IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i14p5938-d1433643.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrated Assessment of Methane Production from the Co-Digestion of Swine Wastewater and Other Organic Wastes

Author

Listed:
  • Izabelle de Paula Sousa

    (Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa 36571-900, Brazil)

  • André Pereira Rosa

    (Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa 36571-900, Brazil)

  • Guilherme Kurtemback Almeida

    (Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa 36571-900, Brazil)

  • Dilson Novais Rocha

    (Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa 36571-900, Brazil)

  • Thiago de Alencar Neves

    (Department of Sanitary and Environmental Engineering, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte 31270-901, Brazil)

  • Alisson Carraro Borges

    (Department of Agricultural Engineering, Federal University of Viçosa, Viçosa 36571-900, Brazil)

Abstract

The study aimed to evaluate and compare the co-digestion of swine wastewater (SW) and other co-substrates: grass residue (GR), food waste (FW), and poultry litter (PL). The comparisons were performed using the biochemical methane potential (BMP) test. The maximum accumulated methane (CH 4 ) production was submitted to a joint analysis of variance. Tukey’s test (α = 0.05) was used to compare the results of the treatments, and Dunnett’s test (α = 0.05) was used to compare the ratios (100:0, 75:25, 50:50, 25:75, and 0:100) (based on volatile solids—VS). In addition, both the synergistic effect and kinetic adjustment of some models were evaluated. The results indicated that the co-digestion of all substrates (GR, FW, and PL) with SW improved the methane production yield in comparison with mono-digestion (GR, FW, and PL). A positive synergistic effect was observed for the FW:SW (25:75 and 75:25). According to both Tukey’s and Dunnett’s tests (α = 0.05), the FW:SW ratio of 25:75 did not show statistical difference compared with the mono-digestion (SW), which exhibited the largest CH 4 production. Among the models evaluated, the modified Gompertz function presented the best fit. For the co-digestion treatments, the ratio of FW:SW of 25:75 exhibited the most promising potential for integrated management, demonstrating the best synergistic effect among the substrates. In this context, methane production from co-digestion equalled that of mono-digestion, while enabling integrated residue management.

Suggested Citation

  • Izabelle de Paula Sousa & André Pereira Rosa & Guilherme Kurtemback Almeida & Dilson Novais Rocha & Thiago de Alencar Neves & Alisson Carraro Borges, 2024. "Integrated Assessment of Methane Production from the Co-Digestion of Swine Wastewater and Other Organic Wastes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-14, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:14:p:5938-:d:1433643
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/14/5938/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/14/5938/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pengjiao Tian & Binbin Gong & Kaijian Bi & Yuxin Liu & Jing Ma & Xiqing Wang & Zhangsun Ouyang & Xian Cui, 2023. "Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Pig Manure and Rice Straw: Optimization of Process Parameters for Enhancing Biogas Production and System Stability," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-14, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Maurizio Bressan & Elena Campagnoli & Carlo Giovanni Ferro & Valter Giaretto, 2023. "A Mass Balance-Based Method for the Anaerobic Digestion of Rice Straw," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(11), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Otton K. Roubinek & Anna Wilinska-Lisowska & Magdalena Jasinska & Andrzej G. Chmielewski & Krzysztof Czerwionka, 2023. "Production of Biogas from Distillation Residue as a Waste Material from the Distillery Industry in Poland," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-15, March.

    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:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:14:p:5938-:d:1433643. 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.