IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v8y2015i3p1990-2007d46774.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Organic Loading Rate on Psychrophilic Anaerobic Digestion of Solid Dairy Manure

Author

Listed:
  • Noori M. Cata Saady

    (Dairy and Swine Research and Development Center, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sherbrooke, QC J1M 0C8, Canada)

  • Daniel I. Massé

    (Dairy and Swine Research and Development Center, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Sherbrooke, QC J1M 0C8, Canada)

Abstract

Increasing the feed total solids to anaerobic digester improves the process economics and decreases the volume of liquid effluent from current wet anaerobic digestion. The objective of this study was to develop a novel psychrophilic (20 °C) anaerobic digestion technology of undiluted cow feces (total solids of 11%–16%). Two sets of duplicate laboratory-scale sequence batch bioreactors have been operated at organic loading rates (OLR) of 6.0 to 8.0 g total chemical oxygen demand (TCOD) kg −1 inoculum day −1 (d −1 ) during 210 days. The results demonstrated that the process is feasible at treatment cycle length (TCL) of 21 days; however, the quality of cow feces rather than the OLR had a direct influence on the specific methane yield (SMY). The SMY ranged between 124.5 ± 1.4 and 227.9 ± 4.8 normalized liter (NL) CH 4 kg −1 volatile solids (VS) fed d −1 . Substrate-to-inoculum mass ratio (SIR) was 0.63 ± 0.05, 0.90 ± 0.09, and 1.06 ± 0.07 at OLR of 6.0, 7.0, and 8.0 g TCOD kg −1 inoculum d −1 , respectively. No volatile fatty acids (VFAs) accumulation has been observed which indicated that hydrolysis was the rate limiting step and VFAs have been consumed immediately. Bioreactors performance consistency in terms of the level of SMYs, VFAs concentrations at end of the TCL, pH stability and volatile solids reduction indicates a stable and reproducible process during the entire operation.

Suggested Citation

  • Noori M. Cata Saady & Daniel I. Massé, 2015. "Impact of Organic Loading Rate on Psychrophilic Anaerobic Digestion of Solid Dairy Manure," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-18, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:8:y:2015:i:3:p:1990-2007:d:46774
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/8/3/1990/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/8/3/1990/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Massé, Daniel I. & Rajagopal, Rajinikanth & Singh, Gursharan, 2014. "Technical and operational feasibility of psychrophilic anaerobic digestion biotechnology for processing ammonia-rich waste," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 49-55.
    2. Martí-Herrero, Jaime & Chipana, Maria & Cuevas, Carlos & Paco, Gabriel & Serrano, Victor & Zymla, Bernhard & Heising, Klas & Sologuren, Jaime & Gamarra, Alba, 2014. "Low cost tubular digesters as appropriate technology for widespread application: Results and lessons learned from Bolivia," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 156-165.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhang, Quanguo & Hu, Jianjun & Lee, Duu-Jong, 2016. "Biogas from anaerobic digestion processes: Research updates," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 108-119.
    2. Yao, Yao & Huang, Gordon & An, Chunjiang & Chen, Xiujuan & Zhang, Peng & Xin, Xiaying & Jian Shen, & Agnew, Joy, 2020. "Anaerobic digestion of livestock manure in cold regions: Technological advancements and global impacts," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    3. Dehkordi, Seyed Mohammad Mehdi Noorbakhsh & Jahromi, Ahmad Reza Taghipour & Ferdowsi, Ali & Shumal, Mohammad & Dehnavi, Ali, 2020. "Investigation of biogas production potential from mechanical separated municipal solid waste as an approach for developing countries (case study: Isfahan-Iran)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    4. Awasthi, Mukesh Kumar & Sarsaiya, Surendra & Wainaina, Steven & Rajendran, Karthik & Kumar, Sumit & Quan, Wang & Duan, Yumin & Awasthi, Sanjeev Kumar & Chen, Hongyu & Pandey, Ashok & Zhang, Zengqiang , 2019. "A critical review of organic manure biorefinery models toward sustainable circular bioeconomy: Technological challenges, advancements, innovations, and future perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 115-131.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jaime Jaimes-Estévez & German Zafra & Jaime Martí-Herrero & Guillermo Pelaz & Antonio Morán & Alejandra Puentes & Christian Gomez & Liliana del Pilar Castro & Humberto Escalante Hernández, 2020. "Psychrophilic Full Scale Tubular Digester Operating over Eight Years: Complete Performance Evaluation and Microbiological Population," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-17, December.
    2. Yao, Yao & Huang, Gordon & An, Chunjiang & Chen, Xiujuan & Zhang, Peng & Xin, Xiaying & Jian Shen, & Agnew, Joy, 2020. "Anaerobic digestion of livestock manure in cold regions: Technological advancements and global impacts," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    3. Zheng, Zehui & Liu, Jinhuan & Yuan, Xufeng & Wang, Xiaofen & Zhu, Wanbin & Yang, Fuyu & Cui, Zongjun, 2015. "Effect of dairy manure to switchgrass co-digestion ratio on methane production and the bacterial community in batch anaerobic digestion," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 249-257.
    4. Fuchs, Werner & Wang, Xuemei & Gabauer, Wolfgang & Ortner, Markus & Li, Zifu, 2018. "Tackling ammonia inhibition for efficient biogas production from chicken manure: Status and technical trends in Europe and China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 186-199.
    5. German Smetana & Ewa Neczaj & Anna Grosser, 2021. "Biomethane Potential of Selected Organic Waste and Sewage Sludge at Different Temperature Regimes," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-18, July.
    6. Ni, Ping & Lyu, Tao & Sun, Hao & Dong, Renjie & Wu, Shubiao, 2017. "Liquid digestate recycled utilization in anaerobic digestion of pig manure: Effect on methane production, system stability and heavy metal mobilization," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 1695-1704.
    7. Yang, Ziyi & Sun, Hangyu & Kurbonova, Malikakhon & Zhou, Ling & Arhin, Samuel Gyebi & Papadakis, Vagelis G. & Goula, Maria A. & Liu, Guangqing & Zhang, Yi & Wang, Wen, 2022. "Simultaneous supplementation of magnetite and polyurethane foam carrier can reach a Pareto-optimal point to alleviate ammonia inhibition during anaerobic digestion," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 104-116.
    8. Ortiz, Willington & Terrapon-Pfaff, Julia & Dienst, Carmen, 2017. "Understanding the diffusion of domestic biogas technologies. Systematic conceptualisation of existing evidence from developing and emerging countries," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 1287-1299.
    9. Yao, Yiqing & Yu, Liang & Ghogare, Rishikesh & Dunsmoor, Alexander & Davaritouchaee, Maryam & Chen, Shulin, 2017. "Simultaneous ammonia stripping and anaerobic digestion for efficient thermophilic conversion of dairy manure at high solids concentration," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 179-188.
    10. Rupf, Gloria V. & Bahri, Parisa A. & de Boer, Karne & McHenry, Mark P., 2016. "Broadening the potential of biogas in Sub-Saharan Africa: An assessment of feasible technologies and feedstocks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 556-571.
    11. Akindolire, Muyiwa Ajoke & Rama, Haripriya & Roopnarain, Ashira, 2022. "Psychrophilic anaerobic digestion: A critical evaluation of microorganisms and enzymes to drive the process," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    12. Junmin Lee & Keungoui Kim & Hyunha Shin & Junseok Hwang, 2018. "Acceptance Factors of Appropriate Technology: Case of Water Purification Systems in Binh Dinh, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, June.
    13. Dávid Nagy & Péter Balogh & Zoltán Gabnai & József Popp & Judit Oláh & Attila Bai, 2018. "Economic Analysis of Pellet Production in Co-Digestion Biogas Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-21, May.
    14. Garfí, Marianna & Martí-Herrero, Jaime & Garwood, Anna & Ferrer, Ivet, 2016. "Household anaerobic digesters for biogas production in Latin America: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 599-614.
    15. Chen, Miao & Liu, Shujun & Yuan, Xufeng & Li, Qing X. & Wang, Fengzhong & Xin, Fengjiao & Wen, Boting, 2021. "Methane production and characteristics of the microbial community in the co-digestion of potato pulp waste and dairy manure amended with biochar," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 357-367.
    16. Tavera-Ruiz, C. & Martí-Herrero, J. & Mendieta, O. & Jaimes-Estévez, J. & Gauthier-Maradei, P. & Azimov, U. & Escalante, H. & Castro, L., 2023. "Current understanding and perspectives on anaerobic digestion in developing countries: Colombia case study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    17. Ortner, Markus & Wöss, David & Schumergruber, Alexander & Pröll, Tobias & Fuchs, Werner, 2015. "Energy self-supply of large abattoir by sustainable waste utilization based on anaerobic mono-digestion," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 460-471.
    18. Martí-Herrero, J. & Soria-Castellón, G. & Diaz-de-Basurto, A. & Alvarez, R. & Chemisana, D., 2019. "Biogas from a full scale digester operated in psychrophilic conditions and fed only with fruit and vegetable waste," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 676-684.
    19. Yasar, Abdullah & Nazir, Saba & Rasheed, Rizwan & Tabinda, Amtul Bari & Nazar, Masooma, 2017. "Economic review of different designs of biogas plants at household level in Pakistan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 221-229.
    20. Emma Lindkvist & Maria T. Johansson & Jakob Rosenqvist, 2017. "Methodology for Analysing Energy Demand in Biogas Production Plants—A Comparative Study of Two Biogas Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-20, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:8:y:2015:i:3:p:1990-2007:d:46774. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.