4.6 Review

A Review of Composting Process Models of Organic Solid Waste with a Focus on the Fates of C, N, P, and K

期刊

PROCESSES
卷 9, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pr9030473

关键词

composting; organic solid waste; models; nutrients; modeling scale; checklist

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council Scholarship [201908320362]
  2. project URA - German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [01LE1804A1]
  3. German Aerospace Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper reviewed composting models from the past decade, finding that most models involved the fates of carbon and nitrogen, with only a few including phosphorus and potassium. Mechanism-derived models were relatively complex, while data-driven models could provide more accurate predictions and involve more nutrients.
To foster a circular economy in line with compost quality assessment, a deep understanding of the fates of nutrients and carbon in the composting process is essential to achieve the co-benefits of value-added and environmentally friendly objectives. This paper is a review aiming to fill in the knowledge gap about the composting process. Firstly, a systematic screening search and a descriptive analysis were conducted on composting models involving the fates of Carbon (C), Nitrogen (N), Phosphorus (P) and Potassium (K) over the past decade, followed by the development of a checklist to define the gap between the existing models and target models. A review of 22 models in total led to the results that the mainstream models involved the fates of C and N, while only a few models involved P and K as target variables. Most of the models described the laboratory-scale composting process. Mechanism-derived models were relatively complex; however, the application of the fractionation of substrates could contribute to reducing the complexity. Alternatively, data-driven models can help us obtain more accurate predictions and involve the fates of more nutrients, depending on the data volume. Finally, the perspective of developing composting models for the fates of C, N, P, and K was proposed.

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

4.6
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