IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jeners/v14y2021i8p2132-d534026.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Analysis of a Prototype Installation for Biogas Production from Chosen Agricultural Substrates

Author

Listed:
  • Kinga Borek

    (Department of Rural Technical Infrastructure Systems, Institute of Technology and Life Sciences, Warsaw Branch, 32 Rakowiecka St., 02-532 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Wacław Romaniuk

    (Department of Rural Technical Infrastructure Systems, Institute of Technology and Life Sciences, Warsaw Branch, 32 Rakowiecka St., 02-532 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Kamil Roman

    (Institute of Wood Sciences and Furniture, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 166 Nowoursynowska St., 02-787 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Michał Roman

    (Institute of Economics and Finance, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, 166 Nowoursynowska St., 02-787 Warsaw, Poland)

  • Maciej Kuboń

    (Department of Production Organization, Logistics and Applied Computer Science, University of Agriculture in Krakow, 30-239 Kraków, Poland)

Abstract

Methane production by fermentation is a complex biochemical process, in which micromolecular organic substances are broken down by anaerobic bacteria into simple stabilized chemicals—mainly methane CH 4 and carbon dioxide CO 2 . The organic matter of the slurry consists mainly of fats, proteins and carbohydrates. As a result of biochemical changes in the process of anaerobic decomposition, some of this matter is mineralized to simple chemical compounds. Cattle and pig husbandry offers enormous potential for useable biogas plant substrates. As a result of the constantly increasing amounts of animal husbandry products, and increasingly stringent environmental protection requirements aimed at reusing natural fertilizers, it is necessary to look for alternative processing methods. The need for efficiency in obtaining biogas from substrates (e.g., manure) was met by the laboratory stand presented in this article, for which the Polish patent No. 232200 was obtained. The new technology also allows leaching of the organic liquid, e.g., from manure, and subjecting it to methane fermentation. The solution allows the individual elements of the technological line that determine the fermentation process to be tested under laboratory conditions. It also allows testing of the substrates in terms of fermentation, to determine their physical and chemical characteristics, and then to characterize the fermentation process in terms of the quality and quantity of the resulting biogas and the quality of post-fermentation residues. Compressing biogas for local distribution was also proposed. As part of the research, using a laboratory stand, the organic matter was leached from manure, for the purpose of biogas production. In addition, the biogas yield from manure at varying degrees of maturity was assessed. The best properties in terms of biogas yield forecasting were demonstrated by manure composted for 4–8 weeks.

Suggested Citation

  • Kinga Borek & Wacław Romaniuk & Kamil Roman & Michał Roman & Maciej Kuboń, 2021. "The Analysis of a Prototype Installation for Biogas Production from Chosen Agricultural Substrates," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-19, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:14:y:2021:i:8:p:2132-:d:534026
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/8/2132/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/14/8/2132/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chynoweth, David P & Owens, John M & Legrand, Robert, 2001. "Renewable methane from anaerobic digestion of biomass," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-8.
    2. Duncan Graham-Rowe, 2011. "Agriculture: Beyond food versus fuel," Nature, Nature, vol. 474(7352), pages 6-8, June.
    3. Hijazi, O. & Munro, S. & Zerhusen, B. & Effenberger, M., 2016. "Review of life cycle assessment for biogas production in Europe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 1291-1300.
    4. Li, Kun & Liu, Ronghou & Cui, Shaofeng & Yu, Qiong & Ma, Ruijie, 2018. "Anaerobic co-digestion of animal manures with corn stover or apple pulp for enhanced biogas production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 335-342.
    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. Phisamas Hwangdee & Singrun Charee & Watcharin Kheowkrai & Chaiyan Junsiri & Kittipong Laloon, 2022. "Application of the Simplex-Centroid Mixture Design to Biomass Charcoal Powder Formulation Ratio for Biomass Charcoal Briquettes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Hwai Chyuan Ong & Adi Kusmayadi & Nor Aishah Saidina Amin, 2023. "Biomass Energy for Environmental Sustainability," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-3, March.
    3. Maciej Kuboń & Magdalena Tymińska & Zbigniew Skibko & Andrzej Borusiewicz & Jacek Filipkowski & Sylwester Tabor & Stanisław Derehajło, 2023. "Effect of Fertilisation Regime on Maise Yields," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-14, November.
    4. Dmytro Zhuravel & Kyrylo Samoichuk & Serhii Petrychenko & Andrii Bondar & Taras Hutsol & Maciej Kuboń & Marcin Niemiec & Lyudmyla Mykhailova & Zofia Gródek-Szostak & Dmytro Sorokin, 2022. "Modeling of Diesel Engine Fuel Systems Reliability When Operating on Biofuels," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-16, February.
    5. José Antonio Soriano & Reyes García-Contreras & Antonio José Carpio de Los Pinos, 2021. "Study of the Thermochemical Properties of Lignocellulosic Biomass from Energy Crops," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-18, June.
    6. Inna Tryhuba & Taras Hutsol & Anatoliy Tryhuba & Agata Cieszewska & Nataliia Kovalenko & Krzysztof Mudryk & Szymon Glowacki & Andrzej Bryś & Weronika Tulej & Mariusz Sojak, 2023. "An Approach to Assessing the State of Organic Waste Generation in Community Households Based on Associative Learning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(22), pages 1-19, November.
    7. Kamila Ewelina Mazur & Jan Barwicki & Vitalii Tseiko, 2024. "Comparison of Mechanized and Automated Technologies in the Scope of Cumulative Energy in Sustainable Milk Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-14, January.
    8. Hongjing Jing & Wenzhe Li & Ming Wang & Hao Jiao & Yong Sun, 2022. "Mechanism of Electron Acceptor Promoting Propionic Acid Transformation in Anaerobic Fermentation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-14, May.
    9. Maciej Kuboń & Monika Komorowska & Marcin Niemiec & Jakub Sikora & Anna Szeląg-Sikora & Elżbieta Olech & Edyta Molik & Jakub Gajda, 2024. "The Impact of Biochar Additives and Fat-Emulsifying Substances on the Efficiency of the Slaughterhouse Waste Biogasing Process," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-15, June.
    10. Anita Konieczna & Kamil Roman & Kinga Borek & Emilia Grzegorzewska, 2021. "GHG and NH 3 Emissions vs. Energy Efficiency of Maize Production Technology: Evidence from Polish Farms; a Further Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-16, September.

