Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Enhanced biomethane production by 2-stage anaerobic co-digestion of animal manure with pretreated organic waste

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

Abstract

Anaerobic co-digestion (AD) of different organic wastes is a promising technique to enhance clean energy (bioenergy) and manure (slurry) production, reducing stress on the environment. This is an experimental study aimed to investigate 2-stage co-digestion of pretreated organic wastes mixed with fresh animal manure (BD) and digester’s operation conditions (digester temperature and pH) to enhance biomethane production. To increase lignocellulose digestibility and biomethane (BM) production, fruit + vegetable waste (FVW) and corn stalks + wheat straw (CR) in ratio (1:1), respectively, were pretreated with inoculum taken from an anaerobic digester of poultry manure at 35 °C. This AD experiment was performed in a fixed dome biodigester with volumetric capacity of 2.3 m3. Biomethane potential (BMP) tests were conducted for biomass treatments and inoculum used (T1, T2, Ti) at 35 °C. In this study, the temperature of biodigester material was measured in mesophilic (30–40°C) and thermophilic (40–50°C) ranges and pH of fresh feed and slurry feed digesters was in optimum methane production range (7.01–7.52). The total daily methane productions from T1 and T2 were 125.13 ml/g VS and 104.89 ml/g VS in mesophilic range (30–40°C) while these values were 148.41 ml/g VS and 132.74 ml/g VS in mesophilic range (40–50°C), respectively. The 2nd stage digestion of slurry from fresh feed digester added 39–45% and 35–38% more methane production in T1 and T2 respectively. On calibration with BMP tests, experimental data have shown the synergetic effect on methane production and its thermal characteristics promoted by co-digestion of pretreated organic waste and BD. The economic and feasibility analysis proved the biomass co-digestion project viable and adoptable with positive (5.39 $) net return value (NRV), 2.92 years payback time (PBT), and 1.34 benefit cost ratio (BCR).

Graphical abstract

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Usman N, Sagagi B, Garba B (2009) Studies on biogas production from fruits and vegetables waste. Bayero J Pure Appl Sci 2(1):115–118

    Google Scholar 

  2. Mirza UK, Nasir A, Tariq M (2008) An overview of biomass energy utilization in Pakistan. Renew Sust Energ Rev 12(7):1988–1996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Meryem SS, Ahmad SS, Aziz N (2013) Evaluation of biomass potential for renewable energy in Pakistan using LEAP model. Int J Emerg Trends Eng Dev 1:243–249

    Google Scholar 

  4. Karagiannidis GP (2009) A multi-criteria ranking of different technologies for the anaerobic digestion for energy recovery of the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes. Bioresour Technol 100:2355–2360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Plaza G, Robredo P, Pacheco O, Toledo AS (1996) Anaerobic treatment of municipal solid waste, Water Sci. Technol. 33:169–175

    Google Scholar 

  6. Pöschl M, Ward S, Owende P (2010) Evaluation of energy efficiency of various biogas production and utilization pathways. Appl Energy 87:3305–3321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Tambone F, Genevini P, Imporzano GD, Adani F (2009) Assessing amendment properties of digestate by studying the organic matter composition and the degree of biological stability during the anaerobic digestion of the organic fraction of MSW. Bioresource Technol 100:3140–3142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Mata-Alvarez J, Macé S, Llabrés P (2000) Anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes. An overview of research achievements and perspectives. Bioresour Technol 74(1):3–16

  9. Pathak H, Jain N, Bhatia A, Mohanty S, Gupta N (2009) Global warming mitigation potential of biogas plants in India. Environ Monit Assess 157:407–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chen L, Zhao L, Ren C, Wang F (2012) The progress and prospects of rural biogas production in China. Energy Policy 51:58–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mähnert P, Linke B (2009) Kinetic study of biogas production from energy crops and animal waste slurry. Effect of organic loading rate and reactor size. Environ Technol 30:93–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Latif A, Ramzan N (2014) A review of renewable energy resources in Pakistan. Agri Soc Sci 2(3):127–132

    Google Scholar 

  13. Dangoggo SM, Fernando CEC (1986) A simple biogas plant with additional gas storage system. Niger J Solar Energy 5:138–141

    Google Scholar 

  14. Li Y, Stephen Y, Park JZ (2011) Solid-state anaerobic digestion for methane production from organic waste. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15(1):821–826

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lesteur M, Bellon-Maurel V, Gonzalez X, 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 

  16. Cuetos MJ, Gómez X, Otero M, Morán A (2008) Anaerobic digestion of solid slaughterhouse waste (SHW) at laboratory scale: influence of co-digestion with the organic fraction of municipal solid waste (OFMSW). Biochem Eng J 40:99–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Møller HB, Sommer SG, Ahring BK (2004) Methane productivity of manure, straw and solid fractions of manure. Biomass Bioenergy 26:485–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Anderson RE (1979) Biological path to self-reliance. Van No Strand Reinhold Company, New York, pp 219–307

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maheshwari RC, Vasidevan P (1981) Chemical and biochemical aspect of biogas production. Biogas Technology, Vol 1 Centre for Rural Development and Appropriate Technology. IIT, New Delhi, 24-27

  20. Demirekler E, Anderson GK (1998) Effect of sewage sludge addition on the start-up of the anaerobic digestion of OFMSW. Environ Technol 19:837–843

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hamzawi N, Kennedy KJ, Mc Lean DD (1998) Technical feasibility of anaerobic codigestion of sewage sludge and municipal solid waste. Environ Technol 19:993–1003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Callaghan FJ, Wase DAJ, Thayanithy K, Forster CF (1999) Co-digestion of waste organic solids: batch studies. Bioresour Technol 67:117–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Misi SN, Forster CF (2002) Semi-continuous anaerobic co-digestion of agro-wastes. Environ Technol 23:445–451

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sosnowski P, Wieczorek A, Ledakowicz S (2003) Anaerobic co-digestion of sewage sludge and organic fraction of municipal solid wastes. Adv Environ Res 7:609–616

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. El-Mashad HM, Zhang R (2010) Biogas production from co-digestion of dairy manure and food waste. Bioresour Technol 101:4021–4028

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Wu X, Yao W, Zhu J, Miller C (2010) Biogas and CH4 productivity by co-digesting swine manure with three crop residues as an external carbon source. Bioresour Technol 101:4042–4047

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ponsá S, Gea T, Sánchez A (2011) Anaerobic co-digestion of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste with several pure organic co-substrates. Biosyst Eng 108:352–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Li W, Siddhu MAH, Amin FR, He Y, Zhang R, Liu G, Chen C (2018) Methane production through anaerobic co-digestion of sheep dung and waste paper. Energy Convers Manag 156:279–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Hawkes DL (1980) Factors affecting net energy production from mesophilic anaerobic digestion. In: Stratford DA, Wheatley BI, Hughes DE (eds) Anaerobic Digestion. Applied Science Publishers Ltd, London, pp 131–150

    Google Scholar 

  31. Tchobanoglous G, Theisen H, Vigil S (1993) Integrated solid waste management. McGraw-Hill Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  32. EInstruments (2014) Biomass to biogas: anaerobic digestion. Available: www.e-inst.com/biomass-to-biogas. Accessed 2 Sept 2020

  33. Yen HW, Brune D (2007) Anaerobic co-digestion of algae sludge and waste-paper to produce methane. Bioresour Technol 98:130–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Speece RE (1987) In: Chynoweth DP, Isaacson R (eds) Toxicity. Anaerobic digestion of biomass. Elivier Applied Science, London, pp 129–140

    Google Scholar 

  35. Gunaseelan VN (2007) Regression models of ultimate methane yields of fruits and vegetable solid wastes, sorghum and napiergrass on chemical composition. Bioresour Technol 98:1270–1277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Piotrkowska-Cyplik A, Chrzanowski Ł, Cyplik P, Dach J, Olejnik A, Staninska J, Czarny J, Lewicki A, Marecik R, Powierska-Czarny J (2013) Composting of oiled bleaching earth: fatty acids degradation, phytotoxicity and mutagenicity changes. Int Biodeterior Biodegradation 78:49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. ASTM International (2011) Annual Book of ASTM Standards: Waste Management, Vol. 04.11

  38. Batstone DJ, Keller J, Angelidaki I, Kalyuzhnyi SV, Pavlostathis SV, Rozzi A, Sanders WTM, Siegrist H, Vavilin VA (2002) Anaerobic digestion model no.1, Rep. No 13. IWA Publishing, London

    Google Scholar 

  39. Wang Z, Cheng Q, Liu Z, Qu J, Chu X, Li N, Noor RS, Liu C, Qu B, Sun Y (2019b) Evaluation of methane production and energy conversion from corn stalk using furfural wastewater pretreatment for whole slurry anaerobic co-digestion. Bioresour Technol 293:121962

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Abbas I, Liu J, Noor RS, Faheem M, Farhan M, Ameen M, Shaikh SA (2020) Development and performance evaluation of small size household portable biogas plant for domestic use. Biomass Convers Biorefinery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00956-y

  41. Wang Z, Cheng Q, Liu Z, Qu J, Chu X, Li N, Noor RS, Liu C, Qu B, Sun Y (2019a) Furfural wastewater pretreatment of corn stalk for whole slurry anaerobic co-digestion to improve methane production. Sci Total Environ 674:49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Schnürer A, A Jarvis (2010) Microbial handbook for biogas plants, Swedish Waste Management U2009: 03

  43. Janczak D, Marciniak M, Lewicki A, Czekała W, Witaszek K, Rodríguez Carmona PC, Cieślik M, Dach J (2013) Bioreactor internet system for experimental data monitoring and measurement. Proc Technol 8:209–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Cáceres R, Coromina N, Malińska K, Marfà O (2015) Evolution of process control parameters during extended co-composting of green waste and solid fraction of cattle slurry to obtain growing media. Bioresour Technol 179:398–406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Stanislawska-Glubiak E, Korzeniowska J, Hoffmann J, Gorecka H, Jozwiak W, Wisniewska G (2014) Effect of sulphur added to phosphate rock on solubility and phytoavailability of phosphorus. Pol J Chem Technol 16:81–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Pradhan P, Mahajani SM, Arora A (2018) Production and utilization of fuel pellets from biomass: a review. Fuel Process Technol 181:215–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Method 1682 USEPA. Salmonella in sewage sludge (biosolids) by modified semisolid Rappaport-Vassiliadis (MSRV) medium. U.S.: EPA Office of Water; 2005. 41 EPA/821/R-04/028

  48. Chroni C, Kyriacou A, Manios T, Lasaridi K (2009) Investigation of the microbial community structure and activity as indicators of compost stability and composting process evolution. Bioresour Technol 100(15):3745–3750

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Steel RGD, Torrie JH (1997) Principles and procedures of statistics, vol 3. McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc, New York 507pp

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  50. Stolarski MJ, Szczukowski S, Tworkowski J, Krzyzaniak M, Gulczyński P, Mleczek M (2013) Comparison of quality and production cost of briquettes made from agricultural and forest origin biomass. Renew Energy 57:20–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Onchieku JM (2018) Cost benefit analysis of making charcoal briquettes using screw press machine locally designed and fabricated. Int Adv Res J Sci Eng Technol 5:57–65

    Google Scholar 

  52. Adeoti O, Ilori MO, Oyebisi TO, Adekoya LO (2000) Engineering design and economic evaluation of a family-sized biogas project in Nigeria. Technovation 20:103–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Cun-fang L, Xing-zhong Y, Guang-ming Z, Wen-wei L, Jing L (2008) Prediction of methane yield at optimum pH for anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Bioresour Technol 99:882–888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sanusi A, Abdulkadir B, Baki AS (2017) Comparative study on the efficacy of biogas production from mixture of animal waste and water lettuce. UMYU J Microbiol Res 2(2):125–128

    Google Scholar 

  55. Dae HL, Shishir KB, WonKim J, Park H (2009) Methane production potential of leachate generated from Korean food waste recycling facilities: a lab-scale study. Waste Manag 29(2):876–882

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Westerholm M, Müller B, Arthurson V, Schnürer A (2009) Changes in the acetogenic population in a mesophilic anaerobic digester in response to increasing ammonia concentration. Microbes Environ 26(4):347–353

  57. Zheng YH, Wei JG, Li J, Feng SF, Li ZF, Jiang GM, Lucas M, Wu GL, Ning TY (2012) Anaerobic fermentation technology increases biomass energy use efficiency in crop residue utilization and biogas production. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16:4588–4596

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Hu YY, Wu J, Li HZ, Poncin S, Wang KJ, Zuo JE (2019) Study of an enhanced dry anaerobic digestion of swine manure: performance and microbial community property. Bioresour Technol 282:353–360

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Petropoulos E, Dolfing J, Davenport RJ, Bowen EJ, Curtis TP (2017) Developing cold-adapted biomass for the anaerobic treatment of domestic wastewater at low temperatures (4, 8 and 15 C) with inocula from cold environments. Water Res 112:100–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Shamurad B, Gray N, Petropoulos E, Dolfing J, Quintela-Baluja M, Bashiri R, Sallis P (2020) Low-temperature pretreatment of organic feedstocks with selected mineral wastes sustains anaerobic digestion stability through trace metal release. Environ Sci Technol 54(14):9095–9105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Ferrer I, Garfi M, Uggetti E, Ferrer-Martı L, Calderon A, Velo E (2011) Biogas production in low-cost household digesters at the Peruvian Andes. Biomass Bioenergy 35(5):1668–1674

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Yao Y, Huang G, An C, Chen X, Zhang P, Xin X, Agnew J (2020) Anaerobic digestion of livestock manure in cold regions: technological advancements and global impacts. Renew Sust Energ Rev 119:109494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Zhang T, Tan Y, Zhang X (2016) Using a hybrid heating system to increase the biogas production of household digesters in cold areas of China: an experimental study. Appl Therm Eng 103:1299–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Mahmudul HM, Rasul MG, Akbar D, Narayanan R, Mofijur M (2020) A comprehensive review of the recent development and challenges of a solar-assisted biodigester system. Sci Total Environ 753:141920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141920

  65. Deng L, Liu Y, Zheng D, Wang L, Pu X, Song L, Long Y (2017) Application and development of biogas technology for the treatment of waste in China. Renew Sust Energ Rev 70:845–851

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Karray R, Karray F, Loukil S, Mhiri N, Sayadi S (2017) Anaerobic co-digestion of Tunisian green macroalgae Ulva rigida with sugar industry wastewater for biogas and methane production enhancement. Waste Manag 61:171–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Fatima M, Aliyu A, Ummasalma AS, Hadiza G (2018) Biogas production from cow dung for substantial energy generation. UMYU J Microbiol Res 3(1):81–85

    Google Scholar 

  68. Segagi BS, Garba B, Usman NS (2009) Studies on biogas production from fruits and vegetable waste. Bayero J Pure Appl Sci 2(1):115–118

    Google Scholar 

  69. Tamilarasan K, Vimala EA (2019) Biomass pretreatment for enhance of biogas production. Bayero J Pure Appl Sci 3(1):215–218

    Google Scholar 

  70. Bustillo-Lecompte CF, Mehrvar M (2017) Treatment of actual slaughterhouse wastewater by combined anaerobic–aerobic processes for biogas generation and removal of organics and nutrients: an optimization study towards a cleaner production in the meat processing industry. J Clean Prod 141:278–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Ahmad F, Maqbool S, Mehammod-Khan Z, Hassan M, Qui B, Ma J, Jameel T (2019) Enhancement methane generation by co-digestion of cow dung and grass (Cynodon dactylon) with activated sludge. BioResources 14(3):6822–6836

    Google Scholar 

  72. Hassan M, Ding W, Shi Z, Zhao S (2016) Methane enhancement through co-digestion of chicken manure and thermo-oxidative cleaved wheat straw with waste activated sludge: AC/N optimization case. Bioresour Technol 211:534–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Pavi S, Kramer LE, Gomes LP, Miranda LAS (2017) Biogas production from co-digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste and fruit and vegetable waste. Bioresour Technol 228:362–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Lijó L, Lorenzo-Toja Y, González-García S, Bacenetti J, Negri M, Moreira MT (2017) Eco-efficiency assessment of farm-scaled biogas plants. Bioresour Technol 237:146–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. Callaghan FJ, Wase DAJ, Thayanity K, Forster CF (2002) Continuous co-digestion of cattle slurry with fruit and vegetable wastes and chicken manure. Biomass Bioenergy 22:71–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Siegert I, Banks C (2005) The effect of volatile fatty acid additions on the anaerobic digestion of cellulose and glucose in batch reactors. Process Biochem 40:3412–3418

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Angelidaki I, Ahring BK (1993) Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of livestock waste: the effect of ammonia. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 38:560–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Lehtomäki A, Huttunen S, Rintala JA (2007) Laboratory investigation on co-digestion of energy crops and crop residues with cow manure for methane production. Resour Conserv Recycl 51:591–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  80. Salminen E, Rintala J (2002) Anaerobic digestion of organic solid poultry slaughterhouse waste–a review. Bioresour Technol 83:13–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  81. Davidsson A, Gruvberger C, Christensen TH, Hansen TL, Jansen JLC (2007) Methane yield in source-sorted organic fraction of municipal solid waste. Waste Manag 27:406–414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Raposo F, De la Rubia MA, Fernández-Cegrí V, Borja R (2011) Anaerobic digestion of solid organic substrates in batch mode: an overview relating to methane yields and experimental procedures. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16:861–877

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Gunaseelan VN (1997) Anaerobic digestion of biomass for methane production: a review. Biomass Bioenergy 13:83–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. European Commission (EC), Working document on biological treatment of biowaste. 2nd draft. Brussels 2001; DG ENV.A.2./ LM/biowaste/2nd draft

  85. Noor RS, Hussain F, Abbas I, Umair M, Yong S (2020) Effect of compost and chemical fertilizer application on soil physical properties and productivity of sesame (Sesamum Indicum L.). Biomass Conv Bioref. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01066-5

  86. Walekhwa PN, Lars D, Mugisha J (2014) Economic viability of biogas energy production from family-sized digesters in Uganda. Biomass Bioenergy 70:26–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  87. Gwavuya S, Abele S, Barfuss I, Zeller M, Müller J (2012) Household energy economics in rural Ethiopia: a cost-benefit analysis of biogas energy. Renew Energy 48:202–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  88. Kabir H, Palash M, Bauer S (2012) Appraisal of domestic biogas plants in Bangladesh. Bangladesh J Agric Econ 35(454-2016-36351):71

    Google Scholar 

  89. Zeng H, Yunjunb Y, Libertic F, Pietrod B (2019) Francesco Fantozzid. Technical and economic feasibility analysis of an anaerobic digestion plant fed with canteen food waste. Energy Convers Manag 180:938–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  90. Xu C, Shi W, Hong J, Zhang F, Chen W (2015) Life cycle assessment of food waste-based biogas generation. Renew Sust Energ Rev 49:169–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  91. Ansari SH, Khan MS, Haider MS, Ahmad A, Ahmed MA (2011) A study on economic feasibility of biogas plant for a small town. Forensic Sci Int 23:325–326

    Google Scholar 

  92. ISO 17225-3 (2014) Solid biofuels—fuel specifications and classes—part 3: graded wood briquettes; ISO: Geneva, Switzerland

  93. Amjid SS, Bilal MQ, Nazir MS, Hussain A (2011) Biogas, renewable energy resource for Pakistan. Renew Sust Energ Rev 15:2833e2837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Engler CR, Jordan ER, McFarland MJ, Lacewell RD (1999) Economics and environmental impact of biogas production as a manure management strategy. Biological & Agricultural Engineering, Texas A & M, College Station, TX, 109

  95. Abbas Q, Awan SH (2017) Impact of organizational politics on employee performance in public sector organizations. Pak Adm Rev 1(1):19–31

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the PMAS-Arid Agriculture University Rawalpindi, Pakistan for the research facilities.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agriculture, Biological, Environment and Energy Engineering, College of Engineering, Northeast Agricultural University, Harbin, 150030, China

    Rana Shahzad Noor & Yong Sun

  2. Faculty of Agricultural Engineering & Technology, PMAS-Arid Agriculture University, Rawalpindi, 46000, Pakistan

    Rana Shahzad Noor, Aziz Ahmed, Fiaz Hussain & Muhammad Umair

  3. School of Agricultural Equipment Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang, 212013, China

    Irfan Abbas

  4. Department of Agricultural Engineering, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, 34200, Pakistan

    Rabeea Noor

Authors
  1. Rana Shahzad Noor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aziz Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Irfan Abbas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fiaz Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Muhammad Umair
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Rabeea Noor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Yong Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Rana Shahzad Noor conceived the conceptualization of study, design and development of the experiment, data collection, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, visualization, writing an original draft, reviewed, and write-up editing. Aziz Ahmed contributed in development of research project, data collection, and formal analysis. Irfan Abbas and Rabeea Noor worked on manuscript review and editing, Fiaz Hussain and Muhammad Umair contributed in data collection and methodology. Yong Sun reviewed the research methodology and manuscript draft as internal reviewer for the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yong Sun.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

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

Noor, R.S., Ahmed, A., Abbas, I. et al. Enhanced biomethane production by 2-stage anaerobic co-digestion of animal manure with pretreated organic waste. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 13, 2833–2847 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01210-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01210-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation