biomass and bioenergy 45 (2012) 187e194

Biogas fermentation of swine slurry based on the separation of onentrated

li!uid and low ontent li!uid
Liangwei Deng*, Ziai Chen, Hao Yang, Juanyu Zhu, Yi Liu, Yan Long, Dan Zheng
Biogas "nstitute of #inistry of $griulture% 1& 'etion 4% 'outh (enmin (d)% *hengdu% +( *hina
artile info abstrat
$rtile history,
(eei-ed 5 .anuary 2011
(eei-ed in re-ised form 18 #ay
2012 $epted & .une 2012
$-ailable online 2 .uly 2012
/eywords,
'wine slurry
'edimentation
$naerobi digestion
Biogas 01ess heat
2igestate
3his paper aims to demonstrate the bene)ts of using gra-itational sedimentation to separate raw swine slurry
into two substanes, one thi4 and highly5onentrated% the other a low5onentration li!uid) 3he -olume of
the onentrated li!uid% aounting for 18)&6 of the raw slurry% ontained about 71)06 of the hemial o1ygen
demand or biohemial o1ygen demand and ould produe about 706 of the total biogas prodution potential)
3he digestion temperature ould be raised by appro1imately 22 * by heating the
onentrated li!uid with the e1ess heat of biogas generation but
only by about 7)4& *by heating the raw slurry) 3he si8e of digester
with the new proess ould be redued by two5thirds that of the
digester with the on-entional proess) $fter separation% the digestate
of the onentrated li!uid% with nearly three times total nutrient
ontent as that of raw slurry% an readily be used as fertili8er and the
low ontent li!uid an easily meet disharge standards after aerobi
treatment)
9 2012 0lse-ier :td) $ll rights
reser-ed)
1) "ntrodution
;or swine slurry treatment% anaerobi digestion
throughout biogas prodution is a notable option)
$ number of studies on anaerobi digestion of
swine slurry ha-e been arried out in different
reator on)gurations <1e5=) ;urthermore% many
full5sale biogas plants fermenting swine slurry
ha-e been built in *hina% >ermany% $ustria%
'weden% and other ountries <7e9=)
3he dominating fator in)uening the ef)ieny of
biogas prodution is temperature) 3he growth
rate of methanogeni bateria is higher at
thermophili than at mesophili and
psyhrophili temperatures <10=) $t thermophili
temperatures% due to the higher degradation rate%
the hydrauli retention time (?(3) is shorter and
the reator -olume is smaller ompared with
those at mesophili and psyhrophili
temperatures) But the thermophili proess
re!uires a larger energy input and holds a higher
ris4 for ammonia inhibition aused by ammonia
to1iity inreasing with rising
@ *orresponding author) 3el)Afa1,
B87 (0) 28 852&7&77) 05mail address,
dlwbrtCyahoo)om)n (:) 2eng))
temperature <11=) *onse!uently% in >ermany%
about 906 of all biogas plants operate at
mesophili temperatures <12=) #aintenane of
mesophili temperature for anaerobi digestion is
generally by means of heating the reator whih
is aomplished by routing e1ess heat from the
gas engines of a ombined heat and power station
(*?+) to heat e1hangers within the reator
<12%1&=) Dbtaining an optimal temperature for
anaerobi digestion depends on ambient
temperature% yield of biogas and !uantity of
feedsto4) $mong these three fators% it is
impossible to hange ambient temperature but
feasible to ontrol the other two) ?igher
temperatures of anaerobi digestion an be
obtained by reduing the !uantity of feedsto4
and inreasing the biogas yield) 3o reah this
goal% the usual method is to redue the !uantity
of feedsto4 by enhaning its onentration of
total solids (3')% and to add other substrates suh
as energy rops (mai8e silage% grass silage and
ereal residues) or organi waste (industrial
organi waste% soure sorted household waste%
and sewage sludge)