    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. Lerato Shikwambana & Boitumelo Mokgoja & Paidamwoyo Mhangara, 2022. "A Qualitative Assessment of the Trends, Distribution and Sources of Methane in South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Lane, Blake & Kinnon, Michael Mac & Shaffer, Brendan & Samuelsen, Scott, 2022. "Deployment planning tool for environmentally sensitive heavy-duty vehicles and fueling infrastructure," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    3. Henrik B. Møller & Peter Sørensen & Jørgen E. Olesen & Søren O. Petersen & Tavs Nyord & Sven G. Sommer, 2022. "Agricultural Biogas Production—Climate and Environmental Impacts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-24, February.
    4. Hijazi, O. & Abdelsalam, E. & Samer, M. & Attia, Y.A. & Amer, B.M.A. & Amer, M.A. & Badr, M. & Bernhardt, H., 2020. "Life cycle assessment of the use of nanomaterials in biogas production from anaerobic digestion of manure," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 417-424.
    5. Zarzuelo, Carmen & López-Ruiz, Alejandro & Ortega-Sánchez, Miguel, 2018. "Impact of human interventions on tidal stream power: The case of Cádiz Bay," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 88-104.
    6. Di Corato, Luca & Moretto, Michele, 2011. "Investing in biogas: Timing, technological choice and the value of flexibility from input mix," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1186-1193.
    7. Surita, Sharon C. & Tansel, Berrin, 2015. "Preliminary investigation to characterize deposits forming during combustion of biogas from anaerobic digesters and landfills," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 674-681.
    8. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    9. Hanson, Eilish R. & Nagler, Amy & Ritten, John & Rashford, Benjamin, 2022. "Farm-Level Economics of Bioenergy in the Upper Missouri River Basin," Journal of the ASFMRA, American Society of Farm Managers and Rural Appraisers, vol. 2022.
    10. 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).
    11. Jingura, Raphael Muzondiwa & Musademba, Downmore & Kamusoko, Reckson, 2013. "A review of the state of biomass energy technologies in Zimbabwe," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 652-659.
    12. Elena Tamburini & Mattias Gaglio & Giuseppe Castaldelli & Elisa Anna Fano, 2020. "Is Bioenergy Truly Sustainable When Land-Use-Change (LUC) Emissions Are Accounted for? The Case-Study of Biogas from Agricultural Biomass in Emilia-Romagna Region, Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-20, April.
    13. Costa, J.C. & Oliveira, J.V. & Alves, M.M., 2016. "Response surface design to study the influence of inoculum, particle size and inoculum to substrate ratio on the methane production from Ulex sp," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB), pages 1071-1077.
    14. Dae-Yeol Cheong & Jeffrey Todd Harvey & Jinsu Kim & Changsoo Lee, 2019. "Improving Biomethanation of Chicken Manure by Co-Digestion with Ethanol Plant Effluent," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(24), pages 1-10, December.
    15. 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.
    16. Uusitalo, V. & Soukka, R. & Horttanainen, M. & Niskanen, A. & Havukainen, J., 2013. "Economics and greenhouse gas balance of biogas use systems in the Finnish transportation sector," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 132-140.
    17. Jun Hou & Weifeng Zhang & Pei Wang & Zhengxia Dou & Liwei Gao & David Styles, 2017. "Greenhouse Gas Mitigation of Rural Household Biogas Systems in China: A Life Cycle Assessment," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-14, February.
    18. Robert Czubaszek & Agnieszka Wysocka-Czubaszek & Piotr Banaszuk, 2020. "GHG Emissions and Efficiency of Energy Generation through Anaerobic Fermentation of Wetland Biomass," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-25, December.
    19. Francesca Nardin & Fabrizio Mazzetto, 2014. "Mapping of Biomass Fluxes: A Method for Optimizing Biogas-Refinery of Livestock Effluents," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-21, September.
    20. Rasheed, Rizwan & Tahir, Fizza & Yasar, Abdullah & Sharif, Faiza & Tabinda, Amtul Bari & Ahmad, Sajid Rashid & Wang, Yubo & Su, Yuehong, 2022. "Environmental life cycle analysis of a modern commercial-scale fibreglass composite-based biogas scrubbing system," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 1261-1271.

    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:8:p:2132-:d:534026. 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.