What is the potential for biogas digesters to improve soil carbon sequestration in Sub-Saharan Africa? Comparison with other uses of organic residues

Jo Smith, Assefa Abegaz, Robin B. Matthews, Madhu Subedi, Egil R. Orskov, Vianney Tumwesige, Pete Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

14 Citations (Scopus)
4 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Using bioslurry from anaerobic digestion as an organic fertilizer has great potential to increase carbon sequestration by supplying organic matter to the soil. This paper examines this potential in Sub-Saharan Africa compared to other uses of organic residues, including burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves and composting. Measurements of loss of carbon on treatment of organic residues indicate that the proportion of carbon lost from organic residue during treatment is greater for anaerobic digestion than for aerobic composting or pyrolysis. The stability of organic residue is increased by treatment, and is similar for composted and anaerobically digested material, but is higher for material treated by pyrolysis. Simulations using the RothC model, driven by parameters based on incubations of the organic residues with soil, suggest that on the basis of decomposability alone, treated organic residues sequester significantly more carbon than untreated organic residues, and despite the differences observed in stability, unless biochar contains a high proportion of inert organic material that does not decompose at all, the potential carbon sequestration by incorporating biochar is similar to that for compost or bioslurry. However, if losses of carbon during treatment are also taken into account, incorporating bioslurry sequesters only approximately the same amount of carbon as if the organic residue had been left untreated. By contrast, incorporating compost and biochar sequesters significantly more carbon than incorporating the untreated organic residue. Therefore using bioslurry as an organic fertilizer sequesters less of the carbon in the soil from organic residue than burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves or composting.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)73-86
Number of pages14
JournalBiomass & Bioenergy
Volume70
Early online date12 Mar 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2014

Fingerprint

Biogas
biogas
Sub-Saharan Africa
soil carbon
carbon sequestration
Soils
pyrolysis
Carbon
carbon
biochar
composting
Composting
Pyrolysis
anaerobic digestion
organic fertilizers
Stoves
compost
Anaerobic digestion
composts
Fertilizers

Keywords

  • biogas
  • soil carbon sequestration
  • Sub-Saharan Africa
  • anaerobic digestion
  • RothC

Cite this

What is the potential for biogas digesters to improve soil carbon sequestration in Sub-Saharan Africa? Comparison with other uses of organic residues. / Smith, Jo; Abegaz, Assefa; Matthews, Robin B.; Subedi, Madhu; Orskov, Egil R.; Tumwesige, Vianney; Smith, Pete.

In: Biomass & Bioenergy, Vol. 70, 11.2014, p. 73-86.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Smith, Jo ; Abegaz, Assefa ; Matthews, Robin B. ; Subedi, Madhu ; Orskov, Egil R. ; Tumwesige, Vianney ; Smith, Pete. / What is the potential for biogas digesters to improve soil carbon sequestration in Sub-Saharan Africa? Comparison with other uses of organic residues. In: Biomass & Bioenergy. 2014 ; Vol. 70. pp. 73-86.
@article{c1ab59a15a3a4f4e802ac54d7308a334,
title = "What is the potential for biogas digesters to improve soil carbon sequestration in Sub-Saharan Africa? Comparison with other uses of organic residues",
abstract = "Using bioslurry from anaerobic digestion as an organic fertilizer has great potential to increase carbon sequestration by supplying organic matter to the soil. This paper examines this potential in Sub-Saharan Africa compared to other uses of organic residues, including burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves and composting. Measurements of loss of carbon on treatment of organic residues indicate that the proportion of carbon lost from organic residue during treatment is greater for anaerobic digestion than for aerobic composting or pyrolysis. The stability of organic residue is increased by treatment, and is similar for composted and anaerobically digested material, but is higher for material treated by pyrolysis. Simulations using the RothC model, driven by parameters based on incubations of the organic residues with soil, suggest that on the basis of decomposability alone, treated organic residues sequester significantly more carbon than untreated organic residues, and despite the differences observed in stability, unless biochar contains a high proportion of inert organic material that does not decompose at all, the potential carbon sequestration by incorporating biochar is similar to that for compost or bioslurry. However, if losses of carbon during treatment are also taken into account, incorporating bioslurry sequesters only approximately the same amount of carbon as if the organic residue had been left untreated. By contrast, incorporating compost and biochar sequesters significantly more carbon than incorporating the untreated organic residue. Therefore using bioslurry as an organic fertilizer sequesters less of the carbon in the soil from organic residue than burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves or composting.",
keywords = "biogas, soil carbon sequestration, Sub-Saharan Africa, anaerobic digestion, RothC",
author = "Jo Smith and Assefa Abegaz and Matthews, {Robin B.} and Madhu Subedi and Orskov, {Egil R.} and Vianney Tumwesige and Pete Smith",
note = "Acknowledgments We are very grateful to the UK Department for International Development (DFID) New and Emerging Technologies Research Call for funding this work. PS is a Royal Society-Wolfson Research Merit Award holder.",
year = "2014",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.01.056",
language = "English",
volume = "70",
pages = "73--86",
journal = "Biomass & Bioenergy",
issn = "0961-9534",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What is the potential for biogas digesters to improve soil carbon sequestration in Sub-Saharan Africa? Comparison with other uses of organic residues

