REVIEW

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

Mohammadtaghi Vakili • Mohd. Rafatullah • Mahamad Hakimi Ibrahim •

Babak Salamatinia • Zahra Gholami • Haider M. Zwain

Received: 23 January 2014 / Accepted: 8 September 2014� Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Abstract Nowadays, the biomass produced in oil palm industry, such as oil palm fronds,

palm pressed fibers, palm kernel shells, empty fruit bunch, and liquid waste discharged

from the palm oil mill effluent and others, may lead to significant environmental concerns.

The quantity of produced wastes by oil palm industry is increasing with the growth of this

industry day by day. Therefore, the use of these wastes as compost is considered by

researchers to overcome their negative impacts and recycle them to produce a useful

byproduct for agriculture. This review analyzes the recent composting studies on palm oil

biomass and provides useful information about the potential uses of these biomass in

composting as an alternative method for enhanced and sustainable use of biomass pro-

duced from oil palm industry. In addition, environmental impacts of composting are dis-

cussed. This knowledge could build a platform for researchers in this area to understand the

recent developments in palm oil biomass composting by means of addressing the envi-

ronmental pollution concerns as well.

Keywords Compost � Oil palm biomass � Environmental pollution � Agricultural waste �Solid waste

M. Vakili � M. Rafatullah (&) � M. H. IbrahimSchool of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Penang, Malaysiae-mail: mohd_rafatullah@yahoo.co.in; mrafatullah@usm.my

B. SalamatiniaSchool of Engineering, Monash University Sunway Campus, Jalan Lagoon Selatan,46150 Bandar Sunway, Selangor, Malaysia

Z. GholamiSchool of Chemical Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia

H. M. ZwainSchool of Civil Engineering, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 14300 Nibong Tebal, Penang, Malaysia

123

Environ Dev SustainDOI 10.1007/s10668-014-9581-2

1 Introduction

Humans have increased their activities in the field of agriculture, industry, and hygiene by

an excessive and unsuitable use of resources, materials, and energy to improve the quality

of life. Thus, high amounts of organic wastes are produced that cause some environmental

and ecological problems, which have increased human health concerns and environmental

awareness (Vakili et al. 2012a, b). Khalid et al. (2011) reported that an individual generates

approximately 0.77 kg of waste per day in a developing country and the volume of solid

wastes produced in cities worldwide will continuously increase to about three billion tons

per year in 2025. Hence, waste management is an important issue considered worldwide

and should be implemented to reduce the negative and dangerous effects of wastes on the

environment (Ahmad et al. 2007). Thus, different methods such as incineration, disposal of

waste in landfills, and recycling are used to waste treatment methods of solid wastes

(Khalil et al. 2008).

Composting is a useful and desired method to treat organic solid wastes and generate a

byproduct that can be utilized as a resource of organic fertilizer and soil conditioner

(Wolkowski 2003; Barje et al. 2012). This process is an efficient technique, particularly in

places where the organic matter in the soil is reduced by intensive agricultural activities

and weather conditions (Hassen et al. 1998, 2001). Naturally, composting starts when the

fallen leaves of plants pile up and begin to decompose. The decomposed leaves return in

the soil and roots recover the nutrients from the residual leaves (He et al. 1995). In history,

composting has been used since the ancient times when Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians

discovered agriculture production and improved the methods by using organic wastes that

had decayed for a long time (Diaz and de Bertoldi 2007; Kalamdhad and Kazmi 2008). In

ancient times, humans disposed food wastes in piles near their tents and found that seeds of

many food plants sprouted there. This discovery likely led to the idea that organic piles are

good places for food crops to grow (He et al. 1995).

The composting process is defined as an aerobic, biological process that depends on a

microorganism population, which converts the organic substances of wastes into stabilized

humus and less complex compounds by breaking down the organic residues of plants and

animals, stabilizing nutrients, destroying weed seeds and pathogens, as well as controlling

possible toxins or diseases (Xiao et al. 2011; Zhang et al. 2011; Ogunwande and Osunade

2011). During the composting process, carbon and nitrogen compounds are easily trans-

formed and used as energy and protein sources of the microorganisms, thereby producing

heat, CO2, NH3, H2O, organic acids, and mature compost product at the end of the process

(Bernal et al. 2009; Marche et al. 2003; Hamdy 2005).

Under optimal conditions, composting is divided into the moderate-temperature phase

(mesophilic phase), high-temperature phase (thermophilic phase), and maturation phase

(cooling phase). Different microorganisms increase during the composting phases. During

the decomposition phase, the different microorganisms act as decomposers. Later on,

temperature increases and causes the temperature of the final product of the composting

process to increase. At this time, other microorganisms that can act at higher temperatures

(between 45 and 70 �C) become active (Ahmad et al. 2007; Tang et al. 2007; Purnomo

et al. 2010).

Palm oil production is an important industry, which generates huge amount of organic

wastes. In the world’s vegetable oil market, palm oil is one of the most important sources

and produces different biomasses such as the mesocarp fiber, shell, empty fruit bunch

(EFB), oil palm frond (OPF), which may lead to significant environmental concerns

(Ahmad et al. 2011a, b; Mohammad et al. 2012; Rafatullah et al. 2013; Vakili et al. 2014).

M. Vakili et al.

123

This review analyzes recent composting studies of palm oil biomasses and provides useful

information about the potential uses of these biomasses in composting as an alternative

method for treating of biomasses produced from the oil palm industry and as a means of

addressing the environmental pollution concerns. In addition, environmental impacts of

composting are discussed.

2 Composting of agricultural wastes

According to Ahmad et al. (2007), all materials that can be naturally changed by micro-

organisms into environmentally friendly substances are compostable. Among these suit-

able materials, agricultural wastes, which have an adequate level of organic materials, have

an important function in composting (Ahmad et al. 2007; Khalil et al. 2008). In addition,

various biomasses, such as olive tree pruning, rice straw, coffee husk, vegetables, bran,

olive husks, and wheat straw, have been used in composting as shown in Table 1.

Considering the increasing world population and agricultural activities, agricultural waste

management is a serious concern faced by many communities because of the high biode-

gradability, and the disposal of untreated agricultural wastes threatens the environment and

human health (Ahmad et al. 2007; Giuntini et al. 2006; Bouallagui et al. 2005). In particular,

humans experience problems in agricultural waste disposal because of poor economic value

and small amounts of pollutants; however, agricultural wastes are renewable, available in

large amounts, and very easy to obtain (Sabiiti 2011). Recycling them has great advantages

to agriculture and waste management (Sharma and Forster 1995; Singh et al. 2010). They

can be changed into a useful by-product and is used as a valuable resource (Lesteur et al.

2010; Yu and Huang 2009). These properties encourage farmers and other compost users to

utilize the by-product of agricultural waste composting. The use of these by-products helps to

reduce the negative impacts of agricultural wastes on the environment and agriculture. These

by-products also have high amounts of useful nutrients for plants and organic matter (Tortosa

et al. 2012; Martınez-Blanco et al. 2011) that can be used to improve food security, soil

fertility, and crop production (Garcıa-de-la-Fuente et al. 2011; Hargreaves et al. 2008; Jilani

et al. 2007) by producing safe, innocuous, and nutrient-rich organic fertilizer and soil, such as

a soil conditioner, soil amendment, and environmentally friendly products (Mohammad et al.

2012; Nawar 2008; Trillas et al. 2006).

These wastes can be changed into heat, charcoal, methanol, ethanol, animal feed, and

compost, but some of these wastes remain underused. Some are left in the fields or burned,

which are not suitable methods because these wastes contain high amounts of organic

matter and water, and also cause environmental and air pollution (Sabiiti 2011; Jilani et al.

2007) by producing smoke, CO2, N2O, NO2, O3, and NHO3 (Ezcurra et al. 2001; Hegg

et al. 1987; Lacaux et al. 1992). The direct use of agricultural wastes is not suitable for land

and agricultural production because the structures of these wastes are unknown and they

contain some contaminants, such as pathogens, weed seeds, heavy metals, and unpleasant

odors (Kara and Asan 2007). Composting of agricultural wastes or converting them into

compost is considered as one of the most favorable, cheap, and simple methods used to

treat and stabilize these kinds of wastes as well as generate organic fertilizers (Sabiiti 2011;

Tortosa et al. 2012; Fidero et al. 2012).

These methods improve the environmental health by reducing the environmental

problems, decreasing the volume of agricultural wastes, producing manure, and increasing

the degree of contaminant removal (destroying pathogens and weed seeds as well as

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

Ta

ble

1A

nover

vie

wof

the

agri

cult

ura

lw

aste

mat

eria

lsal

read

yuse

dfo

rco

mpost

ing

S.

no

.M

ater

ial

Tim

e(d

ay)

Max

imu

mte

mp

erat

ure

(�C

)M

ois

ture

(%)

pH

(fin

al)

C/N

(fin

al)

Ref

eren

ce

1.

Coff

eepulp

,husk

,an

def

fluen

t150

–6

07.4

17.2

5P

reet

hu

etal

.(2

00

7)

2.

