (ORP) is one of the major for heating and cooking purpose. However, it is worth men-
requirements for the AD process. In case of leakages the ORP tioning that anaerobic digestion of organic matter is carried by
is reduced, which also effects the biogas production potential of complex microbial communities within the digester. This
the plant [57]. In addition, another design flaw is the open inlet requires very low oxygen reduction potential (ORP) and cer-
that negatively impacts the AD process due to supply of oxygen tain operational temperatures, i.e., mesophilic temperatures of
into the digester tank. The proposed solution is a covering lid 35 +2 °C or thermophilic temperatures of 55 +2 °C [67–70].
to maintain the desired ORP of around –100 to –300 mV. Fur- The end-product of the AD process is biogas and mature diges-
thermore, addition of rainwater during the rainy seasons also tate as discussed earlier. Similarly, pH, sulfur inhibition, alka-
interrupts the biogas production process due to disturbances in linity, and moisture content are paramount components for
the moisture ratio inside the digester. process stability [71–73]. If the parameters are not met, the
A sustainable biogas plant requires skilled builders to avoid result will be a failure of the AD process.
failures caused due to improper construction. In the literature,

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 6
These are not the final page numbers! &&
3.2.4 Scum Formation

Scum formation is another major problem in oper-

ating biogas plants [74, 75]. Scum is defined as ‘‘a
layer of dirt or froth on the surface of a liquid’’.
[75] This is one of the most common problem
inside the digester as this scum traps the biogas
inside [76]. The scum also traps the sulfur content,
which is extremely unfavorable for the AD process.
Scum triggers acidic conditions by lowering the pH
of the system. Thus, methanogenesis is stopped
and the biogas plant fails to produce gas [75]. The
precautionary principle is to monitor the pH using
a probe installed inside the digester and regulate it
using alkaline material. Another possible solution
to such problem is opening the tank and remove
the solid surface or changes in the design for provi-
sion of mechanical mixing to avoid scum forma-
tion [77].

3.2.5 Corrosion of Steel Structure

Corrosion of the steel dome is mainly caused by

the disturbance of pH giving rise to sulfate-reduc- Figure 10. Moveable biogas plant made of PVC, adapted from [79].
ing archaea (SRA) which produce H2S gas [78].
H2S is not only corrosive but highly explosive as
well. Therefore, it is necessary to install a scrubber for desulfu- Table 3. Automation techniques for biogas plant.
rization of the biogas as well as prolong the life of steel struc-
ture. Fig. 10 shows a movable biogas plant that was designed Technology Purpose Ref.
using polypropylene and PVC and which tends to be corrosion Pressure water scrubbing Enriching methane content [87]
resistant and very much cost effective [79]. The corrosion of
steel structures also leads to the leaching of the digestate, which Hot potassium carbonate CO2 absorption [88]
can severely degrade the ground water. The leachate is nitro- Pressure swing adsorption CO2 absorption [89–91]
gen-rich by nature and requires adsorption or membrane treat-
ment techniques for safe removal [80, 81]. Adsorption on activated H2S removal, Gas scrubbing [92, 93]
In addition, the sulfur content reduces the methane content carbons
and adds a pungent smell to the produced biogas which is Hydrogen recovery Extracting H2 gas as energy [94]
harmful to health. It is recommended to share the information source
about this solution via facilitators.
Pressure transducer Methane pressure monitoring [95]

pH Self-regulation ternary Process stability [96]

4 Future Perspectives for Biogas Plants buffer system

VFA control Process stability [97]

Recent trends show that Pakistan is on the path to better utilize
energy from biogas. From a technology point of view, process ORP monitoring and control Process stability [98]
upgrading and automation are the way forward for progressing system
biogas technology. Developed countries are using intelligent
systems in biogas plants. Sensors are an integral part of any
modern-day equipment. The basic monitors shall include pH, 5 Conclusion
ORP, gas quality, gas pressure, and temperature measurement
tools which should be an integral part of the digester [82]. Pro- Biogas production via anaerobic digestion is a promising tech-
grammable logic controllers (PLCs) are easily available tools nology to overcome the energy deficit of Pakistan and other
that can assist in the close monitoring of the AD process developmental countries in the Asian region. However, pre-
[83, 84]. Similarly, a provision for slurry or solid removal via vious experiences of difficulties in reactor handling, lack of pol-
pumping mechanism should be incorporated [85, 86]. Some of icy framework and technical support in this field are a major
the successful automation technologies for biogas plants are bottleneck identified in this paper. It is suggested that biogas
listed in Tab. 3. plant designers/engineers should always be mindful of leakages,
solid retention time, and pressure management for sustainable

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 7
These are not the final page numbers! &&
biogas production from the digester. Furthermore, for future MBP [m3] manure biogas potential
work it is suggested that upgrading the design to (poly vinyl)- mi [d] animal husbandry period
based structures and instrumentation can solve many problems Mi [kg] amount of livestock manure produced
and attain sustainability in biogas technology for developing from livestock i
countries. Qi [–] total number of livestock

Abbreviations
Acknowledgment AD anaerobic digestion
VFA volatile fatty acids
The authors are grateful to Dr. Baqir raza, Director general of
GDP gross domestic product
the Pakistan Council for Renewable Energy Technologies
VOCs volatile organic compounds
(PCRET) for providing valuable data and feedback on available
SDGs sustainable development goals
biogas technologies in Pakistan. This research did not receive
Mtoe million ton oil equivalent
any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, com-
BSP biogas support program
mercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
RBM residential biogas model
PCAT Pakistan Council for Appropriate Technology
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
PCRET Pakistan Council of Renewable Energy Technologies
ORP oxygen reduction potential
Zohaib Ur Rehman Afridi is PLCs programmable logic controllers
an Assistant Professor at the
Department of Energy Man-
agement and Sustainability of References
the University of Engineering
and Technology Peshawar, [1] P. A. Breach, S. P. Simonovic, Wastewater Treatment Energy
Pakistan. He obtained his Recovery Potential For Adaptation To Global Change: An
Ph.D. in Environmental Integrated Assessment, Environ Manage. 2018, 61, 624–636.
Science and Engineering from [2] L. Reichenberg, F. Hedenus, M. Odenberger, F. Johnsson,
Tsinghua University, Beijing, Tailoring large-scale electricity production from variable re-
China, and has several publica- newable energy sources to accommodate baseload genera-
tions in international journals. tion in europe, Renewable Energy 2018, 129, 334–346.
His research interest focuses [3] M. A. H. Mondal, L. M. Kamp, N. I. Pachova, Drivers, bar-
on waste to energy, anaerobic digestion, wastewater treat- riers, and strategies for implementation of renewable energy
ment, energy management, and sustainability in policy technologies in rural areas in Bangladesh—An innovation
making. system analysis, Energy Policy 2010, 38, 4626–4634.
[4] K. C. Surendra, S. K. Khanal, P. Shrestha, B. Lamsal, Current
status of renewable energy in Nepal: Opportunities and
challenges, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2011, 15,
Naseha Wafa Qammar is a 4107–4117.
lecturer at department of Elec- [5] M. A. Chaudhry, R. Raza, S. Hayat, Renewable energy tech-
trical Engineering at the City nologies in Pakistan: prospects and challenges, Renewable
University of Science and Sustainable Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 1657–1662.
Technology, Pakistan. She ob- [6] M. Poeschl, S. Ward, P. Owende, Prospects for expanded
tained her M.Sc. degree in utilization of biogas in Germany, Renewable Sustainable
Energy Management and Sus- Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 1782–1797.
tainability. Her area of research [7] E. U. Khan, A. R. Martin, Review of biogas digester technol-
is energy management at ogy in rural Bangladesh, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev.
household level, energy pov- 2016, 62, 247–259.
erty studies, renewable energy, [8] K. Surendra, D. Takara, A. G. Hashimoto, S. K. Khanal, Bio-
and gender equality. gas as a sustainable energy source for developing countries:
Opportunities and challenges, Renewable Sustainable Energy
Rev. 2014, 31, 846–859.
[9] M. Asif, Sustainable energy options for Pakistan, Renewable
Sustainable Energy Rev. 2009, 13, 903–909.
Symbols used [10] M. Khalil, M. A. Berawi, R. Heryanto, A. Rizalie, Waste to
energy technology: The potential of sustainable biogas pro-
bi [m3kg–1] livestock manure biogas conversion duction from animal waste in Indonesia, Renewable Sustain-
parameter able Energy Rev. 2019, 105, 323–331.
di [kg d–1] excretion coefficient

