Biogas Recovery from Refinery Oily Sludge by Co-Digestion Followed by Sustainable Approach for Recycling the Residual Digestate in Concrete Mixes

• Autorzy: Jasim Hassan S. , Ismail Zainab Z.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12913/22998624/154038

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This study investigated the potential of biogas recovery from refinery oily sludge (ROS) inoculated with animals’ manure by co-digestion of in lab-scale biodigesters at mesophilic conditions. Cow dung (CD), cattle manure (CM), and poultry manure (PM) were utilized as co-substrates. The biogas production from the co-digestion process exceeds its production from uninoculated ROS by approximately 67.5 %, 22.13% and 21.6% for PM, CM, and CD, respectively. Kinetics of the co-digestion process was well described by the modified Gompertz model. The predicted and experimental values of biogas production were well fitted with R2 > 0.96, suggesting favorable conditions of the digestion process. New approach for recycling the residual digestate to replace freshwater in concrete mixes was carried out. Results of examining the mechanical properties of the residual digestate-modified concrete mixes demonstrated a potential sustainable approach for the disposal of residual digestate in concrete mixes.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

co-digestion; biogas recovery; methane; Gompertz model; oily sludge; refinery oily sludge; concrete

• Wydawca: Lublin University of Technology ; Polish Society of Ecological Engineering (PTIE), Branch of PTIE in Lublin
• Czasopismo: Advances in Science and Technology. Research Journal
• Rocznik: 2022
• Tom: Vol. 16, no 5
• Strony: 178--191
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 46 poz., fig., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Jasim Hassan S.

• Department of Environmental Engineering, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq

autor

Ismail Zainab Z.

• Department of Environmental Engineering, University of Baghdad, Baghdad, Iraq

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3528-9812

Bibliografia

• 1. Deepanraj, B., Sivasubramanian, V., Jayaraj, S. 2015, Experimental and kinetic study on anaerobic digestion of food waste: The effect of total solids and pH. Journal of Renewable Sustainable Energy, 7, 63104–63114.
• 2. Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., Valijanian, E., Panahi, H.K.S., Nizami, A., Ghanavati, H., Sulaiman, A., Mirmohamadsadeghi, S., Karimi, K. 2020. A comprehensive review on recent biological innovations to improve biogas production, Part 1: Upstream strategies. Renewable Energy, 146, 1204–1220.
• 3. Das A., Mondal C. 2016. Biogas production from co-digestion of substrates: A review. International Research Journal of Environmental Science, 5, 49–57.
• 4. Wandera, S.M., Qiao, W., Algapani, D.E., Bi, S., Yin, D., Qi, X., Liu, Y., Dach, J., Dong, R. 2018. Searching for possibilities to improve the performance of full-scale agricultural biogas plants. Renewable Energy, 116, 720–727.
• 5. Ruffino, B., Fiore, S., Roati, C., Campo, G., Novarino, D., Zanetti, M. 2015. Scale effect of anaerobic digestion tests in fed-batch and semi-continuous mode for the technical and economic feasibility of a full-scale digester. Bioresource Technology, 182, 302–313.
• 6. 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: A C/N optimization case. Bioresource Technology, 211, 534–541.
• 7. Choong, Y.Y., Norli, I., Abdullah, A.Z., Yhaya, M.F. 2016, Impacts of trace element supplementation on the performance of anaerobic digestion process: A critical review. Bioresource Technology, 209, 369–379.
• 8. Sambusiti, C., Monlauc, F., Ficara, E., Musatti, A., Rollini, M., Barakat, A., Malpei, F. 2015. Comparison of various post-treatments for recovering methane from agricultural digestate. Fuel Process Technology, 1–7.
• 9. Li, X., Zhang, F., Guan, B., Sun, J., Liao, G. 2020, Review on oily sludge treatment technology. Environmental Earth Sciences, 467, 12173–12180.
• 10. Jerez, S., Ventura, M., Molina, R., Pariente, M.I., Martínez, F., Melero, J.A. 2021. Comprehensive characterization of an oily sludge from a petrol refinery: A step forward for its valorization within the circular economy strategy. Journal of Environmental Management, 285, 112124–112133.
• 11. Abdulqader, M.A., Habeeb, O.A., Dheab, M.S., Saber, S.E.M., Rabet, A.O., Mohammed, G.J., Saleh, A.H. 2022, Solid fuel char production via pyrolysis process of oily sludge produced as a resulted in storage tanks at north refineries company Baiji. Journal of Petroleum Research and Studies, 34, 199–210.
• 12. Hui, K., Tang, J., Lu, H., Xi, B., Qu, C., Li, J. 2020, Status and prospect of oil recovery from oily sludge: A review. Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 13, 6523–6543.
• 13. Hu, G., Li, J., Zeng, G. 2013. Recent development in the treatment of oily sludge from petroleum industry: a review. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 261, 470–490.
• 14. Roy, A., Sar, P., Sarkar, J., Dutta, A., Sarkar, P., Gupta, A., Mohapatra, B., Pal, S., Kazy, S.K. 2018. Petroleum hydrocarbon rich oil refinery sludge of North-East India harbours anaerobic, fermentative, sulfatereducing, syntrophic and methanogenic microbial populations. BMC Microbiology, 18, 151–173.
• 15. Johnson, O.A., Affam, A.C. 2019. Petroleum sludge treatment and disposal: A review. Environmental Engineering Research, 24, 191–201.
• 16. Xiao, W., Yao, X., Zhang, F. 2019. Recycling of oily sludge as a roadbed material utilizing phosphogypsum-based cementitious materials. Advanced Civil Engineering, ID 6280715 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/6280715.
• 17. Hanif, M.U., Zwawi, M., Algarni, M., Bahadar, A., Iqbal, H., Capareda, S.C., Hanif, M.A., Waqas, A., Hossain, N., Siddiqui, M.T.H., Sabzoi Nizamuddin, S., Asma Jamil, A. 2022. The effects of using pretreated cotton gin trash on the production of biogas from anaerobic co-digestion with cow manure and sludge. Energies, 15, 490–502.
• 18. Tekin, A.R., Dalgıç, A.C. 2000. Biogas production from olive pomace. Resource, Conservation & Recycling, 30, 301–313.
• 19. Karne, H.U., Bhatkhande, D., Jabade, S. 2018. Mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion of faecal sludge in a pilot plant digester. Journal of Environmental Studies, 75, 484–495.
• 20. Ali, R., Rashed Al-Sa’ed, R. 2018. Pilot-scale anaerobic digester for enhanced biogas production from poultry manure using a solar water heating system. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 75, 201–213.
• 21. Otero, A., Mendoza, M., Carreras, R., Fernández, B. 2021. Biogas production from slaughterhouse waste: Effect of blood content and fat saponification. Waste Management, 133, 119–126.
• 22. Sampsom, I.E. 2018, Production of biogas using petroleum sludge. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 4, 2488–984.
• 23. Yang, Q., Zhang, C., Li, L., Xu, W. 2020. Anaerobic co-digestion of oil sludge with corn stover for efficient biogas production. Sustainability, 12, 1861–1870.
• 24. Ghaleb, A.A.S., Kutty, S.R.M., Salih, G.H.A., Jagaba, A.H., Noor, A., Kumar, V., Almahbashi, N.M.Y, Saeed, A.A.H, Al-dhawi, B.N.S. 2021. Sugarcane bagasse as a co-substrate with oil-refinery biological sludge for biogas production using batch mesophilic anaerobic co digestion technology: Effect of carbon/nitrogen ratio. Water, 13, 590–610.
• 25. Shi, Y., Liu, M., Li, J., Yao, Y., Tang, J., Niu, Q. 2022. The dosage-effect of biochar on anaerobic digestion under the suppression of oily sludge: Performance variation, microbial community succession and potential detoxification mechanisms. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 421, 126819–126830.
• 26. Ismail, Z.Z., Khazaal, R.M. 2020. Optimization and modeling the performance of a mediator-less microbial fuel cell using Butler-Volmer-Monod model. Journal of Engineering, 9, 1–12.
• 27. Ellacuriaga, M., García-Cascallana, J., Gómez, X. 2021, Biogas production from organic wastes: Integrating concepts of circular economy. Fuels, 2, 144–167.
• 28. Al-mashhadani, M.K.H., Wilkinson, S.J., Zimmerman, W.B. 2015. Laboratory preparation of simulated sludge for anaerobic digestion experimentation. Journal of Engineering, 21, 1–15.
• 29. Sevillano, C.B.A., Chiappero, M., Gomez, X., Fiore, S., Martinez, E.J. 2020. Improving the anaerobic digestion of wine-industry liquid wastes: Treatment by electro-oxidation and use of biochar as an additive. Energies, 13, 5971–5988.
• 30. American Public Health Association (APHA). 2005. Standard methods of the examination of water and wastewater, Washington, DC.
• 31. Ismail, Z.Z., Noori, N.A. 2018. Anaerobic Co-digestion of Giant Reed for Biogas Recovery. Journal of Engineering, 24, 1–16.
• 32. Almukhtar, R.S., Alwasiti, A.A., Naser, M.T. 2012. Enhancement of Biogas production and organic reduction of sludge by different pre-treatment processes. Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, 13, 19–31.
• 33. Ware, A., Power, N. 2015. What is the effect of mandatory pasteurization on the biogas transformation of solid slaughterhouse wastes? Waste Management, 48, 503–512.
• 34. Borowski, S., Kubacki, P. 2015. Co-digestion of pig slaughterhouse waste with sewage sludge. Waste Management, 40, 119–126.
• 35. Dechrugsa, S., Kantachote, D., Chaiprapat, S. 2013. Effects of inoculum to substrate ratio, subtrate mix ratio and inoculum source on batch codigestion of grass and pig manure. Bioresource Technology, 146, 101–108.
• 36. British Standards Institution. 2016. Types of concrete grade and their ratio. BS 8500-2, BSI, London.
• 37. Praseto, T., Sumardiono, S., Aji, H.A., Pratama, A.Y. 2017. Effect of C/N ratio and pH on biogas production from industrial cassava starch wastewater through anaerobic process. Advanced Science Letters, 23, 5810–5814.
• 38. Nahm, K.H. 2007. Evaluation of the nitrogen content in poultry manure. Worlds Poultry Science Journal, 59, 77–88.
• 39. Kafle, G.K., Chen, L. 2016. Comparison on batch anaerobic digestion of five different livestock manures and prediction of biochemical methane potential (BMP) using different statistical models. Waste Management, 48, 492–502.
• 40. Gray, N.D., A.Sherry, A., Hubert, C., Dolfing, J., Head, I.M. 2010. Chapter 5 – methanogenic degradation of petroleum hydrocarbons in subsurface environments: emediation, heavy oil formation, and energy recovery. Advances in Applied Microbiology, 72, 137–161.
• 41. Toth, C.R.A., Gieg, L.M. 2018. Time course-dependent methanogenic crude oil biodegradation: Dynamics of fumarate addition metabolites, biodegradative genes, and microbial, community composition. Frontiers in Microbiology, 8, 2610–2626.
• 42. Morais, B.P., Martins, V., Martins, G., Castro, A.R., Alves, M.M., Pereira, M.A., Cavaleiro, A.J. 2021. Hydrocarbon toxicity towards hydrogenotrophic methanogens in oily waste streams. Energies, 14, 4830.
• 43. Ejimofor, M.I., Ezemagu, I.G., Menkit, M.C. 2020. Biogas production using coagulation sludge obtained from paint wastewater decontamination: Characterization and anaerobic digestion kinetics. Current Research in Green and Sustainable Chemistry, 3, 100024–100036.
• 44. American Society for Testing and Materials. 2000. Standard test method for slump of hydraulic-cement concrete. ASTM C143/C143M-00, Annual book of ASTM standards.
• 45. American Concrete Institute. 2014. Guide for structural lightweight aggregate concrete, ACI 213R.
• 46. Sloot, H.A.V. 1988. Leaching procedures for waste materials and waste products. Hazardous Waste Detection, Control, Treatment, Part B. Elsevier Science Publisher.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MEiN, umowa nr SONP/SP/546092/2022 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2022-2023).