Artículo de Residuos Solido

Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Review
Sustainability of using composting and vermicomposting technologies

for organic solid waste biotransformation: recent overview,
greenhouse gases emissions and economic analysis
Su Lin Lim, Leong Hwee Lee, Ta Yeong Wu*
Chemical Engineering Discipline, School of Engineering, Monash University, Jalan Lagoon Selatan, 47500 Bandar Sunway, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Received 10 January 2015
Received in revised form
16 August 2015
Accepted 18 August 2015
Available online 28 August 2015
Organic solid waste poses a serious threat to the environment as the world struggles to keep up with its
rapid generation. Biological waste treatment technologies such as composting and vermicomposting are
widely regarded as a clean and sustainable method to manage organic waste. The focus of this review is
to evaluate the feasibility of composting and vermicomposting as a means to recover nutrients from the
organic waste and returning them to the environment. The environmental impact and economic potential of these processes are also discussed. This review shows that composting and vermicomposting
are capable of degrading various types of organic waste, thus enabling them to be adopted widely. The
present review also reveals that greenhouse gases are emitted during composting and vermicomposting
processes. However, introductions of intermittent aeration, bulking agents and earthworm abundance
may reduce the greenhouse gases emissions. Economic assessments of composting and vermicomposting technologies show that these technologies are generally viable except in some cases. The
differences are due to the wide range in market value for organic fertilizer and differences in cost for the
type of composing or vermicomposting system which could affect its economic feasibility. However, if
organic fertilizer value increases and carbon offsets are available for nutrient recycling, it will affect the
economic feasibility in a positive way.
2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Biodegradation
Compost
Earthworm
Organic fertilizer
Vermicompost
Solid waste management
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
Composting and vermicomposting processes: an introduction, differences and similarities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
3.1.
Composting of organic waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
3.2.
Vermicomposting of organic waste . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
3.3.
Integration of composting-vermicomposting process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
Environmental impact of composting and vermicomposting processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272
Economic analysis of composting and vermicomposting processes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
1. Introduction
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 60 3 55146258; fax: 60 3 55146207.

E-mail addresses: wu.ta.yeong@monash.edu, tayeong@hotmail.com (T.Y. Wu).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.083
0959-6526/ 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
World cities generate approximately 1.3 billion metric tons of

solid waste annually, which is almost double the amounts that
S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278
263
Table 1
Current and projected waste generation rates and composition by income level (adapted from Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012).
Income level
Lower
Lower Middle
Upper Middle
High
Urban population (millions)
Current
2025
Current
2025
Current
2025
Current
2025
343
676
1293
2080
572
618
774
912
Waste generation rates (kg/capita/d)
0.60
0.86
0.78
1.30
1.16
1.60
2.13
2.10
Fig. 1. Global solid waste composition (adapted from Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata,
2012).
were generated a decade ago (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). By

2025, solid waste generations will double again (Hoornweg et al.,
2013). The annual increase in solid waste generation is inextricably link to the rapid rise in global population and rate of urbanization. As a country urbanizes, its standard of living and income
level increases which leads to higher consumption of goods and
services, thereby generating larger amount of solid waste per capita
(Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). Table 1 shows the current and
projected waste generation rates according to income level. The
waste generation rates in 2025 are predicted to be 38e67% increase
of the current waste generation rates for the lower to middle income countries. In higher income countries, as their total population are largely urban population (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata,
2012), the waste generation rates have more or less stabilized
during the last decade (UNEP, 2011). Although higher income
countries generate more solid waste, they recycle more and have
the resources to deploy new technologies for treating their waste,
which eventually decrease waste generation and disposal (Sim and
Wu, 2010). On the contrary, developing countries generally do not
have the technical skills nor nancial capability, leading to limited
resources for safe disposal of nal waste. The limitations of resources in developing countries to manage organic waste pose a
signicant challenge that needs to be resolved (UNEP, 2011).
Among the total solid waste generated globally, organic waste is
the largest proportion with 46% (Fig. 1) (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata,
2012). The organic waste includes food scraps, yard waste and
agricultural waste. The rest of the waste is inorganic like paper,
plastic, glass, metal and others (Karak et al., 2012). As the income
level of a country increases, the waste stream composition also
changes and typically has lower proportion of organic waste. The
proportion of organic waste in low income countries is 64% and this
value reduces to 28% in higher income countries (Table 1)
Solid waste composition (%)

Organic
Paper
Plastic
Glass
Metal
Others
64
62
59
55
54
50
28
28
5
6
9
10
14
15
31
30
8
9
12
13
11
12
11
11
3
3
3
4
5
4
7
7
3
3
2
3
3
4
6
6
17
17
15
15
13
15
17
18
Total organic solid

waste volume (t)
48
132
218
526
131
180
169
192

106
106
106
106
106
106
106
106
(Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). Slight reduction in proportion of

organic waste in low to high income countries are projected in
2025. However, the amount of the organic waste is increasing
together with the total amount of solid waste. Solid waste generation rates are predicted to be exceeding 11 million metric tons per
day, which are more than three times the current rate of solid waste
generation using business-as-usual projections by the year of 2100
(Hoornweg et al., 2013).
Current methods of solid waste managements are landlling,
incineration, recycling, reuse, source reduction and others (Wu
et al., 2014). Both landlling and incineration are characterized as
waste disposals, which are the least preferred options in the waste
management hierarchy. In many parts of the world, landlling remains the dominant method for waste disposal as it is the cheapest
in terms of capital costs (Laner et al., 2012). In developed countries,
the landlls are equipped with a combination of waste containment systems such as leak detection and management systems for
collecting leachates and biogas (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012).
On the contrary, proper landlling is often lacking in developing
countries (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). In recent years,
controlled landlling in these countries is increasing (Sim and Wu,
2010) but open dumping is still a common practice (Hoornweg and
Bhada-Tata, 2012). Management of leachate is also a problematic
issue because the raw leachate contains high organic load in
chemical oxygen demand (Romero et al., 2013), which requires
proper management and disposal that will add cost to the landll
vodska
et al., 2014). Greenhouse gas emissions due to
operation (Za
solid waste decomposition in the landll is also a cause for concern
(Pozza et al., 2015). In addition, most landlls in the developed
countries require proper maintenance and continuous care after
their closure. Therefore, extra costs are needed for landll aftercare
until no threat to the human health and environment is found
(Laner et al., 2012). Furthermore, the limitation of land and the
value of waste as resources are concrete reasons to move away from
landlling and shift towards more sustainable waste management
strategy (Marshall and Farahbaksh, 2013). For example, European
countries are doing away with the landll owing to the EU Landll
Directive which requires its member states to reduce landlling of
biodegradable waste to less than 35% of the amount produced in
1995. Countries such as Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany,
Luxembourg, Netherlands and Sweden have fullled and exceeded
the targets of the EU Landll Directive (EEA, 2009). Currently,
Netherlands are landlling only 2e3% of its total waste (Scharff,
2014). In addition, recent study done by Yang et al. (2015) also
showed that over the next 10e15 years, an increase in the proportions of incineration and composting is more feasible than
landlling in municipal solid waste management.
Scarcity of land for landlling leads to another waste disposal
option like incineration. Waste incineration could be the solution
for reducing the degradation of land, generation of methane gas
264
and leachate production caused by improper landlling. Incineration is suitable for non-biodegradable waste with low moisture
content (Tan et al., 2014). Besides, reduction of waste volume of up
to 90% and recovery of energy are possible during incineration
(Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). Waste-to-energy incineration
plants in large scale are common in developed countries such as
Denmark, Japan, Germany, Sweden, Netherlands and United
Kingdom (Tan et al., 2014). One of the major drawbacks of the
incineration plant is the harmful emissions but technologies are
available for controlling gaseous emissions to minimize the impact
on the environment (Samolada and Zabaniotou, 2014). Incineration
plants in the developed countries consist of environmental control
system, in which their governments regulate and monitor the
emissions frequently. The drawback of incineration plant is the high
capital, technical and operation costs. This is an issue especially for
the lower to middle income countries whereby these developing
countries usually do not have the economic resources for setting up
and maintaining an incineration plant (Sim and Wu, 2010).
Furthermore, incineration poses societal and environmental health
risks if misused and shows a less positive energy balance than
transforming materials through recycling (Oliveira and Rosa, 2003).
Generally, incineration is not suitable to be introduced in developing countries such as Ethiopia, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Tunisia, Algeria
and others because these countries produce a lot of organic solid
waste which is high in moisture content and has low caloric value
(Karak et al., 2012).
Other solid waste management options are 3Rs, consisting of
source reduction, recycling and reuse (Zaman, 2013). Waste management options using 3Rs are in line with the cleaner production
initiative which involves continuous application of preventive
environmental strategies to all processes in order to maximize the
efciency and minimize the impact on the environment (UNEP,
2015). Waste avoidance and reduction technology are considered
to be the prime challenge rather than the development of new
waste treatment technology (Zaman, 2013). Source reduction involves redesigning processes and managing products to reduce the
amount of generated waste and greenhouse gas emission. If no
waste is generated, there is no need for treatment or disposal.
However, waste is bound to be generated despite the efforts to
minimize them. Recycling also helps reduce the amount of waste
such as paper, glass and metal generated by returning the materials
consumed to the economy (Shekdar, 2009). Recycling rates are
higher and effective in developed countries as compared to
developing countries due to the better collection services and facilities for sorting and processing. These facilities are highly
equipped, common and regulated (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata,
2012). Developing countries are often lacking of waste recycling
and treatment facilities, where waste is still dumped in the open
environment (Song et al., 2015). The recycling process is generally
informal but is slowly in the process of institutionalization (UNEP,
2011).
Reuse is another waste management strategy for waste that
cannot be recycled and helps reduce the amount for disposal
(Shekdar, 2009). Examples of reuse of organic solid waste are
composting and vermicomposting processes. Composting is a biological decomposition of organic waste under either aerobic or
anaerobic conditions. Similarly, vermicomposting is also a biological decomposition process of organic waste but with an addition of
earthworms to speed up the biodegradation process. The composts
and vermicomposts produced from organic waste can be reused as
nutrient-rich organic fertilizers or for land application (Wu et al.,
2014). These two processes are also highly favored to manage
solid waste owing to the high percentage of organic waste in the
waste composition. Moreover, lesser costs are incurred in both
composting and vermicomposting process, making them a good
option to be applied in developing countries. Increases in composting facilities are mushrooming in developed countries like
Belgium, Denmark, Germany, France, Sweden, Switzerland, United
States and others. From 1995 to 2007, some of the European
countries showed an increase of more than 50% in composting rate
(Karak et al., 2012). In fact, these biological decomposition processes can be considered as a sustainable waste management
strategy, which is in line with the zero waste concept.
In a zero waste system, the resource ow is circular whereby the
resources are conserved and recovered for reuse purposes in
similar or other processes. In other words, what is seen as a waste
from an industry could be reused or converted into value-added
inputs for other industries or processes (Curran and Williams,
2012). Both landlling and incineration with limited energy recovery do not fulll the intentions and goals of zero waste concept
(Scharff, 2014). Open dumping and landlling remain the predominant method of solid waste disposal in the lower to middle
income countries. However, cost-benet analysis of composting
and landlling reveals that the former is a more attractive option
based on its lower environmental and social costs (UNEP, 2011).
Reusing waste could also reduce management costs due to savings
from reducing the amount of organic waste that was sent to landll
(Cabanillas et al., 2013). The efcient treatment and recycling of
value-added products such as compost to agricultural land can
usually be shown to have lower global warming potential as
compared to other disposal processes (Samolada and Zabaniotou,
2014). Life cycle assessment studies also concluded that composting is having lesser environmental impacts as compared to other
organic waste disposals, such as landlling and incineration (Saer
et al., 2013). In short, composting and vermicomposting could be
the most promising option for organic waste management, especially in lower income countries, because they incur lower cost and
have lesser impact on the environment. Mechanisms of both
composting and vermicomposting processes in producing organic
fertilizer from the waste show that they are meeting the cleaner
production concept. Moreover, the driving force behind the introduction of composting and vermicomposting (or other reuse processes) in organic solid waste management is the global recognition
of the need to recover useful organic materials and return them to
the soil. Thus, this review will focus on the potential of introducing
composting and vermicomposting in bio-transforming organic
waste into fertilizer as a sustainable waste management strategy.
2. Methods
The aim of this review is to provide a detailed account on the
feasibility of composting and/or vermicomposting of organic waste
by analysing its environmental and economic aspects. In this review, a summary of the composting and vermicomposting process
was presented. This summary includes the process mechanisms, its
advantages, disadvantages and limitations as reported by existing
researchers. Composting and vermicomposting literature related to
environmental and economic aspects were critically evaluated
based on their signicance and relevance. In addition, the review
aims to provide a comprehensive and balanced portrayal of the
current state and feasibility of composting and/or vermicomposting process by including all viewpoints and conclusions on the
subject matter obtained by different researchers. The literature
included in this review was obtained using databases from major
publishers. Due to the vast amount of literature available in composting and vermicomposting of organic waste, only articles published in 2010 until now were considered. Articles published before
2010 were only included if (1) they were deemed necessary to
support/contradict other studies, or (2) the contents were exclusive
and worth highlighting.
3. Composting and vermicomposting processes: an

introduction, differences and similarities
Composting is a biological decomposition of organic waste
either in an aerobic (Makan et al., 2014) or anaerobic (Minale and
Worku, 2014) environment with the former being more common.
The organic matters in the waste are consumed by aerobic thermophilic and mesophilic microorganisms as substrates and converted into mineralized products such as CO2, H2O, NH4 or
stabilized organic matters (Qian et al., 2014). The resultant compost
is a stable, humus-rich, complex mixture that can improve physical
properties of the soil (Watteau and Villemin, 2011). Factors
affecting composting process are temperature, initial C/N ratio,
aeration, porosity, moisture content and pH (Shafawati and
Siddiquee, 2013). During composting process, these parameters
are regulated and controlled to provide an optimum environment
pezfor the microorganisms to degrade the organic waste (Lo
Gonz
alez et al., 2015).
Similar to composting, vermicomposting process is also a biological decomposition of organic waste to produce stabilized
organic fertilizer, namely vermicompost. Unlike composting, vermicomposting process involves interactions between earthworms
and microorganisms to biodegrade organic waste at a faster rate
(Sim and Wu, 2010). Earthworms act as the main drivers in the
decomposition of organic waste by fragmenting and conditioning
the substrate. In doing so, earthworms increase the surface area of
the organic waste that is exposed to the microorganisms. Thus, the
microbial activity and decomposition process of solid waste are
enhanced. Vermicomposting results in the production of vermicompost or earthworm cast that has low C/N ratio, high porosity,
water-holding capacity and available nutrients (Lim et al., 2015b).
According to Lim and Wu (2015), scanning electron microscope
image of the vermicompost showed a distinct physical appearance
that was more scattered and smaller in nature in comparison with
the initial waste. Like composting, efciency of vermicomposting
process is also inuenced by several factors such as initial C/N ratio,
moisture content, pH and nature of the organic waste. In comparison with the composting process, all the factors inuencing vermicomposting process are also inextricably linked to the
earthworm species which are used during the biodegradation
process. In addition to the vermicompost, earthworm biomass is
also produced during vermicomposting. After the completion of
vermicomposting process, earthworms were removed from the
vermicompost via light, vertical or sideways separation. The excess
earthworms after the vermicomposting process ends could be used
to biotransform other organic waste or as a protein source for animals and as shing bait (Edwards et al., 2010).
Earthworms used in the vermicomposting process must possess
the following characteristics: 1) high rates of organic matter consumption, digestion and assimilation; 2) high tolerance of environmental stress; 3) high reproductive rate; 4) rapid growth and
265
maturation rate of hatchlings (Singh et al., 2011). Earthworms are