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 8
These are not the final page numbers! &&
[11] B. Castellani, S. Rinaldi, E. Bonamente, A. Nicolini, F. Rossi, [27] V. Paolini, F. Petracchini, M. Segreto, L. Tomassetti, N. Naja,
F. Cotana, Carbon and energy footprint of the hydrate-based A. Cecinato, Environmental impact of biogas: A short review
biogas upgrading process integrated with CO2 valorization, of current knowledge, J. Environ. Sci. Health, A 2018, 53,
Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 615, 404–411. 899–906.
[12] D. Georgakakis, N. Christopoulou, A. Chatziathanassiou, [28] G. Arab, D. McCartney, Benefits to decomposition rates
T. Venetis, Development and use of an economic evaluation when using digestate as compost co-feedstock: Part I - Focus
model to assess establishment of local centralized rural bio- on physicochemical parameters, Waste Manage. 2017, 68,
gas plants in Greece, Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2003, 109, 74–84.
275–284. [29] R. C. Michitsch, C. Chong, B. E. Holbein, R. P. Voroney,
[13] P. Börjesson, B. Mattiasson, Biogas as a resource-efficient H. W. Liu, Use of wastewater and compost extracts as
vehicle fuel, Trends Biotechnol. 2008, 26, 7–13. nutrient sources for growing nursery and turfgrass species,
[14] W. Verstraete, F. Morgan-Sagastume, S. Aiyuk, M. Waweru, J. Environ. Qual. 2007, 36, 1031–1041.
K. Rabaey, G. Lissens, Anaerobic digestion as a core technol- [30] F. Tambone, B. Scaglia, G. D’Imporzano, A. Schievano,
ogy in sustainable management of organic matter, Water Sci. V. Orzi, S. Salati, F. Adani, Assessing amendment and fertil-
Technol. 2005, 52, 59–66. izing properties of digestates from anaerobic digestion
[15] H. J. Gljzen, Anaerobic digestion for sustainable develop- through a comparative study with digested sludge and com-
ment: a natural approach, Water Sci. Technol. 2002, 45, post, Chemosphere 2010, 81, 577–583.
321–328. [31] J. Budde, A. Prochnow, M. Plochl, T. Suarez Quinones,
[16] M. Neupane, B. Basnyat, R. Fischer, G. Froeschl, M. Wolbers, M. Heiermann, Energy balance, greenhouse gas emissions,
E. A. Rehfuess, Sustained use of biogas fuel and blood pres- and profitability of thermobarical pretreatment of cattle
sure among women in rural Nepal, Environ. Res. 2015, 136, waste in anaerobic digestion, Waste Manage. 2016, 49,
343–351. 390–410.
[17] J. Kang, J. Li, X. Zhen, Y. I. A. Osman, R. Feng, Z. Si, Experi- [32] P. D. Jensen, C. M. Mehta, C. Carney, D. J. Batstone, Recov-
mental Study on Productivity Performance of Household ery of energy and nutrient resources from cattle paunch
Combined Thermal Power and Biogas System in Northwest waste using temperature phased anaerobic digestion, Waste
China, Biomed Res. Int. 2018, 2018, 7420656. Manage. 2016, 51, 72–80.
[18] Y. Lin, D. Wang, L. Wang, Biological pretreatment enhances [33] H. Escalante, L. Castro, M. P. Amaya, L. Jaimes, J. Jaimes-
biogas production in the anaerobic digestion of pulp and Estevez, Anaerobic digestion of cheese whey: Energetic and
paper sludge, Waste Manage. Res. 2010, 28, 800–810. nutritional potential for the dairy sector in developing coun-
[19] V. J. Brown, Biogas: a bright idea for Africa, Environ. Health tries, Waste Manage. 2018, 71, 711–718.
Perspect. 2006, 114, A300–A303. [34] B. E. Liedl, J. Bombardiere, J. M. Chaffield, Fertilizer poten-
[20] B. Froschle, M. Heiermann, M. Lebuhn, U. Messelhausser, tial of liquid and solid effluent from thermophilic anaerobic
M. Plochl, Hygiene and Sanitation in Biogas Plants, Adv. digestion of poultry waste, Water Sci. Technol. 2006, 53, 69–
Biochem. Eng. Biotechnol. 2015, 151, 63–99. 79.
[21] T. L. Anderman, R. S. DeFries, S. A. Wood, R. Remans, [35] C. Dohoo, J. Read Guernsey, M. D. Gibson, J. VanLeeuwen,
R. Ahuja, S. E. Ulla, Biogas Cook Stoves for Healthy and Impact of biogas digesters on cookhouse volatile organic
