Int. J. Emerg. Sci.

, 2(3), 405-414, September 2012

ISSN: 2222-4254
© IJES

Evaluation of Biogas Production from Solid Waste

using Pretreatment Method in Anaerobic Condition

Yogita Singhal1#, Sumit Kr Bansal1! and Radhika Singh1*

1
Dayalbagh Educational Institute, Dayalbagh, Agra, India-282110
#
[email protected],[email protected], *[email protected]

Abstract. In the present study, biohydrogen production optimized in working

capacity 800ml batch reactor, using kitchen waste and mixed consortia in the
equal in the batch reactor. The batch reactor was operated at the room
temperature and at pH 7 throughout the study. The pH of the kitchen waste
slurry was 6.7. Maximum chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal as the result
of the biogas production was in the range 40-50%. This study shows the
improvement in the hydrogen yield when the pretreatment methods was used
like heat and pH. Pretreatment methods affect the activity of the methanogens or
suppressed their activity and results in the increased production of the hydrogen.
The time period for the pretreatment may be not sufficient due to which the
percentage of hydrogen produced has not remarkable difference than the
untreated reactors. The maximum percentage hydrogen was produced when the
inocula was pretreated at 500C i.e. 26-28%. But when pH pretreatment was
given to the inocula, about 40% of the hydrogen produced at pH 3. Due to the
pretreatment effect percentage production of methane decreases which is
important as the high production of methane will result in global warming.

Keywords: Biohydrogen Production, Pretreatment, Mixed Consortia, Batch

Reactor.

1. INTRODUCTION

A large proportion of the world energy needs are being covered by fossil fuels,
which have led to an accelerated consumption of these non-renewable resources.
Consuming of fossil energy sources such as oil and coal, impose negative impact on
our environment. This has resulted in an increase in CO2 concentration in the
atmosphere and also in the rapid depletion of fossil resources [1]. Renewable fuels
can be derived from biological materials including all the agricultural, forestry and
municipal solid wastes [2]. Waste is one of the most promising options for the
production of biofuel which act as an alternative source of energy. This would also
help in the stabilization of wastes which is becoming a nuisance to the community.
In recent years, biogas formation from municipal solid waste [3-5, 6], food
manufacturing waste [7-10], waste activated sludge [11, 12] have been reported.

405
 Yogita Singhal, Sumit Kr. Bansal and Radhika Singh

Household solid waste is carbohydrate rich waste, which has been intensively used
for methane production [13, 14]. In addition to this, organic waste has also become a
plentiful source of organic substrate for fermentative hydrogen production [15].
Anaerobic degradation of organic matter is a complex process carried out by
multiple microbial populations interacting in a food web. It is a complex physico-
chemical and biological process involving different factors and stages like acid
production, hydrogen production and methane production. This method leads to the
production of the biofuel from the waste in an anaerobic reactor [16]. Ethanol and
hydrogen are also important biofuel, which can be obtained by the fermentation of
biomass using microorganisms [7 and 17]. Anaerobic fermentation processes for
hydrogen production have some basic advantages over other processes, such as
lower energy requirements, utilization of low value waste as raw materials, and
higher rate of production [18]. Biogas is also produced from cattle wastewater by
sewage sludge [19], swine manure [20], municipal solid waste [21], rice winery [22]
and dairy waste [23]. Biogas mainly contains methane, carbon dioxide and hydrogen
Hydrogen holds great promise as the energy carrier of choice for the fuel cell-based
economy in coming years [24]. Currently, the production of hydrogen relies mainly
on the steam reforming of gasoline or natural gas. To enrich the yield of hydrogen
production various pretreatment processes can be used like heat pretreatment,
ultrasonication, pH etc. The pretreatment processes block the degradation of the
substrate at the stage of the hydrogen production which leads to the formation of
methane as the reaction proceeds. The goal of this work was to study the impact of
the various pretreatment processes on the methane and hydrogen production yield
and also on the progress of the reaction in the batch reactors by studying various
physical parameters of the kitchen waste.