classied into three different categories, namely epigeic, endogeic
and anecic. Table 2 shows the characteristics of the three different
categories of earthworms. Among these earthworms, epigeic
earthworms are the most suitable earthworms to be used in vermicomposting process as they live in organic horizons and feed
primarily on decaying organic matter. On the other hand, endogeic
earthworms feed on subsurface soil and live below the soil surface
while anecic earthworms prefers to feed on soil and lives deep in
the soil (Yadav and Garg, 2011a). Epigeic species are the most
efcient in biodegrading organic waste and releasing nutrients into
the soil. In addition, the latest study revealed that surface-dwelling
mode of life guarded the epigeic earthworm against their exposure
to pesticide (Suthar, 2014). Among the epigeic earthworms, Eisenia
fetida and Eisenia andrei are the most commonly used in vermicomposting because both earthworms are peregrine and ubiquitous with a worldwide distribution, resilient and have wide
temperature tolerance (Edwards, 2004).
Table 3 shows the differences between composting and vermicomposting process. Vermicomposting process has the advantage
over composting process in terms of the length of the biodegradation process, whereby the latter generally requires longer time to
produce a good quality fertilizer (Roy et al., 2010). Based on the
earthworm species and substrate characteristics, it takes about
6e18 h for vermicomposting process to occur as this is the amount
of time taken by the earthworm to ingest the substrate and excrete
them as vermicast (Abbasi et al., 2015). However, there are instances where the composting duration is shorter than vermicomposting due to various factors such as system used, the nature
of waste, moisture content, aeration and earthworm species
(Edwards et al., 2010). The vermicompost also possesses ner
texture and lower heavy metal content as compared to the compost
(Wu et al., 2014). On the other hand, composting process can normally decompose a wider range of organic waste without affecting
the efciency of the process because it does not involve earthworms, which are delicate to certain chemicals from the waste.
Thus, a combination between composting and vermicomposting
(as a later stage) is recommended to biodegrade solid waste which
are too oily, salty or have extreme pH. Despite the differences between composting and vermicomposting process, the main purpose of these two processes is to recycle nutrients from the organic
waste. Both composting (Albrecht et al., 2011) and vermicomposting (Shak et al., 2014) processes also reduce the waste volume after
process completion. The recovered nutrients are recycled to the soil
as an organic fertilizer (compost and vermicompost), thereby
closing the organic matter cycle (Singh et al., 2011). According to
Doan et al. (2013), both compost and vermicompost modied soil
chemical properties, leading to higher carbon and nitrogen, higher
pH and cationic exchange capacity but lower available P, NH4 and
NO3 than mineral fertilizer. In addition, Doan et al. (2014)
demonstrated that the nature of the organic amendment from
Table 2
Characteristics of different epigeic earthworm species for vermicomposting process.
Characteristics
Epigeic
Habitat
Feeding habit
Casting habit
3-10 cm, surface dwellers

Coarse particulate organic matter, undecomposed litter
Surface casting
Endogeic
10-30 cm, live in soil upper layer

Subsurface soil material
Mostly underground inside horizontal,
deep-branching burrow system
Size
Small, uniformly pigmented
Medium, little pigmentation
Reproductive rates
High
Low
Eisenia fetida (45e51 d), Eisenia andrei (45e51 d), Eudrilus Octolasion cyaneum (~90 d)
Example of
earthworm species eugeniae (50e70 d), Perionyx excavates (40e50 d)
(life cycle)
Anecic
30-90 cm, deep burrowing
Surface litter, soil
Surface casting or at burrow entrance
Large
Moderate
Lumbricus terrestris (210 d), Lumbricus friendi
(231 d), Aporrectodea trapezoids (153 d)
ndez et al. (2010), Lowe and Butt (2008), Yadav and Garg (2011a).
Source: Butt and Briones (2011), Edwards (2004), Edwards et al. (2010), Ferna
266
Table 3
Differences between composting and vermicomposting process.
Parameters
Composting
Vermicomposting
Type of process
3 stages: Initial activation phase, thermophilic

phase and mesophilic phase
Microorganisms
Sorted organic waste, combination of waste with
similar decomposition rate
Between 20 and 50
No requirement
Coarse organic waste: 70e75%
Fine organic waste: 55e65%
Texture is coarser and may contain heavy metals
Mesophilic stage
Organisms involved in biodegradation

Organic waste characteristics
Initial C/N ratio
pH
Moisture content
Product characteristics
Earthworms and microorganisms

Not hard, oily, salty, acidic and alkaline
30:1 (Ideal proportion)
Between pH 5 to 8
40e55% (Preferable)
Texture is ner and heavy metals accumulated
in earthworm bodies
Source: Chowdhury et al. (2013), Singh et al. (2011), Wu et al. (2014).
either compost or vermicompost had important consequences for

both soil and water microbial abundance and diversity. Both
compost (Fourti, 2013) and vermicompost (Lim et al., 2015b) are
known to positively affect soil structure as well as increasing its
microbial population and activity. Due to the characteristics
s et al. (2014) concluded
possessed by the organic fertilizers, Quiro
that the organic fertilizers were suitable substitutes for mineral
fertilizer. A study conducted by Cabanillas et al. (2013) showed that
basil plant produced better growth when vermicompost was used
as compared to urea. Furthermore, the use of organic fertilizer
reduced the quantity of organic fraction that would end up in
landlls; and optimized the nutrients that were already in use
without requiring the extraction of more nutrients by not dis s et al., 2014).
rupting the natural cycle (Quiro
3.1. Composting of organic waste
Briey, composting process can be divided into three phases,
namely initial activation, thermophilic and mesophilic or maturation phase (Chowdhury et al., 2013). The majority of the organic
waste degradation happens during the thermophilic phase. In this
phase, microorganisms degrade the readily available compounds in
the organic waste. Generally, high microbial activity translates to
high degradation of organic waste (Fourti, 2013). This phase is
characterized by high temperature in the composting pile due to
the heat released from the microbial catabolism of organic waste
(Singh and Kalamdhad, 2014). The high temperature achieved in
this phase is also crucial for pathogen reduction and sanitization of
organic waste. Temperatures above 55 C are required to kill the
pathogens in the organic waste (Tian et al., 2012). The EPA guidelines require composting material to maintain a temperature of
55 C for at least 15 days or 5 consecutive days (Jurado et al., 2014a).
Some composting piles are known to reach temperatures as high as
70 C during the degradation of animal manure (Tang et al., 2011)
ceres et al., 2015). The end of the thermophilic
and green waste (Ca
phase and beginning of the maturation phase is indicated by the
temperature decrease in the composting pile. As the organic waste
stabilizes, the temperature will continue to decrease to ambient air
temperature (S
anchez-Monedero et al., 2010). The temperature
decrease also marks the exhaustion of decomposable organic
fraction in the waste (Ravindran and Sekaran, 2010).
Table 4 shows a variety of organic solid waste that has successfully undergone composting process. The majority of the
composting process was done under aerobic conditions and the
duration of the process was dependent on the composting system
and scale of the process. It was also observed from Table 4 that
different organic waste achieved different peak temperature during
the thermophilic phase which can be attributed to the different
initial C/N ratio of the organic waste. Higher temperature in composting pile is an indication of higher microbial activities (Yahya
et al., 2010), which in turn is enhanced by the available carbon

sources in the organic waste (Raj and Antil, 2011). However, high C/
N ratio will limit the composting rate as there is an excess of
degradable substrate for the microorganisms (Bernal et al., 2009).
This was proven by Singh and Kalamdhad (2012) whereby the
waste materials containing the highest amount of available carbon
had lower temperature during the thermophilic phase. On the
other hand, with lower C/N ratio there is an excess of nitrogen per
degradable carbon and inorganic nitrogen is produced in excess
which can be lost through ammonia volatilization or by leaching
(Bernal et al., 2009). Thus, an optimum initial C/N ratio of organic
waste is necessary for the growth of microorganisms. Different type
of organic waste can be combined to obtain the desired initial C/N
ratio for higher composting efciency (Table 4). Besides, the
mixture of organic waste also helps adjust moisture content
(Tsutsui et al., 2013) and provide structural support to create interceres et al.,
particle void for enhancing composting process (Ca
2015).
Some composting studies that were reported did not achieve
the thermophilic temperature. For example, Paradelo et al. (2013)
noted that the temperatures were in the mesophilic range during
composting of lignocellulosic winery waste, but an evidence of
organic waste decomposition was found. Low temperature during
composting process could be caused by low ambient temperature
or heat retention properties of the composting materials (Singh and
Kalamdhad, 2014). In fact, low temperature is typical for home
composting because the layer for decomposing material is too thin
to retain a signicant amount of heat and the heat is quickly
transferred out from the pile. Although organic waste could be
decomposed in low temperature conditions, the end product is not
guaranteed to be free of pathogens or weed seeds (Faverial and
Sierra, 2014).
Composting is typically a time consuming process, but
advancement in composting technology has reduced the duration
of composting process. Gabhane et al. (2012) showed that additives,
such as jaggery and polyethylene glycol, helped hasten the composting process as well as produce superior quality compost. The
only downside was that the additives were not cost effective. Apart
from additives, microbial inoculums were also used to reduce the
duration of composting process. For example, an addition of specic strain of fungal consortium like Trichoderma viride MTCC 793,
Aspergillus niger MTCC 1344 and Aspergillus avus MTCC 1425
increased the composting rate of municipal solid waste. The
resultant compost had lower C/N ratio and germination index
values of 84e93% as compared to municipal solid waste without
introducing fungal inoculation (Awasthi et al., 2014). Microbes
could also be added to the composting process by an addition of
another type of organic waste, which contained indigenous microbes. For example, Zainudin et al. (2013) used palm oil mill
efuent as microbial seeds to increase the composting rate of oil
267
Table 4
Composting of different types of organic waste.
Organic waste
Composting Comments
duration (d)
Amendment/Bulking agent
Type of
composting
system
Beef manure
Wheat straw, vine shoot

prunings, pepper plant
prunings, almond shell
powder
Sawdust
Cattle manure
Sawdust
Aerobic,
~42
thermoscomposters
(350L)
Aerobic, pile 28 (selfheating
period)
Aerobic,
31.75
reactor
Aerobic, lab- 31
scale reactor
63
Aerobic,
bench-scale
reactors
Aerobic, pile 91
Animal waste:
Anaerobic digestate of pig
slurry
Cattle slurry and hen manure
Barley straw
Cow manure
Sawdust
Pig manure
Pig manure
Woodchips
Aerobic,
windrow
91e105
Pig manure and corn stalk
Mature compost
30
Sheep bedding
Cattle manure
Swine manure
Sawdust
Swine manure
Mushroom residues
Swine manure and rice husk
Bacteria and fungi
Forced-draft
aeration,
vessel
Aerobic,
windrow
Aerobic, labscale reactor
Aerobic,
open
windrow
Aerobic,
windrow
Agro-industrial waste:
Apple and tobacco waste
Chicken feathers from poultry

processing company
Pine bark; rye straw
Olive mill waste (alperujo)

Pressmud from sugar mill
Spent grape marc; vinication

lees and hydrolyzed grape
marc from winery industry
Two-phase olive mill waste
52
69
Sheep manure; olive tree

pruning; horse manure
Wet husks from olive mill

Municipal organic waste:
Banana peel
Poultry litter
Digested sewage sludge
Green waste and pine bark
Wood shaving
- Peak temperature: 70 C after 2 d

- Temperature of pile at 50 C after 28 d
Millner et al.
(2014)
- Peak temperature: 55e68 C within 2.5e3.3 d

- Mesophilic composting
- Addition of CaCN2 to reach sanitary standard rapidly.
Tsutsui et al.
(2013)
Chowdhury
et al. (2014b)
Simujide et al.
(2013)
- Addition of maggots
- Two-stage composting phases: i) Maggot treatment (days
1e9); ii) Thermophilic (days 10e18); iii) Mesophilic
(days 19e43) and iv) Thermostable (days 44e92)
- Peak temperature: 63.8e63.9 C average
- Thermophilic phase duration: 4e6 weeks with
temperature >40 C
- Maturation period: 2 months
- Peak temperature: >55 C for 12 d.
- Converged to ambient temperature on day 29.
Zhu et al.
(2012)
- Thermophilic phase duration: 10e25 d at temperature

>50 C
- Peak temperature: >40 C for 2 d
- Final compost did not meet the sanitation requirements.
- Peak temperature: ~55 C for the whole composting
period.
Costa et al.
(2015)
Kang et al.
(2014)
Wu et al.
(2011)
zquez et al.
Va
(2015)
Luo et al.
(2014)
- Thermophilic phase duration: 44 d with peak temperature Tang et al.

