The Effect of Magnesium Sulfate Addition on Volatile Solid Destruction and Chemical Oxygen Demand Reduction of Food Waste Anaerobic Digestion
Corresponding email: crpriadi@ui.ac.id
Published at : 16 Dec 2019
Volume : IJtech
Vol 10, No 8 (2019)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v10i8.3477
Hapsari, K.L., Tharifa, F., Moersidik, S.S., Adityosulindro, S., Priadi, C.R., 2019. The Effect of Magnesium Sulfate Addition on Volatile Solid Destruction and Chemical Oxygen Demand Reduction of Food Waste Anaerobic Digestion. International Journal of Technology. Volume 10(8), pp. 1602-1608
| Khansa Luqyana Hapsari | University of Indonesia |
| Firyal Tharifa | University of Indonesia |
| Setyo Sarwanto Moersidik | Universty of Indonesia |
| Sandyanto Adityosulindro | Universitas Indonesia |
| Cindy Rianti Priadi | Universitas Indonesia |
Process
instability often occurs in anaerobic digestion (AD) due to inhibitors,
such as the high sodium content in food waste. Recent studies have reported
that magnesium can reduce the sodium ion’s toxicity towards methanogens. This
study aimed to analyze the effect of magnesium addition to Volatile Solids
Destruction (VSD), Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) reduction, and biogas
production in AD of food waste. The experiment consisted of two phases, the
control phase and the experimental phase, without and with MgSO4, respectively. The
control phase results were: average COD reduction, VSD, and methane yield up to
80.9%, 87.6%, 340 mL
CH4/gr VS/day, respectively. The experimental
phase results were: average COD reduction, VSD, and methane yield up to 78.5%,
83.9%, 125 mL CH4/gr
VS/day, respectively. Overall, the study’s results showed that
MgSO4 had a negative impact on VSD and methane yield. The addition
of MgSO4 seemed to cause instability in the AD system, which
resulted in a decrease in the VSD value and a decrease in the methane
concentration.
Biogas; COD; Inhibition; Methane; Solid waste; VSD
Waste management is a fundamental
process for finding solutions to the problems arising from waste produced by individuals
and industry (Pongrácz, 2002). Society’s awareness of environmental issues is
considered to drive the search for waste disposal methods that are alternatives
to landfills (Shukor et al., 2018). Anaerobic
digestion (AD) is a widely used domestic waste processing method that is able
to convert various biodegradable waste materials into energy (Wijayanti et al., 2018) through a biological
anaerobic process that converts organic matter into biogas and digestate (Lin et al., 2018). In comparison to other
aerobic technology, anaerobic processes, such as AD, offer several advantages,
including low energy use and low sludge production; moreover, the produced
biogas can function as an energy source. Furthermore, the anaerobic process
does not have a strong odor because the process is carried out in an enclosed
space (Abdel-Shafy &
Richardson, 1996).
However, operational problems, such as instability in the system and
fluctuating biogas productivity, are disadvantages of AD (Lin et al., 2018). Failure to maintain the balance between acid
bacteria and methanogen bacteria is known to be the main cause of instability
in the system (Demirel & Yenigün, 2002). Furthermore, various elements, such as sodium (Na), are believed
To counter Na
toxicity, a mechanism known as antagonism can be implemented (Kugelman & McCarty, 1965). Antagonism is achieved by the presence of
another cation that reduces the toxicity of other types of cations, which can reactivate enzymes that have been damaged due to an
excess amount of the toxic cation. This may induce a stimulatory effect from
one type of cation, which, in this case, is magnesium (Mg), which could act as
an antagonist cation against Na (Kugelman &
McCarty, 1965). The study
conducted by Bashir
and Matin (2004) found that
the handling of Na inhibition at a concentration of 9,000 mg/L can be done by
adding Mg, which can reduce the toxic effects of Na. Hence, in our study, we
further analyzed the effect of the addition of Mg on Na toxicity in anaerobic
waste treatment. Toward that end, we evaluated the following parameters:
Volatile Solids Destruction (VSD) and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD)
reduction. Both VSD and COD reduction
represent the efficiency of the AD process in reducing organic matter,
depending on the methods and concentrations used in the process.
The increase in VSD is related to the increased production of
biogas (Anwar et al.,
2016). According
to Budiyono et al. (2013), in an
AD system, COD is consumed through microbial activity and is converted into
methane (CH4). Both of these parameters are important because they
represent the performance of the AD process.
