1. JCCT
  2. Всі випуски
  3. Випуск 17, Номер 1, 2023
  4. Розроблення статистичної моделі для прогнозування виробництва метану з відходів активного мулу через спільне бродіння зі стічними водами виробництва оливкової олії та гноєм великої рогатої худоби за допомогою методології поверхні відгуку

Розроблення статистичної моделі для прогнозування виробництва метану з відходів активного мулу через спільне бродіння зі стічними водами виробництва оливкової олії та гноєм великої рогатої худоби за допомогою методології поверхні відгуку

JCCT.
2023;
Випуск 17, Номер 1
: cc. 141 - 153
https://doi.org/10.23939/chcht17.01.141
Автори:
  1. Sarra Maamri
  2. Amrani Moussa
  3. Moussaoui Yacine
1
Laboratoire des sciences fondamentales, université Amar Telidji,Laboratoire des technologies douces, valorisation, physico-chimie des matériaux biologiques et biodiversité
2
Laboratoire des technologies douces, valorisation, physico-chimie des matériaux biologiques et biodiversité
3
Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla

У наш час зростання кількості населення, призводить до утворення великої кількості відходів біомаси внаслідок різноманітної людської, промислової та сільсь-когосподарської діяльності. Для регулювання відходів біомаси та пом'якшення величезного спектра шкоди навколишньому середовищу застосовують переважно анаеробне бродіння. Метою цієї статті є підвищення ефективності анаеробного бродіння багатокомпонентних субстратів з використанням суміші відходів активного мулу (ВАМ), стічних вод виробництва оливкової олії (СВВОО) і гною великої рогатої худоби (ГВРХ). У плануванні експерименту використано методологію поверхні відгуку для визначення індивідуального впливу й інтерактивного ефекту на вихід метану та хімічне зниження потреби в кисні. Після числової оптимізації за допомогою Design Expert® оптимальні фактичні значення тестових факторів були такими: початкове pH = 8, співвідношення загальна хімічна потреба в кисні : загальний азот = 47, 42, співвідношення ГВРХ/ВАМ-СВВОО = 0,352, загальний сухий залишок ЗСЗ = 42,94 г/л. Отримані результати вказують, що ефективності анаеробного спільного бродіння можна досягти через оптимізацію складу субстрату для забезпечення більшого мікробного синергічного ефекту.

відходи активного мулу
стічні води виробництва оливкової олії
гній великої рогатої худоби
метод Бокса-Вілсона
анаеробне спільне бродіння.
  1. [1] Zhang, Q.; Hu, J.; Lee D.-J.; Chang, Y.; Lee, Y.-J. Sludge Treatment: Current Research Trends. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 243, 1159-1172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.07.070
  2. [2] Zhang, G.; Wu, Z.; Cheng, F.; Min, Z.; Lee, D.-J. Thermophilic Digestion of Waste-Activated Sludge Coupled with Solar Pond. Renew. Energ. 2016, 98, 142-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.03.052
  3. [3] Wei, L.-L.; Zhao, Q.-L.; Hu, K.; Lee, D.-J.; Xie, C.-M.; Jiang, J.-Q. Extracellular Biological Organic Matters in Sewage Sludge During Mesophilic Digestion at Reduced Hydraulic Retention Time. Water Res. 2011, 45, 1472-1480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2010.11.003
  4. [4] Zhang, Y.; Chen, X.; Gu, Y.; Zhou, X. A physicochemical Method for Increasing Methane Production from Rice Straw: Extrusion Combined with Alkali Pretreatment. Appl. Energy 2015, 160, 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.09.011
  5. [5] Wan, J.; Jing, Y.; Rao, Y.; Zhang, S.; Luo, G. Thermophilic Alkaline Fermentation Followed by Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion for Efficient Hydrogen and Methane Production from Waste-Activated Sludge: Dynamics of Bacterial Pathogens as Revealed by the Combination of Metagenomic and Quantitative PCR Analyses. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2018, 84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AEM.02632-17
  6. [6] Carrère, H.; Rafrafi, Y.; Battimelli, A.; Torrijos, M.; Delgenès, J.-P.; Ruysschaert, G. Methane Potential of Waste Activated Sludge and Fatty Residues: Impact of Codigestion and Alkaline Pretreatments. Open Environmental Engineering Journal 2010, 3, 71-76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1874829501003010071