(2011)
at 72 C
- Cooling duration: 25 d
51
- Peak temperature: 79 C
- Temperature > 50 C for ~45 d
KorniowiczKowalska and
Bohacz (2010)
Yahya et al.
(2010)
150
- Temperatures reached were in the mesophilic range but

low C/N ratio was achieved.
- Palm oil mill efuent anaerobic sludge added continuously
at 3 d interval
- Peak temperature: >50 C from week 2 to 14
Aerobic, pile 266

Aerobic,
cemented
pits
Aerobic,
composting
vessels
Aerobic,
windrow
Bustamante
et al. (2013)
Kop
ci
c et al.
(2014)
40
Poultry manure; sheep
manure
Mixed farm waste
- Peak temperature: >50 C within the rst week

- Maturation period: 1 month
- Peak temperature: 54.7 C

- Temperature >45 C for 8 d
22
Forcedaeration, invessel
Aerobic, bins 210
Aerobic,
turning
furrow
Aerobic, invessel
Empty fruit bunch, palm oil mill

efuent and decanter cake
slurry
Hydrolyzed grape marc and
vinication lees
Oil palm empty fruit bunch
82e96
References
Paradelo et al.
(2013)
Zainudin et al.
(2013)
Tortosa et al.
(2012)
Raj and Antil
(2011)
150
- Peak temperature: >45 up to 61e68 d
150
- Temperatures in mesophilic range
Paradelo et al.
(2013)
182
- Peak temperature: 50e70 C for 10 weeks
nchezSa
Monedero et al.
(2010)
Agnolucci et al.
(2013)
Aerobic, pile 200
- Peak temperature: 45 C for 80 d
Aerobic;
anaerobic
Forced
aeration,
windrow
- Peak temperature (aerobic): 69.5 C

- Peak temperature (anaerobic): 58.5 C
- Initial phase (4 to 50e60 d) was characterized by intensive
degradation.
- Stabilization phase: up to 146 d
- Temperature: >55 C
84
180
35
Kalemelawa
et al. (2012)
Albrecht et al.
(2011)
(continued on next page)
268
Table 4 (continued )
Organic waste
Amendment/Bulking agent
Food, vegetable, garden and

ofce waste
Green waste
Greenhouse waste
Aerobic,
windrow
Thermocol
boxes
Cattle manure
Kitchen and garden waste
Kitchen bio-waste; anaerobic

sludge; aerobic sludge
Type of
composting
system
Peat
Composting Comments
duration (d)
21
Aerobic, lab- 21
scale reactor
84
Aerobic,
home
composter
441
Passive
aeration
composter
Municipal solid waste; dried

sewage sludge
Post-harvest tomato plants and Wood chips
pine chips
Shredded green waste (GW)
Cattle slurry (CS)
Aerobic,
200
windrow
Forced
136
aeration, pile
196
Forced
aeration,
static pile
Tomato plant waste
Sawdust
Forced
189
aeration, pile
Plastic tube pieces,

woodchips, bio-char, barley
straw, lupin residues
Pine bark; wood chips;
glucose
Cow dung, leaf litter
Aerobic,
cylindrical
reactors
Aerobic,
reactor
Aerobic,
compost
bioreactor
Aerobic, twochamber
bioreactor
Aerobic,
middle-scale
vessel
Industrial waste:
Digested solids from biogas
plant
Dregs from pulp mill industry
Limed animal eshing from
tannery industry
Oiled bleaching earth from

Dewatered sewage sludge;
vegetable fats manufacturer maize straw
Paint sludge from
manufacturing industry
Waste paper; plant residue;

mature compost
Others:
Opium poppy processing waste
References
- Additives used: jaggary, polyethylene

phosphogypsum, y ash)
- Peak temperature: >50 C for 3e4 d
- Peak temperature:>50 C for ~11 d
glycol,
- Peak temperature: 30e43 C
- Peak temperature:
i) Kitchen bio-waste e 63 C (4 weeks)
ii) Anaerobic sludge - 57 C (2 weeks)
iii) Aerobic sludge e 44 C (mesophilic)
- After 84 d, all waste reached ambient temperature
- Temperature: >50 C between 30 and 130 d
Awasthi et al.
(2014)
lime, Gabhane et al.
(2012)
Klc and
Yaldiz (2014)
Faverial and
Sierra (2014)
Himanen and
H
anninen
(2011)
Fourti (2013)
- Temperature: 65e70 C after 24e48 h

-
Jurado et al.
(2014b)
Peak temperature:
C
aceres et al.
i) 1GW:3CS e 76 C (98 d intensive composting; 98 d (2015)
stabilization)
ii) 3GW:1CS e 79.9 C (168 d intensive composting; 28 d
stabilization)
Bio-oxidative phase: 63 d
Jurado et al.
Maturation phase: 123 d
(2014a)
Temperature: >60 C after 48 h
28
- Thermophilic conditions: >45 C within 2 d
Chowdhury
et al. (2014a)
70
- Temperature: 40e57 C for 15 d
49
- Peak temperature: 59 C on day 28
Zambrano et al.
(2010)
Ravindran and
Sekaran (2010)
45
- Peak temperature: 64 C on day 4
84
- Temperature: <40 C
Aerobic, pile 55
- Temperature: >50 C after 14 d
Phumdi (combination of
different type of weeds)
Cattle manure, rice husk
Aerobic, pile 30
Tanned leather waste
Food waste
Water hyacinth
Cow dung; sawdust; lime
20e45
Aerobic,
composting
tank
Agitated pile 30
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia

crassipes)
Cow manure, sawdust
Agitated pile 30
palm empty fruit bunch. The continuous addition of palm oil mill
efuent shortened the composting duration from 60e90 d to 40 d.
The intention of composting process is to convert organic waste
into fertilizer for agricultural or land use. However, certain organic
waste contains high concentrations of heavy metal contents that
are not removed during composting process. Generally, total heavy
metal contents will increase after composting process owing to the
reduction of organic matter but it is the bioavailability and mobility
of heavy metals that provide more signicant information of
toxicity (Singh and Kalamdhad, 2013b). Singh and Kalamdhad
PiotrowskaCyplik et al.
(2013)
Tian et al.
(2012)
Wang et al.
(2014b)
Peak temperature: 46.8 C on the 8th day (5 phumdi: 4 Singh and
cattle manure: 1 rice husk)
Kalamdhad
(2014)
Peak temperature: ~40 C
Zuriaga-Agust
Composting tank equipped with hot water circulation et al. (2015)

inside (35 C)
Thermophilic conditions: ~57 C for 15 d
Singh and
Kalamdhad
(2013)
Temperature ranged during composting phases: 26e56 C Singh and
Kalamdhad
(2012)
(2012) used Tessier sequential extraction method to track

changes in heavy metal speciation during composting process.
Their study concluded that with an addition of appropriate proportion of cattle manure, available fractions of heavy metal could be
signicantly reduced due to better humication. The acidic functional groups in humic substances had high complexity capacities
with metal ions, thus heavy metals could be bound to them easily
r and Bekbo
let, 2010). Lime, an alkaline material was also
(Gngo
proven to help reduce the heavy metal bioavailability signicantly
during composting process (Singh and Kalamdhad, 2013b). Besides
269
Table 5
Vermicomposting of different types of organic waste.
Organic waste
Animal Waste:
Animal waste: Cow, sheep, pig,
chicken
Cattle dung
Cattle manure
Cattle manure
Cattle manure
Cattle manure
Cow dung
Cow dung
Pig manure
Pig slurry
Agro-industrial waste:
Biosolid vinasse and vine shoots
Empty fruit bunches from palm oil mill
Filter cake from sugarcane factory
Grape marc from winery industry
Lees cake vinasse from winerydistillery industries
Palm oil mil efuent (POME)
Pressmud from sugarcane industry
Pressmud from sugar industries
Amendment/Bulking agent Earthworms
Soil
Rock powders
Sugarcane bagasse;
sunower cake
Vermicompost
Vermicompost
Cow dung
Mature vermicompost
Pre-composted/
vermicomposted rabbit
manure
Rice straw; soil
Cow dung
Cow dung
Pre-treatment
(duration, d)
Vermicomposting References
duration (d)
E. eugeniae
Yes (15)
147
E. fetida
Metaphire posthuma; Lampito
mauritii; Allolobophora parva
E. andrei
E. foetida
Yes (7)
e
90
60
e
Yes (30)
60
120
de Souza et al. (2013)

Aguiar et al. (2013)
E. fetida
P. excavatus
Allobophora parva
E. fetida
E. fetida
Yes (30)
e
120
75
147
252
252
Martinez-Balmori et al. (2013)

Suthar (2012)
Suthar (2011)
Monroy et al. (2011)
mez-Brando
n et al. (2011a)
Go
E.
E.
E.
E.
E.
fetida
eugeniae
fetida
andrei
fetida
Yes (14)
e
Yes (30)
e
105
84
120
15
56
Castillo et al. (2013)

Lim et al. (2015a)
Martinez-Balmori et al. (2013)
mez-Brando
n et al. (2011b)
Go
Molina et al. (2013)
E. eugeniae
E. fetida
P. ceylanensis
Yes (14)
Yes (10)
e
42
120
60
Drawida willsi
Yes (30)
40
Lim et al. (2014)

Bhat et al. (2014)
Prakash and Karmegam
(2010)
Kumar et al. (2010)
e
e
Coulibaly and Zoro Bi (2010)

Lv et al. (2013)
Suthar (2014)
Press-mud, bagasse and sugarcane

trash from sugar mill industries
Rice husk
Rice husk, rice straw
Sago industry waste
Soybean husk
Wet olive cake and goat manure
Market refused fruits

Cow dung
Cow dung; poultry manure
Papaya
Vermicompost
E.
E.
E.
E.
E.
eugeniae
eugeniae
foetida
eugeniae
fetida
e
e
Yes (21)
e
Yes (14)
63
60
45
63
126
Lim et al. (2012)

Shak et al. (2014)
Subramanian et al. (2010)
Lim et al. (2011)
Castillo et al. (2013)
Municipal organic waste:

Fresh fruit and vegetable waste
Fresh sewage sludge
Fresh water weeds (macrophytes)
Greenhouse vegetable residues
Soil;
Cow
Cow
Cow
E.
E.
E.
E.
foetida
foetida
fetida
andrei
e
Yes (14)
e
Yes (7)
35
90
60
84
Cow dung
Powdered oyster shell
Cow dung
Cow dung
E.
E.
P.
E.
fetida
andrei
ceylanensis
fetida
Yes (21)
e
Yes (1)
Yes (21)
70
25
50
105
Huang et al. (2014)

Li et al. (2011)
Najar and Khan (2013)
mez et al.
Fern
andez-Go
(2010)
Suthar and Gairola (2014)
Kwon et al. (2009)
John Paul et al. (2011)
Garg and Gupta (2011)
Cattle dung; sawdust

Rice straw
Cow dung; straw
Pre-composted/
vermicomposted rabbit
manure
Fly ash; phosphoric rock
Fly ash; phosphatic rock
Paper-mill sludge; Cattle
manure
Paper-mill sludge
E.
E.
E.
E.
fetida
fetida
fetida
fetida
Yes (14)
Yes (14)
e
120
21
60
56
Lv et al. (2014)
Yang et al. (2014)
Xing et al. (2012)
Molina et al. (2013)
E. fetida
E. fetida
E. fetida
Yes (15)
Yes (20)
e
60
70
105
E. fetida
Yes (14)
168
Vermicompost (from food

waste and cow dung)
E. foetida
Yes (7)
60
Wang et al. (2013c)

Wang et al. (2013b)
mez et al.
Fern
andez-Go
(2011)
mez et al.
Fern
andez-Go
(2013, 2015)
Huang et al. (2013)
Cow dung, leaf litter
E. eugeniae
Yes (3)
25
Cattle dung
Cow dung
Cattle dung
E. fetida
E. fetida
E. fetida
Yes (15)
Yes (15)
Yes (15)
120
45
90
E. fetida, E. eugeniae
63
Pramanik and Chung (2011)
Cow dung
E. fetida
Yes (7)
60
Cow dung
E. fetida
Yes (7)
56
Singh and Suthar (2012a);

Singh and Suthar (2012b)
Negi and Suthar (2013)
Leaf litters
Municipal sewage sludge
Municipal solid waste
Pre-consumer processing vegetable
waste
Sewage sludge
Sewage sludge
Sewage sludge
Sewage sludge
Sewage sludge
Sewage sludge
Tomato plant waste
Tomato-plant waste
Vegetable waste
Industrial waste:
Animal eshing from leather
industries
Bio sludge from beverage industries
Dye laden slurry
Dyeing sludge from textile mill
industries
Fly ash from thermal plant and vinasse
from distillery industry
Herbal pharmaceutical industrial
waste
Paper mill sludge from paper mill
industries
vermicompost
dung; straw
dung
dung; straw
Ravindran et al. (2014);

Ravindran et al. (2013)
Singh et al. (2010)
Kaushik et al. (2012)
Bhat et al. (2013)
(continued on next page)
270
Table 5 (continued )
Organic waste
Amendment/Bulking agent Earthworms
Pre-treatment
(duration, d)
Pulp sludge from paper manufacturing

company
Shredded waste paper
Tannery sludge
Wastewater sludge from paper and
pulp industry
Wood waste from timber industries
Powdered oyster shell
E. andrei
Vermicomposting References
duration (d)
25
Kwon et al. (2009)
Cow dung; rock phosphate E. fetida

Cattle dung
E. fetida
Cow dung
E. fetida
e
Yes (20)
Yes (7)
42
120
60
D. willsi
Yes (30)
40
Kumar and Shweta (2011)
45
Singh and Kalamdhad

(2013a); (2013c)
Subhash Kumar et al. (2015)
Rajiv et al. (2013); Rajiv et al.
(2014)
Others:
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) Cow manure, sawdust
E. fetida
Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) Cow dung

Weed (Parthenium hysterophorus L.)
Cow dung
E. eugeniae
E. eugeniae
heavy metal, composting could also degrade resistant compounds

nchez-Monedero et al. (2010), morphine (Wang
such as phenols (Sa
et al., 2014b) and melamine resins (Tian et al., 2012).
3.2. Vermicomposting of organic waste

Vermicomposting has been attempted on many types of organic
solid waste such as animal manure, sewage sludge, vegetable
waste, industrial sludge and agriculture waste (Table 5). Vermicomposting, similar to composting process, is also an organic waste
decomposition process but with an addition of earthworms to aid
and hasten the waste stabilization process (Lim et al., 2015b).
Therefore, suitable organic waste or feedstock for earthworms is
crucial to ensure a successful and efcient vermicomposting process (Yadav and Garg, 2011a). Earthworms can consume most
organic materials that have pH in the range from 5 to 8, moisture
content between 40 and 55% and initial C/N ratio around 30
(Table 3). However, not all organic waste fall within these parameters. Therefore, to make the organic waste more suitable for vermicomposting, the waste should be: i) amended with bulking
agents/organic waste (or amendments) or ii) undergone some form
of pre-treatment process.
During vermicomposting process, bulking agents or amendments are used to make the organic waste more palatable for the
earthworms. For example, cow dung is commonly used as an
amendment in vermicomposting process because it is the easiest
animal waste for growing the earthworms (Edwards, 2004). Fruit
waste could also be used in some instances as amendments during
vermicomposting of soybean husk (Lim et al., 2011) and rice husk
(Lim et al., 2012). Some organic waste that have high moisture
content are amended with bulking agents (or amendments) to
reduce the moisture content. In fact, liquid waste like palm oil mill
efuent was absorbed onto a bulking material for vermicomposting
process (Lim et al., 2014). Other amendments used are soil and
matured vermicompost (Huang et al., 2014). Vermicompost is used
to provide an initial habitat for earthworms and as a source of
microbial inoculums (Castillo et al., 2013). Lignocellulosic organic
has high carbon content, hence this waste could be mixed with
other organic waste that has low carbon content to improve the
initial C/N ratio of the waste mixtures (Castillo et al., 2013). Other
example includes animal eshing waste from tannery industry
which had low C/N ratio, thus it was suitable to be amended with
leaf litter and cow dung (Ravindran et al., 2014). Optimum initial C/
N ratio of feedstock for vermicomposting is around 30, but it is
possible to vermicompost organic waste which has higher C/N ratio
(Pramanik and Chung, 2011). For example, Lim et al. (2015a) successfully vermicomposted empty fruit bunches and cow dung that
Yes (30)
Yes (60)
40
45
Unuon and Mnkeni (2014)

Vig et al. (2011)
Suthar et al. (2014)
had initial C/N ratio >50. After 12 weeks of vermicomposting, the C/

N ratio of the waste mixture dropped to <20.
Some organic waste could be vermicomposted without using
bulking materials but some form of pre-treatment process should
be introduced prior to vermicomposting process. For example,
dried cow dung is commonly used as an amendment but fresh cow
dung is unfavorable for the growth of earthworms (Edwards, 2004).
Thus, cow dung was dried under natural sunlight for one week with
periodic turning as a pre-treatment process (Lv et al., 2013). Pretreated cow dung could be used alone (Suthar, 2012) or mixed
with other organic waste (Aguiar et al., 2013) for vermicomposting
process. Therefore, in most vermicomposting studies, it is a common practice to pre-treat the organic waste by at least turning the
waste manually to eliminate the volatile gases which are toxic to
the earthworms (Lim et al., 2014) and reduce high moisture content
in some organic waste (Yang et al., 2014). Pre-treatment also encourages initial microbial degradation and softening of the waste
(Suthar and Gairola, 2014).
Similar to the compost, the presence of heavy metals in the
vermicompost poses a serious threat to human and environment
owing to its agricultural application. Singh and Kalamdhad
(2013a) found that vermicomposting process was effective in
reducing most of the bioavailable fractions of heavy metals. The
heavy metal ions could form complexes with humic substances
present in the vermicompost. Various organic functional groups
in the humic compounds could bind with metal ions through
ionic forces. Singh and Kalamdhad (2013c) conrmed that the
leachable concentration of heavy metals in the vermicompost
was under the threshold limit. Moreover, earthworms were able
to accumulate heavy metals in the organic waste via skin absorption or in their intestine (Lim et al., 2015b). Suthar et al.
(2014) found that some available fractions of heavy metals
were removed by the earthworms through gut/skin absorption.
Heavy metal content found in the worm tissues conrmed the
theory that earthworms had the capability to regulate metals.
Additives like y ash and phosphatic rock functions could also be
used as an immobilizing amendment to reduce the heavy metals
availability (Wang et al., 2013b).
One of the major concerns using vermicomposting process is
that it does not involve a thermophilic stage. However, limited
studies showed that vermicomposting could reduce pathogens in
the organic waste. Yadav et al. (2010) detected no coliforms in the
mature vermicompost derived from source-separated human fecal.
It was suggested that pathogens were killed or reduced through the
action of intestinal enzymes in the earthworms as well as the
competition between pathogens and microbes for the limited resources that earthworms left behind (Sim and Wu, 2010). This
result was supported by Hill and Baldwin (2012) who proved the
viability of using vermicomposting to convert fecal matter and

toilet paper into vermicompost which had lesser Escherichia coli.
3.3. Integration of composting-vermicomposting process

Organic waste stabilization through composting or vermicomposting is well established and proven to be feasible. However,
each of this process has its own disadvantages. In the composting
process, longer duration is needed for waste stabilization and the
organic waste requires frequent aeration to maintain aerobic conditions (Hait and Tare, 2011b). The major drawback during vermicomposting process is the low temperature required for the
duration of the process due to the presence of earthworms. The
waste might not be sanitized at low temperature and the vermicompost could not meet the required level of pathogen in the
organic fertilizer (Fornes et al., 2012). Thus, an integrated compostingevermicomposting process is suggested to overcome the
disadvantages of each stabilization process. The composting stage
in the integrated system will ensure that the produced fertilizer is
free from pathogens due to the presence of thermophilic stage,
while the vermicomposting stage reduces the particle size and
increases available nutrient recovery at a much higher rate with the
presence of earthworms. In addition, earthworms can help to turn
and mix the organic waste which will help reduce the cost needed
to maintain aerobic conditions during organic matter stabilization
(Dominguez and Edwards, 2011). Besides, the integrated system
allows for a wider range of organic waste to be treated. For example,
high moisture content of faecal slurry was not suitable to be used as
a direct feedstock for vermicomposting process. Therefore,
271
composting stage could be introduced before the pre-treated waste

was subjected to vermicomposting process (Yadav et al., 2012).
Table 6 shows the integrated compostingevermicomposting
system applied on different types of organic waste. Most studies
indicated that organic waste went through composting rst and
then followed by vermicomposting. Ndegwa and Thompson (2001)
compared the product obtained from two combined systems,
namely vermicomposting followed by composting and composting
followed by vermicomposting. The conclusion from their study
showed that composting followed by vermicomposting yielded
better end product. In most cases, a short period of composting can
be applied to pre-treat the waste before the pre-treated waste is
undergone vermicomposting process at the later stage (Wu et al.,
2014). Pre-treatment via pre-composting of organic waste usually
lasts for about 2e3 weeks and involves thermal stabilization,
initiation of microbial degradation and softening of organic waste,
making the pre-treated waste more palatable for earthworm consumption (Deka et al., 2011b). During pre-composting, organic
waste is turned periodically to ensure continuous aerobic condition
and remove any odor (Suthar and Sharma, 2013). After the
completion of composting, earthworms are added to the composted organic waste for further stabilization and degradation. The
resultant vermicompost from the integrated system usually has
nal C/N ratio of less than 20 and higher in available nutrients (Garg
et al., 2012).
A comparison between composting process alone and the integrated system revealed higher organic matter stability and nu

trients (P, Mg and Ca) in the latter (Sierra et al., 2013). Man
akova
et al. (2014) showed that higher reduction of arsenic mobility and
availability in the integrated system as compared to composting or
Table 6
Integration compostingevermicomposting of organic waste.
Organic waste
Activated sewage sludge

Animal manure
Apple pomace
Biogas digestate
Biogas slurry
Cattle manure
Citronella plant (Cymbopogon
winterianus Jowitt.)
Dewatered sludge
Amendment/Bulking agent Composting

Duration
(days)
Comments
30
20
14
Wheat straw
Wheat straw, sugarcane
trash, guar bran
Sunower cake
Cow dung
15
Corn stalk, compost, cow

manure, paper
Mushroom residues
Straw
References
Earthworms
E. fetida
Kharazzi et al. (2014)
- Manually aerated every 2 d

- Mechanically aerated
100
30
E. fetida
Eisenia
14
21
- Thermal stabilization
150
105
Eisenia
E. fetida
Song et al. (2014)

Hanc and Chadimova
(2014)
Hanc and Vasak (2015)
Suthar (2010)
60
- Thermophilic conditions
30
E. foetida
Busato et al. (2012)
E. eugeniae; P.
excavatus
E. fetida
Deka et al. (2011a,

2011b)

et al. (2014)
Man
akova
E. fetida
Wang et al. (2014a)
E. fetida
Yadav and Garg (2011b)
E. fetida
Garg et al. (2012)
E. fetida
Suthar et al. (2012)
E. fetida
E. fetida
Zhu et al. (2014)

Hait and Tare (2011a,
2011b, 2012)
Azizi et al. (2013)
Duck manure
Food industry sludge
Cow dung, poultry dropings 28
Pig manure
Primary sewage sludge; waste
activated sludge
Sewage sludge
Duration
(days)
40
Horse manure, saw dust,

grass clippings
Reed straw; zeolite
Food industry sludge, biogas plant

slurry, animal manure
Milk processing industry sludge
Vermicomposting
105
90
45
- Peak temperature: >55 C for 32

4d
- Semi-decomposition
and 91
thermal stabilization
- Semi-decomposition
and 105
thermal stabilization
90
28
Cow dung, sugarcane trash, 21
wheat straw
Rice straw
15
Matured vermicompost
Spent mushroom compost
21
Temple oral offerings

Tomato crop residues
Weed (Lantana camara)
Mature cow dung

Almond shells
Cow dung
15
63
21
Weed (Parthenium hysterophorus)
Cow dung
21
e
20 cycles of mixing
recycling
- Manual turning
- Semi-composting
- Manually aerated
90
and
45
28
105
L. rubellus
120
198
60
E. fetida
E. fetida
E. fetida
126
E. fetida
Singh et al. (2013)

Fornes et al. (2012)
Suthar and Sharma
(2013)
Yadav and Garg (2011c)
272
vermicomposting process alone. Similarly, Soobhany et al. (2015)

reported lower Cd, Cr, Cu, Co, Zn and Ni content in the integrated
system as compared to composting process alone, suggesting that
earthworms reduced the heavy metals in the organic fertilizer by
accumulating the metals in their bodies during vermicomposting
process. According to Wang et al. (2014a), lower greenhouse gas
emissions were produced in the integrated system. Therefore, it
would seem that the integration of composting and vermicomposting process results in a higher quality organic fertilizer and
poses lesser negative impact on the environment. Furthermore, the
thermophilic composting stage in the integrated system also ensures the fertilizer fullling the pathogen reduction requirements.
4. Environmental impact of composting and
vermicomposting processes
Emissions of signicant amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs)
during composting and vermicomposting processes are leading to
secondary pollution such as greenhouse effect, thus mortifying the
environmental benets of both processes. As stated by Hao et al.
(2004), losses of carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) during composting
process will reduce the agronomic value of the compost. GHGs are
released due to the energy needed by the composting facility (i.e.
machinery used) and by the biodegradation process itself which
produces CO2, methane and nitrous oxide (Friedrich and Trois,
2013). Most C is lost as CO2 while methane accounting for <6%
(Hao et al., 2004), which are two of the most important GHGs in the
nninen
atmosphere (Majumbar et al., 2006). Himanen and Ha
(2011) stated that the emissions of CO2 implied the mineralization and degradation of organic matters. This statement corresponded well to the studies reported by Hao et al. (2004), Tsutsui
et al. (2013) and Luo et al. (2014), where they correlated the
emissions of CO2 with a consumption of O2 in biodegradation
process as the decomposition of organic matters consumed O2 and
released CO2. Table 7 shows the GHG emissions for different types
of feedstock used in composting and/or vermicomposting.
Aeration and turning are known to be important factors
affecting the emissions of GHGs, including CO2 during composting
process. Based on the experiment conducted by Chowdhury et al.

(2014b), they concluded that low aeration was more effective in
reducing GHG emissions, while Wang et al. (2013a) indicated that
intermittent aeration was better than continuous aeration in
mitigating CO2 emissions. Turning enhanced air exchange in the
piles, thus decreasing methane emission and shortening the
maturing period (Jiang et al., 2013). Experiment carried out by Luo
et al. (2014) concluded that the emissions of GHGs during composting process could be efciently controlled by turning and
covering pig manure with mature compost. For the composting of
Ganqinfen pig manure, Jiang et al. (2013) also suggested that a
treatment with turning twice weekly without covering would
result in compost that was sufciently matured after six weeks
with the lowest emissions of GHGs. Between aeration and turning,
a study conducted by Friedrich and Trois (2013) reveled that during
composting of garden waste, turned windrow composting released
8.14% higher GHGs than aerated dome composting. Their ndings
may prove that the use of aeration in composting could reduce the
GHGs emissions as compared to composting with turning or
without turning. To reduce GHGs emissions such as CO2, some researchers suggested that mature compost (Luo et al., 2014), biochar (Chowdhury et al., 2014b) and C-bulking agent, such as
woodchips (Chowdhury et al., 2014b), sawdust or crop residues
(Maeda et al., 2013), could be used to mix with manure to adjust the
condition of the waste mixture prior to composting process. Li et al.
(2013) showed that ammonia emission could be mitigated by
adding a mixture of sucrose and straw powder at the beginning
stage of composting process.
Until now, only handful of studies have been carried out to
examine the emission of GHGs during vermicomposting process.
An earlier experiment done by Luth et al. (2011) showed that the
emission of CO2 was increased by an elevation of manure input.
However, decreases in emissions of ammonia and nitrous oxide as
well as a sink of methane in treatments with earthworms were
observed, suggesting that earthworm abundance could be used to
discourage the production of GHGs (Luth et al., 2011). Furthermore, results obtained by Chan et al. (2010) indicated that the
total GHGs emissions, including both nitrous oxide and methane,
Table 7
GHGs emission for different types of feedstock.
Feedstock
Amendment/Bulking agent Method
GHGs emission (g
CO2-eq/kg waste)
CO2
Straw-bedded cattle feedlot manure

Wood chip-bedded cattle feedlot manure
Dairy manure
Animal manure
Animal manure
Animal manure
Animal manure
Animal manure
Animal manure
Cattle slurry
Cattle slurry
Hen manure
Hen manure
Hen manure
Hen manure
Household waste
Household waste
Duck manure
Duck manure
Duck manure
Duck manure
Duck manure
Duck manure
e
e
e
e
Plastic tube
Woodchips
Bio-char
Barley straw
Lupin residues
High ow
Low ow
High ow
Low ow
Bio-char, high ow
Bio-char, low ow
e
e
e
Reed straw
Reed straw, zeolite
e
Reed straw
Reed straw, zeolite
Composting
165.0
Composting
145.6
Composting
587.0
Composting
62.3
Composting
63.2
Composting
48.0
Composting
41.2
Composting
50.3
Composting
61.2
Composting
93.0
Composting
85.0
Composting
79.0
Composting
70.0
Composting
62.0
Composting
54.0
Composting
e
Vermicomposting
e
Vermicomposting
26.6
Vermicomposting
27.8
Vermicomposting
23.9
Combined pre-composting and vermicomposting 264.4
N2O
Reference
CH4
10.2 187.3
11.2 188.6
48.0 153.0
2.81
1.39
1.97
0.73
3.62
1.08
1.79
0.11
1.06
0.74
1.29
6.31
12.0
12.0
12.2
24.8
12.75
4.25
14.63
4.37
11.96
1.04
12.22
0.78
4.27
0.43
3.37
0.93
53.67
0.12
16.39
0.06
15.02
0.1
77.69
0.26
27.65
0.15
32.75
0.15
Hao et al. (2004)

Mulbry and Ahn (2014)
Chowdhury et al. (2014a)
Chowdhury et al. (2014b)
Chan et al. (2010)

Wang et al. (2014a)
were the lowest during vermicomposting of household waste in

Brisbane, followed by methods using aerobic composting and
anaerobic digestion. The lower emission of nitrous oxide from the
vermicomposting system was probably offset by the reduction of
anaerobic denitrication, due to the burrowing action of the
earthworms (Chan et al., 2010). Also, moisture content and temperature are two crucial factors that would affect the emission of
ammonia and methane during vermicomposting process. VelascoVelasco et al. (2011) reported that water content of 80% and 15 C
would produce lesser ammonia than 70% water content and 22 C.
Chan et al. (2010) further observed a reduction in methane
emission during vermicomposting process at lower temperature.
On the other hand, a recent experiment using combined precomposting and vermicomposting was carried out by Wang
et al. (2014a). Wang et al. (2014a) showed that CO2 emission
was not affected by the presence of the earthworms but the
release of CO2 was signicantly increased by about 20% with an
addition of reed straw. This phenomenon could be due to the
addition of reed straw which helped promote the decomposition
of duck manure at higher temperature in longer duration during
pre-composting process (Wang et al., 2014a). Wang et al. (2014a)
concluded that the combined pre-composting and vermicomposting with additions of reed straw and zeolite not only
successfully bio-transformed duck manure into organic fertilizer
but also reducing the emissions of ammonia, nitrous oxide and
methane signicantly during biodegradation of duck manure.
Life cycle assessment (LCA) could be used in analyzing the
environmental impacts of composting and vermicomposting process. According to Seo et al. (2004), global warming, eutrophication
and acidication were the main factors of causing impact to the
environment. Global warming, the greatest contributor, was caused
by CO2 and methane emissions (Seo et al., 2004), followed by
acidication which was due to the emissions of NOx, SOx and
ammonia while eutrophication which was due to the emissions of
ammonia and SOx (Cadena et al., 2009). Lou (2008) found that the
GHG emissions during composting process was estimated to be
0.284 ton CO2-eq/ton-of-mixed waste, with emissions from the
operational activities taken into account. Composting of municipal
solid waste produced lower GHGs as compared to the conventional
landll in which 1.287 ton CO2-eq/ton-of-waste was emitted in the
former (Lou and Nair, 2009). Lou and Nair (2009) further justied
that the emissions from landlling activities, such as transportation, excavation, compaction and soil spreading, would also
contribute to overall GHG emissions. Similar results could be
observed from the study done by Banar et al. (2009), where landlling was a greater contributor to global warming with an emission of 6990 kg CO2-eq/ton-of-waste managed, as compared to the
composting with an emission of 1370 kg CO2-eq/ton-of-waste
managed. In addition, Lee et al. (2007) compared the environment
impacts of landll, incineration and composting. The results
demonstrated that incineration process was the main source of
global warming, with emissions of 580,317 g CO2-eq/ton-of-waste,
followed by landll and composting, with emissions of 409,433 and
269,647 g CO2-eq/ton-of-waste, respectively (Lee et al., 2007).
However, Gereca et al. (2006) found that the global warming was
mainly contributed by the emission of GHGs from landlling, followed by incineration and composting. Yay (2015) further
concluded that among the waste management methods, composting demonstrated better performance, as compared to landlling and incineration. On the other hand, between composting
and vermicomposting of biodegradable waste, Komakech et al.
(2015) found that vermicomposting process caused 78.19% lesser
GHG emission as compared to composting process which released
80.9 kg CO2-eq/ton-of-waste. The huge variation in the GHGs
emission observed was due to the different amount of solid waste
273
involved in the waste treatment processes as well as the duration

and conditions of the processes.
Generally, reuse of solid waste through composting and vermicomposting processes provide positive impact on the environment. An application of compost or vermicompost on land, could
reduce the amount of chemical fertilizers and pesticides needed in
agriculture, thus reducing possible environmental pollution (Lou
and Nair, 2009). Moreover, an application of compost and vermicompost could enhance carbon sequestration in the soil, thus
reducing the release of GHGs into the environment (Luth et al.,
2011). Ruggieri et al. (2009) stated that the compost could act as
a suppressor agent against different diseases occurred in the crop
or plantation. Besides, the thermophilic condition in the composting process was able to prevent the threat of pathogen infections (Ruggieri et al., 2009). On the other hand, Chan et al. (2010)
reported that the earthworms were able to reduce the volatile
sulfur compounds emission, which would in turn decreased the
environmental pollution.
5. Economic analysis of composting and vermicomposting
processes
Thus far, composting and vermicomposting processes are
feasible organic waste management strategies because both processes are able to transform a wide variety of waste and with
relatively low environmental impact as compared to other management options. It is also well-known that composting and vermicomposting are sustainable processes in terms of economic
aspects as they involve lower operating cost as compared to other
waste management options (Ruggieri et al., 2009). The low cost
involved in composting system is due to low technical complexity
and capital requirements (Galgani et al., 2014). Studies on economic
analysis of composting and vermicomposting process are scarce
and to the best of our knowledge, no economic analysis was done
previously on integrated composting-vermicomposting process.
Table 8 shows the economic assessment for composting and
vermicomposting technology. Generally, the economic analysis in
composting system encompasses capital, labor, biomass, processing energy, repair and maintenance costs, revenue from compost
production and disposal credit (Blumenstein et al., 2012). An
anaerobic sludge composting plant with a capacity of 7.12 106 kg
required investment costs of approximately V462,646 and annual
cost between V250,000 and V360,000. The composting plant was
equipped with an aeration system or/and turning vehicle and
assuming 50% load for each composting type. Housing and gas
emission treatment facilities were included for aerated composting
whilst only roong for composting with pile turning. The plant also
included either asphalt or concrete platform to collect any leachate
and precipitation. The revenue for the composting plant came from
selling 60% of the compost (V0.041 per kg) while the remaining
compost was used as a landll cover. This set-up of composting
system and nal use of compost was economically viable with a
payback period of 2.9 years (Cukjati et al., 2012). Other studies also
showed economic viability of composting system as compared to
other organic waste management method. Ruggieri et al. (2009)
made a comparison between external management costs and
composting costs of organic waste produced in wine industries.
This study showed a savings of V19.56 per ton of organic waste if
composting was used to manage wine industries waste in comparison with external management. Cost benet analysis for
municipal solid waste management in Africa also showed that
aerated open windrow composting system was the better option as
compared to controlled landlling (Couth and Trois, 2012).
Nevertheless, Blumenstein et al. (2012) highlighted that composting of semi-natural grassland was not protable from an
274
Table 8
Economic assessment of several composting and vermicomposting technologies.
Total
Treatment technology Capacity Life time
cost
(t/y)
scenario
analysis (y) (USD
million)
Total
revenue
(USD
million/y)
Remarks
Payback Return on
Internal
Net present
period, investment,
rate of
value, NPV
(USD million) return, IRR PBP (y) ROI (%)
(%)
Integrated biogas and 218,570 10

composting
technology
6.29a
2.38
9.53
32
2.9
Composting
technology
276,000 10
~4.37a
~1.10
3.91
31
2.9
Composting toilets
ec
50
0.22b
0.49
6e7
Vermicomposting
system for urban
small-holder
farmer
Composting plant in
Ghana
0.6e1.2
170e200
1500
10
~0.24
~0.13
16.25
36,500
~2.38
~2.28
Continuous-ow
reactor
vermicomposting
system
- Clean Development Mechanism

(CDM) was taken into
consideration of economic
analysis
- Clean Development Mechanism
(CDM) was taken into
consideration of economic
analysis
- PBP at discount rates 0e12%
References
Yoshizaki
et al.
(2013)
Yoshizaki
et al.
(2012)
Anand and
Apul
(2011)
- Prot: USD 100e280 per annum Lalander
et al.
(2015)
- Economic
analysis
includes Galgani
revenue through carbon credits et al.
(2014)
- Prot: USD ~2.06 million per Edwards
annum
et al.
(2010)
Total cost Investment cost Annual operation and maintenance cost.

Total cost Lifetime manufacturing cost Lifetime operational cost.
c
Composting system similar to Sun Mar's Centrex 3000 A/F extra high capacity composting toilet systems. Composting tanks (0.8 0.7 1.8 m) were placed in the
basement of building (comprises approximately 2200 people) and every two toilets were connected to one single composting chamber.
b
investors' point of view as compared to producing solid fuel and

