European Journal of Scientific Research ISSN 1450-216X Vol.57 No.4 (2011), pp.626-634 EuroJournals Publishing, Inc. 2011 http://www.eurojournals.com/ejsr.

htm

Effect of Kinetic Parameters on Biogas Production from Local Substrate using a Batch Feeding Digester
Abdullahi, I. Physics Department, Ahmadu Bello University School of Basic and Remedial Studies, Funtua, Nigeria E-mail: phy00429@yahoo.com Tel: +2348064816581 Ismail, A. Department of Physics, Ahmadu Bello University P.M.B. 1044, Zaria, Nigeria Musa, A. O. Department of Physics, Bayero University P.M.B. 3011, Kano, Nigeria Galadima, A. Surface Chemistry and Catalysis Research Group Department of Chemistry, University of Aberdeen Meston Building, AB24 3UE, Aberdeen, United Kingdom E-mail: ahmadgldm@yahoo.com, agaladima@abdn.ac.uk Abstract While the various international energy agencies vehemently warned on the increasing energy demand, the global proven fossil fuels reserves were projected to last only for the next few decades. Therefore, the search for alternative energy sources is unavoidable. Biofuel, particularly biogas, is renewable alternative with strong potentials for future energy security and environmental sustainability. Thus, multi-dimensional studies on all aspect of its production are necessary. In the current research, a batch feeding digester was developed to evaluate the effect of temperature and seeding parameters on the biogas yield and rate of digestion. Biogas production was monitored using 1.8 Kg of cow dung substrate in the digester, capable of producing 20 Liters of net reaction gases. Kinetic modeling revealed the reaction to generally proceeds by first order kinetics with respect to the substrate concentration ([S]). Similarly, rise in both temperature and seeding parameters enhanced biogas production, with temperature effect outweighing by at least 25 %. The seeding effect was also found to decay with significant decrease in digestion temperature. Keywords: Cow dung, biogas, kinetics, seeding, temperature

1. Introduction
Since the beginning of the last century fossil fuels had became the major source of global energy. In the last 110 years large quantities of oil, gas and coal were removed from their ground deposits. These

Effect of Kinetic Parameters on Biogas Production from Local Substrate using a Batch Feeding Digester

627

fuels are generally used as sources of energy in combustion engines, and in some instances as rawmaterials for the petrochemical industries. Although, the fossil fuels play a key role in the global economic and political situations, their numerous challenges accounted for a shift to more sustainable energy sources (El Shinnawi et al., 1989; John, 1992; Desai and Madamwar, 1994; Fabian, 2003; Matins, 2003; Santosh et al., 2004; Igoni et al., 2008; FS, 2011). Environmental pollution is the major issue of concern associated with exploitation of these fuels. There are currently about 750 Giga tones of CO2 in the atmosphere, a greenhouse gas that was identified as the major contributor to the current global warming problem. Reports by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) revealed that, the world is experiencing severe consequences ranging from drought, melting of sea ice, diminishing of important plant and animal species to overspread of diseases especially in the developing countries. Oil spill and gas flaring are another environmental threats associated with exploitation of fossil fuels. Burger (2007) had shown that between 1970 and 2004 more than 700 tones of oil were accidentally spilled from tankers across the globe, the consequences of which include economic loses and destruction of marine plants and animals (Hischberg et al., 2004). Another major challenge with these fuels is their un-sustainability and projected depletion over the years. While the total reserves would only last for the next few decades, the consumption was projected to doubled in many centuries. For example, analysis by Energy Information Administration (EIA) of USA showed the US energy demands to rise by 62 % for natural gas, 33 % for oil, and 45 % for electricity by the year 2020. To address the various energy challenges associated with these fuels, many countries have indicated commitment to biofuels production. Biogas in particular, had became an important source of energy even in the rural communities. For example, there are currently about 135000 biogas plants in Nepal (Katuwal and Bohara, 2009). In the year 2007, there were 26.5 million biogas plants in china, producing 10.5 billion m3 of biogas to mostly the rural people (Chen et al., 2010). In African countries such as South Africa, Zimbabwe, Egypt e.t.c there are numerous of biogas producing units used daily by the local inhabitants (Amigun and VomBlottnitz, 2010). However, despite these international commitments to sustainable energy development, the Nigerian government and the local communities have only indicated a partial concern. In fact very few biogas units, operating mainly on a significantly low level of technology are available in Nigeria. The local manure from animal herds, other agricultural and industrial wastes that are largely produced daily in the country could be employed as raw-materials for both small and large scale biogas production. In addition to energy security and waste management, the biogas has strong potentials for jobs creation and source of revenues to the government. The current study is aimed at evaluating the effects of kinetic parameters on biogas production from a local substrate produced in Nigeria using a batch feeding digester developed by the authors. The abundant of the biogas feedstock, especially the cow dung, and other advantages propelled the desire for continuous research in this field.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. The Raw-Material The substrate used in both batch 1 and batch 2 experiments was a fresh cow dung collected from local Fulani Herds men settled in Funtua local government of Katsina state, Nigeria. The cows are mostly being fed with fresh grass. The substrate was collected in a polyethylene bag and immediately prepared after collection by mixing with water in the ratio 1:1 (w/w) and then placed in the digesters for the experiments. 2.2. The Digestion Process The digester used in the experiments was a simple (single stage) cylindrical batch feeding digester that has no moving parts, developed locally by the authors for the purpose of this research. A duplicate of

