Search results

Filters

  • Journals
  • Authors
  • Keywords
  • Data
  • Type

Search results

Number of results: 4
items per page: 25 50 75
Sort by:
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The article presents technological and measurement systems and methods for substrate preparation, production and purification of raw biogas, biogas storage, cogeneration, and processing of post-fermentation mass. Based on the existing infrastructure for biogas production from pig slurry, a model system for integrating objects in the AVEVA environment using integration mechanisms was demonstrated. The simulation used an imaging method, and the 3D model was used for technological simulations. The work presents simulation results that allow us to understand the availability of graphic imaging techniques at each stage, define and expand the library of typical errors and requirements for pipeline installations, structures and devices, facilitating the identification of design errors and accelerated introduction of corrections to the installation design.
The article features the use of integration of elements of a pilot biogas production installation in the AVEVA environment – innovative systems for heating the substrate and managing agricultural biogas production were implemented. A node for the production of raw biogas was indicated for the transport system of biogas produced in the fermentation tank, along with devices enabling the conduct, control and regulation of the fermentation process. The visualisation concerned integration of the biogas production technology diagram with the model environment for the created pipelines using integrator mechanisms.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Grzegorz Wałowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Institute of Technology and Life Sciences – National Research Institute, Falenty, 3 Hrabska Ave, 05-090 Raszyn, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

Sewage sludge (municipal, or industrial) treatment is still a problem in so far that it is not satisfactorily resolved in terms of cost and final disposal. Two common forms of sludge disposal are possible; the first being direct disposal on land (including agriculture) and the second being incineration (ash production), although neither of these methods are universally applied. Simplifying the issue, direct sludge disposal on land is seldom applied for sanitary and environmental reasons, while incineration is not popular for financial (high costs) reasons. Very often medium and large wastewater treatment plants apply anaerobic digestion for sludge hygiene principles, reducing the amount to be disposed and for biogas (energy) production. With the progress in sewage biological treatment aiming at nutrient removal, primary sludge has been omitted in the working processes and only surplus activated sludge requires handling. Anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge (WAS) is more difficult due to the presence of microorganisms, the decomposition of which requires a relatively long time for hydrolysis. In order to upgrade the hydrolysis effects, several different pre-treatment processes have already been developed and introduced. The additional pre-treatment processes applied are aimed at residual sludge bulk mass minimization, shortening of the anaerobic digestion process or higher biogas production, and therefore require additional energy. The water-energy-waste Nexus (treads of) of the benefits and operational difficulties, including energy costs are discussed in this paper. The intensity of pre-treatment processes to upgrade the microorganism’s hydrolysis has crucial implications. Here a low intensity pre-treatment process, alkalisation and hydrodynamic disintegration - hybrid process - were presented in order to achieve sufficient effects of WAS anaerobic digestion. A sludge digestion efficiency increase expressed as 45% biogas additional production and 52% of the total or volatile solids reduction has been confirmed.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Jan Suschka
Klaudiusz Grübel
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The aim of the study was to assess the effect of silage additive containing heterofermentative lactic acid bacteria (LAB) strain of Lactobacillus buchneri species on ensiling quality, as well as methane yield and the kinetics of biogas production from ensiled perennial energy grasses: Miscanthus × giganteus (miscanthus), Spartina pectinata (cordgrass), Panicum virgatum (switchgrass) and Andropogon gerardii (big bluestem). The listed plants are not commonly used for biogas production, their susceptibility to ensiling is also little known, hence the need to investigate their suitability for these processes. Effective methods for increasing the biogas yield from biomass are still demand, hence the research on the use of LAB for this purpose.
After harvesting the grasses were cut and ensiled in barrels with and without (controls) the usage of commercial silage inoculant containing Lactobacillus buchneri LN40177. After 90 days of ensiling obtained silages were analysed in order to compare their chemical composition: organic acids content, the loss of dry matter, the differences in particular fibres composition. The silages were then subjected to methane fermentation using OxiTop® sensors and exposed to air in order to check their aerobic stability.
The silages prepared with LAB additive had higher concentration of acetic acid than the control silages prepared without LAB addition, which contributed to increased aerobic stability but had no effect on the methane yield of miscanthus, switchgrass and big bluestem. Using the microbial inoculant during ensiling had beneficial effect in terms of reducing the duration of biogas production process from obtained silages: lag phase was shortened, daily biogas production rate was increased and 90% of biogas was produced in a shorter period of time compared to the control silages from investigated grasses. The modified Gompertz model well reflected the kinetics of biogas production process.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marta Kupryś-Caruk
1
ORCID: ORCID
Aleksander Lisowski
2
ORCID: ORCID
Chrystian Chomontowski
1
ORCID: ORCID

