• No results found

Investigation of mutual antagonism in the presence of sodium and ammonia during anaerobic digestion

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Investigation of mutual antagonism in the presence of sodium and ammonia during anaerobic digestion"

Copied!
5
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)

http://www.diva-portal.org

Postprint

This is the accepted version of a paper presented at World Congress on Anaerobic digestion (AD14), Vina del Mar, Chile, 15-18 Nov., 2015.

Citation for the original published paper: Schwede, S. (2015)

Investigation of mutual antagonism in the presence of sodium and ammonia during anaerobic digestion.

In:

N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper.

Permanent link to this version:

(2)

Investigation of mutual antagonism in the presence of sodium

and ammonia during anaerobic digestion

S. Schwede*

* School of Business, Society and Engineering, Department of Energy, Building and Environment, Box 883, SE-721 23 Västerås, Sweden (E-mail: Sebastian.schwede@rub.de)

Abstract

High concentrations of both sodium (Na+) and ammonium (NH

4+) ions can cause process

imbalances through inhibition of the microbial community during anaerobic digestion. The co-presence of Na+ and NH4+ might decrease the toxicity of the particular compound due to mutual

antagonism.

In this study the influence of Na+ or NH

4+ addition was compared to the co-addition of both

compounds during an anaerobic batch experiment. In general, Na+ showed less inhibition

compared to NH4+ and was beneficial at lower concentrations (1.5 g L-1). At higher NH4+

concentrations (6.0 g L-1) the anaerobic digestion process was strongly retarded. Nevertheless, the microbial community adapted to the high concentrations. During co-addition of higher Na+ and NH4+ concentrations (4.5-6.0 g L-1) biogas production was completely inhibited. However,

adaptation of the microbial community was faster compared to inhibition at high NH4+

concentrations suggesting a mutual benefit during the co-presence of Na+ and NH4+.

Keywords

Ammonia; Anaerobic digestion; Biogas production; Inhibition; Mutual antagonism; Sodium

INTRODUCTION

During anaerobic digestion (AD) of various feedstocks such as microalgae, food waste and manure process imbalances can occur due to the release of ammonium ions (NH4+) mainly from the

degradation of proteins at mesophilic and thermophilic conditions (Angelidaki and Ahring, 1993; Banks et al., 2012; Schwede et al., 2013). Depending on pH and temperature NH4+ dissociates to

free ammonia (FA, NH3) that passively diffuses through cell membranes and can cause inhibition

(Chen et al., 2008). In Chen et al. (2008) reported mutual antagonism in the presence of both NH4+

and Na+ is summarized. As a results of antagonism, toxicity of one ion is reduced by the presence of other ions.

During semi-continuous mono-digestion of marine microalgal biomass both NH4+ and Na+

accumulated resulting in process imbalances with increasing volatile fatty acid concentrations and lowered biogas productivity (Schwede et al., 2013).However, these effects could not be related to Na+, NH4+ or both components.

In the present study mutual antagonism in the presence of NH4+ and Na+ was evaluated in a batch

digestion experiment for 97 days. The co-digestion of feedstocks with high protein and high Na+ content or the addition of Na+ to high protein digestion could be a strategy to counteract inhibition due to NH4+ accumulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Anaerobic batch digestion tests were performed in 1 L bottles sealed with rubber and metal caps to evaluate mutual antagonism of Na+ and NH

4+. Sewage sludge from a waste water treatment plant

(Kungsängen, Västerås, Sweden) was used as inoculum. The sludge was preincubated for two weeks at 37°C prior to the experiment. Particles >2 mm were removed by sieving. Microcrystalline cellulose was used as the sole substrate. Substrate to inoculum ratio was 0.7 with 4.4 g volatile solids (VS) from the inoculum and 3 g VS from the substrate. NaCl and NH4Cl were added from a