Ric

est

raw

,fa

rmy

ard

man

ure

90

–5

0–

60

8.1

71

3.1

Hel

lal

(20

07)

Ric

est

raw

,ch

icken

man

ure

90

–5

0–

60

81

0.3

Ric

est

raw

,fa

rmyar

dm

anure

,ch

icken

man

ure

90

–5

0–

60

8.0

31

2.5

3.

Lea

ves

,g

rass

,an

dsm

all

shre

dd

edb

run

ches

15

06

35

0–

40

––

Gaz

iet

al.

(20

07)

4.

Ric

est

raw

,v

eget

able

s,so

il,

bra

n3

65

66

08

.31

6.6

2Z

han

get

al.

(20

11)

5.

Sag

ow

aste

60

40

50

–7

07

.32

7.3

3P

etru

set

al.

(20

09)

6.

Veg

etab

lew

aste

and

tree

leav

es90

60–70

55–62

8–8.3

4.1

–5.8

Kal

amdhad

etal

.(2

00

9)

7.

Wh

eat

stra

w,

po

ult

rym

anu

re1

36

3.8

5–

8.8

–9

.2–

Pet

ric

etal

.(2

00

9)

8.

Oli

ve

mil

lw

aste

(alp

eru

jo)

70

––

9.2

18

Gar

cıa-

de-

la-F

uen

teet

al.

(20

11)

9.

Oli

ve

oil

ind

ust

ryw

aste

s,p

ou

ltry

man

ure

27

06

0–

70

50

–6

08

.9–9

.31

1.9

Hac

hic

ha

etal

.(2

00

9a,

b)

10

.R

ice

stra

w9

05

54

2.0

7.0

3–

7.1

21

0.6

Ro

ca-P

erez

etal

.(2

00

9)

11

.L

euca

enas

trim

min

gre

sid

ues

78

53

–5

84

0–

60

7.0

6–

7.5

71

2.6

–2

0B

uen

oet

al.

(20

08)

12

.O

liv

em

ill

was

tes,

sew

age

slu

dg

e1

75

65

–7

–S

anch

ez-A

rias

etal

.(2

00

8)

13.

Agri

cult

ura

lfa

rmw

aste

s30

70

–7.9

019

Sad

iket

al.

(20

10)

14

.C

off

eeh

usk

and

pu

lp7

0–

–8

11

.52

–1

4.7

7K

assa

etal

.(2

01

1)

15

.P

ou

ltry

man

ure

,ri

cest

raw

14

52

.5–

64

.6–

8.8

5–

Pet

ric

and

Sel

imb

asic

(20

08)

16

.O

liv

eh

usk

resi

du

es9

02

2–

62

34

–5

75

.4–8

.62

8.1

–5

3.5

Alf

ano

etal

.(2

00

8)

17

.G

reen

was

te(g

rass

cutt

ing

san

dfa

llen

leav

es)

21

50

–9

.24

0G

abh

ane

etal

.(2

01

2)

18

.O

liv

eo

ilh

usk

,p

run

ing

was

tes,

shee

pm

anu

re1

20

60

13

.87

.95

27

.9M

onte

mu

rro

etal

.(2

00

9)

Oli

ve

oil

hu

sk,

pru

nin

gw

aste

s,sh

eep

man

ure

12

06

01

3.8

7.9

52

7.9

Oli

ve

oil

hu

sk,

pru

nin

gw

aste

s,u

rea

59

16

.98

.06

23

.5

M. Vakili et al.

123

Ta

ble

1co

nti

nued

S.

no

.M

ater

ial

Tim

e(d

ay)

Max

imu

mte

mp

erat

ure

(�C

)M

ois

ture

(%)

pH

(fin

al)

C/N

(fin

al)

Ref

eren

ce

Oli

ve

oil

hu

sk,

catt

lem

anu

re,

wh

eat

stra

w,

saw

du

st,

lett

uce

resi

dues

65

18

.28

.61

22

.1

Oli

ve

oil

hu

sk,

catt

lem

anu

re,

amm

oniu

msu

lfat

e,w

hea

tst

raw

,sa

wd

ust

,le

ttu

cere

sid

ues

60

31

.86

.44

14

.3

19.

Agri

cult

ura

lorg

anic

was

tes

(ric

est

raw

,v

eget

able

s,b

ran

and

soil

)4

25

54

5–

55

–1

6Z

eng

etal

.(2

01

0)

20.

Ric

est

raw

,an

imal

dung,

(Jat

ropha

curc

as)

deo

iled

cak

e2

5*

70

50

–60

8.8

0–

9.3

51

1.2

–3

2.5

Das

etal

.(2

01

1)

21

.R

ice

stra

w,

veg

etab

les,

bra

n,

soil

50

55

55

–60

9.0

2–

Zen

get

al.

(20

11)

22.

Str

aw,

saw

dust

,hay

,sp

ecifi

edri

skm

ater

ials

300

70

43–62

6.3

–6.5

20–35

Zen

get

al.

(20

12)

23.

Ses

ame

bar

k,

oli

ve

mil

lw

aste

wat

er210

65

40–60

8.7

118.7

5H

achic

ha

etal

.(2

00

9a,

b)

24

.T

ob

acco

pla

nt

was

te,

cow

man

ure

50

62

60

–63

81

2.2

7S

aith

epet

al.

(20

09

25.

Veg

etab

le–fr

uit

was

tes

20

58–70

–8.5

16.5

–17.0

Ars

lan

etal

.(2

01

1)

26

.T

ob

acco

was

te–

34

60

9.5

11

Kay

ikci

oglu

and

Ok

ur

(20

11)

To

bac

cow

aste

,o

liv

ep

om

ace

–3

66

09

.61

7

To

bac

cow

aste

,g

rap

ep

om

ace

–4

16

09

.71

3

27

.C

off

eep

ulp

,b

agas

se1

05

65

–70

50

71

0.4

–2

3.8

Rolz

etal

.(2

01

0)

28.

Ric

e,goat

man

ure

,gre

enw

aste

(veg

etab

lean

dfr

uit

was

te)

90

58

.25

0–

60

7.5

51

0.3

Juso

het

al.

(20

13)

Ric

e,goat

man

ure

,gre

enw

aste

(veg

etab

lean

dfr

uit

was

te)

90

56

.25

0–

60

7.6

21

6.1

29

.E

xh

aust

edg

rap

em

arc,

cow

du

ng

15

45

5–

7.1

–7

.42

0.2

–1

5.5

Bust

aman

teet

al.

(20

08)

30

.C

hic

ken

man

ure

,sa

wd

ust

63

68

–7

.3–7

.45

28

Gao

etal

.(2

01

0)

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

decreasing the undesirable odor) (Oviasogie et al. 2010; Gajalakshmi and Abbasi 2008;

Manungufala et al. 2008).

3 Palm oil

Palm oil has been used by humans for more than 5,000 years. It is regarded as a gift from

nature to the world, having benefits such as health and nutritional properties as well as a

value as an energy source being discovered (Narasimhulu and Nanganuru 2010). Oil palm

(Elaeis guineensis) is a tropical plant that grows rapidly in tropical and equatorial areas,

thereby causing some negative impacts on the environment, such as deforestation and loss

of a variety of plant and animal species; some positive impacts, such as economic growth

and production of another fuel source, are also observed (Paterson et al. 2009; Sheil et al.

2009). Oil palm is one of the highly significant industrial crops that is used to produce

vegetable oil for cooking, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, and biofuels (Fitzherbert et al. 2008;

Koh and Wilcove 2008).

Oil palm has geographically spread from its origin in West Africa to tropical areas in 43

countries in Africa, America, and Asia (Paterson et al. 2009; Narasimhulu and Nanganuru

2010; Yaap et al. 2010). About 5,000 years ago, the oil palm plant was considered a native

plant in Nigeria and its product was used for daily life or commerce (Nigam and Pandey

2009). Until the mid-1960s, the increase in oil palm trees of approximately 74 % of the

whole global oil palm plantation caused Nigeria to become the largest palm oil producer in

the world (Oviasogie et al. 2010). After this period, the number of trees increased sig-

nificantly in other tropical countries, such as Malaysia and Indonesia, which have been

recognized as the largest palm oil producers and exporters in the world (Rupani et al. 2010;

Paterson et al. 2009). These tropical countries have suitable conditions for the growth of

the oil palm tree, including favorable climate, rich natural resources, tropical weather, and

high amount of rainfall (Yaap et al. 2010). Mohammad et al. (2012) revealed that both

Malaysia and Indonesia currently produce approximately 85 % of palm oil that is produced

worldwide (Malaysia 41 % and Indonesia 44 %).

3.1 Palm oil biomass

High productivity, high oil production per unit area, and efficient carbon assimilation of oil

palm are some of its many natural advantages. Palm oil and palm kernel oil are palm oil

industry oil production extracted from same fruit. Palm kernel oil, extracted from the

kernel within the mesocarp, is used in oleo chemical industry to produce beauty products,

soaps, and detergents (Basiron 2007), while palm oil, obtained from the fruit of a palm tree,

is the highest source of edible oil worldwide (25 % of the whole edible oil production in

the world) (Rupani et al. 2010; Shuit et al. 2009). Among the world’s vegetable oil

producers, oil palm is one of the most important sources, followed by soya and rapeseed

(Vakili et al. 2012a, b; Sumathi et al. 2008; Jayed et al. 2011). Compared with other oil-

producing plants, oil palm has advantages such as less production expense, less land usage,

and more production and thus is considered attractive for farmers. After palm oil, rapeseed,

groundnut, sunflower, soybean, coconut, cotton seed, and sesame seed are major edible oil

producer, respectively (Sheil et al. 2009; Hansen 2007).

The oil palm tree is a very productive plant that produces 10–35 tons of fresh fruit

bunch (FFB) in 1 year per hectare (Yusoff 2006). A mature palm is a single-stemmed tree

of approximately 20–30 m in height, with approximately 3 to 5 m-long pinnate leaves and

M. Vakili et al.

123

large clusters (10–40 kg) of approximately 200 individual fruits. Overall, the oil palm tree

has 25–30 years of economic life that starts 3 years after planting by harvesting the FFB.

The peak yield is about 12–14 years after planting (Yusoff 2006; Sumathi et al. 2008). The

produced FFB is approximately 45–56 % of the yield, and the total oil obtained from the

kernel is approximately 40–50 %. The produced oil from the mesocarp and the kernel of

the fruit is approximately 17 tons per hectare annually (Rupani et al. 2010).

In general, the palm oil industry produces several types of biomass, which are produced in

plantation like oil palm fronds (OPF), oil palm trunks (OPT), oil palm bark (OPB), and the

wastes produced in the mill such as palm pressed fibers (PPF), oil palm mesocarp fiber

(OPMF), palm kernel shells (PKS), empty fruit bunch (EFB), palm kernel cake (PKC),

decanter cake (DC), palm oil mill biogas sludge (POMS) and liquid waste discharged from the

palm oil mill effluent (POME) (Rupani et al. 2010; Uemura et al. 2011; Sulaiman et al. 2010).

3.2 Utilization of palm oil biomass

The quantity of produced wastes by palm oil industry is increasing with the growth of this

industry day by day. It is estimated that 184 million tons residues in the world and about 53

million tons of residues are generated from oil palm trees every year in Malaysia and it is

increasing annually by 5 % (Mohammed et al. 2011). Because of the considerable quantity

of generated biomass annually, the several uses of these wastes for value-added purposes

and their conversion into useful products increase financial income and profits, decrease

wastes, and make the palm oil industry an environmentally friendly industry (Shuit et al.

2009; Chavalparit et al. 2006). In the past, empty fruit bunch was utilized as fuel in mills

and the generated ash (approximately 30–40 %) was used as a potassium-rich fertilizer

(Singh et al. 2010) and also ash be able to be mix with concrete (Tangchirapat et al. 2007).

However, empty fruit bunch, decanter cake and the mill effluent are utilized as mulch and

soil improver to preserve the soil surface moisture in palm oil plantation areas; fiber and

shells are applied as fuels in the palm oil industries (Yusoff 2006; Singh et al. 2010) and as

well as fiber is used as an inexpensive adsorbent to filter the heavy metal pollutants in

industrial processes (Isa et al. 2008). The produced methane gas by the fermentation of mill

effluent can be used in the process of energy production in the factory (Yacob et al. 2006).

Other applications include foods, oleochemicals, particle board, pulp, paper, feedstuff,

soap, fertilizer, carbon briquette, activated carbon, furniture, fiber boards and fillers, and

compost production (Ramachandran et al. 2007).

4 Composting of palm oil biomass

Biomass management can decrease energy as well as economical and environmental

problems caused by the unsuitable disposal of huge amounts of agro-industrial wastes;

these wastes have the potential to improve the soil fertility because of their high content of

organic matter and mineral elements (Khan et al. 2009; Ordonez et al. 2006). Composting

is a beneficial way of recycling biomasses to produce a compost that is easy to handle,

stable, and rich in nutrients (Yaser et al. 2007; Castaldi et al. 2005). The conversion of

palm oil biomass to compost as a useful technique in treating these wastes is of high

interest (Yaser et al. 2007). Table 2 shows an overview of the types of palm oil biomasses

already used for composting.

Considering that empty fruit bunch (EFB) is produced in huge amounts in oil palm

mills, it is an appropriate substance for recycling (Singh et al. 2010). The amount of EFB

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

Ta

ble

2A

no

ver

vie

wo

fth

ety

pes

of

pal

mo

ilb

iom

ass

use

dfo

rco

mp

ost

ing

S.

no

.M

ater

ial

Tim

e(d

ay)

Max

imu

mT

emp

erat

ure

(�C

)M

ois

ture

(%)

pH

(fin

al)

C/N

(fin

al)

Ref

eren

ce

1.

EF

B,

PO

ME

,dec

ante

rca

ke

slurr

y51

79

50–60

8.5

27

18.6

Yah

ya

etal

.(2

01

0)

EF

B,

PO

ME

51

–5

0–

60

8.6

27

28

.02

2.

EF

B,

fron

d,

po

ult

ryli

tter

80

49

–57

40

–65

7.1

5–

7.3

81

7.6

–2

6.1

Vak

ili

etal

.(2

01

2a,

b)

3.

EF

B,

PO

ME

60

60

.27

07

.81

2.8

Bah

arud

din

etal

.(2

00

9a,

b)

4.

Oil

pal

mm

esoca

rpfi

ber

,P

OM

E,

60

60

55

–60

7.5

01

2.6

Lim

etal

.(2

00

9)

5.

EF

B,

PO

ME

40

67

55

–65

8.1

12

.4B

ahar

ud

din

etal

.(2

01

0)

6.

PO

MS

,sa

wd

ust

30

04

0–

5.7

19

Yas

eret

al.

(20

07)

7.

EF

B,

trea

ted

PO

ME

60

62

65

–75

7.8

–8

.11

2.7

Bah

arud

din

etal

.(2

00

9a,

b)

8.

EF

B,

pal

moil

was

tew

ater

sludge,

bio

soli

ds,

sandy

soil

49

25–26

20

––

Al-

Mad

houn

etal

.(2

00

5)

9.

EF

B,

ferm

enta

tio

nli

qu

idw

aste

,ch

ick

enm

anu

re5

07

06

54

.5–

61

6S

uh

aim

ian

dO

ng

(20

01)

EF

B,

PO

ME

,ch

icken

man

ure

85

70

65

4.5

–6

16

10

.E

FB

,P

OM

E9

87

0–

75

–7

.51

5S

chu

char

dt

etal

.(2

00

2)

11

.P

alm

pre

ssfi

ber

56

70

65

7–

82

6T

ham

bir

ajah

and

Ku

thu

buth

een

(19

89)

Pal

mp

ress

fib

er,

po

ult

ryla

yer

dee

pli

tter

,u

rea

56

70

65

7–

81

7

Pal

mp

ress

fib

er,

po

ult

ryb

roil

erfl

oo

rli

tter

,u

rea

56

72

65

7–

81

6

12

.O

ilp

alm

was

tes

(EF

B,

fro

nd

,tr

un

k),

sew

age

slu

dg

e8

42

8.1

–4

3.3

60

5.8

–6

.91

9–

41

.5K

ala

etal

.(2

00

9)

13

.O

PF

,ch

icken

man

ure

,ri

ceb

ran

21

56

40

–60

–1

5.7

9–

21.3

4K

ausa

r(2

01

2)

14

.P

alm

oil

mil

lb

iog

assl

ud

ge

60

–5

0–

65

6.9

28

.17

Nu

ton

gkae

wet

al.

(20

11)

Pal

mo

ilm

ill

bio

gas

slud

ge,

pal

mo

ilem

pty

fruit

bu

nch

es6

04

4.6

65

0–

65

7.8

21

5.7

7

Pal

moil

mil

lbio

gas

sludge,

dec

ante

rca

ke

60

–50–65

7.7

57.5

7

Pal

mo

ilm

ill

bio

gas

slu

dg

e,p

alm

oil

empty

fru

itb

un

ches

,dec

ante

rca

ke

60

49

50

–65

7.7

91

3.4

7

15

.P

alm

ker

nel

cake,

po

ult

rym

anu

re4

25

8–

7.3

52

3.1

7K

ola

de

etal

.(2

00

5)

M. Vakili et al.

123

Ta

ble

2co

nti

nued

S.

no

.M

ater

ial

Tim

e(d

ay)

Max

imu

mT

emp

erat

ure

(�C

)M

ois

ture

(%)

pH

(fin

al)

C/N

(fin

al)

Ref

eren

ce

Pal

mk

ern

elca

ke,

go

at/s

hee

pm

anu

re4

26

4–

7.4

61

7.4

1

16

.E

FB

,P

OM

Esl

ud

ge

60

–5

0–

70

8.1

12

.7A

hm

adet

al.

