DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Biogas Production from Vietnamese Animal Manure, Plant Residues and Organic Waste: Influence of Biomass Composition on Methane Yield

  • Cu, T.T.T. (Faculty of Animal Science and Aquaculture, Vietnam National University of Agriculture) ;
  • Nguyen, T.X. (Faculty of Animal Science and Aquaculture, Vietnam National University of Agriculture) ;
  • Triolo, J.M. (University of Southern Denmark, Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Environmental Engineering) ;
  • Pedersen, L. (University of Southern Denmark, Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Environmental Engineering) ;
  • Le, V.D. (Faculty of Animal Science and Aquaculture, Vietnam National University of Agriculture) ;
  • Le, P.D. (Hue University of Agriculture and Forestry) ;
  • Sommer, S.G. (University of Southern Denmark, Faculty of Engineering, Institute of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology and Environmental Engineering)
  • Received : 2014.04.16
  • Accepted : 2014.07.28
  • Published : 2015.02.01

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion is an efficient and renewable energy technology that can produce biogas from a variety of biomasses such as animal manure, food waste and plant residues. In developing countries this technology is widely used for the production of biogas using local biomasses, but there is little information about the value of these biomasses for energy production. This study was therefore carried out with the objective of estimating the biogas production potential of typical Vietnamese biomasses such as animal manure, slaughterhouse waste and plant residues, and developing a model that relates methane ($CH_4$) production to the chemical characteristics of the biomass. The biochemical methane potential (BMP) and biomass characteristics were measured. Results showed that piglet manure produced the highest $CH_4$ yield of 443 normal litter (NL) $CH_4kg^{-1}$ volatile solids (VS) compared to 222 from cows, 177 from sows, 172 from rabbits, 169 from goats and 153 from buffaloes. Methane production from duckweed (Spirodela polyrrhiza) was higher than from lawn grass and water spinach at 340, 220, and 110.6 NL $CH_4kg^{-1}$ VS, respectively. The BMP experiment also demonstrated that the $CH_4$ production was inhibited with chicken manure, slaughterhouse waste, cassava residue and shoe-making waste. Statistical analysis showed that lipid and lignin are the most significant predictors of BMP. The model was developed from knowledge that the BMP was related to biomass content of lipid, lignin and protein from manure and plant residues as a percentage of VS with coefficient of determination (R-square) at 0.95.This model was applied to calculate the $CH_4$ yield for a household with 17 fattening pigs in the highlands and lowlands of northern Vietnam.

