nach oben

Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management

Erschienen in:

02.02.2023 | ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Life cycle inventory for an organic swine waste treatment system

verfasst von: Sonia López Fenández, Araceli Amaya Chávez, Rodolfo Serrato Cuevas, Germán Gómez Tenorio, Gabriela Roa Morales

Erschienen in: Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management | Ausgabe 2/2023

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the efficiency of a system of treatment of organic swine waste as a management tool in the transformation of organic waste into products of value in the swine industry. The residues from the pig farm and the products obtained (compost, biol and biogas) were quantified and characterized, as were the energy used within the process and the distribution of the products. The negative impacts on the soil and adjacent river, as well as the efficiency of the compost as fertilizers and biol in grass and corn crops, were evaluated. The subsystems were: S1-slurry separation, S2-anaerobic digestion, S3-composting solid fraction of slurry, and S4-composting of dead tissues. S2 was not efficient in obtaining biol, with COD and TSS required. The process requires 31.1 kW/d of electrical energy and 3.22 L/d of diesel. The biogas (35,486.0 m³/d) is used for cooking food and heating houses, whilst the compost (82 kg/d) and biol (7.72 m³/d) replace inorganic fertilizers in crops. The system was adequate for the transformation of 38,109.0 kg/d of waste into valuable products. The biol needs further treatment time or to couple biodigesters-another treatment. The pig farm can be considered eco-efficient.

Vorheriger Artikel Biological stability assessment of MSW organic fractions by means of respirometric and germination tests

Nächster Artikel Recycling potential of MWCNTs/HDPE nanocomposite filament: 3D printing and mechanical characterization

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

FAOSTAT (2019) http://www.fao.org/faostat/es/#data/QA

FAO (2020) World Food and Agriculture of the United Nations—Statistical Yearbook. https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1329en

USDA (2017) China’s pork imports rise along with production costs. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/81948/ldpm-271-01.pdf?v=0. Accessed 24 Sep 2020

FAO (2020b) Food Outlook - Biannual Report on Global Food Markets. FAO- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Doi: https://doi.org/10.4060/cb1993en

SIAP. 2020. Agri-food and Fisheries Information Service. Meat in pig carcass. Monthly advance of livestock production. http://infosiap.siap.gob.mx/repoAvance_siap_gb/pecAvanceProd.jsp Accessed 8 Sep 2020

Cherubini E, Zanghelini GM, Alvarenga RAF, Franco D, Soares SR (2015) Life cycle assessment of swine production in Brazil: a comparison of four manure management systems. J Clean Prod 87:68–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.035CrossRef

Makara A, Kowalski Z (2018) Selection of pig manure management strategies: case study of polish farms. J Clean Prod 172:187–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.095CrossRef

Leip A, Ledgard S, Uwizeye A et al (2019) The value of manure-Manure as co-product in life cycle assessment. J Environ Manage 241:293–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.059CrossRef

Edesi L, Talve T, Akk E, Võsa T, Saue T, Loide V, Vettik R, Plakk T, Tamm K (2020) Effects of acidified pig slurry application on soil chemical and microbiological properties under field trial conditions. Soil Tillage Res 202:104650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2020.104650CrossRef

10.

Makara A, Kowalski Z, Lelek Ł, Kulczycka J (2019) Comparative analyses of pig farming management systems using the Life Cycle Assessment method. J Clean Prod 241:118305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118305CrossRef

11.

Aziz NIHA, Hanafiah MM, Gheewala SH (2019) A review on life cycle assessment of biogas production: challenges and future perspectives in Malaysia. Biomass Bioenergy 122:361–374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.01.047CrossRef

12.

Alonso-Estrada D, Lorenzo-Acosta Y, Díaz-Capdesuñer YM, Sosa-Cáceres R, Angulo-Zamora Y (2014) Treatment of pig waste for biogas production. ICIDCA- On Sugarcane Derivatives 48(3): 16–21. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=223132853003

13.

Duan N, Khoshnevisan B, Lin C, Liu Z, Liu H (2020) Life cycle assessment of anaerobic digestion of pig manure coupled with different digestate treatment technologies. Environ Int 137:105522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.105522CrossRef

14.

Elwan A, Arief YZ, Adzis Z, Muhamad NA (2015) Life cycle assessment-based environmental impact comparative analysis of composting and electricity generation from solid waste. Energy Procedia 68:186–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.03.247CrossRef

15.

Santos A, Fangueiro D, Moral R, Bernal MP (2018) Composts produced from pig slurry solids: nutrient efficiency and N-leaching risks in amended soils. Front Sustain Food Syst. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2018.00008CrossRef

16.

Gooding CH, Meeker DL (2016) Comparison of 3 alternatives for large-scale processing of animal carcasses and meat by-products. Prof Anim Sci 32(3):259–270. https://doi.org/10.15232/pas.2015-01487CrossRef

17.

Guidoni LL, Martins GA, Guevara MF, Brandalise JN, Lucia T, Gerber MD, Corrêa LB, Corrêa ÉK (2021) Full-scale composting of different mixtures with meal from dead pigs: process monitoring, compost quality and toxicity. Waste Biomass Valoriz. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-021-01422-0CrossRef

18.

Saavedra-Jiménez LA, Miranda-Romero LA, Jerónimo-Romero (2014) Compostaje de mortalidad de conejo en la granja experimental de la Universidad Autónoma Chapingo. Tropical and Subtropical Agroecosystems. 17(2):295–297. https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=93931761020

19.

ISO (2006a). ISO 14040: 2006. Environmental management - life cycle assessment - principles and framework

20.

ISO (2006b) ISO 14044: 2006. Environmental management - life cycle assessment - requirements and guidelines

21.

Ramírez-Islas ME, Güereca LP, Sosa-Rodríguez FS, Cobos-Peralta MA (2020) Environmental assessment of energy production from anaerobic digestion of pig manure at medium-scale using life cycle assessment. Waste Manage 102:85–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.10.012CrossRef

22.

GMT (2019) Municipal Development Plan 2019–2021. Gaceta Municipal Temascaltepec. https://www.temascaltepec.mx/NORMATECA/PDM2019-2021%20(A). Accessed 7 Oct 2020

23.

INEGI (2016) Statistical and geographical yearbook of México. 2015. http://www3.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/biblioteca/ficha.aspx?upc=702825077280. Accessed 20 Sep 2018

24.

INEGI (2019) Geostatistical Framework September. National Institute of Statistics and Geography https://www.inegi.org.mx/temas/mg/. Accessed 8 Oct 2020

25.

APHA (2005) WPCF, 1992 Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, Washington

26.

Pampuro N, Dinuccio E, Balsari P, Cavallo E (2016) Evaluation of two composting strategies for making pig slurry solid fraction suitable for pelletizing. Atmos Pollut Res 7(2):288–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apr.2015.10.001CrossRef

27.

USDA, USCC (2001) Test methods for the examination of composting and compost. Department of Agriculture and Composting Council. USA, Houston.

28.

USDA (2009) Soil survey field and laboratory methods manual. Soil survey investigations report no. 51, version 1.0 R. Burt (Ed.) US Department of Agriculture, Naturals Resources Conservation Service.

29.

Terrero MA, Muñoz MÁ, Faz Á, Gómez-López MD, Acosta JA (2020) Efficiency of an integrated purification system for pig slurry treatment under mediterranean climate. Agronomy 10(2):208. www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy

30.

Antoneli V, Mosele AC, Bednarz JA et al (2019) Effects of applying liquid swine manure on soil quality and yield production in tropical soybean crops (Paraná, Brazil). Sustainability 11(14):3898. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143898CrossRef

31.

Ávila FA, Vargas GPI, Saá PSV (2019) Slurry analysis of three feeding systems for fattening or fattening pigs in the Pedro Carbo and Isidro Ayora Canton of the province of Guayas. DELOS 12(34):1–13. http://www.eumed.net/rev/delos/34/index.html

32.

Pantelopoulos A, Aronsson H (2021) Two-stage separation and acidification of pig slurry-Nutrient separation efficiency and agronomical implications. J Environ Manage 280:111653. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111653CrossRef

33.

Blanco D, Suárez J, Jiménez J, González F, Álvarez LM, Cabeza E, Verde J (2015) Efficiency of pig waste treatment in covered lagoon digesters. Pastures and Forages 38(4):441–447. http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=269143377008

34.

Corbala-Robles L, Sastafiana WND, Volcke EIP, Schaubroeck T (2018) Life cycle assessment of biological pig manure treatment versus direct land application a trade-off story. Resour Conserv Recycl 131:86–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.12.010CrossRef

35.

Safavi SM, Unnthorsson R (2017) Enhanced methane production from pig slurry with pulsed electric field pre-treatment. Environ Technol. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2017.1304455CrossRef

36.

