Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Co-digestion of orange peels and marine seaweed with cattle manure to suppress inhibition from toxicants

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Traditionally, anaerobic digestion (AD) is applied for the simultaneous generation of energy and treatment of various organic wastes. For example, despite orange peels (OP) and seaweed (SW) are highly available for AD, their physicochemical composition can inhibit the microbiome and collapse the process. In the present work, we examined the combination of OP and SW with livestock manure (MN) at a co-digestion process. At first, batch toxicity tests revealed that D-limonene and gallic acid at 0.2% v/v and 2.28 g L−1 respectively solely inhibit methane generation. At batch assays and based on added volatile solids (VS), the mono-digestion of OP and SW had methane yields of 398.4 ± 9.4 and 348.6 ± 10.2 m3 tVS−1, respectively. Furthermore, continuous mode experiments were conducted in order to examined process performance and bioenergy outcome at the co-digestion of OP, SW, and MN at various organic loading rates and substrate contributions. This work revealed two successful operation strategies when OP and SW were co-digested with manure resulting in methane yields of 264.5 ± 5.2 and 220.5 ± 5.2 m3 tVS−1, respectively. The results of this work potentially could be applied when dealing with other types of algal biomass.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

AD:

Anaerobic digestion (−)

BMP:

Practical biomethane potential (m3 tVS−1)

HRT:

Hydraulic retention time (day)

OP:

Orange peels (−)

ORL:

Organic loading rate (kgVS m−3 day−1)

SW:

Seaweed (−)

MN:

Manure (−)

ThBMP:

Theoretical biomethane potential (m3 tVS−1)

TKN:

Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (g kg−1)

TS:

Total solids (kg kg−1)

VFA:

Volatile fatty acids (kg m−3)

VS:

Volatile solids (kg kg−1)

References

  1. Biswas R, Ahring BK, Uellendahl H (2012) Improving biogas yields using an innovative concept for conversion of the fiber fraction of manure. Water Sci Technol 66:1751–1758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aghbashlo M, Tabatabaei M, Soltanian S, Ghanavati H (2019) Biopower and biofertilizer production from organic municipal solid waste: an exergoenvironmental analysis. Renew Energy 143:64–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tabatabaei M, Aghbashlo M, Valijanian E, Kazemi Shariat Panahi H, Nizami AS, Ghanavati H, Sulaiman A, Mirmohamadsadeghi S, Karimi K (2020) A comprehensive review on recent biological innovations to improve biogas production, part 2: mainstream and downstream strategies. Renew Energy 146:1392–1407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.07.047

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Martín MA, Siles JA, Chica AF, Martín A (2010) Biomethanization of orange peel waste. Bioresour Technol 101:8993–8999

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Negro V, Mancini G, Ruggeri B, Fino D (2016) Citrus waste as feedstock for bio-based products recovery: review on limonene case study and energy valorization. Bioresour Technol 214:806–815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ruiz B, Flotats X (2016) Effect of limonene on batch anaerobic digestion of citrus peel waste. Biochem Eng J 109:9–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Montingelli ME, Tedesco S, Olabi AG (2015) Biogas production from algal biomass: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 43:961–972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nkemka VN, Murto M (2010) Evaluation of biogas production from seaweed in batch tests and in UASB reactors combined with the removal of heavy metals. J Environ Manag 91:1573–1579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hierholtzer A, Akunna JC (2012) Modelling sodium inhibition on the anaerobic digestion process. Water Sci Technol 66:1565–1573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen Y, Cheng JJ, Creamer KS (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour Technol 99:4044–4064

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Moen E, Horn S, Østgaard K (1997) Alginate degradation during anaerobic digestion of Laminaria hyperborea stipes. J Appl Phycol 9:157–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Milledge JJ, Nielsen BV, Harvey PJ (2019) The inhibition of anaerobic digestion by model phenolic compounds representative of those from Sargassum muticum. J Appl Phycol 31:779–786

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hernandez JE, Edyvean RGJ (2008) Inhibition of biogas production and biodegradability by substituted phenolic compounds in anaerobic sludge. J Hazard Mater 160:20–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Angelidaki I, Ellegaard L (2003) Codigestion of manure and organic wastes in centralized biogas plants: status and future trends. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 109:95–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Angelidaki I, Karakashev D, Batstone DJ, et al (2011) Biomethanation and its potential, 1st ed. Elsevier Inc.

