农业废弃物养分循环利用技术模式评估模型的研究进展

doi:10.13287/j.1001-9332.202212.022

应用生态学报 ›› 2022, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (12): 3213-3219.doi: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.202212.022

• 产业生态学与社会生态系统管理专栏 • 上一篇下一篇

农业废弃物养分循环利用技术模式评估模型的研究进展

杨铮^1*, 李宏庆¹, 翟家宁², 张丽华^2,3, 南琼⁴

¹柏林工业大学循环经济与回收技术系, 德国柏林 10623;
²中国科学院沈阳应用生态研究所, 中国科学院污染生态与环境工程重点实验室, 沈阳 110016;
³山东师范大学地理与环境学院, 济南 250358;
⁴浙江大学环境与资源学院, 杭州 310058

收稿日期:2022-07-29 接受日期:2022-09-15 出版日期:2022-12-15 发布日期:2023-07-05
通讯作者: * E-mail: zheng.yang@campus.tu-berlin.de
作者简介:杨铮, 男, 1994年生, 博士研究生。主要从事农业废弃物资源化利用、废弃物处理评估模型研究。E-mail: zheng.yang@campus.tu-berlin.de
基金资助:
德国联邦教育与研究部城市地区可持续发展计划项目“城乡共构”项目(BMBF, 01LE1804A1)、德国联邦教育与研究部“城市同伴”项目(BMBF,01DO17037)、国家留学基金委项目(CSC,201908320362)和中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(XDA2307050305)

Review on the assessment model of nutrient recycling with agricultural residues treatment technologies

YANG Zheng^1*, LI Hong-qing¹, ZHAI Jia-ning², ZHANG Li-hua^2,3, NAN Qiong⁴

¹Chair of Circular Economy and Recycle Technology, Technical University of Berlin, Berlin 10623, Germany;
²Key Laboratory of Pollution Eco-logy and Environmental Engineering, Institute of Applied Ecology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang 110016, China;
³College of Geography and Environment, Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250358, China;
⁴College of Environmental & Resource Sciences, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China

Received:2022-07-29 Accepted:2022-09-15 Online:2022-12-15 Published:2023-07-05

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 农业废弃物的养分循环利用技术模式是实现农业循环经济的重要手段,其评估模型为优化养分循环利用技术提供了重要支撑。本文总结了农业废弃物养分循环技术模式评估框架、评估模型及评价指标、模型的数据源及其不确定性分析,以及模型应用尺度的研究进展。当前,常用于评估养分流动的模型主要是过程数学模型和产业生态学模型。过程数学模型和产业生态学模型在评估结果的可靠性和模拟尺度上存在较大差异,前者主要集中在实验室或中试规模,精度较高;后者可以实现从微观到宏观的多尺度模拟,数据的获取方式导致其具有较高的不确定性。最后,本文对农业废弃物养分循环利用技术评估模型的研究进行展望,提出为了在区域尺度上实现对农业生产系统废弃物资源化利用技术的准确评估,可以将过程数学模型与工业生态学模型相结合,建立可靠的模型框架和数据库,同时,在工厂、农场、村落、乡镇、区域等地理尺度进行模型拓展研究。

关键词: 农业废弃物, 堆肥, 厌氧消化, 过程模型, 产业生态学模型, 养分循环

Abstract: The technology for nutrient resource utilization of agricultural residues is crucial to realizing a circular agricultural economy. The assessment model provides essential support to optimize nutrient recovery and treatment technologies. We specifically summarized research progress in the assessment framework of agricultural residues nutrient recycling technology, assessment models and evaluation indicators, data sources of models and their uncertainty analysis, and the application scale of models. We found that process mathematical models and industrial eco-logy models are the common nutrient flow assessment models. Process mathematical and industrial ecology models differed greatly in terms of the reliability of assessment results and the simulation scale. The former mainly focused at laboratory or pilot scale, with higher accuracy. The latter could achieve multi-scale simulation from microscopic to macroscopic and had higher uncertainty, due to the way its data were obtained. Finally, we provided an outlook on the research on the assessment model of agricultural residues nutrient resource utilisation technology. In order to achieve accurate assessment of waste resource utilisation technology in agricultural production systems at the regional scale, a reliable model framework and database should be established by combining process mathematical models with industrial ecology models. Meanwhile, we should carry out research on model expansion at the geographical scales of factory scale, farm scale, village scale, township scale, and regional scale.

