IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i3p570-d485550.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Spent Mushroom Substrate with Different Livestock Manure

Author

Listed:
  • Xionghui Gao

    (Biogas Institute of Ministry of Rural Affairs and Agriculture, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Xiaoyu Tang

    (Biogas Institute of Ministry of Rural Affairs and Agriculture, Chengdu 610041, China
    Institute of Modern Agricultural Equipment, Xihua University, Chengdu 610039, China)

  • Kunyang Zhao

    (Biogas Institute of Ministry of Rural Affairs and Agriculture, Chengdu 610041, China)

  • Venkatesh Balan

    (Engineering Technology Department, College of Technology, University of Houston-Sugarland, Houston, TX 77479, USA)

  • Qili Zhu

    (Biogas Institute of Ministry of Rural Affairs and Agriculture, Chengdu 610041, China)

Abstract

Spent mushroom substrate (SMS) is defined as the biomass waste generated during industrial mushroom cultivation. Utilization of SMS has been extensively researched and has immense potential as a sustainable substrate for generating biogas that can offset fossil fuel use. This closed loop energy generation process that can be set up in mushroom plants will reduce the dependence on fossil fuels and has the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, which will benefit the environment. Anaerobic co-digestion of SMS with different agricultural wastes such as livestock manure would result in enhanced biogas production. In this study, the anaerobic co-digestion of SMS was carried out by combing yellow back fungus SMS along with chicken, dairy and pig manure. SMS combined with chicken manure yielded a slightly higher cumulative methane yield when compared with the combination of dairy manure and pig manure. Factors such as the total solids (TS) and the relative ratio of manure to SMS loading had a significant impact on the cumulative methane yield, volatile solids removal, with a particularly prominent synergistic effect. The synergistic effect was also closely related to the C/N ratio, and under experimental conditions (TS = 15%, SMS relative ratio of 50% and C/N ratio = 25.6), the cumulative methane yield of SMS with chicken manure (CM) was increased by 414% compared with that obtained using SMS or CM separately. We carried out a multiple linear regression (MLR) analysis, a statistical technique that uses several explanatory variables to predict the outcome of a response variable. Our analysis concluded that by using operating conditions (TS = 15%, and SMS ratio = 38.9), we were able to achieve the maximum cumulative methane yield (CMY).