628

Abdullahi, I., Ismail, A., Musa, A. O. and Galadima, A.

the digester was further constructed to allow batch wise studies. Each time the digester was loaded with slurry and then sealed off for the production of biogas to begin. At the end of an experiment, the digester was off loaded by opening the lid and removing the old slurry, new slurry then introduced and then sealed off again. The gas was collected using an inverted graduated gas holder. Gas impurities such as H2S and CO2 were generally removed by passing the exit gas mixture through aqueous solutions of NaOH and Pb (CH3COO)2 (BDH, England Chemicals, . 98% purity). The experiments were performed in two batches; each batch was repeated two times using two digesters having the same contents. First Batch In the first experiment of the first batch the digesters consists of 1.8 kg of cow slurry operated at an average temperature of 200C for 40 days. The digesters were labeled D1 (200C) and D2 (200C) respectively. The experiment was then repeated with the same digesters having equal contents as before but this time operated at an average temperature of 350C. The digesters were labeled D1 (350C) and D2 (350C) respectively. The composition of the digesters is shown in Table 2.0.
Table 2: Composition of the unseeded digesters
CONTENTS TS (Kg) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 OPERATING TEMPERATURE 200C 200C 350C 350C

Slurry (Kg) D1(200C) 1.80 D2(200C) 1.80 D1(350C) 1.80 D2(350C) 1.80 TS = Total Solid, VS= Volatile Solid

DIGESTER

VS (Kg) 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12

Second Batch The second batch of the experiment was also repeated two times using two digesters. Firstly the two digesters were loaded with 1.8kg of slurry seeded with approximately 0.2kg of slurry obtained at the end of the first batch experiment. The digesters were then sealed off and again operated at an average temperature of 200C for 40 days. The digesters were labeled and respectively. The experiment was then repeated with the same digesters containing equal amount of seeded substrates as before but this time operated at an average temperature of 350C. The digesters were then and respectively. The composition of the digesters is shown in Table labeled as 2.1
Table 2.1: Composition of the seeded digesters
CONTENTS Cow slurry DIGESTER M* TS (Kg) 1.8 0.15 1.8 0.15 1.8 0.15 1.8 0.15 *M is the mass of the slurry seeding VS 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.12 M* 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 TS (Kg) 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 0.0083 VS 0.0067 0.0067 0.0067 0.0067 OPERATING TEMPERATUR E 200C 200C 350C 350C

