ad as an integral part of manure management - bioenergyfarm 2 · sulfadiazin sulfamethazin...
Post on 06-May-2019
215 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
AD as an integral part of
manure management Michael Köttner
Train-the-Trainer WS 2, Kleve, 29 April 2015
2
Contents:
• 1. Enivormental Aspects
• 2. Application of Digestate
• 3. Digestate Processing
• 4. Treatment Costs - Profitability
• 5. Legal Aspects
5
Biology – properties of different manures
Liquid manure typepH –
ValueC/N Properties
Cattle liquid manure 6.8 – 7 10 – 17• Good buffering capacity
• Rich in methane bacteria
Pig liquid manure approx. 7 5 - 10
• Good buffering capacity
• High proportion of heavy
metals (Zn 700-2000;
Cu 250-760 [mg/kg DM])
Poultry liquid manure 7 – 7.3 approx. 7• Good buffering capacity
• Strong sediment accumulation
Direct digestate application
6
S ubstrate D igestate0
200
400
600
800
1000B ov ine s lurry
Organic
As hes
Water
Kg
/tfr
es
h m
as
s
90
28
93
25
S ubstrate D igestate0
200
400
600
800
1000C orn s ilag e
Organic
As hes
Water
Kg
/tfr
es
h m
as
s
S ubstrate D igestate0
200
400
600
800
1000Wheat (all c rop s ilag e)
Organic
As hes
Water
Kg
/tfr
es
h m
as
s
55
3
42
77
5
18
S ubstrate D igestate0
200
400
600
800
1000R ye (g rain)
Organic
As hes
Water
Kg
/tfr
es
h m
as
s15
2
83
693
29
89
38
49
10
41
Fuchs and Drosg, 2010
Modification of composition for different substrates after passage
through a biogas installation (Peretzky 2008)
7
Environmental friendly (ecologi-
cal) liquid manure management
S&H Umwelt GmbH & Co.
Very big quantities of liquid manure lead to:
Odor impacts during treatment and production Spreading of pathogenic germs Damage of the botanical composition and building of a typical
“Liquid Manure Flora” in the available grassland Worsening of the soil properties Contamination of the ground and surface waters
Biogas technology can not substantially reduce liquid manure quantities. It
OFFERS HOWEVER, different solutions for this problem, thanks to its positive
energy balance from the production of biogas.
8
Impact of selected substrate on
digestate composition Parameter Impact on digestate
Substrate influence
Energy Crops High DM
High organic residue fraction [oDM/DM]
Bio wastes Lower DM
Lower organic residue fraction [oDM/DM]
High slurry fraction High azotic concentration
High NH4-N/TN
High slaughter house waste
fraction
High azotic concentration
High NH4-N/TN
Fuchs and Drosg, 2010
9
Substrate DM oDM N P
Biogas
production Masse loss
[%] [DM%] [kg/t] [kg/t] [m³/t FM] [%]
Agricultural dung
Cowshed slurry 8-11 75-82 2,6-6,7 0,5-3,3 20-30 2-4
Pig slurry approx. 7 75-86 6-18 2-10 20-35 2-4
Cowshed manure approx. 25 68-76 1,1-3,4 1-1,5 40-50 5-6
Pig manure 20-25 75-80 2,6-5,2 2,3-2,8 55-65 7-8
Hen manure Approx. 32 63-80 5,4 - 70-90 9-11
Energy Crops
Corn silage 20-35 85-95 1,1-2 0,2-0,3 170-200 22-27
Rye 30-35 92-98 4,0 0,71 170-220 22-28
Sugar beet 23 90-95 2,6 0,4 170-180 22-23
Fodder sugar beet 12 75-85 1,9 0,4 75-100 10-13
Beet leaves 16 75-80 0,2-0,4 0,7-0,9 approx.70 9
Grass silage 25-50 70-95 3,5-6,9 0,4-0,8 170-200 22-26
Handreichung Biogasgewinnung und -nutzung (2006)
Nutrients content and mass loss fordifferent Substrates
10