Suggested Citation

  • Xionghui Gao & Xiaoyu Tang & Kunyang Zhao & Venkatesh Balan & Qili Zhu, 2021. "Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Spent Mushroom Substrate with Different Livestock Manure," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-15, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:3:p:570-:d:485550
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/3/570/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/3/570/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shen, Jian & Yan, Hu & Zhang, Ruihong & Liu, Guangqing & Chen, Chang, 2018. "Characterization and methane production of different nut residue wastes in anaerobic digestion," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 116(PA), pages 835-841.
    2. Zheng, Zehui & Liu, Jinhuan & Yuan, Xufeng & Wang, Xiaofen & Zhu, Wanbin & Yang, Fuyu & Cui, Zongjun, 2015. "Effect of dairy manure to switchgrass co-digestion ratio on methane production and the bacterial community in batch anaerobic digestion," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 249-257.
    3. Wenshuo Gao & Weidong Song & Tianhang Ding & Jiaoling Wang & Niansheng Tang, 2020. "Design of Bacteria Bottle Clamping Elements Based on Regression Models," Journal of Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2020, pages 1-12, October.
    4. Zhou, Jialiang & Zhang, Yuanhui & Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Duan, Na, 2021. "Meta-analysis of anaerobic co-digestion of livestock manure in last decade: Identification of synergistic effect and optimization synergy range," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 282(PA).
    5. Yang, Liangcheng & Xu, Fuqing & Ge, Xumeng & Li, Yebo, 2015. "Challenges and strategies for solid-state anaerobic digestion of lignocellulosic biomass," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 824-834.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Muhammad Usman Hanif & Mohammed Zwawi & Mohammed Algarni & Ali Bahadar & Hamid Iqbal & Sergio C. Capareda & Muhammad Adnan Hanif & Adeel Waqas & Nazia Hossain & Muhammad Tahir Hussain Siddiqui & Sabzo, 2022. "The Effects of Using Pretreated Cotton Gin Trash on the Production of Biogas from Anaerobic Co-Digestion with Cow Manure and Sludge," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-12, January.
    2. Wojciech Czekała & Tomasz Jasiński & Mieczysław Grzelak & Kamil Witaszek & Jacek Dach, 2022. "Biogas Plant Operation: Digestate as the Valuable Product," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-11, November.
    3. Siswo Sumardiono & Bakti Jos & Agata Advensia Eksa Dewanti & Isa Mahendra & Heri Cahyono, 2021. "Biogas Production from Coffee Pulp and Chicken Feathers Using Liquid- and Solid-State Anaerobic Digestions," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-15, August.
    4. Yang Mo Gu & Seon Young Park & Ji Yeon Park & Byoung-In Sang & Byoung Seong Jeon & Hyunook Kim & Jin Hyung Lee, 2021. "Impact of Attrition Ball-Mill on Characteristics and Biochemical Methane Potential of Food Waste," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-10, April.
    5. Meng, Xingyao & Wang, Qingping & Zhao, Xixi & Cai, Yafan & Ma, Xuguang & Fu, Jingyi & Wang, Pan & Wang, Yongjing & Liu, Wei & Ren, Lianhai, 2023. "A review of the technologies used for preserving anaerobic digestion inoculum," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    6. Reza Salehi & Qiuyan Yuan & Sumate Chaiprapat, 2022. "Development of Data-Driven Models to Predict Biogas Production from Spent Mushroom Compost," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, July.
    7. Xiaoyu Tang & Kunyang Zhao & Chunlin Gao & Xionghui Gao & Venkatesh Balan & Wenguo Wang, 2022. "Isolation of Lignin from Anaerobically Digested Unhydrolyzed Solids Produced in a Biorefinery," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-14, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zamir Sánchez & Davide Poggio & Liliana Castro & Humberto Escalante, 2021. "Simultaneous Synergy in CH 4 Yield and Kinetics: Criteria for Selecting the Best Mixtures during Co-Digestion of Wastewater and Manure from a Bovine Slaughterhouse," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, January.
    2. Qi, Chuanren & Cao, Dingge & Gao, Xingzu & Jia, Sumeng & Yin, Rongrong & Nghiem, Long D. & Li, Guoxue & Luo, Wenhai, 2023. "Optimising organic composition of feedstock to improve microbial dynamics and symbiosis to advance solid-state anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and organic waste," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 351(C).
    3. Grigorios Rekleitis & Katherine-Joanne Haralambous & Maria Loizidou & Konstantinos Aravossis, 2020. "Utilization of Agricultural and Livestock Waste in Anaerobic Digestion (A.D): Applying the Biorefinery Concept in a Circular Economy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-14, August.