3. Results and Discussion

The details of the results obtained are shown in table 3.1. The gas production was noted at five days interval due to the fact that anaerobic digestion is a slow process. As can be seen from the table D1(20) produced a cumulative biogas of seven liters while D2(20) produced a cumulative biogas of eight liters

Effect of Kinetic Parameters on Biogas Production from Local Substrate using a Batch Feeding Digester

629

with the highest gas production of 2 liters between day 31 and 35. Similarly D1(35) produced 12.5 liters of biogas with the highest gas production of four liters between day 21 and 25. D2(35) on the other hand produced a total biogas of 13liters. The gas production of D1(20), D2(20), D1(35) and D2(35) is shown in the graph of figure 3.1. Gas production began only after fifteen days for the digesters working at 200C while gas production began after ten days in the case of the digesters working at an elevated temperature of 350C.
Table 3.1: Details of the result obtained
Volume of gas produced (L) 15-Nov 16-20 21-25 0.00 0.50 1.50 0.50 1.00 1.50 1.50 3.00 4.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 1.50 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.50 3.00 3.00 2.50 3.00 3.00 2.50

Days D1(200C) D2(200C) D1(350C) D2(350C) D1(200C) D2(200C) D1(350C) D2(350C)

0-5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 3.00

10-Jun 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.50 2.50 2.50

26-30 1.00 1.50 3.50 4.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 3.00

31-35 2.50 2.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.50 2.50 2.50

36-40 1.50 1.50 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00

Total 7.00 8.00 12.50 13.00 10.50 10.50 18.50 19.50

Figure 3.1: Gas productions of the unseeded samples

As can clearly be seen on the graph (figure 3.1) the gas production of the unseeded substrate is in the order D2(35) > D1(35) > D2(20) > D1(20). This shows that the gas production at a temperature of 350C is higher for a given time than at 200C. D1(20) produced 12.5L of biogas when operated at 350C which means that there is 78.6% increase in gas production. Similarly D2(20) produced a total biogas of 13L when the temperature is increased to 350C and this represents 62.5% increase. It was observed that in the final days of the experiment D1(35) and D2(35) produced no gas at all, this shows that the gas content within the substrate was completely given off, while D1(20) and D2(20) continued to produce gas even in the final days of the experiment. This again shows that it is not all the gas content within the substrate that is given off still gas can be produced had it been the time is extended.

630

Abdullahi, I., Ismail, A., Musa, A. O. and Galadima, A.

Figure 3.2: Gas productions of the seeded samples

Figure 3.2 shows the graphs of the gas productions of the seeded digesters i.e , , . As can be seen gas production began in the first days of the experiment. produced 1 litre of gas between day 1 and 5 and cumulatively produced 10.5L of gas at the end of the experiment. The gas production is almost uniform. followed the same trend as and this shows that the pattern of gas production for the two digesters are almost identical. The cumulative biogas produced by the seeded samples operating at 350C is 18.5L and 19.5L respectively for and . This result shows that there was increase in gas production when compared with the unseeded samples. D1(20) when seeded gives 50% increase in biogas production at the same operating temperature. Similarly there was 25% increase in production in the case of seeded D2(20) at the same operating temperature. gave 48% increase in gas production while gave 50% increase. Clearly this result shows that seeding the substrate increase gas production considerably. 3.1. Evaluation of the Waste Biodegradability of the Digester In order to evaluate the performance of the digester, kinetics of anaerobic digestion process has to be evaluated. The kinetics helps in finding the performance of the digester and consequently helps in digester design (Castillo et al., 1995). It is intended here to find the performance of the digester at the two tested temperatures (200C and 350C) and also to find the performance of the digester when seeded and when not seeded. There are many kinetic models but in this research the first order kinetic was selected, this is because it is easy and simple to apply. But before applying the model, the ultimate methane yield (B0) was evaluated. To evaluate B0 a plot of the cumulative Methane yield B against the inverse of digestion time (T-1) has to be plotted. By extrapolation of the straight line as T tends to infinity, the intercept gives the value of B0 (Alvarez et al., 1993). In this research B0 was found to be 9.25L, 14L, 18L and 24L respectively for D1(20), , D1(35) and . 3.2. The First Order Kinetic Model The first order kinetic model equation is given as (Pfeffer, 1974; Chen and Hashimoto, 1979);

