Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 8

IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm


A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

Impact of Slurry Temperature on Biogas


Production from Chicken Waste and Food
Wastes by Anaerobic Digestion Method
Farhana Huqe 1* and Shuichi Torii2
1
Doctoral student, Department of Mechanical System Engineering, Kumamoto University, Kurokami, 2-39-1, Kumamoto860-
8555, Japan.
2
Professor, Department of Mechanical System Engineering, Kumamoto University, Kurokami, 2-39-1, Kumamoto 860-8555,
Japan. *Corresponding author

ABSTRACT
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is considered to be the most convenient method for biogas production. But this process is mainly
maintained by several species of microorganisms and slurry temperature plays a vital role on influencing the activity of these
microbes to produce biogas from organic wastes. In this paper, we have focused on the influence of slurry temperature on the
of biogas production from chicken waste and food wastes. In our experiment, we have set two 10L plastic tanks as digesters (D1
and D2 ) and poured the slurry in it and kept for 14 days anaerobic digestion in our laboratory. One of the digesters (D 1) was
kept at mesophilic temperature and another digester (D 2) was kept at thermophilic temperature. In case of D 1, the slurry
temperature was maintained within 20ο C to 25 ο C (mesophilic condition) and for D2, the slurry temperature was preserved
between 40 ο C to 45 ο C (thermophilic condition) with the help of a heat controller. Both digesters were often shaken to avoid the
formation of surface crust which can be responsible to create barrier during the biochemical interaction of the
microorganisms. During anaerobic digestion, we observed that, the biogas production rate was being increased as the active
sludge was being increased in D2. The maximum amount of biogas produced in D1 was about 615mL and in D2 was
1200.50mL. Besides, the highest amount of methane obtained in the raw biogas of D1 was 54.28% and for D2 , the maximum
methane concentration was found to be 69.47%. These results indicate that, the increment in slurry temperature can be utilized
as a method to enhance biogas production by increasing the methane concentration in the raw biogas. Besides, the biogas
production rate can also be accelerated with this method.
Keywords: Biogas, anaerobic digestion, slurry temperature, daily biogas production, methane concentration

1. INTRODUCTION
Energy crisis and major changes in the climates are the prime burning issues to the modern civilization. Rapid
growth in the population and abandoned urbanization are the reasons behind such situation. As the population has
become larger, therefore, the demand of energy has also become ten times larger and this condition is leading to the
severe energy crisis. To reduce poverty, improve life conditions, and promote living standards; we have to get sufficient
amounts of reasonably priced energy. Currently, the main source of energy for the world’s industries and individuals is
fossil fuel; however, as fossil fuels are not renewable and they are very limitedly found in the earth, therefore, the price
of all types of fossil fuels are increasing day by day. Another concern related to the usage of fossil fuels is the
environmental pollution, resulting in global warming, and water, air, and soil contamination. As such, enormous
efforts are being directed towards using renewable energy sources, mainly solar, wind, and bioenergy, in place of fossil
fuels. Each of these renewable energy sources has tremendous potential to be utilized instead of traditional fossil fuels.
Among them, biogas originated form solid organic waste materials has enormous capability to reduce the application of
natural gas in various purposes. Biogas can be produced by both thermochemical and biochemical method. But the
thermochemical methods like pyrolysis or combustion can make environmental problem. For such circumstances,
anaerobic digestion can be a better method to produce biogas from solid wastes. Anaerobic digestion is the mostly
employed technique of organic waste demolition due to its high performance in volume reduction and stabilization and
the production of biogas that makes the process profitable. However, biological hydrolysis, which is the rate-limiting
step for the anaerobic degradation [1] has to be improved to enhance the overall process performance and to reduce the
associated cost. Several mechanical, thermal, chemical, or biological pretreatment methods have been considered to
improve hydrolysis and anaerobic digestion performance.

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 13


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

These pretreatments result in the lysis or disintegration of cells [2, 3] and release of intracellular matter that becomes
more accessible to anaerobic micro-organisms [4], thus improving anaerobic digestion [1]. Anaerobic digestion process
is very significant method as it reduces the total mass of wastes, generates solid or liquid fertilizer and yields energy.
This biochemical method is carried out by some selective microbial species and the interaction of these microorganisms
is highly influenced by some factors such as temperature and PH of the slurry. This process can be operated at three
different thermal conditions: psychrophilic (12-16οC), mesophilic (25-35οC,) and thermophilic conditions (40-60 οC).
The main drawbacks of thermophilic anaerobic fermentation are the reduced process stability and reduced dewatering
properties of the fermented sludge and the requirement for large amounts of energy for heating, whereas the thermal
destruction of pathogenic bacteria at elevated temperatures is considered a big advantage [5]. The slightly higher rates
of hydrolysis and fermentation under thermophilic conditions have not led to a higher methane yield. [6, 7] reported no
significant change in the total methane yield from organic matter for fermentation temperatures ranging from 30 οC to
60 οC. There are three consecutive steps evolved with anaerobic digestion. The first step involves the enzyme-mediated
transformation of insoluble organic material and higher molecular mass compounds such as lipids, polysaccharides,
proteins, fats, nucleic acids, etc [8]. Into soluble organic materials, i.e. to compounds suitable for the use as source of
energy and cell carbon such as monosaccharides, amino acids and other simple organic compounds. This step is called
the hydrolysis and is carried out by strict anaerobes such as Bactericides, Clostridia and facultative bacteria such as
Streptococci, etc. In the next step, acidogenesis, another group of microorganisms ferments the break-down products to
acetic acid, hydrogen, carbon dioxide and other lower weight simple volatile organic acids like propionic acid and
butyric acid which are in turn converted to acetic acid. In the third step, these acetic acid, hydrogen and carbon dioxide
are converted into a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide by the methanogenic bacteria (acetate utilizers like
Methanosarcina spp. and Methanothrix spp. and hydrogen and formate utilizing species like Methanobacterium,
Methanococcus, etc.) [9]. The flow diagram of biogas production by anaerobic digestion is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Anaerobic digestion for biogas production

From anaerobic digestion, biogas is found as a metabolic by-product of the microorganisms. The biogas obtained in this
process is often called as “raw biogas” as it is found as a mixture of methane, carbon dioxide, ammonia, hydrogen
sulfide and trace of water. Biogas obtained from an anaerobic digester is used as fuel for power and heat production.
The quantity of biogas produced as a function of the quantity of introduced raw material will be variable according to
several factors such as the quality of the organic matter and the environmental parameters. The intensity of the

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 14


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

microbial activity on which the production of methane depends, is a function of the environment temperature [10]. As
we mentioned before that, there are three operative temperature ranges for anaerobic digester (psycrophilic, mesophilic
and thermophilic condition) [11]. The proper choice of temperature setting for an anaerobic digester is one the toughest
challenge for the researchers. Mainly, the appropriate choice of temperature is dependent on the type of raw materials
are chosen for digestion process. Because, suitable temperature range influences the microbial community structure, the
biochemical conversion pathways, the kinetics and thermodynamic balance of the biochemical reaction and the
stoichiometry of the products formed [12]. Because different reaction rates, transient accumulation of potentially
inhibitory substances is possible, particularly with complex substrates are responsible for the properties of the products
occurred during the biochemical reactions regarding with anaerobic digestion [13]. The aim of this study is to verify the
effect of digester temperature to enhance biogas production rate as well as to increase the amount of methane in the raw
biogas yields from chicken waste and food wastes.

2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY


Utilization of the impact of slurry temperature as an enhancement method for biogas production is not a new idea.
Despite of being such a familiar methodology, this technique has not been explored on enriching methane
concentration in the raw biogas yet. Hence the main focus of this study was to observe the impact of slurry temperature
on improvising the methane concentration of the raw biogas obtained from the anaerobic co-digestion of chicken waste
and food wastes. The presence of impurities in the raw biogas decreases the efficiency of raw biogas and the
requirement of purification method arises from this disadvantage. Therefore, the higher concentration of methane can
increase the efficiency of raw biogas and can also reduce the necessity of using purification method. Moreover, this
simplified experimental approach has also investigated the daily biogas production rate at two different temperature
conditions (mesophilic and thermophilic conditions). The reason behind setting two separate temperature conditions for
the experiment was to determine the temperature range that provides higher methane concentration with larger volume
of raw biogas produced from the anaerobic co-digestion of chicken waste and food wastes.

