PRODUCTION OF BIOGAS FROM POULTRY WASTE

BY

EKONG RICHARD GEORGE

AK16/ENG/CPE/024

A PROJECT REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF

CHEMICAL/PETROCHEMICAL ENGINEERING

IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT FOR THE BACHELOR OF

ENGINEERING DEGREE

JANUARY, 2022

1
 CERTIFICATION

This is to certify that this project work titled “Production of biogas from poultry waste” was

carried out by Ekong Richard George with registration number AK16/ENG/CPE/024 of

the department of Chemical/Petrochemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Akwa Ibom

State University, Ikot Akpaden, Mkpat Enin L.G.A, Akwa Ibom State.

………………………………… ……………………

Mayen Ibeh Date

(Project Supervisor)

………………………………… .…………………..

Engr. Uduak Eyibio Date

(Project Co-Ordinator)

…………………………………. …………………….

Engr. Dr. Rasheed Babalola Date

(Head of department)

………………………………... ….…………………

Date

(External Supervisor)

i
 DECLARATION

I Ekong, Richard George with registration number AK16/ENG/CPE/024 of the department

of Chemical/Petrochemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Akwa Ibom State

University, Ikot Akpaden, Mkpat Enin L.G.A, Akwa Ibom State. Declare that I personally

undertook this project and it has not been produced anywhere for award of a degree except

other people’s works cited which have been duely acknowledged.

………………………………… ……………………

Ekong Richard George Date

(Project Student)

………………………………… ……………………

Mayen Ibeh Date

(Project Supervisor)

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I acknowledge God almighty for His unfailing love, guidance, mercies and immense favour,

bestowed upon me, that has brought me to a successful completion of my project work. I also

take this opportunity to express my profound gratitude and deep regards to my supervisor,

Ms. Mayen Ibeh for her exemplary guidance, monitoring and providing valuable insights

leading to the successful completion of this project study. The blessing, help and guidance

given by her time to time shall carry me a long way in the journey of life on which I am about

to embark. I also take this opportunity to express a deep sense of gratitude to Engr. Dr.

Rasheed Babalola for his great leadership as the Head of Department of

Chemical/Petrochemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Akwa Ibom State University. I

am grateful to lecturers of the Department of Chemical/Petrochemical Engineering, for the

valuable information, knowledge and skills they have impacted in me throughout my

academic journey in the university in their respective fields. I sincerely appreciate the

inspiration and supports of all those people who have been instrumental in making this

project a success. I would like to thank my colleagues Akpan Anthonia, Sunny Okon, Peter

Akpabio, John Sampson for the fruitful discussions and their support during my academic

journey and the preparation of this project work. I really enjoyed the time we spent together

on campus.

Lastly, I place a deep sense of gratitude to my family and friends who have been constant

sources of inspiration throughout my academic journey.

iii
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this report to God almighty for his unlimited grace, consistent love, and
immeasurable faithfulness and for sparing my life throughout my stay in the university, and
to my sponsors and good friends who gave me all the support I needed.

iv
 CONTENTS

CERTIFICATION i

DECLARATION ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii

DEDICATION iv

LIST OF FIGURES vii

LIST OF PLATE viii

LIST OF TABLES ix

NOMENCLATURE x

ABSTRACT xi

CHAPTER ONE 1

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background of Studies 1

1.2 Statement of Research Problem 2

1.3 Aim 3

1.4 Objectives 3

1.5 Justification of Studies 3

CHAPTER TWO 4

LITERATURE REVIEW 4

2.1 Biogas Production 4

2.1.1 Poultry Waste 4

v
2.2 Stages of Biogas Production 5

2.2.1 Hydrolysis 5

2.2.2 Acidogenesis (Acid Formation) 6

2.2.3 Acetogenesis (Acetic Acid Formation) 6

2.2.4 Methanogenesis (Methane formation) 7

2.3 Factors Affecting Biogas Production 8

2.3.1 Temperature 8

2.3.2 Oxygen 11

2.3.3 pH Value 11

2.3.4 Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT) 12

2.3.5 Organic Loading Rate (OLR) 13

2.3.6 Mixing 13

2.3.7 Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA) 15

2.3.8 Substrates 15

2.3.9 Carbon/Nitrogen Ratio (C/N) 15

2.4 Digesters/Reactor Technology 16

2.4.1Process with full intermixing (stirred-tank reactors) 16

2.4.2 Plug-flow process 17

2.4.3 Batch processes 18

2.5 Waste Production and Management 18

2.5.1 Waste Production and Management in Nigeria 20

vi
 2.5.2 Biogas from fruit and vegetable solid waste (FVSW) and Organic MSW (OMSW) 22

2.6 Energy 23

2.6.1 Energy Crisis in Nigeria 24

2.7 Extent of Past Research 25

MATERIALS AND METHODS 28

3.1 Study Area 28

3.2 Materials 28

3.3 Methods 29

3.3.1 Substrate management 29

3.3.2 Design and Setup of process 31

3.3.3 Operation of Digester and Receivers 33

3.4 Collection of Data and Analysis 34

3.4.1 pH determination 34

3.4.3 Temperature measurement 34

3.4.4 Biogas yield/production 35

3.4.5 Combustion test 35

3.4.6 Percentage Yield 35

3.4.7 Data analysis 35

CHAPTER FOUR 36

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 36

4.1 pH value 36

vii
4.2 Moisture Content 36

4.3 Biogas yield and temperature 36

4.2 Daily Biogas yield 37

4.3 The total volume of biogas 38

4.4 Percentage Yield 38

4.5 Combustion 38

CHAPTER FIVE 39

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 39

5.0 Conclusion 39

5.1 Recommendation 39

REFERENCES 40

Appendix A 44

Tables 44

Calculations 45

viii
 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1; Schematic representation of anaerobic decomposition 7

Figure 2.2; Current and projected global population 16

Figure 2.2 stirred-tank reactors (Gulzow, 2010) 16

Figure 2.3 Plug flow reactor/Digester 16

Figure 2.4; Current and projected global population (United Nations, 2017) and MSW

generation (Kaza et al., 2018; Huber 2019) 18

Figure 2.5; Waste hierarchy according to the EU Waste Framework Directive 19

ix
 LIST OF PLATE
Plate 3.1 Poultry Waste 30

Plate 3.2 pH setup 30

Plate 3.3 Block flow of biogas process 31

Plate 3.3; Digester 32

Plate 3.4b Receiver design 33

Plate 3.4c General setup 35

Plate 3.5 Flammability setup 35

x
 LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1; Temperature range for anaerobic digestion process 16

Table 2.2; Waste Management strategy 21

xi
 NOMENCLATURE

Abbreviation Meaning

AD Anaerobic Digestion

FVSW Fruit and Vegetable Solid Waste

C/N Carbon/Nitrogen

HRT Hydraulic Retention Time

MW Mega Watts

MSW Municipal Solid Waste

OLR Organic Loading Rate

OMSW Organic Municipal Solid Waste

NaOH Sodium Hydroxide

SWM Solid Waste Management

VFA Volatile Fatty Acid

xii
 ABSTRACT

Due to the increase in population, both developed and developing countries are facing mainly

issues surrounding the future energy security and a better use of natural resources. Such

present and future energy problems can be solved by the use of renewable energy sources.

Among several renewable energy sources is a sustainable means of anaerobic digestion (AD)

for production of gases. In the past, AD as a source of biogas was used mainly for

degradation of waste materials or toxic compounds. However, recently, there has been great

interest in producing biogas from organic waste energy crops. Biogas is a flammable gas

composed mainly of a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide. Biogas generating technology

is a favourable dual-purpose technology, at present; Biogas that is generated can be used to

meet energy requirements and also the secondary product of the process is a sludge residue

(digestate) that can be directly used as soil amendment or as starting material for high quality

compost preparation. In principle, many types of biomass can be used for biogas production.

This study is aimed at determining biogas production from poultry waste using batch

digester. Biogas digester with a capacity of 0.2m 3 was designed. Poultry waste was used as

the feedstock which was obtained from poultry. The waste sample was mashed and mixed

with water in a ratio 1:2 to form the slurry. The test was carried out at an ambient temperature

between 20-34℃ within a retention time of 20 days. At the end of 20 days HRT 1904ml gas

was produced. Adding NaOH improved the pH of the feedstock.

xiii
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of Studies

Waste is defined as any substances or item which is no longer considered useful and therefore

discarded (Azzi, 2017; EU, 2008; Huber, 2019). The definition above entails one’s prospect

towards appreciation, utilization and purpose when classifying an object as ‘trash’ or

‘treasure’, or as ‘waste’ or ‘resource’, respectively. The 21 st century has seen global increase

in consumption of goods which require substantial energy input, a growing number of

consumers and accumulating amounts of abandoned products and garbage (Huber, 2019).