Keywords

Biochemical Methane Potential;Biogas;Vietnam;Manures;Organic Wastes;Inhibition

References

  1. Abouelenien, F., W. Fujiwara, Y. Namba, M. Kosseva, N. Nishio, and Y. Nakashimada. 2010. Improved methane fermentation of chicken manure via ammonia removal by biogas recycle. Bioresour. Technol. 101:6368-6373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.03.071
  2. Amon, T., B. Amon, V. Kryvoruchko, W. Zollitsch, K. Mayer, and L. Gruber. 2007. Biogas production from maize and dairy cattle manure-influence of biomass composition on the methane yield. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 118:173-182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2006.05.007
  3. Ankom technology protocol. http://www.ankom.com/procedures.aspx. Accessed March 1, 2014.
  4. APHA. 2005. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 21st ed. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, USA.
  5. Bruun, S., L. S. Jensen, V. Vu Thi Khanh, and S. G. Sommer. 2014 Rural household biogas digesters-An option for global warming mitigation and a potential climate bombs (Feature article). Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 33:736-741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.02.033
  6. Bujoczek, G., J. A. Oleszkiewicz, R. R. Sparling, and S. Cenkowski. 2000. High solid anaerobic digestion of chicken manure. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 76:51-60. https://doi.org/10.1006/jaer.2000.0529
  7. FAO Stat. 2010. http://faostat.fao.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=339&lang=en. Accessed March 1, 2014.
  8. Cu, T. T. T., H. C. Pham, T. H. Le, V. C. Nguyen, X. A. Le, X. T. Nguyen, and S. G. Sommer. 2012. Manure management practices on biogas and non-biogas pig farms in developing countries - using livestock farms in Vietnam as an example. J. Clean. Prod. 27:64-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.006
  9. Chen, Y. R. and A. G. Hashimoto. 1978. Kinetics of methane fermentation. In: Proceedings of Symposium on Biotechnology in Energy Production and Conservation (Ed. C. D. Scott). Wiley, New York, USA. p. 269.
  10. Cuetos, M. J., X. Gomez, M. Otero, and A. Moran. 2010. Anaerobic digestion and co-digestion of slaughterhouse waste (SHW): Influence of heat and pressure pre-treatment in biogas yield. Waste Manag. 30:1780-1789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2010.01.034
  11. Energy fish market. Enerfish Consortium. 2011. Market Study. http://www.enerfish.eu/uploaded/results/results_9.pdf. Accessed May 1, 2014.
  12. Goering, H. K. and P. J. Van Soest. 1970. Forage Fiber Analysis (Apparatus, Reagents, Procedures and Some Applications). Agriculture Handbook No. 379. Agriculture Research Service, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA.
  13. Gunaseelan, V. N. 1997. Anaerobic digestion of biomass for methane production: A review. Biomass Bioenergy 13:83-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(97)00020-2
  14. Hashimoto, A. G., Y. R. Chen, and V. H. Varel. 1981. Theoretical aspects of methane production: State-of-the-art. In Livestock Wastes: A Renewable Resource. ASAE. St. Joseph. MI, USA. pp. 86-91.
  15. Hejnfelt, A. and I. Angelidaki. 2009. Anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse by-products. Biomass Bioenergy 33:1046–1054. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.03.004
  16. Herva, M, A. Alvarez, and E. Roca. 2011. Sustainable and safe design of footwear integrating ecological footprint and risk criteria. J. Hazard. Mater. 192:1876-1881. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.07.028
  17. IPCC. 2006. IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/2006gl/index.html. Accessed July 20, 2014.
  18. Kougias, P. G., K. Boe, and I. Angelidaki. 2013. Effect of organic loading rate and feedstock composition on foaming in manurebased biogas reactors. Bioresour. Technol. 144:1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.06.028
  19. Institute of Energy. 2010. The Power Master Plan VII. 2010. http://www.nti.org/media/pdfs/VietnamPowerDevelopmentPlan2030.pdf?_=1333146022. Accessed April 15, 2014.
  20. Jorgensen, H., T. Prapaspongsa, V. T. K. Vu, and H. D. Poulsen. 2013. Models to quantify excretion of dry matter, nitrogen, phosphorus and carbon in growing pigs fed regional diets. J. Anim. Sci. Biotechnol. 4:42. https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-1891-4-42
  21. Khanh Toan, P., N. Minh Bao, and N. Ha Dieu. 2011. Energy supply, demand, and policy in Viet Nam, with future projections. Energy Policy 39:6814-6826. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2010.03.021