3. MATERIALS AND METHODS


3.1 Experimental set-up
In our experiment, we had two sets of experimental arrangements. Each of the sets was consist of three parts: a
digester, a water-gas chamber and a water collector. These parts were interconnected with each other by plastic hose
pipes. Besides, plastic valves were used to control the flow of biogas and water throughout the system. As it was
mentioned before that, the digester D1 was kept at mesophilic temperature condition and the digester D2 was kept at
thermophilic temperature condition, therefore we needed to use ribbon heater to heat up the digesters because the
temperature of the surrounding was about 10 ο C. Additionally, to control the slurry temperature within the selective
temperature conditions, we have used heat controller. For each of the experimental set-up, we set a thermocouple to
measure the slurry temperature and the temperature was observed on daily basis by a digital data logger (each of the
thermocouple was connected with a digital data logger). The raw biogas was collected in the gas bags for further
analyses.
3.2 Slurry preparation
In our experiment, we have used chicken wastes and food wastes as raw material of the digester. The chicken waste
used in this experiment was mainly the dried chicken manure that is basically used in the agricultural fields. Food
wastes were included rotten rice, carrot and potato. These food wastes were crushed separately into small pieces of
about one millimeter with a mechanical crusher so that they can be used as single substrate. After that, they were mixed
with chicken waste homogeneously and the mixing ratio between chicken waste and food wastes was 1:1. Later they
were mixed firmly with tap water. The mixing ratio between the waste materials and water was 1:1. Then this slurry
was poured into two digesters. As both of the digesters had capacity of 10L, therefore, 8L of slurry was poured in each
digester and kept for 14 days of fermentation.
3.3 Data collection and analyses
Daily biogas production was measured by water displacement method and the volume of raw biogas was measured
directly by the volume of water expelled by the gas from the water-gas chamber in the water collecting bottle. Figure 2
presents the schematic diagram of water displacement method and figure 3 presents the schematic diagram of the
experimental arrangement for biogas production. The raw biogas was collected in a plastic gas bag for the analysis of
methane concentration on daily basis. The methane concentration present in the raw biogas was measured by gas
chromatograph (GC-8AIT/CR8A SHIMADZU Corporation, Japan). The PH of the slurry was measured by a digital PH
meter (HM-25R (TOADKK)) before pouring it in the digester. Additionally, the moisture content of the waste materials
was measured by using moisture meter (MOC63u). Total solids (TS) and volatile solids (VS) were determined at 104

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 15


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441
ο
C to constant weight and by the loss on ignition of the dried sample at 550 ℃, respectively [14]. Table 1 is presenting
the characteristics of the raw materials.

Figure 2 Water displacement method

Figure 3 Experimental arrangement


Table 1 Characteristics of the raw materials
Characteristics Chicken waste Rotten rice Potato Carrot
Moisture content (%) 38.27 57.02 78.93 81.68

Total solid [Kg/Kg-wet] 0.0035 0.0081 0.00934 0.00347

Volatile solid [Kg/kg-wet] 0.541 0.793 0.964 0.772

4. OBJERVATION
Biogas production from the co-digestion of chicken wastes and food wastes was observed for 14days of digestion at
two different temperature conditions. In our experiment, we have used two sets of anaerobic digesters. One of them (D1)
was kept at mesophilic temperature condition (20 οC to 30 ο C) and another (D2) was kept at thermophilic temperature

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 16


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

condition (40 οC -50 οC) for 14days of anaerobic digestion. From both of these experimental set up, the daily biogas
production was observed. As we mentioned before that, the volume of the raw biogas was directly measured by waster
displacement method. Besides, the concentration of methane in raw biogas was also measured by gas chromatography
daily. Interestingly, the biogas production has been started from the 1st day of digestion in both D1 and D2. We observed
that, as the temperature of the slurry in D2 was increased, the biogas production rate was also increased compared with
the biogas production rate of the digester D2. Similar outcome was also noticed in the percentage of methane in the raw
biogas. The concentration of methane was enhanced significantly with the increase of temperature in the digester D2.

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


The main purpose of this experiment was to monitor the effect of temperature in biogas production from chicken waste
and food waste by anaerobic co-digestion method so that the most favorable temperature can be determined at which
the maximum methane concentration can be obtained. For this reason, the two digesters were kept in two different
temperature conditions. The digester D1 was placed in mesophilc condition and the digester D2 was set in thermophilic
condition. Both of these digesters were heated by ribbon heaters (as the room temperature was below 10 οC in our
experimental room) and they were wrapped by insulating materials so that the heat cannot escape from the system. In
our experimentation, we have considered the daily biogas production and percentage of methane present in the raw
biogas. Both of them were observed daily. Figure 4 is presenting the daily biogas production from the two digesters.
The blue line is presenting the daily biogas production from D1 and the red line is presenting the daily biogas
production from D2. From this figure, we can see that, biogas has been started to produce from the 1st day of digestion
in both of the digesters. For the digester D1, the minimum volume of raw biogas was found to be 89.78mL (1st day) and
the maximum volume was found to be 615mL (9th day). On the other hand, for the digester D2, the lowest volume was
110mL (1st day) and the highest volume was 1200.50mL (8th day). The average biogas production from the digester D1
was 371.42mL/day and from the digester D2, the average biogas production was found to be 700.714mL/day. These
results illustrate that, if we increase the slurry temperature, the biogas production rate can be enhanced.

Figure 4 Daily biogas production observed from the two digesters

Now, figure 5 presents the concentration of methane measured in the raw biogas from the two digesters. Similar with
the previous figure, the blue colored line stands for the methane generation from the digester D1 and the red colored
line stands for the methane concentration obtained from the raw biogas of the digester D2. From this figure we can
notice that, the least concentration of methane in the raw biogas of the digester D1 is 14% (1st day) and the largest
methane concentration was 54.28% (8th day). Now, in the case for the digester D2, the nethermost percentage of
methane in the raw biogas was 12.64% (1st day) and the highest percentage was 69.47% (9th day). Though the initial
concentration of methane in the raw biogas of the digester D2 was found to be lower compared to D1, but as the
temperature of the slurry in D2 was being increased the methane concentration was also being increased.

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 17


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

Figure 5 Methane concentration of the raw biogas measured from the two digesters
Now, figure 6 is presenting the daily temperature variation of the slurry of the two digesters. Here, the blue line is
representing the daily slurry temperature of the digester D1 and the red line is presenting the daily slurry temperature
of the digester D2. From this figure we can clearly observe that, the slurry temperature in the digester D1 is maintained
within 20οC to 30οC. On the other hand, the slurry temperature of the digester D2 was kept within 40 οC to 50 οC. The
maximum slurry temperature of the digester D1 was 29 οC (9th day). On the other hand, the maximum slurry
temperature of the digester D2 was 46 οC (8th day). The higher percentage of methane and the larger volume of raw
biogas were obtained from the digester D2 that operated at the temperature range 40 οC to 50 οC. From these outcomes
we can come to a conclusion that, slurry temperature plays very important role on enhancing biogas production rate and
by keeping the slurry temperature at thermophilic condition the better quality of raw biogas can be achieved. Though
sometimes the PH of the slurry increases with the increment of slurry temperature and creates some obstacle on biogas
production by affecting the biochemical reaction of the microbial communities, but still we have some possibility to
maintain the slurry temperature within 45 ο C or 50 οC and can get better quality of raw biogas.

Figure 6 Daily temperature of the slurry

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 18


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

6. CONCLUSION
Anaerobic co-digestion is very prominent technique for biogas production as this method provides better balance of
nutrients to the microbial community to get the favorable environment to degrade the organic waste materials. Besides,
chicken waste and food wastes are used as potential biomass now a day. In our experiment, we have focused on the
impact of temperature on biogas production as a helpful technique to enhance biogas production process. As mesophilic
temperature is considered to be favorable for biogas production [10]. But if the temperature of the slurry can be
increased to thermophilic condition, the biogas production can be enhanced [9, 11, 12]. But thermophilic condition
may not be supportive for every digestion system. Anaerobic digestion is mainly maintained by the biochemical
reactions occurred by some selective microorganisms. If the temperature of the active sludge can be increased more
than 60 οC, the activity of these microbes may be disturbed [14]. Besides, the PH of the slurry is also an important factor
for initiating and sustaining the entire process of anaerobic digestion. If the slurry temperature exceeds more than 55οC,
the PH of the slurry will also increase and thus it can easily affect the reaction rate of the microbial communities during
biogas production [14]. For this reason, we focused to find out a supportive temperature range at which we can obtain
faster biogas production rate and better methane concentration in the raw biogas. To fulfill this goal, we have set two
digesters at two different temperature conditions and we have used the mixture of chicken waste and food wastes as raw
material. One of the digester was kept at mesophilic temperature (digester D1 ) and another was kept at thermophilic
temperature (digester D2). The results obtained from the experiment indicate that, the temperature range 35℃ to 45℃ is
very favorable for biogas production. Besides, the methane concentration in the raw biogas can also be enriched within
this temperature range. The maximum volume achieved from the digester D2 is 1200.50mL (at 8th day of digestion). On
the contrary, the maximum volume of raw biogas was found to be 615mL (at 9th day of digestion). Besides, the highest
percentage of methane attained from the digester D2 is 69.47%. But the maximum methane concentration from the
digester D1 was measured 54.28%. These outcomes clearly imply that, if the slurry temperature can be increased, both
the biogas production rate and methane concentration can be increased to satisfactory level. Additionally, this
technique can be applied in larger scale of biogas plants to obtain better quality of biogas.

Acknowledgment
The authors would like to acknowledge the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
(MONBUKAGAKUSHO: MEXT for providing the financial support (PhD scholarship) for this research and the
extended help of Thermal engineering laboratory under the Department of Advanced Mechanical System Engineering,
Kumamoto University, Japan, for providing the facility for the simulation process.

References
[1] A. Tiehm, K. Nickel, M. Zellhorn, U. Neis, “Ultrasonic waste activated sludge disintegration for improving
anaerobic stabilization, Water Research”, 35(8), pp. 2003-2009, 2001.
[2] J. Ariunbaatar, A. Panico, G. Esposito, F. Pirozzi, N. Lens, “Pretreatment methods to enhance anaerobic digestion
of organic solids, Applied Energy, 123, pp. 143-156, 2014.
[3] P. Vindis, B. Mursec, M. Janzekovic, F. Cus, “Processing of soybean meal into concentrates and testing for
Genetically Modified Organism (GMO), Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering”,
20 pp. 507-510, 2007.
[4] C. Bougrier, H. Carrere, J. Delgenes, “Solubilisation of waste-activated sludge by ultrasonic treatment, Chemical
Engineering”, 106, pp. 163-169, 2005.
[5] J. Winter, U. Temper, “Microbiology of the anaerobic wastewater treatment, Sewage Waste Recycle”, 38, pp. 14-
21, 1987.
[6] A. Hashimoto, V. Varel, Y. Chen, “Ultimate methane yield from beef cattle manure: effect of temperature,
constitute, antibiotics and manure age, Agricultural Wastes”, 3, pp. 241-256, 1981.
[7] B. Mursec, M. Janzekovic, F. Cus, U. Zuperl, “Comparison of rollers after sowing of buckwheat, Journal of
Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering”, 17, pp. 269-272, 2006.
[8] R. Verma, S. Suthar, “Utility of duckweeds as source of biomass energy: a Review, BioEnergy Research”, 8, pp.
1589-1597, 2015.
[9] R. Ramaraj, Y. Unpaprom, N. Whangchai, N. Dussadee, “Culture of macroalgae Spirogyra ellipsospora for long-
term experiments, stock maintenance and biogas production. Emergent Life Science Research”, 1, pp. 38-45, 2015.
[10] R. Kettunen, J. Rintala, “ The effect of low temperature (5-29∘ C) and adaptation on the methanogenic activity of
biomass, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology”, 48, pp. 570-576, 1997.

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 19


IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm
A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijme@ipasj.org
Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 ISSN 2321-6441

[11] K. Chae, A. Jang, S. Yim, I. Kim, “The effects of digestion temperature and temperature shock on the biogas
yields from the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Bioresource Technology”, 99, pp. 1-6, 2008.
[12] R. Labatut, L. Angenent, N. Scott, “Conventional mesophilic vs. thermophilic anaerobic digestion: a trade-off
between performance stability, Water Research”, 53, pp. 249-258, 2014.
[13] E. Rice, R. Baird, A. Eaton, L. Clesceri, Standard methods for the examination of water and waste water, APHA,
(AWWA), Water Environment Fed, Washington D C, 525-987, 1995.
[14] P. Vindis, B. Mursec, M. Janzekovic and F. Cus, “The Impact of Mesophilic and Thermophilic Anaerobic
Digestion on Biogas Production, Journal of Achievements in Materials and Manufacturing Engineering”, 36(2),
pp. 192-198, 2009

AUTHORS

Farhana Huqe received B.Sc. (Hons) and M.Sc. from Department of Physics in University of Dhaka,
Bangladesh. She is currently working as a PhD student at Advanced Mechanical System in Kumamoto
University, Japan. Her research interest includes biomass conversion by anaerobic digestion and
application of computational fluid dynamics for designing convenient anaerobic digester.

Shuichi Torii was born on January 27, 1960 in Kumamoto, Japan. He received his B.Sc. in Mechanical
Engineering from Kagoshima University, Japan in 1983. He successfully completed his Masters and PhD
degrees in Mechanical Engineering from Kyushu University, Japan in 1985 and 1989 respectively. He
currently is a PROFESSOR of Department of Mechanical Engineering at Kumamoto University. His
research interests on production and development of clean Energy and renewable Energy, thermal fluid
flow transport phenomena using nano fluids and development of new clean fuel with the aid of shock-wave.

Volume 7, Issue 6, June 2019 Page 20