Korean Journal of Environmental Agriculture (한국환경농학회지)

The Korean Society of Environmental Agriculture (한국환경농학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Effect of Rice Straw on Methane Production Potential of Cow Manure

우분과 볏짚의 병합 혐기성 소화를 통한 메탄 생산에 대한 고찰

  • Park, So Yun (Department of Agricultural and Biological Chemistry, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Jang, Jeong A (Department of Agricultural and Biological Chemistry, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chonnam National University) ;
  • Zhao, Xin (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, College of Engineering, Seoul National University) ;
  • Hong, Jin-Kyung (Department of Environmental and Energy Engineering, College of Science and Technology, Yonsei University) ;
  • Jho, Eun Hea (Department of Agricultural and Biological Chemistry, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Chonnam National University)
  • 박소윤 (전남대학교 농업생명과학대학 농생명화학과) ;
  • 장정아 (전남대학교 농업생명과학대학 농생명화학과) ;
  • 조흠 (서울대학교 공과대학 건설환경공학부) ;
  • 홍진경 (연세대학교 과학기술융합대학 환경에너지공학부) ;
  • 조은혜 (전남대학교 농업생명과학대학 농생명화학과)
  • Received : 2022.05.11
  • Accepted : 2022.05.26
  • Published : 2022.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Animal manures are one of the biggest sources of greenhouse gases and improper manage-ment of animal wastes contributes to the increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Con-verting greenhouse gases generated from animal manures to energy is one way of contributing to the net-zero carbon emissions. METHODS AND RESULTS: The potential for methane production from cow manure (CM) was studied by measuring the methane yield using the biochemical methane potential (BMP) test. In particular, the effect of co-digestion using rice straw (RM) on the methane production was studied. The methane yields from the co-digestion of CM and RS were statistically similar to that from the mono-digestion of CM or RS. But there was a synergy effect at the CM:RS ratio of 1:2 and 1:1. This can be attributed to the increased C/N ratio. The changed microbial community structure with the addition of substrates (CM, RS) probably led to the increase in the methane produc-tion. CONCLUSION(S): The methane production potential of the particular CM used in this study was not improved by the addition of RS as a co-substrate. The addition of substrates to the anaerobic sludge promoted the increase in the microbial species having synergetic relationship with methano-gens, and this can partially explain the increase in the methane production with the addition of substrates. Overall, there are needs for further studies to improve the methane yield from CM.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This article was supported by "Regional Innovation Strategy (RIS)" through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education (MOE) (2021RIS-002). This article was also supported by NRF-2021R1A2C4001746.

