Prospective of Eggshell Nanocalcium in Improving Biogas Production from Palm Oil Mill Effluent

  • Yessie Widya SariEmail author
  • Eka Listiani
  • Sumaya Yulia Putri
  • Zaenal Abidin
Original Paper


The palm oil industry is one of the strategic industries in Indonesia. However, it cannot be denied that the annual increase of palm oil production leads to a range of associated environmental effects. Liquid by-products are also generated due to the use of steam and water; known as Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME). Interestingly, having high organic content, POME can be a profitable as it can be used to generate biogas. In this study, the effect of calcium nanoparticle on the anaerobe digestion of POME was investigated. Nanocalcium, obtained from milled-calcined chicken eggshell, was added into anaerobe digester. Biogas production was investigated for 20 days. We found that nanocalcium concentration of 10 g/L (mass of particle/volume of slurry) had the highest Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) removal efficiency. Adding 5 g/L (mass of particle/volume of slurry) nanocalcium into anaerobe digester resulted in 1.5 × higher accumulative biogas production than adding calcium, at the same concentration. This finding indicates that reducing calcium particle size, using ball milling technique, improved accumulative biogas produced. However, at concentration of 10 g/L (mass of particle/volume of slurry), a vice versa phenomenon was observed, indicating that excessive calcium may not preferred for biogas production.

Graphic Abstract


Ball mill By-products COD Nanoparticles Methane XRD SEM 



This work is financially supported by the Indonesian Ministry of Research and Higher Education through National Strategic Program Research Grant (2018). The authors gratefully acknowledge the support and generosity of PT. Rajawali Nusantara Indonesia (RNI) Holding Company for providing POME from PT. Mitra Ogan.


  1. 1.
    Kementerian Perdagangan.: Negara Tujuan Ekspor 10 Komoditi Utama. (2016). Accessed 5 May 2016.
  2. 2.
    Departemen Pertanian.: Luas Areal, Produksi dan Produktivitas Perkebunan di Indonesia Tahun 2011–2015. (2015). Accessed 5 May 2016.
  3. 3.
    Basiron, Y.: Palm oil production through sustainable plantations. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 109(4), 289–295 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Prasertsan, S., Prasertsan, P.: Biomass residues from palm oil mills in Thailand: an overview on quantity and potential usage. Biomass Bioenerg. 11(5), 387–395 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poh, P.E., Yong, W.-J., Chong, M.F.: Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) characteristic in high crop season and the applicability of high-rate anaerobic bioreactors for the treatment of POME. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49(22), 11732–11740 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bala, J.D., Lalung, J., Ismail, N.: Studies on the reduction of organic load from palm oil mill effluent (POME) by bacterial strains. Int. J. Recycl. Org. Waste Agric. 4(1), 1–10 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Soleimaninanadegani, M., Manshad, S.: Enhancement of biodegradation of Palm Oil Mill Effluents by local isolated microorganisms. Int. Sch. Res. Not. 2014, 8 (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Poh, P.E., Chong, M.F.: Development of anaerobic digestion methods for palm oil mill effluent (POME) treatment. Biores. Technol. 100(1), 1–9 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chin, M.J., et al.: Biogas from palm oil mill effluent (POME): Opportunities and challenges from Malaysia's perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 26, 717–726 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ni, J.-Q., Nyns, E.-J.: New concept for the evaluation of rural biogas management in developing countries. Energy Convers. Manage 37(10), 1525–1534 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Achinas, S., Achinas, V., Euverink, G.J.W.: A technological overview of biogas production from biowaste. Engineering 3(3), 299–307 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abdelsalam, E., et al.: Effects of Co and Ni nanoparticles on biogas and methane production from anaerobic digestion of slurry. Energy Convers. Manage 141, 108–119 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ali, A., Mahar, R.B., Soomro, R.A., Sherazi, S.T.H.: Fe3O4 nanoparticles facilitated anaerobic digestion of organic fraction of municipal solid waste for enhancement of methane production. Energy Sour. A 39(16), 1815–1822 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, T., et al.: Effects of metal nanoparticles on methane production from waste-activated sludge and microorganism community shift in anaerobic granular sludge. Sci. Rep. 6, 25857 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Geng, Y., et al.: Improving methane production during the anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge: Cao-ultrasonic pretreatment and using different seed sludges. Proc. Environ. Sci. 31, 743–752 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Toro, P., Quijada, R., Yazdani-Pedram, M., Arias, J.L.: Eggshell, a new bio-filler for polypropylene composites. Mater. Lett. 61(22), 4347–4350 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Angelidaki, I., Ellegaard, L.: Codigestion of manure and organic wastes in centralized biogas plants. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 109(1), 95–105 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mao, C., Feng, Y., Wang, X., Ren, G.: Review on research achievements of biogas from anaerobic digestion. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 45, 540–555 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Manyi-Loh, C.E., et al.: Microbial anaerobic digestion (Bio-Digesters) as an approach to the decontamination of animal wastes in pollution control and the generation of renewable energy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10(9), 4390–4417 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van Kessel, J.A.S., Russell, J.B.: The effect of pH on ruminal methanogenesis. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 20(4), 205–210 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Roy, S., Das, D.: Biohythane production from organic wastes: present state of art. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 23(10), 9391–9410 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Si, B., et al.: Towards biohythane production from biomass: influence of operational stage on anaerobic fermentation and microbial community. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 41(7), 4429–4438 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Willquist, K., et al.: Design of a novel biohythane process with high H2 and CH4 production rates. Int J Hydrogen Energy 37(23), 17749–17762 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mamimin C, Prasertsan P, Kongjan P, Thong SO (2017) Effects of volatile fatty acids in biohydrogen effluent on biohythane production from palm oil mill effluent under thermophilic condition. Electron. J. Biotechnol. 29:78–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Liu, Z., et al.: States and challenges for high-value biohythane production from waste biomass by dark fermentation technology. Biores. Technol. 135, 292–303 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biophysics Division, Department of Physics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural SciencesIPB University (Bogor Agricultural University)BogorIndonesia
  2. 2.Anorganic Chemistry Division, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural SciencesIPB University (Bogor Agricultural University)BogorIndonesia

Personalised recommendations