4.7 Article

Evaluation of methane production from maize silage by harvest of different plant portions

期刊

BIOMASS & BIOENERGY
卷 67, 期 -, 页码 339-346

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.05.016

关键词

Anaerobic digestion; Biomethane potential; Maize; Plant portions; Corn ear silage

资金

  1. Regione Lombardia
  2. European Social Fund

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Biogas production is mainly based on the anaerobic digestion of cereals silages and maize silage is the most utilized. Regarding biogas production, the most important portion of the plant is the ear. The corn ear, due to high starch content, is characterized by a higher biogas production compared to the silage of the whole plant. In this paper, we present the results of experimental field tests carried out in Northern Italy that aim to evaluate the anaerobic methane potential (BMP) of different portions of ensiled maize hybrids. The BMP production is evaluated considering the possibility of harvesting and ensiling: the whole plant; the plant cut at 75 cm of height; the ear only; the plant without the ear. For the different solutions, the results are reported as specific BMP and as average biogas production achievable per hectare. The methane production by harvesting and ensiling the whole plant (10,212 and 10,605 m(3) ha(-1), for maize class 600 and 700, respectively) is higher than the ones achievable by the other plant portions (7961 and 7707 m(3) ha(-1), from the ear; 9523 and 9784 m(3) ha(-1), from the plant cut at 75 cm; 3328 and 3554 m(3) ha(-1), from the plant without the ear, for maize class 600 and 700, respectively). The harvest of the whole plant, although it is the most productive solution, could not be the best solution under an economic and environmental point of view. Harvesting only the ear can be interesting considering the new Italian subsidy framework and for the biogas plants fed by biomass transported over long distances. (C) 2014 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