4.7 Article

Assessment of process control parameters in the biochemical methane potential of sunflower oil cake

期刊

BIOMASS & BIOENERGY
卷 32, 期 12, 页码 1235-1244

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.02.019

关键词

Biochemical methane potential (BMP); Sunflower oil cake (SuOC); Inoculum to substrate ratio (ISR); Anaerobic digestion

资金

  1. European Union [SES-CT-2004-502824-6th]
  2. Ministry of Educacion y Ciencia of the Spanish Government [CTM 2005-01260/TECNO]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A laboratory-scale study was conducted on the batch anaerobic digestion of sunflower oil cake (SuOC), solid waste derived from the extraction process of sunflower oil. A multi-reactor system was used to compare methane production from this waste at inoculum to substrate ratios (ISRs) of 3.0, 2.0, 1.5. 1.0, 0.8 and 0.5 (expressed as volatile solids (VS) basis). The tests were carried out at mesophilic temperature (35 degrees C) and run against a control of inoculum without substrate. The results obtained in the biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests showed that the ultimate methane yield (Y(M,ult)) decreased considerably from 227 +/- 23 to 107 +/- 11 ml CH(4) at standard temperature and pressure (STP) conditions g(-1) VS(added) when the ISR decreased from 3.0 to 0.5, showing a clear influence of the ISR on the methane yield coefficient. The biodegradability (BD) of the waste also decreased from 86% to 41% when the ISR varied from 3.0 to 0.5. A net total ammonia nitrogen (TAN) yield of 39.2 mg N g(-1) VS(added) was obtained, and this value was not influenced by the ISRs assayed, which demonstrated the appropriate operation of the hydrolytic-acidogenic stage of the overall digestion process. A clear imbalance of the methanogenic process was observed at the lowest ISRs studied (0.5 and 0.8) due to a considerable increase in CODs and TVFA in the digestates. The profile of VIA was also influenced by the ISR, typical of the proteinaceous substrates. (C) 2008 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

4.7
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