Key words: agricultural waste, composting, anaerobic digestion, process modelling, industrial ecology modelling, nutrient recovery

杨铮, 李宏庆, 翟家宁, 张丽华, 南琼. 农业废弃物养分循环利用技术模式评估模型的研究进展[J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(12): 3213-3219.

YANG Zheng, LI Hong-qing, ZHAI Jia-ning, ZHANG Li-hua, NAN Qiong. Review on the assessment model of nutrient recycling with agricultural residues treatment technologies[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology, 2022, 33(12): 3213-3219.

参考文献

[1] 农业农村部. 农业绿色发展技术导则(2018—2030年) [EB/OL]. (2018-07-02) [2022-09-13]. http://www.gov.cn/gongbao/content/2018/content_5350058.htm
[2] 国家发展改革委. “十四五”循环经济发展规划 [EB/OL]. (2021-07-01) [2022-07-15]. http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/zhengceku/2021-07/07/content_5623077.htm
[3] 刘敏, 王永鹏, 王春燕, 等. “王草-黑山羊-粪肥”生态系统养分循环利用研究. 中国热带农业, 2020(3): 80-84
[4] 缪宏, 杨铮, 王蒙, 等. 螺带-螺杆式搅拌好氧堆肥反应器研制及应用效果. 农业工程学报, 2018, 34(24): 232-238
[5] 缪宏, 江城, 梅庆, 等. 废气自循环利用生物质炭化装备设计与性能研究. 农业工程学报, 2017, 33(21): 222
[6] 马铭婧, 郗凤明, 尹岩, 等. 碳中和视角下秸秆处置方式对碳源汇的贡献. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(5): 1331-1339
[7] Yang Z, Muhayodin F, Larsen OC, et al. A review of composting process models of organic solid waste with a focus on the fates of C, N, P, and K. Processes, 2021, 9: 473
[8] Muhayodin F, Fritze A, Rotter VS. Mass balance of C, nutrients, and mineralization of nitrogen during anaerobic co-digestion of rice straw with cow manure. Sustai-nability, 2021, 13: 11568
[9] Qu J, Zhang L, Zhang X, et al. Biochar combined with gypsum reduces both nitrogen and carbon losses during agricultural waste composting and enhances overall compost quality by regulating microbial activities and functions. Bioresource Technology, 2020, 314: 123781
[10] 李恒, 柯蓝婷, 王海涛, 等. 低劣生物质厌氧产甲烷过程的模拟研究进展. 化工学报, 2014, 65(5): 1577-1586
[11] Oladele SO, Adetunji AT. Agro-residue biochar and N fertilizer addition mitigates CO₂-C emission and stabilized soil organic carbon pools in a rain-fed agricultural cropland. International Soil and Water Conservation Research, 2021, 9: 76-86
[12] Li H, Ke L, Chen Z, et al. Estimating the fates of C and N in various anaerobic codigestions of manure and lignocellulosic biomass based on artificial neural networks. Energy & Fuels, 2016, 30: 9490-9501
[13] Li H, Chen Z, Fu D, et al. Improved ADM1 for modelling C, N, P fates in anaerobic digestion process of pig manure and optimization approaches to biogas production. Renewable Energy, 2020, 146: 2330-2336
[14] Bonifacio HF, Rotz CA, Richard TL. A process-based model for cattle manure compost windrows: Part 1. model description. Transactions of the ASABE, 2017, 60: 877-892
[15] Faverial J, Cornet D, Paul J, et al. Multivariate analysis of the determinants of the end-product quality of manure-based composts and vermicomposts using Bayesian Network modelling. PLoS One, 2016, 11(6): e0157884
[16] Xu F, Li Y, Wang Z. Mathematical modeling of solid-state anaerobic digestion. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2015, 51: 49-66
[17] Urtnowski-Morin C, Tanguay-rioux F, Legros R, et al. Upgrading waste material flow analysis with process models: The case of anaerobic digestion. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2021, 298: 126695
[18] Tully K, Ryals R. Nutrient cycling in agroecosystems: Balancing food and environmental objectives. Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems, 2017, 41: 761-798
[19] Fernandez-Mena H, Nesme T, Pellerin S. Towards an agro-industrial ecology: A review of nutrient flow modelling and assessment tools in agro-food systems at the local scale.Science of the Total Environment, 2016, 543: 467-479
[20] Onoso-bravo A, Mailier J, Martin C, et al. Model selection, identification and validation in anaerobic digestion: A review. Water Research, 2011, 45: 5347-5364
[21] 葛金怡. 颗粒尺度猪粪-麦秸好氧堆肥耗氧速率及甲烷产排机理模型. 博士论文. 北京:中国农业大学, 2016
[22] Li D, Lee I, Kim H. Application of the linearized ADM1 (LADM) to lab-scale anaerobic digestion system. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 2021, 9: 105193
[23] Bonifacio HF, Rotz CA, Richard TL. A process-based model for cattle manure compost windrows: Part 2. model performance and application. Transactions of the ASABE, 2017, 60: 893-913
[24] Pommier S, Chenu D, Quintard M, et al. A logistic model for the prediction of the influence of water on the solid waste methanization in landfills. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 2007, 97: 473-482
[25] Stmartin CCG, Bekele I, Eudoxie GD, et al. Modelling response patterns of physico-chemical indicators during high-rate composting of green waste for suppression of Pythium ultimum. Environmental Technology, 2014, 35: 590-601
[26] Bayram A, Kankal M, Ozsahin TS, et al. Estimation of the carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio in compostable solid waste using artificial neural networks. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin,2011, 20: 3250-3257
[27] Batstone DJ, Keller J, Angelidaki I, et al. The IWA Anaerobic Digestion Model No 1 (ADM1). Water Science and Technology, 2002, 45: 65-73
[28] Sun H, Yang Z, Zhao Q, et al. Modification and extension of anaerobic digestion model No.1 (ADM1) for syngas biomethanation simulation: From lab-scale to pilot-scale. Chemical Engineering Journal, 2021, 403: 126177
[29] Bułkowska K, Białobrzewski I, Gusiatin ZM, et al. ADM1-based modeling of anaerobic codigestion of maize silage and cattle manure-calibration of parameters and model verification (part II). Archives of Environmental Protection, 2015, 41: 20-27
[30] Strömberg S, Nistor M, Liu J. Early prediction of biochemical methane potential through statistical and kine-tic modelling of initial gas production. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 176: 233-241
[31] Payraudeau S, van der Werf HM. Environmental impact assessment for a farming region: A review of methods. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 2005, 107: 1-19
[32] Velasco-Muñoz JF, Mendoza JMF, Aznar-Sánchez JA, et al. Circular economy implementation in the agricultural sector: Definition, strategies and indicators. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2021, 170: 105618
[33] Muhayodin F, Fritze A, Rotter VS. A review on the fate of nutrients and enhancement of energy recovery from rice straw through anaerobic digestion. Applied Sciences, 2020, 10: 2047
[34] Boe K, Batstone DJ, Steyer JP, et al. State indicators for monitoring the anaerobic digestion process. Water Research, 2010, 44: 5973-5980
[35] Wang S, Zeng Y. Ammonia emission mitigation in food waste composting: A review. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 248: 13-19
[36] Molina-Moreno V, Leyva-Díaz J, Llorens-Montes F, et al. Design of indicators of circular economy as instruments for the evaluation of sustainability and efficiency in wastewater from pig farming industry. Water, 2017, 9: 653
[37] Zhang B, Chen B. Emergy-based cost-benefit analysis for urban biogas project. Energy Procedia, 2016, 88: 119-125
[38] Hermann BG, Debeer L, de Wilde B, et al. To compost or not to compost: Carbon and energy footprints of biodegradable materials' waste treatment. Polymer Degradation and Stability, 2011, 96: 1159-1171
