Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The characterisation of biochar and biocrude products of the hydrothermal liquefaction of raw digestate biomass

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The ease and simplicity of applying the anaerobic digestion technology in the generation of cheap bioenergy has led to its global acceptance as a viable technique for simultaneous value extraction from high moisture containing waste biomass and organic waste management. Crucially, however, the widespread application of anaerobic digestion technologies results in the associated generation of large masses of raw biogas digestate, leading to unintended digestate management challenges. A previous study subsequently investigated the utilisation of the digestate as a sustainable feedstock for bioproduct generation via the incorporation of the hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) technology. As a sequel to the aforementioned study, the present work sought to investigate the characteristic properties of the major products of the hydrothermal liquefaction processing of anaerobic digestate while simultaneously proposing viable and practical uses of these products. Several characterisation techniques such as nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry and gas chromatograph-mass spectrometry were applied with representative HTL products from digestate employed in this regard.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Okoro OV, Sun Z, Birch J (2018) Prognostic assessment of the viability of hydrothermal liquefaction as a post-resource recovery step after enhanced biomethane generation using co-digestion technologies. Appl Sci 8(11):https://doi.org/10.3390/app8112290

  2. Okoro OV, Sun Z, (2019) Desulphurisation of Biogas: A Systematic Qualitative and Economic-Based Quantitative Review of Alternative Strategies. Chem Eng 3 (3):76

  3. Logan M, Visvanathan C, (2019) Management strategies for anaerobic digestate of organic fraction of municipal solid waste: Current status and future prospects. Waste Manag & Res 37 (1_suppl):27-39

  4. Baggesen DL (2007) Veterinary safety in relation to handling of manure and animal by products and the use of biogas technologies. In: Presentation National Food Institute Denmark

  5. Hentges DJ (1996) Anaerobes: general characteristics. In: medical microbiology. 4th edition. University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston, Galveston, Texas

  6. Okoro OV, Sun Z, Birch J (2017) Meat processing waste as a potential feedstock for biochemicals and biofuels – a review of possible conversion technologies. J Clean Prod 142(part 4):1583–1608

    Google Scholar 

  7. Golkowska K, Vázquez-Rowe I, Lebuf V, Accoe F, Koster D (2014) Assessing the treatment costs and the fertilizing value. Water Sci Technol 69(3):656–662

    Google Scholar 

  8. Okoro OV, Zhifa S, Birch J (2019) Thermal depolymerization of biogas digestate as a viable digestate processing and resource recovery strategy. In: Advances in Eco-Fuels for a Sustainable Environment. Wood head publishing Cambridge, pp 277–308

  9. Okoro OV, Sun Z, Birch J (2018) Thermal depolymerisation of digestate for biofuel and biomaterial production. In Proceedings of the 2014th World Congress on New Technologies (NewTech’2018), Madrid, Spain, pp 2019-2021

  10. Biller P, Lawson D, Madsen RB, Becker J, Iversen BB, Glasius M (2017) Assessment of agricultural crops and natural vegetation in Scotland for energy production by anaerobic digestion and hydrothermal liquefaction. Biomass Conv Bioref 7:467–477

    Google Scholar 

  11. Vardon DR, Sharma BK, Scott J, Yu G, Wang Z, Schideman L, Zhang Y, Strathmann TJ (2011) Chemical properties of biocrude oil from the hydrothermal liquefaction of Spirulina algae, swine manure, and digested anaerobic sludge. Bioresour Technol 102(17):8295–8303

    Google Scholar 

  12. ASTM (1998) D2017–98 Standard test method of accelerated laboratory test of natural decay resistance of woods , decay, evaluation, laboratory, natural, resistance and subjected to termite bioassay according to no-choice test procedure based upon AWPA E1–97 (AWPA, 1. West Conshohocken

  13. IBI (2012) IBI biochar standard. Minesota

  14. Domingues RR, Trugilho PF, Silva CA, de Melo ISNA, Melo LCD, Magriotis ZA, Sánchez-Monedero MA (2017) Properties of biochar derived from wood and high-nutrient biomasses with the aim of agronomic and environmental benefits. PLoS One 12(5):e0176884. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. ASTM (2015) ASTM D3176–15 Standard practice for ultimate analysis of coal and coke. ASTM International, West Conshohocken

  16. Channiwala SA, Parikh PP (2002) A unified correlation for estimating HHV of solid, liquid and gaseous fuels. Fuel 81:1051–1063