Velthof GL, Rietra RPJJ (2019) Nitrogen use efficiency and gaseous nitrogen losses from the concentrated liquid fraction of pig slurries. Int J Agron 2019:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/9283106CrossRef

37.

Martínez LM (2015) Potential production of biogas using pig excreta in the state of Guanajuato. Revista Electrónica Nova Scientia 7(15):96–115. https://doi.org/10.21640/ns.v7i15.273. (ISSN 2007-0705)CrossRef

38.

Cao L, Keener H, Huang Z, Liu Y, Ruan R, Xu F (2019) Effects of temperature and inoculation ratio on methane production and nutrient solubility of swine manure anaerobic digestion. Bioresour Technol 299:122552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122552CrossRef

39.

González-Arias J, Fernández C, Rosas JG, Bernal MP, Clemente R, Sánchez ME, Gómez X (2020) Integrating anaerobic digestion of pig slurry and thermal valorisation of biomass. Waste Biomass Valor 11:6125–6137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-019-00873-wCrossRef

40.

Venegas VJA, Espejel GA, Pérez FA, Castellanos SJA, Sedano CG (2017) Potential of electrical energy and financial feasibility for biodigester-motor generator in pig farms in Puebla. REMEXA 8(3):735–740. http://cienciasagricolas.inifap.gob.mx/index.php/agricolas/issue/view/2

41.

Nhu TT, Dewulf J, Serruys P et al (2015) Resource usage of integrated pig–biogas–fish system: partitioning and substitution within attributional life cycle assessment. Resour Conserv Recycl 102:27–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2015.06.011CrossRef

42.

Jury C, Benetto E, Koster D, Schmitt B, Welfring J (2010) Life cycle assessment of biogas production by monofermentation of energy crops and injection into the natural gas grid. Biomass Bioenergy 34(1):66–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.09.011CrossRef

43.

Wang QL, Li W, Gao X, Li SJ (2016) Life cycle assessment on biogas production from straw and its sensitivity analysis. Bioresour Technol 201:208–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.11.025CrossRef

44.

Moretti SML, Bertoncini EI, Abreu-Junior CH (2020) Characterization of raw swine waste and effluents treated anaerobically: parameters for Brazilian environmental regulation construction aiming agricultural use. J Mater Cycles Waste Manag 23(1):165–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-020-01115-1CrossRef

45.

Cano-Hernández M, Bennet-Eaton A, Silva-Guerrero E, Robles-González S, Sainos-Aguirre U, Castorena-García H (2016) Characterization of bioles from the anaerobic fermentation of cattle and swine excreta. Agrociencia 50(4):471–479. https://agrociencia-colpos.mx/index.php/agrociencia/article/view/1226

46.

Torrens A, Folch M, Salgot M (2021) Design and performance of an innovative hybrid constructed wetland for sustainable pig slurry treatment in small farms. Front Environ Sci 8:577186. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2020.577186CrossRef

47.

Fagundes DS, Orrico JMAP, Amorim OAC, Oliveira SL (2015) Mathematical models of anaerobic digestion for the treatment of swine effluents. Pesqui Agropecu Trop 45(2):172–179. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-40632015v4531052CrossRef

48.

Karmakar S, NKetia M, Laguë C, Agnew J (2010) Development of expert system modeling-based decision support system for swine manure management. Comput Electron Agric 71(1):88–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2009.12.009CrossRef

49.

SEMARNAT (1997) Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources. NOM-003-ECOL-1997, which establishes the maximum permissible limits of contaminants for treated wastewater that is retained in services to the public. DOF: 21 September 1998.

50.

Luján-Facundo MJ, Iborra-Clar MI, Mendoza-Roca JA, Also-Jesús M (2019) Alternatives for the management of pig slurry: Phosphorous recovery and biogas generation. J Water Process Eng. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2017.08.011CrossRef

51.

FAO (2013) Manual de compostaje del agricultor Experiencias en América Latina. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. https://www.fao.org/3/i3388s/I3388S.pdf. Accessed 7 Oct 2019

52.

Preusch PL, Adler PR, Sikora LJ, Tworkoski TJ (2002) Nitrogen and phosphorus availability in composted and uncomposted poultry litter. J Environ Qual 31:2051–2057. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2002.2051CrossRef

53.

