Abstract
AbstractThis research was carried out with the aim to evaluate the anaerobic digestion (AD) of llama and dromedary dungs (both untreated and trampled) in batch mode at mesophilic temperature (35 °C). The biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests with an inoculum to substrate ratio of 2:1 (as volatile solids (VS)) were carried out. The methane yield from trampled llama dung (333.0 mL CH4 g−1 VSadded) was considerably higher than for raw llama, raw and trampled dromedary dungs (185.9, 228.4, 222.9 mL CH4 g−1 VSadded, respectively). Therefore, trampled llama dung was found to be the best substrate for methane production due to its high content of volatile solids as well as its high nitrogen content (2.1%) and more appropriate C/N ratio (23.6) for AD. The experimental data was found to be in accordance with both first-order kinetic and transference function mathematical models, when evaluating the experimental methane production against time. By applying the first-order kinetic model, the hydrolysis rate constants, kh, were found to be 19% and 11% higher for trampled dungs in comparison with the raw dung of dromedary and llama, respectively. In addition, the maximum methane production rate (Rm) derived from the transference function model for trampled llama dung (22.0 mL CH4 g−1 VS d−1) was 83.3%, 24.4% and 22.9% higher than those obtained for raw llama manure and for raw and trampled dromedary dungs, respectively.
Funder
Consejería de Economía, Innovación, Ciencia y Empleo, Junta de Andalucía
Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades
Universidad Pablo de Olavide
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
Reference40 articles.
1. IEA (International Energy Agency), the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and the United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD), World Bank, WHO (2021) Tracking SDG 7: The Energy Progress Report. World Bank, Washington DC
2. IEA, International Energy Agency (2019) World Energy Outlook 2019, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/caf32f3b-en. Accessed 26 July 2021
3. Goal 7- Affordable and Clean Energy, FAO-ONU https://www.sdfinance.undp.org/content/sdfinance/en/home/sdg/goal-7--affordable-and-cleanenergy.html?utm_source=EN&utm_medium=GSR&utm_content=US_UNDP_PaidSearch_Brand_English&utm_campaign=CENTRAL&c_src=CENTRAL&c_src2=GSR&gclid=CjwKCAjwhOyJBhA4EiwAEcJdcTHN4hcMGhKrFZG2TgxRU085FRtq. Accessed 3 May 2021
4. Najm S, Matsumoto KI (2020) Does renewable energy substitute LNG international trade in the energy transition? Energy Econ 92:104964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2020.104964
5. Nižetić S, Djilali N, Papadopoulos A, Rodrigues JJ (2019) Smart technologies for promotion of energy efficiency, utilization of sustainable resources and waste management. J clean Prod 231:565–591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.04.397
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献