    Google Scholar 

  17. Gai C, Zhang Y, Chenb W, Zhang P, Donga Y (2014) Energy and nutrient recovery efficiencies in biocrude oil produced via hydrothermal liquefaction of Chlorella pyrenoidosa. RSC Adv 4:16958–16967

    Google Scholar 

  18. Barnés MC, de Visser MM, Rossum GV, .Kersten SRA, Lange JP (2017) Liquefaction of wood and its model components. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 125:136–143

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wu Z, Rodgers RP, Marshall AG (2004) 2 and 3-dimensional van Krevelen Diagrams: a graphical analysis complementary to the Kendrick mass plot for sorting elemental compositions of complex organic mixtures based on ultrahigh-resolution broadband Fourier transform ion cyclotron resonance mass. Anal Chem 76(9):2511–2516

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fryda L, Visser R (2015) Biochar for soil improvement: evaluation of biochar from gasification and slow pyrolysis. Agriculture 5(4):1076–1115

    Google Scholar 

  21. Luo L, Sheehan JD, Dai L, Savage PE (2016) Products and kinetics for isothermal hydrothermal liquefaction of soy protein concentrate. ACS Sustain Chem Eng 4:2725–2733

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chen W-T, Zhang Y, Zhang J, Yu G, Schideman LC, Zhang P, Minarick M (2014) Hydrothermal liquefaction of mixed culture algal biomass from wastewater treatment system into biocrude oil. Bioresour Technol 152:130–139

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vardon DR, Sharma BK, Blazina GV, Rajagopalan K, Strathmann TJ (2012) Thermochemical conversion of raw and defatted algal biomass via hydrothermal liquefaction and slow pyrolysis. Bioresour Technol 109:178–187

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chen W-T, Zhang Y, Zhang J, Yu G, Schideman LC, Zhang P et al (2014) Co- liquefaction of swine manure and mixed- culture algal biomass from wastewater treatment system to produce biocrude oil. Appl Energy 128:209–216

    Google Scholar 

  25. Mullen CA, Strahan GD, Boateng AA (2009) Characterization of various fast-pyrolysis bio-oils by NMR spectroscopy. Energy Fuel 23:2707–2718

    Google Scholar 

  26. Özbay N, Apaydın-Varol E, Uzun BB, Pütün AE (2008) Characterization of bio-oil obtained from fruit pulp pyrolysis. Energy 33:1233–1240

    Google Scholar 

  27. Cheng F, Cui F, Chen L, Jarvis J, Paz N, Schaub T, Nirmalakhandand N, Brewera CE (2017) Hydrothermal liquefaction of high- and low-lipid algae: bio-crude oil chemistry. Appl Energy 206:278–292

    Google Scholar 

  28. Qian Y, Zuo C, Tan J, He J (2007) Structural analysis of bio-oils from sub-and supercritical water liquefaction of woody biomass. Energy 32(3):196–202

  29. Zhang L, Shen C, Liu R (2014) GC–MS and FT-IR analysis of the bio-oil with addition of ethyl acetate during storage. Front Energy Res. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2014.00003

  30. Jena U, Das KC (2011) Comparative evaluation of thermochemical liquefaction and pyrolysis for bio-oil production from microalgae. Energy Fuel 25:5472–5482

  31. Li H, Yuan X, Zeng G, Huang D, Huang H, Tong J, You Q, Zhang J, Zhou M (2010) The formation of bio-oil from sludge by deoxy-liquefaction in supercritical ethanol. Bioresour Technol 101:2860–2866

    Google Scholar 

  32. Karagöz S, Bhaskar T, Muto A, Sakata Y (2005) Comparative studies of oil compositions produced from sawdust, rice husk, lignin and cellulose by hydrothermal treatment. Fuel 84:875–884

    Google Scholar 

  33. Chumpoo J, Prasassarakich P (2010) Bio-oil from hydro-liquefaction of bagasse in supercritical ethanol. Energy Fuel 24:2071–2077

    Google Scholar 

  34. API (2011) Crude oil: CAS No. 8002-05-9. American Petroleum Institute, Washington D.C.

  35. Flagan RC, Seinfeld JH (1988) Combustion fundamentals. In: Fundamentals of air pollution engineering. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, pp 59–166

    Google Scholar 

  36. Demirbas A (2002) Relationships between heating value and lignin, moisture, ash and extractive contents of biomass fuels. Energy Explor Exploit 20:105–111

