Abstract
A performance evaluation of three first generation fixed dome anaerobic reactors installed in Kenya was undertaken to understand emerging design and operational deficiencies and inform design and scheme management improvements. These reactors were designed for decentralized human waste treatment and bio-resources recovery. Scheme management and reactor design configuration were explored while sixteen operating and performance parameters were monitored over 42 weeks using standard wastewater measurement techniques. The study results showed treatment efficiencies ranging from 26% to 51% for physicochemical parameters and 44% to 80% for microbiological indicators. However, effluent quality consistently failed to meet than World Health Organization and Food and Agriculture Organization (WHO/FAO) standards. Notably, Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in the effluent ranged from 1,843 to 2,299 mg/L—substantially higher than typical raw wastewater levels of 155 to 330 mg/L (median ~250 mg/L)—indicating poor solids removal. Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) levels were between 735 and 2,522 mg/L (higher than WHO limit: ≤250 mg/L), Electrical Conductivity (EC) reached 5,140 µS/cm (WHO/FAO limit: ≤700 µS/cm for unrestricted irrigation), while microbial contaminants E. coli (2,254–2,370 MPN/100 mL) and helminths (31–52 eggs/100 mL) far exceeded limits for restricted irrigation (<1,000 MPN/100 mL and ≤1 egg/L, respectively). Additionally, the microbial log reduction value (LRV) was only 0.3, well below the WHO recommended LRV > 2 for secondary treatment. These findings confirm the reactors’ inadequate pathogen attenuation and pollutant removal, limiting safe effluent reuse. Design flaws that include straight-line inlet-outlet pipe configuration, low hydraulic retention times (2–5 days), and operation under psychrophilic temperatures (27–28 °C resulted in dead zones and poor flow dynamics. Systems that received more diluted influent (e.g., Gachoire) performed slightly better than those handling concentrated waste (e.g., Kibera). Still, none achieved adequate treatment. The computed Treatment Index (TI) values—0.58 (Gachoire), 0.52 (Naivasha), and 0.46 (Kibera)—confirmed the reactors’ inadequacy in reducing both microbial and chemical pollutants. Bioresource recovery potential was however demonstrated, with daily nitrogen recovery of 496.2 kg and biogas production of 60 m³. The findings underscore that single-stage fixed dome systems adapted from livestock applications are inadequately suited for human waste treatment. Advanced modelling, adoption of baffled or hybrid designs and integration of dual-metric performance evaluation (percentage removal and absolute concentrations) are recommended to improve treatment efficiency, ensure safe reuse, and achieve environmental compliance in future deployments.
References
Ahring, B., 1995. Methanogenesis in thermophilic biogas reactors. International Journal of General and Molecular Microbiology, pp. 67 (1), 91-92.
American Public Health Association, APHA., 1998. Standard Methods for the Examination of water and wastewater, USA: American Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation.
Anaokar, G. S., Khambete, A. K. & and Christian, R. A., 2018. Evaluation of a Performance Index for Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants using MCDM – TOPSIS. International Journal of Technology, Volume 4, pp. 715-726.
Andriania, D., Wrestaa, A., Saepudina, A. & Prawaraa, B., 2015. A review of recycling of human excreta to energy through biogas generation: Indonesia case. Energy Procedia, pp. 219-225.
APHA, 2017. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water of Wastewater. 23 ed. s.l.:APA.
Appels, L., Baeyens, J., Degreve, J. & Dewil, R., 2008. Principles and potential of the anaerobic digestion of waste-activated sludge. Journal of Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, pp. Appels, L, J Baeyens, J Degreve, and R Dewil. “Appels, L, Baeyens, J., Degreve, J. and R. Dewil. Principles and potential of the anaerobic digestion 755-781..
Awad , A. et al., 2014. Characteristics, Process Parameters, and Inner Components ofAnaerobic Bioreactors. BioMed Research Internationa, Volume 2014, p. 10.
Bates, V., 2012. The Effect of Infrastructure on Water-Related Diseases in Rural African Communities, Nashville: Vanderbilt University.
Blumensaat, F. & Keller, J., 2005. Modelling of two-stage anaerobic digestion using the IWA Anaerobic Digestion Model No. 1 (ADM1). Water Research, January, 39(1), pp. 171-182.
Blumenthal, J. U. et al., 2000. Guidelines for the microbiological quality of treated wastewater used in agriculture:recommendations for revising WHO guidelines. Special Theme – Environment and Health, 78(9).