  7. [7] Carrère, H.; Dumas, C.; Battimelli, A.; Batstone, D.J.; Delgenès, J.P.; Steyer, J.P.; Ferrer, I. Pretreatment Methods to Improve Sludge Anaerobic Degradability: A Review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2010, 183, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.06.129
  8. [8] Abelleira-Pereira, J.M.; Pérez-Elvira, S.I.; Sánchez-Oneto, J. de la Cruz, R.; Portela, J.R.; Nebot, E. Enhancement of Methane Production in Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion of Secondary Sewage Sludge by Advanced Thermal Hydrolysis Pretreatment. Water Res. 2015, 71, 330-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.12.027
  9. [9] Jang, H.M.; Kim, M-S.; Ha, J.H.; Park, J.M. Reactor Performance and Methanogenic Archaea Species in Thermophilic Anaerobic co-Digestion of Waste Activated Sludge Mixed with Food Wastewater. Chem. Eng. J. 2015, 276, 20-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.04.072
  10. [10] Jing, Y.; Wan, J.; Angelidaki, I.; Zhang, S.; Luo, G. iTRAQ Quantitative Proteomic Analysis Reveals the Pathways for Methanation of Propionate Facilitated by Magnetite. Water Res. 2017, 108, 212-221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2016.10.077
  11. [11] Zhen, G.; Lu, X.; Kobayashi, T.; Li, Y.-Y.; Xu, K.; Zhao, Y. Mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of waste activated sludge and Egeria densa: Performance assessment and kinetic analysis. Appl. Energy 2015, 148, 78-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.03.038
  12. [12] Fernández-Rodríguez, M.; Rincón, B.; Fermoso, F.G.; Jiménez, A.M.; Borja, R. Assessment of Two-Phase Olive Mill Solid Waste and Microalgae co-Digestion to Improve Methane Production and Process Kinetics. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 157, 263-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.096
  13. [13] Zhang, M.; Zhang, Y.; Li, Z.; Zhang, C.; Tan, X.; Liu, X.; Wan, C.; Yang, X.; Lee, D.-J. Anaerobic co-Digestion of Food Waste/Excess Sludge: Substrates - Products Transformation and Role of NADH as an Indicator. J. Environ. Manage. 2019, 232, 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.11.087
  14. [14] Nordlander, E.; Thorin, E.; Yan, J. Investigating the Possibility of Applying an ADM1 Based Model to a Full-Scale co-Digestion Plant. Biochem. Eng. J. 2017, 120, 73-83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2016.12.014
  15. [15] Anjum, M.; Khalid, A.; Qadeer, S.; Miandad, R. Synergistic Effect of co-Digestion to Enhance Anaerobic Degradation of Catering Waste and Orange Peel for Biogas Production. Waste Manag. Res. 2017, 35, 967-977. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734242X17715904
  16. [16] Li, J.; Wei, L.; Duan, Q.; Hu, G.; Zhang, G. Semi-Continuous Anaerobic co-Digestion of Dairy Manure with Three Crop Residues for Biogas Production. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 156, 307-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.064
  17. [17] Xu, R.; Zhang, K.; Liu, P.; Khan, A.; Xiong, J.; Tian, F.; Li, X. A Critical Review on the Interaction of Substrate Nutrient Balance and Microbial Community Structure and Function in Anaerobic co-Digestion. Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 247, 1119-1127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.095
  18. [18] O-Thong, S.; Boe, K.; Angelidaki, I. Thermophilic Anaerobic co-Digestion of Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunches with Palm Oil Mill Effluent for Efficient Biogas Production. Appl. Energy 2012, 93, 648-654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.12.092
  19. [19] Kashi, S.; Satari, B.; Lundin, M.; Horváth, I.S.; Othman, M. Application of a Mixture Design to Identify the Effects of Substrates Ratios and Interactions on Anaerobic co-Digestion of Municipal Sludge, Grease Trap Waste, and Meat Processing Waste. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 6156-6164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2017.11.045
