期刊文献+

A comparative study on the alternating mesophilic and thermophilic two-stage anaerobic digestion of food waste 被引量:4

A comparative study on the alternating mesophilic and thermophilic two-stage anaerobic digestion of food waste
原文传递
导出
摘要 An alternating mesophilic and thermophilic two stage anaerobic digestion (AD) process was conducted. The temperature of the acidogenic (A) and methanogenic (M) reactors was controlled as follows: System 1 (S1) mesophilic A-mesophilic M; (S2) mesophilic A-thermophilic M; and (S3) thermophilic A-mesophilic M. Initially, the AD reactor was acclimatized and inoculated with digester sludge. Food waste was added with the soluble chemical oxygen demand (SCOD) concentrations of 41.4-47.0 g/L and volatile fatty acids of 2.0-3.2 g/L. Based on the results, the highest total chemical oxygen demand removal (86.6%) was recorded in S2 while S3 exhibited the highest SCOD removal (96.6%). Comparing S1 with S2, total solids removal increased by 0.5%;S3 on the other hand decreased by 0.1% as compared to S1. However, volatile solids (VS) removal in S1, S2, and S3 was 78.5%, 81.7%, and 79.2%, respectively. S2 also exhibited the highest CH4 content, yield, and production rate of 70.7%, 0.44 L CH4/g VSadded, and 1.23 L CH4/(L.day), respectively. Bacterial community structure revealed that the richness, diversity, evenness, and dominance of S2 were high except for the archaeal community. The terminal restriction fragments dendrogram also revealed that the microbial community of the acidogenic and methanogenic reactors in S2 was distinct. Therefore, S2 was the best among the systems for the operation of two-stage AD of food waste in terms of CH4 production, nutrient removal, and microbial community structure. An alternating mesophilic and thermophilic two stage anaerobic digestion (AD) process was conducted. The temperature of the acidogenic (A) and methanogenic (M) reactors was controlled as follows: System 1 (S1) mesophilic A-mesophilic M; (S2) mesophilic A-thermophilic M; and (S3) thermophilic A-mesophilic M. Initially, the AD reactor was acclimatized and inoculated with digester sludge. Food waste was added with the soluble chemical oxygen demand (SCOD) concentrations of 41.4-47.0 g/L and volatile fatty acids of 2.0-3.2 g/L. Based on the results, the highest total chemical oxygen demand removal (86.6%) was recorded in S2 while S3 exhibited the highest SCOD removal (96.6%). Comparing S1 with S2, total solids removal increased by 0.5%;S3 on the other hand decreased by 0.1% as compared to S1. However, volatile solids (VS) removal in S1, S2, and S3 was 78.5%, 81.7%, and 79.2%, respectively. S2 also exhibited the highest CH4 content, yield, and production rate of 70.7%, 0.44 L CH4/g VSadded, and 1.23 L CH4/(L.day), respectively. Bacterial community structure revealed that the richness, diversity, evenness, and dominance of S2 were high except for the archaeal community. The terminal restriction fragments dendrogram also revealed that the microbial community of the acidogenic and methanogenic reactors in S2 was distinct. Therefore, S2 was the best among the systems for the operation of two-stage AD of food waste in terms of CH4 production, nutrient removal, and microbial community structure.
出处 《Journal of Environmental Sciences》 SCIE EI CAS CSCD 2014年第6期1274-1283,共10页 环境科学学报(英文版)
基金 supported by the Korean Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (313007-03-1-HD020)
关键词 community structure food waste methane production nutrient removal two-stage anaerobic digestion community structure food waste methane production nutrient removal two-stage anaerobic digestion
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献35

  • 1吴静,姜洁,周红明.我国城市污水处理厂污泥产沼气的前景分析[J].给水排水,2009,35(S1):101-104. 被引量:16
  • 2Alatriste-Mondragon F, Samar P, Cox H H J, Ahring B K, Iranpour R, 2006. Anaerobic codigestion of municipal, farm, and industrial organic wastes: A survey of recent literature. Water Environment Research, 78(6): 607-636.
  • 3Anderson G K, Donnelly T, Mckeown K J, 1982. Identification and control of inhibition in the anaerobic treatment of industrial wastewaters. Process Biochemistry, 17: 28-32.
  • 4Angelidaki I, Ahring B K, 1993. Thermophilic anaerobic di- gestion of livestock waste: the effect of ammonia. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 38: 560-564.
  • 5Angenent L T, Zheng D D, Sung S H, Raskin L, 2002. Microbial community structure and activity in a compartmentalized, anaerobic bioreactor. Water Environment Research, 74(5): 450-461.
  • 6Bapteste E, Brochier C, Boucher Y, 2005. Higher-level classi- fication of the Archaea: evolution of metbanogenesis and methanogens. Archaea, 1(5): 353-363.
  • 7Bouallagui H, Lahdheb H, Ben Romdan E, Rachdi B, HamdiM, 2009. Improvement of fruit and vegetable waste anaero- bic digestion performance and stability with co-substrates addition. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5): 1844-1849.
  • 8Conklin A, Stensel H D, Ferguson J, 2006. Growth kinetics and competition between Methanosarcina and Methanosae- ta in mesophilic anaerobic digestion. Water Environment Research, 78(5): 486-496.
  • 9Dearman B, Marschner P, Bentham R H, 2006. Methane pro- duction and microbial community structure in single-stage batch and sequential batch systems anaerobically co- digesting food waste and biosolids. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 69(5): 589-596.
  • 10Demirel B, Scherer P, 2008. The roles of acetotrophic and hy- drogenotrophic methanogens during anaerobic conversion of biomass to methane: a review. Reviews in Environmental Science and BitTechnology, 7(2): 173-190.

共引文献6

同被引文献51

引证文献4

二级引证文献20

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部