BIOGAS GENERATION FROM ANAEROBIC FERMENTATION OF ANIMAL MANURES AND THE NUTRIENT DYNAMICS IN THE RESIDUES

Li  Yurong; Nantakorn  Boonkerd; Sopone  Wongkeaw; Zhiliang  Peng; Sodchol  Wonprasaid

Authors

Li Yurong Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Science, Guiyang, Guizhou, 550006, China.
Nantakorn Boonkerd School of Biotechnology, Institute of Agricultural Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, 30000, Thailand.
Sopone Wongkeaw School of Crop Production Technology, Institute of Agricultural Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, 30000, Thailand
Zhiliang Peng Guizhou Academy of Agricultural Science, Guiyang, Guizhou, 550006, China.
Sodchol Wonprasaid School of Crop Production Technology, Institute of Agricultural Technology, Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, 30000, Thailand.

Keywords:

Anaerobic fermentation, animal manures, biogas, residue, nutrient dynamics

Abstract

Biogas technology helps to generate energy from waste treatment, reduce global warming, and earn carbon credits. The biogas residues (BRs), which contain all available plant nutrients, would be good sources of organic fertilizer for crop production. A Chinese fixed dome biogas digester has been successfully adopted in Asian countries recently but not in Thailand. The objectives of this study were to compare biogas generated from domestic animal manures (pig, chicken, and cow) in the Chinese fixed dome digesters and to determine the nutrient dynamics in both biogas liquid residues (BLRs)and biogas solid residues (BSRs). The results showed that from 1000 kg dry matter, the duration of biogas production from pig, chicken, and cow manures was 150, 90, and 90 days, and gas volume was250, 150, and 70 m3 with maximum CH4 compositions of 76.1, 79.9, and 62.0%, respectively. Nutrient dynamics were analyzed regularly and it was found that all manures had similar nutrient dynamics but cow manure BLR had a lower N content. Most of the N in all the BRs was in NH4+ form. NH4+increased in all the BLRs while NO3 - decreased after the hydrolysis phase due to the absence of O2. All other nutrients increased in the BLRs but decreased in the BSRs due to the digestion and dissolution into the BLRs. Available P was relatively low in all the BLRs. It could be concluded that the Chinese fixed dome biogas digester could be successfully applied in Thailand’s environmental conditions.Among the 3 manures (pig, chicken, and cow), pig manure was the best material for biogas generation.

References

Chen, Z.P. (2009). An introduction to the program of China Rural Development and Energy implemented by the Global Environmental Institute. Global Environment Institute (GEI)report, Beijing, China.

Chen, Z.Y., Cai, C.D., and Shi, D.W. (2009). Effect of different temperatures on anaerobic digestion oflivestock manures. Guizhou Agricultural Science,37(12):148-151.

Constant, M., Naveau, H., Ferrero, G.L., and Nyns,E.J. (1989). Biogas end-use in the European Community. Elsevier Applied Science, London,UK, 345p.

Dieter, D. and Steinhauser A. (2008). Biogas from waste and renewable resources: an introduction.Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, Germany, 443p.

Feng, X.S. and Fang S. (1989). Anaerobic digestion Technology. Hangzhou, Zhejiang Science and Technology Press, 94, 106, 118-119.

Gupta, D.R. (1991). Bio-fertilizer from biogas plants.Changing villages. Jan-Mar, 1991. HMG/ASDB/FINNIDA (1988) Master Plan for Forestry Sector, Kathmandu, Nepal.

India Development Gateway. (2010). [on-line].Available:http://www.indg.in/rural-energy/technologies under-rural-energy/energy-production/biogas.Accessed date: Jan 01, 2010.

Jackson, M.D. (1960). Orgnic matter determination for soil. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice-HallInc. Eaglewood Cliffs, N.J., p. 205-226.

Li, K.M. and Mae, W.H. (2002). Biogas China (EB/OL).[on-line]. Available: http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Biogas-China. php. Accessed date: Jan 01, 2010.

Liu, W.K., Yang, Q.C., and Wang, S.Q. (2009). A review on effect of biogas slurry on vegetables and soil.China Biogas, 27(1):43-48.

Okoroigwe, E.C., Ibeto, C,N., and Okpare, C.G. (2010).Comparative study of the potential of dog waste for biogas production. Trends in Applied Research, 5(1):71-77.

Shi, J.C., Liao, X.D., and Wu, Y.B. (2010). Methane generation during anaerobic fermentation of four livestock slurries. Chinese J. Eco-Agri.,18(3):632-636.

Shri, M.J. (2010). Twin solution for energy generation and waste disposal. [on-line]. Available: http://www.vkendra.org/print/146. Accessed date: Jan01, 2010.

Soil and Plant Analysis Council. (2000). Soil analysis:Handbook of reference methods. CRC Press.London, UK.

Starkenburg, W. (1997). Anaerobic treatment of wastewater:State of the art. Microbiology, 66:705-715.

Tanusri, M. and Mandal, N.K. (1997). Comparative study of biogas production from different waste materials. Energ. Convers. Manage., 38(7):679-683.

Weiland, P. (2006). Biomass digestion in agriculture: A successful pathway for the energy production and waste treatment in Germany Eng. Life Sci.6(3):302-309.

Xu, W.H., Wang, Z.Y., Wang, Q., Ou-yang, J., and Chen,C.F. (2005). A review on studies of biogas fermentation residue effect on vegetable yield and quality. China Biogas, 23(2):27-29.

Zeng, B., Zhong, R.Z., and Tan, Z.L. (2009). Methane emission and abatement strategy in animal husbandry. Chinese Journal of Eco-Agriculture,17(4):811-816.

Zhang, M., Deng, Y., Zhang, H., Hu, G.Q., and Sun, G.P.(2005). Study on anaerobic wastewater treatment of chicken farm. China Biogas, 23(1):21-24