  20. [20] Carrère, H.; Bougrier, C.; Castets, D.; Delgenès, J.P. Impact of Initial Biodegradability on Sludge Anaerobic Digestion Enhancement by Thermal Pretreatment. J. Environ. Sci. Health A 2008, 43, 1551-1555. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10934520802293735
  21. [21] Heo, N.H.; Park, S.C.; Kang, H. Effects of Mixture Ratio and Hydraulic Retention Time on Single-Stage Anaerobic Co-digestion of Food Waste and Waste Activated Sludge. J. Environ. Sci. Health A 2004, 39, 1739-1756. https://doi.org/10.1081/ESE-120037874
  22. [22] Bolzonella, D.; Battistoni, P.; Susini, C.; Cecchi, F. Anaerobic Codigestion of Waste Activated Sludge and OFMSW: The Experiences of Viareggio and Treviso Plants (Italy). Water Sci. Technol. 2006, 53, 203-211. http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wst.2006.251
  23. [23] Dinsdale, R.M.; Premier, G.C.; Hawkes, F.R.; Hawkes, D.L. Two-Stage Anaerobic co-Digestion of Waste Activated Sludge and Fruit/Vegetable Waste Using Inclined Tubular Digesters. Bioresour. Technol. 2000, 72, 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(99)00105-4
  24. [24] De Vrieze, J.; De Lathouwer, L.; Verstraete, W.; Boon, N. High-Rate Iron-Rich Activated Sludge as Stabilizing Agent for the Anaerobic Digestion of Kitchen Waste. Water Res. 2013, 47, 3732-3741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2013.04.020
  25. [25] Sun, Y.; Wang, D.; Qiao, W.; Wang, W.; Zhu, T. Anaerobic co-Digestion of Municipal Biomass Wastes and Waste Activated Sludge: Dynamic Model and Material Balances. J. Environ. Sci. 2013, 25, 2112-2122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(12)60236-8
  26. [26] Silvestre, G.; Illa, J.; Fernández, B.; Bonmatí, A. Thermophilic Anaerobic co-Digestion of Sewage Sludge with Grease Waste: Effect of Long Chain Fatty Acids in the Methane Yield and its Dewatering Properties. Appl. Energy 2014, 117, 87-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.11.075
  27. [27] Di Maria, F.; Micale, C.; Contini, S. Energetic and Environmental Sustainability of the co-Digestion of Sludge with Bio-Waste in a Life Cycle Perspective. Appl. Energy 2016, 171, 67-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.03.036
  28. [28] Di Maria, F.; Sordi, A.; Cirulli, G.; Micale, C. Amount of Energy Recoverable from an Existing Sludge Digester with the co-Digestion with Fruit and Vegetable Waste at Reduced Retention Time. Appl. Energy 2015, 150, 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.146
  29. [29] Tsapekos, P.; Kougias, P.G.; Treu, L.; Campanaro, S.; Angelidaki, I. Process Performance and Comparative Metagenomic Analysis During co-Digestion of Manure and Lignocellulosic Biomass for Biogas Production. Appl. Energy 2017, 185, 126-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.10.081
  30. [30] Zheng, Z.; Liu, J.; Yuan, X.; Wang, X.; Zhu, W.; Yang, F.; Cui, Z. Effect of Dairy Manure to Switchgrass co-Digestion Ratio on Methane Production and the Bacterial Community in Batch Anaerobic Digestion. Appl. Energy 2015, 151, 249-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.04.078
  31. [31] APHA. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater; 20th Ed.; American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water Environmental Federation, Washington DC, 1998.
  32. [32] González-Fernández, C.; Molinuevo-Salces, B.; García-González, M.C. Evaluation of Anaerobic Codigestion of Microalgal Biomass and Swine Manure Via Response Surface Methodology. Appl. Energy 2011, 88, 3448-3453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.035
  33. [33] Babaki, M.; Yousefi, M.; Habibi Z.; Mohammadi, M. Process Optimization for Biodiesel Production from Waste Cooking Oil Using Multi-Enzyme Systems Through Response Surface Methodology. Renew. Energ. 2017, 105, 465-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.12.086
  34. [34] Mason, R.L.; Gunst, R.F.; Hess, J.L. Statistical Design and Analysis of Experiments: With Applications to Engineering and Science; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, 2003.