biogas from the biomass. Protability could only be obtained when
grassland disposal costs were increased due to no other management options were available in a specic locality and shortages of
fossil fuels which led to higher fertilizer values (Blumenstein et al.,
2012). Yoshizaki et al. (2012, 2013) showed that composting system
and integrated system of biogas plus composting had similar internal rate of return and payback period but the net present value
was higher in the integrated system (Table 8). Both of these studies
revealed that composting system had lower investment and capital
cost but it brought in lesser revenue as compared to integrated
system with biogas generation (Blumenstein et al., 2012; Yoshizaki
et al., 2013). Galgani et al. (2014) also reported that composting was
not viable without external subsidies in a case study conducted at
Northern Ghana. However, composting was economically feasible
without any subsidies in Bangladesh and Indonesia (Galgani et al.,
2014). Thus, the economic viability of composting system is hard
to be determined as it depends on the cost of many parameters
such as type of composting system, production volume, existing
facilities and equipment, feedstocks, compost prices and more
importantly how the estimates were calculated (Rynk, 2001). For
example, investment costs from different composting farms and
compost prices could be ranged from $20e40 and $15e35 per cubic
yard compost, respectively (Rynk, 2001).
The capital cost of an indoor continuous-ow reactor vermicomposting system was estimated to be $2,159,000 and the operating cost was $220,000 with an annual return of $2,275,000. The
revenue was inclusive of the sales of vermicompost and landll
savings. Therefore, the potential annual prot was around
$2,055,000. The price of vermicompost varies from $200 to $1000
per ton, depending on its quality, unit size and packaging (Edwards
et al., 2010). In Uganda, the market price for vermicompost was
$0.08 per kg (Lalander et al., 2015), indicating that the vermicompost revenue also depended on the location. Excess earthworm
biomass from the vermicomposting process can also generate
revenue. Market value for earthworm biomass can be ranged from
$5 to $35 per pound (Edwards et al., 2010). Similar to the composting system, the economic potential of a vermicomposting
system is dependent on the initial costs as well as vermicompost
and earthworm revenues at a particular location, making the vermicomposting system not entirely feasible in certain scenarios.
Carbon markets also play a role in the economic feasibility of
composting system. Although composting contributes to lower
GHG emissions in comparison with landlling, carbon offsets are
not considered for recycling of nutrients to produce compost from
organic waste thus far. The carbon offsets have only be approved for
avoiding methane formation from landlling waste (Galgani et al.,
2014). Until now, no economic analyses are attempted on integrated composting-vermicomposting system. Thus, one can only
estimate the total cost of the process based on the individual
composting and vermicomposting process. It can be postulated that
the cost of an integrated compostingevermicomposting system
contributed higher capital and annual costs than using composting
system alone. However, an integrated system could also bring in
more revenues due to the higher quality of organic fertilizer and
sale of earthworm biomass.
6. Conclusion
The available literature proves that composting and vermicomposting technologies are able to degrade a variety of organic
solid waste and convert them into value-added product(s). The
integration of composting-vermicomposting system was also
proven to be more efcient than individual composting or vermicomposting process. This review also shows that during composting and vermicomposting processes, the emitted GHGs would lead
to secondary pollution which in turn morties the environmental
benets of both processes, but it can be mitigated. Mature compost
and C-bulking agent could be used to mix with the solid waste prior
to composting or vermicomposting process to reduce the emissions
of GHGs. Economic assessment of composting and vermicomposting process are limited and those available are generally positive
with some studies showing the opposite. The differences in economic potential is due to the differences in type of composting
system, market value of organic fertilizer, production volume and
etc. Also, solid fuel and biogas generation systems are generally
more established and protable than composting system, making
the latter less desirable. Despite that, it is commonly known that
composting or vermicomposting system has low investment cost
than other waste treatment methods. Additionally, both composting and vermicomposting are considered as clean and sustainable
technologies because they reuse waste to produce organic fertilizer
which could be applied to agricultural lands.
Acknowledgments
The research was funded by Ministry of Higher Education,
Malaysia under Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS/1/
2013/STWN03/MUSM/02/1). In addition, the authors would like to
thank Monash University Malaysia for providing both S.L. Lim and
L.H. Lee with postgraduate scholarships.
References
Abbasi, S.A., Nayeem-Shah, M., Abbasi, T., 2015. Vermicomposting of phytomass:
limitations of the past approaches and the emerging directions. J. Clean. Prod.
93, 103e114.
Agnolucci, A., Cristani, C., Battini, F., Palla, M., Cardelli, R., Saviozzi, A., Nuti, M., 2013.
Microbially-enhanced composting of olive mill solid waste (wet husk): bacterial
and fungal community dynamics at industrial pilot and farm level. Bioresour.
Technol. 134, 10e16.
Aguiar, N.O., Olivares, F.L., Novotny, E.H., Dobbss, L.B., Balmori, D.M., SantosJnior, L.G., Chagas, J.G., Faanha, A.R., Canellas, L.P., 2013. Bioactivity of humic
acids isolated from vermicomposts at different maturation stages. Plant Soil
362, 161e174.
Albrecht, R., Petit, J.L., Terrom, G., Perissol, C., 2011. Comparison between UV
spectroscopy and nirs to assess humication process during sewage sludge and
green wastes co-composting. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 4495e4500.
Anand, C., Apul, D.S., 2011. Economic and environmental analysis of standard, high
efciency, rainwater ushed and composting toilets. J. Env. Manag. 92,
419e428.
Awasthi, M.K., Pandey, A.K., Khan, J., Bundela, P.S., Wong, J.W.C., Selvam, A., 2014.
Evaluation of thermophilic fungal consortium for organic municipal solid waste
composting. Bioresour. Technol. 168, 214e221.
Azizi, A.B., Lim, M.P.M., Noor, Z.M., Abdullah, N., 2013. Vermiremoval of heavy metal
in sewage sludge by utilising Lumbricus reubellus. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 90,
13e20.
Banar, M., Cokaygil, Z., Ozkan, A., 2009. Life cycle assessment of solid waste management options for Eskisehir, Turkey. Waste Manag. 29, 54e62.
Bernal, M.P., Alburquerque, J.A., Moral, R., 2009. Composting of animal manures and
chemical criteria for compost maturity assessment. A review. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 5444e5453.
Bhat, S.A., Singh, J., Vig, A.P., 2013. Vermiremediation of dyeing sludge from textile
mill with the help of exotic earthworm Eisenia fetida Savigny. Environ. Sci.
Pollut. Res. 20, 5975e5982.
Bhat, S.A., Singh, J., Vig, A.P., 2014. Genotoxic assessment and optimization of
pressmud with the help of exotic earthworm Eisenia fetida. Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. 21, 8112e8123.
ller, D., 2012. Economic assessment of
Blumenstein, B., Bhle, L., Wachendorf, M., Mo
the integrated generation of solid fuel and biogas from biomass (IFBB) in
comparison to different energy recovery, animal-based and non-rening
management systems. Bioresour. Technol. 119, 312e323.
Busato, J.G., Lima, L.S., Aguiar, N.O., Canellas, L.P., Olivares, F.L., 2012. Changes in
labile phosphorus forms during maturation of vermicompost enriched with
phosphorus-solubilizing and diazotrophic bacteria. Bioresour. Technol. 110,
390e395.
rez-Murcia, M.D., Paredes, C.,
Bustamante, M.A., Restrepo, A.P., Alburquerque, J.A., Pe
Moral, R., Bernal, M.P., 2013. Recycling of anaerobic digestates by composting:
effect of the bulking agent used. J. Clean. Prod. 47, 61e69.
Butt, K.R., Briones, M.J.I., 2011. Life cycle studies of the earthworm Lumbricus friendi
(Cognetti, 1904). Pedobiologia 54S, S27eS29.
Cabanillas, C., Stobbia, D., Ledesma, A., 2013. Production and income of basil in and
out of season with vermicomposts from rabbit manure and bovine ruminal
contents alternatives to urea. J. Clean. Prod. 47, 77e84.
ceres, R., Coromina, N., Malin
ska, K., Marfa
, O., 2015. Evolution of process control
Ca
parameters during extended co-composting of green waste and solid fraction of
cattle slurry to obtain growing media. Bioresour. Technol. 179, 396e406.
n, J., Artola, A., Sa
nchez, A., Font, X., 2009. Environmental impact of
Cadena, E., Colo
two aerobic composting technologies using life cycle assessment. Int. J. Life
Cycle Assess. 14, 401e410.
275
Castillo, J.M., Romero, E., Nogales, R., 2013. Dynamics of microbial communities
related to biochemical parameters during vermicomposting and maturation of
agroindustrial lignocellulose wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 146, 345e354.
Chan, Y.C., Sinha, R.K., Wang, W.J., 2010. Emission of greenhouse gases from home
aerobic composting, anaerobic digestion and vermicomposting of household
wastes in Brisbane (Australia). Waste Manag. Res. 29, 540e548.
Chowdhury, A.K.M.M.B., Akratos, C.S., Vayenas, D.V., Pavlou, S., 2013. Olive mill
waste composting: a review. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegr. 85, 108e119.
Chowdhury, M.A., Neergaard, A., Jensen, L.S., 2014a. Composting of solid separated
from anaerobically digested animal manure: effect of bulking agents and
mixing ratios on emissions of greenhouse gases and ammonia. Biosyst. Eng.
124, 63e77.
Chowdhury, M.A., Neergaard, A., Jensen, L.S., 2014b. Potential of aeration ow rate
and bio-char addition to reduce greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions during
manure composting. Chemosphere 97, 16e25.
Costa, M.S.S.M., Cestonaro, T., Costa, L.A.M., Rozatti, M.A.T., Carneiro, L.J.,
Pereira, D.C., Lorin, H.E.F., 2015. Improving the nutrient content of sheep
bedding compost by adding cattle manure. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 9e14.
Coulibaly, S.S., Zoro Bi, I.A., 2010. Inuence of animal wastes on growth and
reproduction of the African earthworm species Eudrilus eugeniae (Oligochaeta).
Eur. J. Soil Biol. 46, 225e229.
Couth, R., Trois, C., 2012. Cost effective waste management through composting in
Africa. Waste Manag. 32, 2518e2525.
Cukjati, N., Zupan
ci
c, G.D., Ros, M., Grilc, V., 2012. Composting of anaerobic sludge:
an economically feasible element of a sustainable sewage sludge management.
J. Environ. Manag. 106, 48e55.
Curran, T., Williams, I.D., 2012. A zero waste vision for industrial networks in
Europe. J. Hazard. Mater 207e208, 3e7.
Deka, H., Deka, S., Baruah, C.K., Das, J., Hoque, S., Sarma, N.S., 2011a. Vermicomposting of distillation waste of citronella plant (Cymbopogon winterianus
Jowitt.) employing Eudrilus eugeniae. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 6944e6950.
Deka, H., Deka, S., Baruah, C.K., Das, J., Hoque, S., Sarma, H., Sarma, N.S., 2011b.
Vermicomposting potentiality of Perionyx excavates for recycling of waste
biomass of java citronella-an aromatic oil yielding plant. Bioresour. Technol.
102, 11212e11217.
de Souza, M.E.P., de Carvalho, A.M.X., Deliberali, D.C., Jucksch, I., Brown, G.G.,
Mendonca, E.S., Cardoso, I.M., 2013. Vermicomposting with rock powder increases plant growth. Appl. Soil Ecol. 69, 56e60.
Doan, T.T., Bouvier, C., Bettarel, Y., Bouvier, T., Henry-des-Tureaux, T., Janeau, J.L.,
Lamballe, P., Nguyen, B.V., Jouquet, P., 2014. Inuence of buffalo manure,
compost, vermicompost and biochar amendments on bacterial and viral communities in soil and adjacent aquatic systems. Appl. Soil Ecol. 73, 78e86.
Doan, T.T., Ngo, P.T., Rumpel, C., Nguyen, B.V., Jouquet, P., 2013. Interactions between
compost, vermicompost and earthworms inuence plant growth and yield: a
one-year greenhouse experiment. Sci. Hortic. 160, 148e154.
Dominguez, J., Edwards, C.A., 2011. Relationships between composting and vermicomposting. In: Edwards, C.A., Arancon, N.Q., Sherman, R. (Eds.), Vermiculture
Technology. CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, pp. 11e25.
Edwards, C.A., 2004. Earthworm Ecology, second ed. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton,
USA.
Edwards, C.A., Arancon, N.Q., Sherman, R., 2010. Vermiculture Technology: Earthworms, Organic Wastes, and Environmental Management. CRC Press LLC, Boca
Raton, USA.
European Environmental Agency (EEA), 2009. Diverting Waste from Landll,
Effectiveness of Waste-management Policies in the European Union. Report No
7/2009. Ofce for the Ofcial Publications of the European Communities,
Luxembourg. http://dx.doi.org/10.2800/10886.
Faverial, J., Sierra, J., 2014. Home composting of household biodegradable wastes
under tropical conditions of Guadeloupe (Frence Antilles). J. Clean. Prod. 83,
238e244.
ndez-Go
mez, M.J., Daz-Ravin
~ a, M., Romero, E., Nogales, R., 2013. Recycling of
Ferna
environmentally problematic plant wastes generated from greenhouse tomato
crops through vermicomposting. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 10, 697e708.
ndez-Go
mez, M.J., Nogales, R., Plante, A., Plaza, C., Ferna
ndez, J.M., 2015.
Ferna
Application of a set of complementary techniques to understand how varying
the proportion of two wastes affects humic acids produced by vermicomposting. Waste Manag. 35, 81e88.
ndez, R., Novo, M., Gutie
rrez, M., Almodo
var, A., Cosn, D.J.D., 2010. Life cycle
Ferna
s,
and reproductive traits of the earthworm Aporrectodea trapezoides (Duge
1828) in laboratory cultures. Pedobiologia 53, 295e299.
ndez-Go
mez, M.J., Romero, E., Nogales, R., 2010. Feasibility of vermiFerna
composting for vegetable greenhouse waste recycling. Bioresour. Technol. 101,
9654e9660.
ndez-Go
mez, M.J., Romero, E., Nogales, R., 2011. Impact of imidacloprid resiFerna
dues on the development of Eisenia fetida during vermicomposting of greenhouse plant waste. J. Hazard. Mater 192, 1886e1889.
ndez, D., Garca-de-la-Fuente, R., Abad, M., Belda, R.M.,
Fornes, F., Mendoza-Herna
2012. Composting versus vermicomposting: a comparative study of organic
matter evolution through straight and combined processes. Bioresour. Technol.
118, 296e305.
Fourti, O., 2013. The maturity tests during composting of municipal solid wastes.
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 72, 43e49.
Friedrich, E., Trois, C., 2013. GHG emission factors developed for the recycling and
composting of municipal waste in South African municipalities. Waste Manag.
33, 2520e2531.
276
Gabhane, J., William, S.P.M.P., Bidyadhar, R., Bhilawe, P., Anand, D., Vaidya, A.N.,
Wate, S.R., 2012. Additives aided composting of green waste: effects on organic
matter degradation, compost maturity, and quality of the nished compost.
Bioresour. Technol. 114, 382e388.
Galgani, P., van der Voet, E., Korevaar, G., 2014. Composting, anaerobic digestion and
biochar production in Ghana. Environmental-economic assessment in the
context of voluntary carbon markets. Waste Manag. 34, 2454e2465.
Garg, V.K., Gupta, R., 2011. Optimizing of cow dung spiked pre-consumer processing
vegetable waste for vermicomposting using Eisenia fetida. Ecotoxicol. Env. Saf.
74, 19e24.
Garg, V.K., Suthar, S., Yadav, A., 2012. Management of food industry waste
employing vermicomposting technology. Bioresour. Technol. 126, 437e443.
mez-Brando
n, M., Aira, M., Lores, M., Domnguez, J., 2011a. Changes in microbial
Go
community structure and function during vermicomposting of pig slurry. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 4171e4178.
mez-Brando
n, M., Lazcano, C., Lores, M., Domnguez, J., 2011b. Short-term staGo
bilization of grape marc through earthworms. J. Hazard. Mater 187, 291e295.
, S., Baldasano, J.M., Jime
nez-Guerrero, P., 2006. Life cycle
Gereca, L.P., Gasso
assessment of two biowaste management systems for Barcelona, Spain. Resour.
Conserv. Recycl. 49, 32e48.
Bekbo
r, E.B.O.,
let, M., 2010. Zinc release by humic and fulvic acid as inuGngo
enced by pH, complexation and DOC sorption. Geoderma 159, 131e138.
Hait, S., Tare, V., 2012. Transformation and availability of nutrients and heavy metals
during integrated composting-vermicomposting of sewage sludges. Ecotoxicol.
Environ. Saf. 79, 214e224.
Hait, S., Tare, V., 2011a. Optimizing vermistabilization of waste activated sludge
using vermicompost as bulking material. Waste Manag. 31, 502e511.
Hait, S., Tare, V., 2011b. Vermistabilization of primary sewage sludge. Bioresour.
Technol. 102, 2812e2820.
Hanc, A., Chadimova, Z., 2014. Nutrient recovery from apple pomace waste by
vermicomposting technology. Bioresour. Technol. 168, 240e244.
Hanc, A., Vasak, F., 2015. Processing separated digestate by vermicomposting
technology using earthworms of the genus Eisenia. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.
12, 1183e1190.
Hao, X.Y., Chang, C., Larney, F.J., 2004. Carbon, nitrogen balances and greenhouse
gas emission during cattle feedlot manure composting. J. Environ. Qual. 33,
37e44.
Hill, G.B., Baldwin, S.A., 2012. Vermicomposting toilets, an alternative to latrine
style microbial composting toilets, prove far superior in mass reduction,
pathogen destruction, compost quality, and operational cost. Waste Manag. 32,
1811e1820.
Himanen, M., H
anninen, K., 2011. Composting of bio-waste, aerobic and anaerobic
sludges e effect of feedstock on the process and quality of compost. Bioresour.
Technol. 102, 2842e2852.
Hoornweg, D., Bhada-Tata, P., Kennedy, C., 2013. Waste production must peak this
century. Nature 502, 615e617.
Hoornweg, D., Bhada-Tata, P., 2012. What a Waste: a Global Review of Solid Waste
Management. World Bank, Washington, DC, USA.
Huang, K., Li, F., Wei, Y., Chen, X., Fu, X., 2013. Changes of bacterial and fungal
community compositions during vermicomposting of vegetable wastes by
Eisenia foetida. Bioresour. Technol. 150, 235e241.
Huang, K., Li, F., Wei, Y., Fu, X., Chen, X., 2014. Effects of earthworms on physiochemical properties and microbial proles during vermicomposting of fresh
fruit and vegetable wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 170, 45e52.
Jiang, T., Schuchardt, F., Li, G.X., Guo, R., Luo, Y.M., 2013. Gaseous emission during
the composting of pig feces from Chinese Ganqinfen system. Chemosphere 90,
1545e1551.
John Paul, J.A., Karmegam, N., Daniel, T., 2011. Municipal solid waste (MSW) vermicomposting with an epigeic earthworm P. ceyleanensis Mich. Bioresour.
Technol. 102, 6769e6773.
pez, M.J., Lo
pezJurado, M.M., Su
arez-Estrella, F., Vargas-Garca, M.C., Lo
lez, J.A., Moreno, J., 2014a. Evolution of enzymatic activities and carbon
Gonza
fractions throughout composting of plant waste. J. Env. Manag. 133, 355e364.
rez-Estrella, F., Vargas-Garca, M.C., Lo
pez, M.J., 2014b. Increasing
Jurado, M.M., Sua
native microbiota in lignocellulosic waste composting: effects on process efciency and nal product maturity. Process Biochem. 49, 1958e1969.
Kang, W., Kim, I., Lee, T., Kim, K., Kim, D., 2014. Effect of temperature on bacterial
emissions in composting of swine manure. Waste Manag. 34, 1006e1011.
Kalemelawa, F., Nishihara, E., Endo, T., Ahmad, Z., Yeasmin, R., Tenywa, M.M.,
Yamamoto, S., 2012. An evaluation of aerobic and anaerobic composting of
banana peels treated with different inoculums for soil nutrient replenishment.
Karak, T., Bhagat, R.M., Bhattacharyya, P., 2012. Municipal solid waste generation,
composition, and management: the world scenario. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 42, 1509e1630.
Kaushik, P., Malik, A., Sharma, S., 2012. Vermicomposting: an eco-friendly option for
fermentation and dye decolourization waste disposal. Clean. e Soil Air Water
41, 616e621.
Kharazzi, S.M., Younesi, H., Abedini-Torghabeh, J., 2014. Microbial biodegradation of
waste materials for nutrients enrichment and heavy metals removal: an integrated composting-vermicomposting process. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegr. 92,
41e48.
nsson, H., Vinners, B., 2015. Life cycle assessment of
Komakech, A.J., Sundbery, C., Jo
biodegradable waste management treatment systems for sub-Saharan African
cities. Resour. Conserv. Recycl 99, 100e110.
Korniowicz-Kowalska, T., Bohacz, J., 2010. Dynamics of growth and succession of

