Innovative Educational Program for Biogas Production Carried Out at University of Hradec Králové (CZ) and at University of Opole (PL)

Open access

Abstract

Recently, there is a growing pressure on a rapid construction of agricultural biogas plants, particularly in the Czech-Polish border region. It is an area with large expanses of agricultural land which can serve to supply biogas plants with biomass. This strategy should contribute to harmonize the common agricultural policy of the European Union. A need for qualified operators of these stations on this territory is also increasing. Therefore we first include a demonstration of an education program for students in the field of agricultural waste anaerobic fermentation and biogas production. We present here the first part of an innovative approach which we use in the teaching program “Physico-technical Measurements and Computer Technology” at the Faculty of Science at the University of Hradec Kralove and also in the education of internshipers from the Faculty of Natural Sciences and Technology at the University of Opole. There are requirements to fulfil labour market expectations and to make this subject more attractive for the students. Students’ theoretical and practical preparation constitutes a comprehensive source of knowledge and skills required in a real life job. Joined theoretical and practical knowledge gained by students, reinforced by the skills developed during task analysis followed by their solution, provides the future graduate higher quality abilities and better position in the labour market.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] Kříž J Hyšplerová L Trnková L Lyčka A Vybíral B Hlúbik J et al. Innovation in study of physical and technical measurements. Czech-polish cooperation of universities. Chem Didact Ecol Metrol. 2014;19(1-2):37-45. DOI: 10.1515/cdem-2014-0003.

  • [2] Igliński B Piechota G Buczkowski R. Development of biomass in polish energy sector: an overview. Clean Techn Environ Policy. 2015;17(2):317-329. DOI: 10.1007/s10098-014-0820-x.

  • [3] The agricultural biogas plants in Poland. Oil and Gas Institute - National Research Institute Poland. 2014. https://www.globalmethane.org/documents/Poland-Ag-Biogas-Plants-April-2014.pdf.

  • [4] Lebuhn M Munk B Effenberger M. Agricultural biogas production in Germany - from practice to microbiology basics. Energy Sustainability Society. 2014;4:10. DOI: 10.1186/2192-0567-4-10.

  • [5] Weiland P. Biogas production: Current state and perspectives. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2009;85(4):849-860. DOI: 10.1007/s00253-009-2246-7.

  • [6] Bond T Templeton MR. History and future of domestic biogas plants in the developing world. Energy Sust Develop. 2011;15(4):347-354. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0973082611000780.

  • [7] El Monayeri DS Atta NN El Mokadem SM Aboulfotoh AM. Improvement of anaerobic digesters using pre-selected micro-organisms. Inter Water Technol J. 2013;3(1):45-59. http://iwtj.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/V3-N1-P5.pdf.

  • [8] Chen YR Hashimoto AG. Substrate utilization kinetic model for biological treatment process. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1980;22(10):2081-95. DOI: 10.1002/bit.260221008.

  • [9] Ghatak MD Mahanta P. Comparison of kinetic models for biogas production rate from saw dust. Int J Res Eng Technol. 2014;3(7):248-254. http://esatjournals.net/ijret/2014v03/i07/IJRET20140307042.pdf.

  • [10] Echiegu EA. Kinetic models for anaerobic fermentation processes - A review. Amer. J. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2015;11(3):132-148. DOI: 10.3844/ajbbsp.2015.132.148.

  • [11] Yu L Wensel PC Ma J Chen S. Mathematical modeling in anaerobic digestion. J Bioremed Biodeg. 2013;S4(003):1-12. DOI: 10.4172/2155-6199.S4-003.

  • [12] Kříž J Hyšplerová L Smolík M Eminger S Vargová A Keder J et al. Modelling of emissions from large biogas plants. Chem Didact Ecol Metrol. 2015;20(1-2):49-58. DOI: 10.1515/cdem-2015-0005.

  • [13] Mirkouei A Bhinge R McCoy C Haapala KR Dornfeld DA. A pedagogical module framework to improve scaffolded active learning in Manufact Eng Educ. Procedia Manufacturing. 2016;5:1128-1142. DOI: 10.1016/j.promfg.2016.08.088.

  • [14] Nielsen TB Holmegaard HT. From university student to employee. Int J Innovation Sci Math Educ. 2016;24(3):14-30. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/308889074.

  • [15] Smigiel E Sonntag M. A paradox in physics education in France. Phys Educ. 2013;48(4):497. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9120/48/4/497. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0031-9120/48/4/497/meta.

  • [16] Korpela A Tarhasaari T Kettunen L Mikkonen R Kinnari-Korpela H. Towards deeper comprehension in higher engineering education: rethinking “in theory yes but not in practice”. Europ J Sci Math Educ. 2015;3(4):390-407. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282661587.

Search
Journal information
Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 408 64 3
PDF Downloads 422 48 3