Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41236063›Full record

ReviewWater science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research2025

Review of full-scale advanced anaerobic digestion in North America.

Farokh Laqa Kakar, Ahmed Elsayed, Andrew Marcus, Mahdis Zareie, John Norton, Kevin Jankowski, Christopher Cox, Matt Seib, Chris Peot, Thomas Morse and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Water science and technology : a journal of the International Association on Water Pollution Research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Farokh Laqa KakarBrown and Caldwell, Vancouver, BC, Canada E-mail: fkakar@brwncald.com; farokhlaqa.kakar@gmail.com.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4577-9279
Ahmed ElsayedToronto Metropolitan University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, USA.
Andrew MarcusGreat Lake Water Authority, 735 Randolph St Ste 1900, Detroit, MI 48226, USA.
Mahdis ZareieToronto Metropolitan University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, USA.
John NortonGreat Lake Water Authority, 735 Randolph St Ste 1900, Detroit, MI 48226, USA.
Kevin JankowskiGreat Lake Water Authority, 735 Randolph St Ste 1900, Detroit, MI 48226, USA.
Christopher CoxCity of Montpelier WRRF, Montpelier, VT, USA.
Matt SeibMadison Metropolitan Sewerage District, 1610 Moorland Rd, Madison, WI 53713-3324, USA.
Chris PeotDC Water, 1385 Canal Street Southeast, Washington, DC, USA.
Thomas MorseMetro Water Recovery, 6450 York Street, Denver, CO 80229, USA.
Diana SmillovaCity of St Petersburg, 900 Magazine Road, Petersburg, VA 23803, USA.
Chris MullerBrown and Caldwell, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Elsayed ElbeshbishyToronto Metropolitan University, 350 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON M5B 2K3, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study presents a comprehensive analysis of the distribution and performance of advanced anaerobic digestion (AD) technologies across the United States and Canada. The study reveals that temperature-phased anaerobic digestion is the most prevalent technology, with 20 water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) adopting it, followed by acid-methane AD and thermal hydrolysis process. The distribution analysis indicates that 59% of the projects have a plant capacity of 40-400 million liters per day, and 30% of the projects have more than 20 AD reactors. The biosolids classification shows that Class A biosolids constitute 45%, while Class B biosolids make up 51% of these projects. Case studies from Madison Metropolitan Sewerage District, City of St Petersburg, City of Montpelier WRRF, Metro Water Recovery, and DC Water highlight the financial impacts, including cost savings and increased revenue from high-strength biosolids. The findings underscore the variability in the effectiveness of AD technologies and the importance of cost and operational efficiencies in technology selection.

Indexed as

BioreactorsWaste Disposal, FluidAnaerobiosisCanadaNorth AmericaUnited Statesanaerobic digestionbiogasfull-scale technologyintensification

Identifiers

PMID41236063

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.