Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 19, pp 19434–19444 | Cite as

Feasibility of anaerobic digestion on the release of biogas and heavy metals from rice straw pretreated with sodium hydroxide

  • Liqing Xin
  • Zhaohui GuoEmail author
  • Xiyuan Xiao
  • Chi Peng
  • Peng Zeng
  • Wenli Feng
  • Wenxuan Xu
Research Article
  • 154 Downloads

Abstract

The feasibility of anaerobic digestion on the release of biogas and heavy metals from contaminated rice straw pretreated with NaOH solution was studied. The results show that NaOH pretreatment can significantly boost the release of biogas and heavy metals from rice straw using anaerobic digestion. Under the optimal conditions for biomass pretreated 6% (w/w) NaOH with a solid-to-solution ratio of 1:20, total biogas and methane yields of 446.3 mL/g and 263.5 mL/g volatile solids were achieved, which were 22.18% and 41.59% higher than those of the control without NaOH pretreatment, respectively, and the release percentages of Cd, Pb, Cu, and Zn from rice straw reached 86.95–97.69%. The release of heavy metals from rice straw can contribute to both the degradation of lignin by NaOH pretreatment and the utilization/transformation of lignocellulose via anaerobic digestion. The acidification levels and total volatile fatty acid contents significantly influence on the release of heavy metals. Based on the Illumina HiSeq sequencing analysis, the dominant phyla in the biogas residues were proteolytic (Bacteroidetes) and hydrogen-producing (Firmicutes) bacteria, while the growth of Methanospirillum and Methanosaeta in anaerobically digested effluent was promoted. The results revealed that anaerobic digestion combined with NaOH pretreatment is suitable for the disposal of heavy metal–contaminated biomass.

Keywords

Rice straw NaOH pretreatment Anaerobic digestion Heavy metals Microbial community 

Notes

Funding information

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 21577176), the Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 2018JJ4018), and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central University of Central South University (No. 2018zzts057).

Supplementary material

11356_2019_5195_MOESM1_ESM.docx (73 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 72 kb)

References

  1. Adl M, Sheng K, Gharibi A (2012) Technical assessment of bioenergy recovery from cotton stalks through anaerobic digestion process and the effects of inexpensive pre-treatments. Appl Energy 93:251–260.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.11.065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alejo L, Atkinson J, Guzmán-Fierro V, Roeckel M (2018) Effluent composition prediction of a two-stage anaerobic digestion process: machine learning and stoichiometry techniques. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:21149–21163.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-4048-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anderson GK, Yang G (1992) Determination of bicarbonate and total volatile acid concentration in anaerobic digesters using a simple titration. Water Environ Res 64:53–59.  https://doi.org/10.2175/WER.64.1.8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ariesyady HD, Ito T, Okabe S (2007) Functional bacterial and archaeal community structures of major trophic groups in a full-scale anaerobic sludge digester. Water Res 41:1554–1568.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2006.12.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Arreola-Vargas J, Celis LB, Buitrón G, Razo-Flores E, Alatriste-Mondragón F (2013) Hydrogen production from acid and enzymatic oat straw hydrolysates in an anaerobic sequencing batch reactor: performance and microbial population analysis. Int J Hydrog Energy 38:13884–13894.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.08.065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolan NS, Adriano DC, Curtin D (2003) Soil acidification and liming interactions with nutrient and heavy metal transformation and bioavailability. Adv Agron 78:215–272.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2113(02)78006-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cao Z, Wang S, Wang T, Chang Z, Shen Z, Chen Y (2015) Using contaminated plants involved in phytoremediation for anaerobic digestion. Int J Phytoremediation 17:201–207.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15226514.2013.876967 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chandra R, Takeuchi H, Hasegawa T (2012) Methane production from lignocellulosic agricultural crop wastes: a review in context to second generation of biofuel production. Renew Sust Energ Rev 16:1462–1476.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.11.035 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen H, Chang S (2017) Impact of temperatures on microbial community structures of sewage sludge biological hydrolysis. Bioresour Technol 245:502–510.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.08.143 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen Y, Cheng JJ, Creamer KS (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour Technol 99:4044–4064.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.01.057 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Da Silva MLB, Cantão ME, Mezzari MP, Ma J, Nossa CW (2015) Assessment of bacterial and archaeal community structure in swine wastewater treatment processes. Microb Ecol 70:77–87.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00248-014-0537-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Demirel B, Yenigun O (2010) Anaerobic acidogenesis of dairy wastewater: the effects of variations in hydraulic retention time with no pH control. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 79:755–760.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.1052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feng WL, Guo ZH, Peng C, Xiao XY, Shi L, Han XQ, Ran HZ (2018) Modelling mass balance of cadmium in paddy soils under long term control scenarios. Environ Sci-Process Impacts.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C8EM00153G
  14. Gao L, Chen SL, Zhang DY (2017) Advances in modifying lignin structures for largely enhancing high-lignin biomass saccharification. Process Biochem 57:175–180.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2017.04.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guan RL, Li XJ, Wachemo AC, Yuan HR, Liu YP, Zou DX, Zuo XY, Gu JY (2018) Enhancing anaerobic digestion performance and degradation of lignocellulosic components of rice straw by combined biological and chemical pretreatment. Sci Total Environ 637–638:9–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.04.366 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guo JH, Peng YZ, Ni BJ, Han XY, Lu F, Yuan ZG (2015) Dissecting microbial community structure and methane-producing pathways of a full-scale anaerobic reactor digesting activated sludge from wastewater treatment by metagenomic sequencing. Microb Cell Factories 14:33–43.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-015-0218-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Guwy AJ, Hawkes FR, Wilcox SJ, Hawkes DL (1997) Neural network and on-off control of bicarbonate alkalinity in a fluidised-bed anaerobic digester. Water Res 31:2019–2025.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(97)00016-X CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Han XQ, Xiao XY, Guo ZH, Xie YH, Zhu HW, Peng C, Liang YQ (2018) Release of cadmium in contaminated paddy soil amended with NPK fertilizer and lime under water management. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 159:38–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2018.04.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hao H, Tian YL, Zhang HY, Chai Y (2017) Copper stressed anaerobic fermentation: biogas properties, process stability, biodegradation and enzyme responses. Biodegradation 28:369–381.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-017-9802-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang B, Guo ZH, Tu WJ, Peng C, Xiao XY, Zeng P, Liu YN, Wang MW, Xiong J (2018) Geochemistry and ecological risk of metal(loid)s in overbank sediments near an abandoned lead/zinc mine in Central South China. Environ Earth Sci 77(68).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-018-7249-1
  21. Jang HM, Kim JH, Ha JH, Park JM (2014) Bacterial and methanogenic archaeal communities during the single-stage anaerobic digestion of high-strength food wastewater. Bioresour Technol 165:174–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.02.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kamali M, Gameiro T, Costa MEV, Capela I (2016) Anaerobic digestion of pulp and paper mill wastes—an overview of the developments and improvement opportunities. Chem Eng J 298:162–182.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.03.119
  23. Lee SK, Yeoh HK, Chua AS, Ngoh GC (2012) Applying the least squares method for the titrimetric determination of the concentration of VFA. Water Sci Technol 66:620–626.  https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2012.216 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lee J, Kim JR, Jeong S, Cho J, Kim JY (2016) Long-term performance of anaerobic digestion for crop residues containing heavy metals and response of microbial communities. Waste Manag 59:498–507.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.10.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lee J, Park KY, Cho J, Kim JY (2017) Releasing characteristics and fate of heavy metals from phytoremediation crop residues during anaerobic digestion. Chemosphere 191:520–526.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2017.10.072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li YF, Jian S, Nelson MC, Chen PH, Graf J, Li YB, Yu ZT (2016) Impact of different ratios of feedstock to liquid anaerobic digestion effluent on the performance and microbiome of solid-state anaerobic digesters digesting corn stover. Bioresour Technol 200:744–752.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.10.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Liang FB, Song YL, Huang CP, Li YX, Chen BH (2013) Synthesis of novel lignin-based ion-exchange resin and its utilization in heavy metals removal. Ind Eng Chem Res 52:1267–1274.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie301863e CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lin YQ, Wang DH, Wu SQ, Wang CM (2009) Alkali pretreatment enhances biogas production in the anaerobic digestion of pulp and paper sludge. J Hazard Mater 170:366–373.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2009.04.086 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lin Q, De VJ, He G, Li X, Li J (2016) Temperature regulates methane production through the function centralization of microbial community in anaerobic digestion. Bioresour Technol 216:150–158.