Biogas energy production from tropical biomass wastes by anaerobic digestion

Download Biogas energy production from tropical biomass wastes by anaerobic digestion

Post on 01-Feb-2017




2 download

Embed Size (px)


<ul><li><p>Bioresource Technology 169 (2014) 3844Contents lists available at ScienceDirect</p><p>Bioresource Technology</p><p>journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate /bior techBiogas energy production from tropical biomass wastes by anaerobicdigestion 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</p><p> Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 330 263 3855; fax: +1 330 263 3670.E-mail address: (Y. Li).Xumeng Ge a, Tracie Matsumoto b, Lisa Keith b, Yebo Li a,aDepartment of Food, Agricultural and Biological Engineering, The Ohio State University/Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center, 1680 Madison Ave., Wooster, OH44691-4096, USAbUSDA, ARS, DKI US PBARC, Plant Genetic Resources and Disease Research, 64 Nowelo Street, Hilo, HI 96720, USA</p><p>h i g h l i g h t s</p><p> Biogas energy yield of tropical biomass waste was evaluated. Liquid anaerobic digestion (L-AD) is effective for treating tropical food wastes. Solid-state anaerobic digestion (SS-AD) is suitable for treating albizia biomass. Albizia biomass showed higher methane yield than similar lignocellulosic biomass.a r t i c l e i n f o</p><p>Article history:Received 3 May 2014Received in revised form 13 June 2014Accepted 18 June 2014Available online 26 June 2014</p><p>Keywords:TropicalBiomass wasteAnaerobic digestionBiogasAlbiziaa b s t r a c t</p><p>Anaerobic digestion (AD) is an attractive technology in tropical regions for converting locally abundantbiomass wastes into biogas which can be used to produce heat, electricity, and transportation fuels.However, investigations on AD of tropical forestry wastes, such as albizia biomass and food wastes, suchas taro, papaya, and sweet potato, are limited. In this study, these tropical biomass wastes were evaluatedfor biogas production by liquid AD (L-AD) and/or solid-state AD (SS-AD), depending on feedstock charac-teristics. When albizia leaves and chips were used as feedstocks, L-AD had greater methane yields (161and 113 L kg1 VS, respectively) than SS-AD (156.8 and 59.6 L kg1 VS, respectively), while SS-ADachieved 5-fold higher volumetric methane productivity than L-AD. Mono-digestion and co-digestionof taro skin, taro flesh, papaya, and sweet potato achieved methane yields from 345 to 411 L kg1 VS,indicating the robustness of AD technology.</p><p> 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.1. Introduction</p><p>Tropical regions have high biomass productivity compared toother regions (Parikka, 2004). Large amounts of biomass wasteare generated each year from agricultural, forestry, and food sys-tems in tropical regions, such as Eastern Africa (Ferrey, 2006;Otieno and Awange, 2006; Scheffran, 2010). Albizia moluccana(albizia) is one of the fastest growing tropical and subtropical trees(West, 2014), and is considered an invasive species on islandsacross the Pacific, such as Hawaii (EL Little and Skolmen, 1989).Taro, papaya, and sweet potato, which are native to tropicalregions, are produced as traditional food (Manshardt, 2014;Midmore and Nguyen, 2003) and contribute large quantities offood wastes. For example, about 50% of the fresh papaya grownin Hawaii deteriorate and cannot be sold, creating waste thatrequires further treatment (Gill, 2004). As a result, there is anopportunity to improve the sustainability of energy production intropical regions by converting these locally abundant biomasswastes into bioenergy products; however, potential technologiesneed to be evaluated.