Comparison of One-Phase and Two-Phase Anaerobic Digestion of Swine Manure

Abstract:

The possible exploitation of two-phase anaerobic digestion for swine manure was investigated in this study. One-phase and two-phase anaerobic digestion process were investigated in continuous stirred-tank reactor with hydraulic retention times 15 days (hydrolysis and acidification for 3 days and methanogenic12 days in two-phase). When the organic loading rates were equal to or less than 4 g VS/L day, the biogas yield and volumetric production of two processes were no significant difference. However, in the case of organic loading rates being equal to or higher than 5.0 g VS/L day, two-phase biogas yield and volumetric biogas production averaged 0.294 L CH₄/g VS added and 2.218 L/L day, compared with one-phase averaged 0.255L CH₄/g VS added and 2.168 L/L day, respectively. Significant advantages in saving cost of biogas project were indicated by the comparison of biogas production and COD degradation in the one-phase and two-phase processes.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 726-731)
• Pages: 2875-2880
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.726-731.2875
• Online since: August 2013
• Authors: Wen Hao Liu, Shi Jie Tian, Shu Biao Wu, Xiao Qian Zhang, Chang Le Pang, Ren Jie Dong
• Keywords: Anaerobic Digestion, Biogas, Phase Separation, Swine Manure

References

[1] Fox P. and F.G. Pohland, 1994. Anaerobic treatment applications and fundamentals: substrate specificity during phase separation, Water Environment Research, 66 (5), pp.716-724.

DOI: 10.2175/wer.66.5.8

[2] Lier J.B. van; Zee F.P. van der, RebacS, KleerebezemR, 2001. Advances in high rate anaerobic treatment: staging of reactor systems. Water Science and Technology, 44(8), pp.15-25.

DOI: 10.2166/wst.2001.0454

[3] Andara A.R. and J.M.L. Esteban, 1999. Kinetic study of the anaerobic digestion of the solid fraction of piggery slurries, Biomass & Bioenergy, 17 (50), pp.435-443.

DOI: 10.1016/s0961-9534(99)00059-8

[4] Ince B. K., O. Ince, 2000. Changes to bacterial community make-up in a two-phase anaerobic digestion system. Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology, 75(6), pp.500-508.

DOI: 10.1002/1097-4660(200006)75:6<500::aid-jctb246>3.0.co;2-t

[5] Mata-Alvarez J., S. Macé and P. Llabrés, 2000. Anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes. An overview of research achievements and perspectives, Bioresource Technology, 74 (1), pp.3-16.

DOI: 10.1016/s0960-8524(00)00023-7

[6] Borja R., B. Rincón, F. Raposo, J. Alba and A. Martín, 2002. A study of anaerobic digestibility of two-phase olive mill solid waste (OMSW) at mesophilic temperature, Process Biochemistry, 38 (5), pp.733-742.

DOI: 10.1016/s0032-9592(02)00202-9

[7] Borja R., E. Sánchez, B. Rincón, F. Raposo, M.A. Martín and A. Martín, 2005. Study and optimization of the anaerobic acidogenic fermentation of two-phase olive pomace, Process Biochemistry, 40 (1), pp.281-291.

DOI: 10.1016/j.procbio.2004.01.002

[8] Raposo F., R. Borja, E. Sánchez, M.A. Martín and A. Martín, 2004. Performance and kinetic evaluation of the anaerobic digestion of two-phase olive mill effluents in reactors with suspended and immobilized biomass, Water Research, 38 (8), pp.2017-2026.

DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.01.007

[9] Environmental Protection Administration of P. R. China, 2002. Water and Wastewater Monitoring Analysis Method, China Environmental Science Press, p.120.

[10] Wang J.Y., H.L. Xu, H. Zhang and J.H. Tay, 2003. Semi-continuous anaerobic digestion of food waste using a hybrid anaerobic solid–liquid bioreactor, Water Science and Technology, 48 (4), pp.169-174.

DOI: 10.2166/wst.2003.0247

[11] Wen Z., W. Liao and S. Chen, 2004. Hydrolysis of animal manure lignocellulosics for reducing sugar production, Bioresource Technology, 91 (1), pp.31-39.

DOI: 10.1016/s0960-8524(03)00166-4