  35. [35] Myers, R.H.; Montgomery, D.C. Response surface methodology: process and product optimisation using designed experiments; Wiley: New York; 1995.
  36. [36] Qian, J.; Du, X.; Zhang, B.; Fan, B.; Yang, X.; Optimization of QR Code Readability in Movement State Using Response Surface Methodology for Implementing Continuous Chain Traceability. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 139, 56-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2017.05.009
  37. [37] Rostamian, H.; Lotfollahi, M.N. New Functionality for Energy Parameter of Redlich-Kwong Equation of State for Density Calculation of Pure Carbon Dioxide and Ethane in Liquid, Vapor and Supercritical Phases. Period. Polytech. Chem. Eng. 2016, 60, 93-97. http://dx.doi.org/10.3311/PPch.8221
  38. [38] Niladevi, K.N.; Sukumaran, R.K.; Jacob, N.; Anisha, G.S.; Prema, P. Optimization of Laccase Production From a Novel Strain-Streptomyces Psammoticus Using Response Surface Methodology. Microbiol. Res. 2009, 164, 105-113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micres.2006.10.006
  39. [39] Lay, J.-J.; Li, Y.-Y.; Noike, T. Influences of pH and Moisture Content on the Methane Production in High-Solids Sludge Digestion. Water Res. 1997, 31, 1518-1524. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(96)00413-7
  40. [40] Gueguim Kana, E.B.; Oloke, J.K.; Lateef, A.; Adesiyan, M.O. Modeling and Optimization of Biogas Production on Saw Dust and Other co-Substrates Using Artificial Neural Network and Genetic Algorithm. Renew. Energy 2012, 46, 276-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.03.027
  41. [41] Pishgar, R.; Hamza, R.A.; Tay, J.H. Augmenting Lagoon Process Using Reactivated Freeze-dried Biogranules. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2017, 183, 137-154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-017-2435-2
  42. [42] Mao, C.; Wang, X.; Xi, J.; Feng, Y.; Ren, G. Linkage of Kinetic Parameters with Process Parameters and Operational Conditions During Anaerobic Digestion. Energy 2017, 135, 352-360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.06.050
  43. [43] Suschka, J.; Kowalski, E.; Mazierski, J.; Grübel, K. Alkaline Solubilisation of Waste Activated Sludge (WAS) for Soluble Organic Substrate - (SCOD) Production. Arch. Environ. Prot. 2015, 41, 29-38. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1515/aep-2015-0012
  44. [44] Kim, J.; Park, C.; Kim, T.-H.; Lee, M.; Kim, S.; Kim, S.-W.; Lee, J. Effects of Various Pretreatments for Enhanced Anaerobic Digestion with Waste Activated Sludge. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2003, 95, 271-275. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-1723(03)80028-2
  45. [45] Angelidaki, I.; Ahring, B.K.; Deng, H.; Schmidt, J.E. Anaerobic Digestion of Olive Oil Mill Effluents Together with Swine Manure in UASB Reactors. Water Sci. Technol. 2002, 45, 213-218. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2002.0334
  46. [46] Al-Mallahi, J.; Furuichi, T.; Ishii, K. Appropriate Conditions for Applying Naoh-Pretreated Two-Phase Olive Milling Waste for Codigestion with Food Waste to Enhance Biogas Production. Waste Manage. 2016, 48, 430-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.10.009
  47. [47] Carrere, H.; Passos, F.; Antonopoulou, G.; Rouches, E.; Affes, R.; Battimelli, A.; Ferrer, I.; Steyer, J.P.; Lyberatos, G. Enhancement of Anaerobic Digestion Performance: Which Pretreatment for Which Waste? Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Engineering for Waste and Biomass Valorisation (WasteEng14), August 25-28, 2014, Rio de Janeiro 2014.