(3)

stock solution (200 g L-1) accounting for 1.5, 3.0, 4.5 and 6.0 g L-1 (Na+ and/or NH4+) in the

samples. NH4+ and Na+ content in the inoculum were 1.3 g L-1 and 0.1 g L-1 and were analyzed

externally (ALS Scandinavia AB, Sweden). In addition, one sample without Na+ and NH4+ was

prepared as reference and one sample without cellulose, Na+ and NH4+ to determine biogas

production by the inoculum. Total working volume in the bottles was adjusted to 700 mL by adding tap water. All bottles were flushed with nitrogen gas for 1 min to obtain anaerobic conditions before incubation at 36.2±0.5°C. All samples were investigated in triplicate and mixed manually before pressure measurements.

Biogas production was determined by pressure measurement (Digital Pressure Meter GMH 3161, Greisinger electronic, Germany) in the bottles. The overpressure was subsequently released to atmospheric pressure. Dry gas volume was corrected to standard conditions (0°C, 101.325 kPa) and gas production by the inoculum was deducted from the samples. The biogas production is stated as biogas yield (in m3 kg VS-1) by dividing the corrected biogas volume by the amount of substrate added (in volatile solids; VS).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Biogas yields during anaerobic batch digestion of cellulose with addition of Na+ (A), NH

4+ (B), and

Na+/NH4+ (C) are shown in Figure 1. The reference sample without addition of Na+ and NH4+

showed the highest biogas yield (0.69 m3 kg VS-1) after 97 days. This corresponds to 93% of the theoretical maximum biogas yield of cellulose (0.75 m3 kg VS-1) and indicates a high activity of the inoculum used for the test series. Most of the biogas was produced during the first 21 days (83%) after a lag-phase without biogas production during the first 2 days.

In general, inhibition of biogas production was higher with addition of NH4+ compared to Na+. The

addition of 1.5 g L-1 of Na+ showed a positive effect until day 37 with an increase of 38% after 4 days compared to the reference sample. Conversely, after 97 days biogas yield was 5% (0.66 m3 kg VS-1) lower. With increasing Na+ concentrations biogas production was retarded and lowered by 11% (3.0 g L-1), 12% (4.5 g L-1) and 17% (6.0 g L-1) after 97 days. The lag- phase was additionally

prolonged with addition of 4.5 and 6.0 g L-1 Na+ by one and two days, respectively.

Addition of 1.5 and 3.0 g L-1 NH4+ showed slight retard of the biogas production and a lowered

biogas yield (15% and 16%) after 97 days. With increasing NH4+ concentrations biogas production

was strongly retarded, whereas the biogas yield was similar to the lower NH4+ concentrations.

During co-addition of Na+ and NH4+ biogas production with 1.5 g L-1 was similar to the reference sample until day 30 and biogas yield was subsequently decreased by 12%. Samples with higher Na+ and NH4+ concentrations showed strong inhibition in the beginning. Consequently, the lag-phase

was prolonged by 2 (3.0 g L-1), 5 (4.5 g L-1) and 14 days (6.0 g L-1). The final biogas yield was decreased by 14, 20 and 29% compared to the reference sample. In comparison to the mono-addition of NH4+ the inhibition pattern differs significantly especially at high concentrations during

co-addition of Na+ and NH4+. Here, after the prolonged lag-phase the biogas production increases

continuously and faster than in the mono-addition of NH4+ where a plateau was reached after 20

days. During that phase the biogas production stopped for a period of 25 days. This indicates that the adaptability of the microbial community is supported by the simultaneous presence of Na+ and NH4+.

(4)

Figure 1. Biogas yields during anaerobic digestion of microcrystalline cellulose with addition of different

Na+ (A), NH

4+ (B) and Na+/NH4+ (C) concentrations.

