Viability of Biogas Production and Determination of Bacterial Kinetics in Anaerobic Co-digestion of Cabbage Waste and Livestock Manure

[EN] For the economically depressed communities such as of those in the Canton Guaranda, Ecuador, to generate their own energy, from organic waste is very important because they are sometimes insulated and its gas and electricity supply is very deficient. The aim of this research, was to determine the feasibility of anaerobic co-digestion of wasted cabbage from the town's market in Guaranda, Ecuador, and livestock manure. Two variables were studied: temperature of the process and the percentage of cabbage and livestock manure. Biogas quantity and kinetic parameters were evaluated. Kinetic model were analyzed by minimizing the mean percentage of error between the observed values (measured experimentally) and predicted, using the Runge-Kutta of order 4 for solving the system of differential equations obtained from mass balance. The results showed that a 50-50% ratio cabbage-manure at 30 degrees C temperature gave the highest production of biogas achieved is (389.47cm(3)N/g initial SV) with a composition of 61% methane. The kinetic parameters found were mu(max)=0.1053day(-1); Ks=0.1153mg/l; Y=0.00246g VSS /g COD and K-dec=0.001005day(-1).This research work has been carried out inside the cooperation framework funded by the ADSIDEO program of the Centro de Cooperacion al Desarrollo (CCD) of Universidad Politecnica de Valencia (Spain), in collaboration with the Centro de Estudios de la Biomasa (CEB), Universidad Estatal de Bolivar, Guaranda, Ecuador. The participation of Dr. Sergio Perez in this work was possible thanks to funding from the Ecuadorian Government by means of the PROMETEO program, led by the Secretaria Nacional de Educacion Superior, Ciencia y Tecnologia (SENESCYT).Gaibor-Chavez, J.; Niño-Ruiz, Z.; Velázquez Martí, B.; Lucio-Quintana, A. (2018). Viability of Biogas Production and Determination of Bacterial Kinetics in Anaerobic Co-digestion of Cabbage Waste and Livestock Manure. Waste and Biomass Valorization. 10(8):2129-2137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-018-0228-7S21292137108Alkaya, E., Erguder, T.H., Demirer, G.N.: Effect of operational parameters on anaerobic co-digestion of dairy cattle manure and agricultural residues: a case study for the Kahramanmaras region in Turkey. Eng. Life Sci. 10, 552–559 (2010)Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B.K.: Effects of free long fatty acids on thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 37(6), 808–812 (1992)Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B.K.: Effect of the clay mineral bentonite on ammonia inhibition of anaerobic thermophilic reactors degrading animal waste. Biodegradation. 3, 409–414 (1993)Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B.K.: Anaerobic thermophilic digestion of manure at different ammonia loads: effect of temperature. Water Res. 28(3), 727–731 (1994)APHA: Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. (2005). 21th edn. Washington, DC. American Public Health AssociationCallaghan, F., Wase, J., Thayanithy, K., Forster, C.: Co-digestion of waste organic solids: batch studies. Biores. Technol. 67, 117–122 (1999)Campos-Pozualo A.E.: Optimización de la digestión anaerobia de purines de cerdo mediante codigestión con residuos orgánicos de la industria agroalimentaria. Tesis de doctorado Universidad de Lleida. España (2001)Cendales, E.: Producción de biogás mediante la codigestión anaeróbica de la mezcla de residuos cítricos y estiércol bovino para su utilización como fuente de energía renovable. Tesis de Magister en Ingeniería Mecánica. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá, D.C., Colombia (2011)Chapra, S., Canale, R.: Métodos Numéricos para Ingenieros, 5ta edición. Mc Graw Hill. pp. 1001 (2007)Chynoweth, D.P., Wilkie, A.C., Owens, J.M.: (1998). Anaerobic processing of piggery wastes: a review. Proceedings of the ASAE Annual International Meeting, Orlando, Florida, USACorsetti, A., Perpetuini, G., Schirone, M., Tofalo, R., Suzzi, G.: Application of starter cultures to table olive fermentation: an overview on the experimental studies. Front. Microbiol. 3, 248 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2012.00248Demirbas, A.H., Demirbas, I.: Importance of rural bioenergy for developing countries. Energy Convers. Manag. 48, 2386–2398 (2007)Díaz, J.P., Reyes, I.P., Lundin, M., Horváth, I.S.: Bioresource technology. Co-digestion of different waste mixtures from agro-industrial activities: Kinetic evaluation and synergetic effects. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 10834–10840 (2011)Fields, T.D., Lys, T.Z., Vincent, L.: Empirical research on accounting choice. J. Acc. Econ. 31(1–3), 255–307 (2001)Gaibor-Chávez, S., Pérez-Pacheco, B., Velázquez-Martí, Z., Niño-Ruiz, V., Domínguez- Narváez: Dendrometric characterization of corn cane residues and 1 drying models in natural conditions in bolivar province (Ecuador). Renew. Energy. 86, 745–750 (2016)Hashimoto, A.G.: Ammonia Inhibition of methanogenesis from cattle wastes. Agric. Wastes. 17, 241–261 (1986)Hashimoto, A.G.: Effect of inoculum/substrate ratio on methane yield and production rate from straw. Biological Wastes. 28, 247–255 (1989)Jih-Gaw, L., Ying-Shih, M., Allen, C., Cheng-Lung, H.: BMP test on chemically pretreated sludge. Biores. Technol. 