The results of this experiment demonstrated that the addition of
MgSO4 did not improve the performance of the AD process. The
addition of a significant amount of MgSO4 caused
a significant decrease in VSD (p < 0.05), as seen in the VSD value of 83.9% ± 0.04% obtained in the experimental phase and
the VSD value of 87.6% ± 0.07% obtained in the control phase. Moreover, the
addition of MgSO4 caused a significant decrease in the CH4 yield (p < 0.05), as seen in the CH4 yield of 125±107.2 mL CH4/gr
VS/day obtained in the experimental phase and the CH4 yield of
339±156.5 mL CH4/gr VS/day
obtained in the control phase. However, in this experiment, the addition of MgSO4 did not significantly influence the efficiency of COD
reduction, as seen in the COD reduction of 78.5% ± 0.2% in the experimental
phase and the COD reduction of 80.9% ± 0.12% ??in the control phase. Further study on the synergistic effect
of MgSO4 must be analyzed in a complex food waste AD environment.
This research and its publication are supported by the Superior Applied Research Grant 2019 from the Higher Education and Research Ministry Indonesia (number NKB-1728/ UN2.R3.1/HKP.05.00/2019).
| Filename | Description |
|---|---|
| R1-CVE-3477-20191026221939.png | Figure 1 |
| R1-CVE-3477-20191026221951.png | Figure 2 |
Abbassi-Guendouz,
A., Brockmann, D., Trably, E., Dumas, C., Delgenès, J.-P., Steyer, J.-P.,
Escudié, R., 2012. Total Solids Content Drives High Solid Anaerobic Digestion
via Mass Transfer Limitation. Bioresource Technology, Volume 111,
pp. 55–61
Abdel-Shafy, H., Richardson, M., 1996. Environment Xenophobic.
London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.
Ahring, B., Ibrahim, A., Mladenovska, Z., 2001. Effect of
Temperature Increase from 55 to 65? on Performance and Microbial
Population Dynamics of an Anaerobic Digester Treating Cattle Manure. Water
Research, Volume 35(10), pp. 2446–2452
Alhraishawi, A., Alani, W.K., 2018.
The Co-fermentation of Organic Substrates: A Review Performance of Biogas
Production under Different Salt Content. In:
The Sixth Scientific Conference Renewable
Energy and its Applications, IOP Publishing
Anwar, N., Wang, W., Zhang, J., Li, Y., Chen, C., Liu, G., Zhang,
R., 2016. Effect of Sodium Salt on Anaerobic Digestion of Kitchen Waste. Water
Science & Technology, Volume 73(8), pp. 1865–1871
Ashish, T., Oprakash, S., 2014. Study of Characteristics and
Treatment of Dairy Industry Wastewater. Journal of Applied and Environmental
Microbiology, Volume 2(1), pp. 16–22
Bashir, B.H., Matin, A., 2004. Sodium Toxicity Control by the Use
of Magnesium in an Anaerobic Reactor. Journal of Applied Sciences and
Environmental Management, Volume 8(1), pp. 17–21
Boshoff, G., Duncan, J., Rose, P., 2004. Tannery Effluent as a
Carbon Source for Biological Sulphate Reduction. Water Research, Volume
38(11), pp. 2651–2658
Budiyono, Syaichurrozi, I., Sumardiono, S., 2013. Biogas
Production from Bioethanol Waste: The Effect of pH and Urea Addition to Biogas
Production Rate. Waste Technology, Volume 1, pp. 1–5
Demirel, B., Yenigun, O., 2002. Two-phase Anaerobic Digestion
Processes: A Review. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology,
Volume 77(7), pp. 743–755
Chen, Y., Cheng, J.J., Creamer, K.S. 2008. Inhibition of Anaerobic
Digestion Process: A Review. Bioresource Technology, Volume
99(10), pp. 4044–4064
Dogterom , P., Fu, C., Legg, T., Chiou, Y., Brandon, S., 2018. The
Absolute Bioavailability and the Effect of Food on a New Magnesium Lactate
Dihydrate Extended-release Caplet in Healthy Subjects. Drug Development and
Industrial Pharmacy, Volume 44(9), pp. 1481–1487
Grady, C., Daigger, G., Lim, H., 1999. Biological Wastewater
Treatment, New York: Marcel Dekker
Hajarnis, S., Ranade, D., 1993. Revival of Ammonia Inhibited
Cultures of Methanobacterium-bryantii and Methanosarcina-barkeri. Journal of
Fermentation and Bioengineering, Volume 76(1), pp. 70–72
Kavuma, C., 2013. Variation
of Methane and Carbon Dioxide Yield in a Biogas Plant. MSc. Thesis, Graduate
Program, Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden
Klauck, E., Hengge, R., 2012. ?S-Controlling Networks in Escherichia
Coli. Bacterial Regulatory
Networks, A.A. Filloux Caister Academic Press, U.K.