[39] Bacenetti J, Fiala M. Carbon footprint of electricity from anaerobic digestion plants in Italy. Environmental Engineering and Management Journal, 2015, 14: 1495-1502
[40] Leip A, Weiss F, Lesschen JP, et al. The nitrogen footprint of food products in the European Union. Journal of Agricultural Science, 2014, 152: 20-33
[41] Saer A, Lansing S, Davitt NH, et al. Life cycle assessment of a food waste composting system: Environmental impact hotspots. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2013, 52: 234-244
[42] Timonen K, Sinkko T, Luostarinen S, et al. LCA of anaerobic digestion: Emission allocation for energy and digestate. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2019, 235: 1567-1579
[43] Schwab O, Zoboli O, Rechberger H. A data characterization framework for material flow analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2017, 21: 16-25
[44] de Clercq D, Wen Z, Fei F, et al. Interpretable machine learning for predicting biomethane production in industrial-scale anaerobic co-digestion. Science of the Total Environment, 2020, 712: 134574
[45] Stanisavljevic N, Brunner PH. Combination of material flow analysis and substance flow analysis: A powerful approach for decision support in waste management. Waste Management & Research, 2014, 32: 733-744
[46] Levis JW, Barlaz MA, Decarolis JF, et al. Systematic exploration of efficient strategies to manage solid waste in U.S. municipalities: Perspectives from the solid waste optimization life-cycle framework (SWOLF). Environmental Science & Technology, 2014, 48: 3625-3631
[47] Laner D, Rechberger H, Astrup T. Systematic evaluation of uncertainty in material flow analysis. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2014, 18: 859-870
[48] Patrício J, Kalmykova Y, Rosado L, et al. Uncertainty in material flow analysis indicators at different spatial levels. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2015, 19: 837-852
[49] Wang Y, Ma H. Analysis of uncertainty in material flow analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2018, 170: 1017-1028
[50] Han JC, Shang F, Li P, et al. Coupling Bayesian-Monte Carlo simulations with substance flow analysis for efficient pollutant management: A case study of phosphorus flows in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2021, 169: 105550
[51] Donoso-Bravo A, Mailier J, Martin C, et al. Model selection, identification and validation in anaerobic digestion: A review. Water Research, 2011, 45: 5347-5364
[52] 余亚东, 陈定江, 胡山鹰, 等. 经济系统物质流分析研究述评. 生态学报, 2015, 35(22): 7274-7285
[53] Birat JP. MFA vs. LCA, particularly as environment management methods in industry: An opinion. Matériaux & Techniques, 2020, 108: 503
[54] 孙畅. 产业共生视角下产业结构升级的空间效应分析. 宏观经济研究, 2017(7): 114-127
[55] Tayibi S, Monlau F, Marias F, et al. Industrial symbiosis of anaerobic digestion and pyrolysis: Performances and agricultural interest of coupling biochar and liquid digestate. Science of the Total Environment, 2021, 793: 148461
[56] Matthews HS, Hendrickson CT, Weber CL. The importance of carbon footprint estimation boundaries. Environmental Science & Technology, 2008, 42: 5839-5842
[57] 喻锋, 李晓波, 王宏, 等. 基于能值分析和生态用地分类的中国生态系统生产总值核算研究. 生态学报, 2016, 36(6): 1663-1675
[58] 魏志标, 柏兆海, 马林, 等. 中国天然草地氮磷流动空间特征. 中国农业科学, 2018, 51(3): 523-534
[59] Wilkinson MD, Dumontier M, Aalbersberg IJJ, et al. The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data, 2016, 3: 160018
[60] 中华人民共和国农业农村部. 农村有机废弃物资源化利用典型技术模式与案例公示 [EB/OL]. (2022-01-04) [2022-08-31]. https://www.moa.gov.cn/xw/bmdt/202201/t20220104_6386233.htm
[61] 翟家宁, 李宏庆, 任婉侠, 等. 市域尺度农村系统氮素流动及污染氮足迹核算——以沈阳市为例. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(12): 4475-4487

