This study investigated the effect of loading and temperature on anaerobic co-digestion of poultry manure with straw in mesophilic conditions. The study was made at lab-scale using 70l reactor with a HRT of 15 days. During the first phase, different loads of 1.0, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5 and 4.0 kg VS/m3.d were studied in order to produce biogas. At load of 3.0 kg VS/ m3.d, VS removal and gas production rate amounted 72% and 44.8 l/d, respectively. At this state, methane contents were in the 53%-70.2% range and the specific methane yield was calculated about 0.12 m3/kg VS%, at higher loads, VS removal, biogas production rate and methane yield decreased. In next step, the effect of different temperatures of 25, 30 and 35°C on optimum load of the first stage was studied. The methane yield at 30°C and 25°C became less than 34°C. It was measured 0.096 and 0.055m3/kg VS, respectively. VS removal at 30°C was 69% and at 25°C was calculated 61%.The Increase of COD up to 4900 mg/l and the decrease of pH to less than 6.8 causes a drop in efficiency. Proper range of soluble COD was determined 700-3500 mg/l and for pH it was 7.3-8. According to the results, the anaerobic co-digester appeared feasible with a loading of 3.0 kg VS/ m3.d at 34°C and biogas production rate of 44.8 l/d which can be used as a fuel resource.
Roshani, A., Shayegan, J., & Babaee, A. (2012). Methane Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Poultry Manure. Journal of Environmental Studies, 38(2), 83-88. doi: 10.22059/jes.2012.29102
MLA
Anis Roshani; Jalal Shayegan; Azadeh Babaee. "Methane Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Poultry Manure", Journal of Environmental Studies, 38, 2, 2012, 83-88. doi: 10.22059/jes.2012.29102
HARVARD
Roshani, A., Shayegan, J., Babaee, A. (2012). 'Methane Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Poultry Manure', Journal of Environmental Studies, 38(2), pp. 83-88. doi: 10.22059/jes.2012.29102
VANCOUVER
Roshani, A., Shayegan, J., Babaee, A. Methane Production from Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Poultry Manure. Journal of Environmental Studies, 2012; 38(2): 83-88. doi: 10.22059/jes.2012.29102
)