(20

11a,

b)

Mes

oca

rpfi

ber

,P

OM

Esl

ud

ge

60

–5

0–

70

7.5

12

.6

OP

F,

PO

ME

slu

dg

e6

05

65

0–

70

8.2

18

17

.E

FB

60

75

65

9.5

24

Th

amb

iraj

ahet

al.

(19

95)

EF

B,

go

atd

un

g,

60

75

65

9.5

14

EF

B,

cow

du

ng

60

75

65

9.5

18

EF

B,

chic

ken

man

ure

60

75

65

9.5

12

18

.E

FB

,P

OM

E7

07

0–

7.7

15

Sti

chno

the

and

Sch

uch

ard

t(2

01

0)

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

produced in an oil palm mill is 20 % of the daily capacity of the mills, or about 100 metric

tons of FFB per day (Singh et al. 2010; Mohammad et al. 2012). In the past, these wastes

were burned to generate the heat in mills or used in fields, thereby causing some envi-

ronmental problems (Igwe and Onyegbado 2007). Composting is a feasible way to convert

them to a valuable, manageable and environmentally friendly product. Numerous

researchers are currently conducting assays to use these wastes in composting.

Microbiological and biochemical variations during the composting of EFB were ana-

lyzed by Thambirajah et al. (1995). EFB was composted by adding goat dung, cow dung,

and chicken manure as a supplement in four different treatments. The initial C/N ratios in

all of the treatments decreased during the composting process, 60 days, and producing the

stable mature compost. The temperature increased to 70 �C at the beginning of the process

and remained constant for 3 days. During the process, mesophilic and thermophilic bac-

teria were active, whereas fungal activity was decreased within the peak heating period.

Yahya et al. (2010) investigated the composting of EFB and decanter cake (DC) slurry

by adding POME under an ordered turning operation. They found that the rate of the EFB

composting process increased by adding a DC slurry. After a composting period of

51 days, the compost (EFB and DC slurry) was matured and contain 46.4 % nitrogen,

17.9 % phosphorus, 17.7 % potassium, and 23.1 % calcium compared with compost

without a DC. Baharuddin et al. (2009a, b) found out that the co-composting of EFB with a

slightly treated POME is a useful method to change these materials to suitable mature

compost and is effective in oil palm farms as a fertilizer. At 3 days of the period, the

temperature reached 58.5 �C and eradicated the pathogens. The moisture and C/N ratio

decreased from 65 to 75 % to approximately 60 % and 45–12 at the end of the process,

respectively. The mature compost contained very low levels of heavy metals and a sig-

nificant rate of nutrients, such as carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium,

magnesium, sulfur, and iron.

POME, a non-toxic liquid waste discharged from an oil palm mill comprises approxi-

mately 95–96 % water, 0.6–0.7 % oil, and 4–5 % total solids that are mostly residue of the

fruit. POME contains high levels of pollutants and harmful properties that threaten the

environment, such as soluble chemical materials, high levels of biochemical oxygen

demand, and chemical oxygen demand (Yacob et al. 2006; Alam et al. 2007; Mumtaz et al.

2010; Hassan et al. 2013). Therefore, the discharge of POME on the surrounding envi-

ronment causes environmental pollution to a certain degree. Considering the biological

properties of composting in nature, composting can be an appropriate management method

for this waste (Rupani et al. 2010). Wood et al. (1979) reported that the use of POME as a

fertilizer was senseless because it destroys vegetation, causes compression, and reduces the

permeability and water logging of the soil, thereby resulting in an anaerobic condition.

This issue can be resolved by using the proper amount of POME. Oviasogie and Aghimien

(2003) also revealed that the suitable use of POME is useful for the environment and

improves the soil fertility. The results indicated that the use of POME likely leads to the

enrichment of the soil in terms of some elements, such as phosphorus, nitrogen, calcium,

magnesium, sodium, and potassium. Copper, iron, and lead are present in organic forms,

whereas zinc is present in an exchangeable form.

Nwoko and Ogunyemi (2010) reconfirmed that the POME is a low-cost resource of

nutrients for plants. The use of POME as an organic fertilizer can promote a sustainable

agriculture considering that the maize crop production possibly improves. Yaser et al.

(2007) assessed the efficiency of POME composting as a fertilizer for growing Cymbo-

pogun citratus, a Malaysian herbal plant, by adding sawdust to produce the compost. The

composting process was conducted in a natural aerated reactor. During the process, the

M. Vakili et al.

123

temperature in the reactor was increased to 40 �C. The pH and C/N ratio were reduced

from 7.5 to 5.7 and 25 to 19.25, respectively. The proportion of the organic matter losses

was 50 % at 300 days during the composting period. The produced compost was combined

with 70 % sandy soil to achieve the best result for the growth of C. citratus.

Baharuddin et al. (2010) carried out the composting of pressed-shredded EFB with

POME anaerobic sludge under controlled conditions. The microbial seeding, high levels

of nitrogen and nutrients sources from POME anaerobic sludge, increased the rate of the

composting process and reduced the composting period to 40 days. During the com-

posting process, the temperature increased to 60–67 �C (thermophilic phase). The curing

phase was then observed after the fourth week. The high biodegradation rate of the

microbial activity decreased because of the reduction of the moisture content

(64.5–52.0 %), C/N ratio (45.6–12.4), pH, 8.56–8.12, cellulose (34.0 %), and hemicel-

lulose (27.0 %) during the process. Moreover, the mature compost contained a low level

of heavy metals and a high amount of nutrients. Kabashi et al. (2007) examined the

composting of EFB and POME with wheat flour as a co-substrate in a tray bioreactor.

Some strains derived from the POME, such as Phanerochaete chrysosporium, Tricho-

derma harzianum, Aspergillus niger (A 106, S 101), and Penicillium, were used in this

process. The change in pH during the composting process was not very significant at the

range of 5–6. The organic matter percentage, germination index, and C/N ratio decreased

to 3 %, 95 %, and 17, respectively, whereas the total nitrogen content increased from

0.744 to 2.96 g/g.

There is a growing interest to use of other produced biomasses in oil palm industry such

as palm oil fronds, mesocarp fiber, trunk, and kernel cake are a suitable resource as a raw

material for composting. Ahmad et al. (2011a, b) investigated the physicochemical changes

and microbial population within the co-composting of OPF with a POME anaerobic

sludge. The results indicated that the microbial activities and the number of thermophilic

and mesophilic microorganisms changed by varying the temperature during the com-

posting process of 60 days. The temperature increased within the range of 50–56 �C in the

first 6 weeks of the composting period. However, the moisture content, oxygen level, and

pH increased from 60–70 %, 2–12 %, and 7.9–8.5, respectively. The C/N ratio decreased

from 64 to 18 after the composting period. The final mature compost contained 1.8 %

nitrogen, 0.1 % phosphorous, 0.9 % potassium, and a low level of heavy metal.

Lim et al. (2009) assessed the physicochemical changes of the oil palm mesocarp fiber

(OPMF) and POME anaerobic sludge composting with a pilot scale. The temperature

during the first week increased to 68 �C and maintained within the range of 50–68 �C in

the first 40 days of the composting process because of the addition of the POME anaerobic

sludge as a nutrient source. The moisture content decreased to about 50 % and the C/N

ratio decreased from 78 to 12.6 during the composting process of 50 days. The pH value

remained stable within the range of 6.8–7.8 during the whole process. The results indicated

that the produced compost had low heavy metal content and had the acceptable properties

of mature compost that can be used as a fertilizer or for soil improvement. Erwan et al.

(2012) evaluated the physicochemical and biological changes within the composting

process of OPF. Raw materials (OPF, chicken manure, and rice bran) were mixed in three

piles, A, B, and C, in different ratios of 40:40:20, 40:30:30, and 40:20:40, respectively. The

results indicated that 21 days after starting the process, the compost produced in Pile A was

matured and adequately contained the highest amounts of nitrogen, phosphorus, and

potassium with the lowest C/N ratios of 2.33, 2.02, 1.80, and 15.79, respectively. Nut-

ongkaew et al. (2011) analyzed the compost production from an oil palm mill sludge

(POMS) mixed with oil palm mill wastes and biogas effluent. The EFB’s total organic

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

carbon was 52.83 % dry weight, and the total nitrogen of the POMS and DC was 3.6 and

2.37 % dry weights, respectively. Moreover, the oil palm fuel ash had high amounts of

phosphorus and potassium of 2.17 and 1.93 % dry weight, respectively. During the

composting process of 60 days, the pH value was stable in the range of 6.9–7.8, whereas

the moisture content reduced to 30 % at the end of the period. The composting mixture

with a POMS/PEFB/DC ratio of 0.5:0.25:0.25 were found. The addition of the biogas

effluent represented the best properties of the compost, in which 31.75 % higher nitrogen

content obtained compared with the other treatments. The amounts of nitrogen, 3.26 %,

and phosphorous, 0.84 %, were more than the level necessary for a plant fertilizer (0.5 %

nitrogen, 0.5 % phosphorus).