  1. Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Institute of Biology, 159 Nowoursynowska St, 02-776 Warsaw, Poland
  2. Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Institute of Mechanical Engineering, Warsaw, Poland
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex

Abstract

The waste production is closely related with human activity. Various approaches have been applied to manage and reduce its increasing volume (Paranjpe et al. 2023). One of the possibilities that comply with the assumptions of circular economy is utilization of wastes in anaerobic digestion (AD) process. This technology is common worldwide and it is recognized as the cost-effective methods of energy generation that also allow for nutrient recovery, as well as effective waste management (Alharbi et al. 2023). The biogas generated within this process is considered as a multifunctional renewable source that might be a promising alternative to the depleting traditional fuels. It finds various applications such as heat and power generation, fuel in automobiles, and substrate in chemical industry (Shitophyta et al. 2022, Pradeshwaran 2024). Typically, biogas contains 50–70% of CH4, 30–50% of CO2, and 1–10% of other trace gases like H2, H2S, CO, N2. Its composition mainly depends on the feedstock characteristics, operational conditions, and adopted technology (Gani et al. 2023, Archana et al. 2024). Considering further application, the priority action should be increasing its volume and methane content. There are several strategies to achieve these goals, including implementing codigestion strategy, adding additional component to the main substrate, introducing trace elements essential in AD, pretreatment strategies, and introducing enzymes and microbial strains to digesters (Zhang et al. 2019). Each method has limits related to the implementation costs, changes in the adopted technology, operator training needs, and additional energy input, which might negatively influence the energy balance of wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) (Meng et al. 2022). Therefore, recent scientific attention has focused on combining various strategies to achieve intended goals. Moreover, such combinations might allow for an effective utilization of various wastes, the earlier use of which in AD was difficult. Orange waste could be an example of such a substrate. The previous studies indicated that its application in AD resulted in poor process efficiency, mainly due to the presence of limonene, recognized as the main inhibitor of biological activity (Calabro et al. 2020, Bouaita et al. 2022). In this study, the novel concept of implementing solidified carbon dioxide (SCO2) in the anaerobic co-digestion of municipal sewage sludge (SS) and orange peel waste (OPW) has been proposed. This approach may help overcome the disadvantages of the two-component AD of these wastes. Importantly, such studies have not been conducted thus far. However, the recent studies indicated that application of SCO2 to aerobic granular sludge improved biogas and methane yields and also enhanced the kinetics of biogas production (Kazimierowicz et al. 2023 a,b). Importantly, SCO2 might be generated in biogas upgrading technologies (Yousef 2019). Such solution is consistent with the principles of the circular economy and contributes to reducing the carbon footprint of WWTPs.
Go to article

