4.8 Review

Review of feedstock pretreatment strategies for improved anaerobic digestion: From lab-scale research to full-scale application

期刊

BIORESOURCE TECHNOLOGY
卷 199, 期 -, 页码 386-397

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.007

关键词

Algae; Anaerobic biodegradability; Animal by-products; Lignocellulosic biomass; Sewage sludge

资金

  1. Campus France
  2. Greek General Secretariat for Research and Technology through 'Bilateral projects Greece-France' [-1455-FrancEllas]
  3. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness through EDARSOL project [CTQ2014-57293-C3-3-R]
  4. Generalitat de Catalunya through Consolidated Research Groups [2014SGR116]
  5. National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) from the Brazilian Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

When properly designed, pretreatments may enhance the methane potential and/or anaerobic digestion rate, improving digester performance. This paper aims at providing some guidelines on the most appropriate pretreatments for the main feedstocks of biogas plants. Waste activated sludge was firstly investigated and implemented at full-scale, its thermal pretreatment with steam explosion being most recommended as it increases the methane potential and digestion rate, ensures sludge sanitation and the heat needed is produced on-site. Regarding fatty residues, saponification is preferred for enhancing their solubilisation and bioavailability. In the case of animal by-products, this pretreatment can be optimised to ensure sterilisation, solubilisation and to reduce inhibition linked to long chain fatty acids. With regards to lignocellulosic biomass, the first goal should be delignification, followed by hemicellulose and cellulose hydrolysis, alkali or biological (fungi) pretreatments being most promising. As far as microalgae are concerned, thermal pretreatment seems the most promising technique so far. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.8
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