Dergiler / Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi / 2014 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3

Optimum Solid Loading Rate for Biogas Production from Agricultural Wastes

Sayfa
219–224
Yayın Tarihi
2014-06-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Consequently, theoptimum SLR for anaerobic digestion of tomato and pepper was determined as 7% and 15%,respectively.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Turkey was the fourth and third largest producer of tomato and pepper fromgreenhouses, respectively, according to FAO in 2012.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The huge amount of agricultural wastesgenerated from the production of tomato and green pepper are served as renewable sources forenergy production via anaerobic digestion (AD) For efficiently biogas production, it is essential todetermine the operation conditions of AD such as solid loading rate (SLR) for target wastes.The aim of this study is to optimize SLR for optimum biogas production from tomato and greenpepper wastes.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Consequently, theoptimum SLR for anaerobic digestion of tomato and pepper was determined as 7% and 15%,respectively.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:2012 Verileri
⚙️Değişkenler:Agricultural wastes · biochemical methane production · solid loading rate

Özet

Turkey was the fourth and third largest producer of tomato and pepper fromgreenhouses, respectively, according to FAO in 2012. The huge amount of agricultural wastesgenerated from the production of tomato and green pepper are served as renewable sources forenergy production via anaerobic digestion (AD) For efficiently biogas production, it is essential todetermine the operation conditions of AD such as solid loading rate (SLR) for target wastes.The aim of this study is to optimize SLR for optimum biogas production from tomato and greenpepper wastes. For this purpose, biochemical methane potential tests were carried out at 37 °Cwith 7% and 15% of SLRs. For supplying the nutritional requirements of AD process, cow manurewas also added as a 10% of the selected SLR. As the biogas production from tomato wastes wasnearly 75% increased with the increase in SLR from 15% to 7%., the optimum SLR wasdetermined as 7% for anaerobic digestion of tomato wastes. On the other hand, decreasing SLR ofpepper waste from 15% to 7% is resulted with only 11% decrease in biogas production. When theenergy revenue between the 7% and 15% SLRs is compared with disposal cost of nearly two-foldpepper wastes, suitable SLR for pepper wastes can be suggested as 15%. Consequently, theoptimum SLR for anaerobic digestion of tomato and pepper was determined as 7% and 15%,respectively.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

AKMAN, H. E., AKMAN, E., CIGGIN, A. S., PERENDECİ, N. A., YALDIZ, O. (2014). Optimum Solid Loading Rate for Biogas Production from Agricultural Wastes. Tarım Makinaları Bilimi Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 3, 219–224. https://ajindex.com/articles/260416

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (10)

  1. Agdag, O.N., Sponza, D.T., 2007. Co-digestion of mixed industrial sludge with municipal solid wastes in anaerobic simulated landfilling bioreactors. J. Hazard. Mat. 140, 75–85. APHA., 1995.
  2. AWWA., WEF., Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 19th Edition.
  3. Carrere, H., B. Sialve, N. Bernet. 2009 Improving Pig Manure into Biogas by Thermal and Thermo-Chemical Pretreatments. Bioresource Technol. 100, 3690–3694.
  4. Dreywood, R. 1946. Qualitative test for carbohydrate material, Ind. and Eng. Chem.Res., 18. 199. Hartmann, H., Ahring, B.K., 2005. Anaerobic digestion of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste: influence of codigestion with manure. Water Res. 39,1543–1552.
  5. Ferrer, P., Cambra-López, M., Cerisuelo, A., Peñaranda, D.S., Moset, V., 2014. The use of agricultural substrates to improve methane yield in anaerobic co-digestion with pig slurry: Effect of substrate type and inclusion level. Waste Management, 34, 196–203.
  6. Khalid, A., Arshad, M., Anjum, M., Mahmood, T., Dawson, L. 2011. The anaerobic digestion of solid organic waste. Waste Management, 31, 1737-1744. Lehtomäki, A., Huttunen, S., Rintala, J.A. 2007. Laboratory investigations on co-digestion of energy crops and crop residues with cow manure for methane production: Effect of crop to manure ratio, Resources, Conservation and Recycling 51, 591-609.
  7. Llabres-Luengo, P., Mata-Alvarez, J. 1987. Kinetic study of the anaerobic digestion of straw-pig manure mixture. Biomass, 14, 129–142.
  8. Lowry, O.H., Rosebrough, N.J. Fau, A.L., Randall, R.J. 1951. Protein measurement with the Folin reagent, J. of Bio. Chem., 193, 265-275.
  9. Monnet, F. (2003). An Introduction to Anaerobic Digestion of Organic Wastes -Final Report. Retrieved August 4, 2009,from http://www.remade.org.uk/files/ctiontoAnaerobicDigestio n_279515567.pdf. Reichert, P., Ruchti, J. & Simon, W. 1998 Aquasim 2.0. Swiss Federal Institute for Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG), CH-8600 Duebendorf, Switzerland. Vandevivere, P., De Baere, L. & Verstraete, W., 1999. Unpublished manuscript. TUIK, 2013.
  10. Turkish Statistics Institute, Plant Production Statistics. http://tuikapp.tuik.gov.tr/bitkiselapp/bitkisel