  48. [48] Zhang, C.; Xiao, G.; Peng, L.; Su, H.; Tan, T. The Anaerobic co-Digestion of Food Waste and Cattle Manure. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 129, 170-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.10.138
  49. [49] Mao, C.; Feng, Y.; Wang, X.; Ren, G. Review on Research Achievements of Biogas from Anaerobic Digestion. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 2015, 45, 540-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.032
  50. [50] Zhang, P.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, Q.; Zheng, X.; Zhu, X.; Zhao, Y. Understanding Short-Chain Fatty Acids Accumulation Enhanced in Waste Activated Sludge Alkaline Fermentation: Kinetics and Microbiology. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44, 9343-9348. https://doi.org/10.1021/es102878m
  51. [51] Welte, C.; Kröninger, L.; Deppenmeier, U. Experimental Evidence of an Acetate Transporter Protein and Characterization of Acetate Activation in Aceticlastic Methanogenesis of Methanosarcina Mazei. FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2014, 359, 147-153. https://doi.org/10.1111/1574-6968.12550
  52. [52] Wormald, R.M.; Rout, S. P.; Mayes, W.; Gomes, H.; Humphreys, P.N. Hydrogenotrophic Methanogenesis Under Alkaline Conditions. Front. Microbiol. 2020, 11, 614227. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2020.614227
  53. [53] Xu, J.; Bu, F.; Zhu, W.; Luo, G.; Xie, L. Microbial Consortiums of Hydrogenotrophic Methanogenic Mixed Cultures in Lab-Scale Ex-Situ Biogas Upgrading Systems under Different Conditions of Temperature, pH and CO. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 772. https://doi.org/10.3390/microorganisms8050772
  54. [54] Jin, Q.; Kirk, M.F. pH as a Primary Control in Environmental Microbiology: 1. Thermodynamic Perspective. Front. Environ. Sci. 2018, 6, 21. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2018.00021
  55. [55] Carrere, H.; Rafrafi, Y.; Battimelli, A.; Torrijos, M.; Delgenes, J.P.; Motte, C. Improving Methane Production During the Codigestion of Waste-Activated Sludge and Fatty Wastewater: Impact of Thermo-Alkaline Pretreatment on Batch and Semi-Continuous Processes. Chem. Eng. J. 2012, 210, 404-409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2012.09.005
  56. [56] Li, J.; Rui, J.; Yao, M.; Zhang, S.; Yan, X.; Wang, Y.; Yan, Z.; Li, X. Substrate Type and Free Ammonia Determine Bacterial Community Structure in Full-Scale Mesophilic Anaerobic Digesters Treating Cattle or Swine Manure. Front. Microbiol. 2015, 6, 1337. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2015.01337
  57. [57] Oleszek, M.; Krzemińska, I. Enhancement of Biogas Production by Co-Digestion of Maize Silage with Common Goldenrod Rich in Biologically Active Compounds. Bioresources 2017, 12, 704-714. http://dx.doi.org/10.15376/biores.12.1.704-714
  58. [58] Barragán-Trinidad, M.; Carrillo-Reyes, J.; Buitrón, G. Hydrolysis of Microalgal Biomass Using Ruminal Microorganisms as a Pretreatment to Increase Methane Recovery. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 244, 100-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.07.117
  59. [59] Oz, N.A.; Uzun, A.C. Ultrasound Pretreatment for Enhanced Biogas Production from Olive Mill Wastewater. Ultrason. Sonochem. 2015, 22, 565-572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2014.04.018
  60. [60] Zhang, Y.; Yan, L.; Chi, L.; Long, X.; Mei, Z.; Zhang, Z. Startup and Operation of Anaerobic EGSB Reactor Treating Palm Oil Mill Effluent. J. Environ. Sci. (China) 2008, 20, 658-663. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(08)62109-9
  61. [61] Khoufi, S.; Louhichi, A.; Sayadi, S. Optimization of Anaerobic co-Digestion of Olive Mill Wastewater and Liquid Poultry Manure in Batch Condition and Semi-Continuous Jet-Loop Reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 2015, 182, 67-74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.01.092
  62. [62] Gonçalves, M.R.; Costa, J.C.; Marques, I.P.; Alves, M.M. Strategies for Lipids and Phenolics Degradation in the Anaerobic Treatment of Olive Mill Wastewater. Water Res. 2012, 46, 1684-1692. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2011.12.046
  63. [63] Abbassi-Guendouz, A.; Brockmann, D.; Trably, E.; Dumas, C.; Delgenès, J.-P.; Steyer, J.-P.; Escudié, R. Total Solids Content Drives High Solid Anaerobic Digestion via Mass Transfer Limitation. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 111, 55-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.01.174