Regulatory Promotion and Benefit Analysis of Biogas-Power and Biogas-Digestate from Anaerobic Digestion in Taiwan’s Livestock Industry
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Current Status of Livestock Industry in Taiwan
3.1.1. Statistics of Livestock Industry in Taiwan
Hogs
Cattle
3.1.2. Current Status of Livestock Waste Management in Taiwan
- -
- The first step is the solid-liquid separation. After the operation, the recycled solid material is often collected for composting in the subsequent utilization.
- -
- The second step is called anaerobic fermentation or anaerobic digestion (AD). During the anaerobic treatment, biogas is generated as a valuable by-product. Raw biogas is mainly composed of methane (60–75 vol %) and carbon dioxide (19–33 vol %) [21]. It also contains small amounts of hydrogen sulfide (H2S), ammonia (NH3), and water vapor. In order to prevent damage of biogas utilization units, the desulfurization (H2S removal) of raw biogas is crucial in the subsequent reuses such as fuel sources for the stove, water heater, piglet warming, water pump, electricity generation, automobile, etc. [22]. In addition, the biogas digestate formed during the AD process is another valuable by-product since it constitutes a bio-fertilizer with increased availability of soil nutrients like nitrogen and inorganic minerals. However, the study by Czubaszek and Wysocka–Czubaszek [23] showed a relatively low impact of the emissions of CO2 and CH4 from the field fertilized with biogas digestate on total emission from agriculture.
- -
- The third step is an aerobic treatment. The activated sludge process is used to further treat the anaerobically treated wastewater. The excess sludge generated in this step is dehydrated and directly used as a fertilizer. Occasionally, the spent activated sludge and recycled biosolid generated in the first step are processed into organic fertilizers.
3.2. Preliminary Benefit Analysis of Biogas-to-Power in the Taiwan’s Pig-Raising Industry
- Methane emission factor: 5 kg CH4·head−1·year−1 (equivalent to 11.75 m3 biogas head−1·year−1 based on methane concentration of 65% in biogas) [13].
- Electricity generation factor: 0.626 m3 biogas per kW-h (based on 5500 kcal·m−3 heating value, 25% energy efficiency) [24].
- Electricity purchase charge (FIT): 0.172 US$ per kW-h, seen in Figure 1.
- Global warming potential for methane: 25 (100-year time horizon) [25].
- Methane reduction: 1,223,674 head × 5 kg CH4·head−1·year−1 × 10−6 Gg·kg−1 ≈ 6.1 Gg·year−1.
- Electricity generation: 6.1 × 106 kg·year−1 × 2.35 m3 kg−1 ÷ 0.626 m3 kW-h−1 ≈ 2.3 × 107 kW-h·year−1.
- Equivalent electricity charge: 2.3 × 107 kW-h·year−1 × 0.172 US$ kW-h−1 ≈ 4.0 × 106 US$·year−1.
- Equivalent carbon dioxide mitigation: 6.1 Gg·year−1 × 25 ≈ 152.5 Gg·year−1.
3.3. Characterization of Biogas Digestate in Taiwan
3.4. Regulatory Measures of Livestock Waste Recycling in Taiwan
- -
- Large-sized farms with more than 2000 pig heads or 500 cattle heads will meet at least 5% of recycling wastewater generated in 5 years, and 10% of recycling wastewater generated in 10 years from 27 December 2017.
- -
- Medium-sized farms with 20–2000 pig heads or 40–500 cattle heads will meet at least 5% of recycling wastewater generated in 8 years, and 10% of recycling wastewater generated in 12 years from 27 December 2017.
- -
- Defining the plan for implementing AD-based liquor and digestate as fertilizers for farmlands. It refers to the liquor and digestate generated from livestock excrements, or the livestock excrements collected by the management operator of livestock waste treatment center (or biogas recycling center) after anaerobic fermentation or aeration treatment, and then used on farmlands for fertilization.
- -
- Expanding the scope of suitable users of liquor and digestate from the AD process as organic fertilizers for agricultural lands. In addition, agricultural land is clearly defined as land registered under a general or specific agricultural zone.
- -
- Adjusting the groundwater background values and test items for agricultural soil quality on which AD-based liquor and digestate are used as fertilizers. It means that testing for NH4 + -N in AD-based liquor and digestate, pH, nitrate nitrogen, total phosphorus, copper, and zinc in groundwater, and pH and total phosphorus in soil are no longer required.
- -
- Simplifying the application procedures for reusing AD-based liquor and digestate as agricultural fertilizers. The agricultural competent authorities (i.e., the COA and local governments) have been authorized to determine the minimum number of days for the anaerobic fermentation of livestock waste based on the review of case plan. On-site inspections of the plan for implementing AD-based liquor and digestate as fertilizers for farmlands will be conducted on a flexible basis.
4. Conclusions and Prospects
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Christensen, M.L.; Sommer, S.G. Manure characterization and inorganic chemistry. In Animal Manure Recycling: Treatment and Management; Sommer, S.G., Christensen, M.L., Schmidt, T., Jensen, L.S., Eds.; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, UK, 2013; pp. 41–65. [Google Scholar]
- Tahsee, Q. Manure: Its impacts on environment quality and on soil biota with special reference to nematodes. In Manure: Management, Uses and Environmental Impacts; Dellaguardia, C.S., Ed.; Nova: London, UK, 2010; pp. 49–81. [Google Scholar]
- Food and Agriculture Organization of United States (FAO). Tackling Climate Change through Livestock; FAO: Rome, Italy, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Ho, T.L.T.; Cao, T.S.; Luong, D.A.; Vu, D.T.; Kurosawa, K.; Egashira, K. Evaluation of water pollution caused by different pig–farming systems in Hungyen Province of Vietnam. J. Fac. Agric. Kyushu Univ. 2013, 58, 159–165. [Google Scholar]
- Sorathiya, L.M.; Fulsoundar, A.B.; Tyagi, K.K.; Patel, M.D.; Singh, R.R. Eco-friendly and modern methods of livestock waste recycling for enhancing farm profitability. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2014, 3, 50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pullen, T. Anaerobic Digestion—Making Biogas—Making Energy; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Tsai, W.T. Feed-in tariff promotion and innovative measures for renewable electricity: Taiwan case analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014, 40, 1126–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deublein, D.; Steinhauser, A. Biogas from Waste and Renewable Resources: An Introduction, 2nd ed.; WILEY-VCH: Weinheim, Germany, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Rehl, T.; Muller, J. Life cycle assessment of biogas digestate processing technologies. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2011, 56, 92–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chambers, B.J.; Taylor, M. The use of digestate as a substitute for manufactured fertilizer. In Bioenergy Production by Anaerobic Digestion; Korres, N.E., O’Kiely, P., Benzie, J.A.H., West, J.S., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 359–374. [Google Scholar]
- Prask, H.; Szlachta, J.; Fugol, M.; Kordas, L.; Lejman, A.; Tuznik, F.; Tuznik, F. Sustainability biogas production from Ensiled Plants consisting of the transformation of the digestate into a valuable organic-mineral granular fertilizer. Sustainability 2018, 10, 585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sogn, T.A.; Dragicevic, I.; Linjordet, R.; Krogstad, T.; Eijsink, V.G.H.; Eich-Greatorex, S. Recycling of Biogas Digestates in Plant Production: NPK Fertilizer Value and Risk of Leaching. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 2018, 7, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories; Institute for Global Environmental Strategies: Hayama, Japan, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Hung, C.Y.; Tsai, W.T.; Chen, J.W.; Lin, Y.Q.; Chang, Y.M. Characterization of biochar prepared from biogas digestate. Waste Manag. 2017, 66, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hsu, J.H.; Lo, S.L. Effect of composting on characterization and leaching of copper, manganese, and zinc from swine manure. Environ. Pollut. 2001, 114, 119–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Agrafioti, E.; Bouras, G.; Kalderis, D.; Diamadopoulos, E. Biochar production by sewage sludge pyrolysis. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrol. 2013, 101, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Monlau, F.; Francavilla, M.; Sambusiti, C.; Antoniou, N.; Solhy, A.; Libutti, A.; Zabaniotou, A.; Barakat, A.; Monteleone, M. Toward a functional integration of anaerobic digestion and pyrolysis for a sustainable resource management. Comparison between solid-digestate and its derived pyrochar as soil amendment. Appl. Energy 2014, 169, 652–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Council of Agriculture (COA). Agriculture Statistics Yearbook 2017; COA: Taipei, Taiwan, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Zaks, D.P.M.; Winchester, N.; Kucharik, C.J.; Barford, C.C.; Paltsev, S.; Reilly, J.M. Contribution of anaerobic digesters to emissions mitigation and electricity generation under U.S. climate policy. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, 6735–6742. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Tsai, W.T.; Lin, C.I. Overview analysis of bioenergy from livestock manure management in Taiwan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2009, 66, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dhanya, M.S.; Prasad, S.; Singh, A. Biogas technology for developing countries: An approach to sustainable development. In Bioenergy Production by Anaerobic Digestion; Korres, N.E., O’Kiely, P., Benzie, J.A.H., West, J.S., Eds.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2013; pp. 397–421. [Google Scholar]
- Chang, C.W.; Lee, T.H.; Lin, W.T.; Chen, C.H. Electricity generation using biogas from swine manure for farm power requirement. Int. J. Green Energy 2015, 12, 339–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Czubaszek, R.; Wysocka-Czubaszek, A. Emissions of carbon dioxide and methane from fields fertilized with digestate from an agricultural biogas plant. Int. Agrophys. 2018, 32, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tsai, W.T.; Chou, Y.H. Progress in energy utilization from agrowastes in Taiwan. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2004, 8, 461–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Eum, Y.; Choi, E. Optimization of nitrogen removal from piggery waste by nitrite nitrification. Water Sci. Technol. 2002, 45, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Year | Hog | Cattle | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Buffalo | Yellow/Hybrid Cattle | Holstein | Sum | ||
2007 | 6,620,790 | 3452 | 6986 | 126,689 | 137,127 |
2008 | 6,427,597 | 3599 | 7236 | 123,115 | 133,950 |
2009 | 6,130,003 | 3862 | 7884 | 121,967 | 133,713 |
2010 | 6,185,952 | 3844 | 13,175 | 122,983 | 140,002 |
2011 | 6,265,546 | 3627 | 13,099 | 127,587 | 144,312 |
2012 | 6,008,317 | 2951 | 11,223 | 129,445 | 146,186 |
2013 | 5,806,237 | 2511 | 14,478 | 130,409 | 147,398 |
2014 | 5,545,010 | 2437 | 14,694 | 128,608 | 145,739 |
2015 | 5,496,216 | 2311 | 15,059 | 132,009 | 149,379 |
2016 | 5,442,381 | 2037 | 14,922 | 129,071 | 146,030 |
Scale (Heads) | Farms | Percentage (%) | Heads on Farms | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
1~99 | 2354 | 31.8% | 70,323 | 1.3% |
100~199 | 824 | 11.1% | 124,727 | 2.3% |
200~299 | 404 | 5.5% | 98,567 | 1.8% |
300~499 | 613 | 8.3% | 245,349 | 4.5% |
500~999 | 1528 | 20.6% | 1,156,265 | 21.3% |
1000~1999 | 1067 | 14.4% | 1,488,771 | 27.4% |
2000~2999 | 203 | 2.7% | 494,451 | 9.1% |
3000~4999 | 141 | 1.9% | 530,549 | 9.8% |
5000 or more | 123 | 1.7% | 1,223,674 | 22.5% |
Sum | 7407 | 100.0% | 5,432,676 | 100.0% |
Location | Farms | Heads on Farms |
---|---|---|
Northern Taiwan | 6 | ~19,000 |
Central Taiwan | 10 | ~114,000 |
Southern Taiwan | 39 | ~308,000 |
Sum | 55 | ~441,000 |
© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Tsai, W.-T. Regulatory Promotion and Benefit Analysis of Biogas-Power and Biogas-Digestate from Anaerobic Digestion in Taiwan’s Livestock Industry. Fermentation 2018, 4, 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation4030057
Tsai W-T. Regulatory Promotion and Benefit Analysis of Biogas-Power and Biogas-Digestate from Anaerobic Digestion in Taiwan’s Livestock Industry. Fermentation. 2018; 4(3):57. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation4030057
Chicago/Turabian StyleTsai, Wen-Tien. 2018. "Regulatory Promotion and Benefit Analysis of Biogas-Power and Biogas-Digestate from Anaerobic Digestion in Taiwan’s Livestock Industry" Fermentation 4, no. 3: 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation4030057
APA StyleTsai, W. -T. (2018). Regulatory Promotion and Benefit Analysis of Biogas-Power and Biogas-Digestate from Anaerobic Digestion in Taiwan’s Livestock Industry. Fermentation, 4(3), 57. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation4030057