bacterial and fungal communities during composting of feather waste. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 1268e1276.
Kop
ci
c, N., Domanovac, M.V., Ku
ci
c, D., Briski, F., 2014. Evaluation of laboratory-scale
in-vessel co-composting of tobacco and apple waste. Waste Manag. 34,
323e328.
Klc, R., Yaldiz, O., 2014. The composting of agricultural wastes and the new
parameter for the assessment of the process. Ecol. Eng. 69, 220e225.
Kumar, R., Shweta, 2011. Enhancement of wood waste decomposition by microbial inoculation prior to vermicomposting. Bioresour. Technol. 102,
1475e1480.
Kumar, R., Verma, D., Singh, B.L., Kumar, U., Shweta, 2010. Composting of sugar-cane
waste by-products through treatment with microorganisms and subsequent
vermicomposting. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 6707e6711.
Kwon, Y.T., Lee, C.W., Yun, J.H., 2009. Development of vermicast from sludge and
powdered oyster shell. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 708e711.
Lalander, C.H., Komakech, A.J., Vinners, B., 2015. Vermicomposting as manure
management strategy for urban small-holder animal farms e Kampala case
study. Waste Manag. 39, 96e103.
Laner, D., Crest, M., Scharff, H., Morris, J.W.F., Barlaz, M.A., 2012. A review of approaches for the long-term management of municipal solid waste landlls.
Waste Manag. 32, 498e512.
Lee, S.H., Choi, K.I., Osako, M., Dong, J.I., 2007. Evaluation of environmental burdens
caused by changes of food waste management systems in Seoul, Korea. Sci.
Total Environ. 387, 42e53.
Li, X., Xing, M., Yang, J., Huang, Z., 2011. Compositional and functional features of
humic acid-like fractions from vermicomposting of sewage sludge and cow
dung. J. Hazard. Mater. 185, 740e748.
Li, Y.B., Li, W.G., Wu, C.D., Wang, K., 2013. New insights into the interactions between carbon dioxide and ammonia emissions during sewage sludge composting. Bioresour. Technol. 136, 385e393.
Lim, P.N., Wu, T.Y., Sim, E.Y.S., Lim, S.L., 2011. The potential reuse of soybean husk as
feedstock of Eudrilus eugeniae in vermicomposting. J. Sci. Food Agric. 91,
2637e2642.
Lim, P.N., Wu, T.Y., Clarke, C., Daud, N.N.N., 2015a. A potential bioconversion of
empty fruit bunches into organic fertilizer using Eudrilus eugeniae. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 12, 2533e2544.
Lim, S.L., Wu, T.Y., 2015. Determination of maturity in the vermicompost produced
from palm oil mill efuent using spectroscopy, structural characterization and
thermogravimetric
analysis.
Ecol.
Eng.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.ecoleng.2015.09.050.
Lim, S.L., Wu, T.Y., Clarke, C., 2014. Treatment and biotransformation of highly
polluted agro-industrial wastewater from palm oil mill into vermicompost
using earthworms. J. Agric. Food Chem. 62, 691e698.
Lim, S.L., Wu, T.Y., Lim, P.N., Shak, K.P.Y., 2015b. The use of vermicompost in organic
farming: overview, effects on soil and economics. J. Sci. Food Agric. 95,
1143e1156.
Lim, S.L., Wu, T.Y., Sim, E.Y.S., Lim, P.N., Clarke, C., 2012. Biotransformation of
rice husk into organic fertilizer through vermicomposting. Ecol. Eng. 41,
60e64.
pez-Gonz
rez-Estrella, F., Vargas-Garca, M.C., Lo
pez, M.J.,
Lo
alez, J.A., Sua
Jurado, M.M., Moreno, J., 2015. Dynamics of bacterial microbiota during lignocellulosic waste composting: studies upon its structure, functionality and
biodiversity. Bioresour. Technol. 175, 405e416.
Lou, X.F., 2008. A Mathematical Estimation of the Impact of Landlling, Composting
and Anaerobic Digestion on Greenhouse Gas Emissions e the Total Emissions
Accountability Mode. Honours Thesis. Murdoch University, Australia.
Lou, X.F., Nair, J., 2009. The impact of landlling and composting on greenhouse gas
emissions-A review. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 3792e3798.
Lowe, C.N., Butt, K.R., 2008. Life cycle traits of the parthenogenetic earthworm
Octolasion cyaneum (Savigny, 1826). Eur. J. Soil Biol. 44, 541e544.
Luo, W.H., Yuan, J., Luo, Y.M., Li, G.X., Nghiem, L.D., Price, W.E., 2014. Effects of
mixing and covering with mature compost on gaseous emissions during
composting. Chemosphere 117, 14e19.
Luth, Robin, P., Germain, P., Lecomte, M., Landrain, B., Li, Y.S., Cluzeau, D., 2011.
Earthworm effects on gaseous emissions during vermiltration of pig fresh
slurry. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 3679e3686.
Lv, B., Xing, M., Yang, J., Qi, W., Lu, Y., 2013. Chemical and spectroscopic characterization of water extractable organic matter during vermicomposting of cattle
dung. Bioresour. Technol. 132, 320e326.
Lv, B., Xing, M., Zhao, C., Yang, J., Xiang, L., 2014. Towards understanding the stabilization process in vermicomposting using PARAFAC analysis of uorescence
spectra. Chemosphere 117, 216e222.
Maeda, K., Hanajima, D., Morioka, R., Toyoda, S., Yoshida, N., Osada, T., 2013. Mitigation of greenhouse gas emission from the cattle manure composting process
by use of a bulking agent. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 59, 96e106.
Majumbar, D., Patel, J., Bhatt, N., Desai, P., 2006. Emission of methane and carbon
dioxide and earthworm survival during composting of pharmaceutical sludge
and spent mycelia. Bioresour. Technol. 97, 648e658.
Makan, A., Assobhei, O., Mountadar, M., 2014. Initial air pressure inuence on invessel composting for the biodegradable fraction of municipal solid waste in
Morocco. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 11, 53e58.
a
kova
, B., Kuta, J., Svobodova
, M., Hofman, J., 2014. Effects of combined comMan
posting and vermicomposting of waste sludge on arsenic fate and bioavailability. J. Hazard. Mater 280, 544e551.

Marshall, R.E., Farahbaksh, K., 2013. Systems approaches to integrated solid waste
management in developing countries. Waste Manag. 33, 988e1003.
Martinez-Balmori, D., Olivares, F.L., Spaccini, R., Aguiar, K.P., Arajo, M.F.,
Aguiar, N.O., Guridi, F., Canellas, L.P., 2013. Molecular characteristics of vermicompost and their relationship to preservation of inoculated nitrogen-xing
bacteria. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 104, 540e550.
Millner, P., Ingram, D., Mulbry, W., Arikan, O.A., 2014. Pathogen reduction in minimally managed composting of bovine manure. Waste Manag. 34, 1992e1999.
Minale, M., Worku, T., 2014. Anaerobic co-digestion of sanitary wastewater and
kitchen solid waste for biogas and fertilizer production under ambient temperature: waste generated from condominium house. Int. J. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 11, 509e516.
Molina, M.J., Soriano, M.D., Ingelmo, F., Llinares, J., 2013. Stabilization of sewage
sludge and vinasse bio-wastes by vermicomposting with rabbit manure using
Eisenia fetida. Bioresour. Technol. 137, 88e97.
Monroy, F., Aira, M., Domnguez, J., 2011. Epigeic earthworms increase soil
arthropod populations during rst steps of decomposition of organic matter.
Pedobiologia 54, 93e99.
Mulbry, W., Ahn, H., 2014. Greenhouse gas emissions during composting of dairy
manure: inuence of the timing of pile mixing on total emissions. Biosyst. Eng.
126, 117e122.
Najar, I.A., Khan, A.B., 2013. Management of fresh water weeds (macrophytes) by
vermicomposting using Eisenia fetida. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 20, 6406e6417.
Ndegwa, P.M., Thompson, S.A., 2001. Integrating composting and vermicomposting
in the treatment and bioconversion of biosolids. Bioresour. Technol. 76,
107e112.
Negi, R., Suthar, S., 2013. Vermistabilization of paper mill wastewater sludge using
Eisenia fetida. Bioresour. Technol. 128, 193e198.
Oliveira, L.B., Rosa, L.P., 2003. Brazilian waste potential: energy, environmental,
social and economic benets. Energy Policy 31, 1481e1491.
Paradelo, R., Moldes, A.B., Barral, M.T., 2013. Evolution of organic matter during
mesophilic composting of lignocellulosic winery wastes. J. Env. Manag. 116,
18e26.
Piotrowska-Cyplik, A., Chrzanowski, L., Cyplik, P., Dach, J., Olejnik, A., Staninska, J.,
Czarny, J., Lewicki, A., Marecik, R., Powierska-Czarny, J., 2013. Composting of
oiled bleaching earth: fatty acids degradation, phytotoxicity and mutagenicity
changes. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegr. 78, 49e57.
Pozza, S.A., Penteado, C.S.G., Criscuolo, V.G., 2015. A greenhouse gas inventroy in the
municipal landll of the City of Limeira, Brazil. Chem. Eng. Trans. 43,
2083e2088.
Prakash, M., Karmegam, N., 2010. Vermistabilization of pressmud using Perionyx
ceylanensis Mich. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 8464e8468.
Pramanik, P., Chung, Y.R., 2011. Changes in fungal population of y ash and vinasse
mixture during vermicomposting by Eudrilus eugeniae and Eisenia fetida:
documentation of cellulase isozymes in vermicompost. Waste Manag. 31,
1169e1175.
Qian, X., Shen, G., Wang, Z., Guo, C., Liu, Y., Lei, Z., Zhang, Z., 2014. Co-composting of
livestock manure with rice straw: characterization and establishment of
maturity evaluation system. Waste Manag. 34, 530e535.
s, R., Villalba, G., Mun
~ oz, P., Font, X., Gabarrell, X., 2014. Environmental and
Quiro
agronomical assessment of three fertilization treatments applied in horticultural open eld crops. J. Clean. Prod. 67, 147e158.
Raj, D., Antil, R.S., 2011. Evaluation of maturity and stability parameters of composts
prepared from agro-industrial wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 2868e2873.
Rajiv, P., Rajeshwari, S., Venckatesh, R., 2014. Impact of Parthenium weeds on
earthworms (Eudrilus eugeniae) during vermicomposting. Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. 21, 12364e12371.
Rajiv, P., Rajeshwari, S., Yadav, R.H., Venckatesh, R., 2013. Vermiremediation:
detoxication of parthenin toxin from Parthenium weeds. J. Hazard. Mater 262,
489e495.
Ravindran, B., Contreras-Ramos, S.M., Wong, J.W.C., Selvam, A., Sekaran, G., 2014.
Nutrient and enzymatic changes of hydrolysed tannery solid waste treated with
epigeic earthworm Eudrilus eugeniae and phytotoxicity assessment on selected
commercial crops. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21, 641e651.
Ravindran, B., Sekaran, G., 2010. Bacterial composting of animal eshing generated
from tannery industries. Waste Manag. 30, 2622e2630.
Ravindran, B., Sravani, R., Mandal, A.B., Contreras-Ramos, S.M., Sekaran, G., 2013.
Instrumental evidence for biodegradation of tannery waste during vermicomposting process using Eudrilus eugeniae. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 111,
1675e1684.
Romero, C., Ramos, P., Costa, C., M
arquez, M.C., 2013. Raw and digested municipal
waste compost leachate as potential fertilizer: comparison with a commercial
fertilizer. J. Clean. Prod. 59, 73e78.
Roy, S., Arunachalam, K., Dutta, B.K., Arunachalam, A., 2010. Effect of organic
amendments of soil on growth and productivity of three common crops viz. Zea
mays, Phaseolus vulgaris and Abelmoschus esculentus. Appl. Soil Ecol. 45, 78e84.
Ruggieri, L., Cadena, E., Martnez-Blanco, J., Gasol, C.M., Rieradevall, J., Gabarrell, X.,
nchez, A., 2009. Recovery of organic waste in the Spanish
Gea, T., Sort, X., Sa
wine industry. Technical, economic and environmental analyses of the composting process. J. Clean. Prod. 17, 830e838.
Rynk, R., 2001. Exploring the economics of on-farm composting Part II. Biocycle 42,
62e70.
Saer, A., Lansing, S., Davitt, N.H., Graves, R.E., 2013. Life cycle assessment of a food
waste composting system: environmental impact hotspots. J. Clean. Prod. 52,
234e244.
277
Samolada, M.C., Zabaniotou, A.A., 2014. Comparative assessment of municipal