0971595&4AE e see front matter 9 2012 0lse-ier :td) $ll rights
reser-ed)
http,AAd1)doi)orgA10)1017AF)biombio
e)2012)07)004
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4
into the slurry if its total solids are low <14%15=)
"n >ermany% the typial 3' ontent of the
digester feedsto4 usually ranges from 86 to
106 in biogas plants <15=) "n order to reah
mesophili anaerobi digestion using this
feedsto4% up to one5third of the total biogas
energy produed is used to heat the digester <17=)
?owe-er% the total solids ontent of swine slurry
is in the range of 1e26 <17=% and methods to
enhane the onentration of total solids% suh as
adding organi matters% ould not be applied
beause it is more dif)ult for the )nal ef)uent
with higher onentration to meet disharge
standards in *hina) *onse!uently% the digestion
temperature of swine slurry ould not reah
mesophili onditions using on-entional
treatment methods% resulting in large -olume of
digester and high in-estment) 3herefore% a new
strategy for the biogas fermentation of swine
slurry needs to be de-eloped)
$ new biogas fermentation system for swine
slurry with 3' ontent of about 16 was
de-eloped as a way to separate the raw swine
slurry into onentrated li!uid and low ontent
li!uid by sedimentation) 3he present researh is
to determine the separation ef)ieny of
sedimentation% to assess the potential of biogas
prodution from onentrated li!uid and low
ontent li!uid% to alulate the potential inrease
in temperatures for onentrated li!uid digestion
and raw slurry that ould be ahie-ed)
2) #aterials and methods
2.1. Swine slurry and inoculum
'wine slurry for the study was ta4en from a pig
farm of .inli $griultural and :i-esto4 *o) :td
in *hengdu% *hina% &0 4m away from the
laboratory% whih was a propagation and
fattening pig farm with animal population of
about 7000 heads bred on partially slotted )oor)
3he harateristis of the raw swine slurry are
listed in 3able 1) 'ampling was arried out in the
morning time) Ghen the swine slurry was sent to
the laboratory% the sedimentation separation
e1periment was started at one)
$naerobi sludge obtained from a full5sale
digester treating swine slurry of the same pig
farm)
2.2. Sedimentation searation
e!eriment
3he settling olumn (;ig) 1) omprised a ylinder
made of transparent rigid% +le1iglas tubing with a
15 m internal
diameter and a 2)45 m height) 'ampling ports
were uniformly spaed along the length of the
olumn at the heights of 45% 85% 125% 175% 205
and 245 m from the bottom of the olumn) $fter
the raw swine slurry was pumped in the settling
olumn% samples were olleted from eah
sampling point at 10% 20% &0% 70% 90% 120 and 180
min) $nalysis of the samples olleted
throughout the e1periment showed the hange in
onentration with time and height differene)
;ig)1e'hematidiagramofthesettlingolumn)
$fter )nishing abo-e sedimentation e1periment%
all li!uid in the settling olumn was replaed
with raw swine slurry) $fter & hH settling% the
supernatant abo-e port 5 (at 45 m height) was
olleted% referred to as low ontent li!uid)
'amples olleted below port 5 were referred to
as
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4
onentrated li!uid) :ow ontent li!uid and
onentrated li!uid were stored at 5 * until being
used for the e1periment of biogas prodution
potential)
2.". #iogas roduction otential
assessment o$ the concentrated li%uid
and the low content li%uid
3he biogas prodution potential of the
onentrated li!uid and the low ontent li!uid
was measured with totally 9 sets of biogas
fermentation de-ies (digesters)) 0ah digester
onsisted of a 1000 m: glass )as4 with a wor4ing
-olume of 900 m:) 3he digesters were sealed
with rubber stoppers ontaining an in)uentAef)uent
port to allow inFetion of feedsto4) $ 500 m:
glass )as4 was used as a gasholder) 3he
gasholders were also sealed with rubber stoppers
ontaining an in)uentAef)uent port to allow the
entrane of biogas and the disharge of water)
3he digesters were onneted by rubber tubes to
the gasholder) Biogas was olleted and
measured by the displaement of water from the
gasholders (;ig) 2)) "nitially% the reators were
inoulated with 500 m: of anaerobi sludge) 3he
reators operated in a draw5and5)ll mode twie a
day) 2raw5and5)ll mode means that a de)nite
-olume of supernatant of digester was deanted
)rst% and then the same -olume of feedsto4 (the
onentrated li!uid or the low ontent li!uid) was
)lled into digester) "n the )rst 50 days% the -olume
of one draw5and5)ll was 50 m: for the
onentrated li!uid and 100 m: for the low
ontent li!uid) "n the ne1t 25 days% to ensure the
same organi loading rate (D:() in the
e1periment% the -olume of one draw5and5)ll was
hanged to 50 m: for the onentrated li!uid and
200 m: for the low ontent li!uid) "n order to
distinguish the amount of gas produed by the
inoulum itself% the ontrol e1periments were
performed with digesters whih ontain the same
-olume of anaerobi sludge and 400 m: tap
water) 0ah e1periment was done in triple
repliation) $ water bath was used to maintain
the temperature of the digesters at &5 ) 1 *) 3he
biogas fermentation systems were operated for
75 days)
2.&. 'nalytical methods
3he analysis on total solids (3')% suspended
solids ('')% hemial o1ygen demand (*D2)%
ammonia nitrogen (I?&eI)% total nitrogen (3I)
and total phosphorus (3+) was arried out
aording to standard methods <18=) p? was
determined using a p? meter (ino:ab
)
p? 7200%
G3G5Gissenshaftlih 3ehnishe Ger4statten
>mb?% >ermany)) Biologial o1ygen demand
(BD25) was determined using a BD2 meter
(D1ide
)
*ontrol $12% G3G5Gissenshaftlih
3ehnishe Ger4statten >mb?% >ermany)) 3otal
potassium (3/) was analy8ed in ?;e?*lD4
e1trat) 3he potassium in all e1trats was deter5
mined using a )ame photometer ('ystoli model
no) 121))
;ig)2e'hematidiagramofabiogasfermentationd
e-ieforassessmentofbiogasprodutionpotential)
&) (esults and disussion
".1. Searation o$ swine slurry (y gra)ity
sedimentation
3ables 2 and & show the -ariation of '' and
*D2 in different heights of the settling olumn)
2uring the )rst &0 min of settling% the
onentrations of '' and *D2 inreased with
dereasing distane to the bottom of the settling
olumn) $fter &0 min of settling% the '' and
*D2 ontents at eah of the )-e sampling points
ranged narrowly from 1)1 g :
1
to 1)&g:
1
and4)&g:
1
to 4)7g:
1
% respeti-ely) *omparing this with raw
slurry% the o-erall redued rate -aried between
78)16 (bottom sampling port of the olumn) and
78)&6 (top sampling port of the olumn) for ''%
and from 52)&6 (bottom sampling port of the
olumn) to 57)06 (top sampling port of the
olumn) for *D2 after &0 min of settling)
3he mi1ed li!uid abo-e sampling port 5 (45 m)
ould be referred to as supernatant (the low
ontent li!uid)) 3he harateristis of the raw
slurry and supernatant after & hHs settling are
illustrated in 3able 1) ;or supernatant% gra-ity
sedimentation redued *D2% BD25% 3I and 3+
by 52)76% 52)86% 42)46 and 52)86%
respeti-ely) 3he sedimentation ef)ieny of ''
found in this study are omparable to those found
in pre-ious studies <19=) 3he sedimentation
ef)ieny of *D2 may be omparable with the
results obtained using a polyarylamide (+$#)5
aided solids )oulation treatment <20=)
3hrough gra-ity sedimentation% raw swine slurry
was separated into the onentrated li!uid
olleted below port 5 (45 m) and the low
ontent li!uid olleted abo-e port 5) 3he
distribution of organi matters and nutrients in
the onentrated li!uid and the low ontent li!uid
is shown in 3able 4) 3able 4 indiates that
although the -olume of the onentrated li!uid
aounted for 18)&6 of the total -olume% the
!uantity of *D2 or BD25 in the onentrated
li!uid both omprised about 716% and that of 3I%
3+ and 3/ omprised 5&)06% 71)46 and 50)06%
respeti-ely% of the total ontent in the settling
hamber) 3his indiated that most of the organi
matters and nutrients were ondensed in the
onentrated li!uid oupying a small portion of
the total -olume of the hamber) "n the
meantime% the onentration of *D2% BD25% 3I
and 3+ of the low ontent solid li!uid was
dereased remar4ably ompared with the raw
slurry% resulting in that it an easily meet
disharge standards after aerobi treatment)
".2. *he (iogas roduction otential o$ the
concentrated li%uid and low content li%uid
$t a fermentation temperature of &5 ) 1 *% the
performane of biogas prodution of the
onentrated li!uid and low ontent li!uid is
shown in ;ig)&) 3he biogas prodution potential
re)ets the potential biogas prodution of the
feedsto4) ;or the
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4
a 3he distane from the bottom of settling olumn to the
sampling port)
a 3he distane from the bottom of settling olumn to the
sampling port)
onentrated li!uid% 1 : of feedsto4 produed
about 10e20 : of biogas% with an a-erage -olume
of 15)9 : (3able 5)) ;or the low ontent li!uid% 1
: of feedsto4 produed only about 2e&:of
biogas% with an a-erage -alue of 2)&7 : (3able 5))
3he biogas prodution potential of the
onentrated li!uid was about 7)70 times that of
the low ontent li!uid) #oreo-er% the -olumetri
biogas prodution rate% whih re)ets the
prodution ef)ieny of the digester also showed
the digestion ef)ieny of onentrated li!uid% was
superior to that of the low ontent li!uid) $t the
same fermentation temperature and organi
loading rate% the digesters using onentrated
li!uid as feedsto4 ould produe about 1)5e2)0 :
of biogas per liter of digester per day% with an
a-erage of 1)70 : :
1
d
1
) ?owe-er% the digesters
using
low ontent li!uid ould only produe about
0)70e1)0::
1
d
1
% with an a-erage of 0)947 : :
1
d
1
)
3he higher -olumetri biogas prodution rates of
onentrated li!uid may be due to a longer
hydrauli retention time (?(3) and high
onentration of the substrate) 3hese higher
-olumetri biogas prodution rates of digesters
using onentrated li!uidasfeedsto4 are
omparable with the results obtained in a benh
sale anaerobi digester with pig dung as feed
material <21=) 3he biogas prodution potential
and -olumetri biogas prodution rate both
illustrated that the performane of biogas
prodution of onentrated li!uid was muh
better than that of low ontent li!uid)
;rom the biogas prodution potential% it an be
alulated that
&5)& : of low ontent li!uid% aounting for
81)76 of the total -olume of raw slurry% ould
only produe 81)7 : of biogas% aounting for
40)06 of the total biogas yield) $lthough the
-olume of onentrated li!uid was only 7)9 :%
omprising 18)&6 of the total -olume of raw
slurry% the biogas yield reahed 125)7 :%
aounting for about 706 of the total biogas
yield (3able 5)) 3hese results were onsistent
with the distribution of *D2 and BD25 in the
onentrated li!uid and low ontent li!uid (3able
4))
".". +nergy (alances and estimates o$ the
re%uired digester )olumes
3a4ing a 50%0005head pig farm as an e1ample% the
disharge of slurry was estimated at about 20 :
per pig per day <22=%adding up 1000 m
&
d
1
for the
whole li-esto4 farm) $ shemati diagram
omposed of the new proess and a on-entional
proess for biogas fermentation of the swine
slurry was shown in ;ig)4)
0nergy balanes and estimates of the re!uired
digester -olume in 3able 7 were alulated on the
base of the following riteria)
(1) 3he datum in 3able 1 was ta4en as the
onentration of raw swine slurry)
(2) $ording to 3able 4% in the new proess
reported in this paper% the separation ratio based
on the -olume of the
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4
a
20 0)7
18
0)7
B
i
o
g
a
s
y
ie
l
d
p
e
r
u
n
it
o
f
f
e
e
d
st
o

4
(
:
:
5
1
)
1
7 0)
5
1
4
1
2
0)
4
1
0
0)
&
Bio
gas
yiel
d
per
unit
of
*D
25
1
)
(
:
g
8
7
0)
2 4
0)
1
2
0
0
1 & 5 7 9 11 1& 15 17 19 21 2& 25 3ime (d)
;ig) & e 3he potential and ef)ieny of biogas prodution of the onentrated li!uid and low ontent
li!uid (a) Biogas yield per unit of feedsto4J (b) Kolumetri biogas prodution rate)
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4
;ig) 4 e 'hemati diagram of the new proess and a on-entional
proess)
onentrated li!uid to low ontent li!uid was
assumed to be 2,8) Dnly the onentrated
li!uid was anaerobially digested% while the
low ontent li!uid was aerobially treated
diretly) $ording to 3able 5% biogas yield per
unit of feedsto4 for the raw slurry and the
onentrated li!uid were 4)84 : :
1
and 15)9 :
:
1
of li!uid respeti-ely)
(&) "n the proess of on-entional ombined
anaerobi5aerobi treatment of swine slurry%
about one5third of the raw slurry must be added
to the digested ef)uent to ensure steady running
of the aerobi post5treatment proess <2&=)
(4) 2igestion temperature whih ould be
inreased was alulated aording to the
literature <24=% using biogas lower heating -alue
of appro1imately 21 #. m
&
) 3he biogas was used
to generate eletriityJ then e1ess heat from the
gas engine was used to heat the digester <17=)
3he lowest temperature of swine slurry assumed
to be 5 *) 3he digester and feedsto4 were
heated by e1ess heat whih aounted for about
one5third of the total energy of the biogas
produed <17=)
(5) 3hrough alulation of energy balanes% the
digestion temperature ould be inreased 7)4& *
for raw slurry% and
22)2 * for onentrated li!uid (3able 7)) +lus
the lowest temperature of swine slurry (5 *)%
the digestion temperature ould reah 11 * for
raw slurry% and 27 * for onentrated li!uid)
$ording to authorsH e1periene in designing
and operating biogas plant fermenting swine
slurry <22=% the -olumetri biogas prodution
rate of
d
1
digester was about 1)00 m
&
m
&
at 25e&0 *% and
0)&& m
&
m
&
d
1
at 10e15 *)
"n order to satisfy assumption (&) abo-e% 777 m
&
of water per day would be added to the digester
in the proess of on-entional ombined
anaerobi5aerobi treatment% and the
d
1
other &&& m
&
would be added to the digested
ef)uent <22%2&=) ;or the new proess reported in
this paper% howe-er% the amount of slurry
(onentrated li!uid) fed into the digester was
about 200 m
&
d
1
(;ig) 4)) 3he estimated biogas
yield of the two proesses was all about &200 m
&
d
1
) 3he biogas yield was almost the same% so was
the e1ess heat from the gas engine) 3he more
the amount of feedsto4 was fed into digester% the
lower digestion temperature turned) $s 3able 7
shows% the digestion temperature ould be
inreased by appro1imately 22 * using the
e1ess heat of biogas generation for heating the
onentrated li!uid but only by about 7)4& * for
heating the raw slurry) 3his indiates that normal
operations of the biogas plant heated only by
e1ess heat from the *?+ in winter ould not be
maintained in the on-entional proess% but ould
do by the digester treating the onentrated li!uid
with the new proess) 3o reah the same remo-al
result and biogas yield% the re!uired digester