Effect of Kinetic Parameters on Biogas Production from Local Substrate using a Batch Feeding Digester
ds = ks dt

631 (3.1)

As can be seen from the equation above, the rate of change of concentration with time is directly proportional to the decay constant k and thus the higher the k, the higher the biodegradability of the digester. In order to know the exact value of k for the digester, the first order equation has to be solved. i.e
s

s0

ds = k dt s 0

ln S ln S 0 = kt s ln( ) = kt s0 Where S0 is the initial substrate concentration, But because the concentration S of a given substrate is difficult to obtain, the last equation can be written as [12]: B B (3.2) ln ( 0 ) = kt
B0

Therefore, the slope of the graph of

ln ( B0 B ) B0

against the digestion time represents the k value.

Figure 3.3: Graph of lnS/S0 against time for D1(20)

For D1(20) k was found by calculating the slope of figure 3.3 above and is exactly equals to 0.03167 per day.

632

Abdullahi, I., Ismail, A., Musa, A. O. and Galadima, A.

Similarly the k value of the seeded digester was found by finding the slope of figure 3.4. The value is exactly equals to 0.0354 per day. This shows that the degradability of the digester was high when seeded and thus the performance was also higher. On the other hand the k value of D1(35) was found from the graph of figure 3.5 to be 0.0310 per day while that of is exactly equals to 0.0408 per day. This again shows that the digester performance is high when the digester is seeded.
Figure 3.4: Graph of lnS/S0 against time for D1(20)

As can be seen from table 3.2, when the digester D1(20) was seeded the degradability increases from 0.03167 to 0.0354 per day which represents 12% increase. Similarly when digester D1(35) was seeded, the degradability increases from 0.031 to 0.0408 which represents 31.6% increase in the efficiency. On the other hand when the temperature of D1(20) was raised to 350C, there was a decrease in the efficiency of the digester by 1.9%. This fall could be attributed to experimental error. When the temperature of was increased to 350C there was an increase in the efficiency by 15.25%.
Figure 3.5: Graph of lnS/S0 against time for D1(35) & D1(35)

Effect of Kinetic Parameters on Biogas Production from Local Substrate using a Batch Feeding Digester
Table 3.2: Modeled K values for the digesters
Digester D1(20) D1(35) B0 (L) 9.25 14 18 24 K value (Per day) 0.03167 0.0354 0.0310 0.0408

633

3.3. Comparison between the Effects of Seeding and that of Temperature As can be seen from table 3.1 unseeded D1(20) produced a cumulative biogas of 7.0liters, but when operated at 350C produced 12.5 litres of gas and this represents 78.6% increase in the production. However, when the same digester D1(20) was seeded but maintained at constant temperature(200C), there was 50% increase in the gas production. This means effect of temperature outweigh that of seeding by 28.6%. Similarly, when the temperature of D2(20) was increased to 350C, there was 62.5% increase in the gas production, but when seeded and operated at constant temperature of 200C the rise in the production was only 25%. This again shows that the effect of temperature outweighs that of seeding. Going by this result it is clear that the effect of temperature on biogas production outweigh that of seeding.
Table 3.3: Comparison between the effects of seeding & temperature
Digester D1 D2 Gas production at 200C 350C 7 litres 12.5 litres 8 litres 13 litres Increase (%) 78.6% 62.5% Gas production when seeded Not seeded 10.5 litres 7 litres 10 litres 8 litres Increase (%) 50% 25% Difference (a b) 28.6% 37.5%