  16. Buswell AM, Mueller HF (1952) Mechanism of methane fermentation. Ind Eng Chem 44:550–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Sheng C, Azevedo JLT (2005) Estimating the higher heating value of biomass fuels from basic analysis data. Biomass Bioenergy 28:499–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Lesteur M, Bellon-Maurel V, Gonzalez C, Latrille E, Roger JM, Junqua G, Steyer JP (2010) Alternative methods for determining anaerobic biodegradability: a review. Process Biochem 45:431–440

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Labatut RA, Angenent LT, Scott NR (2011) Biochemical methane potential and biodegradability of complex organic substrates. Bioresour Technol 102:2255–2264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Forgács G, Pourbafrani M, Niklasson C, Taherzadeh MJ, Hováth IS (2012) Methane production from citrus wastes: process development and cost estimation. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 87:250–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Disley RS, Walmsley MJ, Forster CF (1992) Inhibition of gas production by thermophilic anaerobic sludges : the effect of organic compounds. Environ Technol 13:1153–1159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Angelidaki I, Alves M, Bolzonella D, Borzacconi L, Campos JL, Guwy AJ, Kalyuzhnyi S, Jenicek P, van Lier JB (2009) Defining the biomethane potential (BMP) of solid organic wastes and energy crops: a proposed protocol for batch assays. Water Sci Technol 59:927–934

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Montgomery DC (1984) Design and analysis of experiments, 7th ed. New York

  24. Hansen TL, Schmidt JE, Angelidaki I, Marca E, Jansen JC, Mosbæk H, Christensen TH (2004) Method for determination of methane potentials of solid organic waste. Waste Manag 24:393–400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. DEA (2014) ENERGY STATISTICS 2014

  26. APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC, USA

    Google Scholar 

  27. Wang T, Jónsdóttir R, Liu H, Gu L, Kristinsson HG, Raghavan S, Ólafsdóttir G (2012) Antioxidant capacities of phlorotannins extracted from the brown algae Fucus vesiculosus. J Agric Food Chem 60:5874–5883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Angelidaki I, Ellegaard L, Ahring BK (1992) Compact automated displacement gas metering system for measurement of low gas rates from laboratory fermentors. Biotechnol Bioeng 39:351–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mamma D, Kourtoglou E, Christakopoulos P (2008) Fungal multienzyme production on industrial by-products of the citrus-processing industry. Bioresour Technol 99:2373–2383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Grohmann K, Cameron RG, Buslig BS (1995) Fractionation and pretreatment of orange peel by dilute acid hydrolysis. Bioresour Technol 54:129–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Schiener P, Black KD, Stanley MS, Green DH (2014) The seasonal variation in the chemical composition of the kelp species Laminaria digitata, Laminaria hyperborea, Saccharina latissima and Alaria esculenta. J Appl Phycol 27:363–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Alvarado-Morales M, Gunnarsson IB, Fotidis IA et al (2015) Laminaria digitata as a potential carbon source for succinic acid and bioenergy production in a biorefinery perspective. Algal Res 9:126–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Ramos-Cormenzana A, Juárez-Jiménez B, Garcia-Pareja MP (1996) Antimicrobial activity of olive mill wastewaters (alpechin) and biotransformed olive oil mill wastewater. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 38:283–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kostas ET, White DA, Cook DJ (2017) Development of a bio-refinery process for the production of speciality chemical, biofuel and bioactive compounds from Laminaria digitata. Algal Res 28:211–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Garcia-Peña EI, Parameswaran P, Kang DW, Canul-Chan M, Krajmalnik-Brown R (2011) Anaerobic digestion and co-digestion processes of vegetable and fruit residues: process and microbial ecology. Bioresour Technol 102:9447–9455

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Khoshnevisan B, Tsapekos P, Alvarado-Morales M, Angelidaki I (2018) Process performance and modelling of anaerobic digestion using source-sorted organic household waste. Bioresour Technol 247:486–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Schnürer A, Bohn I, Moestedt J (2017) Protocol for start-up and operation of CSTR biogas processes. In: McGenity TJ, Timmis KN, Nogales B (eds) Hydrocarbon and lipid microbiology protocols: bioproducts, biofuels, Biocatalysts and Facilitating Tools. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 171–200

  38. Tsapekos P, Kougias PG, Kuthiala S, Angelidaki I (2018) Co-digestion and model simulations of source separated municipal organic waste with cattle manure under batch and continuously stirred tank reactors. Energy Convers Manag 159:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wikandari R, Nguyen H, Millati R et al (2015) Improvement of biogas production from orange peel waste by leaching of limonene. Biomed Res Int 2015:494182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Tabassum MR, Xia A, Murphy JD (2016) The effect of seasonal variation on biomethane production from seaweed and on application as a gaseous transport biofuel. Bioresour Technol 209:213–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Cogan M, Antizar-Ladislao B (2016) The ability of macroalgae to stabilise and optimise the anaerobic digestion of household food waste. Biomass Bioenergy 86:146–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Himanshu H, Murphy JD, Grant J, O’Kiely P (2018) Antagonistic effects on biogas and methane output when co-digesting cattle and pig slurries with grass silage in in vitro batch anaerobic digestion. Biomass Bioenergy 109:190–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Tsapekos P, Alvarado-Morales M, Kougias PG, Konstantopoulos K, Angelidaki I (2019) Co-digestion of municipal waste biopulp with marine macroalgae focusing on sodium inhibition. Energy Convers Manag 180:931–937. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.11.048

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Zha X, Tsapekos P, Alvarado-morales M et al (2020) Potassium inhibition during sludge and biopulp co-digestion ; experimental and model-based approaches. Waste Manag 113:304–311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Sun H, Kovalovszki A, Tsapekos P, Alvarado-Morales M, Rudatis A, Wu S, Dong R, Kougias PG, Angelidaki I (2019) Co-digestion of Laminaria digitata with cattle manure: a unimodel simulation study of both batch and continuous experiments. Bioresour Technol 276:361–368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Lo KV, Liao PH, Chiu C (1988) Mesophilic anaerobic digestion of a mixture of cheese whey and diary manure. Biomass 15:45–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. McMahon KD, Stroot PG, Mackie RI, Raskin L (2001) Anaerobic codigestion of municipal solid waste and biosolids under various mixing conditions-II: microbial population dynamics. Water Res 35:1804–1816

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Demirel B, Scherer P (2008) The roles of acetotrophic and hydrogenotrophic methanogens during anaerobic conversion of biomass to methane : a review. Rev Env Sci Biotechnol 7(2):173–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rosen MA (2018) Environmental sustainability tools in the biofuel industry. Biofuel Res J 5:751–752. https://doi.org/10.18331/BRJ2018.5.1.2

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This work was supported by Energinet.dk project no. 2013-1-12097.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Applied Science and Technology, Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, 10129, Torino, Italy

    Viviana Negro, Debora Fino & Bernardo Ruggeri

  2. Department of Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Denmark, Bld 115, 2800, Lyngby, Denmark

    Merlin Alvarado-Morales, Panagiotis Tsapekos & Irini Angelidaki

Authors
  1. Viviana Negro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Merlin Alvarado-Morales
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Panagiotis Tsapekos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Debora Fino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bernardo Ruggeri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Irini Angelidaki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Panagiotis Tsapekos or Irini Angelidaki.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Negro, V., Alvarado-Morales, M., Tsapekos, P. et al. Co-digestion of orange peels and marine seaweed with cattle manure to suppress inhibition from toxicants. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 12, 3209–3218 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00912-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00912-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation