IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v12y2019i24p4605-d293875.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Hydrogen Sulfide Scrubbing Systems for Anaerobic Digesters on Two U.S. Dairy Farms

Author

Listed:
  • Abhinav Choudhury

    (Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA)

  • Timothy Shelford

    (Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA)

  • Gary Felton

    (Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA)

  • Curt Gooch

    (Department of Biological and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA)

  • Stephanie Lansing

    (Department of Environmental Science and Technology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA)

Abstract

Hydrogen sulfide (H 2 S) is a corrosive trace gas present in biogas produced from anaerobic digestion systems that should be removed to reduce engine-generator set maintenance costs. This study was conducted to provide a more complete understanding of two H 2 S scrubbers in terms of efficiency, operational and maintenance parameters, capital and operational costs, and the effect of scrubber management on sustained H 2 S reduction potential. For this work, biogas H 2 S, CO 2 , O 2 , and CH 4 concentrations were quantified for two existing H 2 S scrubbing systems (iron-oxide scrubber, and biological oxidation using air injection) located on two rural dairy farms. In the micro-aerated digester, the variability in biogas H 2 S concentration (average: 1938 ± 65 ppm) correlated with the O 2 concentration (average: 0.030 ± 0.004%). For the iron-oxide scrubber, there was no significant difference in the H 2 S concentrations in the pre-scrubbed (450 ± 42 ppm) and post-scrubbed (430 ± 41 ppm) biogas due to the use of scrap iron and steel wool instead of proprietary iron oxide-based adsorbents often used for biogas desulfurization. Even though the capital and operating costs for the two scrubbing systems were low (<$1500/year), the lack of dedicated operators led to inefficient performance for the two scrubbing systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Abhinav Choudhury & Timothy Shelford & Gary Felton & Curt Gooch & Stephanie Lansing, 2019. "Evaluation of Hydrogen Sulfide Scrubbing Systems for Anaerobic Digesters on Two U.S. Dairy Farms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:12:y:2019:i:24:p:4605-:d:293875
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/24/4605/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/12/24/4605/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Key, Nigel D. & Sneeringer, Stacy E., 2011. "Climate Change Policy and the Adoption of Methane Digesters on Livestock Operations," Economic Research Report 102758, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    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. Joanna K. Huertas & Lawrence Quipuzco & Amro Hassanein & Stephanie Lansing, 2020. "Comparing Hydrogen Sulfide Removal Efficiency in a Field-Scale Digester Using Microaeration and Iron Filters," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-14, September.
    2. A. S. M. Younus Bhuiyan Sabbir & Chayan Kumer Saha & Rajesh Nandi & Md. Forid Uz Zaman & Md. Monjurul Alam & Shiplu Sarker, 2021. "Effects of Seasonal Temperature Variation on Slurry Temperature and Biogas Composition of a Commercial Fixed-Dome Anaerobic Digester Used in Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-15, October.
    3. Morgane Poser & Luis Rodolfo Duarte E. Silva & Pascal Peu & Éric Dumont & Annabelle Couvert, 2022. "A Two-Stage Biogas Desulfurization Process Using Cellular Concrete Filtration and an Anoxic Biotrickling Filter," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-14, May.
    4. Justyna Franc-Dąbrowska & Magdalena Mądra-Sawicka & Anna Milewska, 2021. "Energy Sector Risk and Cost of Capital Assessment—Companies and Investors Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-20, March.
    5. 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).
    6. Becker, C.M. & Marder, M. & Junges, E. & Konrad, O., 2022. "Technologies for biogas desulfurization - An overview of recent studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    7. Jiang, Danping & Ge, Xumeng & Lin, Long & Chen, Zhou & Zhang, Quanguo & Li, Yebo, 2023. "Biological conversion of methane to methanol at high H2S concentrations with an H2S-tolerant methanotrophic consortium," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 475-484.

    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. Key, Nigel D. & Sneeringer, Stacy E., 2012. "Carbon Emissions, Renewable Electricity, and Profits: Comparing Policies to Promote Anaerobic Digesters on Dairies," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(2), pages 1-19, August.
    2. T. Chen & M. Liu & Y. Takahashi & J.D. Mullen & G.C.W. Ames, 2016. "Carbon emission reduction and cost--benefit of methane digester systems on hog farms in China," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(6), pages 948-966, June.
    3. Borchers, Allison M. & Xiarchos, Irene & Beckman, Jayson, 2014. "Determinants of wind and solar energy system adoption by U.S. farms: A multilevel modeling approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 106-115.
    4. Sands, Ron & Westcott, Paul & Price, J. Michael & Beckman, Jayson & Leibtag, Ephraim & Lucier, Gary & McBride, William D. & McGranahan, David & Morehart, Mitch & Roeger, Edward & Schaible, Glenn & Woj, 2011. "Impacts of Higher Energy Prices on Agriculture and Rural Economies," Economic Research Report 262236, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    5. Hitaj, Claudia & Suttles, Shellye, 2016. "Trends in U.S. Agriculture's Consumption and Production of Energy: Renewable Power, Shale Energy, and Cellulosic Biomass," Economic Information Bulletin 262140, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

    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:12:y:2019:i:24:p:4605-:d:293875. 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.