Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
May, 2015
Introduction
(Capsicum
annuum
L.)
and
tomato
grown in Turkey.
renewable
According
energy
production
and
environmental
May, 2015
ammonia/ammonium
content
of
manure.
161
The
Co-digestion of
according
functions
to
standard
(C=O)
methods
(Dreywood,
(APHA,
1946).
1995).
Protein
presented in Table 1.
et al., 2007).
Parameter
Tomato
Residues
Pepper
Residues
Cow
Manure
TS (gTS/kgSample)
158.77
128.43
193.70
VS (gVS/kgSample)
132.44
104.35
149.64
Tomato and
561.57
1154.14
2072.93
301.17
258.70
300.72
129.76
92.54
590.14
43.80
69.39
56.20
Protein (mgPro/gVS)
280.75
416.50
320.05
Along with
162
May, 2015
Effects of mixture ratio of cow manure and greenhouse wastes on anaerobic co-digestion process
(0.5),
(0.4),
reactors.
modeling
samples.
Na2SeO3
(0.5),
CuCl2.2H2O
results
adequately
matching
with
the
simulated
cumulative
to
fit
methane
production
diminished.
Banks, 2004).
respectively.
The modified
simulation.
as given in Table 2.
Table 2 Modified models used for the evaluation of the co-digestion performance
Model
Gompertz
Model
R e
R e
PM1
PM 2
Transference
Model
R t 1
R t 2
PM 2 1 exp M 2
M P PM1 1 exp M1
P
P
M
1
M
2
First Order
Model
163
May, 2015
residues
Figure 1b.
Seed Sludge
CM:TR (70:30)
CM:TR (100:0)
CM:TR (55:45)
CM:TR (85:15)
CM:TR (40:60)
160
200
140
mL CH4 /g VS
BMP (mLCH4/gVS)
120
150
100
100
80
60
40
50
20
0
0
0
10
20
Time (days)
30
40
100:00
CM:TR 80.79
85:15
97.25
10:90
52.64
Figure 1 (a) Cumulative biomethane production from the co-digestion of cow manure (CM) and tomato residues
(TR) (b) Normalized cumulative biomethane production from mixed samples
As can be seen from Figure 1, the highest cumulative
literature.
100:0, 60:40, 40:60 and 20:80 and the BMP values were
Any more
residues
Ahring
suspended solid.
et
al.,
2001;
Lehtomki
et
al.,
2007;
cow manure from this study are lower than the findings
reported in literature.
Figure 2b.
164
May, 2015
Effects of mixture ratio of cow manure and greenhouse wastes on anaerobic co-digestion process
Seed Sludge
CM:PR (70:30)
CM:PR (100:0)
CM:PR (55:45)
CM:PR (85:15)
CM:PR (40:60)
250
300
200
mL CH4 /g VS
BMP (mLCH4/gVS)
250
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
10
20
Time (days)
30
40
Figure 2 (a) Cumulative biomethane production from the co-digestion of cow manure (CM) and pepper residues
(PR) (b) Normalized cumulative biomethane production from mixed samples
As illustrated in Figure 2, the relatively more biogas
The highest
For
Table 3.
The
May, 2015
165
Table 3 Predicted kinetic parameters of co-digestion of cow manure with tomato residues
Mixing Ratio
(CM:TR)
100:0
85:15
70:30
55:45
40:60
25:75
10:90
Model
GM
RC
FO
GM
RC
FO
GM
RC
FO
GM
RC
FO
GM
RC
FO
GM
RC
FO
GM
RC
FO
Experimental
BMP (ml/ g VS)
80.79
97.25
100.45
130.27
124.72
124.03
52.64
PM
(ml/ g VS)
RM
(ml/g VS.d)
80.00
80.00
80.00
95.38
91.10
104.26
96.46
96.71
110.05
126.22
129.87
124.87
118.24
119.12
118.16
122.58
122.89
116.09
51.39
52.03
50.64
7.445
10.720
kR
(L/d)
(d)
R2
0
0
0.920
0.967
0.967
0.953
0.971
0.979
0.986
0.972
0.993
0.978
0.991
0.983
0.960
0.982
0.973
0.987
0.997
0.985
0.934
0.971
0.950
0.138
7.584
10.720
0
0
0.138
7.584
10.968
0
0
0.141
7.584
10.968
0.141
7.358
9.866
0.058
0
0.138
7.358
9.866
0.058
0
0.138
7.163
9.919
0.182
0
0.129
were added more than the 45% of total volatile solid, the
knowledge, this study reports for the first time the kinetic
results.
Also,
in Figure 3e.
166
May, 2015
Effects of mixture ratio of cow manure and greenhouse wastes on anaerobic co-digestion process
120
90
80
100
70
60
50
40
30
20
60
40
20
10
10
20
Time (days)
30
40
100
50
10
20
Time (days)
30
40
10
20
Time (days)
30
40
100
10
20
Time (days)
30
50
0
40
60
GM
70:30
55:45
25:75
10:90
50
BMP (mLCH4 /gVS)
50
150
150
80
40
30
20
10
e
10
20
Time (days)
30
30
20
10
0
40
kH1
kH3
kH4
kH6
kH7
40
0.5
1.5
Time (day)
2.5
Figure 3 The simulation results for (a) digestion of cow manure alone and, for co-digestion of cow manure with
tomato residues (b) 70:30, (c) 55:45, (d) 25:75, (e) 10:90, (f) simulation results for kH
The hydrolysis rate constants (kH) illustrated in Figure
The
of BMP tests.
Table 4 Calculated kH values for co-digestion of cow manure with tomato residues
Mixing Ratio (CM:TR)
R2
100:0
85:15
70:30
55:45
40:60
25:75
10:90
0.347
0.368
0.368
0.368
0.288
0.288
0.208
0.197
0.197
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.100
0.999
0.982
0.992
0.993
0.993
0.995
0.993
Experimental BMP
P (mL
4/gVS)
100
80
60
40
BMP-GE
BMP-RC
BMP-FO
May, 2015
167
Conclusions
The evaluation of co-digestion for efficiently biogas
References
Ahring, B.K., A.I. Ashraf, and Z. Mladenovska. 2001. Effect of
temperature increase from 55 C to 65C on performance and
microbial population dynamics of an anaerobic reactor
treating cattle manure.
Water Research, 32
(10):24462452.
APHA., AWWA., WEF. 1995. Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, 19th Edition.
Ashekuzzaman, S.M., and G.T. Poulsen. 2011. Optimizing feed
composition for improved methane yield during anaerobic
digestion of cow manure based waste mixtures.
Bioresour.Technol.102, 22132218.
Buendia, I., F. Fernandez, J. Villasenor, and L. Rodriguez. 2009.
Feasibility of anaerobic co-digestion as a treatment option of
meat industry wastes.
Bioresource Technology, 100:
19031909.
Carrere, H., B. Sialve, and N. Bernet. 2009. Improving Pig
manure into biogas by thermal and thermo-chemical
pretreatments.
Bioresource Technology, 100 (15):
36903694.
Defra.
2009.
Anaerobic Digestion Shared Goals.
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK.
Dreywood, R. 1946.
Industrial
&
18(8):499-499.