Applied Biological Chemistry

, Volume 61, Issue 5, pp 557–565 | Cite as

Potential of biogas production from swine manure in South Korea

  • Dong Jin Lee
  • Ji Su BaeEmail author
  • Dong Cheol SeoEmail author


This study is to compare biogas potentials with the theoretical methane yields of swine manure from livestock farm (LF) and in situ biogasification facilities treating swine manure. In the case of LF, theoretical methane yield based on VS and CODcr by element analysis was 0.39 Sm3CH4/kg and 30.96 Sm3CH4/ton, respectively. For the in situ biogasification facilities, theoretical methane yield based on VS and CODcr by element analysis was 0.30 Sm3CH4/kg and 8.28 Sm3CH4/ton, respectively. Theoretical methane yields based on the weight of swine manure from LF were about three times higher than those from in situ facilities (ISF). As a result, when swine manure has reached the ISF, the decrement of about 24.5–73.3% in the methane yield could be seen due to the 3–6-month stationing of swine manure in the storage tank of LF. In order to improve the biogasification efficiency of swine manure, it is important to maintain high concentration of swine manure during the collection process from LF.


Anaerobic digestion Livestock farm Methane yield Swine manure 



This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) Grant funded by the Korea government (MSIP), [NRF-2017R1A2B4004635] and the Fund for New Professor Research Foundation Program (2016-0198), Gyeongsang National University, 2016.


  1. 1.
    Korean Ministry of Environment (KMOE) (2008) Economic analysis of waste-to-energy project. KMOE, Waste-to-Energy Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    KMOE (2014) Statistics of swine manure treatment. KMOE, Watershed and Total Load Management Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    STATISTICS Korea (2014) Investigation report of agriculture, forestry and fisheries. STATISTICS Korea, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim SU, Owens VN, Kim SY, Hong CO (2017) Effect of different way of bottom ash and compost application on phytoextractability of cadmium in contaminated arable soil. Appl Biol Chem 60(4):353–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Park WK, Park NB, Shin JD, Hong SG, Kwon SI, Kang KK (2011) Study on characteristics of biogas production and liquid fertilizer with anaerobic co digestion of livestock manure and food waste. Korean J Soil Sci Fert 44(5):895–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shin JD, Hong SG, Lee SI, Hong SC, Lee JS (2017) Estimation of soil carbon sequestration and profit analysis on mitigation of CO2-eq. emission in cropland cooperated with compost and biochar. Appl Biol Chem 60(4):467–472CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yoon YM (2013) Status and development way of biogas production technology and policy using livestock waste. J KORRA 21(2):18–40Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA) (2013) Long-term countermeasure of waste-to-energy of swine manure. MAFRA, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    MAFRA (2009) Action plan of energization of swine manure. MAFRA, Livestock Policy Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    KMOE (2015) Status of organic waste energy utilization facilities. KMOE, waste resource and energy division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    KMOE (2007) Comprehensive plan of energization and land disposal of food waste leachate. KMOE, Municipal Solid Waste Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    KMOE (2012) Research on improvement and management policy of food waste. KMOE, Waste Resources Management Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER) (2014) Guideline of biogasification in Germany. NIER, Waste-to-Energy Research Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    KMOE (2015) Official waste testing method, ES06301.1a. KMOE, NIER, Environmental Measurement and Analysis Center, South Korea, pp 57–60Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Korea Pork Producers Association (KPPA) (2009) Guideline of piggery farm. KOME, Water Environment Policy Division, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    American Public Health Association (APHA) (2005) American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation, Standard method for the examination of water and wastewater, 22nd edn. APHA, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    KMOE (2015) Official testing method with respect to water pollution process, ES 04363.1a, ES 04355.1b, ES 04362.1b, ES 04360.2b. KMOE, NIER, Environmental Measurement and Analysis Center, South Korea, pp 302–405Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MOFDS) (2015) Official food testing method, general testing method, B. Methods using the protein analyzer. MOFDS, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    MOFDS (2015) Official food testing method. General testing method, Ether extraction method. MOFDS, South KoreaGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tchobanoglous G, Theisen H, Vigil S (1993) Integrated solid waste management. McGraw-Hill, PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shin JD, Hong SG, Kim SC, Yang JE, Lee SR, Li FZ (2016) Estimation of potential methane production through the mass balance equations from agricultural biomass in Korea. Appl Biol Chem 59(5):765–773CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lee DJ, Bae JS, Seo DC (2017) Effect of seasonal variations of organic loading rate and acid phase on methane yield of food waste leachate in South Korea. Appl Biol Chem 60(1):87–93Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rittmann BE, McCarty PL (2001) Environmental biotechnology: principles and applications. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gujer W, Zehnder AJB (1983) Conversion processes in anaerobic digestion. Water Sci Technol 15(8–9):127–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Park BK, Ryu HD, Ahn KH, Kim SJ, Choi SA, Shin DS, Park JH, Kim HT, Kim YS, Rhew DH, Oa SW (2014) The study on the status of resource recovery system of livestock manure. National Institute of Environmental Research (NIER), NIER RP2014–320Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hansen KH, Angelidaki I, Ahring BK (1998) Anaerobic digestion of swine manure: inhibition by ammonia. Water Res 32(1):5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ahring BK, Sandberg M, Angelidaki I (1995) Volatile fatty acids as indicators of process imbalance in anaerobic digesters. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 43(3):559–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Chen Y, Cheng JJ, Creamer KS (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour Technol 99(10):4044–4064CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society for Applied Biological Chemistry 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Environmental Resources Research DepartmentNational Institute of Environmental Research, Environmental Research ComplexIncheonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Division of Applied Life Science (BK21 Plus) and Institute of Agriculture and Life ScienceGyeongsang National UniversityJinjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations