Pretreatment of Animal Manure Biomass to Improve Biogas Production: A Review

Quelal, Washington Orlando Meneses; Velázquez‐Martí, Borja

doi:10.3390/en13143573

Cited by 67 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 105 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 3 compares LM and VM residues with other types of manure residues from the literature. Generally, the types of manure most used in the production of biogas have been cow, pig, and poultry manure; 46 this is due to the fact that their average VS/TS ratios are 80.37%, 74.75%, and 62.19%, respectively. To a lesser extent, other authors have also considered that llama manure has enormous potential in biogas production; 11, 12, 47, 50 as its average VS/TS ratio is 68.80%.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of the co‐digestion of agricultural lignocellulosic residues with manure from South American camelids

Meneses-Quelal

Gaibor‐Chávez

Niño

2021

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to evaluate the effects of the co‐digestion of agricultural residues with manure from camelids from the Andean zone. Different combinations of llama manure (LM) and vicuñas (VM) were made with amaranth (AS), quinoa (QS), and wheat (WS) residues. They were fermented using sewage sludge as inoculum. The co‐digestion was evaluated under mesophilic conditions for 40 days. The ratios of volatile substances of substrate / co‐substrate evaluated were 0:100; 25:75; 50:50, 75:25, and 100:0. Two substrate / inoculum ratios (SIR 1:1 and SIR1:2) were also evaluated. The results indicate that the maximum methane accumulation rate is obtained in SIR 1:1 for a VM‐AS ratio (25:75) with 540 mL/g volatile solid (VS). In general, the results did not increase with the increase in inoculum; rather, the tendency to improve methane yield is associated with an increase in the amount of agricultural residues, mainly AS. Regarding the kinetic modeling, the transfer model is the one that best adjusted the predicted values to those observed with an r2 between 0.991 and 0.999, and an RMSE value between 2.06 and 13.62 mL/g (volatile solid) VS. Finally, all the trials presented synergistic effects in their co‐digestion except the digesters formed by LM‐AS, LM‐QS and LM‐WS of SIR 1:2. These presented antagonistic effects in which the addition of the co‐substrate generated competition with the substrates, reducing methane production. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of the co‐digestion of agricultural lignocellulosic residues with manure from South American camelids

Meneses-Quelal

Gaibor‐Chávez

Niño

2021

Biofuels Bioprod Bioref

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…After proper food processing, waste can be used as raw materials for the production of technical fats, agricultural biogas [Czekała et al 2018b], biodiesel, building material fillers, fertilizers, as well as for the synthesis of lipolytic enzymes, as feed additives (even for food products). High amounts of organic matter and protein in slaughterhouse wastes make them a viable choice for anaerobic digestion and biogas production [Latifi et al, 2019;Orlando and Borja, 2020]. The implementation of waste to the energy technology such as biogas production from animal waste has been considered as one of the best means to achieve sustainable energy development goals in many developing countries [Munawar et al, 2019].…”

Section: Database System For Estimating the Biogas Potential Of Cattlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Database System for Estimating the Biogas Potential of Cattle and Swine Feces in Poland

Wawrzyniak¹,

Lewicki²,

Pochwatka³

et al. 2021

J. Ecol. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal biomass is an important substrate in the anaerobic digestion process. The implementation of a waste technology for energy production, such as the production of biogas from animal waste, has been recognized in many countries as one of the best ways to achieve the Sustainable Energy Development Goals. Without a systematic review of resources and accurate estimation of available sources in terms of the amount of potential electricity, it is impossible to manage biomass rationally. The main aim of the article was to present a new tool for assessing the biomass of animal origin and estimating its potential energy through a computer database, which will be widely available in the end of 2020 to show results from the calculation using the database. This tool is configured to enter the data on the developed and undeveloped biomass resources in production of farm animals in rural areas in Poland. Calculations from the database show the biogas potential of swine and cattle manure and slurry in Poland, which is approximately 5.04 billion m 3 , with a 60% share of methane in biogas. It is the value of approximately 3.03 billion m 3 of methane. It is worth underlining that slurry and manure are not high-energy substrates; therefore, it is necessary to introduce more energetic substrate streams to improve the biogas plant efficiency.

show abstract

“…In addition to pathogen removal, hygienization, no matter thermal or alternative (e.g., PEF, microwave and ultrasound), may serve as pretreatment of substrates influencing their biomethane potential [80]. Many studies on ABP [81], biowaste [82] and green waste [83] were realized and around 0-50% BMP increase could be achieved [5].…”

Section: Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conventional and Innovative Hygienization of Feedstock for Biogas Production: Resistance of Indicator Bacteria to Thermal Pasteurization, Pulsed Electric Field Treatment, and Anaerobic Digestion

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Animal by-products (ABP) can be valorized via anaerobic digestion (AD) for biogas energy generation. The digestate issued from AD process is usually used to fertilize farming land for agricultural activities, which may cause potential sanitary risk to the environment. The European Union (EU) requires that certain ABP be thermally pasteurized in order to minimize this sanitary risk. This process is called hygienization, which can be replaced by alternative nonthermal technologies like pulsed electric field (PEF). In the present study, Enterococcus faecalis ATCC 19433 and Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 were used as indicator bacteria. Their resistance to thermal pasteurization and PEF treatment were characterized. Results show that Ent. faecalis and E. coli are reduced by 5 log10 in less than 1 min during thermal pasteurization at 70 °C. The critical electric field strength was estimated at 18 kV∙cm−1 for Ent. faecalis and 1 kV∙cm−1 for E. coli. “G+” bacteria Ent. faecalis are generally more resistant than “G-” bacteria E. coli. AD process also plays an important role in pathogens inactivation, whose performance depends on the microorganisms considered, digestion temperature, residence time, and type of feedstock. Thermophilic digestion is usually more efficient in pathogens removal than mesophilic digestion.

show abstract

Pretreatment of Animal Manure Biomass to Improve Biogas Production: A Review

Cited by 67 publications

References 105 publications

Effect of the co‐digestion of agricultural lignocellulosic residues with manure from South American camelids

Effect of the co‐digestion of agricultural lignocellulosic residues with manure from South American camelids

Database System for Estimating the Biogas Potential of Cattle and Swine Feces in Poland

Conventional and Innovative Hygienization of Feedstock for Biogas Production: Resistance of Indicator Bacteria to Thermal Pasteurization, Pulsed Electric Field Treatment, and Anaerobic Digestion

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About