Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
in press
2013
ABSTRACT
An anaerobic digestion pilot system was implemented in June 2010 in the Moroccan village of Dayet
Ifrah. The input material consists of toilet wastewater and cattle manure. Biogas is produced under
anaerobic conditions. It is used for heating and cooking. This biogas system could be an useful
sanitation technology due to its ability to treat wastewater. The biogas system was monitored over
86 days in summer 2012 to measure gas production. The average gas production recorded was
about 1,870 l per day. This amount is sufcient for a farming family composed of 17 people. Our work
seeks to nd the most appropriate formula to predict biogas production under Moroccan conditions.
We compared and ranked different formulas by applying principal component analysis and the
ELECTRE III method. The variables studied were the chemical oxygen demand reduction and biogas
volume measurements. The results show that the formula of Vedrenne (2007) is the most
appropriate equation to predict biogas production in Moroccan rural areas.
Key words
| anaerobic digestion, biogas, ELECTRE III method, methanisation, Moroccan rural areas,
principal component analysis
INTRODUCTION
Anaerobic digestion is a series of biological processes in
(Naik et al. ).
The rst two stages are often grouped together as they are per-
Uncorrected Proof
2
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
sensitive to temperature variations of more than 3 C; therefore, variations have to be kept within a limited range to
ensure steady biogas production. To cope with this constraint, the digester should be covered with a good thermal
odour.
The main stages of anaerobic digestion are: hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis and methanogenesis.
Alkalinity
Partial alkalinity, as a measure of bicarbonate concentration, and intermediate alkalinity, as a measure of the
Uncorrected Proof
3
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
follows:
The solids retention time (SRT) is the average time solids spend
in the digester, whereas the hydraulic retention time (HRT) is
Table 1
the average time the liquid sludge is held in the digester. The
subsequent steps of the digestion process are directly related
to the SRT. A decrease in the SRT decreases the extent of the
reactions and vice versa. Each time sludge is withdrawn, a fraction of the bacterial population is removed thus cell growth
must at least compensate cell removal to ensure steady state
Alkalinity (g CaCO3)
Acidity (g)
Ratio acidity/alkalinity
13 June 2011
11
0.27
16 June 2011
14
6.75
0.48
23 June 2011
10.45
4.76
0.46
27 June 2011
12.23
5.66
0.46
pH measurements
pH
inlet
pH
outlet
01 April 2011
7.23
8.25
13 April 2011
7.75
8.13
14 April 2011
7.7
8.12
15 April 2011
7.6
8.2
04 May 2011
7.12
8.01
05 May 2011
7.5
8.5
06 May 2011
7.42
7.91
16 May 2011
7.08
7.91
17 May 2011
7.13
7.89
18 May 2011
7.18
8.21
01 June 2011
7.16
8.16
02 June 2011
7.35
8.2
03 June 2011
7.28
8.09
14 June 2011
7.18
7.95
20 June 2011
7.32
7.92
23 June 2011
7.41
8.18
27 June 2011
7.60
8.30
Uncorrected Proof
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
().
According
to
the
BOD5
analysis,
the
anaerobic
3.34 m3/d.
Currently, the average biogas production recorded
during summer 2012 by the ow meter installed on site as
in Table 3.
18 May 2011
8,500
1,550
27 May 2011
9,200
1,200
13 June 2011
1,150
16 June 2011
9,550
1,400
23 June 2011
7,600
1,180
27 June 2011
8,500
1,100
Table 4
Quantity of:
Biogas production
Summer
Slurry (kg/d)
90
132
in Figures 3 and 4.
Wastewater (kg/d)
Winter
(l/kg)
(l/d)
(l/kg)
(l/d)
35
3,150
450
42
190
190
3,340
640
Figure 2
Uncorrected Proof
5
Y. Abarghaz et al.
Figure 3
in press
2013
METHODS
(1)
(2)
where: Vg: the quantity of biogas produced (m3); Ps: the specic
gas production (from 200 to 900 l gas) (Figure 5);
Uncorrected Proof
6
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
water.
Q Bo Mo MCF Sg
Q Bo:Mo
(3)
where: Q: amount of biogas produced (m3); Bo: the potential of biogas production, i.e. the total volume of biogas
produced per unit of treated organic matter; Mo: oxidisable
(5)
able matter, i.e. the total volume of biogas produced per unit
of treated organic matter. It is based on the biodegradability
of the substrate; Mo: oxidizable matter; Sg: part of cattle
excreta directed towards anaerobic system; MCF: methane
conversion factor (Table 5).
Formula according to Executive Board-CDM ()
matter.
(4)
(6)
100%; CODf: fraction of COD converted to biogas; F: fraction of methane in gas (0.5, IPCC 2006); 16/12: fraction of
carbon converted to methane.
VVJ B:Mo=HRT
Table 5
Methane conversion factor (MCF) for storage of cattle slurry at different temperatures and durations
10
15
20
30
digester.
30
0.02
0.34
100
0.31
0.63
180
0.15
0.27
0.41
0.77
Uncorrected Proof
7
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
decision aid, typically used in the eld of waste management; its principle is to class different proposed actions
and select the most suitable one (Saaty ). We adopt
the ELECTRE III method in this work because it has been
executed with success during the last two decades on a
large range of real applications in ranking problematics.
and ELECTRE III, it was found that the formula of VedrA biogas ow meter was installed on site in 2012 and the
Figure 7 shows the position of each biogas production formula compared to others.
To choose the appropriate formula, we applied the
ELECTRE III method.
of
predictive
models.
PCA
is
linear
Figure 7
Uncorrected Proof
8
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
barycentre point and the origin (0,0). Thus, the closest for-
choose.
biogas amount.
Table 6
Ranking formulas
there is little gas in the gasholder, the gas pressure will be low
and the farmers needs cannot be satised.
Figure 8
In the biodigester built in Dayet Ifrah village, a manometer was introduced to measure gas pressure Figure 10).
Figure 11 shows the evolution of pressure in the gasometer over a period of 41 days. It shows that biogas is
produced under an average pressure equal to 52.7 mbar in
the reactor. This pressure is sufcient in the case of direct
Uncorrected Proof
9
Y. Abarghaz et al.
Figure 9
in press
2013
Manometer installed in Dayet Ifrah for measuring the pressure of the biogas.
Photo: Abarghaz 2012.
(Wauthelet et al. ).
Figure 11
Uncorrected Proof
10
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
achieved.
REFERENCES
CONCLUSION
According to the PCA and ELECTRE III method, our
study nds that the amount of biogas production and
COD removed in the digester are governed by the Vedrenne formula. Therefore, we conclude that the Vedrenne
equation remains the most appropriate model for the Moroccan context in estimating biogas production and COD
removed.
The technology is new and needs to be shared and tested
in order to be better applied in other Moroccan rural areas.
The outcome of this study will help in the design of new
biogas systems planned in Morocco. The goal behind this
research is to optimize capital, operation and maintenance
costs. All in all, only a well-planned and carefully designed
biogas system will improve living conditions in rural areas.
These results will improve the design of future biodigesters
planned shortly in Dayet Ifrah by GIZ and in other locations
in Morocco.
Other experiments using toilet wastewater in combination with cattle manure must be carried out to
Al Saedi, T., Rutz, D., Prassl, H., Kttner, M., Finsterwalder, T.,
Volk, S. & Janssen, R. Biogas Handbook. University of
Southern Denmark Esbjerg, Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10. DK-6700
Esbjerg, Denmark.
Appels, L., Baeyens, J., Degreve, J. & Dewil, R. Principles and
potential of the anaerobic digestion of waste-activated sludge.
Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 34, 755781.
Balsam, J. Anaerobic Digestion of Animal Wastes: Factors to
Consider. NCAT, ATTRA Publication IP219.Slot 218.
Version 102506.
Bouille, E. & Dubois, V. Treatment, purication and
valorisation of efuent from a cheese factory. Available at:
http://hmf.enseeiht.fr/travaux/CD0405/beiere/4/html/
binome3/dim_inst.htm (accessed 12 August 2011) [In
French].
Boursier, H. Study and Modelling of Biological Processes
During the Aerobic Treatment of Manure in Order to
Optimize the Process, Environment Engineering Thesis,
School of Mines in Nantes, 203 pp. [In French].
Chen, Y. R. & Hashimoto, A. G. Kinetics of methane
fermentation. Biotechnlogy and Bioengineering Symposium
8, 269.
Couturier, C. & Galtier, L. State of Knowledge of Pathogenic
Germs and Micro-Pollutants Destination During
Anaerobic Digestion of the Waste and Organic Byproducts.
ADEME program. Health-Waste, Solagro. April 2004.
[In French]
Djafri, M., Kheli, M., Kalloum, S., Tahri, A., Kaidi, K. & Touzi,
A. The impact of seeding on the waste anaerobic
digestion in Adrar city. Journal of Renewable Energies 12 (3),
369374. [In French]
Executive Board-CDM Indicative simplied baseline and
monitoring methodologies for selected smal-scale CDM
project activity categories, version 08, 14p. United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change. Available at:
http://cdm.unfccc.int/EB/023/eb23_repan33. (accessed 10
October 2012).
Franco, A., Roca, E. & Lema, J. M. Enhanced start-up of
upow anaerobic lters by pulsation. Journal of
Environmental Engineering 133 (2), 186.
Hashimoto, A. G. & Chen, Y. R. Anaerobic fermentation of
beef cattle and crop residues, In: Proc. of III annual fuels
from biomass symposium, June 46, Golden, Co.
Hashimoto, A. G. Methane from swine manure. Agricultural
Wastes 9, 299308.
Hill, D. T. A comprehensive dynamic model for animal
waste methanogenesis. Transactions of the ASAF 25,
13741380.
Uncorrected Proof
11
Y. Abarghaz et al.
in press
2013
First received 1 December 2012; accepted in revised form 21 February 2013. Available online 24 April 2013