Vegetable processing wastes addition to improve swine manure anaerobic digestion: Evaluation in terms of methane yield and SEM characterization

Applied Energy

Volumn 91, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 36-42

  Molinuevo Salces, Beatriz ^a   González Fernández, Cristina ^a   Gómez, Xiomar ^b   García González, María Cruz ^a   Morán, Antonio ^b  

^a INSTITUTO TECNOLÓGICO AGRARIO DE CASTILLA Y LEÓN   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEÓN   (Spain)

Author keywords

Anaerobic digestion; CSTR reactors; SEM; Swine manure; Vegetable wastes

Indexed keywords

MANURES; METHANE; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; VEGETABLES;

ANAEROBIC REACTOR; CO-SUBSTRATE; DIGESTATE; HYDRAULIC RETENTION TIME; LABORATORY SCALE; LIGNOCELLULOSIC MATERIAL; METHANE YIELD; MICROBIAL COMPOSITION; MORPHOTYPES; ORGANIC LOADING RATES; PROCESSING WASTES; SEMI-CONTINUOUS; STIRRED TANK REACTORS; SWINE MANURE; VEGETABLE WASTES;

ANAEROBIC DIGESTION;

ANOXIC CONDITIONS; BIODEGRADATION; BIOREACTOR; CELLULOSE; INOCULATION; LIGNIN; MANURE; METHANE; MICROBIAL ACTIVITY; MORPHOTYPE; SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPY; VEGETABLE; WASTE;

SUIDAE;

EID: 80053452616     PISSN: 03062619     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.09.010     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Flotats X., Bonmatí A., Fernández B., Magrí A. Manure treatment technologies: on-farm versus centralized strategies. NE Spain as case study. Bioresour Technol 2009, 100:5519-5526.
2. Angelidaki I., Ahring B.K. Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of livestock waste: the effect of ammonia. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 1993, 38:560-564.
3. Holm-Nielsen J.B., Al Saedi T., Oleskowickz-Popiel P. The future of anaerobic digestion and biogas utilization. Bioresour Technol 2009, 100:5478-5484.
4. Fountoulakis M.S., Drakopoulou S., Terzakis S., Georgaki E., Manios T. Potential for methane production from typical Mediterranean agro-industrial. Biomass Bioenergy 2008, 32:155-161.
5. Kaparaju P., Rintala J. Anaerobic co-digestion of potato tuber and its industrial by-products with pig manure. Resour Conserv Recycl 2005, 43:175-188.
6. Panichnumsin P., Nopharatana A., Ahring B., Chaiprasert P. Production of methane by co-digestion of cassava pulp with various concentrations of pig manure. Biomass Bioenergy 2010, 34:1117-1124.
7. Najafpour G.D., Hashemiyeh B.A., Asadi M., Ghasemi M.B. Biological treatment of dairy wastewatwer in an upflow anaerobic sludge-fixed film bioreactor. J Agric Environ Sci 2008, 4(2):251-257.
8. Alphenaar P.A., Groeneveld N., Van Aelst A.C. Scanning electron microscopical method for internal structure analysis of anaerobic granular sludge. Micron 1994, 25(2):129-133.
9. APHA. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 21th ed. Washington DC: American Public Health Association. American Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation; 2005.
10. Hansen K., Angelidaki I., Ahring B. Anaerobic digestion of swine manure: inhibition by ammonia. Water Res 1998, 32:5-12.
11. Ogejo J.A., Li L. Enhancing biomethane production from flush dairy manure with turkey processing wastewater. Appl Energy 2010, 87:3171-3177.
12. Alvarez R., Lidèn G. Semi-continous co-digestion of solid slaughterhouse waste, manure, and fruit and vegetable waste. Renew Energy 2008, 33:726-734.
13. Callaghan F.J., Wase D.A.J., Thayanithy K., Forster C.F. Continuous co-digestion of cattle slurry with fruit and vegetable wastes and chicken manure. Biomass Bioenergy 2002, 27:71-77.
14. Bouallagui H., Touhami Y., Ben Cheikh R., Hamdi M. Bioreactors performance used in anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes: review. Process Biochem 2005, 40:989-995.
15. Molinuevo-Salces B., García-González M., González-Fernández C., Cuetos M.J., Morán A., Gómez X. Anaerobic co-digestion of livestock wastes with vegetable processing wastes: a statistical analysis. Bioresour Technol 2010, 101:9479-9485.
16. Ten-Hong C., Hashimoto A. Effects of pH and substrate: inoculum ratio on batch methane fermentation. Bioresour Technol 1996, 56:179-186.
17. Vedrenne F., Béline F., Dabert P., Bernet N. The effect of incubation conditions on the laboratory measurement of the methane producing capacity of livestock wastes. Bioresour Technol 2008, 99:146-155.
18. 4Cl levels on methanogenic associations. Water Res 1984, 18:543-548.
19. Gallert C., Winter J. Mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion of source sorted organic waste: effect of ammonia on glucose degradation and methane production. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 1997, 48:405-410.
20. Flotats X, Sarquella L. Producció de biogàs per codigestió anaeròbia. Intitut Català d́Energia. Generalitat de Catalunya; 2008.
21. Zupančič G.D., Ro M. Heat and energy requirements in thermophilic anaerobic sludge digestion. Renew Energy 2003, 28(14):2255-2267.
22. Rapport J.L., Zhang R., Jenkins B.M., Hartsough B.R., Tomich T.P. Modeling the performance of the anaerobic phased solids digester system for biogas energy production. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35(3):1263-1272.
23. Bouallagui H., Haouari O., Touhami Y., Cheikh R.B., Marouani L., Hamdi M. Effect of temperature on the performance of an anaerobic tubular reactor treating fruit and vegetable waste. Process Biochem 2004, 39(12):2143-2148.
24. 3 of closed anaerobic methane digested tank on pressed-shredded empty fruit bunch (EFB) composting process. Afr J Biotechnol 2010, 9:2427-2436.
25. Kaviani B., Padasht Dehkaei M.N., Darabi A.H., Rafizadeh A., Rahmati B. The anatomical properties of endemic Lilium ledebourii (Baker) Bioss. (Liliaceae) species. Int J Bot 2008, 4:62-66.
26. Robbins J.E., Armold M.T., Lacher S.L. Methane production from cattle and straw. Appl Microbiol Environ 1979, 38:175-178.
27. Haug RT. The practical handbook of compost engineering. Boca Raton, Florida: Lewis Publishers; 1993. p. 717.
28. Díaz E., Amils R., Sanz J.L. Molecular ecology of anaerobic granular sludge grown at different conditions. Water Sci Technol 2003, 48:57-64.