68, 187–192 (1999)Kaffle, G.P., Kim, S.H., y Sung, K.: Batch anaerobic co-digestion of Kimchi factory waste silage and swine manure under mesophilic conditions. Biores. Technol. 124, 489–494 (2012)Kafle, G.K., Bhattarai, S., Kim, S.H., Chen, L.D.: Anaerobic digestion of Chinese cabbage waste silage with swine manure for biogas production: batch and continuous study. Environ. Technol. 35, 2708–2717 (2014)  Khanal, S.: Anaerobic Biotechnology for Bioenergy Production—Principles and Applications. Blackwell Publishing, Iowa (2008)Li, R., Chen, S., Li, X., Lar, J.S., et al.: Anaerobic codigestion of kitchen waste with cattle manure for biogas production. Energy Fuels. 23, 2225–2228 (2009)Li, Y., Hua, D., Mu, H., Xu, H., Jin, F., Zhang, X.: Conversion of vegetable wastes to organic acids in leaching bed reactor: Performance and bacterial community analysis. J. Biosci. Bioenergy 124(2), 195–203 (2017)Lomas, J.M., Urbano, C., Camarero, L.M.: Evaluation of a pilot scale downflow stationary fixed film anaerobic reactor treating piggery slurry in the mesophilic range. Biomass Bioenergy. 17, 49–58 (1999)Masse, D.I., Talbot, G., Gilbert, Y.: On farm biogas production: a method to reduce GHG emissions and develop more sustainable livestock operations. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 166, 436–445 (2011)Monod, J.: The growth of bacterial cultures. Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 3, 371–394 (1949)Pagés Díaz, J., Pereda Reyes, I., Lundin, M., Sárvári Horváth, I.: Co-digestion of different waste mixtures from agro-industrial activities: Kinetic evaluation and synergetic effects. Bioresour. Technol. 102(23), 10834–10840 (2011)Patra, J.K., Das, G., Paramithiotis, S., Shin, H.: Kimchi and other widely consumed traditional fermented foods of korea: A review. Front. Microbiol. 7, 1493 (2016)Robbins, J.E., Gerhardt, S.A., Kappel, T.J.: Effects of total amonia on anaerobic digestion and an example of digestor performance from cattlemanure-protein mixture. Biol. Wastes. 27, 1–4 (1989)Sakar, S., Yetilmezsoy, K., Kocak, E.: Anaerobic digestion technology in poultry and livestock waste treatment—a literature review. Waste Manag. Res. 27, 3–18 (2009)Shen, F., Yuan, H., Pang, Y., Chen, S., Zhu, B., Zou, D., et al.: Performances of anaerobic co-digestion of fruit & vegetable waste (FVW) and food waste (FW): Single-phase vs. two-phase. Biores. Technol. 144, 80–85 (2013)Sonnand, J.R., Goudar, C.T.: (2004). Solution of the Haldane equation for substrate inhibition enzyme kinetics using the decomposition method. Math. Comput. Modelling 40(5–6), 573–582Steffen, R., Szolar, O., Braun, R.: Feedstocks for anaerobic digestion. Institute of Agrobiotechnology Tulin, University of Agricultural Sciences, Vienna (1998)Strick, D.P, Domnanovich, A.M., Holubar, P.: A pH-based control of ammonia in biogas during anaerobic digestion of artificial pig manure and maize silage. Process Biochem. 41, 1235–1238 (2006)Trejos, V.M., Fontalvo, A.J., Garcia, M.A.G.: Descripción matemática y análisis de estabilidad de procesos fermentativos. Dyna, vol. 76, núm. 158, junio, 2009, pp. 111–121 (2009)Trujillo, D., Pérez, J.F., Cebreros, F.J.: Energy recovery from wastes. Anaerobic digestion of tomato plant mixed with rabbit wastes. Biores. Technol. 45, 81–83 (1993)Wang, J.: Decentralized biogas technology of anaerobic digestion and farm ecosystem: opportunities and challenges. Front. Energy Res. 2, 10 (2014)Zaher, U., Rongping, L., Jeppsson, U., Steyer, J., Chen, S.: GISCOD: general integrated solid waste co-digestion model. Water Res. 43, 2717–2727 (2009)Zeeman, G., Wiegant, W.M., Koster-Treffers, M.E., Lettinga, G.: The influence of total ammonia concentration on the thermophilic digestion of cow manure. Agric. Wastes. 14, 19–35 (1985)Zhang, L., Xu, C., Champagne, P.: Overview of recent advances in thermo-chemical conversion of biomass. Energy Convers. Manag. 51, 969–982 (2010

Enhancement of methane production from Cotton Stalk using different pretreatment techniques

China produces large amount of cotton stalk (CS) residues as agricultural biomass, which are incinerated on-site, causing air pollution. The high organic content of CS could be utilized for biogas production, but the direct digestion without pretreatment always leads to a low methane yield and biodegradability, due to the complicated structure of lignocellulose. In order to search best fitting pretreatment methods in effective anaerobic digestion (AD) of CS, effects of various pretreatments including KOH, NaOH, Ca(OH)2, alkali hydrogen peroxide (AHP), H2SO4, H3PO4 and steam explosion (SE) were studied. It was seen that all treatments resulted in varying methane yields. Among all the pretreatments, acid pretreatment is not suitable for AD of CS. The results showed that the highest cumulative methane yield (CMY) of 192.4 mL·gVS-1 was obtained after 3% AHP pretreatment of CS, and the methane yield improved by 254.3% than the untreated CS. Therefore, AHP treatment was proven to be an efficient pretreatment technique. XRD and FTIR analyses had shown that pretreated CS had favorable structural changes. This research is beneficial in developing environment friendly and cost-effective pretreatment technologies to utilize CS for methane production in future application