• Home
  • Identifying and ranking factors influencing the sustainable development of environmental culture in sports

Share To

Article Url


Manuscript ID : JSDE-2209-1227 (R1) Visit : 134 Page: 91 - 102

Article Type: Original Research

Identifying and ranking factors influencing the sustainable development of environmental culture in sports

Subject Areas : Environmental pollutions (water, soil and air)

omid mohamadalikhan 1 , shahrzad khoramnejadian 2

1 - PhD student, Department of Environment, Damavand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Damavand, Iran.
2 - Assistant professor, Department of Environment, Damavand Branch, Islamic Azad University, Damavand, Iran. * (Corresponding Author)

Received: 2022-09-11 Accepted : 2023-01-11 Published : 2022-12-22

Keywords: Biogas, Phytoremediation, camel dung, Solid Waste,

Abstract :

Background & Objective: Production of clean energy and elimination of waste is one of the priorities of environmentally friendly societies. By producing biogas from manure, biological pollution in the environment can be reduced and energy can be produced. Phytoremediation is one of the ways to remove soil pollutant. The purpose of this research is to investigate the production of biogas from camel dung and phytoremediation waste and also to identify the variables that improve biogas production using the fuzzy AHP method. Material and Methodology: The loading of camel dung in the digester has been done at different mesophilic and thermophilic temperatures (36-37 and 55). The waste from the lead phytoremediation was mixed with camel dung and was loaded in similar conditions. During 1 month of material loading, biogas production was measured. The results have been analyzed using SPSS software. Findings: The results showed that pH plays an important role in biogas production. The first load was low due to low input feed as well as failing to reach the desired digestion operation, resulting in very low digestive pH, which gradually increased as the number of gas production speeds and gas production increased. It was also found to decrease the amount of biogas production as the amount of refined plant was increased. The parameters were ranked using the fuzzy AHP method. Discussion and Conclusion: According to the results, camel dung has a good potential for biogas production. Nitrogen and phosphorus are more important in biogas production and the ratio of volatile solids has the lowest rank according to the fuzzy AHP method. Phytoremediation waste could be used in small amounts.

References:


  1. Saidu Y, Odutola A, Jafali J et al. (2013) Contextualizing the informed consent process in vaccine trials in developing countries. Journal of Clinical Research and Bioethics 4, 141.
    2.
  2. Afazeli, H., Jafari, A., Rafiee, S. & Nosrati, M. (2014). An investigation of biogas production potential from livestock and slaughterhouse wastes, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 34, 380-386.
    3.
  3. El-Mashad, H.M. and Zhang, R. (2010). Biogas production from co-digestion of dairy manure and food waste. Bioresource technology, 101(11), pp. 4021-4028.
    4.
  4. Chhabra, Abha, K. R. Manjunath, Sushma Panigrahy, and J. S. Parihar. "Spatial pattern of methane emissions from Indian livestock." Current Science (2009): 683-689.
    5.
  5. Kargar Borzi, N., & Vali, A. (2017). Production and reproduction characteristics and breeding status of camel in Kerman province. Applied Animal Science Research Journal, 5(21), 81-88. doi: 10.22092/aasrj.2017.114987.1124 (In Persian)
    6.
  6. Ahmadi Asour, A., Saghi, M. H., Khamirchi, R., Vaziri, T., & Rastegar, A. (2013). A Study of the Chemical and Physical Properties obtained from the Composition of Live stock and Poultry Wastes in Biogas System. Journal of Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, 20(2), 222-229. (In Persian)
    7.
  7. Salehi, K., Khazraee, S., Hosseini, F., & Khosravani Pour Mostafazadeh, F. (2014). Biogas Production from Chicken Waste and Sheep Manure in Laboratory Scale. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 16(1), 463-470. (In Persian)
    8.
  8. alidadi H, etemadi mashhadi S, najafpoor A, moheb rad B. Investigation of Biogas Production Process by the Mixture of Landfill Leachate and Animal Waste. J Health Res Commun 2017; 3 (2):44-54. (In Persian)
    9.
  9. Yan A, Wang Y, Tan SN, Mohd Yusof ML, Ghosh S and Chen Z (2020) Phytoremediation: A Promising Approach for Revegetation of Heavy Metal-Polluted Land. Front. Plant Sci. 11:359.
    10.
  10. Stine SW, Pepper IL, Gerba CP. Contribution of drinking water to the weekly intake of heterotrophic bacteria from diet in the United States. Water Research. 2005 January; 39 (1): 257-263.
    11.
  11. Taghinazhad, J., Abdi, R., & Adl, M. (2018). Modeling of Biogas Production Process from Cow Manure with Completely Stirred Tank Reactor under Semi Continuously Feeding. Journal of Agricultural Machinery, 8(1), 159-169. doi: 10.22067/jam.v8i1.57758. (In Persian)
    12.
  12. Sarkheil, H., Azimi, Y., & Rahbari, S. (2018). Modeling environmental air quality assessment using fuzzy logic in the Pars Special Economic Energy Zone (Case study: Assaluyeh, Bidkhon and Shirino regions). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 20(4), 1-16. doi: 10.22034/jest.2019.13698.­(In Persian )
    13.
  13. Monnet, F. 2003. An introduction to anaerobic digestion of organic waste (Final report). Remade Scotland. p.48.
    14.
  14. Mohammed Silwadi, Hasan Mousa, Badriya Yahya AL-Hajji, Shamsa Said AL-Wahaibi & Zainab Zayid AL-Harrasi (2022) Enhancing biogas production by anaerobic digestion of animal manure, International Journal of Green Energy, DOI: 10.1080/15435075.2022.2038608
    15.
  15. Nguyen, N.N., Rana, A., Goldman, C., Moore, R., Tai, J., Hong, Y., Shen, J., Walker, D.W., Hur, J.H. (2019). Proteasome β5 subunit overexpression improves proteostasis during aging and extends lifespan in Drosophila melanogaster.  Rep. 9(1): 3170.
    16.
  16. Kheira BN, Dadamoussa B, Bendraoua A, Mel M, Labed B. Effects of Co-digestion of Camel Dung and Municipal Solid Wastes on Quality of Biogas, Methane and Biofertilizer Production. J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sc. [Internet]. 2020Dec.1 [cited 2022Jul.31]; 40(1):7-17.
    17.
  17. Altaş, “Inhibitory effect of heavy metals on methane-producing anaerobic granular sludge,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 162, no. 2-3, pp. 1551–1556, 2009.
    18.
  18. Quang-Minh Nguyen, Duy-Cam Bui, Thao Phuong, Van-Huong Doan, Thi-Nham Nguyen, Minh-Viet Nguyen, Thien-Hien Tran, Quang-Trung Do, "Investigation of Heavy Metal Effects on the Anaerobic Co-Digestion Process of Waste Activated Sludge and Septic Tank Sludge", International Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 2019, Article ID 5138060, 9 pages, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5138060
    19.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

