PII: S0043-1354(99)00301-2

Wat. Res. Vol. 34, No. 6, pp. 18031816, 2000

# 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Printed in Great Britain
0043-1354/00/$ - see front matter

www.elsevier.com/locate/watres

ANAEROBIC DIGESTION FOR WASTEWATER

TREATMENT IN MEXICO: STATE OF THE TECHNOLOGY
OSCAR MONROY*, GRACIELA FAMA, MONICA MERAZ,
LETICIA MONTOYA and HERVE MACARIE{M
Department of Biotechnology, Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana-Iztapalapa, Apdo. Postal 55-535,
Mexico, D.F. 09340 Mexico
(First received 1 July 1998; accepted in revised form 1 July 1999)
AbstractDue to the nascent wastewater treatment practice in Mexico there is great opportunity to
introduce anaerobic digestion as the core of the wastewater treatment processes. Nevertheless, this
requires an understanding of all the technical, economical and nancial aspects that limit its
development. According to the National Water Commission, in 1995 municipal and industrial
wastewater were produced at rates of 232 and 168 m3 s1 respectively, but only 20 and 12% of these
volumes were treated, often with very low eciencies. In order to increase the treatment capacity of the
country, approximately US$ 4515 million managed by the banks for development are supposed to be
available to invest in environmental projects. Other nancing mechanisms exist through treasury
incentives and penalties. Within this situation, anaerobic digestion has grown although not at the
required rate and bigger investments are being made on conventional aerobic and physicochemical
technologies. Presently there are in the country 85 anaerobic wastewater treatment plants treating
216,295 m3 d1 with an installed volume of 228,551 m3. UASB reactors account for 74% of the
installed volume and national companies have supplied 76% to the anaerobic market. Proper
integration of the anaerobic digestion processes for water recycling and energy recovery has not been
achieved and there is a big need to demonstrate economic and ecological sustainability. # 2000
Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
Key wordsanaerobic digestion, wastewater, Mexico, technology, industrial, domestic, municipal, biogas use, treated water reuse

INTRODUCTION

There is a great public concern in Mexico for the

origin and fate of water and wastewater. Due to
this concern and to the recent environmental laws,
there has been a great investment in municipal
water supply and wastewater collection and treatment (see Table 1).
Municipal wastewater
Since 1988 the growth rate of municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) has been of 102
plants or 4.8 m3 s1 per year (Table 2). Despite this
relative high growth rate (compared to the economic growth), the gap between the treated 47 m3
s1 and the produced 232 m3 s1 of sewage is still
very large (Table 1), giving place for advanced and
inexpensive technologies.
A closer analysis of the small fraction of treated
wastewater will show that out of the 946 municipal
*Author to whom all correspondence should be addressed;
e-mail: monroy@xanum.uam.mx
{Invited researcher from Institut de Recherche pour le
Developpement (IRD), France.

treatment plants, approximately 40% are stabilization ponds. The second largest number corresponds to activated sludge plants which together
with oxidation ditches, aerated ponds and trickling
lters, make up another 40% of the treatment systems. From these plants, only 755 (79%) are in operation, 41% (312 plants) have BOD removal
eciencies higher than 75 and 26% (199 plants)
have an eciency lower than 50%. This is because
the treatment systems are of dierent types as
shown in Fig. 1. Average capacity of these plants is
42 L s1 ranging from 5000 to 1 L s1. The front
columns in Fig. 1 show the distribution of the
plants which are not in operation. It can be seen
that, probably due to overloading conditions, most
of them are stabilization ponds (9% of total) and
primary treatment systems (3% of total). Aerobic
processes account for 30% of the nonoperating facilities due to lack of aerator's maintenance.
Moreover, very few of them have sludge treatment
facilities, which added to the high operating and
investment costs, make them a nonviable option in
the long term.

1803

1804

Oscar Monroy et al.

Table 1. Drinking water and sewage nets, coverage and growth rate in 1995. MWW=municipal wastewatera

Drinking water net

Total MWW produced
MWW in sewers
MWW treatment

Flow rate (m3 s1)

Population covered %

Growth rate (% per year)

272
232
120
47.6

86.2

69
14.5

4.34 (population based)

8.47 (population based)

14 (plants based)

Source: CNA (19951996).

Table 2. Growth pattern of municipal wastewater treatment plants. n.d.: non determineda
Year

No. of plants

Treated ow rate (m3 s1)

Expected removal (103 kg BOD5 d1)

1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995

233
256
310
361
577
650
825
946

14.0
15.2
19.3
25.1
29.1
34.8
38.4
47.6

302
343
418
541
627
750
830
n.d.

Extracted from Sancho (1992) and CNA (19951996).

Industrial wastewater
According to the National Commission for
Water (CNA), by 1994, industrial wastewater was
produced at a rate of 168 m3 s1, 12% being treated
in 282 treatment plants, 61% released untreated to
the environment and 27% discharged to sewers.
The sugar cane industry generated 39% of this
volume, 21% the chemical industry, 22% the paper,
petrochemical and oil industries and 18% was produced by other industries.
LEGAL, ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ASPECTS

In 1988 the Mexican government issued the

General Law for the Ecological Equilibrium and

Environmental Protection which triggered an
intense activity to match the Mexican industry discharge standards to those of their partners in the
NAFTA (North America Free Trade Agreement).
This activity is characterized by: (a) the continuous
inspection of industrial discharges with consequent
partial or total closures, (b) penalization for the
amount of wastes discharged (CNA, 1993), (c) an
advertised fund availability for any kind of pollution control facilities, (d) hundred of studies for
the preparation of Ecological Guidelines (INE,
19931994) and programs for human resources
training (Jimenez, 1995).

Fig. 1. Operating and nonoperating municipal wastewater treatment plant distribution per type.
SP=stabilization ponds, AS=activated sludge, PT=primary treatment, BF=trickling lters,
AP=aerated ponds, OD=oxidation ditches, IT=Inmho tank, ZZ=others (biological disks, counterow aeration, lemna pond), from CNA (19951996); Mej a (1993).

Anaerobic digestion in Mexico

1805

Fig. 2. Anaerobic WWTP constructed per type of wastewater (domestic and industrial) and origin of
technology (national or foreign), by April 1998.

The Environmental Budget grew from US$ 6.6

million in 1989 to US$ 78 million in 1992 (Ceron,
1993). Currently, according to the Secretariat of
Ecology (Semarnap), from 1995 to 2000, there will
be an investment in the environmental market of
US$ 4515 million (La Jornada, 1996). These funds
will come from banks for development and from
national and foreign private investments. To our
knowledge these banks do not provide readily available fresh funds for most of the middle and large
sized industries. For this reason, industries tend to
invest on their own prot expense rather than borrowing from banks. Their selnancing has been
propelled by charges on COD, SS and wastewater
volume discharged as well as the cost on tap water.
Discharge limits should be gradually reduced all
over the country during the next twelve years to
reach a 20:20 (BOD5:SS) quality for water reuse, as
stated by the guideline NOM-003-ECOL-1997,
recently edicted. NOM-001-ECOL-1996 establishes
30:40 as the maximum permissible limits for pollutants in wastes discharged into supercial waters.
The guideline NOM-002-ECOL-1996, does not
establish limits for BOD5:SS in euents discharged
into urban or municipal sewage systems. These
guidelines take into account the producer's socioeconomic level, infrastructure and population size.
Euents should adequate to particular discharge
limits depending on the discharge site's dilution capacity and use of water. Treatment processes to
meet the discharge consents are left to the user's
choice.
Cities with larger treatment facilities, turn out to

contract the services from foreign or national private companies which invest under service contracts
to build and operate new or existing facilities under
a BOT (build, operate and transfer) scheme, while
the government faces the responsibility with the
public. Contracts can include a total privatization
of the facilities or its recovery by the municipality
upon an agreed number of years. This system provides the cities with wastewater treatment plants at
no initial cost, nevertheless these kind of contracts
have been, thus far, dicult to negotiate due to the
risks involved with the long term operation of
plants.
DEVELOPMENT OF ANAEROBIC DIGESTION IN MEXICO

The use of anaerobic digestion (AD) for wastewater treatment started late in Mexico compared to
the European countries or even to North America.
The rst digester was constructed by 1987 (see Fig.
2). Further development was rather slow since until
1991 the rate of digester's construction remained
around one to four reactors per year. It is only in
1992, with 16 reactors built that a signicant
growth of 400% was achieved. During the two subsequent years, the rate of reactor's construction
remained higher than 10 per year, reaching a maximum of 19 in 1993. However, decreased abruptly in
1995 due to the economic crisis after a 100% devaluation of the peso in December 1994.
Since 1996, a recovery has been noticed despite
the reduction of public and private funds available
to solve environmental problems. Presently, 85 full-

1806

Oscar Monroy et al.

Fig. 3. Distribution of digesters by April 1998 per number and volume, per type of wastewater and origin of technology.

scale reactors are in operation in Mexico. Their

total installed volume is 228,551 m3 and they are
treating 216,295 m3 d1 (2.5 m3 s1) wastewater and
590 tons COD per day, which is equivalent to a
population of 12.3 million, considering 160 L consumed per inhabitant per day and 300 mg
COD L1. These represent 0.62% of the total generated wastewater volume and 3.69% of the treated
wastewater (5.5% of industrial and 2.93% of municipal).
Type of wastewater treated
As shown in Fig. 2, the rst reactors were built

in Mexico to treat industrial wastewater. Two

years later (1989) however, the rst UASB reactor
treating sewage was built as a 50 m3 demonstration unit at the campus of the Universidad
Autonoma MetropolitanaIztapalapa (UAM-I), followed shortly in 1990 by two big units of 2200 m3
each, constructed by the government (Table 5, reactors 2 and 3).
It should be noted that contrary to Europe and
North America but similarly to Brazil, China,
Colombia and India, anaerobic treatment has been
applied in Mexico not only to industrial wastewater
but also to sewage, due to the warm weather and

Fig. 4. Distribution of anaerobic digesters in Mexican industry, by April 1998.

Anaerobic digestion in Mexico

1807

Table 3. Type of reactors constructed in Mexico related to the type of wastewater treated and the origin of technology
Upow lter

Hybrid

Low ratea

Modied Chinese

EGSB

UASB

Reactors (in number) (%)

Reactors (in volume) (%)
Reactors built by national companies (%)

4.76
0.34
75

16.5
1.75
100

2.35
23
50

1.18
0.01
100

2.35
1.06
100

71.8
73.8
70.5

% of reactors treating
Industrial waste waters
Municipal waste waters

50
50

100
0

100
0

49
51

Type of reactor

93
7.14

100
0

Includes ADI-BVF and lagoons.

limited economical resources. Indeed, 40% of all

reactors (almost 40% in volume) are treating domestic wastewater (Fig. 3). These reactors include the
biggest UASB built in the world (83,700 m3, 36%
of the total reactor's volume) which treat both
industrial and municipal euents and should be
extended to 133,920 m3 in the future (Table 5, reactor 7). Most of the reactors treating domestic euents however are very small, since 32% of them (11
plants) have volumes less than 50 m3, 29% (10
plants) have volumes between 50 and 100 m3 and
only 9% (3 plants) have a volume greater than
350 m3.
Most of the industrial euents treated by AD in
Mexico are typical to this technology over the
world (malt, brewery, dairy and cheese, soft drinks,
yeast, paper, food, potato and fruit processing
industries and pig farms) predominating the brewery sector which includes 25.4% of the industrial
reactors (Fig. 4). Nevertheless, some euents
characteristic of local activities like wet coee processing which is seldom treated in the world by AD
are being treated in Mexico (Table 4, reactors 2, 7,
35, 37, 38, 42, 51).
It is important to notice the absence of anaerobic
reactors in the sugar cane industry despite the discharged volume and their incipient presence in the
chemical industry, through two plants treating
wastewater containing dimethyltherephthalate and
therephthalic acid. Research has been done with
this two types of euents to improve eciencies by
supplementing nutrients and reducing inhibition
(Duran et al., 1991; Espinosa et al., 1995; Fajardo
et al., 1997). Nevertheless, the economic diculties
and the lack of development programs faced by the
sugar cane industry will not allow further development into this eld in the near future. The situation
could be dierent in the case of the chemical industry.
Source of the technology
Both national and foreign technologies have been
applied in Mexico. Nevertheless, until 1991, only
reactors based on local technologies were built (Fig.
2). The application of the technology and construction of these units, opened the doors to the inter-

national anaerobic market traders. Leader

companies like the Dutch Biothane and Paques, the
Canadian ADI and the Cuban CENIC, built 20
plants within the 19921993 period. These plants
represent 41.5% of the total installed volume
(95,000 m3) and 23.5% of all the plants and are
treating 46% of the COD removed by AD (Tables
4 and 5 and Fig. 3).
Their contribution has declined considerably due
to the previously mentioned economic constraint, as
can be seen in Fig. 2. It is possible to see for
instance that after selling seven plants in two years,
Paques has only built a new plant and increased the
capacity of another one (Table 4, reactors 13 and
34) in the subsequent ve years. In the same way,
ADI has only expanded the plant built in 1992
(Table 4, reactor 17). Biothane, with ve reactors
sold since 1994 seems to have faced the economical
restraint in a better way, however, four reactors
belong to the same client, the Modelo brewery
(Table 4, reactors 46, 47, 48, 49), which had already
contracted Biothane services before (Table 4, reactors 22, 23 and 24). This foreign introduction was
limited to the treatment of a narrow range of industrial euents mostly those from breweries, paper
and yeast factories, whose wastewater are well
known and do not require complex and costly treatment feasibility studies (Fig. 4).
From all the local technologies applied, the one
developed by the UAM-UNAM research groups,
commercialized by Imasa, Energ a y Ecolog a,
Forza, DescontaminAccion, Tacsa, GTSA, Proesa
and IBTech, has received the best acceptation with
39 UASB reactors built (totaling 40,982 m3). For
some projects, IMASA, Energ a y Ecolog a and
IBTech have even competed successfully with
foreign companies (Noyola and Monroy, 1994).
Also emerging are similar technologies developed
by researchers of the Universidad de Yucatan, that
make up 7 reactors treating industrial wastewater
and totaling 2,592 m3 (Magana and Magana, 1996),
commercialized in this case by PYSA. Those developed by Semarnap, that account for 6 reactors
treating domestic wastewater totaling 88,261 m3
(Rodr guez and Altamirano, 1995) and by AITA,
S.C., for the coee processing industries with 4

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

Celaya,
Guanajuato
Bola de Oro
Coatepec, Ver.
Protapsa,
Guanajuato
Moulinex,
Guanajuato

Location

UASB/480

Imasa

UASB/380

UASB/
2  925

Paques

Paques

UASB/
2  700

Paques

UASB/300

Hybrid/10

UASB/2400

Imasa

Cirad
(National)
Energ a y
Ecolog a

UASB/4.5

UASB/4.5

AF/250

108

Reactor
typeb/
volume
(m3)

IPN

IPN

Inireb

IPN

Designer/
constructora

1992, in Embotelladora del PYSA /user Hybrid/320

operation Caribe, Cancun,
Q.R.
1992, in Embotelladora de PYSA /user Hybrid/160
operation
Chetumal, Q.
Roo.
1992, in Toluca, Estado de
ADI
ADI-BVF/
operation
Mexico
2  14250

1992, in
Kimberly Clark
Paques
UASB/1320
operation Orizaba, Veracruz
1992, in
Unipak, Morelos
Paques
UASB/190
operation
UASB/100
extention
1998, in
operation
1992, in Embotelladora de PYSA /user Hybrid/250
operation Campeche, Camp.

Central de Malta
S. A. de C. V.,
Puebla
1992, in
Cuauhtemoc
operation Moctezuma, S.A.
de C.V. Toluca,
Edo. de Mexico
1992, in
Tlapexcatl,
operation
Veracruz
1992, in
CORP. BIMBO,
operation
Planta Barcel,
Edo. de Mex.
1992,
Cuauhtemoc
in operation Moctezuma, S.A.
de C.V. Tecate,
B.C.
1992, in
Cuauhtemoc
operation Moctezuma, S.A.
de C.V.
Guadalajara, Jal.
1992, in
Jugos del Valle,
operation
Mexico City

1991, in
operation

1987 in
operation
1988, in
operation
1991, in
operation
1991, in
operation

Reactor Year of
number construction/
actual state

3400

155

Soft drinks
Yeast

475

350

250

650

2200

1140

5600

3100

605

34

9072

Screening,
acidication tank

Screening,
primary settler,
acidication tank

Screening,
primary settler
acidication tank

Screening, grit
chamber,
homogenization
Screening,
primary settler,
homogenization
tank
Primary settler,
otation
DAF, grit
chamber

Grease interceptor
tank

None

Heating tank

None

Pretreatment

23000

3500

3864

4574

Screening,
neutralization,
homogenization
Screening,
neutralization,
homogenization
Screening,
neutralization,
homogenization
Homogenization
tank, heating

DAF,
Acidication tank
40006000
DAF,
acidication tank

9160

3700

4200

5100

2119

30006000

4056

1700

700

18
3800

1000

5000

700

COD
(mg L1)

18

22.5

432

Treated
ow rate
(m3 d1)

Soft drinks

Soft drinks

Paper factory

Paper factory

Fruit packing

Brewery

Brewery

Wet coee
Processing
Bakery and
snacks

Brewery

Industrial
domestic
goods
Malting

Lubricants
(mechanical)
Wet coee
processing
Food

Type of
wastewater

7.66

2530

3.4

28

1.6

5.73

30

35

6.4

1015

1320

15.26

26

35

3040

11.21

12.71

3032

30

11.3

4.27

3032

26

2.69

30

1820

2.8

0.45

2.8

38

38

35

20

Bvb
Operating
temperature (kg COD
(8C)
m3 d1)

14

0.7

0.72

0.4

0.29

0.6

0.33

0.33

0.45

0.5

2.53.3

0.53

0.63

0.25

0.25

11

0.25

HRTb
(days)

62
(COD)

85

85

85

60

85

80

85

85

85

70

80

77

97

97
(BOD)
80

99.9

COD
removal
(%)

Table 4. Anaerobic digesters treating industrial wastewater in Mexico

Treated
water use/
discharge

5900 ared up

1800 ared up

To sewer

To sewer

To sewer

1000 ared up

8500 boiler

3000 ared up

To river
basin

To sewer

7.7/Cooking
facilities
Vented

6480 ared up

To river
basin
To river
basin
Watering

Flared up

To river
basin

Vented

Vented

Vented

Vented

Biogas
production
(m3 d1)/use

Activated Well injection Iron ltration

and vented
sludge,
chlorination
Activated Well injection Iron ltration
and vented
sludge,
chlorination
Activated Well injection Iron ltration
and vented
sludge,
chlorination
Aerobic SBR
To sewer
30000

H2S oxidation
tank

Aerobic
biodisc,
secondary
settler,
chlorination
None

Activated
sludge,
chlorination

Aeration, sand
lter
Aerobic
biodisc,
chlorination
Activated
sludge,
chlorination

Activated
sludge,
chlorination
Activated
sludge,
chlorination

Aerobic
Recycled to
reactors
process
Settler, sand
To river
lter
basin
Land
Well injection
inltration
Aerobic
Watering
biolter

Posttreatment

Fertilizer

Drying

None

Fertilizer

Drying

None

Fertilizer

Sold as
inoculum
Landll

Sold as
inoculum

Sold as
inoculum

Drying

None

None

None

Anaerobic
digestion, band
lter

Sold as
inoculum

None
Anaerobic
digestion, band
lter

Fertilizer

Fertilizer

To land

Fertilizer

Sludge
use/disposal

Thickening,
anaerobic
digestion, lter
press
Sun drying

None

None

None

Sun drying

None

Sludge
treatment

1808
Oscar Monroy et al.

1993, in
operation

1993, in
operation

1993, in
operation

1994, in
operation

1994, in
operation

1994, in
operation

1994, in
operation

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

26

Reactor
typeb/
volume
(m3)

UASB/3000

Biothane

Biothane

Biothane

Paper factory
Pig farm
Soft drinks
Soft drinks

UASB/2850

UASB/715
UASB/191
Hybrid/332
Hybrid/760
UASB/945 Milk rehydration

Brewery

UASB/1816

Yeast

Brewery

Brewery

Brewery

Milk rehydration

Petrochemical
(dimethylterephthalate)
Brewery

UASB/
2  2400

UASB/500

UASB/5000

UASB/85
UASB/1700

Forza

Biothane

Cheese

Cheese

Type of
wastewater

Hybrid/172 Milk rehydration

Biothane

Tacsa

Imasa
Cuauhtemoc
Moctezuma S.A.
de C.V. Navojoa,
Sonora
Paques
Cuauhtemoc
Moctezuma S.A.
de C.V.
Monterrey, Nvo.
Leon
Paques
Empaques
Modernos,
Guadalajara, Jal.
Energ a y
Rancho ``San
Francisco'' Teran, Ecolog a
Nuevo Leon
Embotelladora PYSA /user
``La Bufa'',
Zacatecas
Embotelladora del PYSA /user
Suerste, Merida,
Yuc.
Liconsa Tlahuac,
Tacsa
Mexico City

Petrocel Tampico,
Tamaulipas

Imexa, Puebla

1993, in
operation
1993, in
operation

25

24

23

22

1993, in
operation

LICONSA San
Antonio de la
Isla, Edo. de
Mexico
1993 shutLiconsa San
down
Isidro, Morelos
1993, in
Cervecer a
operation
Modelo Ciudad
Obregon, Sonora.
1993, in
Cervecer a del
operation
Tropico,
Tuxtepec, Oax.
1993, in
Cervecer a
operation
Zacatecas, Zac.

21

Designer/
constructora

ADI
ADI-BVF
extention Toluca, Estado de
Mexico
20000
1996,
in operation
c
1992, in El Sauz Cortazar, UAM-I /User Lagoon fed
as UASB/
operation
Guanajuato
4000
c
1993, in
La Caperucita UAM-I /User UASB/
operation
Queretaro
2  88.4

Location

20

19

18

17

Reactor Year of
number construction/
actual state

1210

691

259

140

2200

13825

3000

4250

9700

5828

4500

3000

2690

18500

2028
5356

17000

6849

7000

7000

2032

2132

1874

4430

COD
(mg L1)

221

5016

3816

1800

260

345

88

500

Treated
ow rate
(m3 d1)

Screening, grit
chamber, settler,
homogenization
Screening,
neutralization,
homogenization
Screening,
neutralization,
homogenization
Grease interceptor
tank,
neutralization

DAF,
acidication tank

Grease and solid

tramps,
homogenization
tank, DAF
Homogenization,
grease interceptor,
neutralization
tank
Neutralization,
grit chamber
Screening,
homogenization
tank
Screening,
homogenization
tank
Screening,
homogenization
tank
Homogenization
tank
Screening,
homogenization
tank
Screening,
primary settler,
homogenization
tank
Screening,
primary settler,
homogenization,
acidication

Grease interceptor
tank

Pretreatment

13.84
4.28
7.56
3.86
3.85

20
30
28
20

14.55

38

3040

7.93

2535

7.5

6.87

30

30.4

8.9

35

7.52

7.45

32

6.21

4.26

18

24

0.94

29

32.4

0.55

1.6

26

35

Bvb
Operating
temperature (kg COD
(8C)
m3 d1)

Table 4 (continued )

0.78

1.1

1.3

1.36

0.32

0.21

0.34

2.37

2.26

0.99

0.78

0.94

0.33

0.5

14

HRTb
(days)

70

90

80

70

70

75

80

95

75

85

85

85

75

75d

75

85

89 (BOD)

COD
removal
(%)

Flared up

10600 ared up

To sewer

Reused and 3000 ared up

discharged to
sewer

Storage tank

Flared up

Fertilizer

Drying
None

(continued on next page)

Fertilizer

Sold as
inoculum

Sold as
inoculum

Sold as
inoculum
Sold as
inoculum

Sold as
inoculum

Sold as
inoculum

Sold as
inoculum

To landll

To landll

None

No need

Sludge
use/disposal

Press lter

Thickening,
aerobic digestion,
band lter

Thickening,
aerobic digestion,
lter press

Storage tank

Storage tank
Flared up

Boiler

To sewer

Storage tank

Storage tank

None

None

None

No need

Sludge
treatment

To river
basin
To sea

Boiler

Boiler
To sewer

138.6 vented
To sewer

222 Vented

Vented

Vented

Boiler

Biogas
production
(m3 d1)/use

Watering

To sewer

Irrigation

Irrigation

Treated
water use/
discharge

Activated Well injection Flared up

sludge,
chlorination
Activated Well injection Iron ltered
and vented
sludge,
chlorination
Watering
889 vented
Activated
sludge,
disinfection

Activated
sludge

Activated
sludge,
chlorination

Extended
aeration,
activated sludge
Activated
sludge,
chlorination

Extended
aeration,
activated sludge
None

Activated
sludge
Extended
aeration,
activated sludge
Activated
sludge

Activated
sludge

Aerobic and
water hyacinth
lagoons
Sand lter,
chlorination

Posttreatment

Anaerobic digestion in Mexico

1809

Hybrid/
2  225
Hybrid/
2  50

AITA, S.C.
AITA, S.C

1997 in
construction

1998 in
construction

1998 in
construction

1998, in
construction

1998, in
construction

45

46

47

48

49

691
5143
1944
2856
1512

Brewery
Brewery
Brewery
Brewery

60

1500

57

173

2700

4.55

50

375

60

4320

Treated
ow rate
(m3 d1)

Soft drinks

Sea food factory

Textile industry

EGSB/2332

EGSB/80

Wet coee
processing

Candy factory

Condiments
processing
Corn starch

Wet coee
Processing

Wet coee
processing

Pig farm

Wet coee
processing

Fruit and chilli

processing

Type of
wastewater

AF/400

Hybrid/
2  200

PYSA /user Hybrid/760

Industria
Refresquera
Merida, Yucatan
Biothane
UASB/
Cervecer a
3  3000
Modelo Mexico
City
Biothane
UASB/
Cervecer a
2  1700
Modelo Torreon,
Coah.
Biothane
UASB/
Cervecer a
2  2500
Modelo
Guadalajara, Jal.
Biothane
UASB/
Cervecer a
2  1300
Modelo
Mazatlan, Sin.

1997 start-up Atlantida del Sur II-UNAM/

Merida, Yucatan
user

43

44

IBTech

UASB/1100

Modied
Chinese/30

AITA, S.C.

Biothane

Hybrid/
2  40

AITA, S.C.

Hybrid/10

UASB/1450

Paques

PYSA /user

Reactor
typeb/
volume
(m3)

Designer/
constructora

Biotec
1997 start-up Benecio ``Roma''
Emiliano Zapata,
Ver.
II-UNAM/
1997, in
ACATEX
user
construction
Texmelucan,
Puebla

Jumex/La
Costena
Tulpetlac, Edo. de
Mexico
1995, in
``Solidaridad
operation Cafetera Sabana'',
Huatusco, Ver.
1995, in
Granja porcina
operation
``El Olvido''
Atzalan, Veracruz
1996, in
Benecio ``Prof.
operation Manuel Sedas'',
Huatusco, Ver.
1996, in Benecio ``Vicente
operation
Guerrero'',
Misantla, Ver.
1996, in
El Yucateco
operation Merida, Yucatan
1996, in CPC Arancia San
operation
Juan del R o,
Qro.
1996 in start- RICOLINO San
up
Luis Potos , SLP

1996, in
operation

Location

42

41

40

39

38

37

36

35

34

Reactor Year of
number construction/
actual state

Pretreatment

6500

6500

6500

6500

4250

2000

2000

40007000
(BOD)

23,360

5060

1574

15002500

2250

60008000

Screening

Screening

Screening

Screen,
neutralization,
homogenization
Screening

Screening, grit
chamber

Screening,
sedimentation,
homogeneization

Heating tank

Screen,
homogenization

Water cooling

Screen

Primary settler

Primary settler

None

Screening,
homogenization,
DAF acidication
tank
30006000
Primary settler
otation

5500

COD
(mg L1)

3.86

28

40

40

40

3.78

3.71

3.71

3.7

1.5

27

1.33

20

10

12.4

0.71

1.83

1.875

1.52

40

1.5

0.33

HRTb
(days)

1.72

1.75

1.75

1.75

1.1

1.3

1.5

710

2.3

0.4

2.2

1.2

0.60.8 10

13

20

37

40

28

1820

1719

22

1820

30

Bvb
Operating
temperature (kg COD
(8C)
m3 d1)

Table 4 (continued )

Activated
sludge,
ltration,
chlorination
Filtration

85d

Activated
sludge
Activated
sludge
Activated
sludge

90d
90d
90d

90d

90

80d

80d

To sewer

To river
basin

To sewer

Vented

1700 ared up

Flared up

Vented

47 ared up

204 ared up

20 cooking
facilities

To sewer

To sewer

To sewer

Boiler

Boiler

Boiler

To river
Vented
Anaerobic
basin
lagoon, aerobic
reactor,
sedimentation
lagoon
Well injection
Vented
Aerobic
reactor,
sedimentation,
chlorination
Activated Well injection Iron ltered
and vented
sludge,
chlorination
Activated
To sewer
Boiler
sludge

None

> 90d

To river
basin

To river
basin

To river
basin

Chlorination Well injection

Lagoon, sand
lter

Lagoon, sand
lter

Lagoon

10000 boiler

Recycled to
Activated
process
sludge,
chlorination
inverse osmosis
Lagoon, sand
To river
lter
basin
96 ared up

Biogas
production
(m3 d1)/use

Treated
water use/
discharge

Posttreatment

88

96

60

73

85

75

90

COD
removal
(%)

None

None

None

None

None

None

None

Fertilizer

Drying
None

Fertilizer

To landll

None

To landll

None

To landll

Fertilizer

Sold as
inoculum

Sludge
use/disposal

Drying

Drying

None

Press lter

Anaerobic
digestion
None

No need

No need

None

No need

None

Sludge
treatment

1810
Oscar Monroy et al.

Biothane is represented in Mexico by Tecnolog a Intercontinental, Paques by Atlatec, the companies Imasa, Energ a y Ecolog a, Tacsa, Forza, GTSA, DescontaminaAccion, Proesa and IBtech commercialize the technology developed by UAM-UNAM.
b
AF: anaerobic lter; UASB: upow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor; EGSB: expanded granular sludge bed reactor; ADI-BVF: low-rate upow sludge blanket process; Bv: organic loading rate; HRT: hydraulic retention time; DAF: dissolved air otation.
c
Redesigned from existing facilities.
d
Design data.

2943
51

No need
No need
To river
basin
20

2.53.8

83d

Aspertion and
lagoon

120 coee
dryers

To landll
None
2000025000
Boiler
To river
basin
Activated
sludge
50

1998 in
construction

IBTechc/user UASB/20808
Temex
Cosoleacaque,
Veracruz
1998, in
Benecio de cafe AITA, S.C. UASB/110
construction
``Cerro de
Cintepec''
Catemaco,
Veracruz

Chemical
(Terephthalic
acid)
Wet coee
processing

5000
6000

1000015000

Solids tramp,
homogenization,
water cooling
8000120,000 Primary settler

3540

23

34

60d
minimum

Treated
water use/
discharge
Bvb
Operating
temperature (kg COD
(8C)
m3 d1)
Pretreatment
COD
(mg L1)
Treated
ow rate
(m3 d1)
Type of
wastewater
Reactor
typeb/
volume
(m3)
Designer/
constructora
Location
Reactor Year of
number construction/
actual state

Table 4 (continued )

HRTb
(days)

COD
removal
(%)

Posttreatment

Biogas
production
3 1
(m d )/use

Sludge
treatment

Sludge
use/disposal

Anaerobic digestion in Mexico

1811

reactors totaling 740 m3 (Castillo et al., 1993).

Contrary to what happened in Colombia and
Brazil (Borzacconi et al., 1995), some Mexican
companies have demonstrated the capacity to construct large reactors and apply the technology to
the cheese and coee industries wastewater, which
have not been treated before by foreign companies
(Fig. 4).
The main dierences between the national and
foreign technologies are the gravity feeding system
and the local construction materials, pipes and
mechanical equipment, used condently by local
rms, opposed to the pumping feeding system and
the imported items used by the foreign companies.
These dierences have been reected in the cost for
a particular solution.
Type of reactors applied
Six types of reactors have been applied in the
country: upow anaerobic lters, low rate reactors,
modied Chinese, upow anaerobic sludge bed
(UASB), hybrid (UASB reactor with inert support
at the top) and expanded granular sludge bed
(EGSB) reactors (see Table 3). However the dominating technology is the UASB conguration, considering both number and volume, independently
of the origin of the technology. This is probably a
consequence of the construction simplicity and the
low cost associated to the absence of packing material.
Except in one case (Table 5, plant No. 17), all
anaerobic lters and hybrid reactors have been
built by national companies to treat industrial as
well as domestic euents. Contrary to what could
be expected, only one Chinese reactor and two low
rate reactors have been constructed. More surprisingly, 92% of the volume of this last type of digester corresponds to one sole plant built by ADI
(Table 4, plant No. 17). This single plant represents
21% of the total digester's volume installed in
Mexico. In fact, this plant plus the R o Blanco one
(Table 5, plant No. 7) make up almost 58% of the
total reactor's volume of the country.
Finally, the recent introduction of the EGSB
reactors must be emphasized since these reactors
are one of the latest developments in AD. The design applied in Mexico, is a local technology developed in order to solve some problems observed
with the conventional UASB reactors, during the
treatment of waste waters rich in toxic compounds
such as azo dyes or ammonia (Table 4, plants 43
and 44, respectively).
Operation temperature
Most of the plants built in Mexico operate at environmental temperature, which correspond to the
lower level of the mesophilic range (18308C).
Wastewater heating or cooling to reach the optimum temperature (35408C) is only applied in a
few plants (Table 4, reactors 2, 17, 40, 42, 50).

1992, in operation

19921994, startup

1993, in operation

1993, in operation

20

19

18

1994, in operation
1994, in operation

16
17

17
87

UASB/4.25
UASB/21.6

UASB/105

Energ a y Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

50

UASB

100

200

UASB/100

UASB/50

112
27

272

346

86

420

174

47

519

UASB (modied
Imho tank)/339
AF/95
AF/24

UASB/87

UASB/25

UASB/48.4

Energ a y
Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

UASB/2,17

UASB/14

UASB/130

UASB/5  16740 108,000

86

UASB/75

2592

2592

UASB/2200
UASB/2200

56

375

375

500

550

533

500

590

500

500

500

500

Screening

Screening

Screening

Grease interceptor
tank, screen,
homogenization,
trituration
Screen, grit chamber,
homogenization tank
Screen, grit chamber,
homogenization tank

Screening, grit
chamber

Grit chamber,
homogenization tank

None

Screening, grit
chamber
None

Screening, grit
chamber

2400b

550

Homogenization tank

Screening, grit
chamber
Screening, grit
chamber
Screening grit chamber

Screenig, grit chamber

Screenig, grit chamber

Pretreatment

500

458

800

600

600

365

Treated COD
volume (mg L1)
(m3d1)

UASB/50

Reactor
typeb/
volume
(m3)

Forza

Forza

Sedena, Nayarit
National
Cenic (Cuba)
Club de Tenis
Tepepan, Mexico
City
GTSA/Sabbia, S.A. de
1994, in operation
Conjunto
C.V.
habitacional San
Jose Iturbide,
Gto.
GTSA
1994, in operation ``Frac. Villas de
Vista Hermosa''
Toluca, Edo. de
Mexico
1994, in operation NEPSA, Mexico
GTSA
City

``La Parota''
Temixco, Morelos
1993, in operation Ticuman, Morelos

1993, in operation

15

14

13

12

11

Designer/
constructora

UAM-I, Mexico DescontaminAccion

City
Sedue
Tepeyanco(National)
Atlamaxac,
Tlaxcala
Quiroga,
Sedue
Michoacan
(National)
Ingenio Puga
National
Nayarit
Forza
Vitocrista
Cubiertos Estado
de Mexico
Energ a y
Centro Campestre
Ecolog a
Ecologico
``Asturiano'',
Morelos
Sedue/
Fideicomiso Alto
Gutierrez de Velasco
R o Blanco
(National)
Ixtaczoquitlan,
Ver.
Acatipla, Morelos
Forza

Location

Grupo Beta
Centro Comercial
1993, in operation Tlalpuente, Edo.
de Mexico
1993, in operation
Cooporativo
Televisa Santa Fe,
Mexico City
1993, in operation
Huatecalco
Tlaltizapan,
Morelos
1993, in operation
Hotel ``Las
Quintas'' Morelos

1992, shut down

10

1990

1991, in operation

1990, in operation

1989, in operation

Year of
construction/
actual state

Reactor
number

2025

1020

2025

25
20

20

0.75

0.75

0.65

0.43

2.04

20

20

1.8

1.7

2.2

1.83

0.9

0.7

0.7

0.4

20

20

20

28

21

22.5

20

20

23

20

20

32

12

12

12

20.3
21

30

6.6

18.6

20.8

20.3

20.3

21.5

80

8085

7080

50

70

75

90

75

95

70

75

75

80c

75

7580
(BOD)
8085
(BOD)
70

7580
(BOD)

70

Bv
Operating
HRT COD
temperature (kg COD (h) removal
m3d1)
(8C)
(%)

Table 5. Anaerobic digesters treating municipal wastewater in Mexico

Rapid sand lter

Secondary settler,
chlorination

Slow ltration,
chlorination
Secondary settler,
chlorination

Activated carbon and

sand ltration,
chlorination
Aerobic submerged
lter, secondary
settler, chlorination

Aerobic submerged
lter, sedimentation,
chlorination

Anoxic and aerobic

submerged lters, fast
ltration, chlorination
Slow ltration,
chlorination

Filtration and
disinfection
Filtration and
disinfection
Disinfection

None

Slow ltration

UV disinfection,
anoxic reactor

Aerobic and hyacinth

lagoons

None

Posttreatment

Watering

23 vented

13 vented

23.25
vented

Watering

Watering

Vented

Vented

Vented

Irrigation

Irrigation

Vented

Vented

317
vented
Vented

38.5 vented

54000
ared up

Vented

1.4 vented

Vented

Vented

Biogas
production
(m3 d1)/
use

Irrigation
and cleaning

Fish culture

To sewer

Irrigation

To river
basin

Watering

Reused in
toilet

To sewer

Treated
water use/
discharge

None

None

Sludge tank

Sludge tank

Sludge tank

None

None

None

Incineration
project

None

Drying

Drying

Drying

None

Sludge
treatment

Landll

To gardens

To
cultivation
land

None

Landll

Landll

Sold as
inoculum

Landll

None

Sludge use/
disposal

1812
Oscar Monroy et al.

1995, in operation

1996, in operation

1996, in operation

1996, in operation

25

26

27

28

1997, in
construction
1997, in
construction
1998 in
construction

Quechultenango,
Guerrero
Colotlipa,
Guerrero
Ecatepec, Estado
de Mexico

UASB/43.2

(National)

Hybrid/194.4
UASB/200

Tecnoadecuacion
Proesa

Proesa

Ibtech

Ibtech

UASB/101

UASB/117

UASB/350

UASB/68

UASB/20

Energ a y Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

UASB/97

UASB/21.32

UASB/135.36

UASB/89.6

Energ a y Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

Energ a y Ecolog a

UASB/75

UASB/43.2

(National)

Energ a y Ecolog a

Reactor
typeb/
volume
(m3)

Designer/
constructora

397

400

1200

204

572

259

80

290

49

406

276

225

86

86

600

500

500

250

540

213

300

300

300

300

280

280

200
(BOD)

Treated COD
volume (mg L1)
(m3d1)

Screen, grit chamber,

grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screening, grit
chamber
Screening, grit
chamber
Screening, grit
chamber

Screening, grit
chamber

Screen, grit chamber,

grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screen, grit chamber,
grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screen, grit chamber,
grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screen, grit chamber,
grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screen, grit chamber,
grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screen, grit chamber,
grease interceptor
tank, homogenization
Screen, grit chamber
grease interceptor tank

Screen, pump station,

homogenization tank

Screen, pump station,

homogenization tank

Pretreatment

0.8
0.8
0.7
0.9
1.2

20
20
16
15
20

20

2.36

1.71

1.71

0.75

20
21

1.54

22

0.28

0.8

20

19

0.4

0.4

20

20

8.4

18

10

12

12

Aerobic lagoon
Chlorination
Chlorination

55c
55c
c

50

Secondary settler,
chlorination

Chlorination

Secondary settler,
chlorination

Secondary settler,
chlorination

Secondary settler,
chlorination

Secondary settler,
chlorination, trickling
lter
Secondary settler,
chlorination

Secondary settler,
chlorination

Rapid sand lter,

chlorination

Rapid sand lter,

chlorination

Posttreatment

70

70

87.65

70

70

70

70

70

70

8085
(BOD)

HRT COD
Bv
Operating
temperature (kg COD (h) removal
3 1
(%)
md )
(8C)

Vented

93 vented

Vented

Vented

2.66 vented

0.6 vented

To river
98 vented
basin
To river
41 vented
basin
Well injection
Vented

Watering

Watering

Land
inltration

Watering

Watering

Watering

5 vented

3.4 vented

Watering
Watering

2.8 vented

Biogas
production
(m3 d1)/
use

Watering

Watering

Watering

Treated
water use/
discharge

None

None

None

None

Digestion

Drying

Drying

Sludge
treatment

None

Landll

Landll

Soil
fertilizer

Landll

To soil

Soil
fertilizer

Soil
fertilizer

Soil
fertilizer

Soil
fertilizer

Soil
fertilizer

Soil
fertilizer

Sludge use/
disposal

Biothane is represented in Mexico by Tecnolog a Intercontinental, Paques by Atlatec, the companies Imasa, Energ a y Ecolog a, Tacsa, Forza, GTSA, DescontaminaAccion, PROESA and IBtech commercialize the
technology developed by UAM-UNAM.
AF: anaerobic lter; UASB: upow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor; EGSB: expanded granular sludge bed reactor; ADI-BVF: low-rate upow sludge blanket process; Bv: organic loading rate; HRT: hydraulic retention time; DAF: dissolved air otation.
c
Design data. in op.=in operation; in const.=in construction.

34

33

32

31

30

San Luis R o
Colorado, Sonora

Santa Gertrudis,
Chihuahua

Esperanza,
Sonora

El Sabino,
Chiapas

Club Pumas,
UNAM Mexico
City
1996, in operation
Cuautitlan,
Ciudad Juarez,
Chih.
1996, in operation
Conj. urbano
``Hacienda del
Pedregal'',
Atizapan de
Zaragoza, Edo. de
Mexico
1997, in operation
Chicoasen,
Chiapas

1995 start-up

29

Location

Unidad
habitacional
militar de Puerto
Juarez, Cancun,
Q.R.
1994, in operation
Unidad
habitacional
militar de
Champoton,
Campeche
1995, in operation Ixtepec, Oaxaca

1994, in operation

Year of
construction/
actual state

24

23

22

21

Reactor
number

Table 5 (continued )

Anaerobic digestion in Mexico

1813

1814

Oscar Monroy et al.

Fig. 5. Biogas uses per wastewater type (industrial or domestic) and technology origin (national or
foreign) by April 1998. Notice that F=ltered and V=vented.

Most of the anaerobic reactors in the world are

also operated under mesophilic conditions since this
allows a greater stability compared to the thermophilic ones.
Biogas use
Despite that one important factor for the selection of anaerobic treatment is the possibility of
energy recovery through biogas combustion, this is
done only in 13 plants (Fig. 5). Eleven use it in boilers, one in dryers and two for cooking facilities.
This is a worldwide tendency due to the extra
investment required to achieve such recovery or, as
in the case of domestic wastewater because of the
low biogas production. More worrying is the fact
that at least 54% of the plants installed in Mexico
do not even are up the biogas produced and rather
vent it directly to the atmosphere, contributing to
the greenhouse eect. Some of them however, perform at least iron ltration to remove hydrogen sulde. It should be noticed that in all the plants
commissioned by foreign companies, the biogas is
recovered or ared up and the problem of venting
is conned exclusively to locally designed reactors
independently of the type of wastewater.
Treated water use
The limited water availability in the country has
provided an incentive to recycle it. As a conse-

quence, in 25 plants (38% national plants), the treated water is used for irrigation and one of them for
sh culture (Fig. 6). Other uses involve the recycle
for cleaning operations (Table 5, plants 5 and 11)
as well as production processes (Table 4, plant 1).
Contrary to the local companies, no reuse has been
projected for the treated water from 95% of the
digesters built by foreign companies which directly
discharge to the environment or to sewers. One
treatment plant (Table 4, reactor 34) recently
acquired an inverse osmosis unit to polish the water
and recycle it to the process. AD euents need a
posttreatment to be reused and companies apply
them as required.
Sludge use
Four companies occasionally sell their sludges as
inoculum for anaerobic reactors at about US$ 60
per m3 (Table 4, reactor 9, 10, 11, 12, 22, 23, 24,
25, 26 and 34), thus reducing the imported sludge
price ve times. Some others, like the cheese industry have handed the sludge over at no cost, as part
of their commercial agreements.
CONCLUSIONS

Anaerobic digestion can be considered nowadays

as a mature technology in Mexico. Despite its economical advantages it remains as a minor technology

Anaerobic digestion in Mexico

1815

Fig. 6. Uses of treated water per type of wastewater (domestic or industrial) and origin of technology
(national or foreign) by April 1998.

compared to other technologies. Some local companies have shown the capacity to compete successfully with foreign companies. An eort should be
made to promote anaerobic digestion as the core of
a sustainable technology for wastewater treatment.
As a rst step, biogas utilization and water recycling has to be considered. One interesting point is
that, compared to its North American neighbors,
Mexico has shown a better acceptation for anaerobic digestion. Indeed, in 11 years Mexico has
installed more than 3 times the number of digesters
built in Canada (26 reactors, the rst one in 1982)
and more than 90% of the digesters operating in
the United States (89 reactors, the rst in 1977,
Hulsho-Pol, personal communication).
AcknowledgementsThanks are given to the companies
cited in Table 4 as well as to the CNA and SEMARNAP
sta, whose interest in the subject made this compilation
possible. We also thank Carmen Fajardo for data logging,
Adalberto Noyola, Alex Eitner and Look Hulsho Pol for
their kind advises, TBW-Frankfurt for providing the funds
and Dick Speece for his kind revision of the manuscript.
REFERENCES

Borzacconi L., Lopez I. and Vinas M. (1995) Application

of anaerobic digestion to the treatment of agroindustrial
euents in Latin America. Water Sci. Tech. 22(12),
105111.
Castillo M., Bailly H., Violle P., Pommares P., Sallee B.
(1993) Coee wastewater treatment in the Coatepec
River Basin, Veracruz, Mexico. Ed. Turrialba. 43(2),
143150.
Ceron F. (1993) Mexican environmental market conditions. In Memorias de la Mesa Redonda: Plantas de
Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales, Mercado, Concesiones,
Tratado de Libre Comercio, June 30. Instituto de
Ingenier a UNAM, Mexico City, pp. 4146.

CNA (1993) Federal Law and Rights on Water.

CNA, Clean Water, Weekly Bulletin, 19951996, Ano 2,
No. 23 and 24.
Duran C., Noyola A., Poggi H. and Zedillo L. E. (1991)
Biodegradation of process industry wastewater. Case
problem: sugar cane industry. In Biological Degradation
of Wastes, ed. A. M. Martin, pp. 363388. Elsevier,
New York, USA.
Espinosa A., Rosas L., Ilangovan K. and Noyola A.
(1995) Eect of trace metal on the anaerobic degradation of volatile fatty acids in molasses stillage. Water
Sci. Tech. 32(12), 121129.
Fajardo C., Guyot J. P., Macarie H. and Monroy O.
(1997) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion by terephthalic
acid and its aromatic by products. Water Sci. Tech.
36(6/7), 8390.
INE (1994) Report on the General Situation on
Environmental Equilibrium and Protection, 19931994.
Social Development Secretariat and National Ecology
Institute, 377 pp.
Jimenez C. B. (1995) Human resources in environmental
engineering: needs, actual state and perspectives.
Ingenieria Ambiental 8(27/28), 5168.
La Jornada, daily newspaper, La SEMARNAP preve un
crecimiento anual de 20%, 10 abril 1996, 11 pp.
Magana A. H. and Magana A. C. (1996) Evaluation of
the treatment plant of a soft drink industry based on
high rate anaerobicaerobic system. In Memorias del IV
Seminario-Taller Latinoamericano sobre Tratamiento
Anaerobio de Aguas Residuales, eds O. Rojas and L.
Acevedo, pp. 223235. Universidad Industrial de
Santander, Columbia.
Mej a M. E. (1993) Infrastructure: present state, guidelines
and policy. In Memorias de la Mesa Redonda: Plantas
de Tratamiento de Aguas Residuales, Mercado,
Concesiones, Tratado de Libre Comercio, June 30.
Instituto de Ingenier a UNAM, Mexico City, pp. 5471.
NOM-001-ECOL-1996. Ocial Mexican Guideline, that
establishes the maximum permissible limits of pollutants
in wastewater discharges into national waters and
goods. Diario Ocial de la Federacion, enero 6 de 1997.
NOM-002-ECOL-1996. Ocial Mexican Guideline, that
establishes the maximum permissible limits of pollutants

1816

Oscar Monroy et al.

in wastewater discharged into urban and municipal sewage systems. Diario Ocial de la Federacion, junio 3 de
1997.
NOM-003-ECOL-1997. Ocial Mexican Guideline, that
establishes the maximum permissible limits of pollutants
for treated wastewater to be reused for public service.
Diario Ocial de la Federacion, septiembre 21 de 1998.
Noyola A. and Monroy O. (1994) Experiences and per-

spectives of anaerobic treatment in Mexico. In

Tratamiento Anaerobio, eds M. Vinas, M. Soubes, L.
Borzacconi and L. Muxi, pp. 331340. Universidad de
la Republica, Montevideo, Uruguay.
Rodr guez S. and Altamirano R. (1995) Wastewater treatment with upow anaerobic reactors. Teorema 6, 1819.
Sancho C. J. (1992) Clean water programme. Ingeniera
Ambiental. 5(15), 1016.