| Literature DB >> 29151888 |
Michał Gaworski1, Sławomir Jabłoński1, Izabela Pawlaczyk-Graja2, Rafał Ziewiecki2, Piotr Rutkowski3, Anna Wieczyńska2, Roman Gancarz2, Marcin Łukaszewicz1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pig manure utilization and valorization is an important topic with tightening regulations focused on ecological and safety issues. By itself pig manure is a poor substrate for biogas production because of its excessive nitrogen content relative to available organic carbon. Such substrate is alkaline, and methanogenesis can be suppressed, and so additional substrates with high organic carbon must be added. The most promising is straw, which is available from adjacent biogas plant cultures. However, the abundant lignocellulosic biomass of wheat straw undergoes slow decomposition, and only a fraction of the chemical energy can be converted into biogas; thus economical methods for pretreatment increasing bioavailability are sought.Entities:
Keywords: Lignocellulosic biomass pretreatment; Liquid hot water extraction; Methane production; Steam explosion; Wheat straw
Year: 2017 PMID: 29151888 PMCID: PMC5679381 DOI: 10.1186/s13068-017-0922-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biotechnol Biofuels ISSN: 1754-6834 Impact factor: 6.040
Fig. 1Schematic representation of the processes involved in the experimental setup
TS, ash and VS used in the experiments of the biogas production
| TS (w/w%) | Ash (w/w%) | VS (w/w%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dry raw WS | 93.30 ± 0.20 | 2.94 ± 0.07 | 90.36 ± 0.27 |
| LHW-SE WS | 6.36 ± 0.21 | 0.98 ± 0.02 | 5.37 ± 0.23 |
| Recycled water | 3.39 ± 0.01 | 0.84 ± 0.02 | 2.55 ± 0.03 |
| Inoculum of Koczała plant (KB) | 4.50 ± 0.04 | 0.87 ± 0.01 | 3.62 ± 0.05 |
| Inoculum of Strzelin plant (SB) | 3.14 ± 0.02 | 0.89 ± 0.01 | 2.25 ± 0.03 |
Values are expressed as mean of five measurements ± SD
Fig. 2FT-IR spectra of wheat straw (WS) and its pretreated solids product (LHW-SE WS)
Fig. 3Size exclusion chromatography (SEC) analysis of water-soluble compounds. a Saccharide profile of wheat straw (WS) and of its pretreated liquor product (LHW-SE WS), identified by evaporative light scattering (ELS) detection method; b polyphenolic profile of wheat straw (WS) and of its pretreated liquor product (LHW-SE WS), where they were detected using UV–Vis detection system (λ = 270 nm)
Results of the water-soluble components of the LHW-SE WS pulp, and recycled water SEC HPLC analysis
| Fraction no. | (WS) | (LHW-SE WS) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average | % | Average | % | |||||
| Polyphenolic part | Saccharide part | ∑ | Polyphenolic part | Saccharide part | ∑ | |||
| 1 | ~ 1500 | 5.6 | 16.4 | 22.0 | ~ 2300 | 0.4 | 7.5 | 7.9 |
| 2 | ~ 30 | 3.5 | 35.6 | 39.1 | ~ 30 | 0.5 | 15.8 | 16.3 |
| 3 | ~ 1–10 | 6.6 | 31.1 | 37.7 | ~ 0.2–1 | 0.5 | 75.1 | 75.6 |
| 98.8 | 99.8 | |||||||
| Impurities from recycled water | ||||||||
| 4 | ~ 1500 | 0.12 | 0.58 | 0.72 | ~ 1500 | 0.03 | 0.09 | 0.12 |
| 5 | ~ 160 | 0.08 | 0.42 | 0.48 | ~ 160 | 0.02 | 0.06 | 0.08 |
| 1.20 | 0.20 | |||||||
GC-MS analysis of the LHW-SE WS chloroform extract and methanol extract compounds
| Signal no. | Retention time (min) | Compound name | Area (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| 1 | 19.98 | Dodecanoic acid | 34.41 |
| 2 | 22.04 | 2-Pentadecanol | 1.98 |
| 3 | 23.89 | Hexadecanoic acid | 4.63 |
| 4 | 27.90 | Hexanedioic acid | 6.07 |
| 5 | 31.09 | 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid | 13.17 |
|
| |||
| 1 | 5.41 | Acetic acid | 35.14 |
| 2 | 8.67 | Propionic acid | 2.61 |
| 3 | 9.36 | Butanoic acid | 3.07 |
| 4 | 12.55 | Hexanoic acid | 5.05 |
| 5 | 20.44 | Ethylene | 0.84 |
| 6 | 22.56 | Pentadecanoic acid | 2.98 |
| 7 | 23.90 | Hexadecanoic acid | 4.92 |
| 8 | 24.10 | 1,2-Benzenedicarboxylic acid | 1.52 |
| 9 | 24.34 | 9,12-Octadecadienoic acid ( | 6.73 |
| 10 | 24.51 | 9,12,15-Octadecatrienoic acid | 0.96 |
| 11 | 25.62 | Oleic acid | 15.80 |
Fig. 4Biogas yield potential measurement of wheat straw (WS) and its pretreated product (LHW-SE WS)
Fig. 5Processing data in Koczała biogas plant (KB) presented in the span of over 5 years. a The average biogas production on the total organic dry mass input. b Raw materials contribution in the total organic dry mass
Fig. 6Correlation of real and theoretical biogas yield charts in Koczała plant over 1570 days of work
The average biogas yield produced from the dry organic mass
| Raw material | Theoretical biogas yield (m3 tdm−1) |
|---|---|
| Pig slurry | 320a |
| Corn silage | 610b |
| Recirculate | 150c |
| LHW-SE WS | 350c/600d |
am3 tdm−1 of biogas yield from the dry organic mass depending on the literature data [4]
bm3 tdm−1 of biogas yield calculated, based on the methanogenic potential of recirculate measured in the experiments in the laboratory scale
c350 m3 tdm−1 of biogas yield calculated, based on the methanogenic potential of LHW-SE WS according to the laboratory data, measured in the experiments in the laboratory scale
d600 m3 tdm−1 of biogas yield obtained according to the biogas plant data
Average daily energy consumption in liquid hot water–steam explosion plant
| Energy type | LHW-SE (kWh) | Mill (kWh) | Overall (kWh) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Electrical | 568 | 59 | 627 |
| Thermal | 10,339 | – | 10,339 |
| Σ | 10,907 | 59 | 10,966 |
Average for 750 days of operation excluding malfunctions since LHW-SE launch
Average theoretical daily energy net profitability from liquid hot water–steam explosion plant
| Energy type | LHW-SE (kWh) |
|---|---|
| Electrical | 15,300 |
| Thermal | 13,500 |
| Σ | 28,800 |