Sustainable Diets? A Case Study in Southern India, Front compound exposure for rural Kenyan farmwomen, J. Expo.
Nutr. 2015, 2, 28. Sci. Environ. Epidemiol. 2015, 25, 167–174.
[22] Y. Li, H. Liu, F. Yan, D. Su, Y. Wang, H. Zhou, High-calorific [36] C. Dohoo, J. R. Guernsey, K. Critchley, J. VanLeeuwen, Pilot
biogas production from anaerobic digestion of food waste study on the impact of biogas as a fuel source on respiratory
using a two-phase pressurized biofilm (TPPB) system, Bio- health of women on rural Kenyan smallholder dairy farms,
resour. Technol. 2017, 224, 56–62. J. Environ. Public Health 2012, 2012, 636298.
[23] Y. Zhang, H. Li, Energy recovery from wastewater treatment [37] Yadvika, Santosh, T. R. Sreekrishnan, S. Kohli, V. Rana,
plants through sludge anaerobic digestion: effect of low- Enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates us-
organic-content sludge, Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2019, ing different techniques - a review, Bioresour. Technol. 2004,
26, 30544–30553. 95, 1–10.
[24] H. Kjerstadius, S. Haghighatafshar, A. Davidsson, Potential [38] J. Liebetrau, H. Strauber, J. Kretzschmar, V. Denysenko,
for nutrient recovery and biogas production from black- M. Nelles, Anaerobic Digestion, Adv. Biochem. Eng. Biotech-
water, food waste and greywater in urban source control sys- nol. 2019, 166, 281–299.
tems, Environ. Technol. 2015, 36, 1707–1720. [39] A. Zayen, G. Schories, S. Sayadi, Incorporation of an anaero-
[25] D. Ruiz, G. San Miguel, B. Corona, A. Gaitero, A. Domi- bic digestion step in a multistage treatment system for sani-
nguez, Environmental and economic analysis of power gen- tary landfill leachate, Waste Manage. 2016, 53, 32–39.
eration in a thermophilic biogas plant, Sci. Total Environ. [40] J. Zhang, W. Zhao, H. Zhang, Z. Wang, C. Fan, L. Zang,
2018, 633, 1418–1428. Recent achievements in enhancing anaerobic digestion with
[26] R. K. Dereli, C. Yangin-Gomec, A. Ozabali, I. Ozturk, The carbon-based functional materials, Bioresour. Technol. 2018,
feasibility of a centralized biogas plant treating the manure 266, 555–567.
produced by an organized animal farmers union in Turkey, [41] T. Nevzorova, V. Kutcherov, Barriers to the wider implemen-
Water Sci. Technol. 2012, 66, 556–563. tation of biogas as a source of energy: A state-of-the-art
review, Energy Strategy Rev. 2019, 26, 100414.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 9
These are not the final page numbers! &&
[42] M. M. Crossan, M. Apaydin, A Multi-Dimensional Frame- [59] M. Riazul Hamid, M. Nazmul Haque, M. A. Rouf, M. Islam,
work of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of Dissemination of Domestic Biogas Plants in Bangladesh –
the Literature, J. Manage. Stud. 2010, 47, 1154–1191. Current State, Problems faced and Barriers, Int. J. Sci. Eng.
[43] A. Martı́n-Martı́n, E. Orduna-Malea, M. Thelwall, E. D. Ló- Res. 2013, 4 (3), 1–4.
pez-Cózar, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A [60] H. Roubı́k, J. Mazancová, J. Banout, V. Verner, Addressing
systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories, problems at small-scale biogas plants: a case study from cen-
J. Informetrics 2018, 12, 1160–1177. tral Vietnam, J. Cleaner Prod. 2016, 112, 2784–2792.
[44] A. Martı́n-Martı́n, E. Orduna-Malea, E. D. López-Cózar, [61] F. Xu, F. Wang, L. Lin, Y. Li, Comparison of digestate from
Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web solid anaerobic digesters and dewatered effluent from liquid
of Science, and Scopus: a multidisciplinary comparison, anaerobic digesters as inocula for solid state anaerobic diges-
Scientometrics 2018, 116, 2175–2188. tion of yard trimmings, Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 200,
[45] M. E. Falagas, E. I. Pitsouni, G. A. Malietzis, G. Pappas, 753–760.
Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, web of science, and Google [62] C. Rico, J. L. Rico, I. Tejero, N. Munoz, B. Gomez, Anaerobic
scholar: strengths and weaknesses, FASEB J. 2008, 22, digestion of the liquid fraction of dairy manure in pilot plant
338–342. for biogas production: residual methane yield of digestate,
[46] S. L. De Groote, R. Raszewski, Coverage of Google Scholar, Waste Manage. 2011, 31, 2167–2173.
Scopus, and Web of Science: A case study of the h-index in [63] F. Tambone, P. Genevini, G. D’Imporzano, F. Adani, Assess-
nursing, Nursing Outlook 2012, 60, 391–400. ing amendment properties of digestate by studying the or-
[47] G. Halevi, H. Moed, J. Bar-Ilan, Suitability of Google Scholar ganic matter composition and the degree of biological stabil-
as a source of scientific information and as a source of data ity during the anaerobic digestion of the organic fraction of
for scientific evaluation—Review of the literature, J. Infor- MSW, Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 3140–3142.
metrics 2017, 11, 823–834. [64] C. R. Lohri, L. Rodic, C. Zurbrugg, Feasibility assessment
[48] Pakistan Economic Survey 2017-2018, Government of Paki- tool for urban anaerobic digestion in developing countries,
stan, Finance Division, Islamabad 2018. J. Environ. Manage. 2013, 126, 122–131.
[49] M. A. Sanz-Bobi, A review of key points of an industrial [65] J. Snyman, K. Vorster, Sustainability of composting as an
biogas plant. A European perspective, in 2012 Int. Conf. on alternative waste management option for developing coun-
Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA), tries: a case study of the City of Tshwane, Waste Manage.
Nagasaki, November 2012. Res. 2011, 29, 1222–1231.
[50] M. Gao, D. Wang, H. Wang, X. Wang, Y. Feng, Biogas poten- [66] Y. Chen, G. Yang, S. Sweeney, Y. Feng, Household biogas use
tial, utilization and countermeasures in agricultural provin- in rural China: a study of opportunities and constraints,
ces: A case study of biogas development in Henan Province, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2010, 14, 545–549.
China, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2019, 99, [67] G. A. Iocoli, M. C. Zabaloy, G. Pasdevicelli, M. A. Gomez,
191–200. Use of biogas digestates obtained by anaerobic digestion and
[51] S. S. Amjid, M. Q. Bilal, M. S. Nazir, A. Hussain, Biogas, co-digestion as fertilizers: Characterization, soil biological
renewable energy resource for Pakistan, Renewable Sustain- activity and growth dynamic of Lactuca sativa L, Sci. Total
able Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 2833–2837. Environ. 2018, 647, 11–19.
[52] F. ter Heedge, Program implementation document for a [68] C. Li, P. Champagne, B. C. Anderson, Anaerobic co-diges-
national program on domestic biogas dissemination in tion of municipal organic wastes and pre-treatment to en-
Pakistan, Winrock International, Morrilton, AR 2008. hance biogas production from waste, Water Sci. Technol.
[53] A. Yasar, S. Nazir, R. Rasheed, A. B. Tabinda, M. Nazar, 2014, 69, 443–450.
Economic review of different designs of biogas plants at [69] E. Salminen, J. Rintala, Anaerobic digestion of organic solid
household level in Pakistan, Renewable Sustainable Energy poultry slaughterhouse waste - a review, Bioresour. Technol.
Rev. 2017, 74, 221–229. 2002, 83, 13–26.
[54] Biogas for cooking and lighning, Governmental report, [70] F. Xu, Y. Li, X. Ge, L. Yang, Y. Li, Anaerobic digestion of food
Pakistan Council for Renewable Energy Technologies, waste - Challenges and opportunities, Bioresour. Technol.
Ministry of Science and Technology, Islamabad 2018. 2018, 247, 1047–1058.
[55] M. Nazir, Biogas plants construction technology for rural [71] Q. Feng, Y. Lin, Integrated processes of anaerobic digestion
areas, Bioresour. Technol. 1991, 35, 283–289. and pyrolysis for higher bioenergy recovery from lignocellu-
