Clean compost: pollution control: during composting of livestock and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
clean compost pollution control during composting of
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Clean compost: pollution control: during composting of livestock and - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Mar 30, 2023 119 likes •532 views

Clean compost: pollution control: during composting of livestock and poultry manure Prof. Zengqiang Zhang College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province, PR China Email: zhangzq58@126.com

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Clean compost: pollution control: during composting of livestock and poultry manure

  • Prof. Zengqiang Zhang

College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province, PR China Email: zhangzq58@126.com

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2018/6/21 2

Contents 2

The concept, principle and influence factors of composting

3

Aerobic composting process and equipment

4

Compost maturity and product quality

5

Composting process example The source, characteristic livestock manure

1

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Huge quantities of soild waste was produced every day， How to deal with them, testing our wisdom and ability

2018/6/21 3

Waste Challenge in China

slide-4
SLIDE 4
  • 2018/6/21

4

Livestock Farming Status in China

slide-5
SLIDE 5
  • 2018/6/21

Livestock Farming Status in China

Source: China Statistical Yearbook ( based on slaughter) 5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

2018/6/21

With rapid development of the livestock industry, the production of manure increased year by year.

6

Livestock Farming Status in China

Source: Zhu et al., 2014.

a b

  • Fig. Amounts (a) of livestock manure in China during 1978 to 2011, and cropland load of

manures in 2011 (b)

Amounts of manure /hundred million (pig equivalent)

Year

a

slide-7
SLIDE 7

2018/6/21 7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

2018/6/21

Nutrient And Pollutant Contents in Livestock Manure

  • A. The nutrient contents in livestock manure

Category

N(%) P2O5(%) K2O(%) Cu(mg/kg) Zn(mg/kg)

Pig Manure

0.2~5.19 0.39~9.05 0.94~6.65 12.1~1742 40.5~2287

Cattle Manure

0.32~4.13 0.22~8.74 0.20~3.75 8.9~437.2 31.3~634.7

Chicken Manure 0.60~4.85

0.39~6.75 0.59~4.63 16.8~736.5 38.8~1017

Sheep Manure

0.25~3.08 0.35~2.72 0.89~3.00 13.1~47.9 30.2~161.1

Source (Li et al., 2009) 8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

2018/6/21

  • B. Heavy metals contents in livestock manure

Category Cd Pb Cr As Hg Ni

Pig Manure

0.06~2.75 0.71~16.02 0.20~116.20 0.54~88.97 0~0.13 4.03~20.45

Chicken Manure 0.04~1.48 0.92~26.94

0.60~42.75 0.57~66.99 0~0.12 7.44~15.08

Cattle Manure 0.10~1.67 2.11~23.61

0.05~29.04 0.42~5.95 0~0.11 3.73~19.15

Source (Jia et al., 2016) 9

Unit: (mg/kg)

slide-10
SLIDE 10

2018/6/21

Parameter (mg/kg) Tetracycline TTC Oxytetracycline OTC Aureomycin CTC Pig Manure 0.4~78.57 0~524.4 0~124.8 Chicken manure 0~14.56 0~23.43 0~121.78

  • C. Antibiotic contents in pig and chicken manure

10 Source (Wang et al., 2013)

slide-11
SLIDE 11

2018/6/21

Environmental Pollutions of Livestock Manure/ Solid waste

Air pollution

(Obnoxious gases)

Discharge

Water contamination

(Eutrophication)

Soil pollution

(Heavy metals、resistance gens)

Food safety

(Heavy metals)

Pathogens Heavy metals

Antibiotic and resistance gene

Causing bacterial disease

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

2018/6/21 12

Environmental pollution of municipal solid waste

Soil Air Municipal solid waste Water

Eutrophication Aquatic organisms (plastic, toxic elements)

Destroy soil structure

(plastic, rubber) Soil pollution (organic pollutant, heavy metals)

Air pollution

(dust, dioxin, odor)

Enter into Enter into Burning Acid rain

(nitric oxide)

slide-13
SLIDE 13

2018/6/21

The Disadvantage of Traditional Composting

 The emission of greenhouse gas CH4、N2O  The Nitrogen loss NH3, N2O  High mobility of heavy metals Cu、Zn、Cd、Pb、As  Low degree of humification Humus 、Humic acid、fulvic acid

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Households Small community, etc. Small city, etc. Domestic composter Commercial composter Centralized composting facility Centralized composting facility

14

Composting is one of the possible opportunities for Solid Waste management

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Accumulation

  • f VFA

pH decrease Inhibition of microbial activities Less degradation Methane emission

 Thermo acidophilic stage

  • Reduced pH
  • Acidic odour
  • Microbial inhibition
  • Reduced composting efficiency
  • Huge quantity of GHGs emission

 Controlling the acidity

  • Improves the composting
  • Prevents acidic odour
  • Requires alkaline substances

 However, increased pH results

  • Ammonia/ nitrous oxide emission
  • Reduce the N content of compost
  • Increase the salinity

 Resulting in

  • Compost product with low nutrient

content, especially N

  • Higher EC content that affects the soil

application in high quantities

Solid waste pH VFAs

Major Problems in Solid Waste Composting

moisture content 15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

2018/6/21

Improving the Composting Process and Quality of Compost

Optimizing the physical-chemical parameter

Adjust C/N, moisture content, aeration rate

Adding various kinds of additives

Microbial additive, mineral additive, chemical additive

Improve composting pattern

16

Windrow composting, trough composting, fermentation cylinder

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Aims of this study

Formulation of novel feedstock mixture

To evaluate heterogeneity

  • f

additives amendment for total

  • rganic

carbon loss mitigation through CO2 and CH4 emission and nitrogen conservation by N2O and NH4 reduction

To study the relationship between the mechanisms involved in the total gaseous emission, carbon, nitrogen losses and humification of the composting mixtures. The end product quality improvement

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Methodology Formulation of starting mixture

Mixing of additives: Zeolite, Lime, biochar and Ca- bentonite

Monitored the gaseous emission, temperature, pH, moisture, EC, C/N ratio, NH4

+-N, during 0, 3, 7, 10, 14, 21, 28 42

and 56 days of the composting period. Compost maturity was evaluated and compared with HKORC/TMECC compost quality standard.

1 3 4 2

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19

Collection of Sewage sludge and mixing with bulking agents

slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

0.35 L h kg

  • 1
  • 1

Flow diagram of composter

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Wheat straw

Dewater sewage sludge/ manure

Control Wheat straw Days 

Dewatered fresh sewage sludge (DFSS) or sewage sludge (SS) and wheat straw mixed 1:1 ratio on dry weight basis, while additives added on SS dry weight basis; Day 0: 50-60% moisture content Bulk density of the compost mass in the reactor was determined to estimate the compost weight in the reactor ; Continuous thermophilic (55 ºC)

Treatments & Substrate addition

Lime 1% , Zeolite (10, 15 and 30%) and Ca- bentonite (2%, 4% and 10%) 0 1 14 28 56 0 1 14 28 56 0 1 14 28 56 Wheat straw Biochar: 2, 4, 6, 8, 12 and 18%

21

Dewater sewage sludge/ manure Dewater sewage sludge/ manure

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Initial properties of mixing ratio

Parameters DFSS WS Mix Moisture content (%) 81.24±1.85 10.43±0.20 56.23±1.45 pH (solid:water = 1:5) 7.27±0.04 4.93±0.14 8.12± 0.05 EC (mS cm-1) (Solid: water = 1:5) 5.10±0.16 0.71±0.03 3.05± 0.03 Total organic matter (%) 79.28±2.18 97.86±2.74 93.63± 2.78 Total organic carbon (%) 41.38±2.40 62.30±2.41 44.89± 1.02 Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (%) 2.81±0.15 0.80±0.03 1.78± 0.05 C:N ratio 14.72± 0.05 77.90±0.25 25.21± 0.12

DFSS (dewatered fresh sewage sludge or biosolids) and WS (wheat straw)

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Parameters Biochar Zeolite Ca- bentonite Moisture content (%) 2.42±0.50 1.23±0.06 1.20±0.10 pH (solid:water = 1:5) 8.78±0.10 8.58±0.02 8.35±0.04 EC (mS cm-1) (Solid: water = 1:5) 0.98 ±0.03 0.14±0.04 0.11±0.08 Total organic matter (%) 96.23±2.84 ND ND Total organic carbon (%) 67.75±1.78 ND ND Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (%) 0.58±0.02 ND ND C:N ratio 116.81 ± 1.43 ND ND

Initial properties of additives

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

Flow diagram of composting process

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Changes temperature and pH during composting

10 20 30 40 50 60 pH 5 6 7 8 9

10 20 30 40 50 60 Temperature (oC) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 DFSS+WS (Control) DFSS + WS + 2%B DFSS + WS + 4%B DFSS + WS + 6%B DFSS + WS + 8%B DFSS + WS + 12%B DFSS + WS + 18%B 10 20 30 40 50 60 pH 4 6 8 10

Composting time (days) Composting time (days) 25

10 20 30 40 50 60 Temperature (oC) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DFSS+WS (Control) DFSS+WS+L DFSS+WS+L+Z10% DFSS+WS+ L+ Z15% DFSS+WS+ L+ Z30%

pH pH Temperature Temperature

a b c d

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

Changes temperature and pH during composting

10 20 30 40 50 Temperature (oC) 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 a Composting time (days)

DFSS+WS (Control) DFSS + WS + 2%Ca-B DFSS + WS + 4%Ca-B DFSS + WS + 10%Ca-B Room

(d) Composting time (days)

10 20 30 40 50

pH

4 6 8 10

Temperature

a b

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

10 20 30 40 50 60

C H 4 em ission (gC H 4-C /kg /day)

2 4 6 8 10 10 20 30 40 50 60

C O 2-C evolution (g/day)

20 40 60 80

DFSS+WS (Control) DFSS+WS+L1% DFSS+WS+Z10% DFSS+WS+Z15% DFSS+WS+Z30%

Composting time (days)

10 20 30 40 50 60

N 2O

  • em

ission (gN 2O

  • N

/k g /day)

1 2 3 4 5 A B 10 20 30 40 50 60

N H 3-N em ission (g/day)

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 C D

Composting time (days)

Gaseous emission

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

10 20 30 40 50 60

CO2-C evolution (g/day)

20 40 60 80

(a)

10 20 30 40 50 60

CH4 em ission (gCH4-C/kg/day)

2 4 6 8 10

(b)

Composting time (days)

10 20 30 40 50 60

NH3-N em ission (g/day)

0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 0.25 0.30

Composting time (days)

10 20 30 40 50 60

N2O-em ission (gN2O-N/kg/day)

1 2 3 4

(c) (d)

Gaseous emission

slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

Gaseous emission

10 20 30 40 50

C O 2-C evolution (g/day)

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 DFSS+WS (Control) DFSS + WS + 2%Ca-B DFSS + WS + 4%Ca-B DFSS + WS + 10%Ca-B 10 20 30 40 50

C H 4 em ission (gC H 4-C /kg /day)

2 4 6 8 10

Composting time (days)

10 20 30 40 50

N H 3-N em ission (g/day)

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Composting time (days)

10 20 30 40 50

N 2O

  • em

ission (gN 2O

  • N

/kg/day)

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5

a b c c

slide-30
SLIDE 30

Pig manure composting/ Gaseous emission

2018/6/21 30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

2018/6/21 31

Pig manure composting/ Gaseous emission

slide-32
SLIDE 32

16SRNA technology for microbial dynamics

(a) (b)

32

slide-33
SLIDE 33

The relative abundance of the dominant bacterial taxonomic groups separated using total 16S rDNA gene sequences

33

slide-34
SLIDE 34

34

16SRNA technology for microbial dynamics

Heat-map of species abundance is clustering; the genus classification position clustering (horizontal) and top 35 genera sample clustering (vertical clustering). Different color means the different relative abundance of the genus in the all seven treatments (red means great abundance).

slide-35
SLIDE 35

16SRNA technology for microbial dynamics

35

The relative abundance of each class based on 16S rDNA sequence analysis. The relative abundance is expressed in percentage and classification tree of complex samples. Different color of circle fan means different sample; the size of the fan means the relative abundance

  • f

proportional size on classification level

  • f samples; the numbers below the

classification name stands for the average percentage

  • f

relative abundance on this classification level in all samples. There were two numbers, the former one means the percentage of all species, the latter one means the percentage of selected species.

slide-36
SLIDE 36

36

Total greenhouse emission (g/kg CO2-eq. DM)

a b

slide-37
SLIDE 37

37

Total greenhouse emission (g/kg CO2-eq. DM)

Treatments

D F S S + W S ( C

  • n

t r

  • l

) D F S S + W S + 2 % C a

  • B

D F S S + W S + 4 % C a

  • B

D F S S + W S + 1 % C a

  • B

Total greenhouse emission (g/kg CO2-eq. DM)

20 40 60 80 100 120 140

slide-38
SLIDE 38

38

  • 1.0

1.0

  • 1.0

1.0

CO CH NH -N N O Temperature TAB TACB TAPB TAAB TVFAB TOM NH -N p TKN DEA PEA AEA CEA XEA PhEA EC TOC GI Soluble C/ N ratio DOC AP DON Nitrate WS-Na WS-K Solid C/N ratio TP TNa TK

H

2 4 3 2 4 +

RDA1: 65.35% RDA2: 16.56%

(a) (b)

Principal Component and Redundancy Analysis

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Conclusions

Higher dosage of biochar and zeolite added treatments significantly reduced the NH3, CH4 and N2O emission by 58.0-65.2%, 93.0-95.3% and 95.1-97.3% as compare to control treatments. Furthermore, it was estimated that the 30% zeolite and 12% biochar could reduce the length of the active phase and enhance the humification with significant reduction of total N loss and GHG emissions. In addition, the RDA and PCA analysis were also shows significant correlation between gaseous emission and nutrients transformation during the composting. Overall, the addition of 12% biochar for composting demonstrated to be a beneficial practice for the management of solids waste.

39

slide-40
SLIDE 40
  • Tel. +86 13609254113

Email: zhangzq58@126.com Web site: http://zhxy.nwsuaf.edu.cn/szdw/szxx/252817.htm

Thank You…

Questions?

40