4.7 Article

Comparative study on factors affecting anaerobic digestion of agricultural vegetal residues

期刊

BIOTECHNOLOGY FOR BIOFUELS
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1754-6834-5-39

关键词

-

资金

  1. Develop and Support of Multidisciplinary Postdoctoral Programmes in Major Technical Areas of National Strategy of Research - Development - Innovation 4D-POSTDOC [POSDRU/89/1.5/S/52603]
  2. European Social Fund through Sectorial Operational Programme Human Resources Development
  3. ofi Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Presently, different studies are conducted related to the topic of biomass potential to generate through anaerobic fermentation process alternative fuels supposed to support the existing fossil fuel resources, which are more and more needed, in quantity, but also in quality of so called green energy. The present study focuses on depicting an optional way of capitalizing agricultural biomass residues using anaerobic fermentation in order to obtain biogas with satisfactory characteristics.. The research is based on wheat bran and a mix of damaged ground grains substrates for biogas production. Results: The information and conclusions delivered offer results covering the general characteristics of biomass used, the process parameters with direct impact over the biogas production (temperature regime, pH values) and the daily biogas production for each batch relative to the used material. Conclusions: All conclusions are based on processing of monitoring process results, with accent on temperature and pH influence on the daily biogas production for the two batches. The main conclusion underlines the fact that the mixture batch produces a larger quantity of biogas, using approximately the same process conditions and input, in comparison to alone analyzed probes, indicating thus a higher potential for the biogas production than the wheat bran substrate. Adrian Eugen Cioabla, Ioana Ionel, Gabriela-Alina Dumitrel and Francisc Popescu contributed equally to this work

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