[56] S. Cheng, Z. Li, H.-P. Mang, K. Neupane, M. Wauthelet, losic biomass: A brief review, Renewable Sustainable Energy
E.-M. Huba, Application of fault tree approach for technical Rev. 2017, 77, 1272–1287.
assessment of small-sized biogas systems in Nepal, Appl. [72] R. Kothari, A. K. Pandey, S. Kumar, V. V. Tyagi, S. K. Tyagi,
Energy 2014, 113, 1372–1381. Different aspects of dry anaerobic digestion for bio-energy:
[57] C. Vongvichiankul, J. Deebao, W. Khongnakorn, Relation- An overview, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2014, 39,
ship between pH, Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) and 174–195.
Biogas Production in Mesophilic Screw Anaerobic Digester, [73] J. Wei, X. Hao, M. C. M. van Loosdrecht, J. Li, Feasibility
Energy Proc. 2017, 138, 877–882. analysis of anaerobic digestion of excess sludge enhanced by
[58] I. S. Chang, J. Zhao, X. Yin, J. Wu, Z. Jia, L. Wang, Compre- iron: A review, Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2018, 89,
hensive utilizations of biogas in Inner Mongolia, China, 16–26.
Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev. 2011, 15, 1442–1453.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 10
These are not the final page numbers! &&
[74] S. Alanya, Y. D. Yilmazel, C. Park, J. L. Willis, J. Keaney, techno-economic comparison of different upgrading tech-
P. M. Kohl, J. A. Hunt, M. Duran, Anaerobic co-digestion of nologies in the Italian context, Renewable Energy 2019, 135,
sewage sludge and primary clarifier skimmings for increased 663–673.
biogas production, Water Sci. Technol. 2013, 67, 174–179. [88] M. Miltner, A. Makaruk, M. Harasek, Review on available
[75] C. Y. Gomec, Behavior of the anaerobic CSTR in the pres- biogas upgrading technologies and innovations towards
ence of scum during primary sludge digestion and the role advanced solutions, J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 161, 1329–1337.
of pH, J. Environ. Sci. Health, A 2006, 41, 1117–1127. [89] D. Andriani, A. Wresta, T. D. Atmaja, A. Saepudin, A review
[76] L. Moeller, A. Zehnsdorf, D. Pokorná, J. Zábranská, Foam on optimization production and upgrading biogas through
Formation in Anaerobic Digesters, in Advances in Bioenergy CO2 removal using various techniques, Appl. Biochem. Bio-
(Eds: Y. Li, X. Ge), Elsevier, Amsterdam 2018, 1–42. technol. 2014, 172, 1909–1928.
[77] A. Mutungwazi, P. Mukumba, G. Makaka, Biogas digester [90] V. Paolini, F. Petracchini, E. Guerriero, A. Bencini, S. Drigo,
types installed in South Africa: A review, Renewable Sustain- Biogas cleaning and upgrading with natural zeolites from
able Energy Rev. 2018, 81, 172–180. tuffs, Environ. Technol. 2016, 37, 1418–1427.
[78] D. Ozuolmez, H. Na, M. A. Lever, K. U. Kjeldsen, B. B. Jor- [91] M. Ahmad, M. Yousaf, A. Nasir, I. A. Bhatti, A. Mahmood,
gensen, C. M. Plugge, Methanogenic archaea and sulfate X. Fang, X. Jian, K. Kalantar-Zadeh, N. Mahmood, Porous
reducing bacteria co-cultured on acetate: teamwork or co- Eleocharis@MnPE Layered Hybrid for Synergistic Adsorp-
existence?, Front Microbiol. 2015, 6, 492. tion and Catalytic Biodegradation of Toxic Azo Dyes from
[79] K. Mushtaq, A. A. Zaidi, S. J. Askari, Design and perform- Industrial Wastewater, Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53,
ance analysis of floating dome type portable biogas plant for 2161–2170.
domestic use in Pakistan, Sustainable Energy Technol. Assess. [92] E. Santos-Clotas, A. Cabrera-Codony, B. Ruiz, E. Fuente,
2016, 14, 21–25. M. J. Martin, Sewage biogas efficient purification by means
[80] M. Ahmad, S. Liu, N. Mahmood, A. Mahmood, M. Ali, of lignocellulosic waste-based activated carbons, Bioresour.
M. Zheng, J. Ni, Synergic Adsorption – Biodegradation by Technol. 2019, 275, 207–215.
