• Vol 9, No 5 (2018)
  • Chemical Engineering

Response Surface Optimisation of Biogas Potential in Co-Digestion of Miscanthus Fuscus and Cow Dung

Emmanuel Tetteh, Kofi Owusu Ansah Amano, Denis Asante-Sackey, Edward Armah


Cite this article as:
Tetteh, E., Amano, K.O.A., Asante-Sackey, D., Armah, E., 2018. Response Surface Optimisation of Biogas Potential in Co-Digestion of Miscanthus Fuscus and Cow Dung . International Journal of Technology. Volume 9(5), pp. 944-954
48
Downloads
Emmanuel Tetteh Department of Chemical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, S4 Level 1 Steve Biko Campus, P.O. Box 1334, Durban, 4000, South Africa
Kofi Owusu Ansah Amano Department of Chemical Engineering, Biotechnology Laboratory, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, P.M.B Kumasi, Ghana.
Denis Asante-Sackey Department of Chemical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, S4 Level 1 Steve Biko Campus, P.O. Box 1334, Durban, 4000, South Africa
Edward Armah Department of Chemical Engineering, Durban University of Technology, S4 Level 1 Steve Biko Campus, P.O. Box 1334, Durban, 4000, South Africa
Email to Corresponding Author

Abstract
image

In this study, the effects of co-digestion operating conditions for the enhancement of biogas production from Miscanthus Fuscus mixed with cow dung, was investigated. The aforementioned organic wastes are good substrate resources for anaerobic co-digestion (AD) due to their high content of easily biodegradable materials. This source of   effective and eco-friendly technology as AD is for generating energy from organic waste. Response surface methodology (RSM) based on the Box-Behnken (BBD) design was employed to evaluate and optimise four process variables: pH, temperature, and hydraulic retention time (HRT) and feedstock inoculum (F/I) ratio on the biogas production. This study signifies the interactions between the process conditions, and identifies the most significant variables of control in order to maximise the biogas production. A developed regression model established the relationship between the significant effect of the input variables and the response. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a high coefficient of determination value (R2= 0.9997) at 95% confidence level. The results show that the F/I ratio has a major impact on biogas production. The model developed predicted values which were well fitted (P<0.005) with the values obtained from the experimental data. Thus, the regression model confirmed findings. The RSM and BBD employed proved to be economical and a reliable tool for modelling, optimizing and studying the interactive effects of the four process factors (pH, temperature, HRT and F/I ratio) for the biogas production.

Anaerobic digestion; Biogas; Cow Dung; Inoculum to feed ratio; Response surface methodology

Introduction


Conclusion

The biogas production from Miscanthus Fuscus mixed with cow dung was investigated in a batch co-digester process. This could be of economic important in terms of protecting the environment and reducing greenhouse gases. The results showed that the ratio of Miscanthus Fuscus and cow dung (as F/I ratio of 3:1) had a significant impact on biogas production. The RSM and BBD employed proved to be economical and a reliable tool for modelling, optimizing and studying the interactive effects of the four process factors (pH, temperature, HRT and F/I ratio) for the biogas production. A highly significant (R² = 0.9997; P< 0.0001) regression quadratic model equation was obtained by analysing the experimental data obtained from the BBD matrix. The AD process conditions for effective control and biogas performance is therefore defined as a pH of 6, a temperature of 30oC, HRT of 20 days and F/I ratio of 75%. Therefore, using a mixture of organic wastes such as cow dung (I) and Miscanthus Fuscus (F) for biogas production can be encouraged since it reduces waste generation and green energy, and is good for sustainable social economic developments and environmental cost. 

 

Acknowledgement

The authors thank the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology Department of Chemical Engineering, for their support and allowing the use of their Biotechnology Laboratory for the experimental runs.

Supplementary Material
FilenameDescription
R5-CE-1467-20180702134807.docx Figures and tables
References

Abbasi, T., Abbasi, S.A., 2010. Biomass Energy and the Environmental Impacts Associated with Its Production and Utilization. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 14(3), pp. 919–937

Abbasi, T., Tauseef, S.M., Abbasi, S.A., 2012a. Biogas and Biogas Energy: An Introduction. Biogas Energy, Volume 2, pp. 1–10

Abbasi, T., Tauseef, S.M., Abbasi, S.A., 2012b. Anaerobic Digestion for Global Warming Control and Energy Generation—An Overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 16(5), pp. 3228–3242

Al Mamun, M.R.,Torii, S., 2015. Comparative Performance Studies on Biomethane Production from Biodegradable Wastes and Cattle Manure based on Inoculums Source. Journal of Advanced Agricultural Technologies, Volume 2(1), pp. 50–56

Ani, F.N., Said, N.H., Said, M.F.M., 2018. Optimization of Biodiesel Production using a Stirred Packed-bed Reactor. International Journal of Technology. Volume 9(2), pp. 219–228

