Advertisement

Effects of initial C/N ratio on organic matter degradation of composting of rose oil processing solid wastes

  • K. Ekinci
  • İ. Tosun
  • B. Bıtrak
  • B. S. Kumbul
  • F. Şevik
  • K. Sülük
Original Paper

Abstract

This research study was aimed to investigate the degradability of organic substances of rose oil processing solid wastes mixed with separated dairy manure and straw. The experiment was conducted in 2014. Compost mixtures were prepared at five different C/N ratios of 16.52, 23.27, 27.48, 31.39, and 32.35 by keeping the moisture content (on a wet basis, %) between 67.76 and 74.87. Each mixture was replicated twice in composting reactors. To assess degradation rates changing with the initial C/N ratio, a first-order kinetic equation based on mass balance was utilized. Results showed that the highest decomposition rate was calculated as 0.03 kg kg−1 day−1. For each mixture, the compost mass ratio was also determined. The relationship between loss on dry matter and organic matter content and the initial C/N ratio were ascertained by using regression analysis applying Gaussian equation. According to the results, the maximum loss on dry matter and organic matter content was found to be 14.53 and 24.34%, while the corresponding initial C/N ratio was 29.50 and 24.25, respectively. It was concluded that the initial C/N ratio of the mixture could be greater than 30 in order to reduce nitrogen loss. Carbon loss was also expressed as a function of the initial C/N ratio by using regression analysis. An initial C/N ratio > 21.77 was suggested to reduce carbon loss for composting of rose oil processing solid wastes mixed with separated dairy manure and straw.

Keywords

Dry matter loss Organic matter decomposition Rose oil processing solid wastes Separated dairy manure 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) [Grant numbers KAMAG-111G055/111G149].

References

  1. Bernal MP, Alburquerque JA, Moral R (2009) Composting of animal manures and chemical criteria for compost maturity assessment. A review. Biores Technol 100:5444–5453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bicudo JR, Schmidt DR, Gay SW, Gates RS, Jacobson LD, Hoff SJ (2002) Air quality and emissions from livestock and poultry production/waste management systems. National Center for Manure and Animal Waste Management, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N.C. pp 57Google Scholar
  3. Chowdhury AKMMB, Akratos CS, Vayenas DV, Pavlou S (2013) Olive mill waste composting: a review. Int Biodeterior Biodegrad 85:108–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ekinci K (1997) Evaluation of decomposition rate, airflow rate and ammonia control of sort paper fiber with broiler litter and additives—alum and sulfuric acid. Master’s Thesis, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OhioGoogle Scholar
  5. Ekinci K, Keener HM, Michel FC, Elwell DL (2002a) Modeling composting rate as a function of temperature and initial moisture content. Compost Sci Util 12(4):356–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ekinci K, Keener HM, Elwell DL, Michel FC (2002b) Composting short paper fiber with broiler litter and additives: II-evaluation and optimization of decomposition rate versus mixing ratio. Compost Sci Util 10(1):16–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ekinci K, Keener HM, Elwell DL, Michel FC (2004) Effects of four aeration strategies on the composting process. Part I—experimental studies. Trans ASAE 47(5):1697–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ekinci K, Keener HM, Elwell DL, Michel FC (2005) Effects of four aeration strategies on the composting process. Trans ASAE 48(3):1203–1215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Finstein MS, Miller FC, Strom PF (1986a) Waste treatment composting as a controlled system. Biotechnology 8(3):396–443Google Scholar
  10. Finstein MS, Miller FC, Strom PF (1986b) Monitoring and evaluating composting process performance. J (Wat Pollut Control Fed) 58(4):272–278Google Scholar
  11. Hao X, Chang C, Larney FJ (2004) Carbon, nitrogen balances and greenhouse gas emission during cattle feedlot manure composting. J Environ Qual 33:37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harper E, Miller FC, Macauley BJ (1992) Physical management and interpretation of an environmentally controlled composting ecosystem. Aust J Exp Agric 32:657–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haug RT (1993) The practical handbook of compost engineering. Lewis Publishers, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  14. Jolanun B, Towparyoon S (2010) Novel bulking agent from clay residue for food waste composting. Bioresour Technol 101:4484–4490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Keener HM, Marugg C, Hansen RC, Hoitink HAJ (1993) Optimizing the efficiency of the composting process. In: Hoitink HAJ, Keener HM (eds) Science and engineering of composting: design, environmental, microbiological and utilization aspects. Renaissance Publications, Ohio, pp 59–94Google Scholar
  16. Keener HM, Dick WA, Hoitink HAJ (2000) Composting and beneficial utilization of composted by-product materials. In: Power JF, Dick WA, Kashmanian RM, Sims JT, Wright RJ, Dawson MD, Bezdicek D (eds) Beneficial uses of agricultural, industrial and municipal by-products. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 315–341Google Scholar
  17. Keener HM, Ekinci K, Michel FC (2005) Composting process optimization – using on/off controls. Compost Sci Util 13(4):288–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Larney FJ, Buckley KE, Hao X, McCaughey WP (2006) Fresh, stockpiled, and composted beef cattle feedlot manure: Nutrient levels and mass balance estimates in Alberta and Manitoba. J Environ Qual 35:1844–1854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Larsen KL, McCartney DM (2000) Effect of C: N ratio on microbial activity and n retention: bench-scale study using pulp and paper biosolids. Compost Sci Util 8(2):147–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lopez RJ, Foster M (1985) Plant pathogen survival during the composting of agricultural wastes. Composting of agriculture and other wastes. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Marugg C, Grebus M, Hansen RC, Keener HM, Hoitink HAJ (1993) A kinetic model of the yard waste composting process. Compost Sci Util 1(1):38–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Michel FC, Pecchia JA, Rigot J, Keener HM (2004) Mass and nutrient losses during the composting of dairy manure amended with sawdust or straw. Compost Sci Util 12(4):323–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mohee R, White RK (1997) Parameters affecting decomposition rates of bagasse. In: Stentiford EI (ed) Organic recovery and biological treatment into the next millennium. International Conference, Harrogate, United Kingdom, pp 147–152Google Scholar
  24. Montemurro F, Diacono M, Vitti C, Debiase G (2009) Biodegradation of olive husk mixed with other agricultural wastes. Biores Technol 100:2969–2974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Nakasaki K, Yaguchi H, Sasaki Y, Kubota H (1993) Effect of pH control composting of garbage. Waste Manag Res 11(2):117–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Onursal E (2006) A research on determination of optimum C/N ratio of composting of rose processing wastes (in Turkish). Master Thesis. Suleyman Demirel University, IspartaGoogle Scholar
  27. Paredes C, Bernal MP, Cegarra J, Roig A (2002) Bio-degradation of olive mill wastewater by its co-composting with agricultural wastes. Bioresour Technol 85(1):1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Petric I, Helic A, Avdihodzic E (2012) Evolution of process parameters and determination of kinetics for co-composting of organic fraction of municipal solid waste with poultry manure. Bioresour Technol 117:107–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rynk R (1992) On-Farm composting handbook. Northeast Regional Agricultural Engineering Service, NRAES-54, Ithaca, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Sánchez-Monedero MA, Roig A, Paredes C, Bernal MP (2001) Nitrogen transformation during organic waste composting by the Rutger system and its effects on pH, EC and maturity of the composting mixtures. Bioresour Technol 78:301–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sommer SG, Møller HB (2000) Emission of greenhouse gases during composting of deep litter from pig production—effect of straw content. J Agric Sci Camb 134:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Tosun İ (2003) Compostability of rose processing wastes with organic fractions of municipal solid wastes (in Turkish). Ph.D. Thesis, Yildiz Technical University, İstanbulGoogle Scholar
  33. USCC (2002) Test methods for the examination of composting and composts. Thompson W. The US Composting Council: US Government Printing OfficeGoogle Scholar
  34. Villaseñor J, Rodríguez L, Fernández FJ (2011) Composting domestic sewage sludge with natural zeolites in a rotary drum reactor. Bioresour Technol 102:1447–1454CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agricultural Machinery and Technologies EngineeringIsparta University of Applied ScienceCunurTurkey
  2. 2.Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringSuleyman Demirel UniversityCunurTurkey

Personalised recommendations