-olume would be about 9700 m
&
for the
on-entional proess% and about &200 m
&
for the
new proess) 3he new proess would therefore
re!uire
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4
a $bout one5third of the raw slurry was added to digested ef)uent to ensure steady running
of aerobi post5treatment)
a digester only one5third the si8e of a
on-entional digester) 3he abo-e fats indiate
that the new proess ould remar4ably redue the
ost of the digester and ensure steady running of
the biogas plant during winter)
".&. Comarison o$ total nutrient
content and transortation costs
3he best disposal use for digestate is to fertili8e
ropland) 3he nutrients within the swine slurry
are largely retained during the proess of
digestion) 3herefore% the alulations of nutrient
onentrations in 3able 7 were based on the
nutrient ontent of the raw slurry) ;rom 3able 7%
it an be seen that the total nutrient ontent of the
onentrated li!uid was nearly three times that of
the raw slurry% and about )-e times that of the low
ontent li!uid) 3he distane tra-eled to haul and
spread the manure is the most important -ariable
affeting the ost of animal manure appliation
on ropland <25=) 3he total nutrient ontent is an
important fator in)uening potential
transportation distanes of swine slurry or its
digestate) 3he transportation ost per unit of
nutrient is muh higher for swine slurry or its
digestate than for inorgani fertili8er) 3he 78)55
fold higher nutrient density in inorgani fertili8er
is the reason that the unit transportation osts are
78)5 times higher for the digestate than for the
inorgani fertili8er) Ghen the transportation ost
of slurry or its digestate is higher than the ost of
purhasing inorgani fertili8er% farmers would not
apply it% e-en if gi-en for free) "n our
analysis% the ma1imum transportation distane
was de)ned as the distane at whih the
transportation ost of slurry or its digestate% if
gi-en for free% is e!ual to the ost of purhasing
inorgani fertili8er) $s 3able 7 shown% the
ma1imum transportation distane of onentrated
li!uid (1&)1 4m) was muh longer than that of
raw slurry (4)48 4m)) 3his indiates that the
separation of raw slurry would failitate its
utili8ation)
4) *onlusions
3he method shown here indiates that swine
slurry ould be separated into the onentrated
li!uid and the low ontent li!uid by gra-ity
sedimentation) 3he ef)ieny of biogas
prodution using the onentrated li!uid is
superior to that using the low ontent li!uid)
?igher temperatures an be maintained for the
digestion of the onentrated li!uid heated by the
e1ess heat of biogas generation% resulting in a
redued ost on the onstrution of digester and a
stable operation of biogas plant through winter)
$fter separation% the onentrated li!uid
anreadilybeusedasfertili8er% and the low ontent
li!uid an easily meet disharge standards after
aerobi treatment)
$4nowledgments
3his study wor4 was supported by *hina
$griulture (esearh 'ystem (*$('5&7510B))
3he authors wish to e1press their
biomas
s
an
d
bioenerg
y
4
5
(2012
)
187
e5
19
4












speial gratitude to #r) *yimana #ulinda for his
0nglish language re-iew and orretion)
referenes
<1= $ngelida4i "% $hring B/) #ethods for
inreasing the biogas potential from the
realitrant organi matter ontained in manure)
Gater 'i 3ehnol 2000J41(&),189e94)
<2= 'anhe8 0% BorFa (% 3ra-ieso :% #artin $%
*olmenareFo #;) 0ffet of organi loading
rate on the stability% operational parameters and
performane of a seondary up )ow anaerobi
sludge bed reator treating piggery waste)
Bioresour 3ehnol 2005J97(&),&&5e44)
<&= ?ansen #I% /ai +% #uller ?B) 0ffets of
