IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i8p6690-d1124074.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Buffalo Manure and Excess Sludge with Different Mixing Ratios under Thermophilic and Mesophilic Conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Youfei Zhou

    (Design Institute NO.3, Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design and Research Institute (Group) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Weijie Hu

    (Design Institute NO.3, Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design and Research Institute (Group) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Jun Sheng

    (Design Institute NO.3, Shanghai Municipal Engineering Design and Research Institute (Group) Co., Ltd., Shanghai 200092, China)

  • Cheng Peng

    (College of Petrochemical Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050, China)

  • Tianfeng Wang

    (College of Petrochemical Engineering, Lanzhou University of Technology, Lanzhou 730050, China)

Abstract

In this study, the main aim is to evaluate the mixing ratio of co-digestion of buffalo manure (BM) and excess sludge (ES) influenced for methane yield and digestate dewaterability. Five batch experiments with different BM and ES mixing ratios were carried out under thermophilic and mesophilic conditions. The methane yield of co-digestion of BM and ES increased by 10.1–73.5% under thermophilic conditions and 87.9–153.3% under mesophilic conditions, compared with the mono-anaerobic digestion of ES under the same conditions. Shannon and Chao1 indices showed that the bacterial species of the mesophilic digesters were more abundant than that of the thermophilic digesters. With the increase in the BM proportion in the substrate, the normalized capillary suction time (NCST) and total solids (TS) of sediment (centrifugal dewatering) increased. The NCST at thermophilic temperature (8.98–12.54 s∙g −1 -TS) was greater than that at the mesophilic temperatures (5.45–12.32 s∙g −1 -TS). However, the TS of sediment was not directly related to the digestion temperature. This study has shown that anaerobic co-digestion of BM and ES at the appropriate ratio (BM/ES = 1:1.5) has a significant meaning in a high methane yield.

Suggested Citation

  • Youfei Zhou & Weijie Hu & Jun Sheng & Cheng Peng & Tianfeng Wang, 2023. "Comparison of Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Buffalo Manure and Excess Sludge with Different Mixing Ratios under Thermophilic and Mesophilic Conditions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-16, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6690-:d:1124074
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6690/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/8/6690/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Wanqin & Wei, Quanyuan & Wu, Shubiao & Qi, Dandan & Li, Wei & Zuo, Zhuang & Dong, Renjie, 2014. "Batch anaerobic co-digestion of pig manure with dewatered sewage sludge under mesophilic conditions," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 175-183.
    2. Xiao, Benyi & Tang, Xinyi & Zhang, Wenzhe & Zhang, Ke & Yang, Tang & Han, Yunping & Liu, Junxin, 2022. "Effects of rice straw ratio on mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of swine manure and rice straw mixture," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 239(PB).
    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. Egwu, Uchenna & Onyelowe, Kennedy & Tabraiz, Shamas & Johnson, Emmanuel & Mutshow, Alexander D., 2022. "Investigation of the effect of equal and unequal feeding time intervals on process stability and methane yield during anaerobic digestion grass silage," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Latifi, Pooria & Karrabi, Mohsen & Danesh, Shahnaz, 2019. "Anaerobic co-digestion of poultry slaughterhouse wastes with sewage sludge in batch-mode bioreactors (effect of inoculum-substrate ratio and total solids)," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 288-296.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    2. Zhou, Jialiang & Zhang, Yuanhui & Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Duan, Na, 2021. "Meta-analysis of anaerobic co-digestion of livestock manure in last decade: Identification of synergistic effect and optimization synergy range," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    3. Neshat, Soheil A. & Mohammadi, Maedeh & Najafpour, Ghasem D. & Lahijani, Pooya, 2017. "Anaerobic co-digestion of animal manures and lignocellulosic residues as a potent approach for sustainable biogas production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 308-322.
    4. Freitas, F.F. & Furtado, A.C. & Piñas, J.A.V. & Venturini, O.J. & Barros, R.M. & Lora, E.E.S., 2022. "Holistic Life Cycle Assessment of a biogas-based electricity generation plant in a pig farm considering co-digestion and an additive," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    5. Syaichurrozi, Iqbal, 2018. "Biogas production from co-digestion Salvinia molesta and rice straw and kinetics," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 76-86.
    6. Sarto, Sarto & Hildayati, Raudati & Syaichurrozi, Iqbal, 2019. "Effect of chemical pretreatment using sulfuric acid on biogas production from water hyacinth and kinetics," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 335-350.
    7. Qi, Chuanren & Cao, Dingge & Gao, Xingzu & Jia, Sumeng & Yin, Rongrong & Nghiem, Long D. & Li, Guoxue & Luo, Wenhai, 2023. "Optimising organic composition of feedstock to improve microbial dynamics and symbiosis to advance solid-state anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and organic waste," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 351(C).
    8. Syaichurrozi, Iqbal & Basyir, M. Fakhri & Farraz, Rafi Muhammad & Rusdi, Rusdi, 2020. "A preliminary study: Effect of initial pH and Saccharomyces cerevisiae addition on biogas production from acid-pretreated Salvinia molesta and kinetics," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 207(C).
    9. El Ibrahimi, Mohammed & Khay, Ismail & El Maakoul, Anas & Bakhouya, Mohamed, 2022. "Effects of the temperature range on the energy performance of mixed and unmixed digesters with submerged waste: An experimental and CFD simulation study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 1092-1104.
    10. Shubham Dilip Sarode & Deepak Kumar & Divya Mathias & David McNeill & Prasad Kaparaju, 2023. "Anaerobic Digestion of Spoiled Maize, Lucerne and Barley Silage Mixture with and without Cow Manure: Methane Yields and Kinetic Studies," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-20, August.
    11. De Clercq, Djavan & Wen, Zongguo & Caicedo, Luis & Cao, Xin & Fan, Fei & Xu, Ruifei, 2017. "Application of DEA and statistical inference to model the determinants of biomethane production efficiency: A case study in south China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1231-1243.
    12. Ahmadi, Ehsan & Yousefzadeh, Samira & Mokammel, Adel & Miri, Mohammad & Ansari, Mohsen & Arfaeinia, Hossein & Badi, Mojtaba Yegane & Ghaffari, Hamid Reza & Rezaei, Soheila & Mahvi, Amir Hossein, 2020. "Kinetic study and performance evaluation of an integrated two-phase fixed-film baffled bioreactor for bioenergy recovery from wastewater and bio-wasted sludge," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    13. Yin, Yao & Liu, Ya-Juan & Meng, Shu-Juan & Kiran, Esra Uçkun & Liu, Yu, 2016. "Enzymatic pretreatment of activated sludge, food waste and their mixture for enhanced bioenergy recovery and waste volume reduction via anaerobic digestion," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1131-1137.
    14. Jakub Sikora & Marcin Niemiec & Anna Szeląg-Sikora & Zofia Gródek-Szostak & Maciej Kuboń & Monika Komorowska, 2020. "The Effect of the Addition of a Fat Emulsifier on the Amount and Quality of the Obtained Biogas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-12, April.
    15. Noor Azrimi Umor & Sumaiyah Abdullah & Azhar Mohamad & Shahrul Bin Ismail & Siti Izera Ismail & Azizah Misran, 2021. "Energy Potential of Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch (EFB) Fiber from Subsequent Cultivation of Volvariella volvacea (Bull.) Singer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-15, November.
    16. Hassan, Muhammad & Zhao, Chao & Ding, Weimin, 2020. "Enhanced methane generation and biodegradation efficiencies of goose manure by thermal-sonication pretreatment and organic loading management in CSTR," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 198(C).
    17. Kainthola, Jyoti & Kalamdhad, Ajay S. & Goud, Vaibhav V., 2020. "Optimization of process parameters for accelerated methane yield from anaerobic co-digestion of rice straw and food waste," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 1352-1359.
    18. Li, Pengfei & Cheng, Chongbo & Guo, Rui & Yu, Ran & Jiao, Youzhou & Shen, Dekui & He, Chao, 2022. "Interactions among the components of artificial biomass during their anaerobic digestion with and without sewage sludge," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    19. Giovanni Gadaleta & Sabino De Gisi & Michele Notarnicola, 2021. "Feasibility Analysis on the Adoption of Decentralized Anaerobic Co-Digestion for the Treatment of Municipal Organic Waste with Energy Recovery in Urban Districts of Metropolitan Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-17, February.
    20. Cheng, F. & Brewer, C.E., 2021. "Conversion of protein-rich lignocellulosic wastes to bio-energy: Review and recommendations for hydrolysis + fermentation and anaerobic digestion," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 146(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:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:8:p:6690-:d:1124074. 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.