Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave., Wooster, OH 44691, USA; Environmental Science Graduate Program, The Ohio State University, 3138A Smith Lab, 174 West 18th, Columbus, OH 43210, USA.
Department of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University, Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave., Wooster, OH 44691, USA.
Waste Manag. 2019 Feb 15;85:405-416. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.12.037. Epub 2019 Jan 11.
Solid-state anaerobic digestion (SS-AD) and composting are two potential alternatives to divert yard trimmings from landfills. This study aimed to evaluate the techno-economic feasibility of commercial-scale SS-AD and composting systems (20,000 metric tons (MT)/year) that received both yard trimmings and liquid AD effluent using a modeling software, SuperPro Designer. Both the SS-AD and composting systems were shown to be economically feasible. While their revenues were comparable ($48/MT), SS-AD with digestate drying showed a higher capital cost ($256/MT vs. $84/MT) but a lower non-facility-dependent operating cost ($11/MT vs. $21/MT) than composting. The payback time, internal rate of return (IRR), and net present value (NPV) were estimated to be ∼10 years, 8%, and $0.2 million, respectively, for SS-AD, and ∼4.9 years, 33%, and $1.8 million, respectively, for composting. Digestate drying was necessary to make SS-AD profitable via the sale of byproduct, but it was also the most energy intensive step, relying on heat recovery to reduce costs. Moreover, the economics of SS-AD were highly improved (NPV $2 million) with financial incentives (i.e. investment tax credits), indicating that incentives were critical to the economic feasibility of current SS-AD systems that utilize lignocellulosic biomass. However, renewable identification numbers (RINs) and renewable energy certificates (RECs) had minor effects. Furthermore, the economics of both systems were most sensitive to plant size, tipping fees, and byproduct/compost price. The results suggest SS-AD may be favored for centralized management while composting for de-centralized management of yard trimmings. Alternative ways to valorize digestate should be evaluated in future studies.
固态厌氧消化(SS-AD)和堆肥是将庭院修剪物从垃圾填埋场转移的两种潜在替代方法。本研究旨在使用建模软件 SuperPro Designer 评估接收庭院修剪物和液体 AD 流出物的商业规模 SS-AD 和堆肥系统(20,000 公吨/年)的技术经济可行性。SS-AD 和堆肥系统都被证明在经济上是可行的。虽然它们的收入相当(48 美元/公吨),但 SS-AD 与消化物干燥相比,具有更高的资本成本(256 美元/公吨与 84 美元/公吨),但更低的非设施相关运营成本(11 美元/公吨与 21 美元/公吨)。SS-AD 的投资回收期、内部收益率(IRR)和净现值(NPV)估计分别约为 10 年、8%和 200 万美元,而堆肥的投资回收期、内部收益率(IRR)和净现值(NPV)估计分别约为 4.9 年、33%和 1800 万美元。通过销售副产品,干燥消化物对于 SS-AD 的盈利是必要的,但它也是最耗能的步骤,依赖于热回收来降低成本。此外,SS-AD 的经济状况在获得财政激励(即投资税收抵免)后得到了极大改善(NPV 为 200 万美元),这表明激励措施对于利用木质纤维素生物质的当前 SS-AD 系统的经济可行性至关重要。然而,可再生能源标识(RIN)和可再生能源证书(REC)的影响较小。此外,两个系统的经济状况对工厂规模、入场费和副产品/堆肥价格最为敏感。研究结果表明,SS-AD 可能更适合集中管理,而堆肥则更适合庭院修剪物的分散管理。在未来的研究中,应该评估利用消化物的替代方法。