农业废弃物养分循环利用技术模式评估模型的研究进展

Review on the assessment model of nutrient recycling with agricultural residues treatment technologies

PDF (PC)

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

参考文献

相关文章 15

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

[1]	蔡肖凌, 杨光蓉, 冯莹, 沈蓉, 赵亮, 林敦梅. 食碎屑动物通过摄食更多高质量的凋落物促进混合分解效应 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(2): 501-506.
[2]	王菲, 周梓涵, 韩冬锐, 王猛, 魏清岗, 骆秀斌, 高瑞, 张卓然, 方经春. 农业灌溉和施肥在陆面过程模型中的参数化方法研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2024, 35(2): 543-554.
[3]	梁晓烽, 王虹, 李玉中, 杨睿, 张冬冬, 周晚来, 戚智勇, 林伟. 沼液与园林废弃物共堆肥下的氮素转化及其微生物作用机制 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2023, 34(7): 1745-1753.
[4]	刘东, 孙剑平, 王莹莹, 宋琳琳, 李靳, 赵星涵, 刘畅, 全智, 方运霆. 工厂化堆肥温室气体排放和氨气同位素特征 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2022, 33(6): 1451-1458.
[5]	杨丹荔, 罗辑, 贾龙玉, 石文博. 青藏高原东缘海螺沟冰川退缩区植被原生演替的氮磷动态 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(5): 1699-1708.
[6]	李威, 黄玫, 张远东, 顾峰雪, 巩贺, 郭瑞, 钟秀丽, 严昌荣. 中国国家森林公园碳储量及固碳速率的时空动态 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(3): 799-809.
[7]	张文明,王旭杰,尹思倩,常馨怡,海龙. C/N驱动优势细菌菌群变化影响堆肥碳氮损失和腐殖质合成 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(11): 4119-4128.
[8]	薛海连, 田相林, 王彬, 孙帅超, 曹田健. 基于过程模型CROBAS的全局灵敏度分析方法比较 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2021, 32(1): 134-144.
[9]	樊华烨, 李英, 张廷龙, 高焕霖, 呼帅. 陆地植被水碳通量模型模拟与数据同化研究进展 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(6): 2098-2108.
[10]	郝珊, 王晨光, 张阿凤, 王旭东, 马笑, 马越. 不同物料配比对城市绿地土壤渗透性及污染物净化效果的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2020, 31(4): 1349-1356.
[11]	王凯, 沈潮, 孙冰, 王潇楠, 魏东, 吕林有. 干旱胁迫对科尔沁沙地榆树幼苗C、N、P化学计量特征的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(7): 2286-2294.
[12]	郭康莉,郑江,冀拯宇,刘晓,朱兴娟,姜慧敏,杨俊诚,张建峰. 连续施用无害化污泥堆肥对沙质潮土活性有机氮组分的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2018, 29(6): 1960-1968.
[13]	储双双, 童馨, 王文瑞, 莫其锋, 陈晓阳, 曾曙才. 污泥堆肥对黄梁木幼苗生长和元素吸收的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(5): 1550-1556.
[14]	李森, 罗雪梅, 涂卫国, 樊华, 苟小林, 杜玉龙, 李玲, 王琼瑶. 保氮剂对水葫芦堆肥进程及氮素损失的影响 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2017, 28(4): 1197-1203.
[15]	于子旋，杨静静，王语嫣，章力干, 常江，郜红建，孙叶笛. 畜禽粪便堆肥的理化腐熟指标及其红外光谱 [J]. 应用生态学报, 2016, 27(6): 2015-2023.