Nahrul Hayawin et al. (2010) studied the physicochemical changes of an oil palm biomass

during vermicomposting. The data indicated that vermicomposting of an oil palm biomass,

such as EFB, OPT, and OPF, is an appropriate method for recycling the oil palm wastes to a

value-added vermicompost. The total organic carbon, C/N ratio, and pH value were reduced

during the process, whereas the nitrogen, phosphorous, and potassium proportions increased.

In addition, the heavy metal level increased, but the increase was not beyond the nutrient

range in the vermicompost. Thambirajah and Kuthubutheen (1989) studied the potentiality of

PPF for composting. The raw materials were mixed in three heaps with different ratios: The

first heap only contained PPT, 250 kg; the second heap contained 250 kg PPF, 50 kg poultry

layer deep litter, 0.5 kg urea, and 250 kg PPF; and the third heap contained 50 kg poultry

broiler floor litter and 0.5 kg urea. The temperature in all the heaps increased to 60–70 �C in

the first 3 weeks and then decreased to 30–40 �C at the end of the composting time of

8 weeks. The thermophilic to mesophilic fungi ratio increased in the composting time,

whereas the mesophilic bacteria ratio was stable in all the heaps. The cellulose and carbon

were reduced after composting because of the increase in the nitrogen, lignin, and ash level.

The C/N ratios in all the heaps decreased from their initial amounts of 40:1, 33:1, and 26:1 to

26:1, 17:1, and 16:1, respectively.

Kolade et al. (2005) carried out the composting of PKC with goat manure and poultry

droppings as nitrogen supplements. The composting process was started by mixing the

PKC with the poultry manure and goat/sheep manure in two treatments with a ratio of 3:1.

The temperature increased in both treatments from about 30 to 58 �C at 12 days and to

64 �C at 9 days for the composting time of 42 days. The produced compost was assessed

for crop production, resulting in an acceptable product as a fertilizer. This method indi-

cated the ability of decreasing the environmental health problems caused by the current

method of dealing with palm kernel wastes. Kala et al. (2009) investigated the best ratio of

mixing the raw material, oil palm wastes, and sewage sludge. The investigation was

conducted in a greenhouse made of glass by using a polystyrene box to produce the mature

compost, utilized as a potting media in horticulture. The oil palm wastes, EFB, frond, and

trunk, were shredded and mixed with sewage sludge in three ratios of 1:0, 3:1, and 4:1. In

this experiment, the best ratio was 4:1, producing the most favorable result as a medium for

ornamental plants because of its proper texture as a potting media, pH of 6.2, low C/N ratio

of 19, and high levels of nutrients of 2.05 % nitrogen, 0.640 % phosphorus, 1.39 %

potassium, 0.705 % calcium, 0.229 % magnesium.

5 Environmental impacts of composting

Composting is an appropriate, cost effective, and simple method, using for treating organic

wastes, which is able to reduce the volume of wastes, destroys weed seeds, and pathogens,

M. Vakili et al.

123

and stabilizes the nutrients, mature organic matter, produce usable environmentally

friendly final product (Jiang et al. 2011; Rynk et al. 1992). The use of mature compost,

produced from organic wastes, as a fertilizer, is much cheaper than the chemical fertilizers

produced in the industry. The use of chemical fertilizers cause to reduce the production

time for a mean time while in the long run showed bad impacts on soil, water, and air as

well as ecosystem. Unsuitable and continuous usage of them leads to damage the soil

structure, decreases in the organic materials, and finally reduces the soil aggregation

strength, which restricted the productivity of field crops. Farmers are interested to use

chemical fertilizers and pesticides rather than organic fertilizers due to the easily accessible

and rapid growth response for plants; however, using organic fertilizers is useful to

improve the physical, chemical, and biological qualities of soil (Ghoneim 2008; Hellal

2007). It also improves the soil water holding capacity and provides better tilts. It has been

reported utilization of compost is no longer limited to its use as a soil amendment and can

use as a suppressor agent for different crop diseases (Ruggieri et al. 2009). At present, the

compost is applied in control of erosion on highways, the purging of contaminants in storm

water runoff, and in the reduction of soils contaminants such as heavy metals and toxic

organic compounds. Nowadays, global warming is seen as a major problem around the

world and composting could play an important role to eliminate this problem; since the

decomposition of organic wastes in anaerobic condition such as landfill generates methane

gas as a major product which has numerous unfavorable impact on global warming, while

this process in composting produces CO2 (Mohammad et al. 2012).

6 Conclusions

This article has summarized and discussed the composting studies on palm oil biomass

so far in order to address problems associated with waste management of biomass

generated in palm oil industries. Composting is defined as an aerobic biological process

in which microorganisms convert organic materials into a stable environmentally

friendly product, similar to that which naturally occurs in the soil. The palm oil industry

produces large quantities of biomass in different forms, such as PPF, kernel shells, EFB,

OPF, OPT, OPB, PKC, and liquid waste discharged from palm oil mills. These wastes

could have diverse impact on the environment if not managed appropriately; for

instance, EFB needs long time to decay and POME affects the environment by polluting

the ground water and decreasing the soil fertility. However, they may be a potential

resource and value-added product if they are treated and managed properly. Considering

that these wastes are biological, which contain high levels of organic content they could

be a suitable resource and value-added byproduct. Hence, oil palm biomasses’ com-

posting is a suitable option to reduce the volume of the waste and often to make it more

useable than in its original form which is regarded by several researchers. In addition,

the maturity of compost is essential in achieving the beneficial uses. Even though a large

number of studies have been performed in this area, considering enormous amount of

biomass generated annually, still there is a lot of gaps in this area which could be

covered by other researchers.

Acknowledgments The authors acknowledge the research grant provided by Universiti Sains Malaysiaunder the Short Term Grant Scheme (Project No. 304/PTEKIND/6312118).

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

References

Ahmad, R., Jilani, G., Arshad, M., Zahir, Z. A., & Khalid, A. (2007). Bio-conversion of organic wastes fortheir recycling in agriculture: An overview of perspectives and prospects. Annals of Microbiology,57(4), 471–479.

Ahmad, M. N., Mokhtar, M. N., Baharuddin, A. S., Hock, L. S., Ali, S. R. A., Abd-Aziz, S., et al. (2011a).Changes in physicochemical and microbial community during co-composting of oil palm frond withpalm oil mill effluent anaerobic sludge. BioResources, 6(4), 4762–4780.

Ahmad, T., Rafatullah, M., Ghazali, A., Sulaiman, O., & Hashim, R. (2011b). Oil palm biomass basedadsorbents for the removal of water pollutants: A review. Journal of Environmental Science andHealth, Part C, 29(3), 177–222.

Alam, M. Z., Muyibi, S. A., Mansor, M. F., & Wahid, R. (2007). Activated carbons derived from oil palmempty-fruit bunches: Application to environmental problems. Journal of Environmental Sciences,19(1), 103–108.

Alfano, G., Belli, C., Lustrato, G., & Ranalli, G. (2008). Pile composting of two-phase centrifuged olivehusk residues: Technical solutions and quality of cured compost. Bioresource Technology, 99(11),4694–4701.

Al-Madhoun, W. A., Jabieng, S. A., Isa, M. H., Asaari, F. A., Aziz, H. A., & Farooqi, I. (2005). Co-composting of palm oil wastewater sludge and biosolids. In Proceeding of the international conferenceon water: Rights and values. Ramllah, Palestine.

Arslan, E. I., Unlu, A., & Topal, M. (2011). Determination of the effect of aeration rate on composting ofvegetable–fruit wastes. Clean-Soil, Air, Water, 39(11), 1014–1021.

Baharuddin, A. S., Hock, L. S., Yusof, M., Rahman, N. A., Shah, U., Hassan, M., et al. (2010). Effects ofpalm oil mill effluent (POME) anaerobic sludge from 500 m 3 of closed anaerobic methane digestedtank on pressed-shredded empty fruit bunch (EFB) composting process. African Journal of Biotech-nology, 9(16), 2427–2436.

Baharuddin, A. S., Nakamura, M., Tabatabaei, M., Abd-Aziz, S., Abdul Rahman, N., Wakisaka, M., et al.(2009a). Characteristics and microbial succession in co-composting of oil palm empty fruit bunch andpartially treated palm oil mill effluent. The Open Biotechnology Journal, 3, 92–100.

Baharuddin, A. S., Wakisaka, M., Shirai, Y., Abd-Aziz, S., Abdul Rahman, N., & Hassan, M. (2009b). Co-composting of empty fruit bunches and partially treated palm oil mill effluents in pilot scale. Inter-national Journal of Agricultural Research, 4(2), 69–78.

Barje, F., El Fels, L., El Hajjouji, H., Amir, S., Winterton, P., & Hafidi, M. (2012). Molecular behaviour ofhumic acid-like substances during co-composting of olive mill waste and the organic part of municipalsolid waste. International Biodeterioration and Biodegradation, 74, 17–23.

Basiron, Y. (2007). Palm oil production through sustainable plantations. European Journal of Lipid Scienceand Technology, 109(4), 289–295.

Bernal, M., Alburquerque, J., & Moral, R. (2009). Composting of animal manures and chemical criteria forcompost maturity assessment. A review. Bioresource Technology, 100(22), 5444–5453.