    Google Scholar 

  37. Al-arenan S, Alkathiri N, Al-Rashed Y, Doshi T, Alfawzan Z, Six S, Yermankov V (2016) GCC-NEA oil trade: competition in asian oil markets and trhe Russian ‘pivot’ east in: energy relations and policy making in Asia. Springer, Singapore

    Google Scholar 

  38. Makinde I, Lee WJ (2016) Reservoir simulation models – impact on production forecasts and performance of shale volatile oil reservoirs. Glob J Res Eng Gen Eng 16(4):53–69

    Google Scholar 

  39. Kayan C (2012) Systems of units: National and International Aspects. Literary Licensing, Califonia

    Google Scholar 

  40. Campbell J (2014a) Simple equations to approximate changes to the properties of crude oil with changing temperature. https://www.petroskills.com/blog/entry/crude-oil-and-changing-temperature#.XeEP4Ogzbcs/. Accessed 2 Nov 2018

  41. ASTM (2013) Standard test method for specific gravity and density of semi-solid bituminous materials (Pycnometer Method)ASTM D70–03 American Society for Testing and Materials International, West Conshohocken

  42. Chintala R, Mollinedo J, Schumacher TE, Malo DD, Julson JL (2014) Effect of biochar on chemical properties of acidic soil. Arch Agron Soil Sci 60:393–404

    Google Scholar 

  43. Thies JE, Rillig MC (2009) Characteristics of biochar: biological properties (Ch. 6). In: Biochar for environmental management. Earthscan, Gateshead, pp 85–105

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rutherford DW, Wershaw RL, Rostad CE, Kelly CN (2012) Effect of formation conditions on biochars: compositional and structural properties of cellulose, lignin, and pine biochars. Biomass Bioenergy 46:693–701

    Google Scholar 

  45. Vantieghem S (2016) Carbon dioxide sequestration by means of biochar: analytical pyrolysis as a stability proxy method. Faculty of Bioscience Engineering: Gent University Gent

  46. Jindo K, Sonoki T, Matsumoto K, Canellas L, Roig A, Sanchez-Monedero MA (2016) Influence of biochar addition on the humic substances of composting manures. Waste Manag 49:545–552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2016.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Goulding KWT (2016) Soil acidification and the importance of liming agricultural soils with particular reference to the United Kingdom. Soil Use Manag 32:390–399

    Google Scholar 

  48. Carmo DL, Silva CA, Lima JM, Pinheiro GC (2016) Electrical conductivity and chemical composition of soil solution: comparison of solution samplers in tropical soils. Rev Bras Ciênc Solo 40:e0140795

    Google Scholar 

  49. IBI (2015) IBI Biochar Standards Version 2.0. International biochar initiative, US

  50. Lenntech (2019) Water conductivity. In: https://www.lenntech.com/applications/ultrapure/conductivity/water-conductivity.htm./. Accessed 11 Oct 2018

  51. Filiberto DM, Gaunt JL (2013) Practicality of biochar additions to enhance soil and crop productivity. Agriculture 3(4):715–725

    Google Scholar 

  52. Nair VD, KR NP, Dari B, Freitas AM, Chatterjee N, Pinheiro FM (2017) Biochar in the agroecosystem–climate-change–sustainability nexus. Front Plant Sci 8.https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.02051

  53. Asad A, Rafique R (2000) Effect of zinc, copper, iron, manganese and boron on the yield and yield components of wheat crop in tehsil Peshawar. Pak J Biol Sci 3(10):1615–1620

    Google Scholar 

  54. Burton LD (2009) Agriscience fundamentals and applications, 5th edn. Cengage learning, New York

    Google Scholar 

  55. Subbarao GV, Ito O, Berry WL, Wheeler RM (2003) Sodium—a functional plant nutrient. Crit Rev Plant Sci 22(5):391–416

    Google Scholar 

  56. Lyu S, Wei X, Chen J, Wang C, Wang X, Pan D (2017) Titanium as a beneficial element for crop production. Front Plant Sci 8:597. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Bojórquez-Quintal E, Escalante-Magaña C, Echevarría-Machado I (2017) Aluminum, a friend or foe of higher plants in acid soils. Front Plant Sci 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01767

  58. Rout G, Samantaray S, Das P (2001) Aluminium toxicity in plants: a review. Agronomie, EDP Sciences 21(1):3–21

    Google Scholar 

  59. EIA (2017) distillate fuel oil U.S. Energy Information Administration, Washinton D.C.

  60. Apex (2015) FUEL OIL NO. 6, Safety Data Sheet. Apex oil company Inc., Missouri

  61. Gaur S, Reed TB (1998) Thermal data for natural and synthetic fuels. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  62. Okoro OV, Sun Z, Birch J (2017) Meat processing dissolved air flotation sludge as a potential biodiesel feedstock in New Zealand: a predictive analysis of the biodiesel product properties. J Clean Prod 168:1436–1447

    Google Scholar 

  63. Feng S, Yuan Z, Leitch M, Xu CC (2014) Hydrothermal liquefaction of barks into bio-crude – effects of species and ash content/composition. Fuel 116(15):214–220

    Google Scholar 

  64. Webbook NC (2016) NIST standard reference database number 69. NIST, USA

    Google Scholar 

  65. Ramirez JA, Brown RJ, Rainey TJ (2015) A review of hydrothermal liquefaction bio-crude properties and prospects for upgrading to transportation fuels. Energies 8:6765–6794

  66. Wu Y, Chen Y, Wu K (2014) Role of co-solvents in biomass conversion reactions using sub/ supercritical water. In: Near-critical and supercritical water and their applications for biorefineries. Springer, New york, pp 69–98

    Google Scholar 

  67. Zhang C, Tang X, Sheng L, Yang X (2016) Enhancing the performance of Co-hydrothermal liquefaction for mixed algae strains by the Maillard reaction. Green Chem 18 (8):2542–2553

  68. Biller P, Ross AB (2011) Potential yields and properties of oil from the hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae with different biochemical content. Bioresour Technol 102(1):215–225

  69. EngineeringToolBox (2003) Fuels - Higher and Lower Calorific Values In: Engineering ToolBox. https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/fuels-higher-calorific-values-d_169.html/. Accessed 13 Nov 2018

  70. Strezov V, Evans TJE (2015) Biomass processing technologies. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  71. Demirbas A (2011) Competitive liquid biofuels from biomass. Appl Energy 88:17–28

    Google Scholar 

  72. Mohammad IJ, Mohammad GR, Ashfaque AC, Ashwath N (2012) Biofuels production through biomass pyrolysis—a technological review. Energies 5:4952–5001

    Google Scholar 

  73. Blanco-Canqui H (2017) Review & Analysis–Soil Physics & hydrology: biochar and soil physical properties. Soil Sci Soc Am J 81:687–711

    Google Scholar 

  74. Buss W (2016) Contaminant issues in production and application of biochar. The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh

    Google Scholar 

  75. Stella MG, Sugumaran P, Niveditha S, Ramalakshmi B, Ravichandran P, Seshadri S (2016) Production, characterization and evaluation of biochar from pod (Pisum sativum), leaf (Brassica oleracea) and peel (Citrus sinensis) waste. Int J Recycl Org Waste Agric 5:43–53

    Google Scholar 

  76. Umesha T, Dinesh S, Sivapullaiah P (2009) Control of dispersivity of soil using lime and cement. Int J Geol 3(1):8–16

    Google Scholar 

  77. Nartey OD, Zhao B (2014) Biochar preparation, characterization, and adsorptive capacity and its effect on bioavailability of contaminants: an overview. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/715398

  78. Barbosa RN, Overstreet C (2011) What is soil electrical conductivity LSU AgCenter pub. 3185, Los Angeles

  79. Epstein E (1965) Mineral metabolism. In: Plant biochemistry. Wiley, New York, pp 438–466

    Google Scholar 

  80. Yang M, Tan L, Xu Y, Zhao Y, Cheng F, Ye S, Jiang W (2015) Effect of low pH and aluminum toxicity on the photosynthetic characteristics of different fast-growing eucalyptus vegetatively propagated clones. PLoS One 10(6):e0130963. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0130963

Download references

Acknowledgements

Special thanks are expressed to Pauline Bandeen and Lisa Bucke of the Micro analytical laboratory of the Department of Chemistry, University of Otago, New Zealand, Ian Stewart also of the Department of Chemistry, University of Otago, New Zealand and Ashley Duncan of the Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago for the use of their facilities for the analysis of samples.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Process Engineering, Stellenbosch University, Private Bag X1. Matieland, Stellenbosch, 7602, South Africa

    Oseweuba Valentine Okoro

  2. Department of Physics, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Oseweuba Valentine Okoro & Zhifa Sun

Authors
  1. Oseweuba Valentine Okoro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhifa Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Oseweuba Valentine Okoro or Zhifa Sun.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Okoro, O.V., Sun, Z. The characterisation of biochar and biocrude products of the hydrothermal liquefaction of raw digestate biomass. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 11, 2947–2961 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00672-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00672-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation