Enhanced Biomethane Recovery From Source-Separated Cow Urine via Co-Digestion With Waste Paper

IF 4.9 3区工程技术 Q1 AGRONOMY

Global Change Biology Bioenergy Pub Date : 2026-06-13 DOI:10.1111/gcbb.70153

Busra Kabay, Unal Sirin

{"title":"Enhanced Biomethane Recovery From Source-Separated Cow Urine via Co-Digestion With Waste Paper","authors":"Busra Kabay, Unal Sirin","doi":"10.1111/gcbb.70153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, the biogas potential of source-separated cow urine (CU) was evaluated through anaerobic co-digestion with waste paper (WP) under mesophilic conditions (37°C ± 1°C) in batch mode. Anaerobic digestion performance was assessed in terms of biogas-biomethane yields, total (TS) and volatile solids (VS) removal, pH, volatile fatty acids (VFA), soluble chemical oxygen demand (sCOD), and carbon-to-nitrogen (C/N) ratios and compared with WP mono-digestion. Five different blends were prepared in duplicate with an inoculum-to-substrate ratio of 1:1. The proportions were: 100% WP (CU0 control), 90% WP + 10% CU (CU10), 80% WP + 20% CU (CU20), 70% WP + 30% CU (CU30), and 50% WP + 50% CU (CU50) operated over a 66-day hydraulic retention time. The CU50 bioreactor showed the highest efficiency, achieving 86% TS and 87% VS removal, and yielding 92.5% and 150% higher biogas and biomethane yields, respectively, compared with the control. The pH values and VFA concentrations of the bioreactors ranged from 5.395 to 7.83 and 1615.46 to 7280.02 mg L−1, respectively. Effluent sCOD values in CU30, CU20, CU10, and CU0 increased by 80.05, 111.07, 154.41, and 293.94 mg sCOD g−1 VS, respectively, relative to influent values, whereas CU50 achieved 47.2 mg sCOD g−1 VS removal. Comparison of C/N ratios showed a 14.35% decrease in the control, whereas CU50 achieved an optimal C/N ratio of 25.1312, facilitating biogas production. Co-digesting source-separated cow urine with waste office paper effectively enhanced biogas production.","PeriodicalId":55126,"journal":{"name":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","volume":"18 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gcbb.70153","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Change Biology Bioenergy","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcbb.70153","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this study, the biogas potential of source-separated cow urine (CU) was evaluated through anaerobic co-digestion with waste paper (WP) under mesophilic conditions (37°C ± 1°C) in batch mode. Anaerobic digestion performance was assessed in terms of biogas-biomethane yields, total (TS) and volatile solids (VS) removal, pH, volatile fatty acids (VFA), soluble chemical oxygen demand (sCOD), and carbon-to-nitrogen (C/N) ratios and compared with WP mono-digestion. Five different blends were prepared in duplicate with an inoculum-to-substrate ratio of 1:1. The proportions were: 100% WP (CU₀ control), 90% WP + 10% CU (CU₁₀), 80% WP + 20% CU (CU₂₀), 70% WP + 30% CU (CU₃₀), and 50% WP + 50% CU (CU₅₀) operated over a 66-day hydraulic retention time. The CU₅₀ bioreactor showed the highest efficiency, achieving 86% TS and 87% VS removal, and yielding 92.5% and 150% higher biogas and biomethane yields, respectively, compared with the control. The pH values and VFA concentrations of the bioreactors ranged from 5.395 to 7.83 and 1615.46 to 7280.02 mg L⁻¹, respectively. Effluent sCOD values in CU₃₀, CU₂₀, CU₁₀, and CU₀ increased by 80.05, 111.07, 154.41, and 293.94 mg sCOD g⁻¹ VS, respectively, relative to influent values, whereas CU₅₀ achieved 47.2 mg sCOD g⁻¹ VS removal. Comparison of C/N ratios showed a 14.35% decrease in the control, whereas CU₅₀ achieved an optimal C/N ratio of 25.1312, facilitating biogas production. Co-digesting source-separated cow urine with waste office paper effectively enhanced biogas production.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

通过与废纸共消化提高源分离牛尿的生物甲烷回收

本研究在37°C±1°C的中温条件下，采用间歇式厌氧共消化法，对源分离牛尿（CU）与废纸（WP）的沼气潜力进行了评价。通过对沼气-生物甲烷产量、总（TS）和挥发性固体（VS）去除率、pH、挥发性脂肪酸（VFA）、可溶性化学需氧量（sCOD）和碳氮（C/N）比进行厌氧消化性能评估，并与WP单消化进行比较。五种不同的共混物一式两份，接种物与底物的比例为1:1。分别为：100% WP （CU0对照）、90% WP + 10% CU （CU10）、80% WP + 20% CU （CU20）、70% WP + 30% CU （CU30）、50% WP + 50% CU (CU50)，水力滞留时间为66 d。与对照相比，CU50生物反应器的效率最高，TS去除率为86%，VS去除率为87%，沼气和生物甲烷产量分别提高了92.5%和150%。生物反应器的pH值为5.395 ~ 7.83，VFA浓度为1615.46 ~ 7280.02 mg L−1。与进水值相比，CU30、CU20、CU10和CU0的出水sCOD值分别增加了80.05、111.07、154.41和293.94 mg sCOD g−1 VS，而CU50的去除率为47.2 mg sCOD g−1 VS。对照C/N比值降低14.35%，而CU50的最佳C/N比值为25.1312，有利于产气。将源分离牛尿与废办公用纸共消化，有效提高沼气产量。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Global Change Biology Bioenergy AGRONOMY-ENERGY & FUELS

CiteScore

10.30

自引率

7.10%

发文量

审稿时长

1.5 months

期刊介绍： GCB Bioenergy is an international journal publishing original research papers, review articles and commentaries that promote understanding of the interface between biological and environmental sciences and the production of fuels directly from plants, algae and waste. The scope of the journal extends to areas outside of biology to policy forum, socioeconomic analyses, technoeconomic analyses and systems analysis. Papers do not need a global change component for consideration for publication, it is viewed as implicit that most bioenergy will be beneficial in avoiding at least a part of the fossil fuel energy that would otherwise be used. Key areas covered by the journal: Bioenergy feedstock and bio-oil production: energy crops and algae their management,, genomics, genetic improvements, planting, harvesting, storage, transportation, integrated logistics, production modeling, composition and its modification, pests, diseases and weeds of feedstocks. Manuscripts concerning alternative energy based on biological mimicry are also encouraged (e.g. artificial photosynthesis). Biological Residues/Co-products: from agricultural production, forestry and plantations (stover, sugar, bio-plastics, etc.), algae processing industries, and municipal sources (MSW). Bioenergy and the Environment: ecosystem services, carbon mitigation, land use change, life cycle assessment, energy and greenhouse gas balances, water use, water quality, assessment of sustainability, and biodiversity issues. Bioenergy Socioeconomics: examining the economic viability or social acceptability of crops, crops systems and their processing, including genetically modified organisms [GMOs], health impacts of bioenergy systems. Bioenergy Policy: legislative developments affecting biofuels and bioenergy. Bioenergy Systems Analysis: examining biological developments in a whole systems context.