_||_

  1. Saidu Y, Odutola A, Jafali J et al. (2013) Contextualizing the informed consent process in vaccine trials in developing countries. Journal of Clinical Research and Bioethics 4, 141.
    2.
  2. Afazeli, H., Jafari, A., Rafiee, S. & Nosrati, M. (2014). An investigation of biogas production potential from livestock and slaughterhouse wastes, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 34, 380-386.
    3.
  3. El-Mashad, H.M. and Zhang, R. (2010). Biogas production from co-digestion of dairy manure and food waste. Bioresource technology, 101(11), pp. 4021-4028.
    4.
  4. Chhabra, Abha, K. R. Manjunath, Sushma Panigrahy, and J. S. Parihar. "Spatial pattern of methane emissions from Indian livestock." Current Science (2009): 683-689.
    5.
  5. Kargar Borzi, N., & Vali, A. (2017). Production and reproduction characteristics and breeding status of camel in Kerman province. Applied Animal Science Research Journal, 5(21), 81-88. doi: 10.22092/aasrj.2017.114987.1124 (In Persian)
    6.
  6. Ahmadi Asour, A., Saghi, M. H., Khamirchi, R., Vaziri, T., & Rastegar, A. (2013). A Study of the Chemical and Physical Properties obtained from the Composition of Live stock and Poultry Wastes in Biogas System. Journal of Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, 20(2), 222-229. (In Persian)
    7.
  7. Salehi, K., Khazraee, S., Hosseini, F., & Khosravani Pour Mostafazadeh, F. (2014). Biogas Production from Chicken Waste and Sheep Manure in Laboratory Scale. Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 16(1), 463-470. (In Persian)
    8.
  8. alidadi H, etemadi mashhadi S, najafpoor A, moheb rad B. Investigation of Biogas Production Process by the Mixture of Landfill Leachate and Animal Waste. J Health Res Commun 2017; 3 (2):44-54. (In Persian)
    9.
  9. Yan A, Wang Y, Tan SN, Mohd Yusof ML, Ghosh S and Chen Z (2020) Phytoremediation: A Promising Approach for Revegetation of Heavy Metal-Polluted Land. Front. Plant Sci. 11:359.
    10.
  10. Stine SW, Pepper IL, Gerba CP. Contribution of drinking water to the weekly intake of heterotrophic bacteria from diet in the United States. Water Research. 2005 January; 39 (1): 257-263.
    11.
  11. Taghinazhad, J., Abdi, R., & Adl, M. (2018). Modeling of Biogas Production Process from Cow Manure with Completely Stirred Tank Reactor under Semi Continuously Feeding. Journal of Agricultural Machinery, 8(1), 159-169. doi: 10.22067/jam.v8i1.57758. (In Persian)
    12.
  12. Sarkheil, H., Azimi, Y., & Rahbari, S. (2018). Modeling environmental air quality assessment using fuzzy logic in the Pars Special Economic Energy Zone (Case study: Assaluyeh, Bidkhon and Shirino regions). Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 20(4), 1-16. doi: 10.22034/jest.2019.13698.­(In Persian )
    13.
  13. Monnet, F. 2003. An introduction to anaerobic digestion of organic waste (Final report). Remade Scotland. p.48.
    14.
  14. Mohammed Silwadi, Hasan Mousa, Badriya Yahya AL-Hajji, Shamsa Said AL-Wahaibi & Zainab Zayid AL-Harrasi (2022) Enhancing biogas production by anaerobic digestion of animal manure, International Journal of Green Energy, DOI: 10.1080/15435075.2022.2038608
    15.
  15. Nguyen, N.N., Rana, A., Goldman, C., Moore, R., Tai, J., Hong, Y., Shen, J., Walker, D.W., Hur, J.H. (2019). Proteasome β5 subunit overexpression improves proteostasis during aging and extends lifespan in Drosophila melanogaster.  Rep. 9(1): 3170.
    16.
  16. Kheira BN, Dadamoussa B, Bendraoua A, Mel M, Labed B. Effects of Co-digestion of Camel Dung and Municipal Solid Wastes on Quality of Biogas, Methane and Biofertilizer Production. J. Adv. Res. Fluid Mech. Therm. Sc. [Internet]. 2020Dec.1 [cited 2022Jul.31]; 40(1):7-17.
    17.
  17. Altaş, “Inhibitory effect of heavy metals on methane-producing anaerobic granular sludge,” Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 162, no. 2-3, pp. 1551–1556, 2009.
    18.
  18. Quang-Minh Nguyen, Duy-Cam Bui, Thao Phuong, Van-Huong Doan, Thi-Nham Nguyen, Minh-Viet Nguyen, Thien-Hien Tran, Quang-Trung Do, "Investigation of Heavy Metal Effects on the Anaerobic Co-Digestion Process of Waste Activated Sludge and Septic Tank Sludge", International Journal of Chemical Engineering, vol. 2019, Article ID 5138060, 9 pages, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5138060
    19.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related articles

The rights to this website are owned by the Raimag Press Management System.
Copyright © 2021-2024

Home| Login| About Us| Contact Us|
[فارسی] [العربية] [fa] [ar]