IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/rensus/v112y2019icp1-10.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of the methane potential of different agricultural and food processing substrates for improved biogas production in rural areas

Author

Listed:
  • Garcia, Natalia Herrero
  • Mattioli, Andrea
  • Gil, Aida
  • Frison, Nicola
  • Battista, Federico
  • Bolzonella, David

Abstract

Anaerobic Digestion is largely applied in the rural context because of its capability of stabilizing the organic matter while recovering biogas, thus renewable energy, and a renewable fertilizer, the digestate. In the present study, the methane yield of a large number of organic biomasses generated in the agro-industrial sector was evaluated by biomethane potential trials. More than 50 different organic substrates were grouped according to their chemical characteristics or their application in 7 major categories: energy crops, lignocellulosic by-products, herbaceous by-products, vegetable by-products, fruits by-products, livestock effluents and miscellaneous food processing by-products. Results demonstrated that the concentration and the nature of the organic matter is able to influence the methane production. Energy crops are among the more diffused substrates with about 200 million tons/year. Its wide adoption is justified by relative high methane yields (250–350 L CH4/kg TVS) and mainly by the rapid degradation rates with hydrolysis constant of about 0.15 d−1. By-products characterized by high content of lignocellulosic materials showed slower kinetics (0.05–0.09 d−1) and a methane production in the range of 150–400 L CH4/kg TVS, which increased with cellulose content. Livestock effluents had generally a lower methane yield (50–200 L CH4/kg TVS) as effect of the higher ammonia inhibiting compounds. Finally, food by products were characterized by a large methane production's range, 150–700 L CH4/kg TVS, due to heterogeneous nature of these substrates. Food by products rich in lipids content had the higher methane yield (400–700 L CH4/kg TVS), but showed the slowest kinetics (kh lower than 0.1 d−1). P Substrates rich in proteins and carbohydrates had lower methane yields (300–450 L CH4/kg TVS) but higher hydrolysis constants, generally upper than 0.1 d−1. Considering the global biomass generation of these substrates at European level, it was determined that their valorisation could contribute with an annual potential energy output of 2584 PJ (61.7 Mtoe), representing 5.7% of total energy consumed in EU- 28 in 2015 or 34,1% of total renewable energy in the same year.

Suggested Citation

  • Garcia, Natalia Herrero & Mattioli, Andrea & Gil, Aida & Frison, Nicola & Battista, Federico & Bolzonella, David, 2019. "Evaluation of the methane potential of different agricultural and food processing substrates for improved biogas production in rural areas," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 1-10.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:rensus:v:112:y:2019:i:c:p:1-10
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032119303533
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.040?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Li, Yangyang & Jin, Yiying & Li, Hailong & Borrion, Aiduan & Yu, Zhixin & Li, Jinhui, 2018. "Kinetic studies on organic degradation and its impacts on improving methane production during anaerobic digestion of food waste," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 136-147.
    2. Allen, Eoin & Wall, David M. & Herrmann, Christiane & Murphy, Jerry D., 2016. "A detailed assessment of resource of biomethane from first, second and third generation substrates," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 87(P1), pages 656-665.
    3. O’Shea, Richard & Kilgallon, Ian & Wall, David & Murphy, Jerry D., 2016. "Quantification and location of a renewable gas industry based on digestion of wastes in Ireland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 229-239.
    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. Matheri, Anthony Njuguna & Ntuli, Freeman & Ngila, Jane Catherine & Seodigeng, Tumisang & Zvinowanda, Caliphs & Njenga, Cecilia Kinuthia, 2018. "Quantitative characterization of carbonaceous and lignocellulosic biomass for anaerobic digestion," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 92(C), pages 9-16.
    6. Caroline Fritsch & Andreas Staebler & Anton Happel & Miguel Angel Cubero Márquez & Ingrid Aguiló-Aguayo & Maribel Abadias & Miriam Gallur & Ilaria Maria Cigognini & Angela Montanari & Maria Jose López, 2017. "Processing, Valorization and Application of Bio-Waste Derived Compounds from Potato, Tomato, Olive and Cereals: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-46, August.
    7. Dandikas, Vasilis & Heuwinkel, Hauke & Lichti, Fabian & Eckl, Thomas & Drewes, Jörg E. & Koch, Konrad, 2018. "Correlation between hydrolysis rate constant and chemical composition of energy crops," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 34-42.
    8. Fiore, S. & Ruffino, B. & Campo, G. & Roati, C. & Zanetti, M.C., 2016. "Scale-up evaluation of the anaerobic digestion of food-processing industrial wastes," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(PA), pages 949-959.
    9. Parawira, W & Murto, M & Zvauya, R & Mattiasson, B, 2004. "Anaerobic batch digestion of solid potato waste alone and in combination with sugar beet leaves," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(11), pages 1811-1823.
    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. Audrey Lallement & Christine Peyrelasse & Camille Lagnet & Abdellatif Barakat & Blandine Schraauwers & Samuel Maunas & Florian Monlau, 2023. "A Detailed Database of the Chemical Properties and Methane Potential of Biomasses Covering a Large Range of Common Agricultural Biogas Plant Feedstocks," Waste, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-33, January.
    2. Bolzonella, D. & Battista, F. & Mattioli, A. & Nicolato, C. & Frison, N. & Lampis, S., 2020. "Biological thermophilic post hydrolysis of digestate enhances the biogas production in the anaerobic digestion of agro-waste," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Josipa Pavičić & Karolina Novak Mavar & Vladislav Brkić & Katarina Simon, 2022. "Biogas and Biomethane Production and Usage: Technology Development, Advantages and Challenges in Europe," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-28, April.
    4. Giovanni Ferrari & Federico Ioverno & Marco Sozzi & Francesco Marinello & Andrea Pezzuolo, 2021. "Land-Use Change and Bioenergy Production: Soil Consumption and Characterization of Anaerobic Digestion Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-14, July.
    5. Yermek Abilmazhinov & Kapan Shakerkhan & Vladimir Meshechkin & Yerzhan Shayakhmetov & Nurzhan Nurgaliyev & Anuarbek Suychinov, 2023. "Mathematical Modeling for Evaluating the Sustainability of Biogas Generation through Anaerobic Digestion of Livestock Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-14, March.
    6. Joana Silva & Rita Fragoso, 2023. "Enhanced Biomethanation: The Impact of Incorporating Fish Waste on the Co-Digestion of Pig Slurry and Orange Pomace," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(16), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Erika Conde & Prasad Kaparaju, 2022. "Effect of Temporal Variation in Chemical Composition on Methane Yields of Rendering Plant Wastewater," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-16, October.
    8. Giovanni Ferrari & Andrea Pezzuolo & Abdul-Sattar Nizami & Francesco Marinello, 2020. "Bibliometric Analysis of Trends in Biomass for Bioenergy Research," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-21, July.
    9. Justyna Tarapata & Marcin Zieliński & Justyna Zulewska, 2022. "Valorization of Dairy By-Products: Efficiency of Energy Production from Biogas Obtained in Anaerobic Digestion of Ultrafiltration Permeates," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-15, September.
    10. Gábor Pintér, 2020. "The Potential Role of Power-to-Gas Technology Connected to Photovoltaic Power Plants in the Visegrad Countries—A Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-14, December.
    11. Battista, Federico & Zanzoni, Serena & Strazzera, Giuseppe & Andreolli, Marco & Bolzonella, David, 2020. "The cascade biorefinery approach for the valorization of the spent coffee grounds," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 1203-1211.
    12. Scano, Efisio Antonio & Grosso, Massimiliano & Pistis, Agata & Carboni, Gianluca & Cocco, Daniele, 2021. "An in-depth analysis of biogas production from locally agro-industrial by-products and residues. An Italian case," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 308-318.
    13. Federico Battista & Nicola Frison & David Bolzonella, 2019. "Energy and Nutrients’ Recovery in Anaerobic Digestion of Agricultural Biomass: An Italian Perspective for Future Applications," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-13, August.
    14. Kowalczyk-Juśko, Alina & Pochwatka, Patrycja & Zaborowicz, Maciej & Czekała, Wojciech & Mazurkiewicz, Jakub & Mazur, Andrzej & Janczak, Damian & Marczuk, Andrzej & Dach, Jacek, 2020. "Energy value estimation of silages for substrate in biogas plants using an artificial neural network," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    15. Patrycja Pochwatka & Alina Kowalczyk-Juśko & Piotr Sołowiej & Agnieszka Wawrzyniak & Jacek Dach, 2020. "Biogas Plant Exploitation in a Middle-Sized Dairy Farm in Poland: Energetic and Economic Aspects," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.

    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. Bhatnagar, N. & Ryan, D. & Murphy, R. & Enright, A.M., 2022. "A comprehensive review of green policy, anaerobic digestion of animal manure and chicken litter feedstock potential – Global and Irish perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    2. Ó Céileachair, Dónal & O'Shea, Richard & Murphy, Jerry D. & Wall, David M., 2021. "Alternative energy management strategies for large industry in non-gas-grid regions using on-farm biomethane," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 303(C).
    3. Mahmudul, H.M. & Rasul, M.G. & Akbar, D. & Narayanan, R. & Mofijur, M., 2022. "Food waste as a source of sustainable energy: Technical, economical, environmental and regulatory feasibility analysis," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    4. Bedoić, Robert & Špehar, Ana & Puljko, Josip & Čuček, Lidija & Ćosić, Boris & Pukšec, Tomislav & Duić, Neven, 2020. "Opportunities and challenges: Experimental and kinetic analysis of anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and rendering industry streams for biogas production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    5. O'Shea, Richard & Wall, David M. & Kilgallon, Ian & Browne, James D. & Murphy, Jerry D., 2017. "Assessing the total theoretical, and financially viable, resource of biomethane for injection to a natural gas network in a region," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 237-256.
    6. Meneses-Quelal Orlando & Velázquez-Martí Borja, 2020. "Pretreatment of Animal Manure Biomass to Improve Biogas Production: A Review," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-28, July.
    7. Santos, Berta de los & Medina, Eduardo & Brenes, Manuel & Aguado, Ana & García, Pedro & Romero, Concepción, 2020. "Chemical composition of table olive wastewater and its relationship with the bio-fortifying capacity of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.) plants," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    8. Song, Yapeng & Hu, Wanrong & Qiao, Wei & Westerholm, Maria & Wandera, Simon M. & Dong, Renjie, 2022. "Upgrading the performance of high solids feeding anaerobic digestion of chicken manure under extremely high ammonia level," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 13-20.
    9. Bi, Shaojie & Westerholm, Maria & Hu, Wanrong & Mahdy, Ahmed & Dong, Taili & Sun, Yingcai & Qiao, Wei & Dong, Renjie, 2021. "The metabolic performance and microbial communities of anaerobic digestion of chicken manure under stressed ammonia condition: A case study of a 10-year successful biogas plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 644-651.
    10. Yermek Abilmazhinov & Kapan Shakerkhan & Vladimir Meshechkin & Yerzhan Shayakhmetov & Nurzhan Nurgaliyev & Anuarbek Suychinov, 2023. "Mathematical Modeling for Evaluating the Sustainability of Biogas Generation through Anaerobic Digestion of Livestock Waste," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-14, March.
    11. Ao, Tianjie & Chen, Lin & Chen, Yichao & Liu, Xiaofeng & Wan, Liping & Li, Dong, 2021. "The screening of early warning indicators and microbial community of chicken manure thermophilic digestion at high organic loading rate," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    12. 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.
    13. Arora, Amarpreet Singh & Nawaz, Alam & Qyyum, Muhammad Abdul & Ismail, Sherif & Aslam, Muhammad & Tawfik, Ahmed & Yun, Choa Mun & Lee, Moonyong, 2021. "Energy saving anammox technology-based nitrogen removal and bioenergy recovery from wastewater: Inhibition mechanisms, state-of-the-art control strategies, and prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    14. Katinas, Vladislovas & Marčiukaitis, Mantas & Perednis, Eugenijus & Dzenajavičienė, Eugenija Farida, 2019. "Analysis of biodegradable waste use for energy generation in Lithuania," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 559-567.
    15. Rotunno, Paolo & Lanzini, Andrea & Leone, Pierluigi, 2017. "Energy and economic analysis of a water scrubbing based biogas upgrading process for biomethane injection into the gas grid or use as transportation fuel," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 102(PB), pages 417-432.
    16. Mohammad Al-Addous & Motasem N. Saidan & Mathhar Bdour & Mohammad Alnaief, 2018. "Evaluation of Biogas Production from the Co-Digestion of Municipal Food Waste and Wastewater Sludge at Refugee Camps Using an Automated Methane Potential Test System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, December.
    17. Constantin Stan & Gerardo Collaguazo & Constantin Streche & Tiberiu Apostol & Diana Mariana Cocarta, 2018. "Pilot-Scale Anaerobic Co-Digestion of the OFMSW: Improving Biogas Production and Startup," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    18. Nges, Ivo Achu & Liu, Jing, 2010. "Effects of solid retention time on anaerobic digestion of dewatered-sewage sludge in mesophilic and thermophilic conditions," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 2200-2206.
    19. Damaceno, Felippe Martins & Chiarelotto, Maico & Pires Salcedo Restrepo, Juan C. & Buligon, Eduardo Luiz & Costa, Luiz Antonio de Mendonça & de Lucas Junior, Jorge & Costa, Mônica Sarolli Silva de Men, 2019. "Anaerobic co-digestion of sludge cake from poultry slaughtering wastewater treatment and sweet potato: Energy and nutrient recovery," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 489-499.
    20. Alessandro Neri & Bruno Bernardi & Giuseppe Zimbalatti & Souraya Benalia, 2023. "An Overview of Anaerobic Digestion of Agricultural By-Products and Food Waste for Biomethane Production," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-20, September.

    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:eee:rensus:v:112:y:2019:i:c:p:1-10. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/600126/description#description .

    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.