Affiliations 

  • 1 Department of Chemical Engineering, HiCoE-Centre for Biofuel and Biochemical Research, Institute of Self-Sustainable Building, University Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia. Electronic address: yoke.cheng@utp.edu.my
  • 2 Department of Chemical Engineering, HiCoE-Centre for Biofuel and Biochemical Research, Institute of Self-Sustainable Building, University Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia
  • 3 Department of Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering, Khalifa University, P. O. Box 127788, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
  • 4 Department of Fundamental and Applied Sciences, HICoE-Centre for Biofuel and Biochemical Research (CBBR), Institute of Self-Sustainable Building, Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, 32610 Seri Iskandar, Perak, Malaysia
  • 5 State Environmental Protection Key Laboratory of Integrated Surface Water-Groundwater Pollution Control, School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, 1088 Xueyuan Blvd, Nanshan District, Shenzhen 518055, PR China
  • 6 Shenzhen Key Laboratory for Additive Manufacturing of High-Performance Materials, Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Southern University of Science and Technology, Shenzhen 518055, China
J Hazard Mater, 2021 05 05;409:124964.
PMID: 33418292 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.124964

Abstract

Thriving oil palm agroindustry comes at a price of voluminous waste generation, with palm oil mill effluent (POME) as the most cumbersome waste due to its liquid state, high strength, and great discharge volume. In view of incompetent conventional ponding treatment, a voluminous number of publications on non-conventional POME treatments is filed in the Scopus database, mainly working on alternative or polishing POME treatments. In dearth of such comprehensive review, all the non-conventional POME treatments are rigorously reviewed in a conceptual and comparative manner. Herein, non-conventional POME treatments are sorted into the five major routes, viz. biological (bioconversions - aerobic/anaerobic biodegradation), physical (flotation & membrane filtration), chemical (Fenton oxidation), physicochemical (photooxidation, steam reforming, coagulation-flocculation, adsorption, & ultrasonication), and bioelectrochemical (microbial fuel cell) pathways. For aforementioned treatments, the constraints, pros, and cons are qualitatively and quantitatively (with compiled performance data) detailed to indicate their process maturity. Authors recommended (i) bioconversions, adsorption, and steam reforming as primary treatments, (ii) flotation and ultrasonication as pretreatments, (iii) Fenton oxidation, photooxidation, and membrane filtration as polishing treatments, and (iv) microbial fuel cell and coagulation-flocculation as pretreatment or polishing treatment. Life cycle assessments are required to evaluate the environmental, economic, and energy aspects of each process.

* Title and MeSH Headings from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.