</p><p>Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a widely used technology that canprocess various kinds of organic wastes for biogas production bydecomposing organic matter under oxygen-free conditions (Yuand Schanbacher, 2010). The biogas can be used to produce heat,electricity, compressed natural gas (CNG), and/or liquefied naturalgas (LNG). The digestate, which contains nitrogen and phosphorus,can be used as a soil amendment. AD can be carried out at differenttotal solids (TS) contents. Liquid AD (L-AD) is generally operated ata TS content of less than 15%, while solid-state AD (SS-AD) is usu-ally operated at TS higher than 15%. High methane yields havebeen obtained in L-AD due to the good control of temperature,dilution of inhibitors, and good mass transfer provided by mixing.Compared to L-AD, SS-AD generally has higher volumetric methane</p><p>;domain=pdf</p></li><li><p>X. Ge et al. / Bioresource Technology 169 (2014) 3844 39productivity, fewer moving parts, lower energy requirements forheating and mixing, and an end product that is easier to handle.Floating and stratification of fats and fibers, a problem of L-AD,can be solved in SS-AD. The drawback of SS-AD is the lower meth-ane yield than L-AD, which is caused by inadequate mass transferin the system (Li et al., 2011).</p><p>AD of taro, papaya and sweet potato has been reported in sev-eral publications with methane yields ranging from 85 to360 L kg1 VS. Bindu and Ramasamy (2008) studied biogas produc-tion of taro from AD feeding with solid feedstock, and obtained CH4yields of 156360 L kg1 VS. Yang et al. (1984) reported CH4 yieldsof 85357 L kg1 VS during AD of papaya processing wastes.Shiralipour and Smith (1984) investigated CH4 production of dif-ferent storage roots and average CH4 yields about 330 L kg1 VSwere obtained.</p><p>The biogas yield of AD is substantially affected by the composi-tion of the feedstocks (Ahn et al., 2010). Even for the same speciesof biomass, its composition can vary with the geographical loca-tion, variety, and harvesting season (Templeton et al., 2009).Therefore, characterization of feedstock components, such ascellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, and protein, is important for theestimation of methane yield.</p><p>To date, no reports on AD of albizia biomass nor on comparisonbetween L-AD and SS-AD of tropical biomass wastes have beenfound. The objective of this study was to evaluate tropical biomasswastes, including albizia leaves, albizia chips, taro skin, taro flesh,papaya, and sweet potato, as feedstocks for biogas production byAD. The compositions of these feedstocks were analyzed. BothL-AD and SS-AD of these biomass wastes were conducted.Degradation of glucan and hemicellulose in albizia biomass duringAD was also investigated.2. Methods</p><p>2.1. Feedstock and inoculum</p><p>Albizia trees were cut from the United States Department ofAgriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), Daniel KInouye (DKI) Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center (PBARC)in Hilo, Hawaii. Branches containing leaves were trimmed andthe main stem was shredded with a chipper/shredder with a gratesize of 38 mm (Goossen CS1000 PTO Model, Harper, KS, USA).Removed leaves were shredded using a food processor (KitchenAid,St. Joseph, MI, USA), placed in plastic bags and frozen prior to ship-ment. Taro skin and cooked taro flesh were waste products col-lected from a local poi factory. Culled papaya fruits were takenfrom a local papaya packing house. Sweet potato tuberous rootswere remnants collected from a field after harvest. The collectedfood wastes (taro, papaya, and sweet potato) were cut and pro-cessed in a food processor (KitchenAid, St. Joseph, MI, USA), storedin plastic bags, and completely frozen prior to shipment.