Bouallagui, H., Touhami, Y., Ben Cheikh, R., & Hamdi, M. (2005). Bioreactor performance in anaerobicdigestion of fruit and vegetable wastes. Process Biochemistry, 40(3), 989–995.

Bueno, P., Tapias, R., Lopez, F., & Dıaz, M. (2008). Optimizing composting parameters for nitrogenconservation in composting. Bioresource Technology, 99(11), 5069–5077.

Bustamante, M., Paredes, C., Marhuenda-Egea, F., Perez-Espinosa, A., Bernal, M., & Moral, R. (2008). Co-composting of distillery wastes with animal manures: Carbon and nitrogen transformations in theevaluation of compost stability. Chemosphere, 72(4), 551–557.

Castaldi, P., Alberti, G., Merella, R., & Melis, P. (2005). Study of the organic matter evolution duringmunicipal solid waste composting aimed at identifying suitable parameters for the evaluation ofcompost maturity. Waste Management, 25(2), 209–213.

Chavalparit, O., Rulkens, W., Mol, A., & Khaodhair, S. (2006). Options for environmental sustainability ofthe crude palm oil industry in Thailand through enhancement of industrial ecosystems. Environment,Development and Sustainability, 8(2), 271–287.

Das, M., Uppal, H., Singh, R., Beri, S., Mohan, K., Gupta, V. C., et al. (2011). Co-composting of physic nut(Jatropha curcas) deoiled cake with rice straw and different animal dung. Bioresource Technology,102(11), 6541–6546.

Diaz, L. F., & de Bertoldi, M. (2007). Chapter 2 History of composting (waste management series).Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Erwan, M. R. I., Mohd Saud, H., Siddiquee, S., & Kausar, H. (2012). Physical, chemical and biologicalchanges during the composting of oil palm frond. African Journal of Microbiology Research, 6(19),4084–4089.

M. Vakili et al.

123

Ezcurra, A., Ortiz de Zarate, I., Dhin, P. V., & Lacaux, J. (2001). Cereal waste burning pollution observed inthe town of Vitoria (northern Spain). Atmospheric Environment, 35(8), 1377–1386.

Fidero, K., Mimoto, H., & Nakasaki, K. (2012). Effects of turning on the microbial consortia and the in situtemperature preferences of microorganisms in a laboratory-scale swine manure composting. Biore-source Technology, 116, 421–427.

Fitzherbert, E. B., Struebig, M. J., Morel, A., Danielsen, F., Bruhl, C. A., Donald, P. F., et al. (2008). Howwill oil palm expansion affect biodiversity? Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 23(10), 538–545.

Gabhane, J., William, S., Bidyadhar, R., Bhilawe, P., Anand, D., Vaidya, A. N., et al. (2012). Additivesaided composting of green waste: Effects on organic matter degradation, compost maturity, and qualityof the finished compost. Bioresource Technology, 114, 382–388.

Gajalakshmi, S., & Abbasi, S. (2008). Solid waste management by composting: State of the art. CriticalReviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 38(5), 311–400.

Gao, M., Li, B., Yu, A., Liang, F., Yang, L., & Sun, Y. (2010). The effect of aeration rate on forced-aerationcomposting of chicken manure and sawdust. Bioresource Technology, 101(6), 1899–1903.

Garcıa-de-la-Fuente, R., Cuesta, G., Sanchıs-Jimenez, E., Botella, S., Abad, M., & Fornes, F. (2011).Bacteria involved in sulfur amendment oxidation and acidification processes of alkaline ‘al-perujo’compost. Bioresource Technology, 102(2), 1481–1488.

Gazi, A., Kyriacou, A., Kotsou, M., & Lasaridi, K. (2007). Microbial community dynamics and stabilityassessment during green waste composting. Global NEST Journal, 9(1), 35–41.

Ghoneim, A. (2008). Impact of 15 N-labeled rice straw and rice straw compost application on N miner-alization and N uptake by rice. International Journal of Plant Production, 2, 289–295.

Giuntini, E., Bazzicalupo, M., Castaldini, M., Fabiani, A., Miclaus, N., Piccolo, R., et al. (2006). Geneticdiversity of dinitrogen-fixing bacterial communities in soil amended with olive husks. Annals ofMicrobiology, 56(2), 83–88.

Hachicha, S., Cegarra, J., Sellami, F., Hachicha, R., Drira, N., Medhioub, K., et al. (2009a). Elimination ofpolyphenols toxicity from olive mill wastewater sludge by its co-composting with sesame bark.Journal of Hazardous Materials, 161(2), 1131–1139.

Hachicha, R., Hachicha, S., Trabelsi, I., Woodward, S., & Mechichi, T. (2009b). Evolution of the fattyfraction during co-composting of olive oil industry wastes with animal manure: Maturity assessment ofthe end product. Chemosphere, 75(10), 1382–1386.

Hamdy, H. S. (2005). Purification and characterization of pectin lyase produced by Rhizopus oryzae grownon orange peels. Annals of Microbiology, 55(3), 205.

Hansen, S. (2007). Feasibility study of performing an life cycle assessment on crude palm oil production inMalaysia (9 pp). The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 12(1), 50–58.

Hargreaves, J., Adl, M., & Warman, P. (2008). A review of the use of composted municipal solid waste inagriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 123(1), 1–14.

Hassan, M. A., Yee, L.-N., Yee, P. L., Ariffin, H., Raha, A. R., Shirai, Y., et al. (2013). Sustainableproduction of polyhydroxyalkanoates from renewable oil-palm biomass. Biomass and Bioenergy, 50,1–9.

Hassen, A., Belguith, K., Jedidi, N., Cherif, A., Cherif, M., & Boudabous, A. (2001). Microbial charac-terization during composting of municipal solid waste. Bioresource Technology, 80(3), 217–225.

Hassen, A., Jedidi, N., Cherif, M., M’Hiri, A., Boudabous, A., & van Cleemput, O. (1998). Mineralization ofnitrogen in a clayey loamy soil amended with organic wastes enriched with Zn, Cu and Cd. Biore-source Technology, 64(1), 39–45.

He, X.-T., Logan, T. J., & Traina, S. J. (1995). Physical and chemical characteristics of selected USmunicipal solid waste composts. Journal of Environmental Quality, 24(3), 543–552.

Hegg, D. A., Radke, L. F., Hobbs, P. V., Brock, C. A., & Riggan, P. J. (1987). Nitrogen and sulfur emissionsfrom the burning of forest products near large urban areas. Journal of Geophysical Research, 92(D12),14701–14709.

Hellal, F. A. (2007). Composting of rice straw and its influences on iron availability in calcareous soil.Research Journal of Agriculture and Biological Sciences, 3(2), 105–114.

Igwe, J. C., & Onyegbado, C. C. (2007). A review of palm oil mill effluent (Pome) water treatment. GlobalJournal of Environmental Research, 1(2), 54–62.

Isa, M. H., Ibrahim, N., Aziz, H. A., Adlan, M. N., Sabiani, N. H. M., Zinatizadeh, A. A. L., et al. (2008).Removal of chromium (VI) from aqueous solution using treated oil palm fibre. Journal of HazardousMaterials, 152(2), 662–668.

Jayed, M., Masjuki, H., Kalam, M., Mahlia, T., Husnawan, M., & Liaquat, A. (2011). Prospects of dedicatedbiodiesel engine vehicles in Malaysia and Indonesia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,15(1), 220–235.

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

Jiang, T., Schuchardt, F., Li, G., Guo, R., & Zhao, Y. (2011). Effect of C/N ratio, aeration rate and moisturecontent on ammonia and greenhouse gas emission during the composting. Journal of EnvironmentalSciences, 23(10), 1754–1760.

Jilani, G., Akram, A., Ali, R. M., Hafeez, F. Y., Shamsi, I. H., Chaudhry, A. N., et al. (2007). Enhancingcrop growth, nutrients availability, economics and beneficial rhizosphere microflora through organicand biofertilizers. Annals of Microbiology, 57(2), 177–184.

Jusoh, M. L., Manaf, L. A., & Latiff, P. A. (2013). Composting of rice straw with effective microorganisms(EM) and its influence on compost quality. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science &Engineering, 10:17.

Kabashi, N., Alam, Z., & Ainuddin, M. (2007). Bio-composting process development by SSF for utilizationagro-industrial wastes. In F. Ibrahim, N. Osman, J. Usman, & N. Kadri (Eds.), International conferenceon biomedical engineering 2006 (Vol. 15, pp. 464–468, IFMBE Proceedings). Berlin: Springer.

Kala, D. R., Rosenani, A. B., Fauziah, C. I., & Thohirah, L. A. (2009). Composting oil palm wastes andsewage sludge for use in potting media of ornamental plants. Malaysian Journal of Soil Science, 13(1),77–91.

Kalamdhad, A. S., & Kazmi, A. (2008). Mixed organic waste composting using rotary drum composter.International Journal of Environment and Waste Management, 2(1), 24–36.

Kalamdhad, A. S., Singh, Y. K., Ali, M., Khwairakpam, M., & Kazmi, A. (2009). Rotary drum compostingof vegetable waste and tree leaves. Bioresource Technology, 100(24), 6442–6450.

Kara, O., & Asan, A. (2007). Microfungal community structure from forest soils in Northern Thrace Region,Turkey. Annals of Microbiology, 57(2), 149–155.

Kassa, H., Suliman, H., & Workayew, T. (2011). Evaluation of composting process and quality of compostfrom coffee by-products (Coffee Husk & Pulp). Ethiopian Journal of Environmental Studies andManagement, 4(4), 8–13.

Kausar, H. (2012). Physical, chemical and biological changes during the composting of oil palm frond.African Journal of Microbiology Research, 6(19), 4084–4089.

Kayikcioglu, H. H., & Okur, N. (2011). Evolution of enzyme activities during composting of tobacco waste.Waste Management and Research, 29(11), 1124–1133.

Khalid, A., Arshad, M., Anjum, M., Mahmood, T., & Dawson, L. (2011). The anaerobic digestion of solidorganic waste. Waste Management, 31(8), 1737–1744.

Khalil, A., Domeizel, M., & Prudent, P. (2008). Monitoring of green waste composting process based onredox potential. Bioresource Technology, 99(14), 6037–6045.

Khan, M. A. I., Ueno, K., Horimoto, S., Komai, F., Tanaka, K., & Ono, Y. (2009). Physicochemical,including spectroscopic, and biological analyses during composting of green tea waste and rice bran.Biology and Fertility of Soils, 45(3), 305–313.

Koh, L. P., & Wilcove, D. S. (2008). Is oil palm agriculture really destroying tropical biodiversity? Con-servation Letters, 1(2), 60–64.

Kolade, O. O., Coker, A. O., Sridhar, M. K. C., & Adeoye, G. O. (2005). Palm kernel waste managementthrough composting and crop production. Journal of Environmental Health Research, 5(2), 81–86.

Lacaux, J., Loemba-Ndembi, J., Lefeivre, B., Cros, B., & Delmas, R. (1992). Biogenic emissions andbiomass burning influences on the chemistry of the fogwater and stratiform precipitations in theAfrican equatorial forest. Atmospheric Environment Part A: General Topics, 26(4), 541–551.

Lesteur, M., Bellon-Maurel, V., Gonzalez, C., Latrille, E., Roger, J., Junqua, G., et al. (2010). Alternativemethods for determining anaerobic biodegradability: A review. Process Biochemistry, 45(4),431–440.

Lim, S. H., Baharuddin, A. S., Ahmad, M. N., Shah, M., Kalsom, U., Rahman, A., et al. (2009). Physi-cochemical changes in windrow co-composting process of oil palm mesocarp fiber and palm oil milleffluent anaerobic sludge. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 3(3), 2809–2816.

Manungufala, T., Chimuka, L., & Maswanganyi, B. (2008). Evaluating the quality of communities madecompost manure in South Africa: A case study of content and sources of metals in compost manurefrom Thulamela Municipality, Limpopo province. Bioresource Technology, 99(5), 1491–1496.

Marche, T., Schnitzer, M., Dinel, H., Pare, T., Champagne, P., Schulten, H.-R., et al. (2003). Chemicalchanges during composting of a paper mill sludge–hardwood sawdust mixture. Geoderma, 116(3),345–356.

Martınez-Blanco, J., Munoz, P., Anton, A., & Rieradevall, J. (2011). Assessment of tomato Mediterraneanproduction in open-field and standard multi-tunnel greenhouse, with compost or mineral fertilizers,from an agricultural and environmental standpoint. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(9–10),985–997.

Mohammad, N., Alam, M. Z., Kabbashi, N. A., & Ahsan, A. (2012). Effective composting of oil palmindustrial waste by filamentous fungi: A review. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 58, 69–78.

M. Vakili et al.

123

Mohammed, M., Salmiaton, A., Wan Azlina, W., Mohammad Amran, M., Fakhru’l-Razi, A., & Taufiq-Yap,Y. (2011). Hydrogen rich gas from oil palm biomass as a potential source of renewable energy inMalaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(2), 1258–1270.

Montemurro, F., Diacono, M., Vitti, C., & Debiase, G. (2009). Biodegradation of olive husk mixed withother agricultural wastes. Bioresource Technology, 100(12), 2969–2974.

Mumtaz, T., Yahaya, N. A., Abd-Aziz, S., Abdul Rahman, N. A., Yee, P. L., Shirai, Y., et al. (2010).Turning waste to wealth-biodegradable plastics polyhydroxyalkanoates from palm oil mill effluent: AMalaysian perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(14), 1393–1402.

Nahrul Hayawin, Z., Abdul Khalil, H. P. S., Jawaid, M., Hakimi Ibrahim, M., & Astimar, A. A. (2010).Exploring chemical analysis of vermicompost of various oil palm fibre wastes. The Environmentalist,30(3), 273–278.

Narasimhulu, K., & Nanganuru, H. Y. (2010). Statistical optimization of operating conditions for thebioconversion of palm oil mill effluent into bioethanol in a 3 litre computer controlled stirred tankbioreactor. ARPN Journal of Agricultural and Biological Science, 5(4), 19–26.

Nawar, L. S. (2008). Control of root-rot of green been with composted rice straw fortified with Trichodermaharzianum. American-Eurasian Journal of Agricultural & Environmental Science, 3, 370–379.

Nigam, P. S., & Pandey, A. (2009). Biotechnology for agro-industrial residues utilisation: Utilisation ofagro-residues. New York: Springer.

Nutongkaew, T., Duangsuwan, W., Prasertsan, S., & Prasertsan, P. (2011). Production of compost from palmoil mill biogas sludge mixed with palm oil mill wastes and biogas effluent. Paper presented at theTIChE International Conference Hatyai, Songkhla Thailand.

Nwoko, C. O., & Ogunyemi, S. (2010). Evaluation of palm oil mill effluent to maize (Zea Mays L.) crop:Yields, tissue nutrient content and residual soil chemical properties. Australian Journal of CropScience, 4(1), 16–22.

Ogunwande, G. A., & Osunade, J. A. (2011). Passive aeration composting of chicken litter: Effects ofaeration pipe orientation and perforation size on losses of compost elements. Journal of EnvironmentalManagement, 92(1), 85–91.

Ordonez, C., Tejada, M., Benitez, C., & Gonzalez, J. (2006). Characterization of a phosphorus–potassiumsolution obtained during a protein concentrate process from sunflower flour. Application on rye-grass.Bioresource Technology, 97(3), 522–528.

Oviasogie, P., & Aghimien, A. E. (2003). Macronutrient status and speciation of Cu, Fe, Zn and Pb in soilcontaining palm oil mill effluent. Global Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences, 9(1), 71–80.

Oviasogie, P., Aisueni, N., & Brown, G. (2010). Oil palm composted biomass: A review of the preparation,utilization, handling and storage. African Journal of Agricultural Research, 5(13), 1553–1571.

Paterson, R. R., Moen, S., & Lima, N. (2009). The feasibility of producing oil palm with altered lignincontent to control Ganoderma disease. Journal of Phytopathology, 157(11–12), 649–656.

Petric, I., & Selimbasic, V. (2008). Composting of poultry manure and wheat straw in a closed reactor:Optimum mixture ratio and evolution of parameters. Biodegradation, 19(1), 53–63.

Petric, I., Sestan, A., & Sestan, I. (2009). Influence of wheat straw addition on composting of poultrymanure. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 87(3), 206–212.

Petrus, A. C., Ahmed, O. H., Ab Majid, N., Nasir, H. M., Jiwan, M., & Banta, M. G. (2009). Chemicalcharacteristics of compost and humic acid from Sago Waste (Metroxylon sagu). American Journal ofApplied Sciences, 6(11), 1880–1884.

Preethu, D., Bhanu Prakash, B., Srinivasamurthy, C., & Vasanthi, B. (2007). Maturity indices and index toevaluate the quality of compost of coffee waste blended with other organic waste. In Proceeding ofinternational conference on sustainable solid waste management (pp. 270–275), Chennai, India.

Purnomo, A. S., Koyama, F., Mori, T., & Kondo, R. (2010). DDT degradation potential of cattle manurecompost. Chemosphere, 80(6), 619–624.

Rafatullah, M., Ahmad, T., Ghazali, A., Sulaiman, O., Danish, M., & Hashim, R. (2013). Oil palm biomassas a precursor of activated carbons: A review. Critical Review in Environmental Science and Tech-nology, 43(11), 1117–1161.

Ramachandran, S., Singh, S. K., Larroche, C., Soccol, C. R., & Pandey, A. (2007). Oil cakes and theirbiotechnological applications: A review. Bioresource Technology, 98(10), 2000–2009.

Roca-Perez, L., Martınez, C., Marcilla, P., & Boluda, R. (2009). Composting rice straw with sewage sludgeand compost effects on the soil–plant system. Chemosphere, 75(6), 781–787.