anaerobi digestion and separation of pig slurry
on odor emission) $ppl 0ng $gr
2007J22(1),1&5e9)
<4= *hae /.% .ang $% Lim '/% /im "') 3he
effets of digestion temperature and
temperature sho4 on the biogas yields from
the mesophili anaerobi digestion of swine
manure) Bioresour 3ehnol 2008J99(1),1e7)
<5= /un8 $% #iele #% 'teinmet8 (:()
$d-aned swine manure treatment and
utili8ation in Bra8il) Bioresour 3ehnol 2009J
100(22),5485e9)
<7= :ant8 #% '-ensson #% BFornsson :%
BorFesson +) 3he prospets for an e1pansion
of biogas systems in 'wedendinenti-es%
barriers and potentials) 0nergy +ol
2007J&5(&),18&0e4&)
<7= (a-en (+.#% >regersen /?) Biogas plants
in 2enmar4, suesses and setba4s) (enew
'ustain 0nerg (e- 2007J11(1), 117e&2)
<8= 2eng :G% >ong ..% *hen M$)
*omparison of biogas plant between *hina
and >ermany) (enew 0nerg (esour 2008J
27(1),110e4 <in *hinese=)
<9= Geiland +) Biogas prodution, urrent state
and perspeti-es) $ppl #irobiol Biotehnol
2010J85(4),849e70)
<10= $hring B/) 'tatus on siene and
appliation of thermophili anaerobi digestion)
Gater 'i 3ehnol 1994J&0(12),241e9)
<11= $ngelida4i "% 0llegaard :% $hring B/)
$ppliations of the anaerobi digestion proess)
"n, $hring B/% editor) Biomethanation ""% -ol) 82)
Berlin, 'pringerJ 200&) p) 1e&& ("n, 'heper 3%
series editor) $d- Biohem 0ngABiotehnolJ -ol
82))
<12= Geiland +) +rodution and energeti use
of biogas from energy rops and wastes in
>ermany) $ppl Biohem Biotehnol
200&J109(1e&),27&e74)
<1&= Gard $.% ?obbs +.% ?olliman +.% .ones 2:)
Dptimisation of the anaerobi digestion of
agriultural resoures) Bioresour 3ehnol
2008J99(17),7928e40)
<14= $ngelida4i "% 0llegaard :) *odigestion of
manure and organi wastes in entrali8ed biogas
plants, status and future trends) Biotehnol $ppl
Biohem 200&J109(1e&),95e105)
<15= Geiland +) Biomass digestion in agriulture,
a suessful pathway for the energy prodution
and waste treatment in >ermany) 0ng :ife 'i
2007J7(&),802e9)
<17= Bohn "% BFornsson :% #attiasson B) 3he
energy balane in farm sale anaerobi digestion
of rop residues at 11e&7*) +roess Biohem
2007J42(1),57e74)
<17= ?ill 23% Bolte .+) #ethane prodution from
low solid onentration li!uid swine waste using
on-entional anaerobi fermentation) Bioresour
3ehnol 2000J74(&),241e7)
<18= $+?$A$GG$AG0;) "n, *leseri :'%
>reenberg $0% 0aton $2% editors) 'tandard
methods for the e1amination of water and
wastewater) 20th ed) Gashington% 2*, $merian
+ubli ?ealth $ssoiationA$merian Gater
Gor4s $ssoiationA Gater 0n-ironment
;ederationJ 1998)
<19= #artine8 .% Burton *% 'neath () $ study
of the potential ontribution of sedimentation
to aerobi treatment proesses for pig slurry) .
$gri 0ng (es 1995J71(2),87e97)
<20= Gal4er +% /elley 3) 'olids% organi load and
nutrient onentration redutions in swine waste
slurry using a polyarylamide (+$#)5aided
solids )oulation treatment) Bioresour 3ehnol
200&J90(2),151e8)
<21= Gu :.% ?ao LL% 'un *% :iu (?) 0ffet of
different solid onentration on biogas yield
and omposition during anaerobi fermentation
proess) "nt . >lobal 0nerg "ssues
2009J&1(&),240e50)
<22= 2eng :G% *ai *2% *hen M$) 3he
treatment of pig slurry by a full5sale anaerobi5
adding raw wastewater5intermittent aeration
proess) Biosystems 0ng 2007J98(&),&27e&4)
<2&= 2eng :G% Mheng +% *hen M$% #ahmood N)
"mpro-ement in post5treatment of digested
swine wastewater) Bioresour 3ehnol
2008J99(8),&1&7e45)
<24= #etalf O 0ddy% "n) "n, 3hobanoglous >%
Burton ;:% 'tensel ?2% editors) Gastewater
engineering, treatment and reuse) 4th ed) Boston,
#>raw5?illJ 200&)
<25= $rabi $$% $bdo MD% .oye +) 0f)ient use
of animal manure on ropland5eonomi
analysis) Bioresour 3ehnol 2001J 79(2),179e91)