Dry Co-Digestion of Poultry Manure with Agriculture Wastes

被引:24
|
作者
Abouelenien, Fatma [1 ]
Namba, Yuzaburo [2 ]
Nishio, Naomichi [2 ]
Nakashimada, Yutaka [2 ]
机构
[1] Kafer Elshikh Univ, Fac Vet Med, Dept Hyg & Prevent Med, Kafr Al Sheikh, Egypt
[2] Hiroshima Univ, Grad Sch Adv Sci Matter, Dept Mol Biotechnol, Higashi Ku, Kagamiyama 1-3-1, Hiroshima 7398530, Japan
关键词
Dry co-digestion; Methane production; Poultry manure; Coffee waste; Cassava waste; Coconut waste; ANAEROBIC-DIGESTION; CHICKEN MANURE; SOLID-STATE; METHANE PRODUCTION; BIOGAS PRODUCTION; FOOD; DAIRY; FERMENTATION; CODIGESTION; RECOVERY;
D O I
10.1007/s12010-015-1919-1
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
This study tested the effect on thermophilic and mesophilic digestion of poultry manure (PM) or treated poultry manure (TPM) by the addition of agriculture wastes (AWS) as a co-substrate under dry conditions. PM was co-digested with a mixture of AWS consisting of coconut waste, cassava waste, and coffee grounds. Results were increased methane content in biogas, with decreased ammonia accumulation and volatile acids. The highest performance occurred under mesophilic conditions, with a 63 and 41.3 % increase in methane production from addition of AWS to TPM (562 vs. 344 mL g VS-1 from control) and PM (406 vs. 287 mL g VS-1 from control), respectively. Thermophilic conditions showed lower performance than mesophilic conditions. Addition of AWS increased methane production by 150 and 69.6 % from PM (323.4 vs. 129 mL g VS-1 from control) and TPM (297.6 vs. 175.5 mL g VS-1 from control), respectively. In all experiments, 100 % acetate produced was degraded to methane. Maximum ammonia accumulation was lowered to 43.7 % by mixing of AWS (range 5.35-8.55 vs. 7.81-12.28 g N kg(-1) bed). The pH was held at 7.3-8.8, a range suitable for methanogenesis.
引用
收藏
页码:932 / 946
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Determination of bio-methanol as intermediate product of anaerobic co-digestion in animal and agriculture wastes
    Anitha, M.
    Kamarudin, S. K.
    Shamsul, N. S.
    Kofli, N. T.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2015, 40 (35) : 11791 - 11799
  • [42] Evaluation of Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Sewage Sludge with Microalgae and Agriculture Wastes
    Ahmed, Dalia
    Wagdy, Rabab
    Said, Noha
    [J]. BIORESOURCES, 2019, 14 (04) : 8405 - 8412
  • [43] Anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge, wine vinasse and poultry manure for bio-hydrogen production
    Sillero, Leonor
    Solera, Rosario
    Perez, Montserrat
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY, 2022, 47 (06) : 3667 - 3678
  • [44] Effect of Inoculum on Anaerobic Co-digestion of Vegetable Processing Wastes and Cattle Manure at High Solids Concentration
    Yiqing Yao
    Yali Wei
    Lizhe An
    Jianye Zhou
    [J]. Waste and Biomass Valorization, 2018, 9 : 2091 - 2098
  • [45] Effect of Inoculum on Anaerobic Co-digestion of Vegetable Processing Wastes and Cattle Manure at High Solids Concentration
    Yao, Yiqing
    Wei, Yali
    An, Lizhe
    Zhou, Jianye
    [J]. WASTE AND BIOMASS VALORIZATION, 2018, 9 (11) : 2091 - 2098
  • [46] Anaerobic co-digestion of lignocellulosic/lipidic wastes with cattle manure: Investigating biogas production and methane yield
    Mirabi, Mehrdad
    Karrabi, Mohsen
    Shahnavaz, Bahar
    [J]. FUEL, 2024, 366
  • [47] Modelling of the whey and cow manure co-digestion process
    Hublin, Andrea
    Zelic, Bruno
    [J]. WASTE MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH, 2013, 31 (04) : 353 - 360
  • [48] The anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and cattle manure
    Zhang, Cunsheng
    Xiao, Gang
    Peng, Liyu
    Su, Haijia
    Tan, Tianwei
    [J]. BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY, 2013, 129 : 170 - 176
  • [49] Improvement of the anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge by co-digestion with wine vinasse and poultry manure: Effect of different hydraulic retention times
    Sillero, Leonor
    Solera, Rosario
    Perez, Montserrat
    [J]. FUEL, 2022, 321
  • [50] ANAEROBIC DIGESTION AND CO-DIGESTION OF POULTRY LITTER SUBMITTED TO DIFFERENT REUSES
    Vicente Jr, Donizete J.
    Costa, Monica S. S. de M.
    Costa, Luiz A. M.
    Pereira, Dercio C.
    dos Santos, Francielly T.
    [J]. ENGENHARIA AGRICOLA, 2018, 38 (06): : 961 - 967