4.7 Article

Anaerobic digestion modeling of the main components of organic fraction of municipal solid waste

Journal

PROCESS SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
Volume 94, Issue -, Pages 180-187

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.psep.2015.02.002

Keywords

Anaerobic digestion; Organic fraction of municipal solid waste; Fraction; Biochemical methane potential; Model; Composition

Funding

  1. URBASER
  2. Topbio-Innpacto project
  3. FEDER funds
  4. NOVEDAR project

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) is composed of several heterogeneous organic and inorganic wastes. The diversity of composition, the high volatile solid content and the biodegradable material that this waste offers make it quite an interesting option for anaerobic digestion (AD). Depending on the substrate composition, the biological degradation and kinetics of the AD could vary. Biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests are used as a tool to evaluate the methane production of several fractions of OFMSW, in order to study the influence of each fraction in the final mixture. The kinetic parameters of methane curves and the prediction of final productions are studied by different approaches to model equations using linear, exponential, logistic and Gaussian models. The analyses of the fractions indicate that organic substrates such as meat/fish which are in a small proportion in the final mixture, obtain major productivities (291 +/- 3 mlCH(4)/gVS), however others such as paper (217 +/- 5 mlCH(4)/gVS) could have their productivity enhanced due to their high VS present in the final mixture. Both the Gomperzt and the first order model fit reasonably with all the fractions, although substrates with lag phase adjust only to the Gompertz model explaining 99% of the experimental results. (C) 2015 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier BAT. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available