Pampuro N, Bertora C, Sacco D, Dinuccio E, Grignani C, Balsari P, Cavallo E, Bernal MP (2017) Fertilizer value and greenhouse gas emissions from solid fraction pig slurry compost pellets. J Agric Sci 155(10):1646–1658. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002185961700079XCrossRef

54.

Sáez JA, Clemente R, Bustamante MÁ, Yañez D, Bernal MP (2017) Evaluation of the slurry management strategy and the integration of the composting technology in a pig farm Agronomical and environmental implication. J Environ Manage 192:57–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.01.040CrossRef

55.

Bernal MP, Sommer SG, Chadwich D, Quig C, Guoxue L, Frederick CMJ (2017) Current approaches and future trends in compost quality criteria for agronomic, environmental, and human health benefits. Adv Agron 144:143–233. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.agron.2017.03.002CrossRef

56.

Bernal MP, Alburquerque JA, Moral R (2009) Composting of animal manures and chemical criteria for compost maturity assessment. A review. Bioresour Technol 100:5444–5453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.11.027CrossRef

57.

Diaz LF, De Bertoldi M, Bidlingmaier W, Stentiford E (2007) Compost science and technology. Waste management series, vol 8. Elsevier, Amsterdam, p 357

58.

Matiz-Villamil A, Chamorro-Tobar IC, Sáenz-Aponte A (2021) Management of swine mortalities through the use of a mixed composting-accelerating bio-inoculant. Heliyon 7(1):05884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05884CrossRef

59.

Heming SD (2008) The fertilizer equivalence of phosphorus and potassium in organic manures applied to arable soils. Soil Use Manage 24:318–322. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00168.xCrossRef

60.

Ye C, Huang S, Sha C, Wu J, Cui C, Su J, Ruan J, Tan J, Tang H, Xue J (2020) Changes of bacterial community in arable soil after short-term application of fresh manures and organic fertilizer. Environ Technol. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2020.1807608CrossRef

61.

SEMARNAT (2000) Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources. NOM-021-SEMARNAT-2000, which establishes the specifications of fertility, salinity and classification of soils, study, sampling and analysis. DOF: 31 December 2002.

62.

Schuchardt F, Jiang T, Li GX, Huaitalla RM (2011) Pig manure systems in Germany and China and the impact on nutrient flow. J Agri Sci Technol 1(6):858–865 (Corpus ID: 127833218)

63.

LeJeune JT, Wetzel AN (2007) Preharvest control of Escherichia coli O157 in cattle1. J Anim Sci 85(13):73–80. https://doi.org/10.2527/jas.2006-612CrossRef

64.

Hernández VO, Mancilla VÓR, Palomera GC, Olguín LJL, Flores MH, Can CÁ, Ortega EHM, Sánchez BEI (2020) Evaluación de la calidad del agua y de la ribera en dos cuencas tributarias del río Tuxcacuesco Jalisco, México. Rev Int Contam Ambient 36(3):689–701. https://doi.org/10.20937/RICA.53595CrossRef

65.

EC (2006) Directive 78/659/EEC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 July 1978 on the quality of fresh waters needing protection or improvement in order to support fish life. OJ L 222, 14.8.1978, pp 1–10. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A31978L0659. Accessed 9 Nov 2020

66.

Pérez-Díaz JP, Ortega-Escobar HM, Ramírez-Ayala C et al (2019) Concentration of nitrate, phosphate, boron and chloride in Lerma River. Ecosist Recur Agropec 6(16):175–182. https://doi.org/10.19136/era.a6n16.1829CrossRef

Titel: Life cycle inventory for an organic swine waste treatment system
verfasst von: Sonia López Fenández
Araceli Amaya Chávez
Rodolfo Serrato Cuevas
Germán Gómez Tenorio
Gabriela Roa Morales
Publikationsdatum: 02.02.2023
Verlag: Springer Japan
Erschienen in: Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management / Ausgabe 2/2023
Print ISSN: 1438-4957
Elektronische ISSN: 1611-8227
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-023-01606-x

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2023

Biological stability assessment of MSW organic fractions by means of respirometric and germination tests

Solid waste recycling within higher education in developing countries: a case study of the University of Lagos

Digested wastewater sludge dewatering process using water treatment plants chemical sludge and walnut shell activated carbon powder

Sustainable red ceramic block: recycling of a sewage sludge as raw material

Non-catalytic and catalytic wet oxidation of landfill leachate over CuO and MoO3

Life cycle inventory of recycled aggregates derived from construction and demolition waste