S. Sadaka and A. El – Taweel
The pH trends as affected by aeration level and C:N are shown in Figure 3. The
initial pH of the waste material was (6.8 - 7.0). The pH values of the medium increased
slightly with time for all treatments. The effects of aeration and C:N were not pro-
nounced. The results showed that adjustments of pH may not be necessary. Mathur
(1991) reported that most household refuse is between 5.0 and 7.0, more towards the
lower number if the material is partly putrefied as decomposition initially releases or-
ganic acids. On the other hand, if the compost material is high in substances like pro-
teins, urea and uric acid, enzyme hydrolysis initially will release ammonia, thus rais-
ing the reaction to alkalinity.
The effects of the composting time on the carbon to nitrogen ratio are presented
graphically in Figure 4. Neither aeration nor the composting time affects the C:N ra-
tio of the material at the initial C:N ratio of 11. Composting time affects the C:N ratio
for the initial C:N of 39. Rodrigues et al. (1995) and Martin et al. (1993) observed that a
compost with C:N of 20 - 35 is preferred ratio for composting. When C:N ratio is low,
the available carbon may be fully utilized and excess nitrogen may be lost in the form
of ammonia. If C:N ratio is high, nitrogen becomes the limiting factor and the process
slows down. Therefore, the C:N ratio of 26 is the optimum condition for composting.
Conclusions
It can be concluded that Egyptian household waste is a valuable material if it is com-
posted and converted to useful fertilizer. Aeration affects compost temperature. A max-
3
imum temperature of 68°C was achieved at the air flow rate of 0.003 m /h/kg and C:N
ratio of 26. Moisture content of compost material can be reduced by the means of com-
posting technology to reduce transporting costs. From the experiments, it can be con-
cluded that the optimum condition of Egyptian household waste composting process is
3
aeration level of 0.003 m /h/kg and C:N ratio of 26 and moisture content of 45% (d.b).
References
Alexander, M. 1977. Soil Microbiology. New York, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Barington, S.F., K. ELL. Moueddeb and B. Porter. 1997. Improving small-scale composting of
apple waste. Canadian Agricultural Engineering. 39(1):9-16.
Hong, J.H., J. Mastsuda and Y. Ikeuchi. 1983. High rapid composting of dairy cattle manure with
crops and forest residues. Transactions of the ASAE. 26(2):533-545.
Lau, A.K., K.V. Lo, P.H. Liau and J.C. Yu. 1992 . Aeration experiments for swine manure com-
posting. Bioresource Technology. 41:145-152.
Martin, A.M., J. Evans, D. Porter and T.R. Patel. 1993. Comparative effects of peat and sawdust
employed as bulking agents in composting. Bioresources Technology. 44:65-69.
Mathur, S.P. 1991. Composting Process. In: Bioconversion of Waste Material to Industrial Prod-
ucts. New York. Elsevier Appl. Sci., pp. 147-183.
Posey, J.S., D.B. Parker, D.L. Williams, B.W. Auvermann and N.A. Cole. 1999. Production of bio-
gas in landfill cells using beef cattle manure collected in open lots. A paper presented at the
1999 ASAE Annual International Meeting, July 18-21, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Paper No.
994084, ASAE 2950 Niles Rd., St. Joseph, Michigan 49085-9659 USA.
Rodrigues, A.M., L.J. Ferreira, A.L. Fernando, P. Urbano and J.S. Oliveira. 1995. Composting of
sweet sorghum biomass with different nitrogen sources. Bioresources Technology. 54:21-27.
Rynk, R. 1992. On farm composting handbook. NRAES-54.Ithanca, N.Y. Northeast Regional Agri-
cultural Engineering Services.
Sadaka, S.S. and C.R. Engler. 2000. Anaerobic composting of swine, poultry and beef manure
with biogas recovery. A Paper presented at the ASAE Annual International Meeting. Mil-
waukee, Wisconsin. Paper No. 004146.
Sartaj, M., L. Fernandes and N.K. Patni. 1997. Performance of forced, passive and natural aera-
tion methods for composting manure slurries. Transactions of the ASAE. 40(2):457-463.
40 Compost Science & Utilization
Winter 2003