Also, in a planet that is exposed to changing climate conditions and environmental

degradation, earth’s system capacity to provide live-supporting services for the human

species in the long-term are limited and already stressed (Steffen et al., 2015; Huber, 2019).

The fluctuating cost and the environmental effects of conventional sources of energy

(especially crude oil) have made recovery from organic residues and waste stream an ever

more attractive alternative (Sawyerr et al., 2019; Gulzow, 2010), For instance, by the end of

2022, the US is expected to produce about 36 billion gallons of biofuels annually (Molino et

al., 2018). Furthermore, determined to tackle global issues and promoting the agenda for each

country, the United Nations announced the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,

which serves as an action plan to foster people and planet through enhancing well-being and

prosperity, as well as reducing negative impacts and deterioration of natural systems (Rosa,

2017). Waste-to-energy technologies is gaining more and more interest in both developing

and emerging countries, which deals with multiple challenges regarding waste management

1
and energy supply in the face of increasing demands by a growing number of people (Mutz et

al., 2017).

The general technology of anaerobic digestion is well known and has been applied for years

(Sagagi et al., 2009). Biogas was produced as early as 3000 years ago from animal dung,

human sewage and organic waste consisting generally of household waste, agricultural waste,

human and animal waste (U.S Environmental Protection Agency, 2008). The production of

biogas is noncomplex and centralised technology with a low level of organic conversion into

biogas, (nearly 5–10 wt. %), based on the type of feedstock and the operative conditions

(Molino et al., 2013b; Molino et al., 2013a). The controlled decomposition of organic waste

in a biogas facility aggregates advantages of energy recovery, nutrient recycling and waste

management and is a promising technology to deal with contemporary issues of energy

recovery and waste management the major reasons for undertaking this project work .(Huber,

2019).

Biogas is a flammable gas composed mainly of a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide.

Biogas-generating technology is a favourable multi-purpose technology, at present: the

biogas that is generated can be used to meet energy requirements.

1.2 Statement of Research Problem

Energy is a fundamental input in the development of any human society. However, the

amount of energy required per capita to foster or sustain development depends largely on the

state of development, the local resources, the social and economical model chosen by the

country and other factors. Today most countries rely heavily on fossil fuel as source of

energy. The fluctuating cost and the adverse environmental effect of fossil fuel have made

countries to divert attention to renewable sources. Municipal Solid Waste (MSW), consist of

2
everyday items that are discarded in the public. It can be food waste, agricultural waste etc.

Inability to properly manage this waste poses great threat to the environment.

1.3 Aim

This research is aimed at converting Organic Municipal Solid waste to biogas which is a

renewable source of energy

1.4 Objectives

The specific objectives of the research are:

i. Design and fabrication of digester

ii. To collect and sort out waste

iii. To produce biogas from collected poultry waste using the fabricated digester and to

determine the yield.

1.5 Justification of Studies

The controlled decomposition of organic waste in a biogas facility aggregates advantages of

energy recovery from economic point of view, and subsidiary to this project, nutrient

recycling and waste management from environmental point of view and is a promising

technology to deal with contemporary issues of energy recovery, and waste management.

3
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Biogas Production

Biogas is a colourless and flammable gas that is produced by the biological breakdown of

organic complex matter; occurring in the absence of oxygen, the biogas comes from

“biogenic materials (Umeghalu et al., 2012; Sawyerr et al., 2019). It is generated from

anaerobic digestion of biodegradable materials such as biomass, cow dung green waste and

agricultural residue such as cassava, sugar cane, vegetables, kitchen waste etc. (Ghosh, 2000).

This process is widely found in nature, taking place in moors, or at the bottom of lakes, in

slurry pits and in the rumen of ruminants. The organic matter is converted almost entirely to

biogas by a range of different microorganisms. Energy (heat) and new biomass are also

generated (Gulzow, 2010).