Kugelman, I.J., McCarty, P.L., 1965. Cation Toxicity and
Stimulation in Anaerobic Waste Treatment. Water Pollution Control
Federation, Volume 37(1), pp. 97–116
Kushkevych, I., 2016. Dissimilatory Sulfate Reduction in the
Intestinal Sulfate-reducing Bacteria. Studia Biologica, Volume
10(1), pp. 197–228
Lin, L., Xu, F., Ge, X., Li, Y., 2018. Improving the
Sustainability of Organic Waste Management Practices in the Food-energy-water
Nexus: A Comparative Review of Anaerobic Digestion and Composting. Renewable
and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Volume 89, pp. 151–167
Llorens, J.M., Tormo, A., Martínez-García, E., 2010. Stationary
Phase in Gram-negative Bacteria. FEMS Microbiology Reviews, Volume
34(4), pp. 476–495
Lopez, R.J., Higgins, S.R., Pagaling, E., Yan, T., Cooney, M.J.,
2013. High Rate Anaerobic Digestion of Wastewater Separated from Grease Trap
Waste. Renewable Energy, Volume 62, pp. 234–242
Martínez-Alvarez, V., González-Ortega,
M.J., Martin-Gorriz, B., Soto-García, M., Maestre-Valero, J., 2018. Seawater Desalination
for Crop Irrigation—Current Status and Perspectives. In: Emerging
Technologies for Sustainable Desalination Handboo, G. Gude,
Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, United Kingdom, pp. 461–492
Orhorhoro, E.K., Ebunilo, P.O., Sadjere, G.E., 2017. Experimental
Determination of Effect of Total Solid (TS) and Volatile Solid (VS) on Biogas
Yield. American Journal of Modern Energy, Volume 3(6), pp.
131–135
Pongrácz, E., 2002. Re-defining the Concepts of Waste and Waste
Management Evolving the Theory of Waste Management. PhD. Thesis, University
of Oulu
Radhakrishnan,
K., 2011. Impacts of the Use of Magnesia Versus Iron on Mesophilic Anaerobic
Digestion and Odors in Wastewater. Master’s Thesis, Graduate
Program, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA
Rother, M., Sattler, C., Stock, T., 2011. Studying Gene Regulation
in Methanogenic Archaea. Methods in Enzymology, Volume 494, pp.
91–110
Shukor, J.A., Omar, M.F., Kasim, M.M., Jamaludin, M.H., Naim, M.A.,
2018. Assessment of Composting Technologies for Organic Waste Management. International
Journal of Technology, Volume 9(8), pp. 1579–1587
Siregar, M.J., Priadi, C.R., 2017. Optimization of methane
production by combining organic waste and cow manure as feedstock in anaerobic
digestion. AIP
Conference Proceedings Volume 1826, pp.020030
Tassakka, M.I.S., Islami, B.B., Saragih, F.A.N., Suwartha, N., Kristanto,
G.A., Priadi, C.R., 2019. Optimum Organic Loading Rates (OLR) for Food Waste
Anaerobic Digestion: Study Case Universitas Indonesia. International Journal
of Technology, Volume 10(6), pp. 1105–1111
Wijayanti, D.F., Suwartha, N., Priadi, C.R., 2018. Effect of the Addition of Fat Oil and Grease (FOG) on the Performance of a Dry Anaerobic Digestion Food Waste Reactor. International Journal of Technology, Volume 9(2), pp. 267–274
Zabranska, J., Pokorna, D., 2018. Bioconversion of Carbon Dioxide to Methane using Hydrogen and Hydrogenotrophic Methanogens. Biotechnology Advances, Volume 36(3), pp. 707–720