an Advanced Carrier for Enhanced Removal of High- [93] N. N. Zulkefli, M. S. Masdar, W. N. R. Wan Isahak, J. M. Ja-
Strength Nitrogen and Refractory Organics, ACS Appl. him, S. A. M. Rejab, C. Chien Lye, Removal of hydrogen
Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 13188–13200. sulfide from a biogas mimic by using impregnated activated
[81] M. Ahmad, S. Liu, N. Mahmood, A. Mahmood, M. Ali, carbon adsorbent, PLoS One 2019, 14, e0211713.
M. Zheng, J. Ni, Effects of porous carrier size on biofilm [94] B. Ohs, M. Falkenberg, M. Wessling, Optimizing hybrid
development, microbial distribution and nitrogen removal membrane-pressure swing adsorption processes for biogenic
in microaerobic bioreactors, Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 234, hydrogen recovery, Chem. En.g J. 2019, 364, 452–461.
360–369. [95] F. Fdz-Polanco, P. Nieto, S. Perez Elvira, F. P. van der Zee, M.
[82] D. Nguyen, V. Gadhamshetty, S. Nitayavardhana, S. K. Kha- Fdz-Polanc, P. A. Garcia, Automated equipment for anaero-
nal, Automatic process control in anaerobic digestion bic sludge parameters determination, Water Sci. Technol.
technology: A critical review, Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 193, 2005, 52, 479–485.
513–522. [96] D. Yu, J. Liu, Q. Sui, Y. Wei, Biogas-pH automation control
[83] A. Nordberg, M. Hansson, I. Sundh, E. Nordkvist, H. Caris- strategy for optimizing organic loading rate of anaerobic
son, B. Mathisen, Monitoring of a biogas process using membrane bioreactor treating high COD wastewater, Bio-
electronic gas sensors and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIR), resour. Technol. 2016, 203, 62–70.
Water Sci. Technol. 2000, 41, 1–8. [97] P. F. Pind, I. Angelidaki, B. K. Ahring, A novel in-situ sam-
[84] L. Lardon, A. Punal, J. A. Martinez, J. P. Steyer, Modular pling and VFA sensor technique for anaerobic systems,
expert system for the diagnosis of operating conditions of Water Sci. Technol. 2002, 45, 261–268.
industrial anaerobic digestion plants, Water Sci. Technol. [98] S. K. Khanal, C. Shang, J. C. Huang, Use of ORP (oxidation-
2005, 52, 427–433. reduction potential) to control oxygen dosing for online
[85] O. Bernard, Z. Hadj-Sadok, D. Dochain, Software sensors to sulfide oxidation in anaerobic treatment of high sulfate
monitor the dynamics of microbial communities: application wastewater, Water Sci. Technol. 2003, 47, 183–189.
to anaerobic digestion, Acta Biotheor. 2000, 48, 197–205. [99] Livestock Census report 1996, Ministry of National Food
[86] J. P. Steyer, L. Lardon, O. Bernard, Sensors network diagnosis Security & Research, Ismamabad 1996.
in anaerobic digestion processes using evidence theory, [100] Livestock Census report 2006, Ministry of National Food
Water Sci. Technol. 2004, 50, 21–29. Security & Research, Ismamabad 2006.
[87] E. Barbera, S. Menegon, D. Banzato, C. D’Alpaos, A. Bertuc- [101] Energy Year book 2017–2018, Government of Pakistan,
co, From biogas to biomethane: A process simulation-based Ministry of Energy, Islamabad 2017.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 11
These are not the final page numbers! &&
Biogas production from organic waste Technical Challenges and
by anaerobic bacteria is an Optimization of Biogas Plants
environmentally friendly way to obtain
clean and affordable energy. However, Z. U. R. Afridi*, N. W. Qammar
current problems include the frequent
reactor failure, operational challenges, ChemBioEng Rev. 2020, 7 (4),
and lack of awareness to technical XXX L XXX
aspects such as leakage control and
digestate removal techniques for the DOI: 10.1002/cben.202000005
biogas plant. This review discusses the
problems and presents indigenous
solutions to overcome these challenges.

www.ChemBioEngRev.de ª 2020 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim ChemBioEng Rev 2020, 7, No. 0, 1–12 12
These are not the final page numbers! &&