- Open Access
Comparative study on factors affecting anaerobic digestion of agricultural vegetal residues
© Cioabla et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2012
- Received: 12 January 2012
- Accepted: 23 May 2012
- Published: 6 June 2012
Presently, different studies are conducted related to the topic of biomass potential to generate through anaerobic fermentation process alternative fuels supposed to support the existing fossil fuel resources, which are more and more needed, in quantity, but also in quality of so called green energy. The present study focuses on depicting an optional way of capitalizing agricultural biomass residues using anaerobic fermentation in order to obtain biogas with satisfactory characteristics.. The research is based on wheat bran and a mix of damaged ground grains substrates for biogas production.
The information and conclusions delivered offer results covering the general characteristics of biomass used , the process parameters with direct impact over the biogas production (temperature regime, pH values) and the daily biogas production for each batch relative to the used material.
All conclusions are based on processing of monitoring process results , with accent on temperature and pH influence on the daily biogas production for the two batches. The main conclusion underlines the fact that the mixture batch produces a larger quantity of biogas, using approximately the same process conditions and input, in comparison to alone analyzed probes, indicating thus a higher potential for the biogas production than the wheat bran substrate.
Adrian Eugen Cioabla, Ioana Ionel, Gabriela-Alina Dumitrel and Francisc Popescu contributed equally to this work
- Anaerobic Digestion
- Wheat Bran
- Biogas Production
- Anaerobic Fermentation
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is the natural process in which complex organic materials are broken down into simpler compounds in the absence of oxygen by the action of several micro-organism communities. Anaerobic digestion consists of four biochemical steps: hydrolysis - hydrolytic bacteria remove polymers to monomers; acidogenesis - acidogenic bacteria remove monomers to short carboxylic acid, CO2, hydrogen and alcohol; acetogenesis - the products of the previous phase are removed to acetic acid; methanogenesis - methane is built of the acetic acid [1–4].
The most important environmental benefit of the anaerobic digestion process is the production of biogas, a renewable energy source, which can be used as fuel for the internal combustion engines, for direct heating and, under better efficiency, in cogeneration, for electricity production as well . The production of biogas based on biomass generates the reduction of fossil fuel use and enables the lowering of CO2-levels with fossil C origin, in accordance with EU directives regarding the climate changes and supporting the reduction of the green house gases emission especially, not mentioning the use of a local energy resource. Apart from yield of biogas, anaerobic digestion creates solid and liquid by-products, which can have value as a fertilizer or soil amendment.
The biogas produced by anaerobic digestion is a blend consisting mainly of methane (CH4 ≈ 60% by volume), carbon dioxide (CO2 ≈ 40% by volume), and small traces of hydrogen sulphide (H2S), hydrogen (H2), nitrogen (N2), carbon monoxide (CO), oxygen (O2), water vapor (H2O) or other gases and vapors of various organic compounds.
Due to the complexity of the bioconversion processes, many factors affecting the performances of an anaerobic digester were analyzed and depicted [6, 7]. These can be divided in three main classes: (i) feedstock characteristics, (ii) reactor design and (iii) operational conditions. Among the operational conditions, temperature and pH are the most important parameters, thus the research was directed especially to these.
Anaerobic digestion is strongly affected by temperature [8, 9]. Optimum temperature of mesophilic digester for biogas production is 35°C. In the mesophilic range, the activity and growth rate of bacteria decrease by 50% for each 10°C drop. Fall in biogas production starts, when temperatures decreases to 20°C and the production even stops at 10°C . Increasing the temperature level up to 37°C leads to the time reduction required for the digestion process. Further increase in temperature decreases the rate of biogas generation.
The pH of the anaerobic digestion process is another parameter that has a significant effect on the digestion process [10–12]. The optimum pH range in an anaerobic digester is 6.8 to 7.2. However, the process can tolerate a range of 6.5 up to 8.0.
In the present paper, experimental investigation and results for anaerobic digestion of wheat bran and mix damaged ground grains in batch process have been reported.
Main feedstock parameters at the beginning and the end of the process
Ash content [%]
Lower heating value [kJ/kg]
Higher heating value [kJ/kg]
Beginning of the process
Mix damaged ground grains (50% wheat rest corn kernels)
End of the process
Mix damaged ground grains (50% wheat rest corn kernels)
Chemical composition of the used substrates
Concentration in wheat bran [mg / kg]
Concentration in mix [mg / kg]
Heavy metals concentration in the used substrates
Heavy metal concentration in wheat bran, [mg / kg]
Heavy metal concentration in the mix, [mg / kg]
Description of pilot plant
The reactors are fed at the beginning of the experiment with approximately 75 kg dry biomass and 2000 L water. The biogas production was measured daily, as well the pressure difference based on a pressure drop, using the semi-automated system and a gas counter. Methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) compositions (v/v) were measured using a Delta 1600 IV gas analyzer. Temperature and pH were also continuously recorded.
From Figure 7, it can be noticed that the higher value of biogas yield in case of an anaerobic digestion of mix is 0.955 m3 and correspond to a pH of 7 and a temperature of 33°C. The mix experiments were based on values measured during 65 days.