AU - Smith, Jo

AU - Abegaz, Assefa

AU - Matthews, Robin B.

AU - Subedi, Madhu

AU - Orskov, Egil R.

AU - Tumwesige, Vianney

AU - Smith, Pete

N1 - Acknowledgments We are very grateful to the UK Department for International Development (DFID) New and Emerging Technologies Research Call for funding this work. PS is a Royal Society-Wolfson Research Merit Award holder.

PY - 2014/11

Y1 - 2014/11

N2 - Using bioslurry from anaerobic digestion as an organic fertilizer has great potential to increase carbon sequestration by supplying organic matter to the soil. This paper examines this potential in Sub-Saharan Africa compared to other uses of organic residues, including burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves and composting. Measurements of loss of carbon on treatment of organic residues indicate that the proportion of carbon lost from organic residue during treatment is greater for anaerobic digestion than for aerobic composting or pyrolysis. The stability of organic residue is increased by treatment, and is similar for composted and anaerobically digested material, but is higher for material treated by pyrolysis. Simulations using the RothC model, driven by parameters based on incubations of the organic residues with soil, suggest that on the basis of decomposability alone, treated organic residues sequester significantly more carbon than untreated organic residues, and despite the differences observed in stability, unless biochar contains a high proportion of inert organic material that does not decompose at all, the potential carbon sequestration by incorporating biochar is similar to that for compost or bioslurry. However, if losses of carbon during treatment are also taken into account, incorporating bioslurry sequesters only approximately the same amount of carbon as if the organic residue had been left untreated. By contrast, incorporating compost and biochar sequesters significantly more carbon than incorporating the untreated organic residue. Therefore using bioslurry as an organic fertilizer sequesters less of the carbon in the soil from organic residue than burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves or composting.

AB - Using bioslurry from anaerobic digestion as an organic fertilizer has great potential to increase carbon sequestration by supplying organic matter to the soil. This paper examines this potential in Sub-Saharan Africa compared to other uses of organic residues, including burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves and composting. Measurements of loss of carbon on treatment of organic residues indicate that the proportion of carbon lost from organic residue during treatment is greater for anaerobic digestion than for aerobic composting or pyrolysis. The stability of organic residue is increased by treatment, and is similar for composted and anaerobically digested material, but is higher for material treated by pyrolysis. Simulations using the RothC model, driven by parameters based on incubations of the organic residues with soil, suggest that on the basis of decomposability alone, treated organic residues sequester significantly more carbon than untreated organic residues, and despite the differences observed in stability, unless biochar contains a high proportion of inert organic material that does not decompose at all, the potential carbon sequestration by incorporating biochar is similar to that for compost or bioslurry. However, if losses of carbon during treatment are also taken into account, incorporating bioslurry sequesters only approximately the same amount of carbon as if the organic residue had been left untreated. By contrast, incorporating compost and biochar sequesters significantly more carbon than incorporating the untreated organic residue. Therefore using bioslurry as an organic fertilizer sequesters less of the carbon in the soil from organic residue than burning on pyrolysis cook-stoves or composting.

KW - biogas

KW - soil carbon sequestration

KW - Sub-Saharan Africa

KW - anaerobic digestion

KW - RothC

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84910006456&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.01.056

DO - 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.01.056

M3 - Article

VL - 70

SP - 73

EP - 86

JO - Biomass & Bioenergy

JF - Biomass & Bioenergy

SN - 0961-9534

ER -