Bibliography

  1. Alharbi, M., Alseroury, F. & Alkthami, B. (2023). Biogas Production from Manure of Camel and Sheep Using Tomato and Rumen as Co-Substrate. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 24(11), pp. 54–61. DOI:10.12911/22998993/170984
  2. Archana, K., Visckram, A., Senthil Kuma, P., Manikandan, S., Saravanan, A. & Natrayan, L. (2024). A review on recent technological breakthroughs in anaerobic digestion of organic biowaste for biogas generation: Challenges towards sustainable development goals. Fuel, 358, 130298. DOI:10.1016/j.fuel.2023.130298
  3. Awasthi, M.K., Lukitawesa, L., Duan, Y., Taherzadeh, M.J. & Zhang, Z. (2022). Bacterial dynamics during the anaerobic digestion of toxic citrus fruit waste and semi-continues volatile fatty acids production in membrane bioreactors. Fuel, 319, 123812. DOI:10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123812
  4. Bouaita, R., Derbal, K., Panico, A., Iasimone, F., Pontoni, L., Fabbricino, M. & Pirozzi, F. (2022). Methane production from anaerobic co-digestion of orange peel waste and organic fraction of municipal solid waste in batch and semi-continuous reactors. Biomass and Bioenergy, 160, Volume 160, 106421. DOI:10.1016/j.biombioe.2022.106421
  5. Calabrò, P.S., Fazzino, F., Sidari, R. & Zema, D.A. (2020). Optimization of orange peel waste ensiling for sustainable anaerobic digestion. Renewable Energy, 154, pp. 849–862. DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2020.03.047
  6. Fisher, K. & Phillips, C. (2008). Potential antimicrobial uses of essential oils in food: is citrus the answer? Trends in Food Science & Technology, 19, pp. 156–164. DOI:10.1016/j.renene.2020.03.047
  7. Gani, A., Mamat, R., Sudhakar, K., Rosdi, S.M., & Husin, H. (2023). Biomass and wind energy as sources of renewable energy for a more sustainable environment in Indonesia: A review. Archives of Environmental Protection, pp. 57–69. DOI: 10.24425/aep.2022.142690
  8. González-Mas, M.C., Rambla, J.L., López-Gresa, M.P., Blázquez, M.A. & Granell, A. (2019). Volatile Compounds in Citrus Essential Oils: A Comprehensive Review. Frontiers in Plant Science, 10, 12. DOI: 10.3389/fpls.2019.00012.
  9. Grübel, K. & Machnicka, A. (2020) The Use of Hybrid Disintegration of Activated Sludge to Improve Anaerobic Stabilization Process. Ecological Engineering & Environmental Technology, 21, pp. 1–8. DOI:10.12912/23920629/119104.
  10. Hakimi, M., Manogaran, M., Shamsuddin, R.B., Mohd Johari, S.A., Abdalla, M., Hassan, M. & Soehartanto, T. (2023). Co-anaerobic digestion of sawdust and chicken manure with plant herbs: Biogas generation and kinetic study. Heliyon, 9(6), 17096. DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17096.
  11. Howel, G., Bennett, C.J. & Materić, D. (2019). A comparison of methods for early prediction of anaerobic biogas potential on biologically treated municipal solid waste. Journal of Environmental Management, 232, pp. 887–894. DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.137.
  12. Hu, K., Jiang, J., Zhao, Q., Lee, D., Wang, K. & Qiu, W. (2011). Conditioning of wastewater sludge using freezing and thawing: role of curing. Water research, 45 18, pp. 5969–5976. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.08.064.
  13. Kazimierowicz, J., Dębowski, M. & Zieliński, M. (2023a). Long-Term Pre-Treatment of Municipal Sewage Sludge with Solidified Carbon Dioxide (SCO2)—Effect on Anaerobic Digestion Efficiency. Applied Sciences, 13, 3075. DOI:10.3390/app13053075.
  14. Kazimierowicz, J., Dębowski, M., Zieliński, M., Bartkowska, I., Wasilewski, A., Łapiński, D. & Ofman, P. (2023b). The Use of Solidified Carbon Dioxide in the Aerobic Granular Sludge Pre-Treatment before Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion. Applied Sciences, 13, 7864. DOI: 10.3390/app13137864.
  15. Meng, Y., Li, Y., Chen, L. & Han, R. (2022). Application of response surface methodology
  16. to improve methane production from jerusalem artichoke straw. Archives of Environmental Protection, 48, pp. 70–79. DOI: 10.24425/aep.2022.142691.
  17. Millati, R., Wikandari, R., Ariyanto, T., Putri, R.U. & Taherzadeh, M.J. (2020). Pretreatment technologies for anaerobic digestion of lignocelluloses and toxic feedstocks. Bioresource Technology, 122998. DOI:10.1016/j.biortech.2020.122998.
  18. Montusiewicz, A., Lebiocka, M., Rożej, A., Zacharska, E. & Pawłowski, L. (2010). Freezing/thawing effects on anaerobic digestion of mixed sewage sludge. Bioresource Technology, 101 10, pp. 3466–3473. DOI:10.1016/j.biortech.2009.12.125.