The correlation coefficient between T and the biogas volume generated during the anaerobic digestion (T-temperature in degree C and Q - amount of biogas in m3) (Figure 7) is 0.4642 that represents not a very large value, but a significant one, according to , where three domains −1 to −0.33; -0.33 to 0.33; and 0.33 to 1; are given. The correlation coefficient between pH and Q is 0.2737. This result is insignificant but still a positive value. The two quantities are still positively correlated meaning that the growth of one trains the increase of the other. These values are well corresponding to the location of the maxima in the cluster plan for the biogas production (Figure 7).
In correspondence, Figure 8 indicates that the highest yields of biogas for anaerobic digestion of wheat bran is 0.963 m3/day and corresponds to a pH of 6.9 and a temperature of 29°C .
The anaerobic digestion of this batch was monitored during 65 days, also.
The correlation coefficient between T and Q (temperature and amount of biogas) is - 0.508, and is considered as a significant one. The coefficient between the pH and Q value is 0.6892, and is also considered significant. The two quantities are positively correlated, the correlation coefficients corresponding to the location of the maxima in the cluster plan of the biogas production. The two parameters are positively correlated, indicating clearly that the growth of one trains the increase of the other.
The presented study underlines the potential of using different degraded cereal biomass in order to obtain biogas using the anaerobic fermentation process.
Based on the two series of experiments and results, the mix of wheat and corn kernels proved to be more suited for biogas production than the wheat bran batch, for both one considering the general parameter variation in time and the produced biogas quantities.
Similar correlation coefficients were obtained in a further reproducibility tests on same substrate leading to a conclusion that the model can be successfully used for this type of material in anaerobic digestion without inoculums and any further added dry biomass during the process. As other authors observed , ensiling dose does not increase the methane yield, for any crop materials.
Thus, one concludes that the described technology by using vegetal biomass is a relevant solution for using and thus solving the problem of the existing degraded materials which are not capitalized. By comparing two ranges of experiments, conclusions that a better solution is offered by mixtures, are drawn. The analysis accomplished between the experimental data of biogas produced, pH and temperature values supports the conclusions. The value of the technology proposed might be extended by using the resulted compost as fertilizer for agricultural crops.
Material preparation for the anaerobic fermentation
Both materials were prepared similar for the anaerobic fermentation process: the material was subject to dimension reduction with a Retsch SM2000 grinding device to a dimensions of 1 – 2 mm. The selected materials for the experiments were placed inside the anaerobe reactors through the means of a submersible pump, the ratio between the solid and liquid material being 75 kg to 2000 L. The internal agitation occurred by the means of a bubble system, inserted at the bottom of each reactor and by using as agitation factor a part of the produced biogas. The pH corrections were accomplished using a lime suspension with a correction of the pH-value of 12 – 13. The suspension was inserted inside the reactors by means of dosing pumps (Hanna Instruments, model BL20). The obtained biogas was analyzed with a Delta 1600 S – IV gas analyzer for CO2 and CH4 composition with an accuracy domain of +/−5% of reading both for CH4 and CO2.
For the determination of moisture content, the used equipments are: Sartorius AC211 laboratory balance with four decimal precision, weighing dishes, a desiccator and a drying oven (model DHG-9040, A Series). The substrates were systematically weighted with the balance before, during and after the drying process until stable mass. The period of time inside the drying oven was between 2 and 4 hours.
m 1 = is the mass in grams of the empty dish
m 2 = is the mass in grams of the empty dish plus sample before drying
m 3 = is the mass in grams of the empty dish plus sample after drying
At least three determinations for each material were achieved.
For the determination of ash content the used equipments are: Sartorius AC211 laboratory balance with four decimal precision, weighing dishes, a desiccator and a furnace (model L1206 – Caloris Group). The empty dishes were inserted inside the furnace at 815°C for a period of 2 – 3 hours. The materials were measured with the balance, put inside the empty dishes and inside the furnace for approximately 2 hours. After the process was finished, the materials were put near the furnace for 10 minutes to cool and then inside the desiccator for 10–15 minutes. After those steps, the materials are weighed again.
m 1 = is the mass in grams of the empty dish
m 2 = is the mass in grams of the empty dish plus sample
m 3 = is the mass in grams of the empty dish plus ash
M ad is the% moisture content of the test sample used for determination.
Again at least three determinations for each material were carried out.
For the determination of the calorific value there was used a Sartorius 320 laboratory balance with four decimal precision, a calorimeter bomb model IKA C 5000, metal dishes for the bomb, cotton fuses, a pellet press, a ion chromatograph model Dionex IC 20, distilled water and glass bottles for the liquid samples. A quantity of about 0.7 grams of material was pressed inside the pellet press, weighed without the cotton fuse, and introduced inside the bomb. After approximately 40 minutes, the sample was removed from the bomb, washed with 100 ml distilled water and the registered value indicated by the apparatus is inserted into a protocol. The liquid sample was further analyzed inside the ion chromatograph for chlorine, sulphur and nitrates and the obtained values are used for correcting the initial values, together with hygroscopic humidity and ash content. Again, one mentions that at least three determinations for each material were made.
Determining of major and minor elements was based on a two step method. First, each sample was introduced inside a hot press, at a temperature level of 140°C and a force of 50 kN for a period of 330 sec. For the second step, the pressed materials were inserted into a MagiXPro X – Ray Fluorescence Spectrometer for a period of 20 minutes / sample for major elements and 1.5 hours / sample for the minor elements. The results were stored and imported via PC.
For the determination of C and N content the LECO TruSpec CHN analyzer was used, with dedicated software and a Sartorius 320 laboratory balance. Before the determination, a general analysis of the system was made, through blind tests and standard materials for equipment calibration. The obtained values were used for recalculation of the results up to their constancy and the average value was considered.
The correlation coefficient used for data analysis was developed based on real laboratory data, as resulted from the two anaerobic digestion experiments. By analyzing the set of experimental data, it was assumed that the dependence between the biogas production and pH and temperature of the substrates is best to be evaluated by means of the regression coefficient. Also the analysis by means of histograms between the biogas volumes (quantity) generated under different temperature and pH values was proposed.
xi, yi with i = 1, 2, … N, are sample values of the measured quantities (physical values) for which the correlation coefficients are calculated. In particular they represent the substrate pH value during anaerobic digestion, as a function of produced biogas volume [m3/day] and the substrate temperature during anaerobic digestion process [°C] as a function of produced biogas volume [m3/day].
The work was supported by the project “Develop and Support of Multidisciplinary Postdoctoral Programmes in Major Technical Areas of National Strategy of Research - Development - Innovation” 4D-POSTDOC, contract no. POSDRU/89/1.5/S/52603, project co-funded from European Social Fund through Sectorial Operational Programme Human Resources Development 2007–2013. The authors would like to acknowledge also the ofi Austrian Research Institute for Chemistry and Technology for their support in the frame of the Phydades Project and the above mentioned project.
- Samir KK, Rao YS, Tian CZ, Buddhi PL, Tyagi RD, Kao CM: Bioenergy and biofuel from biowastes and biomass. Reston:American Society of Civil Engineers; 2010:44.Google Scholar
- Decker T, Menrad K: Regulation and innovation in biogas technology in selected European countries. Int J Public Policy 2007,2(Nos. ½):89.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kumar S, Mukherjee S, Devotta S: Anaerobic digestion of vegetable market waste in India, World Review of Science, Technology and Sustainable. Development 2010,7(No. 3):217.Google Scholar
- Lyberatos G, Skiadas IV: Modelling of anaerobic digestion - a review. Global Nest: The International Journal 1999,1(2):63-76.Google Scholar
- Demirel B, Scherer P: Production of methane from sugar beet silage without manure addition by a single-stage anaerobic digestion process. Biomass Bioenerg 2008,32(3):203-209. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.09.011View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Ward AJ, Hobbs PJ, Holliman PJ, Jones DL: Optimisation of the anaerobic digestion of agricultural resources. Bioresource Technol 2008, 99: 7928-7940. 10.1016/j.biortech.2008.02.044View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Surroop D, Mohee R: Comparative assessment of anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste at mesophilic and thermophilic temperatures. Int J Environ Technol Manag 2011,14(Nos. 1/2/3/4):238.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Chae KJ, Jang A, Yim SK, Kim IS: The effects of digestion temperature and temperature shock on the biogas yields from the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of swine manure. Bioresource Technol 2008, 99: 1-6. 10.1016/j.biortech.2006.11.063View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Choorit W, Wisarnwan P: Effect of temperature on the anaerobic digestion of palm oil mill effluent. Electron J Biotechn 2007,10(No.3, Issue of July 15):376.Google Scholar
- Romano RT, Zhang R: Anaerobic digestion of onion residuals using a mesophilic Anaerobic Phased Solids Digester. Biomass Bioenerg 2011,35(Issue 10):4174-4179.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wu L, Hao Y, Sun C, Liu R: Effect of different solid concentration on biogas yield and composition during anaerobic fermentation process. International Journal Global Energy Issues 2009,31(Nos. 3/4):240.Google Scholar
- Kumar S: Performance study for anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste in a single phase reactor. Intl J Environ Pollut 2010,43(Nos. 1/2/3):16.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Cioabla AE, Ionel I, Popescu F: Study connected with wood residues behavior during anaerobic fermentation process. Environ Eng Manag J 2010,9(10):1411-1416.Google Scholar
- Ionel I, Ionel S, Nicole D: Correlative comparison of two optoelectronic carbon monoxide measuring instruments. Jl Optoelectron Adv Ms 2007,9(11):3541-3545.Google Scholar
- Kreuger E, Nges IA, Björnsson L: Ensiling of crops for biogas production: effects on methane yield and total solids determination. Biotechnol Biofuels 2011, 4: 44. 10.1186/1754-6834-4-44View ArticleGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.