Thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of cattle manure with agro-wastes and energy crops: Comparison of pilot and full scale experiences

Department of Environmental Sciences, University Ca' Foscari of Venice, Dorsoduro 2137, I-30123 Venice, Italy.
Bioresource Technology (Impact Factor: 4.49). 09/2009; 101(2):545-50. DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2009.08.043
Source: PubMed


The paper deals with the benefits coming from the application of a proper process temperature (55 degrees C) instead of a 'reduced' thermophilic range (47 degrees C), that is often applied in European anaerobic co-digestion plants. The experimental work has pointed out that biogas production improve from 0.45 to 0.62 m(3)/kg VS operating at proper thermophilic conditions. Moreover, also methane content was higher: from 52% to 61%. A general improvement in digester behaviour was clear also considering the stability parameters comparison (pH, ammonia, VFA content). The second part of the study takes into account the economic aspects related to the capital cost of anaerobic digestion treatment with a 1 MW co-generation unit fro heat and power production (CHP). Moreover, the economic balance was also carried out considering the anaerobic supernatants treatment for nitrogen removal. The simulation showed how a pay-back-time of 2.5 yr and between 3 and 5 yr respectively could be determined when the two options of anaerobic digestion only and together with the application of a nitrogen removal process were considered.

Download full-text


Available from: David Bolzonella, Oct 05, 2015
125 Reads
  • Source
    • "), data in Fig. 1 have been elaborated. Data adopted are comparable with those available in scientific literature (Tricase and Lombardi, 2009; Walla and Schneeberger, 2008; Cavinato et al., 2010; Karellas et al., 2010). A regression analysis has been carried out in order to shape both investment and operational costs as a function of the plant size (expressed as annual tons of biomass treated). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Energy production from the anaerobic digestion of organic waste is widely recognized as a social and environmental opportunity, since it allows reducing waste disposal and making waste management economically profitable. However, profitability of these plants is strongly affected by the quantity and the quality of wastes, as well as by the availability of local subsidies. The key role of incentive policies in the economic success of investments in biomass to energy plants is highly recognised and has led EU governments to promote the deployment of these plants. Incentive policies adopted in EU countries differ significantly. In this paper, an evaluation model based on cost-benefit analysis is developed in order to identify the production-based incentive rates making investments in anaerobic digestion plant economically feasible without reducing social and environmental positive impacts. The model has been applied to the case of energy production plants from anaerobic digestion of cattle manure. In order to investigate the influence of the plant size on the investment profitability, different waste collection areas have been considered. Environmental performances of the plants have been evaluated by adopting a life cycle assessment approach. Results obtained confirm the environmental benefits achievable through the energy production from the anaerobic digestion of cattle manure. However, the current production-based incentive rates provided in most EU Countries revealed an inadequate balance between private and public interest, since they make profitable the investments only in case of small plants.
    Journal of Cleaner Production 05/2015; 104. DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.05.021 · 3.84 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "), which was higher than in digesting PPF and CM alone. Previous studies by Cavinato et al. (2010) corroborate our study findings where a significant increase of biogas production was also observed when co-digesting agricultural wastes and cattle manure. According to the substrate characteristics, the C/N ratio of PPF was higher than those of CM (Table 1). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Palm pressed fiber (PPF) and cattle manure (CM) are the waste which can be managed properly by anaerobic co-digestion. The biogas production in co-digested PPF and CM at three volatile solids (VS) ratios of 3:1, 1:1, and 1:3 was investigated in a series of batch experiments at an organic loading rate of 30.0g VS/L under mesophilic (37±1°C) conditions. The highest daily biogas yield of PPF and CM only, was 90.0mL/g VSadded at day 12 and 23.4mL/g VSadded at day 7. For co-digestion of PPF/CM at mixing ratios of 3:1, 1:1 and 1:3, there were 93.6mL/g VSadded at day 11, 86.8 and 26.4mL/g VSadded at day 8. VS removal rate for PPF, CM, and co-digestion at mixing ratio of 3:1, 1:1, and 1:3 were 91.1%, 86.0% and 71.0%, respectively. The anaerobic digestion of PPF and CM and their co-digestion systems were stable in operation with low range of volatile fatty acids (VFA)/TIC (total inorganic carbon) of (0.035-0.091). The main volatile fatty acids were propionic, and iso-butyric acids for PPF, iso-butyric and n-butyric acids for CM. The VFAs and ammonium inhibition were not occurred. The modified Gompertz model can be used to perform a better prediction with a lower difference between the measured and predicted biogas yields. A VS ratio of 3:1 is recommended for practice.
    Waste Management 08/2014; 34(11). DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.07.015 · 3.22 Impact Factor
    • "Substrates Mixture ratio Digester configuration T [1C] OLR [kg a m À 3 d À 1a ] SMP [m 3 CH 4 kg À 1b ] Improvement c Reference CM:FVW 27:73 (wet basis) CSTR 47 5.67 (VS) 0.32 (VS) – [20] 55 4.66 (VS) 0.38 (VS) – CM:Cheese wey 1:2 (wet basis) CSTR 25 HRT ¼5 0.62 d – [21] 34 HRT ¼5 0.90 d – CM:OMW 3:1 (n.d) CSTR 37 5.50 (COD) 0.18 (VS) Â 1.74 [22] 55 5.50 (COD) 0.21 (VS) – CM:PM:WW 40:30:30 (n.d) Batch 37 – 0.30 (VS) – [23] 35:35:30 (n.d) 55 – 0.35 (VS) – CM:PM:WW 35:35:30 (n.d) CSTR 37 1.90 (TOC) 0.21 (VS) Â 1.68 25:35:40 (n.d) 55 1.76 (TOC) 0.28 (VS) Â 1.72 CM:Energy crops 50:50 (VS basis) CSTR 37 2.00 (VS) 0.21 (VS) Â 1.60 [24] 37 4.00 (VS) 0.17 (VS) Â 1.66 55 2.00 (VS) 0.22 (VS) Thermophilic mono-digestion failed 55 4.00 (VS) 0.23 (VS) Thermophilic mono-digestion failed CM:Energy crops: FVW 50:25:25 (VS basis) CSTR 37 2.00 (VS) 0.25 (VS) Â 1.91 37 4.00 (VS) 0.25 (VS) Â 2.44 55 2.00 (VS) 0.29 (VS) Thermophilic mono-digestion failed 55 4.00 (VS) 0.28 (VS) Thermophilic mono-digestion failed n.d: Non-detailed. a "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Anaerobic digestion is a commercial reality for several kinds of waste. Nonetheless, anaerobic digestion of single substrates presents some drawbacks linked to substrate characteristics. Anaerobic co-digestion, the simultaneous digestion of two or more substrates, is a feasible option to overcome the drawbacks of mono-digestion and to improve plant׳s economic feasibility. At present, since 50% of the publication has been published in the last two years, anaerobic co-digestion can be considered the most relevant topic within anaerobic digestion research. The aim of this paper is to present a review of the achievements and perspectives of anaerobic co-digestion within the period 2010–2013, which represents a continuation of the previous review made by the authors [3]. In the present review, the publications have been classified as for the main substrate, i.e., animal manures, sewage sludge and biowaste. Animal manures stand as the most reported substrate, agro-industrial waste and the organic fraction of the municipal solid waste being the most reported co-substrate. Special emphasis has been made to the effect of the co-digestion over digestate quality, since land application seems to be the best option for digestate recycling. Traditionally, anaerobic co-digestion between sewage sludge and the organic fraction of the municipal solid waste has been the most reported co-digestion mixture. However, between 2010 and 2013 the publications dealing with fats, oils and greases and algae as sludge co-substrate have increased. This is because both co-substrates can be obtained at the same wastewater treatment plant. In contrast, biowaste as a main substrate has not been as studied as manures or sewage sludge. Finally, three interdisciplinary sections have been written for addressing novelty aspects in anaerobic co-digestion, i.e., pre-treatments, microbial dynamics and modeling. However, much effort needs to be done in these later aspects to better understand and predict anaerobic co-digestion.
    Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 08/2014; 36:412–427. DOI:10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.039 · 5.90 Impact Factor
Show more