About usContact

BMP testingFats, oils and animal by-products

Slaughterhouse waste (cattle, pigs, poultry) — BMP: 7 studies, weighted mean 607 m³ CH₄/t VS

Slaughterhouse waste is a heterogeneous group of by-products from the slaughter of cattle, pigs and poultry. High in energy, but subject to the ABP rules and carrying a risk of ammonia inhibition.

rating: neutralCH₄ ≈ 66 % (estimate)

Published Updated 3 min readFeedstockData Editorial Team

Illustration: FeedstockData (AI, Google Gemini)

Weighted mean
607m³ CH₄/t VS
Range
217–900m³ CH₄/t VS
Records
7studies
Publications
5sources
Temperatures
35 °C, 37 °C, 38 °Cof the test

Methane in biogas

High methane content · ≈ 6.6 kWh/m³ of biogas

estimate from the substrate type The collected studies contain no measurement. The interval follows from the approximate composition (protein-rich (process classification); fat-rich (process classification)) and the yields of compound groups according to FNR.

How we calculate it and what the zones mean

Rating for biogas plants

neutral — editorial rating for biogas plantsNo clear advantages — worth charging a fee for accepting it

Potential per tonne of fresh matter: high (88 m³ CH₄/t); process risk: fats, protein / nitrogen, foaming. Handling costs: ABP cat. 2, sand, stones, shells.

Why? Rating factors

Potential per tonne +2

  • +2potential 88 m³ CH₄/t fresh matter (BMP 607 × DM 16.6 % × VS 87.1 %)

Process stability −1.75

  • −1fats: risk of accumulation of long-chain fatty acids (LCFA), flotation and overloading
  • −0.5protein / nitrogen: risk of ammonia inhibition at higher shares
  • −0.25foaming: tendency to form foam in the digester

Handling and costs −2.5

  • −2ABP cat. 2: pressure sterilisation before digestion (Reg. 1069/2009, 142/2011)
  • −0.5sand, stones, shells — sediment in the digester

Total points: −2.25 · thresholds: ≥ 2.5 very good, ≥ 1 good, below — neutral; negative with cumulative process risk.

Editorial rating per the methodology · confidence of the rating: high · excluding market prices

Add to the co-digestion calculator CSV data

BMP curves from 7 studies

Weighted mean Individual records

BMP curves: Slaughterhouse waste (cattle, pigs, poultry)Cumulative methane production over time for 7 records and the weighted mean of 607 m³ CH₄/t VS. 7 of the curves are model curves (first-order kinetics).020040060080010000510152025303540time [d]m³ CH₄/t VSFatima i Kommalapati (2025): 689 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)Yoon et al. (2014): 511 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)Rodríguez-Abalde et al. (2017): 900 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)Cu et al. (2014) · 1: 217 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)Cu et al. (2014) · 2: 327 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)Renggaman et al. (2021) · 1: 612 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)Renggaman et al. (2021) · 2: 711 m³ CH₄/t VS (model curve)mean607

Dashed lines are a model curve (first-order kinetics, B(t) = B₀·(1 − e−kt)); the end point comes from the publication. All curves are model curves.

Cumulative methane production over the test [m³ CH₄/t VS]. The thick line is the weighted mean of all records (607); dots mark the end values given in the publications. Point at the chart to read values; click a legend item to hide or show a record.

Records and sources

Download CSV
SourceBMP
m³ CH₄/t VS		TemperatureSampleCurve
Fatima i Kommalapati (2025) DOI68935 °C · mesophilicorganic solid poultry waste (slaughterhouse), SS-AD, S/I 0.5end point (model curve)
Yoon et al. (2014) DOI51138 °C · mesophilicIntestine residue (piggery slaughterhouse)end point (model curve)
Rodríguez-Abalde et al. (2017) DOI90035 °C · mesophilicPP-ABP (pasteurized slaughterhouse waste, animal by-products)end point (model curve)
Cu et al. (2014) · 1 DOI21737 °C · mesophilicpig slaughter wasteend point (model curve)
Cu et al. (2014) · 2 DOI32737 °C · mesophiliccattle slaughter wasteend point (model curve)
Renggaman et al. (2021) · 1 DOI612—Swine slaughter waste (SSW), S/I 1end point (model curve)
Renggaman et al. (2021) · 2 DOI711—Swine slaughter waste (SSW), S/I 0.5end point (model curve)
Weighted mean607arithmetic mean 567, SD 235

Typical composition

Dry matter (DM)
16.6% (range 16.2–17)
Volatile solids (VS)
87.1 % DM (range 82.6–91.7)

Median and range of the determinations reported in the publications behind this substrate's BMP records (read from: MY-D); dry matter: 2 determinations, volatile solids: 2 determinations.

Sources: Cu et al. (2014).

The composition of the raw material varies between batches — for plant calculations use an analysis of your own sample. The calculator inserts typical values automatically.

Process properties

  • protein-rich
  • fat-rich
  • nitrogen-rich
  • tendency to foam
  • sand and sediment
  • ABP cat. 2
  • variable composition
  • editorial classification

Advantages

  • Methane potential in the Substraty.pl BMP dataset: weighted mean 606.7 m³ CH₄/t VS (SD 235.1; 7 records, 5 sources).
  • A mixture of cattle and pig slaughterhouse waste had a high methane potential (270-300 L CH4/kg COD) in batch tests (Palatsi et al. 2011).
  • Adding decanter sludge (42% lipids, 36% protein in DM) up to 5% of the mixture with dairy slurry gave a 3.5-fold increase in volumetric biogas production without inhibition (Pitk et al. 2014).

Drawbacks and risks

  • At substrate concentrations rising to 15 g COD/kg in successive tests, clear lipid-related inhibition was observed (Palatsi et al. 2011).
  • Sterilised material at 10% (w/w) caused intense foaming and LCFA accumulation, 7.5% - NH3 inhibition (Pitk et al. 2013).
  • Contains bones, hair, sand - risk of sediment and pump damage (Salminen and Rintala 2002).

Co-digestion — what to combine it with, what to watch out for

Dosing

Indicative limit from the literatureup to 5% fresh mass of the feed[1][2]

Basis: share in the feed mixture (fresh matter). Pitkä et al. (2014): decanter sludge (42% lipids, 36% protein in DM) up to 5% of the mixture with dairy slurry (mesophilic) gave a stable process without LCFA and NH3 inhibition — this is the largest share tested, not a threshold. Pitkä et al. (2013): sterilised material with sewage sludge stable up to 5% w/w, NH3 inhibition at 7.5%, foaming at 10%. Laboratory data; when technical fat is added at the same time, remember the 2% threshold of the mixture for the fat alone (Pitkä et al. 2014).

Introduce gradually, starting with a small dose and monitoring the process (e.g. FOS/TAC, pH, gas composition).

Practical requirements

  • ABP cat. 2 (Art. 9 of Reg. 1069/2009): with the exception of manure, digestive tract content, milk, colostrum and eggs, admitted to a biogas plant only after pressure sterilisation and permanent marking (Art. 13(e)(i)); method 1: shredding to a maximum of 50 mm, core temperature above 133 °C for at least 20 min without interruption, absolute pressure of at least 3 bar (Reg. 142/2011, Annex IV Ch. III); cat. 1 material has no route to a biogas plant (Art. 12 of Reg. 1069/2009).
  • Do not feed hygienised substrate into the digester hot (FNR 2010, Ch. 3: hygienisation).
  • Shred: shredding increases the surface available for degradation and speeds it up, but does not necessarily raise the final gas yield (FNR 2010, Ch. 3 “Triturado”).
  • Provide for removal of sand and heavy contaminants: sand is often strongly bound to organic matter and is released only in the digester, and sediments reduce its usable capacity, so a scraper or bottom drain is needed (FNR 2010, Ch. 3).

Sources of the process data

  1. Pitk et al. (2014). Mesophilic co-digestion of dairy manure and lipid rich solid slaughterhouse wastes. Bioresour. Technol.
  2. Pitk et al. (2013). Co-digestion of sewage sludge and sterilized solid slaughterhouse waste: methane production efficiency and process limitations. Bioresour. Technol.
  3. Rajagopal, Masse, Singh (2013). A critical review on inhibition of anaerobic digestion process by excess ammonia. Bioresour. Technol.
  4. Palatsi et al. (2011). Anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse waste: main process limitations and microbial community interactions. Bioresour. Technol.
  5. Salminen, Rintala (2002). Anaerobic digestion of organic solid poultry slaughterhouse waste - a review. Bioresour. Technol.
  6. Rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1069/2009 określające przepisy sanitarne dotyczące produktów ubocznych pochodzenia zwierzęcego (art. 9, 10, 12–14, 24)
  7. Rozporządzenie Komisji (UE) nr 142/2011 wykonujące rozporządzenie (WE) nr 1069/2009 (zał. IV rozdz. III, zał. V rozdz. I i III)
  8. FNR (2010). Guía sobre el Biogás – Desde la producción hasta el uso (hiszp. wydanie „Leitfaden Biogas”, GIZ 2013)

The co-digestion calculator will assess a specific mixture containing this substrate.

What it is and where it comes from

Slaughterhouse waste is a general name for varied streams from abattoirs and meat plants: intestinal residues, fat, blood, bones, meat trimmings, stomach contents and others. The dataset includes records for waste from the slaughter of poultry, pigs and cattle, pasteurised by-products and intestinal residues. Because the composition depends on the animal species and the particular stream, the category covers materials with different properties.

Properties relevant to digestion

The characteristic features are a high protein and fat content and a low carbohydrate content. As a result the overall biogas potential is often high, but the process is sensitive to overloading: the decomposition of proteins releases ammonia, and of fats long-chain fatty acids, both inhibiting methanogenesis. Foaming and flotation of the biomass are also very significant. Good practice is co-digestion with a substrate of low nitrogen content and gradual increase of the dose. The waste also contains bones, hair and other elements requiring size reduction and separation.

How to read the spread of results

The dataset gathers results for waste from different species (poultry, pigs, cattle), for different fractions (intestinal residues, a mixture of solid wastes) and for pasteurised by-products. Differences in fat and protein content translate into differences in results, and the substrate-to-inoculum ratio, sample preparation, adaptation of the inoculum and test conditions also have an effect (in some records no temperature is given). Many results concern variants chosen by the authors as the best in a series, which must also be taken into account.

In biogas plant practice

Slaughterhouse waste consists of animal by-products, so its use requires compliance with EU and national rules: classification into the appropriate category, appropriate treatment (shredding and pasteurisation for category 3 material, other requirements for the other categories), documentation and the proper permits of the installation. Technically a reception tank, a shredder, a hygienisation system and gradual dosing are necessary. Ammonia, volatile fatty acids and foaming must also be monitored. Before concluding a supply contract, it is worth carrying out a BMP test on a representative batch. In practice the composition of deliveries from one abattoir changes over the week and the year, so it is good to agree with the supplier the requirements regarding fractions, bone content and the method of separation, and to keep batch records linked to digester performance.

Methodology in brief

BMP is the amount of methane obtained from volatile solids (VS) in a batch test, given in m³ CH₄ per tonne of VS (numerically the same as NmL CH₄/g VS in the publications) and converted to normal conditions (0 °C, 101.325 kPa). The weighted mean gives each publication a total weight of 1, split equally between its results for the substrate — a paper testing twenty varieties does not outweigh a paper with a single sample. In inter-laboratory programmes the unit is the laboratory (total weight 1), and within it the weight of a test grows with the number of bottles (replicates). Results after pretreatment (e.g. thermal, chemical, enzymatic) are shown separately and are not included in the mean.

Solid lines are curves measured in the tests. Where a publication gives only the final result, we draw a first-order kinetic model, B(t) = B₀·(1 − e−kt): only the end point comes from the publication, and the shape of the curve serves purely as visualisation — do not read the production on a particular day from it. For this substrate k = 0.091 d−1 was assumed (no kinetic data for the group – the median of all available rate constants k (93 values) was used).

The statistics describe the spread of published results — a descriptive compilation, not a meta-analysis or a guarantee of plant yield.

Full methodology and correction policy

Bibliography

  1. Fatima, F.; Kommalapati, R.R. (2025). Solid-State Anaerobic Digestion of Organic Solid Poultry Waste for Biomethane Production. Bioengineering 12(7), 712. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering12070712 DOI
  2. Yoon, Y.M.; Kim, S.H.; Shin, K.S.; Kim, C.H. (2014). Effects of Substrate to Inoculum Ratio on the Biochemical Methane Potential of Piggery Slaughterhouse Wastes. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 27(4), 600–607. DOI: 10.5713/ajas.2013.13537 DOI
  3. Rodríguez-Abalde, Á.; Flotats, X.; Fernández, B. (2017). Optimization of the anaerobic co-digestion of pasteurized slaughterhouse waste, pig slurry and glycerine. Waste Management 61, 521–528. DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.022 DOI
  4. Cu, T.T.T.; Nguyen, T.X.; Triolo, J.M.; Pedersen, L.; Le, V.D.; Le, P.D.; Sommer, S.G. (2014). Biogas Production from Vietnamese Animal Manure, Plant Residues and Organic Waste: Influence of Biomass Composition on Methane Yield. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences 28(2), 280–289. DOI: 10.5713/ajas.14.0312 DOI
  5. Renggaman, A.; Choi, H.L.; Sudiarto, S.I.A.; Febrisiantosa, A.; Ahn, D.H.; Choung, Y.W.; Suresh, A. (2021). Biochemical Methane Potential of Swine Slaughter Waste, Swine Slurry, and Its Codigestion Effect. Energies 14(21), 7103. DOI: 10.3390/en14217103 DOI

All sources of the site: bibliography.

Other substrates in the group “Fats, oils and animal by-products”