| Literature DB >> 33077218 |
Luz Selene Buller1, Cristhy Willy da Silva Romero2, Rubens Augusto Camargo Lamparelli3, Samuel Fontenelle Ferreira4, Ana Paula Bortoleto5, Solange I Mussatto6, Tânia Forster-Carneiro4.
Abstract
This study evaluates the benefits of mineral fertilizers replacement for biodigested vinasse. Data from experimental anaerobic digestion (AD) of vinasse were apn>plied to supn>port the analysis. Based on previous experiments, this assessment assumed that vinasse production could reach 2.38 × 107 m3/year generating around 66,585 MWh/year of electric energy from biogas burning in the Administrative Region of Campinas (ARC). This amount of energy could supply more than 103,000 inhabitants and avoid 35,892 tCO2eq/year (from electric energy replacement). The biodigested vinasse might also reduce the total N, P, and K mineral fertilizers demand per hectare of sugarcane crop in 30%, 1%, and 46%, respectively, avoiding additional greenhouse gas emissions of 111,877 tCO2eq/year. There is no biodigested vinasse surplus for a moderate fertigation rate of 100 m3/ha, complying with local environmental laws related to nutrients excess side effects in areas destined to sugarcane crop. Notwithstanding, a Geographic Information System analysis for a small adjacent area to ARC indicated nine different fertigation rates, ranging from 50 to 100 m3/ha. Even though the general analysis for ARC shows high NPK replacement levels, the fertigation practices should be subsidized for robust soil analysis and adequate to safe environmental levels. A management tool can be designed using the results here presented to subsidize investments for AD widespread adoption by the sugarcane industry to catch a reasonable practice from the economic and environmental perspectives.Entities:
Keywords: Biofertilizer; Biogas; Environmental conservation; GHG mitigation; Renewable energy
Year: 2020 PMID: 33077218 PMCID: PMC7539059 DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142717
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Total Environ ISSN: 0048-9697 Impact factor: 7.963
Fig. 1Flowchart of the general research methodology used in the present study.
Fig. 2Administrative Region of Campinas' typical soil (A), sugarcane plantation areas and sugar mills location (B).
Nutritional needs for sugarcane growth cycles: plant cane and ratoon.
| Plant cane | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expected productivity | N | P-resin (mg/dm3) | |||
| 0–6 | 7–15 | 16–40 | >40 | ||
| t/ha | N, kg/ha | P2O5 kg/ha | |||
| <100 | 30 | 180 | 100 | 60 | 40 |
| 100–150 | 30 | 180 | 120 | 80 | 60 |
| >150 | 30 | – | 140 | 100 | 80 |
Fig. 3(A) Soil typical P and K levels in the study area, (B) pedological map in the study region.
Fig. 4Graphic location of the experimental area with sampling points collected.
Characterization of the initial and final contents of thermophilic anaerobic digestion process (0 and 60 days of experiment, respectively).
| In natura vinasse (day 0) | Biodigested in the reactor (day 0) | Biodigested in the reactor (day 60) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| COD (mgO2/L) | 20,866.52 | 10,584.47 | 8407.10 |
| N-NH3 (mg/L) | 13.06 | 126.27 | 344.93 |
| TN (mg/kg) | 414.44 | 838.13 | 987.56 |
| TS (g/kg) | 36.92 | 32.75 | 30.93 |
| STS (%ST) | 58.47 | 56.85 | 61.16 |
| SVS (g/kg) | 14.13 | 18.61 | 19.19 |
| DTS (g/kg) | 0.89 | 5.30 | 8.30 |
| DVS (g/kg) | 0.89 | 4.40 | 5.70 |
| Density (g/mL) | 1.01 | 1.00 | 1.00 |
| pH | 4.67 | 6.11 | 8.36 |
| Total alkalinity (mgCaCO3/L) | 189.04 | 727.10 | |
| TOC (mg/L) | 6955.50 | 3528.16 | 2802.40 |
| C:N | 16.78 | 4.21 | 2.84 |
| P (mg P2O5/L) | 17.00 | 32.00 | |
| K (mg K2O/L) | 1400.00 | 1400.00 |
Not detected.
Data for phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) were obtained from Salomon (2007).
Fig. 5(A) Evolution of biogas composition, (B) ammoniacal nitrogen and CH4 percentage, (C) chemical oxygen demand (COD) and CH4 concentration with time of reactor operation.
Fig. 6Maps presenting the potential of harnessing biogas production related to nutrient recycling: (A) for vinasse in natura, and (B) for biodigested vinasse.
Fig. 7Soil GHG emissions for in natura and biodigested vinasse and the potential mitigation obtained from the last.
Direct and indirect GHG emissions (without LUC).
| Equation | Parameters | Biodigested vinasse (N input = 16,032.02 t year−1) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Eq. | N2O − NN inputs (t year−1) | 454.40 | 160.32 |
| N2O − NOS (t year−1) | 0 | 0 | |
| N2O − NPRP (t year−1) | 0 | 0 | |
| N2ODirect − N (t year−1) | 454.40 | 160.32 | |
| Eq. | FSN | 45,440.15 | 16,032.02 |
| FracGASF | 0.1 | 0.1 | |
| FON | 0 | 0 | |
| FPRP | 0 | 0 | |
| FracGASM | 0 | 0 | |
| EF4 | 0.01 | 0.01 | |
| N2O(ATD) − N (tN2O–N year−1) | 71.45 | 25.19 | |
| Eq. | M | 45,440.15 | 16,032.02 |
| EF | 0.20 | 0.20 | |
| Total direct GHG emissions (t CO2eq year−1) | |||
| Total indirect GHG emissions (t CO2eq year−1) | |||
| Total GHG emissions (t CO2eq year−1) | |||
Parameters from IPCC (2006) default values – Tier 1.
According to sugarcane crop N requirement and in natura vinasse characterization for a fertigation rate of 99 m3 ha−1.
According to sugarcane crop N requirement and biodigested vinasse characterization for a fertigation rate of 100 m3 ha−1.