    4. Soha, Tamás & Papp, Luca & Csontos, Csaba & Munkácsy, Béla, 2021. "The importance of high crop residue demand on biogas plant site selection, scaling and feedstock allocation – A regional scale concept in a Hungarian study area," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    5. Bacenetti, Jacopo & Sala, Cesare & Fusi, Alessandra & Fiala, Marco, 2016. "Agricultural anaerobic digestion plants: What LCA studies pointed out and what can be done to make them more environmentally sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 669-686.
    6. Tonanzi, B. & Gallipoli, A. & Gianico, A. & Montecchio, D. & Pagliaccia, P. & Rossetti, S. & Braguglia, C.M., 2021. "Elucidating the key factors in semicontinuous anaerobic digestion of urban biowaste: The crucial role of sludge addition in process stability, microbial community enrichment and methane production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 272-284.
    7. Siswo Sumardiono & Gebyar Adisukmo & Muthia Hanif & Budiyono Budiyono & Heri Cahyono, 2021. "Effects of Pretreatment and Ratio of Solid Sago Waste to Rumen on Biogas Production through Solid-State Anaerobic Digestion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-11, July.
    8. Chen, Miao & Liu, Shujun & Yuan, Xufeng & Li, Qing X. & Wang, Fengzhong & Xin, Fengjiao & Wen, Boting, 2021. "Methane production and characteristics of the microbial community in the co-digestion of potato pulp waste and dairy manure amended with biochar," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 357-367.
    9. Li Jiang & Yanru Zhang & Yi Zhu & Zhongliang Huang & Jing Huang & Zijian Wu & Xuan Zhang & Xiaoli Qin & Hui Li, 2023. "Effects of Magnetic Biochar Addition on Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion of Sewage Sludge," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-14, February.
    10. De Clercq, Djavan & Wen, Zongguo & Caicedo, Luis & Cao, Xin & Fan, Fei & Xu, Ruifei, 2017. "Application of DEA and statistical inference to model the determinants of biomethane production efficiency: A case study in south China," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 1231-1243.
    11. Choong, Yee Yaw & Chou, Kian Weng & Norli, Ismail, 2018. "Strategies for improving biogas production of palm oil mill effluent (POME) anaerobic digestion: A critical review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 82(P3), pages 2993-3006.
    12. Rivera-Hernández, Yessica & Hernández-Eugenio, Guadalupe & Balagurusamy, Nagamani & Espinosa-Solares, Teodoro, 2022. "Sargassum-pig manure co-digestion: An alternative for bioenergy production and treating a polluting coastal waste," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 1336-1344.
    13. Ge, Xumeng & Xu, Fuqing & Vasco-Correa, Juliana & Li, Yebo, 2016. "Giant reed: A competitive energy crop in comparison with miscanthus," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 350-362.
    14. Hagos, Kiros & Zong, Jianpeng & Li, Dongxue & Liu, Chang & Lu, Xiaohua, 2017. "Anaerobic co-digestion process for biogas production: Progress, challenges and perspectives," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 1485-1496.
    15. Tian, Guangliang & Yang, Bin & Dong, Minghua & Zhu, Rui & Yin, Fang & Zhao, Xingling & Wang, Yongxia & Xiao, Wei & Wang, Qiang & Zhang, Wudi & Cui, Xiaolong, 2018. "The effect of temperature on the microbial communities of peak biogas production in batch biogas reactors," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 15-25.
    16. Zabed, Hossain M. & Akter, Suely & Yun, Junhua & Zhang, Guoyan & Zhang, Yufei & Qi, Xianghui, 2020. "Biogas from microalgae: Technologies, challenges and opportunities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    17. Freitas, F.F. & Furtado, A.C. & Piñas, J.A.V. & Venturini, O.J. & Barros, R.M. & Lora, E.E.S., 2022. "Holistic Life Cycle Assessment of a biogas-based electricity generation plant in a pig farm considering co-digestion and an additive," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    18. Kainthola, Jyoti & Kalamdhad, Ajay S. & Goud, Vaibhav V., 2020. "Optimization of process parameters for accelerated methane yield from anaerobic co-digestion of rice straw and food waste," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 1352-1359.
    19. Li, Pengfei & Cheng, Chongbo & Guo, Rui & Yu, Ran & Jiao, Youzhou & Shen, Dekui & He, Chao, 2022. "Interactions among the components of artificial biomass during their anaerobic digestion with and without sewage sludge," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 261(PB).
    20. Chen, Wei & Geng, Yong & Hong, Jinglan & Kua, Harn Wei & Xu, Changqing & Yu, Nan, 2017. "Life cycle assessment of antibiotic mycelial residues management in China," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 830-838.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:3:p:570-:d:485550. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.