Appels, L., Lauwers, J., Degrève, J., Helsen, L., Lievens, B., Willems, K., Impe, J.V., Dewil, R., 2011. Anaerobic Digestion in Global Bio-Energy Production: Potential and Research Challenges. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 15(9), pp. 4295–4301

El-Gendy, N.S., Madian, H.R., Amr, S.S.A., 2013. Design and Optimization of a Process for Sugarcane Molasses Fermentation by Saccharomyces cerevisiae using Response Surface Methodology. International Journal of Microbiology, Volume 2013, pp. 1–9

El-Mashad, H.M., Zhang, R., 2010. Biogas Production from Co-digestion of Dairy Manure and Food Waste. Bioresource Technology, Volume 101(11), pp. 4021–4028

Guenther, M., 2018. Challenges of a 100% Renewable Energy Supply in the Java-Bali Grid. International Journal of Technology. Volume 9(2), pp. 257–266

Hamawand, I., 2015. Anaerobic Digestion Process and Bio-energy in Meat Industry: A Review and a Potential. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 44, pp. 37–51

Haris, A., Murdianto, B., Susattyo, R., Riyanto, A., 2018. Transforming Seismic Data into Lateral Sonic Properties using Artificial Neural Network: A Case Study of Real Data Set. International Journal of Technology, Volume 9(3), pp. 472–478

Khanal, S.K., 2008. Anaerobic Biotechnology for Bioenergy Production: Principles and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Ames, Iowa, USA

Kurniawan, T., Yuhelsa, P., Dewi M., 2014. Study of Biogas Production Rate from Water Hyacinth by Hydrothermal Pretreatment with Buffalo Dung as a Starter. Waste Technology: An International Journal, Volume 2(2), pp. 26–30

Li, R., Chen, S., Li, X., 2010. Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Food Waste with Dairy Manure in a Two-phase Digestion System. Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, Volume 160(2), pp. 643–654

Menon, A., Wang, J.Y., Giannis, A., 2017. Optimization of Micronutrient Supplement for Enhancing Biogas Production from Food Waste in Two-phase Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion. Waste Management, Volume 59, pp. 465–475

Nasruddin, Nasution, S., Aisyah, N., Surachman, A., Wibowo, A.S., 2018. Exergy Analysis and Exergoeconomic Optimization of a Binary Cycle System using a Multi Objective Genetic Algorithm. International Journal of Technology, Volume 9(2), pp. 275–286

Protasov, A., 2018. Active Infrared Testing of Composites using 3D Computer Simulation. International Journal of Technology. Volume 9(3), pp. 631–640

Rao, P.V., Baral, S.S., Dey, R., Mutnuri, S., 2010. Biogas Generation Potential by Anaerobic Digestion for Sustainable Energy Development in India. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 14(7), pp. 2086–2094

Ribeiro, F.R., Passos, F., Gurgel, L.V.A., Baêta, B.E.L., de Aquino, S.F., 2017. Anaerobic Digestion of Hemicellulose Hydrolysate Produced after Hydrothermal Pretreatment of Sugarcane Bagasse in UASB Reactor. Science of the Total Environment, Volume 584–585, pp. 1108–1113

Safari, M., Abdi, R., Adl, M., Kafashan, J., 2018. Optimization of Biogas Productivity in Lab-Scale by Response Surface Methodology. Renewable Energy, Volume 118, pp. 368–375

Sawatdeenarunat, C., Nguyen, D., Surendra, K.C., Shrestha, S., Rajendran, K., Oechsner, H., Xie, L., Khanal, S.K., 2016. Anaerobic Biorefinery: Current Status, Challenges, and Opportunities. Bioresource Technology, Volume 215, pp. 304–313

Sørensen, A., Lübeck, M., Lübeck, P.S., Ahring, B.K., 2013. Fungal Beta-Glucosidases: A Bottleneck in Industrial Use of Lignocellulosic Materials. Biomolecules, Volume 3(3), pp. 612–631

Tetteh, E.K, Rathilal, S., 2018. Evaluation of the Coagulation Floatation Process for Industrial Mineral Oil Wastewater Treatment using Response Surface Methodology (RSM). International Journal of Environmental Impacts, Volume 1(4), pp. 491–502

Tetteh, E.K., Amano, K.O.A., Asante-Sackey, D., Armah, E.K., 2017. Biochemical Methane Potential (BMP) of Miscanthus fuscus for Anaerobic Digestion. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 7(12), pp. 434–439

Tetteh, E.K., Rathilal, S., 2017. Application of Response Surface Methodology (RSM)-Reduction of Industrial Wastewater Chemical Oxygen Demand. In: CBU International Conference on Innovations in Science and Education, Prague, 22-24 March, Czech Republic

Troschinetz, A.M., Mihelcic, J.R., 2009. Sustainable Recycling of Municipal Solid Waste in Developing Countries. Waste Management, Volume 29(2), pp. 915–923