Rolz, C., de Leon, R., Cifuentes, R., & Porres, C. (2010). Windrow composting of sugarcane and coffeebyproducts. Sugar Technology, 12(1), 15–20.

Ruggieri, L., Cadena, E., Martınez-Blanco, J., Gasol, C. M., Rieradevall, J., Gabarrell, X., et al. (2009).Recovery of organic wastes in the Spanish wine industry. Technical, economic and environmentalanalyses of the composting process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 17(9), 830–838.

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123

Rupani, P. F., Singh, R. P., Ibrahim, M. H., & Esa, N. (2010). Review of current palm oil mill effluent(POME) treatment methods: Vermicomposting as a sustainable practice. World Applied SciencesJournal, 11(1), 70–81.

Rynk, R., Kamp, M. V. D., Willson, G. B., Singley, M. E., Richard, T. L., Kolega, J. J., et al. (1992). On-farm composting handbook. New York: Agricultural, & Engineering Service.

Sabiiti, E. (2011). Utilising agricultural waste to enhance food security and conserve the environment.African Journal of Food, Agriculture, Nutrition and Development, 11(6), 1–9.

Sadik, M., El Shaer, H., & Yakot, H. (2010). Recycling of agriculture and animal farm wastes into compostusing compost activator in Saudi Arabia. Journal of International Environmental Application andScience, 5(3), 397–403.

Saithep, N., Dheeranupatana, S., Sumrit, P., Jeerat, S., Boonchalearmkit, S., Wongsanoon, J., et al. (2009).Composting of tobacco plant waste by manual turning and forced aeration system. Maejo InternationalJournal of Science and Technology, 3(2), 248–260.

Sanchez-Arias, V., Fernandez, F. J., Villasenor, J., & Rodrıguez, L. (2008). Enhancing the co-composting ofolive mill wastes and sewage sludge by the addition of an industrial waste. Bioresource Technology,99(14), 6346–6353.

Schuchardt, F., Darnoko D., & Guritno, P. (2002). Composting of empty oil palm fruit bunch (EFB) withsimultaneous evaporation of oil mill waste water (POME). In International oil palm conference, NusaDua, Bali.

Sharma, D., & Forster, C. (1995). Column studies into the adsorption of chromium (VI) using sphagnummoss peat. Bioresource Technology, 52(3), 261–267.

Sheil, D., Casson, A., Meijaard, E., van Noordwijk, M., Gaskell, J., Sunderland-Groves, J., et al. (2009). Theimpacts and opportunities of oil palm in Southeast Asia: What do we know and what do we need toknow? CIFOR occasional paper, No. 51.

Shuit, S., Tan, K., Lee, K., & Kamaruddin, A. (2009). Oil palm biomass as a sustainable energy source: AMalaysian case study. Energy, 34(9), 1225–1235.

Singh, R., Ibrahim, M. H., Esa, N., & Iliyana, M. (2010). Composting of waste from palm oil mill: Asustainable waste management practice. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, 9(4),331–344.

Stichnothe, H., & Schuchardt, F. (2010). Comparison of different treatment options for palm oil productionwaste on a life cycle basis. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 15(9), 907–915.

Suhaimi, M., & Ong, H. (2001). Composting empty fruit bunches of oil palm. Extension Bulletin-Food &Fertilizer Technology Center, 505, 1–8.

Sulaiman, A., Tabatabaei, M., Yusoff, M. Z. M., Ibrahim, M. F., Hassan, M. A., & Shirai, Y. (2010).Accelerated start-up of a semi-commercial digester tank treating palm oil mill effluent with sludgeseeding for methane production. World Applied Sciences Journal, 8(2), 247–258.

Sumathi, S., Chai, S., & Mohamed, A. (2008). Utilization of oil palm as a source of renewable energy inMalaysia. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 12(9), 2404–2421.

Tang, J.-C., Shibata, A., Zhou, Q., & Katayama, A. (2007). Effect of temperature on reaction rate andmicrobial community in composting of cattle manure with rice straw. Journal of Bioscience andBioengineering, 104(4), 321–328.

Tangchirapat, W., Saeting, T., Jaturapitakkul, C., Kiattikomol, K., & Siripanichgorn, A. (2007). Use ofwaste ash from palm oil industry in concrete. Waste Management, 27(1), 81–88.

Thambirajah, J., & Kuthubutheen, A. (1989). Composting of palm press fibre. Biological Wastes, 27(4),257–269.

Thambirajah, J., Zulkali, M., & Hashim, M. (1995). Microbiological and biochemical changes during thecomposting of oil palm empty-fruit-bunches: Effect of nitrogen supplementation on the substrate.Bioresource Technology, 52(2), 133–144.

Tortosa, G., Alburquerque, J. A., Ait-Baddi, G., & Cegarra, J. (2012). The production of commercial organicamendments and fertilisers by composting of two-phase olive mill waste (‘‘alperujo’’). Journal ofCleaner Production, 26, 48–55.

Trillas, M. I., Casanova, E., Cotxarrera, L., Ordovas, J., Borrero, C., & Aviles, M. (2006). Composts fromagricultural waste and the Trichoderma asperellum strain T-34 suppress Rhizoctonia solani incucumber seedlings. Biological Control, 39(1), 32–38.

Uemura, Y., Omar, W. N., Tsutsui, T., & Yusup, S. B. (2011). Torrefaction of oil palm wastes. Fuel, 90(8),2585–2591.

Vakili, M., Rafatullah, M., Ibrahim, M. H., Abdullah, A. Z., Selamatania, B., & Gholami, Z. (2014). Oilplam biomass as an adsorbents for heavy metals. Reviews of Environmental Contamination andToxicology, 232, 61–88.

M. Vakili et al.

123

Vakili, M., Haque, A. A. M., & Gholami, Z. (2012a). Effect of manual turning frequency on physico-chemical parameters during the oil palm frond and cow dung composting. Caspian Journal of AppliedSciences Research, 1(12), 49–59.

Vakili, M., Haque, A. A. M., Hosseini, S. M., & Salamatinia, B. (2012b). Evaluation of maturation andstability some indexes of mixed palm oil biowaste composting process and poultry litter. WorldApplied Sciences Journal, 19, 234–240.

Wolkowski, R. P. (2003). Nitrogen management considerations for landspreading municipal solid wastecompost. Journal of Environmental Quality, 32(5), 1844–1850.

Wood, B. J., Pillai, K. R., & Rajaratnam, J. A. (1979). Palm oil mill effluent disposal on land. AgriculturalWastes, 1(2), 103–127.

Xiao, Y., Zeng, G.-M., Yang, Z.-H., Ma, Y.-H., Huang, C., Xu, Z.-Y., et al. (2011). Changes in theactinomycetal communities during continuous thermophilic composting as revealed by denaturinggradient gel electrophoresis and quantitative PCR. Bioresource Technology, 102(2), 1383–1388.

Yaap, B., Struebig, M. J., Paoli, G., & Koh, L. P. (2010). Mitigating the biodiversity impacts of oil palmdevelopment. CAB Reviews, 5, 1–11.

Yacob, S., Ali Hassan, M., Shirai, Y., Wakisaka, M., & Subash, S. (2006). Baseline study of methaneemission from anaerobic ponds of palm oil mill effluent treatment. Science of the Total Environment,366(1), 187–196.

Yahya, A., Sye, C. P., Ishola, T. A., & Suryanto, H. (2010). Effect of adding palm oil mill decanter cakeslurry with regular turning operation on the composting process and quality of compost from oil palmempty fruit bunches. Bioresource Technology, 101(22), 8736–8741.

Yaser, A., Abd Rahman, R., & Kalil, M. S. (2007). Co-composting of palm oil mill sludge-sawdust.Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences, 10(24), 4473–4478.

Yu, H., & Huang, G. H. (2009). Effects of sodium acetate as a pH control amendment on the composting offood waste. Bioresource Technology, 100(6), 2005–2011.

Yusoff, S. (2006). Renewable energy from palm oil–innovation on effective utilization of waste. Journal ofCleaner Production, 14(1), 87–93.

Zeng, J., Price, G., & Arnold, P. (2012). Evaluation of an aerobic composting process for the management ofspecified risk materials (SRM). Journal of Hazardous Materials, 219–220, 260–266.

Zeng, G., Yu, M., Chen, Y., Huang, D., Zhang, J., Huang, H., et al. (2010). Effects of inoculation withPhanerochaete chrysosporium at various time points on enzyme activities during agricultural wastecomposting. Bioresource Technology, 101(1), 222–227.

Zeng, G., Zhang, J., Chen, Y., Yu, Z., Yu, M., Li, H., et al. (2011). Relative contributions of archaea andbacteria to microbial ammonia oxidation differ under different conditions during agricultural wastecomposting. Bioresource Technology, 102(19), 9026–9032.

Zhang, J., Zeng, G., Chen, Y., Yu, M., Yu, Z., Li, H., et al. (2011). Effects of physico-chemical parameterson the bacterial and fungal communities during agricultural waste composting. Bioresource Tech-nology, 102(3), 2950–2956.

A review on composting of oil palm biomass

123