The resulting gas consists primarily of a mixture of methane (CH 4 50-75 vol. %) and carbon

dioxide (CO2 20-50 vol. %). It also contains small quantities of hydrogen (H 2 2-7 vol. %),

hydrogen sulphide (H2 approximately 2 vol. %), ammonia (NH3 0-0.05 vol. %) and other

traces gases such as nitrogen. The composition of the gas is essentially determined by the

substrates, the fermentation (digestion) process and the various technical design of the plant

(Kaltschmitt and Hartman, 2001; Gulzow, 2010).

2.1.1 Poultry Waste

Poultry wastes consist of poultry excreta, spilled feed, feathers and materials used as bedding

in the poultry operation which is mostly sawdust.

4
2.2 Stages of Biogas Production

The process by which biogas is formed can be divided into a number of steps which are

hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis. The individual process of

decomposition (degradation) must be coordinated and harmonised with each other in the best

way to ensure that the process as a whole runs smoothly (Gulzow, 2010).

2.2.1 Hydrolysis

Hydrolysis is the first step in the process. The complex compound of the starting materials

(such as carbohydrates, proteins and fats) are broken down into simpler organic compounds

(example, amino acids, sugars and fatty acids). The hydrolytic bacteria involved in this stage

release enzymes that decompose the material by biochemical means (Gulzow, 2010). At the

end of the hydrolysis stage, a simple organic compound is produced (Sawyerr et al., 2019).

Enzymatic catalysis accelerates the hydrolysis process through oxidation of the organic

matter via a process called aerobic biological processes (Pisano, 2007). When the substrate

has been hydrolyzed, it becomes available for cell transportation and the fermentative

bacteria can then degrade these substrates during the acidogenesis stage. Optimization of the

hydrolysis process is, however, important to prevent inefficient degradation of the

macromolecules, which could impact negatively on the rate of digestion or other biological

activities, and consequently the biogas yield (Sawyerr et al., 2019). It is therefore important

to make sure that the culture of microorganisms is actively operational to allow the second

process (acidogenesis) to take place. Physicochemical treatments can also be used to promote

solubilization of organic matter. However, there should not be air intake in the system, as the

presence of air in the biomass will not allow the biomass to perform their duties as anaerobic

units (Gulzow, 2010).

5
2.2.2 Acidogenesis (Acid Formation)

Acidogenesis is the second stage where short-chain volatile fatty acids (VFA) such as acetic

acid, propionic acid, butyric acid are produced (Ellacuriaga et al., 2021). Lactic acid,

alcohols, hydrogen and carbon dioxide are also produced (Kalyuzhnyi et al., 2000). This is

carried out by the breaking down of products of the hydrolysis stage (via absorption and

degradation) by different obligate and facultative fermentative microorganisms (Sawyerr et

al., 2019). The acidogenesis stage involves the production of high concentration of hydrogen

by acid-producing bacteria called acidogenic microorganisms and is usually the fastest step in

a balanced anaerobic process (Gulzow, 2010). The degradation of organic matter to generate

biogas also depends on the complex interaction of various groups of bacteria, with the two

main groups being the acid-producing bacteria (acidogens) and the methane-producing

bacteria (methanogens). Therefore, bacteria is critical in sustaining the successful operation

of any anaerobic digester (White, 2011). This links the fermentation phase with the methane

production phase. Thus, more acid is produced to give birth to methanogens elements, which

produce methane gas (Sawyerr et al., 2019).

2.2.3 Acetogenesis (Acetic Acid Formation)

The process of acetogenesis transforms the organic acid that is produced during the second

stage into acetic acid, acid derivatives, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen (Sawyerr et al., 2019).

The hydrogen partial pressure is particularly important in this step. An excessively high

hydrogen content prevent the conversion of the intermediate products of acidogenesis, for

energy-related reasons (Gulzow, 2010). As a consequences, organic acids, such as propionic

acid, isobutyric acid, isovaleric acid and hexanoic acid, accumulate and inhibit the formation

of methane. For this purpose, the acetogenic bacteria (hydrogen forming bacteria) must co-

exist in a biotic community with the hydrogen consuming methanogenic archaea, which

6
consume hydrogen together with carbon dioxide during the formation of methane thus

ensuring an acceptable environment for the acetogenic bacteria (Wandrey et al., 1983).

2.2.4 Methanogenesis (Methane formation)

This is the final stage of biogas generation. During this stage, carbon dioxide-reducing and

hydrogen oxidizing methanogens convert hydrogen and carbon dioxide to methane, while

acetoclastic methanogens utilize acetate to produce methane (Parawira et al., 2004).

