Upload
trinhliem
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Treatment of animal waste in co-digestion biogas plants in
Sweden
Åke NordbergJTI - Swedish Institute of Agricultural
and Environmental Engineering
Disposition
• Implementation of ABP co-digestion in Sweden
• Laboratory and pilot studies on AD of slaughterhouse waste/animal by-products
• Experiences from Linköping biogas plant
• Hygienisation control
Uppsala
Kalmar
Kristianstad
Linköping
Helsingborg
Laholm
�
�
� � �
�
� Vänersborg
Existing biogas plants approved
for ABP co-digestion
Swedish co-digestion plants treating animal by-products
Solid digestate
Slurry organic fertiliser
Slurry organic fertiliser
Slurry organic fertiliser
Slurry organic fertiliser
Slurry organic fertiliser
Slurry organic fertiliser
Digestate
Heat, vehicle fuelThermophilicVänersborg
Vehicle fuelThermophilicUppsala
Vehicle fuelMesophilicLinköping
Upgraded gas to gridMesophilicLaholm
Heat, vehicle fuelMesophilicKristianstad
Vehicle fuelThermophilicKalmar
Heat, electricity, vehicle fuelMesophilicHelsingborg
Gas utilisationTemperaturePlant
Summary of capacity and treated waste in Swedish biogas plants* 2002 (m3)
219 004 m3
5 609 m3
5 745 m3
26 676 m3
96 923 m3
2 873 m3
14 545 m3
67 476 m3
124 000 m3
219 004 m3
300 000 m3
100 %
3 %
3 %
12 %
44 %
1 %
6 %
31 %
+41 %
73 %
100 %
Total amount of substrate
Water
Other organic waste
Waste from other food industry
Slaughterhouse waste
Source-sorted from restaurants, shops etc
Source-sorted household waste
Manure
Planned increase of treatment capacity
Used capacity
Treatment capacity
*7 ABP-approved biogas plants
Slaughterhouse waste in Sweden-legislation background
• 1988 (SFS 1988:537)– Meat meal from carcasses not allowed in
animal fodder• 1991 (LSFS 1990:51)
– Use of low-risk animal by-products in ruminant fodder prohibited in 1991
Calculated average quantity and composition of waste and by-products from slaughter of cattle
0,805,368270TOTAL
0,020,215Animal high risk
0,010,5319Blood
0,181,11538SRM
0,523,339116Animal low risk excl. blood
0,070,21092Rumen, stomach and intestinal content
PhosphorusNitrogenTSWeightCattle slaughter (kg/cattle)
Calculated average quantity and composition of waste and by-products from slaughter of cattle
0,805,368270TOTAL
0,020,215Animal high risk
0,010,5319Blood
0,181,11538SRM
0,523,339116Animal low risk excl. blood
0,070,21092Rumen, stomach and intestinal content
PhosphorusNitrogenTSWeightCattle slaughter (kg/cattle)
Calculated average quantity and composition of waste and by-products from slaughter of pig
0,1000,606,928TOTAL
0,0050,030,31Animal high risk
0,0010,080,63Blood
0,0790,475,217Animal low risk excl. blood
0,0150,020,77Stomach and intestinal content
PhosphorusNitrogenTSWeightPig slaughter (kg/pig)
Methane yields (batch digestion)
Waste fraction Methane yield(m3 ton-1)
Animal by-products (pasteurised) 225
Animal by-products (not pasteurised) 56
Slaughterhouse waste mixture 160
Source-sorted household waste 130
Manure 13
Calculated methane potential from slaughter of cattle and pigs divided into different waste fractions (% of total methane potential)
and the total amount (MJ or kWh per animal).
Rumen, stomach and intestinal content
Animal low risk (meat and bone)
SRM* Blood Animal high risk (average)
Total
% of tot % of tot % of tot % of tot % of tot MJ/animal kWh/animal
Cattle 9 62 21 5 3 1300 361
Pig 6 82 - 8 4 140 39
* Specified risk material (SRM) shall go to an incineration plant or after a pre-processing to burial in an approved landfill site (Commission Decision 2000/418/EC).
Description of the average waste mixtures (WM) wet weight composition, dry matter and nitrogen content used in the laboratory and pilot study
Process Animal by-products1
Stomach content & sludge2
Food waste
Dilution Liquid manure
DM in WM Nitrogenin WM
% of WM % of WM % of WM % of WM % of WM % of weight % of DM
Lab 13 21 14 51 - 11 5.9
Pilot 15 28 - 15 42 12 6.0
1) Animal by-products and blood. Animal by-products used for the continuous digestion experiments came from a rendering plant. At the rendering plant the animal by-products were crushed, minced and heat-treated (at minimum 133 oC and 3 bar for a minimum period of 20 minutes).2) Includes rumen, stomach and intestinal content from slaughtered animal and sludge from slaughterhouse wastewater treatment.
Data from laboratory and pilot digestion experiments
Process Oper.timedays
HRT
days
OLR
g VS/l,d
pH NH4-N
g/l
NH4N/TKN
%
CO2% biogas
m3 biogas/kg VS
m3 methane/ ton waste
Lab 84 40 2.5 8.0 5.0 75 28 0.86 62
Pilot 182 35 3.2 8,0 4.5 65 30 0.70 55
Linköping biogas plant 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002Slaughterhouse waste High-risk waste t/year 2 830 7 094 10 785 8 243 0 0Low-risk waste -Animal by-products -Blood -Sludge t/year 4 129 9 588 10 881 19 840 31 827 37 432Rumen, stomach and intestinal content
Manure from stables Process water Liquid manure t/year 7 404 23 953 9 033 8 647 2 318 4 677Other t/year 0 7 430 6 784 10 547 9 583 8 394TOTAL t/year 14 363 48 065 37 483 47 277 43 728 50 503 Biogas production m3/year 2 600 000 3 700 000 3 300 000 4 400 000 5 300 000Biogas production GWh/year 18 25 22 30 36
m3 biogas /m3 waste 54 99 70 101 105m3 methane /m3 waste 37 67 47 68 71
Linköping biogas plant
• Operational data for digesters (2x3700 m3)– HRT: ca 45 d– TS-concentration: 4.7%– pH: 8.0– Ammonia-nitrogen: 4.5 g/l– Total nitrogen: 6.7 g/l– VFA: ca 1-3 g/l– Methane concentration: 68%
Quality assurance and certification system
• Absence of existing legislation � voluntary system• Requirements
– Input material and waste supplier– Collection and reception of waste– Treatment process– End product– Labelling and specification
• Procedure– Application– Qualification year– Certificate – Self control– Official control and testing
http://www.sp.se/cert/cert_prod/spcr/spcr120.pdf
Hygienisation Control• Microbiological analysis of digestate
– Salmonella– Enterobacteriaceae– Faecal Streptococci (4 log10-units reduction)
• Technical inspection of the plant– Focused on critical control points. Questionnaire
with 25 questions for description and judgement• Technical design and function• Operation and maintenance• Transport
Technical design and functionIncludes following issues:
• appropriate flow sheets, documents available• Internal transport of material in closed system• “clean” and “dirty” zones• possibility to lead content in the hygienisation tank
back to pre-storage in case of malfunctioning sanitation
• risk of cross flow of “clean” and “dirty” slurries• size reduction of incoming material
Operation and maintenance Includes following issues:
• operation instructions available• personnel with relevant knowledge and education• Monitoring and alert-functions, control and
documentation during operation (temp, holding time; stirring; valves)
• routines for handling disturbances in sanitation• action plan if un-sanitised material ends up in digester• routines for avoidance of vector animals• established contact with local sanitation expert• plans for maintenance and renewing equipment• cleaning routines for incoming area• calibration of instruments
TransportIncludes following issues:• avoidance of contamination of hygienised
material by incoming material• cleaning/disinfection of vehicles inside and
outside• clear instructions regarding cleaning• handling of cleaning water from vehicles and
surfaces
Criteria for approval• Approved system for self-control• Microbiological criteria fulfilled• Technical inspection:
– Major deviations – not approved• e.g. technical solutions leading to insufficient sanitation
– Minor deviation – plant can be approved ifdeviations are corrected within 3 months
• e.g. missing operation- and control routines
Birgitta Strandberg, Linköping Biogas AB, has kindly provided the information on Linköping biogas plant
Acknowledgement
Linköping biogas plant
• Digestate– ~50 000 t/y– ~3000 ha farmland– Certificate in March
2003
Linköping Certification system 1)
Total solids % wet weight
4.7
Volatile solids % of TS 79 Tot N kg/m3 6.7 Ammonia-N kg/m3 4.5 P kg/m3 0.7 K kg/m3 1.0 Pb mg/kg TS <3 100 Cd mg/kg TS ~0.13 1 Cu mg/kg TS 91 100 2) Cr mg/kg TS 7.8 100 Hg mg/kg TS ~0.05 1 Ni mg/kg TS 8.3 50 Zn mg/kg TS 330 300 2)
1) Eco-Label criteria for soil improvers.2) Transition period for Cu and Zn. Until 2003,
max Cu 600mg/kg TS and Zn max 800 mg/kg TS.
Incentives for implementation of biogas technology
Political ambitions• 75% of phosphorous in waste and wastewater should
be recycled to arable land in 2010• 50% decrease of landfilled waste in 2005 calculated
on 1994 level Environmental committee (SOU 2000:52)
• National CO2-goal: 2% decrease during 2008-2012 on 1990 level Climate committee (SOU 2000:32)
Legislation• Landfill tax (250 SEK [28 Euro] started in year 2000)• Proclaimed ban on landfilling organic waste in 2005
Incentives for implementation of biogas technology
Biogas for vehicle fuel• Most environmental friendly fuel (hydrogen
and electricity not included)• Tax exemptions for 10 years • No subsidies for electricity from biogas
Incentives for implementation of biogas technology
Local Investment Programme [1998-2003]• Investment grants for municipalities(30%)• 7.3 billion SEK (~810 million Euro) allocated for
”sustainable development”- 130 million SEK (~14 million Euro) granted for
“biogas for vehicles” - 340 million SEK (~38 million Euro) granted for
“reduced landfilling”
Climate Investment Programme [2002-2004]• 900 million SEK (~100 million Euro)
Biogas and upgrading plants in Sweden
� Existing biogas plants for co-digestion
Uppsala
Kalmar
Borlänge
Kristianstad
Linköping
Kil
Helsingborg
Borås
Laholm
�
�
� �
�
� � �
�
� Vänersborg
� Filling stations for biogas in Sweden
Uppsala
Kalmar
Stockholm
Kristianstad
Linköping
Eslöv Helsingborg
Göteborg Jönköping �
�
� �
�
� � �
� � Trollhättan
Swedish legislation for anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse waste (SJVFS 2000:166)
• Low-risk material– must pass a pasteurisation unit at 70 °C for at least
60 min, max. particle size: 12 mm• High-risk material
– must pass a sterilisation unit at 133 °C, 3 bar for at least 20 min, max. particle size: 50 mm
Today, high-risk material is blended with SRM at the two existing rendering plants � all waste is considered as SRM and must go to incineration
Linköping biogas plant
• Joint venture:
– Tekniska verken in Linköping– Swedish Meats and Swedish Farmers Association
• Investment cost ca 130 million SEK (~8.7 million Euro), including waste treatment and gas upgrading
• Subsidy from government ca 15 million SEK (~1.7 million Euro)
Linköping biogas plant 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001Slaughterhouse waste High-risk waste t/year 2 830 7 094 10 785 8 243 0Low-risk waste -Animal by-products -Blood -Sludge t/year 4 129 9 588 10 881 19 840 31 827Rumen, stomach and intestinal content
Manure from stables Process water Liquid manure t/year 7 404 23 953 9 033 8 647 2 318Other t/year 0 7 430 6 784 10 547 9 583TOTAL t/year 14 363 48 065 37 483 47 277 43 728 Biogas production m3/year 2 600 000 3 700 000 3 300 000 4 400 000Biogas production GWh/year 18 25 22 30m3 methane /m3 waste 37 67 47 68
Plant Feedstock Temperature Hygienisation Digestate Gas utilisationHelsingborg Slaughterhouse waste,
manuremeso pasteurisation slurry Heat, electricity,
vehicle fuelKalmar Manure, slaughterhouse
wastethermo pasteurisation slurry Vehicle fuel
Kil MSW termo pasteurisation Heat
Kristianstad Manure, slaughterhousewaste, MSW
meso pasteurisation slurry Vehicle fuel, heat
Laholm Manure,slaughterhouse waste
meso pasteurisation slurry Upgraded to grid
Linköping Manure, slaughterhousewaste
meso pasteurisation slurry Vehicle fuel
Uppsala Manure,slaughterhouse waste,restaurant waste
thermo pasteurisation slurry Vehicle fuel
Borlänge MSW meso composting compost Heat
Borås MSW meso composting compost Vehicle fuel, heat
Vänersborg MSW, slaughterhousewaste
thermo pasteurisation soliddigestate
Vehicle fuel, heat
Existing solid waste AD- plants
• Biogas utilisation– 5 km pipeline to bus terminal– Upgrading to vehicle quality (98% methane, 250
bar)– All 64 city busses, 125 other vehicles– Gas price in relation to petrol and diesel price– One bus decrease emissions of nitrogen oxides
with 1.2 t/year and 20 t/year of CO2
Linköping biogas plant