2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1 Substrate

For the present study kitchen waste was taken from Institute canteen. This waste
contains high amounts of organic contents i.e. sugars, lipids, proteins, cellulose and
other compounds which degrades easily and also inhibits the function of the some
bacteria [25]. The biodegradable portion of the kitchen waste was crushed by using
an electrical blender and then inoculated with the mixed culture source i.e. cow dung
taken from the nearby dairy. Different physical parameters in the biodegradable
portion of kitchen waste like pH, Moisture, Total solids and Volatile solids were
estimated.

2.2 Operating Procedures And Experimental Set Up In Batch Reactor

Experiments were carried out in one liter batch reactors. The kitchen waste was
inoculated with the inoculum, initially in equal ratios, which was later on taken in the

406
 International Journal of Emerging Sciences 2(3), 405-414, September 2012

ratio 4:1. The fresh kitchen waste was added regularly after every 15 days. Each
bottle was supplemented with 200 mg of KH2PO4, 14 mg of MgCl2·4H2O, 2mg of
Na2MoO4 ·4H2O, 2 mg of CaCl2 ·2H2O, 2.5 mg of MnCl2 ·6H2O, and 10 mg of
FeCl2 ·4H2O [26]. The working volume of each reactor was taken as 800 ml and the
pH was 7. Subsequently, the headspaces of the bottles were flushed with N2 gas for
10 min and the bottles were tightly sealed using open-top screw caps with rubber
septa. The physical parameters i.e. VS, TS, Moisture and Ash were determined by
using standard method of APHA. COD was determined by using APHA method
with some modifications.

2.3 Pretreatment methods

The mixed culture source was pretreated by using different pretreatment methods so
as to enrich the production of the hydrogen in the batch reactors and also studied the
effect of these pretreatment processes on the production yield of methane. The
different pretreatment processes are as follows:

Heat pretreatment: 400ml of cultured mixed consortia samples was taken and they
were heated at different temperature in oven from 35o-70oC for 20 minutes and then
introduced into the batch reactor after mixing it with fresh kitchen waste slurry [27].

Acid Pretreatment: The acid pretreatment was done by adjusting the pH of the
inocula using 1N HCl i.e. up to 3 and 5. This was maintained for 24hrs and then
readjusted to 7.0 by using 1N NaOH [28].

Alkaline Pretreatment: The pH was adjusted to alkaline condition i.e. at 9 by using

1N NaOH for 24 hrs and then readjusted to a pH of 7.0 by using 1N HCl [28].

2.4 Analytical methods

Percentages of CH4 and H2 in the biogas produced were determined using a gas
chromatograph (GC, Shimadzu Japan) using a thermal conductivity detector having
1:8m × 3:2 mm stainless-steel column. Nitrogen was used as a carrier gas at the flow
rate of 30ml/min. Chemical oxygen demands (COD), TS, VS, MOISTURE, ASH,
and pH was also determined according to Standard Methods of APHA [29].

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

There was no remarkable difference in the hydrogen production yield in the

pretreated and untreated inoculum conditions studied. The yield of the methane
production was decreased gradually in the case of the pretreated inoculum condition.
It was observed that with an increase in the time period of the pretreatment
processes, methane production was decreased. This implies that the reaction is

407
 Yogita Singhal, Sumit Kr. Bansal and Radhika Singh

blocked by using the pretreatment method by inhibiting the action of the

methanogens or hydrogen consuming bacteria. For the better yield of hydrogen may
be longer time period is required for the pretreatment process. Other key findings
from this study are described below.

Table1. Characteristics of kitchen waste

Parameter Unit Kitchen waste

TS g/l 17.06
MOISTURE % 75-80
ASH G 1.509
C.O.D mg/l 45000
pH of slurry - 6.7

3.1 Effect of heat pretreatment

The inoculum was heat pretreated from 350C to 700C and the difference in the
production yield of methane and hydrogen was found. The production of CH4 is
more at mesophilic temperature compared to the thermophillic temperature (500C to
700C). The maximum hydrogen production was achieved in the reactor operated with
700 C and at pH 5. In this study we have seen that the production of methane is
higher at pH near 3.
Table2. Abbreviations

Abbreviation Reactor Condition

HT1 Kitchen waste + untreated inoculum (1:1)
HT2 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at 50OC for 20 min.
HT3 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at 60OC for 20 min.
HT4 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at 70OC for 20 min.

Table3. Physical parameters of Kitchen waste + Inoculum

Physical Parameters HT1 HT2 HT3 HT4

Reduction in TS (%) 49.7 52.9 54 22.4
Reduction in COD (%) 41.2 28.7 18.9 40.4
Reduction in Ash (%) 61.9 77.2 76.7 54.3
Reduction in VS (%) 23.8 54.5 53.4 8.6

408
 International Journal of Emerging Sciences 2(3), 405-414, September 2012

0
HT1(35 C)
0
HT2(50 C)
0
30 HT3(60 C)
0
HT4(70 C)
BIOHYDROGEN PRODUCTION IN %

25

20

15

10

-2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
DAYS

Graph1. Hydrogen production in heat pretreatment process.

From graph 1, it was found that the production of the hydrogen was increased as
the time period of the heat pretreatment process increases. The hydrogen producing
activity was less due to the presence of more methanogenic activity but when the
temperature was increased the methanogenic activity becomes less and the
production of hydrogen increases. The maximum percentage of hydrogen produced
was studied in the HT5. The hydrogen concentration in the biogas was increased due
to the heat pretreatment which results in the destruction of other non spore forming
bacteria and also reduced the capacity of the system to consume oxygen [30].
From the graph 2, it was found that the heat pretreatment at 600C and 700C
temperature results in the lesser production of methane but at temperature 35 0C the
methane production was high. The methanogenic activity was more at the mesophilic
temperature but when the temperature was increased the methanogenic activity
becomes low and decreases the activity of the methane forming bacteria.

409
 Yogita Singhal, Sumit Kr. Bansal and Radhika Singh

HT1
HT2
HT3
20 HT4

15
Methane production %

10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
Days

Graph2. Methane production in heat pretreatment process.

3.2 Effect of pH pretreatment

The variation in the production of the hydrogen and methane was studied at different
pH. It was found that the methane production was low at low pH but as the pH
increases methane production also increases and decrease in the hydrogen was
studied.
Table4. Abbreviation

Abbreviation Reactor condition

P1 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at pH 3
P2 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at pH 5
P3 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at pH 7
P4 Kitchen waste + Inocula pretreated at pH 9

Table5. Physical parameters of Kitchen waste + Inoculum

Physical Parameters P1 P2 P3 P4
Reduction in TS (%) 26.6 39.2 41.2 13.5
Reduction in COD (%) 31.8 47.8 40.6 17.6
Reduction in Ash (%) 42.1 44.4 70 48.3
Reduction in VS (%) 56.2 18.5 40.0 35.4

410
 International Journal of Emerging Sciences 2(3), 405-414, September 2012

P1
P2
P3
40
P4

35
Hydrogen production (%)

30

25

20

15

10
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Days

Graph. 3. Hydrogen production in pH pretreatment process.

From graph 3, the maximum hydrogen production was at pH 3 i.e. 40% because the
methanogenic activity was curtailed and hydrogen productivity was significantly
increased. H2 produced in the headspace of the reactor was consumed more in the
sequent fermentation in the case of the acidic pretreatment than in the alkaline
conditions. This is mainly due to the production of the volatile fatty acids in the
batch reactors and due to which pH lowers and drops to 7 and the maximum
production of the H2 (%) was observed.

411
 Yogita Singhal, Sumit Kr. Bansal and Radhika Singh

P1
34
P2
32
P3
30
P4
28
26
24
Methane Production (%)

22
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Days

Graph. 4. Methane production in pH pretreatment process.

From graph 4, the methane production was studied which was low at pH 3. At low
pH, the methanogenic activity was suppressed as compared to the higher pH as in the
alkaline pretreatment methods H2 produced in the headspace of the reactor was
consumed more in the sequent fermentation and therefore results in the high amount
of the methane production.

4. CONCLUSION

In present study the biogas production was carried out by using kitchen waste as
substrate and mixed culture in the batch reactor. The various parameters have been
studied in the kitchen waste containing 75-80% moisture, ash content 1.590 g, TS
17.06 g/l etc. The methanogenic activity had been effectively suppressed by the
temperature, acidic and alkaline pH. This study reveals that the pretreatment
processes when used decreased the activity of methanogens and hence the
production yield of the methane get reduced while on the other hand hydrogen
producing bacteria get activated and the production yield of hydrogen increases.

REFERENCES

1. Gustavo Davila-Vazquez, Sonia Arriaga, Felipe Alatriste-Mondrago, Antonio De Leon-

Rodrıguez, Luis Manuel Rosales-Colunga, Elıas Razo-Flores. ―Fermentative
biohydrogen production: trends and perspectives‖, Rev Environ Sci. Biotechnology,
2008: 7, 27–45

412
 International Journal of Emerging Sciences 2(3), 405-414, September 2012

2. Sheehan, J.J. 1994. ACS symposium series, 566, 1-52

3. Noike T, Mizuno O., ―Hydrogen fermentation of organic municipal wastes‖, Water Sci
Technol 2000, 42(12):155–62.
4. Okamoto M, Miyahara T, Minuno O, Noike T., ―Biological hydrogen potential of
materials characteristic of the organic fraction of municipal solids wastes‖, Water Sci
Technol 2000, 41(3): 25–32.
5. Lay J-J, Fan K-S, Chang J-l, Ku C-H., ―Influence of chemical nature of organic wastes
on their conversion to hydrogen by heat-shock digested sludge‖, Int. J Hydrogen Energy,
2003, 28:1361–1367.
6. Lay J-J, Lee YJ, Noike T., ―Feasibility of biological hydrogen production from organic
fraction of municipal solid waste‖, Water Res 1999, 33(11):2579–86.
7. Picataggio, S.K., M. Zhang & M. Finkelstein., ACS symposium series 1994,566:343-
361.
8. Yokoi H, Saitsu A, Uchida H, Hirose J, Hayashi S, Takasaki Y., ―Microbial hydrogen
production from sweet potato starch residue‖, J Biosci Bioeng 2001, 91(1):58–63.
9. Mizuno O, Ohara T, Shinya M, Noike T., ―Characteristics of hydrogen production from
bean curd manufacturing waste by anaerobic microflora‖, Water Sci Technol, 2000,
42(3–4):345–50.
10. Noike T, Takabatake H, Mizuno O, Ohba M., ―Inhibition of hydrogen fermentation of
organic wastes by lactic acid bacteria‖, Int. J Hydrogen Energy, 2002, 27, 1367–71.
11. Wang CC, Chang CW, Chu CP, Lee DJ, Chang B-V, Liao CS, Tay JH., ―Using filtrate
of waste biosolids to effectively produce bio-hydrogen by anaerobic fermentation‖,
Water Res, 2003, 37:2789–93.
12. Wang CC, Chang CW, Chu CP, Lee DJ, Chang B-V, Liao CS., ―Producing hydrogen
from wastewater sludge by Clostridium bifermentans‖, J Biotechnol, 2003, 102, 83–92.
13. J. Mataalvarez, A. Mtzviturtia, P. Llabresluengo and F. Cecchi, ―Kinetic and
performance study of a batch 2-phase anaerobic-digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes‖,
Biomass Bioenergy 1993,5 (6): 481–488.
14. P. Pavan, P. Battistoni, F. Cecchi and J. Mata-Alvarez, ―Two-phase anaerobic digestion
of source sorted OFMSW (organic fraction of municipal solid waste): performance and
kinetic study‖, Water Science Technol, 2000, 41 (3):111–118.
15. Hallenbeck PC, Benemann JR., ―Biological hydrogen production; fundamentals and
limiting processes‖, Int. J.Hydrogen Energy, 2002, 27, 1185–93.
16. McCarty P, ―One Hundred Years of Anaerobic Treatment in Anaerobic Digestion‖,
Elsevier Biomedical Press B. V, 1981, 3-21.
17. Gauss, W.F., S. Suzzuki & M. Tagagi, U.S. Patent 3, 1976, 990-994.
18. Gui Lan Thang, Jian Huang, Zhen –Jun Sun, QinQing Tang, Chun Hao Yan and Chuang
– Qing Liu, ―Biohydrogen production cattle wastewater by enriched anaerobic mixed
consortia influence of fermentation temperature and pH‖, Journal of Bioscience and
Bioengineering, 2008, 106, 80-87.
19. HaijunYang , Peng Shao , Tingmao Lu , Jianquan Shen, DufuWang, Zhinian Xu,
XingYuan., ―Continuous biohydrogen production from citric acid wastewater via
facultative anaerobic bacteria‖, Int. J. H. E., 2006, 31:1306-1313.
20. Zhu, J., Wu, X., Miller, C., Yu, F., Chen P., and Ruan, R. ―Biohydrogen production
through fermentation using liquid swine manure as substrates‖, J. Environ. Sci. Health
B., 2007, 42:393-401.
21. Idania,V,V., Elvira, R,L., Fernando,E,G., Franko, C., Hector, M.P.V., ―Semicontinuous
solid substrate anaerobic reaction for hydrogen production from organic wastes:
measophilic versus thermophilic regime‖, Int. J. H. E., 2005, 30 , 1383-1391.

413
 Yogita Singhal, Sumit Kr. Bansal and Radhika Singh

22. Yu, H.Q., Zhu Z, H., Hu, W, R., and Zhang H,S., ―Hydrogen production from rice
winery wastewater in an upflow anaerobic reactor by using mixed anaerobic cultures‖,
Int, J. H. E., 2002, 27:1359-1365.
23. Venkata, M,S., Lalit, B, V., Sharma, P,N., ―Effect of various pretreatment method on
anaerobic mixed microflora to enhance biohydrogen production utilizing dairy
wastewater as substrates‖, Biresource Technol, 2008, 99, 59-67.
24. Cheong DY, Hansen CL, ―Acidogenesis characteristics of natural, mixed anaerobes
converting carbohydrate-rich synthetic wastewater to hydrogen‖, Process Biochem,
2006, 41(8):1736–1745
25. Qunhui Wang1, Jun-Ya Narita, Nanqi Ren, Toshifumi Fukushima, Yukihide Ohsumi,
Kohji Kusano, Yoshihito Shirai And Hiroaki I. Ogawa, ― Effect Of Ph Adjustment On
Preservation Of Kitchen Waste Used For Producing Lactic Acid‖. Water, Air, and Soil
Pollution, 2003, 144, 405–418.
26. Lay J-J, Lee YJ, Noike T., ―Feasibility of biological hydrogen production from organic
fraction of municipal solid waste‖, Water Res, 1999, 33(11):2579–86.
27. Wang Jianlong, Wan Wei, ―Factors influencing fermentative hydrogen production: A
review‖, Int. J. of Hydrogen Energy, 2009, 34:799-811.
28. Xiao Benyi & Liu Junxin, ―pH dependency of hydrogen fermentation from alkali-
pretreated sludge‖, Chinese Science Bulletin, 2006, 51( 4):399—404.
29. APHA, AWWA, WEF. ―Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater‖, 20th ed. Washington, DC, USA: APHA; 1998.
30. Hawkes FR, Dinsdale R, Hawkes DL, Hussy I., ―Sustainable fermentative hydrogen
production: challenges for process optimization‖, Int J Hydrogen Energy, 2002,
27:1339–47.

414