Advertisement

Dynamic Thermodynamic Simulation of ADM1 Validates the Hydrogen Inhibition Approach and Suggests an Unfeasible Butyrate Degradation Pathway

  • M. Patón
  • J. RodríguezEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 4)

Abstract

In this work, a dynamic calculation of the thermodynamics of the considered reactions in ADM1 highlighted the role of hydrogen on VFA degradation. In ADM1, a hydrogen inhibition factor based on its concentration is used to represent the same effect. Our comparison of a thermodynamic-based against the simpler concentration-based inhibition factor during dynamic simulations validates the ADM1 approach. Our results also show the need to correct the VFAs Gibbs energies with temperature if a thermodynamic-based inhibition is to be used. The thermodynamics of butyrate degradation under both experimental and simulated conditions suggest the unfeasibility of the reaction and the need for a revision of the current pathway biochemistry.

Keywords

Thermodynamic inhibition Temperature correction Bioenergetics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The Masdar Institute of Science & Technology (SSG2015-0057) and the Government of Abu Dhabi.

References

  1. Batstone DJ, Keller J, Angelidaki I, Kalyuzhnyi SV, Pavlostathis SG, Rozzi A, Sanders WTM, Siegrist H, Vavilin VA (2002) The IWA anaerobic digestion model no 1 (ADM1). Water Sci Technol 45(10):65–73Google Scholar
  2. González-Cabaleiro R (2015) Bioenergetics-based modelling of microbial ecosystems for biotechnological applications. PhD, Grupo de Ingeniería Ambiental y Bioprocesos, Universidade de Santiago de CompostelaGoogle Scholar
  3. Hoh CY, Cord-Ruwisch R (1996) A practical kinetic model that considers endproduct inhibition in anaerobic digestion processes by including the equilibrium constant. Biotechnol Bioeng 51(5):597–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Kleerebezem R, Stams AJ (2000) Kinetics of syntrophic cultures: a theoretical treatise on butyrate fermentation. Biotechnol Bioeng 67(5):529–543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kleerebezem R, van Loosdrecht MC (2006) Critical analysis of some concepts proposed in ADM1. Water Sci Technol 54(4):51–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Rodríguez J, Lema JM, van Loosdrecht MCM, Kleerebezem R (2006) Variable stoichiometry with thermodynamic control in ADM1. Water Sci Technol 54(4):101–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Rodríguez J, Premier GC, Dinsdale R, Guwy AJ (2009) An implementation framework for wastewater treatment models requiring a minimum programming expertise. Water Sci Technol 59(2):367–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Rosen C, Jeppsson U (2006) Aspects on ADM1 implementation within the BSM2 framework. Department of Industrial Electrical Engineering and Automation, Lund University, Lund, Sweden, pp 1–35Google Scholar
  9. Rosen C, Vrecko D, Gernaey KV, Pons MN, Jeppsson U (2006) Implementing ADM1 for plant-wide benchmark simulations in Matlab/Simulink. Water Sci Technol 54(4):11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Zaher U, Rodríguez J, Franco A, Vanrolleghem P (2004) Application of the IWA ADM1 model to simulate anaerobic digester dynamics using a concise set of practical measurements. In: Selected proceedings of the IWA international conference. Water and Environment Management Series (WEMS), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp 249–58Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Masdar Institute of Science and TechnologyAbu DhabiUnited Arab Emirates

Personalised recommendations