Bordner, R., Winter, J. & Scarpino, P., 2002. Microbial Methods for Monitoring the Environment, Water and Wastes, Washington DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Cesaro, A. & Belgiorno, V., 2015. Combined Biogas and Bioethanol Production:Opportunities and Challenges for Industrial Application. Energies, Issue 8, pp. 8121-8144.
Chen, L. & Neibling, H., 2014. Anaerobic Digestion Basics, Moscow, Idaho: University of Idaho.
Chernicharo, C. A. d. L., 2007. Anaerobic Reactors. London, UK: IWA Publishing.
Daud , M. K. et al., 2018. Review of Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor Technology: Effect of Different Parameters and Developments for Domestic Wastewater Treatment,. Journal of Chemistry, Volume 2018, p. 13.
Edem, C. B. & Brew-Hammond, A., 2011. Biogas technology dissemination in Ghana: history, current status, future prospects, and policy significance. International Journal of Energy and Environment, pp. 1(2),277-294.
Geotech UK, 2012. Biogas 5000 Gas Analyzer Operating Manual. London: Geotech.
Gerardi, M. H., 2003. The Microbiology of Anaerobic Digesters. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
Government of Kenya, 2003. Kenya Demographic and Health Survey., Nairobi: Government of Kenya.
Government of Kenya, 2007. Kenya Integrated Household Budget Survey,2005/06, Nairobi: Government of Kenya.
Government of Kenya, 2015. Kenya National Forest Policy, Nairobi: Government Press.
Gutterer, B., Sasse, L., Panzerbreter, T. & Reckerzugel, T., 2009. Decentralized Wastewater Treatment System (DEWATS) and Sanitation in Developing Countries; A practical Guide. Leicestershire, UK: WEDC.
Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B. & & Anderson, R., 2019. Multivariate Data Analysis. 8th ed. s.l.:s.n.
İnce, E., İnce, M. & Önkal , E. G., 2017. Comparison of thermophilic and mesophilic anaerobic treatmentsfor potato processing wastewater using a contact reactor. Global NEST Journa, 19(2), pp. 318-326.
Kalyuzhnyi , S. V., Fedorovichi , . V. & Lens., P. N., 2001 (b). Novel dispersed plug flow model for UASB reactors focusing on sludge dynamics. Journal of Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Volume 90, pp. 107-223.
Kalyuzhnyi , S. V. et al., 2001 (a). Psychophilic one and two step system for pre-treatment of winery waste. Journal of Water and science technology, Volume 4, pp. 23-31.
Kamarád, L., Pohn, S., Bochmann, G. & Harasek, M., 2013. Determination of mixing quality in biogas plant digesters using tracer tests and computational fluid dynamics. Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, LXI(5), p. 269–1278.
Kavuma, C., 2013. Variation of Methane and Carbon dioxide, Stockholm, Sweden: Royal Institute of Technology.
Kenya Bureua of Statistics, 2014. The 2014 Kenya Demographic and Health Survey, Nairobi: Government of Kenya.
Khambete, A. K. & Christian, R. A., 2011. Evaluating Overall Efficiency of Sewage Treatment Plant Using Fuzzy Composition. World Applied Sciences Journal, 12(13), pp. 293-298.
Littleton, H., Daigger, G. & Strom, P., 2007. Application of Computational Fluid Dynamics to Closed-Loop Bioreactors: I. Characterization and Simulation of Fluid-Flow Pattern and Oxygen Transfer. Water Environment Research, 79(6), pp. 600-612.
Mata-Alvarez , J., 1987. A dynamic simulation of a two-phase anaerobic digestion system for solid wastes. Journal of Biotechnology and Bioengineering, Issue 30, p. 844.
Mata-Alvarez , J., 2003. Biomethanization of the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes, Dubendorf: IWA Publishing.
Maya, C., Jimenez , B. & Schwartzbrod , J., 2006. Comparison of Techniques for the Detection of Helminth Ova in Drinking Water and Wastewater. Water Environment Research, February, 78(2), pp. 118-124 .
Merino-Solís , . L. M., Villegas , E., Anda, J. d. & López-López, A., 2015. The Effect of the Hydraulic Retention Time on the Performance of an Ecological Wastewater Treatment System: An Anaerobic Filter with a Constructed Wetland. Journal of Water, pp. 1149-1163.
Metcalf and Eddy, I., Tchobanoglous G., B. & F.L., &. S. H., 2003. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Reuse. 4th ed. s.l.:McGraw-Hill.
Montgomery, D. & Runger, G., 2014. Applied Statistics and Probability for Engineers. 6th ed. s.l.:Wiley.