  19. Nazari, L., Yuan, Z., Santoro, D., Sarathy, S.R., Ho, D., Batstone D.J., Xu C.C. & Ray, M.B. (2017). Low-temperature thermal pre-treatment of municipal wastewater sludge: Process optimization and effects on solubilization and anaerobic degradation. Water research, 113, pp. 111–123. DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2016.11.055.
  20. Paranjpe, A., Saxena, S. & Jain, P. (2023). A Review on Performance Improvement of Anaerobic Digestion Using Co-Digestion of Food Waste and Sewage Sludge. Journal of Environmental Management, 338, 117733. DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.117733.
  21. Phalakornkule, C., Nuchdang, S., Khemkhao, M., Mhuantong, W., Wongwilaiwalin, S., Tangphatsornruang, S., Champreda V., Kitsuwan, J. & Vatanyoopaisarn, S. (2017). Effect of freeze-thaw process on physical properties, microbial activities and population structures of anaerobic sludge. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering, 123 , pp. 474–481. DOI:10.1016/j.jbiosc.2016.11.005.
  22. Pradeshwaran, V., Chen, W., Saravanakumar, A., Suriyaprakash, R. & Selvarajoo, A. (2024). Biocatalyst enhanced biogas production from food and fruit waste through anaerobic digestion. Biocatalysis and Agricultural Biotechnology, 55, 102975. DOI:10.1016/j.bcab.2023.102975.
  23. Purandare, A., Verbruggen, W. & Vanapalli, S. (2023). Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of the Dry Ice Sublimation Temperature for Varying Far-Field Pressure and CO2 Concentration. International Communications in Heat and Mass Transfer, 148, 107042. DOI:10.1016/j.icheatmasstransfer.2023.107042
  24. Rokaya, B., Kerroum, D., Hayat, Z., Panico, A., Ouafa, A., & Pirozzi, F. (2019). Biogas production by an anaerobic digestion process from orange peel waste and its improvement by limonene leaching: Investigation of H2O2 pre-treatment effect. Energy Sources Part A-recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects, pp. 1–9. DOI:10.1080/15567036.2019.1692975.
  25. Ruiz, B. & Flotats, X. (2014). Citrus essential oils and their influence on the anaerobic 721 digestion process: an overview. Waste Management, 34(11), pp. 2063–2079. DOI:10.1016/j.wasman.2014.06.026.
  26. Serrano, A., Siles López, J. A., Chica, A. F., Martín, M. A., Karouach, F., Mesfioui, A. & El Bari, H. (2014). Mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and orange peel waste. Environmental Technology, 35(5-8), pp. 898–906. DOI:10.1080/09593330.2013.855822.
  27. Shitophyta, L. M., Padya, S. A., Zufar, A. F. & Rahmawati, N. (2022). The Impact of Alkali Pretreatment and Organic Solvent Pretreatment on Biogas Production from Anaerobic Digestion of Food Waste. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 23(12), pp. 179–188. DOI:10.12911/22998993/155022.
  28. Szaja, A, Golianek, P. & Kamiński, M. (2022a). Process Performance of Thermophilic Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Municipal Sewage Sludge and Orange Peel. Journal of Ecological Engineering, 23(8), pp. 66–76. DOI:10.12911/22998993/150613
  29. Szaja, A., Montusiewicz, A., Pasieczna-Patkowska, S. & Lebiocka, M. (2022b.) Technological and Energetic Aspects of Multi-Component Co-Digestion of the Beverage Industry Wastes and Municipal Sewage Sludge. Energies, 15, 5395. DOI:10.3390/en15155395.
  30. Wu, D., Li, L., Peng, Y., Yang, P., Peng, X., Sun, Y. & Wang, X. (2021). State indicators of anaerobic digestion: A critical review on process monitoring and diagnosis. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 148, 111260. DOI:10.1016/J.RSER.2021.111260.
  31. Yousef, A.M., El-Maghlany, W.M., Eldrainy, Y.A. & Attia, A. (2019). Upgrading Biogas to Biomethane and Liquid CO2: A Novel Cryogenic Process. Fuel, 251, pp. 611–628. DOI:10.1016/J.FUEL.2019.03.127.
  32. Zawieja, I.E. (2019). The Course of the Methane Fermentation Process of Dry Ice Modified Excess Sludge. Archives of Environmental Protection, 45, pp. 50–58. DOI:10.24425/aep.2019.126421.
  33. Zhang, L., Loh, K.C. & Zhang, J. (2019). Enhanced biogas production from anaerobic digestion of solid organic wastes: Current status and prospects. Bioresource Technology Reports, 5, pp. 280–296. DOI:10.1016/j.biteb.2018.07.005.
Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Aleksandra Szaja
1
ORCID: ORCID
Izabela Bartkowska
2

  1. Lublin University of Technology, Faculty of Environmental Engineering, Lublin, Poland
  2. Bialystok University of Technology, Department of Water Supply and Sewage Systems,Faculty of Civil Engineering and Environmental Sciences, Poland

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more