</p><p>The processed feedstocks were shipped in cooler boxes with iceto the Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center (Woos-ter, OH, USA) then stored at 20 C (4 C for albizia chips), andthawed before use. The following mixtures were prepared as feed-stocks for co-digestion: taro skin/taro flesh (1:1, based on freshweight); papaya/taro flesh (1:1, based on fresh weight); papaya/sweet potato (1:1, based on fresh weight); and taro skin/taroflesh/papaya/sweet potato (1:1:1:1, based on fresh weight).</p><p>Effluent from a mesophilic liquid anaerobic digester feedingwith sewage sludge operated by Schmack Bioenergy (Akron, OH,USA) was used as inoculum for L-AD tests. The Schmack digesteris a continuous stirred-tank reactor with a hydraulic retention timeof 28 days. The effluent was centrifuged at 4000 rpm for 30 min toincrease the total solids (TS) content from 7.6% to 17.7% for SS-ADtests. The inoculums were stored at 4 C, and acclimated at 37 Cfor 3 days before use. Feedstocks and inoculum samples were driedat 40 C to reach a moisture content of lower than 10% (w/w) andthen ground to 20-mesh prior to composition analysis.2.2. Anaerobic digestion</p><p>L-AD lab-scale systems were set up by mixing the feedstockwith inoculum to obtain a feedstock/effluent (F/E) ratio of 0.5(based on volatile solids, VS), and adding tap water to obtain a TScontent of 5%. L-AD trials were carried out in 1-L reactors, eachof which contained about 800 g of mixed feedstock, inoculum,and water, and were sealed with a rubber stopper with an outletfor biogas collection. Reactors were placed on a shaker in a walk-in incubator, and incubated at 37 C with orbital shaking at100 rpm. Biogas generated was collected in 5-L Tedlar gas bagsconnected to the outlet of the reactor (CEL Scientific Tedlar gasbag, Santa Fe Springs, CA, USA). Biogas composition and volumewere measured every 2 days (or longer during late periods of AD)for 24 days. Triplicate reactors were run at each condition. AD trialswith only inoculum were also conducted as control.</p><p>Lab-scale SS-AD of albizia biomass was set up at an F/E ratio of2.3 (based on VS) and a TS content of 20%. SS-AD trials were carriedout with duplicate reactors at 37 C for 50 days without agitation.Other conditions and operations were the same as those for L-AD.</p><p>After AD, the weight of digestate in each reactor was deter-mined, and digestate samples were taken to determine TS. The restof the digestate was dried and ground with the same method asused for the preparation of feedstock sample for compositionanalysis.2.3. Analytical methods</p><p>The TS and VS were determined based on gravimetric analysis(APHA, 2005). Total carbon (TC) and total nitrogen (TN) were mea-sured by an elemental analyzer (Vario Max CNS, Elementar Amer-icas, Mt. Laurel, NJ, USA) to calculate the C/N ratio. Extractives weredetermined using the method reported by Sluiter et al. (2005).Crude protein contents were measured based on the methoddescribed by Hames et al. (2008). Crude lipids were analyzed byextraction from dry solids using Soxhlet extraction with hexaneas solvent. Glucan, lignin, and hemicellulose were analyzed basedon the NREL method (Sluiter et al., 2008). Briefly, extractive freebiomass was hydrolyzed into monomers after a two-step acidhydrolysis, and the concentrations of these monomers were deter-mined by HPLC (Shimadzu LC-20AB, Columbia, MD, USA). Acid-sol-uble lignin was measured by UVVis spectroscopy, and acid-insoluble lignin was determined by gravimetric analysis.</p><p>The volume of biogas collected in the Tedlar bags was measuredby a drum-type gas meter (Ritter, TG 5, Bochum, Germany) at 25 Cand ambient pressure. The composition of biogas (CO2, CH4, N2,and O2) was analyzed by a gas chromatograph (GC) (HP 6890, Agi-lent Technologies, Wilmington, DE, USA) equipped with an alu-mina/KCl deactivation column (30 m 0.53 mm 10 mm) and aThermal Conductivity Detector (TCD). Helium was used as a carriergas at a flow rate of 5.2 mL/min. Temperatures of the injector, col-umn, and detector were set at 150, 40, and 200 C, respectively. Themethane production contributed by inoculumwas subtracted fromthe measured value of each treatment.