  22. Le, Q. S., T. N. Nguyen, and B. H. Bui. 2013. Using forecasting models to calculate the potential of biogas from vegetable waste for Vietnamese conditions. J. Energy Sci. 1:17-24.
  23. Leinoen, A. and N. D. Cuong. 2013. Development of Biomass Fuel Chain in Vietnam. VTT Technology 134. Julkaisija - Utgivare Publisher. Finland http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/technology/2013/T134.pdf Accessed October 1, 2014.
  24. Moller, H. B., S. G. Sommer, and B. K. Ahring. 2004. Methane productivity of manure straw and solid fractions of manure. Biomass Bioenergy 26:485-495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.08.008
  25. Nijaguna, B. T. 2002. Biogas Technology. New Age International (P) Ltd., New Delhi, India.
  26. Paixao, M. A., C. R. G. Tavares, R. Bergamasco, A. L. E. Bonifacio, and R. T. Costa. 2000. Anaerobic digestion from residue of industrial cassava industrialization with acidogenic and methanogenic physical separation phases. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 84-86:809-819. https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:84-86:1-9:809
  27. Rennuit, C. and S. G. Sommer. 2013. Decision support for the construction of farm-scale biogas digesters in developing countries with cold seasons. Energies 6:5314-5332. https://doi.org/10.3390/en6105314
  28. Palatsi, J., M. Vinas, M. Guivernau, B. Fernandez, and X. Flotats. 2011. Anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse waste: main process limitations and microbial community interactions. Bioresour. Technol. 102:2219-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.09.121
  29. Perrigault, T., V. Weatherford, J. Martí-Herrero, and D. Poggio. 2012. Towards thermal design optimization of tubular digesters in cold climates: A heat transfer model. Bioresour. Technol. 124:259-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.08.019
  30. Pham, C. H., J. M. Triolo, and S. G. Sommer. 2014. Predicting methane production in simple and unheated biogas digesters at low temperatures. Appl. Energy 136:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.08.057
  31. Sommer, S. G., N. J. Hutchings, and O. T. Carton. 2001. Ammonia losses field applied animal manure. DIAS report. No 60, Plant production. Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Fisheries. Danish Institute of Agriculture Sciences, Aarhus, Danmark.
  32. Thuy Duong. 2013. By-products from agriculture - Multibenefits. http://bhxhdaknong.gov.vn/index.php/vi/news/Tin-Dak-Nong/Tan-dung-phu-pham-tu-nong-nghiep-Loi-ich-nhieu-mat-134/. Accessed March 12, 2014.
  33. Triolo, J. M., S. G. Sommer, H. B. Moller, M. R. Weisbjerg, and X. Y. Jiang. 2011. A new algorithm to characterize biodegradability of biomass during anaerobic digestion: influence of lignin concentration on methane production potential. Bioresour. Technol. 102:9395-9402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.07.026
  34. Van Soest, P. J. 1963. Use of detergents in the analysis of fibrous feeds. II. A rapid method for the determination of fiber and lignin. J. Assoc. Offic. Agric. Chem. 46:829-835.
  35. Vu, Q. D., T. M. Tran, P. D. Nguyen, C. C. Vu, V. T. K. Vu, and L. S. Jensen. 2012. Effect of biogas technology on nutrient flows for small- and medium-scale pig farms in Vietnam. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 94:1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-012-9516-y
  36. Weather forecast website. http://www.accuweather.com/vi/vn/hanoi/353412/month/353412?monyr=1/01/2013. Accessed March 18, 2014.
  37. Yenigün, O. and B. Demirel. 2013. Ammonia inhibition in anaerobic digestion: A review. Process Biochem. 48:901-911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2013.04.012
  38. Zhang, Q., J. He, M. Tian, Z. Mao, L. Tang, J. Zhang, and H. Zhang. 2011. Enhancement of methane production from cassava residues by biological pretreatment using a constructed microbial consortium. Bioresource Technol. 102:8899-8906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.06.061
  39. Nguyen, Truong Le and Cu, Tran Quang. 2004. Potential of Distributed Power Generation from Biomass Residues in Vietnam - Status and Prospect. Proceedings of Electricity Supply Industry in Transition and Prospect for Asia. January 14-16, 2004; Hanoi, Vietnam. 28-39.

Cited by

  1. Judicious Recycling of Biobased Adsorbents for Biodiesel Purification: A Critical Review pp.19447442, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.13077
  2. SO2 and H2S Sensing Properties of Hydrothermally Synthesized CuO Nanoplates pp.1543-186X, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11664-018-6648-0
  3. Evaluating anaerobic and aerobic digestion strategies for degradation of pretreated pine needle litter vol.16, pp.1, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-017-1601-y