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.05.046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Liu YN, Guo ZH, Xiao XY, Wang S, Jiang ZC, Zeng P (2017) Phytostabilisation potential of giant reed for metals contaminated soil modified with complex organic fertiliser and fly ash: a field experiment. Sci Total Environ 576:292–302.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Liu MP, Xu J, Keogh PH, Song J, Wu LH, Luo YM, Ke X (2018) Assessment of toxicity of heavy metal-contaminated soils toward Collembola in the paddy fields supported by laboratory tests. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25:16969–16978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mancini G, Papirio S, Riccardelli G, Lens PNL, Esposito G, Mancini G, Papirio S, Riccardelli G, Lens PNL, Esposito G (2017) Trace elements dosing and alkaline pretreatment in the anaerobic digestion of rice straw. Bioresour Technol 247:897–903.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.10.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Negi S, Dhar H, Hussain A, Kumar S (2018) Biomethanation potential for co-digestion of municipal solid waste and rice straw: a batch study. Bioresour Technol 254:139–144.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.01.070 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Nzihou A, Stanmore B (2013) The fate of heavy metals during combustion and gasification of contaminated biomass—a brief review. J Hazard Mater 256–257:56–66.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.02.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Orozco AM, Nizami AS, Murphy JD, Groom E (2013) Optimizing the thermophilic hydrolysis of grass silage in a two-phase anaerobic digestion system. Bioresour Technol 143:117–125.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.05.118 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pellera FM, Santori S, Pomi R, Polettini A, Gidarakos E (2016) Effect of alkaline pretreatment on anaerobic digestion of olive mill solid waste. Waste Manag 58:160–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.08.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pires AC, Cleary DF, Almeida A, Cunha A, Dealtry S, Mendonçahagler LC, Smalla K, Gomes NC (2012) Denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis and barcoded pyrosequencing reveal unprecedented archaeal diversity in mangrove sediment and rhizosphere samples. Appl Environ Microbiol 78:5520–5528.  https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00386-12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rubia MADL, Raposo F, Rincón B, Borja R (2009) Evaluation of the hydrolytic-acidogenic step of a two-stage mesophilic anaerobic digestion process of sunflower oil cake. Bioresour Technol 100:4133–4138.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.04.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Salem ZB, Capelli N, Laffray X, Elise G, Ayadi H, Aleya L (2014) Seasonal variation of heavy metals in water, sediment and roach tissues in a landfill draining system pond (Etueffont, France). Ecol Eng 69:25–37.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2014.03.072 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schultz TP, Templeton MC, Mcginnis GD (1985) Rapid determination of lignocellulose by diffuse reflectance Fourier transform infrared spectrometry. Anal Chem 57:2867–2869.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac00291a027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Shi XC, Lin J, Zuo JN, Li P, Li XX, Guo XL (2017) Effects of free ammonia on volatile fatty acid accumulation and process performance in the anaerobic digestion of two typical bio-wastes. J Environ Sci 55:49–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2016.07.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Siegert I, Banks C (2005) The effect of volatile fatty acid additions on the anaerobic digestion of cellulose and glucose in batch reactors. Process Biochem 40:3412–3418.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2005.01.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Song C, Li M, Jia X, Wei Z, Zhao Y, Xi B, Zhu C, Liu D (2014a) Comparison of bacterial community structure and dynamics during the thermophilic composting of different types of solid wastes: anaerobic digestion residue, pig manure and chicken manure. Microb Biotechnol 7:424–433.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.12131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Song ZL, Yang GH, Liu XF, Yan ZY, Yuan YX, Liao YZ (2014b) Comparison of seven chemical pretreatments of corn straw for improving methane yield by anaerobic digestion. PLoS One 9:e93801.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093801 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Valasatava Y, Rosato A, Furnham N, Thornton JM, Andreini C (2018) To what extent do structural changes in catalytic metal sites affect enzyme function? J Inorg Biochem 17:40–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2017.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Walter WG (2005) APHA (American Public Health Association) standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. 21th. Washington, DC, USA: American Water Works Association, and Water Environment Federation 56Google Scholar
  47. Wirth R, Kovács E, Maróti G, Bagi Z, Rákhely G, Kovács KL (2012) Characterization of a biogas-producing microbial community by short-read next generation DNA sequencing. Biotechnol Biofuels 5:41–56.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1754-6834-5-41 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xiao XY, Wang MW, Zhu HW, Guo ZH, Han XQ, Zeng P (2017) Response of soil microbial activities and microbial community structure to vanadium stress. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf 142:200–206.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoenv.2017.03.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Xie XH, Liu N, Yang B, Yu CZ, Zhang QY, Zheng XL, Xu LY, Li R, Liu JS (2016) Comparison of microbial community in hydrolysis acidification reactor depending on different structure dyes by Illumina MiSeq sequencing. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 111:14–21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2016.04.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Xin LQ, Guo ZH, Xiao XY, Xu WX, Ran G, Wang WW (2018) Feasibility of anaerobic digestion for contaminated rice straw inoculated with waste activated sludge. Bioresour Technol 266:45–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.06.048 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yenigã NO, Kizilgã NF, Yilmazer G (2010) Inhibition effects of zinc and copper on volatile fatty acid production during anaerobic digestion. Environ Technol 17:1269–1274.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09593331708616497 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yi J, Dong B, Jin JW, Dai XH (2014) Effect of increasing total solids contents on anaerobic digestion of food waste under mesophilic conditions: performance and microbial characteristics analysis. PLoS One 9:e102548.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0102548 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Yu Y, Lee C, Kim J, Hwang S (2005) Group-specific primer and probe sets to detect methanogenic communities using quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction. Biotechnol Bioeng 89:670–679.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.20347 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zeng P, Guo ZH, Cao X, Xiao XY, Liu YN, Shi L (2017) Phytostabilization potential of ornamental plants grown in soil contaminated with cadmium. Int J Phytoremediation 20:311–320.  https://doi.org/10.1080/15226514.2017.1381939 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Zhang J, Li W, Lee J, Loh K, Dai Y, Tong YW (2017) Enhancement of biogas production in anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and waste activated sludge by biological co-pretreatment. Energy 137:479–486.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.163 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zhou SX, Zhang YL, Dong YP (2012) Pretreatment for biogas production by anaerobic fermentation of mixed corn stover and cow dung. Energy 46:644–648.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2012.07.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Zhu H, Zhong H, Evans D, Hintelmann H (2015) Effects of rice residue incorporation on the speciation, potential bioavailability and risk of mercury in a contaminated paddy soil. J Hazard Master 293:64–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.03.051 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Environmental Engineering, School of Metallurgy and EnvironmentCentral South UniversityChangshaPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations