4.5 Article

Anaerobic digestion of post-hydrothermal liquefaction wastewater for improved energy efficiency of hydrothermal bioenergy processes

期刊

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 72, 期 12, 页码 2139-2147

出版社

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2015.435

关键词

activated carbon; anaerobic digestion; biogas production; energy efficiency; hydrothermal liquefaction; toxicity

资金

  1. National Institute of Food and Agriculture, US Department of Agriculture [2014-67019-21568]
  2. Dudley Smith Initiative
  3. Clean Energy Education Initiative - National Science Foundation
  4. Graduate College at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) is a promising process for converting wet biomass and organic wastes into bio-crude oil. It also produces an aqueous product referred to as post-hydrothermal liquefaction wastewater (PHWW) containing up to 40% of the original feedstock carbon, which reduces the overall energy efficiency of the HTL process. This study investigated the feasibility of using anaerobic digestion (AD) to treat PHWW, with the aid of activated carbon. Results showed that successful AD occurred at relatively low concentrations of PHWW (<= 6.7%), producing a biogas yield of 0.5 ml/mg CODremoved, and similar to 53% energy recovery efficiency. Higher concentrations of PHWW (>= 13.3%) had an inhibitory effect on the AD process, as indicated by delayed, slower, or no biogas production. Activated carbon was shown to effectively mitigate this inhibitory effect by enhancing biogas production and allowing digestion to proceed at higher PHWW concentrations (up to 33.3%), likely due to sequestering toxic organic compounds. The addition of activated carbon also increased the net energy recovery efficiency of AD with a relatively high concentration of PHWW (33.3%), taking into account the energy for producing activated carbon. These results suggest that AD is a feasible approach to treat PHWW, and to improve the energy efficiency of the HTL processes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据