Menu
Peptide Database
Results
No peptides found
Featured

Use search to browse all 100+ peptides

Selank

Selanc, TP-7

Quick Stats
Studies 114
Trials 11
2025 pubmed

The effect of different carbon materials' addition on the biomethane production from food waste.

Kozłowski. Michał M; Papaj. Bernard B; Sobieraj. Karolina K; Świechowski. Kacper K; Kosiorowska. Katarzyna K; Białowiec. Andrzej A

Key Findings

  • Low‑surface‑area carbon materials (TP and HC) increased biomethane yield by 9‑13% compared to food waste alone.
  • High‑surface‑area biochar (BC) reduced the first‑order methane production rate by 16.4%.
  • Functional groups (hydroxyl, carbonyl, etc.) on TP and HC likely provide extra carbon for the microbes, enhancing digestion.

Practical Outcomes

  • If you’re experimenting with turning food waste into biogas, consider adding low‑temperature torrefied or hydrothermal carbon powders rather than high‑surface‑area biochar. These additives can modestly boost methane output, but the effect is modest and not directly related to any peptide or human health benefit.

Summary

Adding certain carbon powders made by low‑temperature processes (TP and HC) to food‑waste digestion can raise the amount of methane produced by about 10‑13%, while a high‑surface‑area biochar (BC) actually slows the reaction. The boost seems to come from organic groups on the powder’s surface that microbes can eat, not from the material’s surface area.

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a useful process that could be utilized for food waste (FW) management. Previous studies have shown that carbon materials (CMs) could be an important additive for increasing biomethane yield. However, why CMs improve AD is still uncertain. A significant body of research has been dedicated to investigating the impact of CMs supplementation on biogas production. However, this article specifically emphasizes examining this effect concerning the specific surface area and the functional groups (e.g. hydroxyl groups, carbonyl groups, or unsaturated carbon structures) present on the surface of CMs, produced by torrefaction-TP (240&#xa0;&#xb0;C/60&#xa0;min), pyrolysis-BC (600&#xa0;&#xb0;C/60&#xa0;min), and hydrothermal carbonization-HC (240&#xa0;&#xb0;C/60&#xa0;min/6-10 Bar) processes. The analyses showed that the size of the specific surface area of the CMs (TP-7.72 m<sup>2</sup>&#xa0;g<sup>-1</sup>, BC- 115.00 m<sup>2</sup>&#xa0;g<sup>-1</sup>, HC-5.46 m<sup>2</sup>&#xa0;g<sup>-1</sup>), does not correspond to the production of biomethane. The highest biomethane potential was found for CMs with the lowest SSA, precisely TP and HC, equal to 407 and 394&#xa0;mL gVS<sup>-1</sup>, which was about 13 and 9% higher than production from FW as a sole source of carbon, respectively. The FTIR analysis confirmed the abundance of different organic functional groups on the surface of TP and HC, which could contribute to improved AD performance. These organic residuals, as thermal degradation products, could be an additional source of carbon for microorganisms. The addition of BC, with the highest SSA, decreased the first-order biomethane rate constant k by 16.4% in comparison to food waste without CMs, which could be related to the presence of harmful, more complex organic compounds on the surface of biochar.

Study Information

Provider

pubmed

Year

2025

Date

2025-05-28T00:00:00.000Z

DOI

10.1038/s41598-025-02564-0

References

66