期刊文献+

Ecological analysis of a typical farm-scale biogas plant in China 被引量:1

Ecological analysis of a typical farm-scale biogas plant in China
原文传递
导出
摘要 The aim of this work was to present the common anaerobic digestion technologies in a typical farm-scale biogas plant in China. The comprehensive benefits of most biogas plants in China have not been fully assessed in past decades due to the limited information of the anaerobic digestion processes in biogas plants. This paper analyzed four key aspects (i.e., operational perfor- mance, nonrenewable energy (NE) savings, CO2 emission reduction (CER) and economic benefits (EBs)) of a typical farm-scale biogas plant, where beef cattle manure was used as feedstock. Owing to the monitoring system, stable operation was achieved with a hydraulic retention time of 18-22 days and a production of 876,000 m3 of biogas and 37,960t of digestate fertilizer annually. This could substantially substitute for the nonrenewable energy and chemical fertilizer. The total amount of NE savings and CER derived from biogas and digestate fertilizer was 2.10× 10^7 MJ (equivalent to 749.7 tee) and 9.71 × 10^5 kg, respectively. The EBs of the biogas plant was 6.84× 10^5 CNY.yr^-1 with an outputs-to-inputs ratio of 2.37. As a result, the monitoring system was proved to contribute significantly to the sound management and quantitative assessment of the biogas plant. Biogas plants could produce biogas which could be used to substitute fossil fuels and reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases, and digestate fertilizer is also an important bio-product. The aim of this work was to present the common anaerobic digestion technologies in a typical farm-scale biogas plant in China. The comprehensive benefits of most biogas plants in China have not been fully assessed in past decades due to the limited information of the anaerobic digestion processes in biogas plants. This paper analyzed four key aspects (i.e., operational perfor- mance, nonrenewable energy (NE) savings, CO2 emission reduction (CER) and economic benefits (EBs)) of a typical farm-scale biogas plant, where beef cattle manure was used as feedstock. Owing to the monitoring system, stable operation was achieved with a hydraulic retention time of 18-22 days and a production of 876,000 m3 of biogas and 37,960t of digestate fertilizer annually. This could substantially substitute for the nonrenewable energy and chemical fertilizer. The total amount of NE savings and CER derived from biogas and digestate fertilizer was 2.10× 10^7 MJ (equivalent to 749.7 tee) and 9.71 × 10^5 kg, respectively. The EBs of the biogas plant was 6.84× 10^5 CNY.yr^-1 with an outputs-to-inputs ratio of 2.37. As a result, the monitoring system was proved to contribute significantly to the sound management and quantitative assessment of the biogas plant. Biogas plants could produce biogas which could be used to substitute fossil fuels and reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases, and digestate fertilizer is also an important bio-product.
出处 《Frontiers of Earth Science》 SCIE CAS CSCD 2014年第3期375-384,共10页 地球科学前沿(英文版)
关键词 biogas plant monitoring system ecologicalbenefits NE savings CO2 emission reduction economicbenefits biogas plant, monitoring system, ecologicalbenefits, NE savings, CO2 emission reduction, economicbenefits
  • 相关文献

参考文献45

  • 1Bhattacharya S C, Abdul Salam P, Sharma M, (2000). Emissions from biomass energy use in some selected Asian countries. Energy, 25(2): 169 188.
  • 2Boe K, Batstone D J, Steyer J P, Angelidaki I (2010). State indicators for monitoring the anaerobic digestion process. Water Res, 44(20): 5973 5980.
  • 3Bmni E, Jensen A P, Pedersen E S, Angelidaki 1 (2010). Anaerobic digestion of maize focusing on variety, harvest time and pretreatment. Appl Energy, 87(7): 2212 2217.
  • 4Cao Y C, Pawtowski A (2013). Life cycle assessment of two emerging sewage sludge-to-energy systems: evaluating energy and greenhouse gas emissions implications. Bioresour Technol, 127:81-91.
  • 5Chen B, Chen G Q, Yang Z F, Jiang M M (2007). Ecological footprint accounting for energy and resource in China. Energy Policy, 35(3): 1599-1609.
  • 6Chen G Q, Zhang B (2010). Greenhouse gas emissions in China 2007: inventory and input-output analysis. Energy Policy, 38(10): 6180- 6193.
  • 7Chen H, Chen G Q (201 lb). Energy cost of rapeseed-based biodiesel as alternative energy in China. Renew Energy, 36(5): 1374-1378.
  • 8Chen S Q, Chen B, Song D (2012). Life-cycle energy production and emissions mitigation by comprehensive biogas-digestate utilization. Bioresour Technol, 114:357-364.
  • 9Chen Y, Yang G H, Sweeney S, Feng Y Z (2010). Household biogas use in rural China: a study of opportunities and constraints. Renew Sustain Energy Rev, 14(1): 545 549.
  • 10Chen Z M, Chen G Q (201 la). An overview of energy consumption o4 the globalized world economy. Energy Policy, 39(10): 5920-5928 /.

同被引文献16

引证文献1

二级引证文献1

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