In an environment where individual productivity can be increased through efforts directed at a conventional task approach and more efficient task approaches that can be identified by thinking outside-the-box, we examine the effects of productivity-target difficulty and pay contingent on meeting and beating this target (i.e., target-based pay). We argue that while challenging targets and target-based pay can hinder the discovery of production efficiencies, they can motivate high productive effort whereby individuals work harder and more productively using either the conventional task approach or more efficient task approaches when discovered. Results of a laboratory experiment support our predictions. Individuals assigned an easy productivity target and paid a fixed wage identify a greater number of production efficiencies than those with either challenging targets or target-based pay. However, individuals with challenging targets and/or target-based pay have higher productivity per production efficiency discovered, suggesting these control tools better motivate productive effort. Collectively, our results suggest that the ultimate effectiveness of these control tools will likely hinge on the importance of promoting the discovery of production efficiencies relative to motivating productive effort. In doing so, our results provide a better understanding of conflicting prescriptions from the practitioner literature and business press.
While it is well known that particle size reduction impacts the performance of bioprocessing such as anaerobic digestion or composting, there is a relative lack of knowledge about particle size distribution (PSD) in pre-treated organic material, i.e., the distribution of particles across different size ranges. PSD in municipal solid waste (MSW) pre-treated for bioprocessing in mechanical–biological treatment (MBT) was researched. In the first part of this study, the PSD in pre-treated waste at two full-scale MBT plants in the UK was determined. The main part of the study consisted of experimental trials to reduce particle sizes in MSW destined for bioprocessing and to explore the obtained PSD patterns. Shredders and a macerating grinder were used. For shear shredders, a jaw opening of 20 mm was found favourable for effective reduction of particle sizes, while a smaller jaw opening rather compressed the wet organic waste into balls. Setting the shredder jaw opening to 20 mm does not mean that in the output all particles will be 20 mm or below. PSD profiles revealed that different particle sizes were present in each trial. Using different types of equipment in series was effective in reducing the presence of larger particles. Maceration yielded a PSD dominated by very fine particles, which is unsuitable for composting and potentially also for anaerobic digestion. It was concluded that shredding, where equipment is well selected, is effective in delivering a material well suited for anaerobic digestion or composting.
Operators of commercial anaerobic digestion (AD) plants frequently note the challenge of transferring research results to an industrial setting, especially in matching well-controlled laboratory studies at a constant organic loading rate (OLR) with full-scale digesters subject to day-to-day variation in loadings. This study compared the performance of food waste digesters at fluctuating and constant OLR. In a long-term experiment over nearly three years, variable daily OLR with a range as wide as 0 to 10.0 g VS L−1 day−1 (weekly average 5.0 g VS L−1 day−1) were applied to one laboratory-scale digester, while a pair of control digesters was operated at a constant daily loading of 5.0 g VS L−1 day−1. Different schemes of trace elements (TE) supplementation were also tested to examine how they contributed to process stability. Variable loading had no adverse impact on biogas production or operational stability when 11 TE species were dosed. When TE addition was limited to cobalt and selenium, the stability of the variable-load digester was well maintained for nearly 300 days before the experiment was terminated, while the control digesters required re-supplementation with other TE species to reverse an accumulation of volatile fatty acids. This work demonstrated that variation in daily OLR across quite a wide range of applied loadings is possible with no adverse effects on methane production or stability of food waste digestion, giving confidence in the transferability of research findings. The positive effect of variable OLR on TE requirement requires further investigation considering its practical significance for AD industry.
The effect of pasteurisation and co-pasteurisation on biochemical methane potential values in anaerobic digestion (AD) was studied. Pasteurisation prior to digestion in a biogas plant is a common hygienisation method for organic materials which contain or have been in contact with animal by-products. Tests were carried out on food waste, slaughterhouse waste, animal blood, cattle slurry, potato waste, card packaging and the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW); pasteurisation at 70 °C for 1 h was applied. Pasteurisation had increased the methane yields of blood (+15%) and potato waste (+12%) only, which both had a low content of structural carbohydrates (hemi-cellulose and cellulose) but a particularly high content of either non-structural carbohydrates such as starch (potato waste) or proteins (blood). With food waste, card packaging and cattle slurry, pasteurisation had no observable impact on the methane yield. Slaughterhouse waste and OFMSW yielded less methane after pasteurisation in the experiments (but statistical significance of the difference between pasteurised and unpasteurised slaughterhouse waste or OFMSW was not confirmed in this work). It is concluded that pasteurisation can positively impact the methane yield of some specific substrates, such as potato waste, where heat-treatment may induce gelatinisation with release of the starch molecules. For most substrates, however, pasteurisation at 70 °C is unlikely to increase the methane yield. It is unlikely to improve biodegradability of lignified materials, and it may reduce the methane yield from substrates which contain high contents of volatile components. Furthermore, in this experimental study, the obtained methane yield was unaffected by whether the substrates were pasteurised individually and then co-digested or co-pasteurised as a mixture before batch digestion.
As the anaerobic digestion of energy crops and crop residues becomes more widely applied for bioenergy production, planners and operators of biogas plants, and farmers who consider growing such crops, have a need for information on potential biogas and methane yields. A rich body of literature reports methane yields for a variety of such materials. These data have been obtained with different testing methods. This work elaborates an overview on the types of data source available and the methods that are commonly applied to determine the methane yield of an agricultural biomass, with a focus on European crops. Limitations regarding the transferability and generalisation of data are explored, and crop methane values presented across the literature are compared. Large variations were found for reported values, which can only partially be explained by the methods applied. Most notably, the intra-crop variation of methane yield (reported values for a single crop type) was higher than the inter-crop variation (variation between different crops). The pronounced differences in reported methane yields indicate that relying on results from individual assays of candidate materials is a high-risk approach for planning biogas operations, and the ranges of values such as those presented here are essential to provide a robust basis for estimation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.