Mugo, F. & Gathui, T., 2010. Biomass energy use in Kenya. A background paper prepared for the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) for an international ESPA workshop on biomass energy, 19-21 October 2010, Parliament House Hotel, Nairobi: Practical Action.
Mungwe, J. N., Colombo, E., Adani, F. & Schievano, a. A., 2016. The fixed dome digester: An appropriate design for the context of Sub-Sahara Africa. Biomass and Bioenergy, pp. 35-44.
Murk , J. S., Frieling, J. . L., Dietrich , C. C. & Tortorici , L. D., 1980. Use of Bench-Scale Digesters to Evaluate Full-Scale Digester Performance. Water Pollution Control Federation, pp. 2709-2716.
Odey , E. A. et al., 2016. Effect of Hydraulic Retention Time on Anaerobic Digestion of Xiao Jiahe Municipal Sludge. International Journal of Waste Resources, p. 231.
Odhiambo , J. O. et al., 2009. Integration Water, Energy and sanitation systems for standalone settlements. Desalination Journal, Elsevier, 248, pp 570-577, Issue 248, pp. 570-577.
Oliveira, F. H., 2003. Mathemetical Tool to Size Rural Digesters. Scientia Agricola, Jan/March, 60(1), pp. 185-190.
Onyango , D. M. & Angienda, P. O., 2010. Epidemiology of waterborne diarrhoea diseases among children aged 6-36 months old in Busia, Western Kenya. International Journal of Environmental and Ecological Engineering, Issue 4 (1), pp. 38-45.
Pandey, P. & Soupir, M., 2011. Escherichia coli inactivation kinetics in anaerobic digestion of dairy manure under moderate, mesophilic and thermophilic temperatures. AMB Express, 15 July, 18(1), p. 1.
Pang, H., 2014. Study of the hydrodynamic charectaristics, COD elimination and nitrification in a new Multi-Section Bioreactor, s.l.: Universite de Toulouse.
Perera K, U. ,., 2011. Investigation of Operating Conditions for Optimum Biogas Production in Plug Flow Type Reactor, Stockholm: KTH School of Industrial Engineering and Management.
Poh, P. E., Gouwanda, D., Mohan, Y. & Gopalai, A. A., 2016. Optimization of Wastewater Anaerobic Digestion Using Mechanistic and Meta-heuristic Methods: Current Limitationsand Future Opportunities. Water Conservation Science and Engineering, Volume 1, pp. 1-20.
Qasem, A., Zayed, T. & Chen, Z., 2009. A Condition Rating System for Wastewater Treatment Plants Infrastructures. International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation, 3(4).
Saaty, T. L., 2008. Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1).
Sakar , S., Yetilmezsoy , . K. & Kocak, E., 2009. Anaerobic digestion technology in poultry and livestock waste treatment — a literature review. Waste Management and Research,, 27(1), pp. 3-18.
Tarieska , J. R. et al., 2007 . Anaerobic reactor system analysis. In: Handbook of Environmental engineering volume 6: Biosolids Treatment Processes. s.l.:s.n.
Tennigkeit, T., Solymosi, K. & Seebau, M., 2013. Carbon Intensification and Poverty Reduction in Kenya: Lessons from the Kenya Agricultural Carbon Project. Field Actions Science Reports, Journal of Field Actions, 13 April.2013(Special Issue 7).
Tilley, E. et al., 2014. Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies, Dubendorf: International Water Association, EAWAG.
U.S. EPA, 2002. Guidance for Data Quality Assessment: Practical Methods for Data Analysis (EPA QA/G-9R). s.l.:s.n.
van Lier, J. B., Vashi , A., van der Lubbe, J. & Heffernan, B., 2008. Anaerobic Sewage Treatment using UASB Reactors: Engineering and Operational Aspects. s.l.:s.n.
World Agroforestry Centre, 2014. Sustainable firewood access and utilization , Nairobi: World Agroforestry Centre .
World Health Organisation (WHO), 1989. Health guidelines for the use of wastewater in agriculture and aquaculture, s.l.: WHO.
World Health Organisation (WHO), 2006. Guidelines for safe use of wastewater, excreta and grey water in agriculture and acaquaculture. 3rd Edition ed. Geneva: WHO.
Xavier, F.-A.et al., 2025. Holistic assessment of management strategies and technological solutions handling anaerobic digester supernatants in wastewater treatment plants. Chemical Engineering Journal, 508( 160934).
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2025 J.O Odhiambo, J.O Onyando, B.M Mutua