Response Surface Optimisation of Biogas Potential in Co-Digestion of Miscanthus Fuscus and Cow Dung
Corresponding email: ektetteh34@gmail.com
Published at : 25 Oct 2018
Volume : IJtech
Vol 9, No 5 (2018)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v9i5.1467
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
| 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 |
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
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.
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.
| Filename | Description |
|---|---|
| R5-CE-1467-20180702134807.docx | Figures and tables |
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