Advertisement

The Anaerobic Digestion of Waste Food Materials by Using Cow Dung: A New Methodology to Produce Biogas

  • A. R. Pati
  • S. Saroha
  • A. P. Behera
  • S. S. MohapatraEmail author
  • S. S. Mahanand
Original Contribution

Abstract

From kitchen and dining place lots of food wastes are generated and these create many problems if these are disposed directly by dumping. Instead of dumping, the aforesaid wastes can be utilized in a better way to produce valuable products such as biogas. In the open literature, different methodologies of digestion by using bacteria or microorganisms have been described. The use of bacteria or microorganism increases the cost of conversion. However, the literature does not disclose any information on the process which describes the digestion of the food waste without the use of microorganism directly. Hence, in the current work, an attempt has been made to digest food waste and to produce biogas by using a novel technique which does not use the bacteria directly. In the current work, nourishment waste was gathered from various messes of National Institute of Technology Rourkela and these were given as the feedstock to our reactor which functions as an anaerobic digester framework to deliver biogas. For the production of biogas, food waste was mixed with cow dung at different ratios and the cow dung acts as an inoculum in the current case as it contains both methanogenic and acid-forming bacteria. By using a gas analyzer, after experimentation, the composition of the gas was analyzed and the achieved composition confirms that the obtained gas is the biogas. The result shows that the rate of biogas production is influenced by the pH, temperature and solid-to-water ratio. The biogas production rate is found to be maximum at an intermediate solid-to-water ratio of 1:2 and at the neutral range of pH. Furthermore, the biogas production rate increases from 110 to 142 ml with the rising temperature from 25 to 40 °C, and with the further increment in temperature, the methane production rate declines. In addition to the above, the process behavior at different conditions has been modeled by using response surface methodology technique and also the optimum conditions (T = 44.03 °C, R = 0.44 and pH 7.02) for the maximum production of biogas has been determined.

Keywords

Anaerobic digestion Inoculum Bio gas Starch rich Methanogenic RSM 

List of Symbols

S

Amount of solid (kg)

W

Amount of water (kg)

S/W

Solid-to-water ratio

T

Temperature of mixture (°C)

V

Volume of methane produced (ml)

R2

Regression coefficient

SD

Standard deviation

R

Solid–water ratio (w/w)

TS

Total solid (g)

TVS

Total volatile solid (g)

COD

Chemical oxygen demand

C/N

Carbon-to-nitrogen ratio

df

Degree of freedom

Cor total

Corrected total

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    D. Palaniswamy, Experimental investigation of biogas production from food waste and analysis for the waste energy recovery and utilization from institutions of state of Tamil Nadu in India, in Intelligent Systems and Control (ISCO), IEEE, Tamilnadu, India (2013) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    H. Chanakya, S. Malayil, Anaerobic digestion for bioenergy from agro residues and other solid wastes—an overview of science, technology and sustainability. J. Indian Inst. Sci. 92, 111 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    T.F. Otun, O.M. Ojo, F.O. Ajibade, J.O. Babatola, Evaluation of biogas production from the digestion and codigestion of animal waste, food waste and fruit waste. Int. J. Energy Environ. Res. 3, 12 (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. Appels, J. Baeyens, J. Degreve, R. Dewil, Principles and potential of the anaerobic digestion of waste-activated sludge. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 34, 755 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    D. Shivaraj, G. Seenayya, Biogas production from various poultry droppings slurry concentration. India J. Environ. Health 36, 115 (1994)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Sahota, A. Singh, Res. Dev. 13, 35–40 (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    B. Nagamani, K. Ramasamy, 31st Annual Conference of Association of Microbiologists of India held at Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, pp. 102 (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    X. Wang, X. Lu, F. Li, G. Yang, Effects of temperature and carbon–nitrogen (C/N) ratio on the performance of anaerobic co-digestion of dairy manure, chicken manure and rice straw: focusing on ammonia inhibition. Li W, ed. PLoS ONE 9, 5 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H.M. El-Mashad, R.H. Zhang, Biogas production from co-digestion of dairy manure and food waste. Biores. Technol. 101, 4021 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    K. Hanaki, M. Nagase, T. Matsuo, Mechanism of inhibition caused by long-chain fatty acids in anaerobic digestion process. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 23, 1591 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    H. Hartmann, I. Angelidaki, B.K. Ahring, Co-digestion of the organic fraction of municipal solid waste with other waste types, in Biomethanisation of the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Wastes (IWA Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 2003), p. 181Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Hatamoto, H. Imachi, Y. Yashiro, A. Ohashi, H. Harada, Identification and cultivation of anaerobic, syntrophic long-chain fatty acid-degrading microbes from mesophilic and thermophilic methanogenic sludge. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 4119 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    G.F. Huang, J.W.C. Wong, Q.T. Wu, B.B. Nagar, Effect of C/N on composting of pig manure with sawdust. Waste Manag 24, 805 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    J.R.S. Ventura, J. Lee, D. Jahng, A comparative study on the alternating mesophilic and thermophilic two-stage anaerobic digestion of food waste. J. Environ. Sci. 26, 1274 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    C. Zhang, G. Xiao, L. Peng, H. Su, T. Tan, The anaerobic digestion of food waste and cattle manure. Biores. Technol. 129, 170 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Vij, Biogas production from kitchen waste & to test the Quality and Quantity of biogas produced from kitchen waste under suitable conditions. e-thesis, NIT Rourkela, India (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M.A. Sanz-Bobi, F. de Cuadra, C. Batlle, A review of key points of an industrial biogas plant, in A European Perspective, Renewable Energy Research and Applications (ICRERA), IEEE, Nagasaki, Japan, pp. 1–6 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M.A. Bezerra, R.E. Santelli, E.P. Oliveira, L.S. Villar, L.A. Escaleira, Response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta 76, 965 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    S.L.C. Ferreira, R.E. Bruns, E.G.P. da Silva, Statistical designs and response surface techniques for the optimization of chromatographic systems. J. Chromatogr. A 1158, 2 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    B. Bhunia, A. Dey, Statistical approach for optimization of physiochemical requirements on alkaline protease production from Bacillus licheniformis NCIM-204, Enzyme Research, 905804 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    D. Vikrant, P. Shekhar, Generation of biogas from kitchen waste—experimental analysis. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Invent. 2(10), 15 (2013)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    L. Louis, Working principle of Arduino and using it as a tool for study and research. Int. J. Control Autom. Commun. Syst. 1(2), 21 (2016)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    B. Bhunia, D. Dutta, S. Chaudhuri, Optimization of enzyme activity determination and partial characterization of extracellular alkaline protease from Bacillus licheniformis NCIM-2042. Eng. Life Sci. 11, 207 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    U.S.P. Uday, P. Choudhury, T.K. Bandyopadhyay, B. Bhunia, Classification, mode of action and production strategy of xylanase and its application for biofuel production from water hyacinth. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 82, 1041 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    G.E.P. Box, D.W. Behnke, Some new three level second order designs for surface fitting, in Statistical Technique Research Group Technical Report 26, Princeton University (1958)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    G.E.P. Box, D.W. Behnke, Some new three level designs for the study of quantitative variables. Technometrics 2, 455 (1960)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    G.E.P. Box, N.R. Draper, Empirical Model Building and Response Surface (Wiley, New York, 1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    R.H. Myers, D.C. Montogomery, C.M.A. Cook, Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization by Using Designed Experimentation, 3rd edn. (Wiley, New York, 2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Institution of Engineers (India) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • A. R. Pati
    • 1
  • S. Saroha
    • 1
  • A. P. Behera
    • 1
  • S. S. Mohapatra
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. S. Mahanand
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringNational Institute of Technology RourkelaRourkelaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Fish Processing Technology and EngineeringCollege of FisheriesLembucherraIndia

Personalised recommendations