Organic matter conversion and methane production characteristics during anaerobic co-digestion of corn stover and aqueous phase derived from cellulose hydrothermal carbonization

doi:10.16085/j.issn.1000-6613.2023-0047

Abstract

Abstract:

In order to realize the harmless treatment and multi-stage utilization of biomass resources, this study aimed to explore the transformation process of organic matter and methane production characteristics during the anaerobic co-digestion of corn stover and aqueous phase derived from cellulose hydrothermal carbonization. The anaerobic co-digestion experiment of the two feedstocks was carried out. Compared with the mono-digestion, the addition of hydrothermal aqueous phase prepared at 200℃ (hold on 30min, 60min, 120min) and 230℃ (hold on 60min) increased the methane production by 7.32%, 4.42%, 22.08% and 21.76%, respectively, and the maximum accumulation of methane was 1387mL. The results showed that the prolongation of hydrothermal time and the increase of hydrothermal temperature had a positive effect on the final methane production. The inhibitors such as furan and its derivatives in the co-substrate did not have obvious negative effects on anaerobic co-digestion. While, it could be decomposed into furfuryl alcohol, etc. by microorganisms to promote methane production. The addition of hydrothermal carbonization aqueous phase promoted the growth of methanogens in the hydrogen reduction pathway of carbon dioxide, and promoted the production of methane in synergy with the methanogenic pathway of acetic acid. The results of this study could provide a theoretical basis for optimizing the anaerobic co-digestion process of corn stover and organic waste liquid of hydrothermal carbonization.

Key words: anaerobic co-digestion, hydrothermal carbonization, aqueous phase, corn stover, microbial community

摘要：

为实现生物质资源的无害化处理与多级利用，本研究旨在探究纤维素水热炭化液相和玉米秸秆混合发酵过程中有机物转化及产气特性。为探究水热反应条件对混合发酵过程的影响，开展了不同条件水热炭化液相与玉米秸秆混合发酵实验。结果表明，与秸秆单发酵相比，在200℃（保温30min、60min、120min）和230℃（保温60min）条件下制备的水热液相和秸秆混合发酵的产气分别提升了7.32%、4.42%、22.08%、21.76%，其中甲烷最大累积量为1387mL。水热时间的延长和水热温度升高对最终产甲烷量都具有正向的促进作用；液相中的呋喃及其衍生物等抑制物并未对混合厌氧发酵产生明显的负面效果，反而被微生物分解为糠基醇等有机物，促进产气。水热炭化液相的加入促进了氢还原二氧化碳途径产甲烷菌的生长，协同乙酸产甲烷途径，促进了甲烷的生产。本研究结果可为优化水热炭化有机废液与秸秆混合发酵工艺提供理论基础。

关键词: 混合发酵, 水热炭化, 液相, 玉米秸秆, 菌群结构

CLC Number:

WANG Hao, DI Lu, WANG Fang, ZHANG Deli, YI Weiming, LI Yongjun, SHEN Xiuli. Organic matter conversion and methane production characteristics during anaerobic co-digestion of corn stover and aqueous phase derived from cellulose hydrothermal carbonization[J]. Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2023, 42(12): 6666-6675.

王浩, 邸璐, 王芳, 张德俐, 易维明, 李永军, 沈秀丽. 纤维素水热炭化液相与玉米秸秆混合发酵有机物转化与产气特性[J]. 化工进展, 2023, 42(12): 6666-6675.

Figures/Tables 9

References 33

1	TAN Zhao, LI Xiang, YANG Chunping, et al. Inhibition and disinhibition of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural in anaerobic fermentation: A review[J]. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2021, 424: 130560.
2	BELETE Yonas Zeslase, Stefan LEU, BOUSSIBA Sammy, et al. Characterization and utilization of hydrothermal carbonization aqueous phase as nutrient source for microalgal growth[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2019, 290: 121758.
3	ZHANG Deli, WANG Fang, SHEN Xiuli, et al. Comparison study on fuel properties of hydrochars produced from corn stalk and corn stalk digestate[J]. Energy, 2018, 165: 527-536.
4	阚玉娜, 陈冰炜, 翟胜丞, 等. 生物质水热碳化及其功能化应用研究进展[J]. 化工新型材料, 2021, 49(12): 43-49.
	KAN Yuna, CHEN Bingwei, ZHAI Shengcheng, et al. Research progress on hydrothermal carbonization of biomass and its functional application[J]. New Chemical Materials, 2021, 49(12): 43-49.
5	KLINKE H B, THOMSEN A B, AHRING B K. Inhibition of ethanol-producing yeast and bacteria by degradation products produced during pre-treatment of biomass[J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2004, 66(1): 10-26.
6	DANSO-BOATENG E, SHAMA G, WHEATLEY A D, et al. Hydrothermal carbonization of sewage sludge: Effect of process conditions on product characteristics and methane production[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 177:318-327.
7	ARAGÓN-BRICEÑO C, ROSS A B, CAMARGO-VALERO M A. Evaluation and comparison of product yields and bio-methane potential in sewage digestate following hydrothermal treatment[J]. Applied Energy, 2017, 208: 1357-1369.
8	ERDOGAN Ezgi, ATILA Buse, MUMME Jan, et al. Characterization of products from hydrothermal carbonization of orange pomace including anaerobic digestibility of process liquor[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 196: 35-42.
9	CHOE Ungyong, MUSTAFA Ahmed M, LIN Hongjian, et al. Effect of bamboo hydrochar on anaerobic digestion of fish processing waste for biogas production[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2019, 283: 340-349.
10	POSMANIK Roy, LABATUT Rodrigo A, KIM Andrew H, et al. Coupling hydrothermal liquefaction and anaerobic digestion for energy valorization from model biomass feedstocks[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2017, 233: 134-143.
11	STEINBACH David, KRUSE Andrea, Jörg SAUER. Pretreatment technologies of lignocellulosic biomass in water in view of furfural and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural production-A review[J]. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, 2017, 7(2): 247-274.
12	TASNIM Farzana, IQBAL Salma A, CHOWDHURY Aminur Rashid. Biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of cow manure with kitchen waste and Water Hyacinth[J]. Renewable Energy, 2017, 109: 434-439.
13	LU Xiaowei, PELLECHIA Perry J, FLORA Joseph R V, et al. Influence of reaction time and temperature on product formation and characteristics associated with the hydrothermal carbonization of cellulose[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2013, 138: 180-190.
14	DASHTBAN Mehdi, GILBERT Allan, FATEHI Pedram. Recent advancements in the production of hydroxymethylfurfural[J]. RSC Adv, 2014, 4(4): 2037-2050.
15	WANG Fang, YI Weiming, ZHANG Deli, et al. Anaerobic co-digestion of corn stover and wastewater from hydrothermal carbonation[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2020, 315: 123788.
16	PAN Xiaohui, ZHANG Yun, HE Chao, et al. Enhancement of anaerobic fermentation with corn straw by pig bone derived biochar[J]. Science of the Total Environment, 2022, 829: 154326.
17	KAFLE Gopi Krishna, KIM Sang Hun. Sludge exchange process on two serial CSTRs anaerobic digestions: Process failure and recovery[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2011, 102(13): 6815-6822.
18	TAHERZADEH M J, GUSTAFSSON L, NIKLASSON C, et al. Physiological effects of 5-hydroxymethylfurfural on Saccharomyces cerevisiae [J]. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2000, 53(6): 701-708.
19	MUÑOZ-PÁEZ Karla M, ALVARADO-MICHI Elba L, Germán BUITRÓN, et al. Distinct effects of furfural, hydroxymethylfurfural and its mixtures on dark fermentation hydrogen production and microbial structure of a mixed culture[J]. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2019, 44(4): 2289-2297.
20	AKUZAWA Masateru, HORI Tomoyuki, HARUTA Shin, et al. Distinctive responses of metabolically active microbiota to acidification in a thermophilic anaerobic digester[J]. Microbial Ecology, 2011, 61(3): 595-605.
21	DI Lu, ZHANG Quanguo, WANG Fang, et al. Effect of nano-Fe₃O₄ biochar on anaerobic digestion of chicken manure under high ammonia nitrogen concentration[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2022, 375: 134107.
22	陈广银, 郑正, 常志州, 等. 不同氮源对麦秆厌氧消化过程的影响[J]. 中国环境科学, 2011, 31(1): 73-77.
	CHEN Guangyin, ZHENG Zheng, CHANG Zhizhou, et al. Effects of nitrogen sources on anaerobic digestion process of wheat straw[J]. China Environmental Science, 2011, 31(1): 73-77.
23	LI Xiang, CHEN Hong, HU Lanfang, et al. Pilot-scale waste activated sludge alkaline fermentation, fermentation liquid separation, and application of fermentation liquid to improve biological nutrient removal[J]. Environmental Science & Technology, 2011, 45(5): 1834-1839.
24	FRANKE-WHITTLE Ingrid H, WALTER Andreas, EBNER Christian, et al. Investigation into the effect of high concentrations of volatile fatty acids in anaerobic digestion on methanogenic communities[J]. Waste Management, 2014, 34(11): 2080-2089.
25	乔江涛, 郭荣波, 袁宪正, 等. 玉米秸秆厌氧降解复合菌系的微生物群落结构[J]. 环境科学, 2013, 34(4): 1531-1539.
	QIAO Jiangtao, GUO Rongbo, YUAN Xianzheng, et al. Phylogenetic analysis of methanogenic corn stalk degrading microbial communities[J]. Environmental Science, 2013, 34(4): 1531-1539.
26	YANG Fuli, LI Wenzhe, LIU Changyu, et al. Impact of total carbon/sulfate on methane production and sulfate removal from co-digestion of sulfate-containing wastewater and corn stalk[J]. Journal of Environmental Management, 2019, 243: 411-418.
27	BUKHTIYAROVA Polina A, ANTSIFEROV Dmitry V, BRASSEUR Gael, et al. Isolation, characterization, and genome insights into an anaerobic sulfidogenic Tissierella bacterium from Cu-bearing coins[J]. Anaerobe, 2019, 56: 66-77.
28	GUO Zechong, ZHOU Aijuan, YANG Chunxue, et al. Enhanced short chain fatty acids production from waste activated sludge conditioning with typical agricultural residues: Carbon source composition regulates community functions[J]. Biotechnology for Biofuels, 2015, 8(1): 192.
29	HAHNKE Sarah, MAUS Irena, WIBBERG Daniel, et al. Complete genome sequence of the novel Porphyromonadaceae bacterium strain ING2-E5B isolated from a mesophilic lab-scale biogas reactor[J]. Journal of Biotechnology, 2015, 193: 34-36.
30	Consolación SÁNCHEZ-SÁNCHEZ, Mercedes ARANDA-MEDINA, Alicia RODRÍGUEZ, et al. Development of real-time PCR methods for the quantification of Methanoculleus, Methanosarcina and Methanobacterium in anaerobic digestion[J]. Journal of Microbiological Methods, 2022, 199: 106529.
31	SAHA Shouvik, KURADE Mayur B, Geon-Soo HA, et al. Syntrophic metabolism facilitates Methanosarcina-led methanation in the anaerobic digestion of lipidic slaughterhouse waste[J]. Bioresource Technology, 2021, 335: 125250.
32	SILVA A R, GOMES J C, SALVADOR A F, et al. Ciprofloxacin, diclofenac, ibuprofen and 17α-ethinylestradiol differentially affect the activity of acetogens and methanogens in anaerobic communities[J]. Ecotoxicology, 2020, 29(7): 866-875.
33	GRANADA Camille E, HASAN Camila, MARDER Munique, et al. Biogas from slaughterhouse wastewater anaerobic digestion is driven by the archaeal family Methanobacteriaceae and bacterial families Porphyromonadaceae and Tissierellaceae [J]. Renewable Energy, 2018, 118: 840-846.

特性	玉米秸秆	接种物
TS	90.26±0.12	11.05±0.37
VS	89.61±0.01	52.31±1.66
纤维素	41.05±0.91	—
半纤维素	26.39±0.89	—
木质素	8.34±0.98	—

特性	玉米秸秆	接种物
TS	90.26±0.12	11.05±0.37
VS	89.61±0.01	52.31±1.66
纤维素	41.05±0.91	—
半纤维素	26.39±0.89	—
木质素	8.34±0.98	—

条件	pH	TOC/mg·L^-1	糠醛/%	5-羟甲基糠醛/%
200℃，30min	4.00±0.04	877.66±37.91	7.91	33.32
200℃，60min	3.98±0.03	903.06±30.61	9.70	35.28
200℃，120min	3.68±0.01	963.04±49.82	14.76	41.10
230℃，60min	2.84±0.03	1994.52±32.69	10.48	66.51

条件	pH	TOC/mg·L^-1	糠醛/%	5-羟甲基糠醛/%
200℃，30min	4.00±0.04	877.66±37.91	7.91	33.32
200℃，60min	3.98±0.03	903.06±30.61	9.70	35.28
200℃，120min	3.68±0.01	963.04±49.82	14.76	41.10
230℃，60min	2.84±0.03	1994.52±32.69	10.48	66.51

有机物种类	CS	H1	H2	H3	H4
甲酸乙烯酯	1.88	1.22	0.79	1.57	1.46
甲酸乙酯	2.04	—	—	—	1.07
1-(呋喃基)乙二醇	—	—	—	—	3.01
乙酸	66.58	66.01	65.07	64.07	62.97
丙酸	16.45	17.85	16.50	16.53	15.08
丁酸	11.52	13.26	16.18	12.52	14.81