Parameter Impact on digestate
Process influence
High fresh water fraction
Higher quantity of produced digestate Lowering of salt concentration Generally less DM
High recyclated fraction
Lower quantity of produced digestate Increase of saltconcentration Increase of DM
Hight inert materials fraction (e.g. sand)Increase of total Dry matter fraction, Decline of oDM/DM
Short residence time
High fatty acid valueHigh organic residues fraction [oDM/DM]Lower NH4-N/TN fraction
One phase or two phases process No significant impact on digestate composition
Fuchs and Drosg, 2010
Impact of selected process on
digestate composition
11
Odor reductionReduction of the odor causing substances (humid acids, Phenols,
Phenol derivate)
Decomposition of organic substance
Decomposition rates oDM: of up to 40%
The fermented liquid manure can pumped and sprayed better compared to
the raw liquid manure
The agitation is reduced before the application on land
Sanitization
The degree of the sanitization depends on retention time, temperature
and applied procedure
Positive changes of liquid manure
properties through fermentation
12
Hydraulic retention time (days)
Rela
tive c
oncentra
tion (%
)
Odor reduction depending on retention time
13
Destroying the weed seeds
The longer the seeds in the liquid manure are exposed to the process and
the higher the temperature is, the more rapidly decreases the germination
capacity
Avoidance of plant corrosion
Improvement of the fertilizer value
The fermented liquid manure has a better short term N-Fertilizer effect
Positive changes of liquid manure
properties through fermentation
14
Reduction of pathogenic germs
1,00E+00
1,00E+01
1,00E+02
1,00E+03
1,00E+04
1,00E+05
1,00E+06
1,00E+07
1,00E+08
1,00E+09
GKZ EBA GCF FCF FKS
Keimart
Rohgülle
Biogasgülle
93,75%
99,90%
Anlage: Laukenmann
Temp.: 38°C
VWZ.: 80 Tage
Typ: Betonfermenter
Datum: Juni 1993
99,98%
99,70%
Messung durch
Institut für
Tierhygiene,
99,98%
Plant: Laukenmann
Temp.: 38°C
HRT: 80 days
Type: Concrete digester
Date: June 1993
Raw l. manure
Biogas digestate
Measurements by the institute for animal hygiene, University of HohenheimGerms Type
Am
ount in
CBU
/g
CBU=Colony Building Units
15
Cattle liquid manure
Biogas digestate
Source: Saxony Regional Office for Agriculture FB LB, Jäkel
Kg/m
3
DM (%) Nitrogen Ammonium Phosphor Potassium Magnesium Calcium pH-value
Mean values of some samples from
cattle liquid manure & biogas digestate
Oberlungwitz biogas plant study case
16
Heavy Metals can not be reduced by the biogas process
Cadmium (Cd)
Chrome (Cr)
Quiksilver (Hh)
Plumb (Pb)
Copper (Cu)
Nickel (Ni)
Zinc (Zn)
Because drymatter content is lowered during biogas-process, in the
corelation the heavy metal concentration rises
After seperation most of the heavy metals content remains in the solid
phase.
Heavy Metal load
17
Certain Antibiotics can be reduced by the biogas process:
Sulfadiazin
Sulfamethazin
Chlortetracyyclin
Oxytetracyclin
Tetracyclin
In a field test in 15 biogas plants an elimination of antibiotics between
digester entrance and exit could be proven.
In the case of Chlortetracyclin the antibiotically inactive Iso-
Chlortetracyclin was confirmed as the main product of elimination.
Antibiotics Degradation
18
Digestate can be spread on the fields
- no hygiene restrictions with animal slurry and plant material
Improved Fertilizer
- avoids nutrient losses
- reduces burning effect on plants
- improves flowing properties
- improves plant compatibility
- improves plant health
- reduces germination ability of weed seeds
Environmentally sound
- reduces the intensity of odor
- reduces air pollution through methane and ammonia
- reduces the wash out of nitrate
- sanitizes liquid manure
- recycles organic residues (co-fermentation)
- can avoid connection costs to a central sewer
5
Use of biogas digestate
20
Digestate storage
After the anaerobic treatment of liquid manure and during the storage nitrogen
losses occur in form of ammonia
Digestate land application
During the application nitrogen losses can be presented in gaseous form
(ammonia) and in mineral form (nitrate)
Liquid digestate processing and
fertilization
21
Trailing Hose Trailing-shoe Injection Splash Plate
Distribution of slurry Even Even Even Very uneven
Risk of amonia volatilization Medium Low Low or none High
Risk of cropcontamination Low Low Very low High
Risk of wind driftMinimal after
applicationMinimal after
application No risk High
Risk of smell Medium Low Very low High
Spreading capacity High Low low High
Working width 12-28 metres 6-12 metres 6-12 metres 6-10 metres
Mechanical cropdamage None None High None
Cost of application Medium Medium High Low
Amount of slurryvisible Some Some Very little Most
adapted from Birkmose, 2009
Example from Denmark summarising the characteristics of
four digestate and raw slurry application methods
22
Fertilizer distributor tractor: strong smell and ammonia emissions, wind-
sensitively
Drag hose tractor: precise fertilization, around 41% lower NH3 emissions
Land application techniques
23
No excessive agitation before the application
Deploy cooled substrate from the final storage
Spread using emission-reducing techniques (drag hose
tractor, etc.), and
Processing the digestate
To prevent the nitrate leaching by liquid digestate fertilization other
measures, besides the type of treatment must be taken into account:
Sufficient storage capacity (at least 6 months)
Periods of application
Quantity of liquid digestate (and thus N-quantity) to be applied
Spreading technology
Measures during liquid
digestate application
24
Sept.-Dec.
Jan.-Feb. March April May June/July August
Inflow in m³ for a daily production of 19,2 m³
2339 1131 595 575 595 1170 595
Taking out in m³ 0 0 1400 4080 0 882 638
Proportional filling in m³ 3179 4310 3505 0 595 883 840
Filling of the endstorage in % with storage capacity of 3500 m³ (=182 days or 6 months)
91 % * 123 % 100 % 0 % ** 17 % 25% 24%
Filling of the endstorage in % with storage capacity of 4800 m³ (=250 days or 8,3 months)
66% 90% ***
73 % 0% ** 12 % 18% 17%
* Around middle December the endstorage would be already 100% full
**Once a year the storage is emptied (+/- 20 m³)
*** 10% buffer for rain water, that accumulates in the silo, and in case
of unfavorable weather conditions at the beginning of march no
digestate can be spread
Example filling level in percent of the total end storage capacity
25
80
155
March-May
July-August
September
Suggestion for digestate distribution in
percent during the course of one year
27
Reasons for processing
digested slurry Saves storage volume (liquid phase)
Surplus of nutrients or lacking area for land spreading Export of nutrients required
Digestate contains 70-90 % of water Removing water saves transport costs
Reduced costs for land spreading
Reduced environmental impacts
Nutrients release in the liquid phase
Reduction of volatile air pollutants
Odor reduction
28
Basic principles of digestate
processing Physical Liquid-solid separation
Membrane technology
Vacuum evaporation
Chemical Flocculation
Precipitation (MAP, Phosphate)
Anaerobic digestion
Composting (aerobe)
Activated sludge process (aerobe)
Nitrification, denitrification
Biological
29
solids: 15 %
microfiltration-concentrate: 20 %
(recirculation into the biogas plant)
reverse osmosis-concentrate: 15 %
(utilisation)
permeate: 50 %
digestate: 100 %
Accumulation of further residues /
side streams
30
1. Partial separation 2. Complete separation
C, P2O5, Norg
N, P
N, K
N,P,K
Elimination of P2O5 Elimination of P2O5 + N
C, P2O5, Norg
Processing strategies
31
Liquid-solid separation
• Screw press
• Decanter centrifuge
• Drying
Membrane technology
Vacuum evaporation
Applied Technologies
32
Liquid solid separation – partial
processing
20-80 % Ptot
10-20 % Ntot
Removal of:
plus: Production of compost
humus balance
Separation of solid contents
always the 1st processing step!!!
34
Parameters Unit
Liquid phase after solid phaseseparation
COD [mg/l] 15 000 – 80 000
BOD5 [mg/l] 1 000 – 15 000
TN (total nitrogen) [mg/l] 3 000 – 8 500
NH4-N [mg/l] 2 500 – 7 500
TP (total phosphorus) [mg/l] 100 – 1 000
PO4-P [mg/l] 50 - 800
DM [%] 1,5 -7
Fuchs and Drosg, 2010
Spectrum of liquid phase composition after solid phase separation from digestate
Example of a waste digestion plant
35
Partial processing
Centrifuge – WLV
Goal: P2O5 elimination
Type of nutrients to
eliminate leads to choice
of technology/ strategy:
P2O5: partial processing
N: complete processing
Source: WLV-Service GmbH, 2006
N: 78000 kg = 100%P2O5: 40234 kg = 100%K: 42843 kg = 100 %
N: 23288 kg = 30%P2O5: 27984 kg = 70%K: 42843 kg = 39 %
N: 55217 kg = 70%P2O5: 12250 kg = 30%K: 25940 kg = 61 %
Examplary nutrient distribution
36
15-20 % DM
approx. 5 % DM in liquid
phase
Removes:
Simple device – often applied
Required coarse material for efficient operation
Wearing part: screen (depending on input matter)
Investment costs:
20.000 - 50.000 €
Liquid-solid separation - screw press
37
30-40 % DS
approx. 1-3 % DM in liquid
phase
Removes:
Higher removal rate
Suitable for subsequent
complete nutrient elimination
Digestate’s properties =
criterium for device selection
Investment costs:
150.000 - 250.000 €Source: www.huber.de
Liquid-solid separation - Decanter centrifuge
38
Liquid-solid separation - Decanter centrifuge
Decanter separation of the mixture digestate/ fats
Value and efficiency of nutrients and liquid manure
Source: Danish agrarian research
Raw manure Fat waste Digestate (fermented
liquid manure) Solid fraction Liquid fraction
Weight portion (%) 97 3 100 7 93
DM content (%) 5,2 41,4 4,2 33 2,3
P (kg/t) 1,2 0,3 1,3 13,4 0,3
N-total (kg/t) 4,8 1,3 4,6 11,7 4,0
NH4-n (kg/t) 3,6 0,4 3,6 3,0 3,6
Org. N (kg/t) 1,2 0,9 2,3 2,6 2,3
NH4-n portion (%) 75 28 79 26 89
Source: Hengdal fermentation gas/Danish agrarian research
FertilizerEfficiency nitrogen
(%)Increase in value per t liquid
manure €
Pig liquid manure 60 - 70 -
Digestate (fermented manure) 65 – 85 0,30 – 0,60
Separated biogas digestate 80 - 90 0,60 - 1,20
39
Water
Partial N-losses
Removes:
Simple technology – mainly applied for sewage sludge
Combined utilisation of solar heat and waste heat
Requires complex control system
Investment costs:
approx. 300.000 €
(digestate from 450 kWel. Plant)
Liquid-solid separation - Solar drying
40
Heat coupled microgas turbine in combination with a solar supported digestate
drying process at the Farm at Karle, Fuessbach, Germany
41
Complete nutrient separationElimination of P2O5 + N
Complex processes, requires
sophisticated technology
High energy demand
Economically viable only at big biogas
plants > 700 kWel
C, P2O5, Norg
N, P
N, K
42
Complete separation - Membrane technology
Anaerobic digestion = best
preparation
Requires good removal of coarse &
fibrous material (DM content ≈ 1 %)
The better AD and solids separtion
were, the better performe the
membranes!
Quelle:www.haase-energietechnik.de 2007
43
Example:
3-MW biogas plant
Vacuum evaporation
source
: ww
w.a
quasy
stem
s-tech
.de
Complete separation –(Vacuum-) Evaporation
44
Complete separation – What isimportant?
High energy demand for generating pressure or heat
utilisation of surplus heat ??