4. Conclusion
From the results of the various experiments the following conclusions could be drawn. The digester was able to produced 7, 18 and 10.5 liters when operated at 20 and 350C and seeded respectively. The effect of temperature outweighs that of seeding by at least 25%. This shows that possibly the major step affected by temperature is methanogenesis. Thus seeding was found to be insignificant with decrease in temperature in terms of increasing the biogas yield and it can be concluded within the limits of experimental errors that the role played by temperature in anaerobic digestion process is greater than that played by seeding even though both parameters increased the production. On the other hand, the reaction process was found to linearly fits the first order kinetics with respect to the cow dung substrate concentration ([S]). The quantity of net biogas produced from the various experiments suggests the economic potentials of the cow dung for both small and large scale biogas production, as well as the, suitability of the developed digester for the production process.

References
[1] [2] [3] Amigun, B., VonBlonttnitz, H. (2010) Capacity-cost and Location-cost analyses for biogas plants in Africa. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55, 63-67. Burgher, P (2007) In-depth analysis of accidental oil spill from tankers in the context of global oil spill trends from all sources. Journal of Harzadous Materials, 140, 245-256. R-T., Castillo, P. Lliabres-Luengo, J M., Alvarez (1995). "Temperature effect on anaerobic digestion of bedding straw in a one phase system at different inoculum concentrations." Agriculture Ecosystems and Environment, vol 54 (1995): 55-66.

634 [4] [5] [6]

Abdullahi, I., Ismail, A., Musa, A. O. and Galadima, A. Chen Y R and Hashimoto A G (1979) Biodegradation of solid waste by anaerobic digestion. Applied BiotechnoL 4 (1979) 1-27 Chen, Y., Yang, G., Sweeney, S., Feng, Y. (2010) Household biogas use in rural china: A stdy of opportunities and constraints. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14, 545-549. Desai M, Madamwar, D (1994) "anaerobic digestion of a mixture of Cheese Whey, poultry waste and cattle dung: a study of the use of adsorbents to improve digester performance." Environmental Pollution, Vol 86(3) (1994): 337-340. El Shinnawi, M M, El tahawi, B S, El houseini M, Fahmy S S (1989) "changes of organic constituents of crp residues and pultry waste during fermentation for biogas production." Applied Microbiology, Biotechnology, vol 5 (1989): 475-486 M, Fabian (2003). An introduction ta anaerobic digestion of organic wastes. Scotland: Remade, 2003. Fact sheet (FS, 2011)"global energy demand". 03 02 2011 <www.worldenergyoutlook.org >. Hischberg, S., Burgher, P., Piekerman, G., Domes, R (2004) Severe accidents in the energy sector; comparative perspective. Journal of Harzadous Materials, 111, 57-65. H. Igoni, M.J. Ayotamuno , C.L. Eze b, S.O.T. Ogaji , S.D. (2008) Probert. "designs of anaerobic digesters for producing biogas from municipal solid waste." Applied Energy, vol 85 (2008): 430-438. IPCC (2007) Fourth assessment report: Climate change 2007 (AR4). Intergovernmental panel on climate change. Valencia, Spain, November, 2007. M., John. (1992) "Organic chemistry." McMurry, John. Organic chemistry. Books/Cole publishing company, 1992. Katawul, H., Bohara, A.K (2009) Biogas: A promising renewable technology and its impact on rural households in Nepal. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13, 2668-2674. J., Mata Alvarez, A MTZ, Viturtia PP, Llabr-Luengo and F Cecchi (1993) Kinetic and performance study of a batch two-phase anaerobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes. Biomass and Bioenergy 5(6) (1993) 60. Pfeffer JT (1974) "temperature effects on anaerobic fermentation of domestic refuse" Biotechnol. Bioeng 16(6) (1974) 771-78 S., Martins (2003). Chemistry:The Molecular Nature of Matter and change third edition . New York: McGraw hill, 2003. Y., Santosh, T.R., Sreekishnan, S. Kohli, V., Rana (2004) "enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates." Bioresource Technology (2004).

[7]

[8] [9] [10] [11]

[12] [13] [14] [15]

[16] [17] [18]