IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v15y2022i21p7869-d951370.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hydrogen and Methane Production by Single- and Two-Stage Anaerobic Digestion of Second Cheese Whey: Economic Performances and GHG Emissions Evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Giuseppe Lembo

    (Energy Technology Department, Italian Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development (ENEA), 00123 Rome, Italy
    Biochem SRL, Via Fratelli Rosselli 38, 00015 Monterotondo, Italy)

  • Antonella Signorini

    (Energy Technology Department, Italian Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development (ENEA), 00123 Rome, Italy)

  • Antonella Marone

    (Energy Technology Department, Italian Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development (ENEA), 00123 Rome, Italy)

  • Claudio Carbone

    (Energy Technology Department, Italian Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development (ENEA), 40129 Bologna, Italy)

  • Alessandro Agostini

    (Energy Technology Department, Italian Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Development (ENEA), 00123 Rome, Italy)

Abstract

This study aimed at evaluating the economic performances of and carbon footprint associated with innovative systems for the energetic valorization of second cheese whey (SCW), a by-product of whey cheese manufacture, through anaerobic digestion processes. Three systems were modeled: a conventional single-stage anaerobic digester (FAD), located at about 50 km from the dairy factory; an on-site conventional single-stage anaerobic digester (CAD), located at the dairy industry; and an on-site two-stage anaerobic digester (TAD). The TAD technology enables the simultaneous production of hydrogen and methane on site. The biogases produced were combusted in combined heat and power plants (CHP), but only the onsite systems provided process heat to the dairy factory. In the specific conditions assumed, TAD configuration exhibited a higher energy output, which led to a GHG emission reduction of about 60% compared to FAD, mostly thanks to the additional hydrogen (H 2 ) production and the improved engine performances. A detailed cost analysis confirmed the results of the environmental analysis, pointing to the TAD solution as the most economically viable, with a payback period of 9 years, while the CAD had a payback time of 12 years. The results here presented aim at providing the dairy industry with a robust economic analysis on the opportunity of building an innovative system for SCW valorization, as well as providing policymakers with environmental reliable data to support the promotion of this technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuseppe Lembo & Antonella Signorini & Antonella Marone & Claudio Carbone & Alessandro Agostini, 2022. "Hydrogen and Methane Production by Single- and Two-Stage Anaerobic Digestion of Second Cheese Whey: Economic Performances and GHG Emissions Evaluation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-15, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:21:p:7869-:d:951370
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/21/7869/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/21/7869/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sgroi, Filippo & Di Trapani, Anna Maria & Foderà, Mario & Testa, Riccardo & Tudisca, Salvatore, 2015. "Economic assessment of Eucalyptus (spp.) for biomass production as alternative crop in Southern Italy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 614-619.
    2. Kang, Jun Young & Kang, Do Won & Kim, Tong Seop & Hur, Kwang Beom, 2014. "Comparative economic analysis of gas turbine-based power generation and combined heat and power systems using biogas fuel," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 309-318.
    3. Alessandro Agostini & Ferdinando Battini & Jacopo Giuntoli & Vincenzo Tabaglio & Monica Padella & David Baxter & Luisa Marelli & Stefano Amaducci, 2015. "Environmentally Sustainable Biogas? The Key Role of Manure Co-Digestion with Energy Crops," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-32, June.
    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. Mazzanti, Gaia & Demichelis, Francesca & Fino, Debora & Tommasi, Tonia, 2025. "A closed-loop valorization of the waste biomass through two-stage anaerobic digestion and digestate exploitation," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    2. Tugume, Moses & Ibrahim, Mona G. & Nasr, Mahmoud, 2025. "Valorization of cheese whey wastewater to achieve sustainable development goals," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).

    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. Mohammadpour, Mohammadreza & Houshfar, Ehsan & Ashjaee, Mehdi & Mohammadpour, Amirreza, 2021. "Energy and exergy analysis of biogas fired regenerative gas turbine cycle with CO2 recirculation for oxy-fuel combustion power generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    2. Jung, Choongsoo & Park, Jungsoo & Song, Soonho, 2015. "Performance and NOx emissions of a biogas-fueled turbocharged internal combustion engine," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 186-195.
    3. Herz, Gregor & Reichelt, Erik & Jahn, Matthias, 2017. "Design and evaluation of a Fischer-Tropsch process for the production of waxes from biogas," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 370-381.
    4. Agostini, A. & Colauzzi, M. & Amaducci, S., 2021. "Innovative agrivoltaic systems to produce sustainable energy: An economic and environmental assessment," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).
    5. Bidart, Christian & Wichert, Martin & Kolb, Gunther & Held, Michael, 2022. "Biogas catalytic methanation for biomethane production as fuel in freight transport - A carbon footprint assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    6. Tataraki, Kalliopi G. & Kavvadias, Konstantinos C. & Maroulis, Zacharias B., 2018. "A systematic approach to evaluate the economic viability of Combined Cooling Heating and Power systems over conventional technologies," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 283-295.
    7. Łukasz Sobol & Arkadiusz Dyjakon & Alessandro Suardi & Rainer Preißmann, 2021. "Analysis of the Possibility of Energetic Utilization of Biomass Obtained from Grass Mowing of a Large-Area Golf Course—A Case Study of Tuscany," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Nadia Palmieri & Alessandro Suardi & Francesco Latterini & Luigi Pari, 2020. "The Eucalyptus Firewood: Understanding Consumers’ Behaviour and Motivations," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, October.
    9. Vanbeveren, Stefan P.P. & Spinelli, Raffaele & Eisenbies, Mark & Schweier, Janine & Mola-Yudego, Blas & Magagnotti, Natascia & Acuna, Mauricio & Dimitriou, Ioannis & Ceulemans, Reinhart, 2017. "Mechanised harvesting of short-rotation coppices," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 90-104.
    10. Anna Laura Pisello & Claudia Fabiani & Nastaran Makaremi & Veronica Lucia Castaldo & Gianluca Cavalaglio & Andrea Nicolini & Marco Barbanera & Franco Cotana, 2016. "Sustainable New Brick and Thermo-Acoustic Insulation Panel from Mineralization of Stranded Driftwood Residues," Energies, MDPI, vol. 9(8), pages 1-20, August.
    11. Andrea G. Capodaglio & Arianna Callegari & Maria Virginia Lopez, 2016. "European Framework for the Diffusion of Biogas Uses: Emerging Technologies, Acceptance, Incentive Strategies, and Institutional-Regulatory Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-18, March.
    12. Sgroi, Filippo & Foderà, Mario & Trapani, Anna Maria Di & Tudisca, Salvatore & Testa, Riccardo, 2015. "Economic evaluation of biogas plant size utilizing giant reed," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 403-409.
    13. Shane, Agabu & Gheewala, Shabbir H. & Phiri, Seveliano, 2017. "Rural domestic biogas supply model for Zambia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 683-697.
    14. Dong Jiang & Tian Ma & Fangyu Ding & Jingying Fu & Mengmeng Hao & Qian Wang & Shuai Chen, 2019. "Mapping Global Environmental Suitability for Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-11, May.
    15. Roberto Murano & Natascia Maisano & Roberta Selvaggi & Gioacchino Pappalardo & Biagio Pecorino, 2021. "Critical Issues and Opportunities for Producing Biomethane in Italy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-14, April.
    16. Shane, Agabu & Gheewala, Shabbir H. & Kafwembe, Young, 2017. "Urban commercial biogas power plant model for Zambian towns," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Sunhee Kim & Taehong Sung & Kyung Chun Kim, 2017. "Thermodynamic Performance Analysis of a Biogas-Fuelled Micro-Gas Turbine with a Bottoming Organic Rankine Cycle for Sewage Sludge and Food Waste Treatment Plants," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, February.
    18. Anita Konieczna & Kamil Roman & Kinga Borek & Emilia Grzegorzewska, 2021. "GHG and NH 3 Emissions vs. Energy Efficiency of Maize Production Technology: Evidence from Polish Farms; a Further Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-16, September.
    19. Parra-López, Carlos & Holley, Martin & Lindegaard, Kevin & Sayadi, Samir & Esteban-López, Gonzalo & Durán-Zuazo, Víctor H. & Knauer, Christoph & Engelbrechten, Hans-Georg von & Winterber, Ralf & Henri, 2017. "Strengthening the development of the short-rotation plantations bioenergy sector: Policy insights from six European countries," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(PB), pages 781-793.
    20. Hurtig, O. & Buffi, M. & Besseau, R. & Scarlat, N. & Carbone, C. & Agostini, A., 2025. "Mitigating biomethane losses in European biogas plants: A techno-economic assessment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 210(C).

    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:15:y:2022:i:21:p:7869-:d:951370. 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.