Literature DB >> 27973356

Towards a standardization of biomethane potential tests.

Christof Holliger1, Madalena Alves2, Diana Andrade3, Irini Angelidaki4, Sergi Astals5, Urs Baier6, Claire Bougrier7, Pierre Buffière8, Marta Carballa9, Vinnie de Wilde10, Florian Ebertseder3, Belén Fernández11, Elena Ficara12, Ioannis Fotidis4, Jean-Claude Frigon13, Hélène Fruteau de Laclos14, Dara S M Ghasimi15, Gabrielle Hack1, Mathias Hartel3, Joern Heerenklage16, Ilona Sarvari Horvath17, Pavel Jenicek18, Konrad Koch19, Judith Krautwald6, Javier Lizasoain20, Jing Liu21, Lona Mosberger6, Mihaela Nistor21, Hans Oechsner22, João Vítor Oliveira2, Mark Paterson23, André Pauss24, Sébastien Pommier25, Isabella Porqueddu12, Francisco Raposo26, Thierry Ribeiro27, Florian Rüsch Pfund6, Sten Strömberg21, Michel Torrijos28, Miriam van Eekert29, Jules van Lier15, Harald Wedwitschka30, Isabella Wierinck31.   

Abstract

Production of biogas from different organic materials is a most interesting source of renewable energy. The biomethane potential (BMP) of these materials has to be determined to get insight in design parameters for anaerobic digesters. Although several norms and guidelines for BMP tests exist, inter-laboratory tests regularly show high variability of BMPs for the same substrate. A workshop was held in June 2015, in Leysin, Switzerland, with over 40 attendees from 30 laboratories around the world, to agree on common solutions to the conundrum of inconsistent BMP test results. This paper presents the consensus of the intense roundtable discussions and cross-comparison of methodologies used in respective laboratories. Compulsory elements for the validation of BMP results were defined. They include the minimal number of replicates, the request to carry out blank and positive control assays, a criterion for the test duration, details on BMP calculation, and last but not least criteria for rejection of the BMP tests. Finally, recommendations on items that strongly influence the outcome of BMP tests such as inoculum characteristics, substrate preparation, test setup, and data analysis are presented to increase the probability of obtaining validated and reproducible results.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27973356     DOI: 10.2166/wst.2016.336

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Water Sci Technol        ISSN: 0273-1223            Impact factor:   1.915


  16 in total

1.  Biomethanation of invasive water hyacinth from eutrophic waters as a post weed management practice in the Dominican Republic: a developing country.

Authors:  Yessica A Castro; Foster A Agblevor
Journal:  Environ Sci Pollut Res Int       Date:  2020-02-10       Impact factor: 4.223

2.  Enhancing methane production from lignocellulosic biomass by combined steam-explosion pretreatment and bioaugmentation with cellulolytic bacterium Caldicellulosiruptor bescii.

Authors:  Daniel Girma Mulat; Silvia Greses Huerta; Dayanand Kalyani; Svein Jarle Horn
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2018-01-29       Impact factor: 6.040

3.  Obtaining filamentous fungi and lipases from sewage treatment plant residue for fat degradation in anaerobic reactors.

Authors:  Anna Cristina P Lima; Magali C Cammarota; Melissa L E Gutarra
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 2.984

4.  Resource Recovery Potential From Lignocellulosic Feedstock Upon Lysis With Ionic Liquids.

Authors:  Beatriz Padrino; Marta Lara-Serrano; Silvia Morales-delaRosa; José M Campos-Martín; José Luis García Fierro; Fernando Martínez; Juan Antonio Melero; Daniel Puyol
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2018-09-05

5.  Standardized protocol for determination of biohydrogen potential.

Authors:  Julián Carrillo-Reyes; Germán Buitrón; Iván Moreno-Andrade; Aida Cecilia Tapia-Rodríguez; Rodolfo Palomo-Briones; Elías Razo-Flores; Oscar Aguilar-Juárez; Jorge Arreola-Vargas; Nicolas Bernet; Adriana Ferreira Maluf Braga; Lucia Braga; Elena Castelló; Lucile Chatellard; Claudia Etchebehere; Laura Fuentes; Elizabeth León-Becerril; Hugo Oscar Méndez-Acosta; Gonzalo Ruiz-Filippi; Estela Tapia-Venegas; Eric Trably; Jorge Wenzel; Marcelo Zaiat
Journal:  MethodsX       Date:  2019-12-04

6.  A comparative analysis of biogas production from tomato bio-waste in mesophilic batch and continuous anaerobic digestion systems.

Authors:  Árpád Szilágyi; Attila Bodor; Norbert Tolvai; Kornél L Kovács; László Bodai; Roland Wirth; Zoltán Bagi; Ágnes Szepesi; Viktória Markó; Balázs Kakuk; Naila Bounedjoum; Gábor Rákhely
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-03-17       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Substrate-to-inoculum ratio drives solid-state anaerobic digestion of unamended grape marc and cheese whey.

Authors:  Josue Kassongo; Esmaeil Shahsavari; Andrew S Ball
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-27       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Microbial biogas production from hydrolysis lignin: insight into lignin structural changes.

Authors:  Daniel Girma Mulat; Janka Dibdiakova; Svein Jarle Horn
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2018-03-09       Impact factor: 6.040

9.  Effects of Two Manure Additives on Methane Emissions from Dairy Manure.

Authors:  Jessie Cluett; Andrew C VanderZaag; Hambaliou Baldé; Sean McGinn; Earl Jenson; Alexander C Hayes; Sylvanus Ekwe
Journal:  Animals (Basel)       Date:  2020-05-07       Impact factor: 2.752

10.  Biomethane Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Selected Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste (OFMSW) with Sewage Sludge: Effect of the Inoculum to Substrate Ratio (ISR) and Mixture Composition on Process Performances.

Authors:  Santo Fabio Corsino; Michele Torregrossa; Gaspare Viviani
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-12-10       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.