sewage sludge incineration, gasication and pyrolysis for a sustainable sludgeto-energy management in Greece. Waste Manag. 34, 411e420.
, N., Civantos, C.G., Fern
ndez, A.,
S
anchez-Monedero, M.A., Serramia
andez-Herna
Roig, A., 2010. Greenhouse gas emissions during composting of two-phase olive
mill wastes with different agroindustrial by-products. Chemosphere 81, 18e25.
Scharff, H., 2014. Landll reduction experience in The Netherlands. Waste Manag.
34, 2218e2224.
Seo, S., Aramaki, T., Hwang, Y., Hanaki, K., 2004. Environmental impact of solid
waste treatment methods in Korea. J. Environ. Eng. 130, 81e89.
Shafawati, S.N., Siddiquee, S., 2013. Composting of oil palm bres and Trichoderma
spp. as the biological control agent: a review. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegr. 85,
243e253.
Shak, K.P.Y., Wu, T.Y., Lim, S.L., Lee, C.A., 2014. Sustainable reuse of rice residues as
feedstocks in vermicomposting for organic fertilizer production. Environ. Sci.
Pollut. Res. 21, 1349e1359.
Shekdar, A.V., 2009. Sustainable solid waste management: an integrated approach
for Asian countries. Waste Manag. 29, 1438e1448.
Sierra, J., Desfontaines, L., Faverial, J., Loranger-Merciris, G., Boval, M., 2013. Composting and vermicomposting of cattle manure and green wastes under tropical
conditions: carbon and nutrient balances and end-product quality. Soil Res. 51,
142e151.
Sim, E.Y.S., Wu, T.Y., 2010. The potential reuse of biodegradable municipal solid
wastes (MSW) as feedstocks in vermicomposting. J. Sci. Food Agric. 90,
2153e2162.
Simujide, H., Aorigele, C., Wang, C.J., Lina, M., Manda, B., 2013. Microbial activities
during mesophilic composting of manure and effect of calcium cyanamide
addition. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegr. 83, 139e144.
Singh, A., Jain, A., Sarma, B.K., Abhilash, P.C., Singh, H.B., 2013. Solid waste management of temple oral offerings by vermicomposting using Eisenia fetida.
Waste Manag. 33, 1113e1118.
Singh, D., Suthar, S., 2012a. Vermicomposting of herbal pharmaceutical industry
solid wastes. Ecol. Eng. 39, 1e6.
Singh, D., Suthar, S., 2012b. Vermicomposting of herbal pharmaceutical industry
waste: earthworm growth, plant-available nutrient and microbial quality of end
materials. Bioresour. Technol. 112, 179e185.
Singh, J., Kalamdhad, A.S., 2014. Potential for composting of green phumdi biomass
of Loktak lake. Ecol. Eng. 67, 119e126.
Singh, J., Kalamdhad, A.S., 2013a. Effect of Eisenia fetida on speciation of
heavy metals during vermicomposting of water hyacinth. Ecol. Eng. 60,
214e223.
Singh, J., Kalamdhad, A.S., 2013b. Effects of lime on bioavailability and leachability
of heavy metals during agitated pile composting of water hyacinth. Bioresour.
Technol. 138, 148e155.
Singh, J., Kalamdhad, A.S., 2013c. Reduction of bioavailability and leachability of
heavy metals during vermicomposting of water hyacinth. Environ. Sci. Pollut.
Res. 20, 8974e8985.
Singh, J., Kalamdhad, A.S., 2012. Concentration and speciation of heavy metals
during water hyacinth composting. Bioresour. Technol. 124, 169e179.
Singh, J., Kaur, A., Vig, A.P., Rup, P.J., 2010. Role of Eisenia fetida in rapid recycling of
nutrients from bio sludge of beverage industry. Ecotoxicol. Env. Saf. 73,
430e435.
Singh, R.P., Singh, P., Araujo, A.S.F., Ibrahim, M.H., Sulaiman, O., 2011. Management
of urban solid waste: vermicomposting a sustainable option. Resour. Conserv.
Recycl. 55, 719e729.
Song, Q., Li, J., Zeng, X., 2015. Minimizing the increasing solid waste through zero
waste strategy. J. Clean. Prod. 104, 199e210.
Song, X., Liu, M., Wu, D., Qi, L., Ye, C., Jiao, J., Hu, F., 2014. Heavy metal and nutrient
changes during vermicomposting animal manure spiked with mushroom residues. Waste Manag. 34, 1977e1983.
Soobhany, N., Mohee, R., Garg, V.K., 2015. Comparative assessment of heavy metal
content during the composting and vermicomposting of municipal solid waste
employing Eudrilus eugeniae. Waste Manag. 39, 130e145.
Subhash Kumar, M., Rajiv, P., Rajeshwari, S., Venckatesh, R., 2015. Spectroscopic
analysis of vermicompost for determination of nutritional quality. Spectrochim.
Acta Pt. A-Mol. Biomol. Spectr. 135, 252e255.
Subramanian, S., Sivarajan, M., Saravanapriya, S., 2010. Chemical changes during
vermicomposting of sago industry waste. J. Hazard. Mater 179, 318e322.
Suthar, S., 2010. Potential of domestic biogas digester slurry in vermitechnology.
Suthar, S., 2011. Production of earthworm Allolobophora parva (Eisen) in cattle
dung. Ecol. Eng. 37, 644e647.
Suthar, S., 2012. Earthworm production in cattle dung during vermicomposting
system under different stocking density loads. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 19,
748e755.
Suthar, S., Mutiyar, P.K., Singh, S., 2012. Vermicomposting of milk processing industry sludge spiked with plant wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 116, 214e219.
Suthar, S., 2014. Toxicity of methyl parathion on growth and reproduction of three
ecologically different tropical earthworms. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 11,
191e198.
Suthar, S., Gairola, S., 2014. Nutrient recovery from urban forest leaf litter waste
solids using Eisenia fetida. Ecol. Eng. 71, 660e666.
Suthar, S., Sharma, P., 2013. Vermicomposting of toxic weed e Lantana camara
biomass: chemical and microbial properties changes and assessment of toxicity
of end product using seed bioassay. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 95, 179e187.
278
Suthar, S., Sajwan, P., Kumar, K., 2014. Vermiremediation of heavy metals in
wastewater sludge from paper and pulp industry using earthworm Eisenia
fetida. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 109, 177e184.
Tan, S.T., Hashim, H., Lim, J.S., Ho, W.S., Lee, C.T., Yan, J., 2014. Energy and emissions
benets of renewable energy derived from municipal solid waste: analysis of a
low carbon scenario in Malaysia. Appl. Energy 136, 797e804.
Tang, Z., Yu, G., Liu, D., Xu, D., Shen, Q., 2011. Different analysis techniques for
uorescence excitation-emission matrix spectroscopy to assess compost
maturity. Chemosphere 82, 1202e1208.
Tian, Y., Chen, L., Gao, L., Michael Jr., F.C., Keener, H.M., Klingman, M., Dick, W.A.,
2012. Composting of waste paint sludge containing melamine resin and the
compost's effect on vegetable growth and soil water quality. J. Hazard. Mater
243, 28e36.
Tortosa, G., Alburquerque, J.A., Ait-Baddi, G., Cegarra, J., 2012. The production of
commercial organic amendments and fertilisers by composting of two-phase
olive mill waste (alperujo). J. Clean. Prod. 26, 48e55.
Tsutsui, H., Fujiwara, T., Matsukawa, K., Funamizu, N., 2013. Nitrous oxide emission
mechanisms during intermittently aerated composting of cattle manure. Bioresour. Technol. 141, 205e211.
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2015. Cleaner and Safer Production. www.unep.org/resourceefciency/Business/CleanerSaferProduction/tabid/
55543/Default.aspx (assessed 15.04.15.).
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), 2011. Towards a Green Economy:
Pathways to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. www.unep.org/
greeneconomy (assessed 15.04.15.).
Unuon, F.O., Mnkeni, P.N.S., 2014. Optimization of Eisenia fetida stocking density
for the bioconversion of rock phosphate enriched cow dung-waste paper
mixtures. Waste Manag. 34, 2000e2006.
V
azquez, M.A., de la Varga, D., Plana, R., Soto, M., 2015. Integrating liquid fraction of
pig manure in the composting process for nutrient recovery and water re-use.
J. Clean. Prod. 104, 80e89.
Velasco-Velasco, J., Parkinson, R., Kuri, V., 2011. Ammonia emissions during vermicomposting of sheep manure. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 10959e10964.
Vig, A.P., Singh, J., Wani, S.H., Dhaliwal, S.S., 2011. Vermicomposting of tannery
sludge mixed with cattle dung into valuable manure using Eisenia fetida
(Savigny). Bioresour. Technol. 102, 7941e7945.
Wang, J., Hu, Z., Xu, X., Jiang, X., Zheng, B., Liu, X., Pan, X., Kardol, P., 2014a. Emissions of ammonia and greenhouse gases during combined pre-composting and
vermicomposting of duck manure. Waste Manag. 34, 1546e1552.
Wang, Y.Q., Zhang, J.L., Schuchardt, F., Wang, Y., 2014b. Degradation of morphine in
opium poppy processing waste composting. Bioresour. Technol. 168, 235e239.
Wang, J.J., Sun, X.J., Zhou, H.T., Zhang, J., 2013a. Inuences of different aeration
patterns on the composting of green waste and rice straw with sewage sludges.
Appl. Mech. Mater 295e298, 1725e1728.
Wang, L., Zhang, Y., Lian, J., Chao, J., Gao, Y., Yang, F., Zhang, L., 2013b. Impact of y
ash and phosphatic rock on metal stabilization and bioavailability during
sewage sludge vermicomposting. Bioresour. Technol. 136, 281e287.
Wang, L., Zheng, Z., Zhang, Y., Chao, J., Gao, Y., Luo, X., Zhang, J., 2013c. Biostabilization enhancement of heavy metals during the vermiremediation of
sewage sludge with passivant. J. Hazard. Mater 244e245, 1e9.
Watteau, F., Villemin, G., 2011. Characterization of organic matter microstructure
dynamics during co-composting of sewage sludge, barks and green waste.
Wu, X., Wei, Y., Zheng, J., Zhao, X., Zhong, W., 2011. The behavior of tetracyclines and
their degradation products during swine manure composting. Bioresour.
Technol. 102, 5924e5931.
Wu, T.Y., Lim, S.L., Lim, P.N., Shak, K.P.Y., 2014. Biotransformation of biodegradable
solid wastes into organic fertilizers using composting or/and vermicomposting.
Chem. Eng. Trans. 39, 1579e1584.
Xing, M., Li, X., Yang, J., Huang, Z., Lu, Y., 2012. Changes in the chemical characteristics of water-extracted organic matter from vermicomposting of sewage
sludge and cow dung. J. Hazard. Mater 205e206, 24e31.
Yadav, A., Garg, V.K., 2011a. Industrial wastes and sludges management by vermicomposting. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 10, 243e276.
Yadav, A., Garg, V.K., 2011b. Recycling of organic waste by employing Eisenia fetida.
Yadav, A., Garg, V.K., 2011c. Vermicomposting-an effective tool for the management
of invasive weed Parthenium hysterophorus. Bioresour. Technol. 102,
5891e5895.
Yadav, K.D., Tare, V., Ahammed, M.M., 2012. Integrated compostingvermicomposting process for stabilization of human faecal slurry. Ecol. Eng.
47, 24e29.
Yadav, K.D., Tare, V., Ahammed, M.M., 2010. Vermicomposting of source-separated
human faeces for nutrient recycling. Waste. Manag. 30, 50e56.
Yahya, A., Sye, C.P., Ishola, T.A., Suryanto, H., 2010. Effect of adding palm oil mill
decanter cake slurry with regular turning operation on the composting process
and quality of compost from oil palm empty fruit bunches. Bioresour. Technol.
101, 8736e8741.
Yang, J., Lv, B., Zhang, J., Xing, M., 2014. Insight into the roles of earthworm in
vermicomposting of sewage sludge by determining the water-extracts through
chemical and spectroscopic methods. Bioresour. Technol. 154, 94e100.
Yang, Z., Zhou, X., Xu, L., 2015. Eco-efciency optimization for municipal solid waste
management. J. Clean. Prod. 104, 242e249.
Yay, A.S.E., 2015. Application of life cycle assessment (LCA) for municipal solid waste
management: a case study of Sakarya. J. Clean. Prod. 94, 284e293.
Yoshizaki, T., Shirai, Y., Hassan, M.A., Baharuddin, A.S., Abdullah, N.M.R.,
Sulaiman, A., Busu, Z., 2012. Economic analysis of biogas and compost projects
in a palm oil mill with clean development mechanism in Malaysia. Environ.
Dev. Sustain 14, 1065e1079.
Yoshizaki, T., Shirai, Y., Hassan, M.A., Baharuddin, A.S., Abdullah, N.M.R.,
Sulaiman, A., Busu, Z., 2013. Improved economic viability of integrated biogas
energy and compost production for sustainable palm oil management. J. Clean.
Prod. 44, 1e7.
Zainudin, M.H.M., Hassan, M.A., Tokura, M., Shirai, Y., 2013. Indigenous cellulolytic
and hemicellulolytic bacteria enhanced rapid co-composting of lignocellulose
oil palm empty fruit bunch with palm oil mill efuent anaerobic sludge. Bioresour. Technol. 147, 632e635.
Zaman, A.U., 2013. Identication of waste management development drivers and
potential emerging waste treatment technologies. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol.
10, 455e464.
squez, I., Baeza, J., Vidal, G.,
Zambrano, M., Pichn, C., Alvear, M., Villarroel, M., Vela
2010. Green liquor dregs effect on Kraft mill secondary sludge composting.
vodska
, A., Benesova
, L., Smyth, B., Morrissey, A.J., 2014. A comparison of
Za
biodegradable municipal waste (BMW) management strategies in Ireland and
the Czech Republic and the lessons learned. Resour. Conserv. Recycl 92,
136e144.
Zhu, F.X., Wang, W.P., Hong, C.L., Feng, M.G., Xue, Z.Y., Chen, X.Y., Yao, Y.L., Yu, M.,
2012. Rapid production of maggots as feed supplement and organic fertilizer
by the two-stage composting of pig manure. Bioresour. Technol. 116,
485e491.
Zhu, W., Yao, W., Zhang, Z., Wu, Y., 2014. Heavy metal behavior and dissolved
organic matter (DOM) characterization of vermicomposted pig manure amended with rice straw. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 21, 12684e12692.
, A., Mendoza-Roca, J.A.,
Zuriaga-Agust, E., Galiana-Aleixandre, M.V., Bes-Pia
~ o-Puchades, V., Segarra, V., 2015. Pollution reduction in and eco-friendly
Risuen
chrome-free tanning and evaluation of the biodegradation by composting of the
tanned leather wastes. J. Clean. Prod. 87, 874e881.

Artículo de Residuos Solido

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Artículo de Residuos Solido

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

Sustainability of using composting and vermicomposting technologies

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 60 3 55146258; fax: 60 3 55146207.

World cities generate approximately 1.3 billion metric tons of

S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

Urban population (millions)

Waste generation rates (kg/capita/d)

were generated a decade ago (Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). By

Solid waste composition (%)

Total organic solid

(Hoornweg and Bhada-Tata, 2012). Slight reduction in proportion of

S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

3. Composting and vermicomposting processes: an

maturation rate of hatchlings (Singh et al., 2011). Earthworms are

3-10 cm, surface dwellers

10-30 cm, live in soil upper layer

S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

3 stages: Initial activation phase, thermophilic

Organisms involved in biodegradation

Earthworms and microorganisms

Source: Chowdhury et al. (2013), Singh et al. (2011), Wu et al. (2014).

either compost or vermicompost had important consequences for

et al., 2010), which in turn is enhanced by the available carbon

S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

Wheat straw, vine shoot

Cattle slurry and hen manure

Pig manure and corn stalk

Swine manure and rice husk

Bacteria and fungi

Chicken feathers from poultry

Pine bark; rye straw

Olive mill waste (alperujo)

Spent grape marc; vinication

Sheep manure; olive tree

Wet husks from olive mill

Digested sewage sludge

Green waste and pine bark

- Peak temperature: 70 C after 2 d

- Peak temperature: 55e68 C within 2.5e3.3 d

- Thermophilic phase duration: 10e25 d at temperature

- Thermophilic phase duration: 44 d with peak temperature Tang et al.

- Temperatures reached were in the mesophilic range but

Aerobic, pile 266

- Peak temperature: >50 C within the rst week

- Peak temperature: 54.7 C

Empty fruit bunch, palm oil mill

- Peak temperature: >45 up to 61e68 d

- Temperatures in mesophilic range

- Peak temperature: 50e70 C for 10 weeks

Aerobic, pile 200

- Peak temperature: 45 C for 80 d

- Peak temperature (aerobic): 69.5 C

(continued on next page)

S.L. Lim et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 111 (2016) 262e278

Food, vegetable, garden and

Kitchen and garden waste

Kitchen bio-waste; anaerobic

Municipal solid waste; dried

Tomato plant waste

Plastic tube pieces,