References

  1. Cheon Y (2022) Review of global carbon neutral strategies and technologies. Journal of the Korean Society of Mineral and Energy Resources Engineers, 59, 99-112. https://doi.org/10.32390/ksmer.2022.59.1.099.
  2. Kim MS, Koo N, Kim, JG (2020) A comparative study on ammonia emission inventory in livestock manure compost application through a foreign case study. Korean Journal of Environmental Biology, 38(1), 71-81. https://doi.org/10.11626/KJEB.2020.38.1.071.
  3. Hassan M, Masud SFB, Anwar M, Zhao C, Singh RS, Mehryar E (2022) Methane enhancement by the co-digestion of thermochemical alkali solubilized rice husk and cow manure: Lignocellulosics decomposition perspectives. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-02310-w.
  4. Wang K, Yun S, Ke T, An J, Abbas Y, Liu X, Zou M, Liu L, Liu J (2022) Use of bag-filter gas dust in anaerobic digestion of cattle manure for boosting the methane yield and digestate utilization. Bioresource Technology, 126729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.126729.
  5. Kunatsa T, Xia X (2022) A review on anaerobic digestion with focus on the role of biomass co-digestion, modelling and optimisation on biogas production and enhancement. Bioresource Technology, 344, 126311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.126311.
  6. Ma G, Ndegwa P, Harrison JH, Chen Y (2020) Methane yields during anaerobic co-digestion of animal manure with other feedstocks: A meta-analysis. Science of the Total Environment, 728, 138224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138224.
  7. Li Y, Achinas S, Zhao J, Geurkink B, Krooneman J, Euverink GJW (2020) Co-digestion of cow and sheep manure: Performance evaluation and relative microbial activity. Renewable Energy, 153, 553-563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.02.041.
  8. Cho J, Kim H, Oh D (2014) Characteristics for co--digestion of food waste and night soil using bmp test. Journal of the Korean GEO-environmental Society, 15, 13-18. https://doi.org/10.14481/jkges.2014.15.9.13.
  9. Tsapekos P, Kougias P, Alvarado-Morales M, Kovalovszki A, Corbiere M, Angelidaki I (2018) Energy recovery from wastewater microalgae through anaerobic digestion process: Methane potential, continuous reactor operation and modelling aspects. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 139, 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2018.08.004.
  10. Kafle GK, Kim SH (2013) Anaerobic treatment of apple waste with swine manure for biogas production: Batch and continuous operation. Applied Energy, 103, 61-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.10.018.
  11. Li Y, Zhao J, Krooneman J, Euverink GJW (2021) Strategies to boost anaerobic digestion performance of cow manure: Laboratory achievements and their full-scale application potential. Science of the Total Environment, 755, 142940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142940.
  12. Jeong K-H, Kim JK, Lee D-j, Cho W-M, Ravindran B, Kwag J-H (2016) Evaluation of solidified fuel value of dairy cattle manure digested by semi-dry anaerobic digestion method. Journal of the Korea Organic Resources Recycling Association, 24, 95-103. https://doi.org/10.17137/korrae.2016.24.4.95.
  13. Zeynali R, Khojastehpour M, Ebrahimi-Nik M (2017) Effect of ultrasonic pre-treatment on biogas yield and specific energy in anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wholesale market wastes. Sustainable Environment Research, 27, 259-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.serj.2017.07.001.
  14. Angelidaki I, Ahring BK (2000) Methods for increasing the biogas potential from the recalcitrant organic matter contained in manure. Water Science and Technology, 41, 189-194. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2000.0071.
  15. Li R, Chen S, Li X, Saifullah Lar J, He Y, Zhu B (2009) Anaerobic codigestion of kitchen waste with cattle manure for biogas production. Energy & Fuels, 23, 2225-2228. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef8008772.
  16. Yang Q, Wang H, Larson R, Runge TM (2017) Comparative study of chemical pretreatments of dairy manure for enhanced biomethane production. BioResources, 12, 7363-7375. http://doi.org/10.15376/biores.12.4.7363-7375.
  17. Budde J, Heiermann M, Quinones TS, Plochl M (2014) Effects of thermobarical pretreatment of cattle waste as feedstock for anaerobic digestion. Waste Management, 34, 522-529. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.10.023.
  18. Sutaryo S, Ward AJ, Moller HB (2014) The effect of mixed-enzyme addition in anaerobic digestion on methane yield of dairy cattle manure. Environmental Technology, 35, 2476-2482. http://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2014.911356.
  19. Yuan Y, Bian A, Zhang L, Chen Z, Zhou F, Ye F, Jin T, Pan M, Chen Tet al. (2019) Thermal-alkali and enzymes for efficient biomethane production from co-digestion of corn straw and cattle manure. BioResources, 14, 5422-5437. http://doi.org/10.15376/biores.14.3.5422-5437.
  20. Tufaner F, Avsar Y (2016) Effects of co-substrate on biogas production from cattle manure: A review. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 13, 2303-2312. http://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-016-1069-1.
  21. Vivekanand V, Mulat DG, Eijsink VG, Horn SJ (2018) Synergistic effects of anaerobic co-digestion of whey, manure and fish ensilage. Bioresource Technology, 249, 35-41. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.169.
  22. Moset V, Fontaine D, Moller HB (2017) Co-digestion of cattle manure and grass harvested with different technologies. Effect on methane yield, digestate composition and energy balance. Energy, 141, 451-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.08.068.
  23. Kamusoko R, Jingura RM, Parawira W, Sanyika WT (2019) Comparison of pretreatment methods that enhance biomethane production from crop residues-a systematic review. Biofuel Research Journal, 6, 1080. http://doi.org/10.18331/BRJ2019.6.4.4.
  24. Xavier CA, Moset V, Wahid R, Moller HB (2015) The efficiency of shredded and briquetted wheat straw in anaerobic co-digestion with dairy cattle manure. Biosystems Engineering, 139, 16-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2015.07.008.
  25. Jugal Sukhesh M, Venkateswara Rao P (2019) Synergistic effect in anaerobic co-digestion of rice straw and dairy manure-a batch kinetic study. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects, 41, 2145-2156. https://doi.org/10.1080/15567036.2018.1550536.
  26. Risberg K, Sun L, Leven L, Horn SJ, Schnurer A (2013) Biogas production from wheat straw and manure-impact of pretreatment and process operating parameters. Bioresource Technology, 149, 232-237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.09.054.
  27. Li D, Liu S, Mi L, Li Z, Yuan Y, Yan Z, Liu X (2015) Effects of feedstock ratio and organic loading rate on the anaerobic mesophilic co-digestion of rice straw and cow manure. Bioresource Technology, 189, 319-326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.04.033.
  28. Li C, Stromberg S, Liu G, Nges IA, Liu J (2017) Assessment of regional biomass as co-substrate in the anaerobic digestion of chicken manure: Impact of co-digestion with chicken processing waste, seagrass and miscanthus. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 118, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2016.11.008.
  29. Shanmugam P, Horan N (2009) Optimising the biogas production from leather fleshing waste by co-digestion with msw. Bioresource Technology, 100, 4117-4120. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.03.052.
  30. Su L, Sun X, Liu C, Ji R, Zhen G, Chen M, Zhang L (2020) Thermophilic solid-state anaerobic digestion of corn straw, cattle manure, and vegetable waste: Effect of temperature, total solid content, and c/n ratio. Archaea, 2020. 8841490. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/8841490.
  31. APHA, Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 1998, American Public Health Association (APHA): Washington DC, USA.
  32. Angelidaki I, Alves M, Bolzonella D, Borzacconi L, Campos J, Guwy A, Kalyuzhnyi S, Jenicek P, Van Lier J (2009) Defining the biomethane potential (bmp) of solid organic wastes and energy crops: A proposed protocol for batch assays. Water Science and Technology, 59, 927-934. http://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.040.
  33. Buswell A, Mueller H (1952) Mechanism of methane fermentation. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry, 44, 550-552. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie50507a033.
  34. Bah H, Zhang W, Wu S, Qi D, Kizito S, Dong R (2014) Evaluation of batch anaerobic co-digestion of palm pressed fiber and cattle manure under mesophilic conditions. Waste Management, 34, 1984-1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.07.015.
  35. Klindworth A, Pruesse E, Schweer T, Peplies J, Quast C, Horn M, Glockner FO (2013) Evaluation of general 16s ribosomal rna gene pcr primers for classical and next-generation sequencing-based diversity studies. Nucleic Acids Research, 41, e1-e1. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks808.
  36. Bolyen E, Rideout JR, Dillon MR, Bokulich NA, Abnet CC, Al-Ghalith GA, Alexander H, Alm EJ, Arumugam M et al. (2019) Reproducible, interactive, scalable and extensible microbiome data science using qiime 2. Nature Biotechnology, 37, 852-857. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-019-0209-9.
  37. Amir A, McDonald D, Navas-Molina JA, Kopylova E, Morton JT, Zech Xu Z, Kightley EP, Thompson LR, Hyde ER et al. (2017) Deblur rapidly resolves single-nucleotide community sequence patterns. MSystems, 2, e00191-00116. https://doi.org/10.1128/mSystems.00191-16.
  38. Bokulich NA, Kaehler BD, Rideout JR, Dillon M, Bolyen E, Knight R, Huttley GA, Caporaso JG (2018) Optimizing taxonomic classification of marker-gene amplicon sequences with qiime 2's q2-feature-classifier plugin. Microbiome, 6, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40168-018-0470-z.
  39. Caceres MD, Legendre P (2009) Associations between species and groups of sites: Indices and statistical inference. Ecology, 90, 3566-3574. https://doi.org/10.1890/08-1823.1.
  40. De Caceres M, Legendre P, Moretti M (2010) Improving indicator species analysis by combining groups of sites. Oikos, 119, 1674-1684. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18334.x.
  41. Weiland P (2010) Biogas production: Current state and perspectives. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 85, 849-860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-009-2246-7.
  42. Muhayodin F, Fritze A, Rotter VS (2021) Mass balance of c, nutrients, and mineralization of nitrogen during anaerobic co-digestion of rice straw with cow manure. Sustainability, 13, 11568. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132111568.
  43. Lee C, Zhao X, Kim JY (2022) Effect of mixing ratio on sewage sludge and septage co-digestion. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-022-01372-2.
  44. Mata-Alvarez J, Dosta J, Romero-Guiza M, Fonoll X, Peces M, Astals S (2014) A critical review on anaerobic co-digestion achievements between 2010 and 2013. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 36, 412-427. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.039.
  45. Gunaseelan VN (1997) Anaerobic digestion of biomass for methane production: A review. Biomass and Bioenergy, 13, 83-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0961-9534(97)00020-2.
  46. Khalid A, Arshad M, Anjum M, Mahmood T, Dawson L (2011) The anaerobic digestion of solid organic waste. Waste Management, 31, 1737-1744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.03.021.
  47. Adekunle KF, Okolie JA (2015) A review of biochemical process of anaerobic digestion. Advances in Bioscience and Biotechnology, 6, 205. https://doi.org/10.4236/abb.2015.63020.
  48. Kambara H, Dinh HT, Matsushita S, Aoi Y, Kindaichi T, Ozaki N, Ohashi A (2022) New microbial electrosynthesis system for methane production from carbon dioxide coupled with oxidation of sulfide to sulfate. Journal of Environmental Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2022.02.029.
  49. Mei R, Nobu MK, Narihiro T, Liu W-T (2020) Metagenomic and metatranscriptomic analyses revealed uncultured bacteroidales populations as the dominant proteolytic amino acid degraders in anaerobic digesters. Frontiers in Microbiology, 2763. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.593006.
  50. Tang F, Tian J, Zhu N, Lin Y, Zheng H, Xu Z, Liu W (2022) Dry anaerobic digestion of ammoniated straw: Performance and microbial characteristics. Bioresource Technology, 126952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.126952.
  51. Bovio-Winkler P, Cabezas A, Etchebehere C (2021) Database mining to unravel the ecology of the phylum chloroflexi in methanogenic full scale bioreactors. Frontiers in Microbiology, 3608. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.603234.
  52. Hao L, Michaelsen TY, Singleton CM, Dottorini G, Kirkegaard RH, Albertsen M, Nielsen PH, Dueholm MS (2020) Novel syntrophic bacteria in full-scale anaerobic digesters revealed by genome-centric metatranscriptomics. The ISME Journal, 14, 906-918. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-019-0571-0.