Compared to anaerobic Bacteria within the anaerobic digestion process methanogenic Archaea show the lowest tolerance for increasing ammonia levels (Chen et al., 2008). At high ammonia concentrations methane is formed via syntrophic acetate oxidation and hydrogenotrophic methanogensis due to a higher sensitivity of aceticlastic methanogens towards ammonia (Banks et al., 2012; Schnürer and Nordberg, 2008). During the mono-addition of 6.0 g L-1 NH4+ one third of

the total biogas was produced within the first 20 days before the biogas production stopped for 25 days (Figure 1B). This indicates that mainly the methanogenic activity was influenced by the high ammonia concentrations, but the methanogenic community adapted to the high ammonia levels in the course of the experiment. However, during co-addition of Na+ and NH4+ the whole microbial

community was affected by the high concentrations and consequently a slightly negative biogas production was observed for up to 14 days in the beginning of the experiment. Due to Na+ addition

(5)

the whole microbial community adapted faster to the inhibitory concentrations as during the mono-addition of NH4+ indicating potential synergetic effects in the co-presence of Na+ and NH4+. Still,

the final biogas yield of the co-addition (6.0 g L-1) was 8% lower than during mono-addition of NH4+ (6.0 g L-1). Accordingly, more energy is consumed by the microbial community probably for

growth of new organisms or ion pumps to withstand the osmotic pressure.

The results showed on the one hand that Na+ appeared to be limiting due to an improved biogas

production after addition of 1.5 g L-1 during the relevant first 30 days of digestion. On the other hand, Na+ showed a beneficial impact on the adaptability of the microbial community during inhibition at high ammonia concentrations. Here further ratios between Na+ and NH4+ need to be

evaluated. Additionally, genomic analysis tools can be used to identify microbial community dynamics and favoured pathways during process imbalances.

REFERENCES

Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B.K., 1993. Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of livestock waste: the effect of ammonia. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 38, 560-564.

Banks, C.J., Zhang, Y., Jiang, Y., Heaven, S., 2012. Trace element requirements for stable food waste digestion at elevated ammonia concentrations. Bioresour. Technol. 104, 127–135.

Chen, Y., Cheng, J.J., Creamer, K.S., 2008. Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: A review. Bioresour. Technol. 99, 4044–4064.

Schnürer, A., Nordberg, Å., 2008. Ammonia, a selective agent for methane production by syntrophic acetate oxidation at mesophilic temperature. Water Sci. Technol. 57, 735-740.

Schwede, S., Rehman, Z.-U., Gerber, M., Theiss, C., Span, R., 2013. Effects of thermal pretreatment on anaerobic digestion of Nannochloropsis salina biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 143, 505–511.

Figure

Figure 1. Biogas yields during anaerobic digestion of microcrystalline cellulose with addition of different  Na +  (A), NH 4 +  (B) and Na + /NH 4 +  (C) concentrations

References

Related documents

Pavan, “Application of the IWA ADM1 model to simulate anaerobic co-digestion of organic waste with waste activated sludge in mesophilic condition,” Bioresource Technology, vol..

Om det nu är så, att fram till år 2000 det har varit den tänkta motståndarens teknologiska nivå och utveckling som har varit styrande för de egna ytstridskrafterna - vad händer

Vad gäller bilagan med moderns uppgifter så är dessa att anse som bestyrkta, men det finns inga dateringar som anger att utredarna tagit del av bilagan FÖRE bedömningarna formuleras,

Administrationsdelen är den andra delen av bokningssystemet där administratörer har tillgång till hantering av förare via ett register och visande av statistik avseende körningar

Studien gav en ökad förståelse för att det ställs stora krav på en sjuksköterska som möter svårt sjuka barn på akutmottagningen. De ska kunna skapa en relation med barn

The purpose of this study is to explore how experienced student writers in Swedish schools handle two different writing tasks, a lab report in physics and a text to be written

4.2 Impact of shifts in wood raw materials and bleaching for pulp production on the AD process and the biomethane production The substantially higher biomethane

TEMA - Department of Thematic Studies, Environmental Change Linköping University. SE-581 83 Linköping,