</p><p>The performance of the AD process was evaluated using CH4yield and volumetric CH4 productivity. The CH4 yield (L kg1 VS)was defined as the volume of CH4 produced per VS of feedstockadded. The volumetric CH4 productivity (L L1 d1) was definedas the volume of CH4 produced per reactor volume per day.</p></li><li><p>40 X. Ge et al. / Bioresource Technology 169 (2014) 38442.4. Statistical analysis</p><p>Statistical significance was determined by analysis of variance(ANOVA, a = 0.05) using Minitab (Version 16, Minitab, Inc., StateCollege, PA, USA). Experimental data were presented as averagevalues (data points in figures) standard deviations (error bars infigures).3. Results and discussion</p><p>3.1. Characteristics of feedstocks and inoculums</p><p>As shown in Table 1, albizia leaves, albizia chips, and sweetpotato had relatively high TS contents, ranging from 35.5% to56.2%. Taro skin and taro flesh had relatively low TS contents(14.8% and 21.1%, respectively). Papaya showed the lowest TS con-tent (10.7%), which makes it unsuitable for SS-AD even whenmixed with the centrifuged inoculum. The VS contents of thesetropical biomass wastes were higher than 92%, except for taro skinwhich had a VS content of 83.5%, significantly (p &lt; 0.05) lower thanthose of other feedstocks.</p><p>In this research, the glucan content of albizia leaves was 10.9%and 79% lower than those of Leucaena leucocephala leaves (12%)(Narayanaswami et al., 1986) and fallen tree leaves (11.7%), respec-tively (Brown et al., 2012). The lignin content (26.9%) of albizialeaves was 1619% higher than that of fallen tree leaves (22.723.1%) and 3.95.6 times higher than that of Leucaena leucocephalaleaves (4.15.5%). The hemicellulose content (4.7%) of albizialeaves was relatively low, and less than half that of fallen treeleaves (10.611.5%). The relatively higher crude protein (7.4%) ofalbizia leaves resulted in a lower C/N ratio (9.8) compared to otherfeedstocks in this study, as well as Leucaena leucocephala leavesand fallen tree leaves in other studies (Brown et al., 2012; Xuet al., 1993). The extractive content of albizia leaves was 33.6%,comparable to those of fallen tree leaves (33.035.1%) (Brownet al., 2012).</p><p>Compared to various woody biomass, such as Eucalyptus, BlackAlder, Cottonwood, Hybrid poplar, Loblolly pine and Sycamore,that have been reported for AD studies (Jerger et al., 1982), albiziachips showed comparable glucan and lignin contents of 36.0% and28.1%, respectively, but a considerably lower hemicellulose con-tent (10.5%).</p><p>Taro and sweet potato, which are starchy biomass, showed highglucan contents. Papaya, a fruit, had a high content of extractives(77.6%), which contained a considerable amount of free glucoseTable 1Composition of feedstocks and inoculums.</p><p>Compositiona Feedstock</p><p>Albizia leaves Albizia chips Taro skin Ta</p><p>TS (%) 36.5 0.1 56.2 1.6 14.8 1.0 21VS (%) 93.7 0.1 98.3 0.2 83.5 0.5 98TC (%) 49.7 0.6 45.1 1.1 47.5 0.9 47TN (%) 5.1 0.2 0.9 0.2 2.0 0.3 1C/N 9.8 0.2 52.2 14.3 23.8 4.4 47Extractives (%) 33.6 0.2 8.5 0.5 31.5 5.0 41Free glucoseb (%) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 0.0 1Glucan (%) 10.9 0.0 36.0 0.9 19.0 0.8 50Hemicellulose (%) 4.7 0.0 10.5 0.8 4.4 0.4 0Lignin (%) 26.9 0.4 28.1 0.1 13.0 0.4 3Crude lipid (%) 5.9 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.2 0.0 0Crude protein (%) 7.4 0.9 3.1 0.0 3.5 0.2 1</p><p>N/D: undetected; values are present as average standard deviationa Based on total dry weight except for TS.b One component of...</p></li></ul>


View more >