Digested slurry might form crusts on the device
choose technology adapted to digested slurry
Complete removal of particulate substances (> 0,2 mm) before
entering membrane technology or vacuum evaporation
Inaccurate solids removal increases rate of failure
Cleaning & Repair might take days and leads to
increased costs!
45
Output costs depending on
transport distance
Tractor truck with 2 hanger (load capacity every 14t)
Tractor truck with 2 hanger (load capacity every 14t) + 2,5 €/m³ output
cost
Motor truck (25t)
Motor truck (25t) + 2,5 €/m3 output cost
Self-propelled unit for output + retrieval vehicule
Tractor truck with vacum baril
25
20
15
10
5
0
Sp
ecific
co
sts
[€/m
³]
0 20 40 60 80 100
Transport distance [km]
46
Separated material – and now ???
1 substance 2-4 different material flows
Concentrated nutrients might contain high salt loads
Concentrated nutrients allow specific fertilizer mixing
Utilization on own farm (partial nutrient removal)
Marketing?
Marketing channels?
Quality assurance and control
Requires good planning &
strategic partners
48
Technology Energy (kWh/t) Costs (€/m3) Application
Composting of solid manure
5 -50 (for conversion
w. aeration system) 12,4 – 37,2No limitation on
farm size
Composting of poultry dung with pine bark n.s. 8,1 (€/t) Test stage
Anaerobic ponds low n.s. Limited
Biological treatment of pig liquid manure 16 (5,6 % DM) 6,1 Large farms
Ventilation of liquid dung 10 - 38 0,7 - 4Extensive
Experience
Mechanical separation 0,5 – 4 (kWh/m3) 1,4 – 4,2Extensive
Experience
Incineration of chicken dung production 18 (€/t)>130.000
BroilerEvaporation and drying process of Chicken manure 30 (kWh/m3 H2O) > 2,3 Test stage
Additives with pig liquid manure production0,5 – 1
(€/animal) Routine
Treatment costs of animal excrements
49
Treatment costsThe total costs for a decanter separation are about 1,- € per t according todata of a Danish biogas manufacturer. This price in Denmark is profitablefor many large cattle farmers.
A further separation in the evaporator is more expensive (approx. 3.40 €per t). This expenditure should be paid back by saved transport costs andby a better utilization of fertilizer as well as by the improved spreading.
Long distances transportation of manure for the fraction which cannot beused in the surroundings of the enterprise would be more profitable
Economic value of digestate is indicated either as 10 € per LU per year orrelated to the nutrients also e.g. (2008):
55 €/ t N, 56 €/ t P,28 €/ t K.
50
Partial separation - profitabilityFertilizer value inprovement (Source KTBL 2010):
Nitrogen Phosphate Potassium
Cost of nutrients (€/kg) 0,60 0,45 0,35
NutrientsAmount C1
(kg/t)
Value C1
(€/t)
Amount C2
(kg/t)
Value C2
(€/t)
Δ Value C2 – C1
(€/t)
N 9,69 5,81 11,5 6,90 1,09
P2O5 4,97 2,24 13,82 6,22 3,98
K2O 5,29 1,85 8,35 2,92 1,07
Σ =6,14
C1: unseperated digestate; C2: seperated digestate
In areas where P2O
5 is not required, the one step treatment and
external transport make sense and could be profitable.
54
Conclusion
Nutrients = problem (surplus) nutrient separation & export
might be the only solution
But: calculate carefully (expensive technolgy) and be aware that you
might need to market nutrients
Also: which nutrients do you need to get rid off – where are they?(nutrient distribution between liquid and solid phase)
Complete nutrient removal is only viable at big biogas plants - not for
plants < 1 – 1,5 MWel
Rising demand and increasing sizes of biogas plants might lead to
decreasing technology prices
55
Michael Köttner
International Biogas and Bioenergy Centre of Competence IBBK
Am Feuersee 6 • 74592 Kirchberg/ Jagst • Germany
phone: +49. 7954. 926 203 • fax: +49. 7954. 926 204
info@biogas-zentrum.de • www.biogas-zentrum.de
Thank you for your attention!
top related