4.8 Article

Adding an appropriate proportion of phosphogypsum ensured rice husk and urea composting to promote the compost as substrate utilization

Journal

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
Volume 344, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2021.126301

Keywords

Composting; Phosphogypsum; C; N; Nitrogen loss; Substrate utilization

Funding

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [31760609, 32160744]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFD0800607]
  3. Central Government Guided Local Universities to Develop Outstanding Talents [A3012020017013]
  4. Top Young Talents of Yunnan High-level Talent Training And Support Program [A3012020057]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

By adding an appropriate proportion of phosphogypsum, urea can replace poultry manure as the nitrogen source in the rice husk composting system, allowing for smooth fermentation and ideal substrates. Adding 30% phosphogypsum can significantly shorten the thermophilic stage, but may increase heavy metals.
To explore the effectiveness of urea replacing poultry manure as the nitrogen source in the rice husk composting system, and to promote the utilization of compost products as substrates, 0%, 10%, 20%, and 30% of phosphogypsum were added respectively in the urea composting system, and were compared with the chicken manure composting (RCP0). Finally, the fermentation and maturation of RCP0 were achieved, but high EC value limited the utilization of compost products as the substrate. Urea, as an N source, could lower the EC value, but the C/N ratio was uncoordinated during the initial stage of composting. Adding an appropriate proportion of phosphogypsum could ensure a proper C/N ratio to promote smooth fermentation and enable the products to be ideal substrates. When the added proportion was 30%, the thermophilic stage was shortened significantly but this may increase heavy metals. 10%-20% were concluded to be the recommended proportion.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available