Methanogens (Archaea) utilize acetate, hydrogen and carbon dioxide, and to a lesser extent

methanol, methylamines and formate, to form methane and carbon dioxide. These end

products are the primary substrates for the methanogenic bacteria to produce biogas, which

generally consists of 50–75% methane, 50–25% carbon dioxide and trace amounts of

nitrogen, hydrogen and hydrogen sulphide. Methanogenesis indicates the extent of biological

activities in an anaerobic system and the state of the digestion. The more methane is

produced, the more the system is stable and well performing (Sawyerr et al., 2019).

7
Figure 2.1 Schematic representation of anaerobic decomposition (Gulzow, 2010).

2.3 Factors Affecting Biogas Production

The four phases of anaerobic degradation take place simultaneously in a single stage process.

However, the bacteria involved in the various degradation phases have different requirement

in terms of habitat, a compromise has to be found in the process technology (Oechsner and

Lemmer, 2009).

2.3.1 Temperature

The general principle is that the rate of chemical reactions increases with ambient

temperature. This is only partially applicable to biological decomposition and conversion

processes, however. In these cases it needs to be borne in mind that the microorganisms

involved in the metabolic processes have different optimum temperatures (Gulzow, 2010). If

8
the temperature is above or below their optimum range, the relevant microorganisms may be

inhibited or, in extreme cases, suffer irrevocable damage. The microorganisms involved in

decomposition can be divided into three groups on the basis of their temperature optima.

These are psychrophilic, mesophilic and thermophilic microorganisms Optimum conditions

for psychrophilic microorganisms are at temperatures below 25 °C. At these temperatures

although there is no need to heat the substrates or the digester, only low degradation

performance and gas production can be achieved. As a rule, therefore, economic operation of

biogas plants is not feasible. The majority of familiar methane-forming bacteria have their

growth optimum in the mesophilic temperature range between 37 and 42 °C. Biogas plants

operating in the mesophilic range are the most widespread in practice because relatively high

gas yields and good process stability are obtained in this temperature range (Al Seadi et al.,

2008). If it is intended that harmful germs should be killed off by hygienisation of the

substrate or if by-products or wastes with a high intrinsic temperature are used as substrates

(process water, for example), thermophilic cultures are a suitable choice for the digestion

process. These have their optimum in the temperature range between 50 and 60 °C. The high

process temperature brings about a higher rate of decomposition and a lower viscosity. It

must be taken into consideration, however, that more energy may be needed to heat the

fermentation process. In this temperature range the fermentation process is also more

sensitive to disturbances or irregularities in the supply of substrate or in the operating regime

of the digester, because under thermophilic conditions there are fewer different species of

methanogenic microorganisms present (Al Seadi et al., 2008). In practice it has been

demonstrated that the boundaries between the temperature ranges are fluid, and it is above all

rapid changes in temperature that cause harm to the microorganisms, whereas if the

temperature changes slowly the methanogenic microorganisms are able to adjust to different

temperature levels. It is therefore not so much the absolute temperature that is crucial for

9
stable management of the process, but constancy at a certain temperature level. The

phenomenon of self-heating is frequently observed in practice. This effect occurs when

substrates consisting largely of carbohydrates are used in combination with an absence of

liquid input materials and well insulated containers. Self-heating is attributable to the

production of heat by individual groups of microorganisms during the decomposition of

carbohydrates. The consequence can be that in a system originally operating under

mesophilic conditions the temperature rises to the region of 43 to 48 °C. Given intensive

analytical backup and associated process regulation, the temperature change can be managed

with small reductions in gas production for short periods (Gulzow, 2010). How Small

changes in temperature can cause significant decrease in activity of microbial and gas

production up to 30%; therefore, the temperature should be kept exactly in the range of +/2ºC

(Deublein, 2008). The bacteria involved are active within limited range of temperature,

especially methanogens that are the methane-producing bacteria (Özmen and Aslanzadeh,

2012)

Table 2.1 Temperature range for Anaerobic digestion process (Kemausuor, 2015; Yeboah. 2015)

Thermal Stages Process Temperature Minimum retention time

Psychrophilic below 25°C 70 to 80 days

Mesophilic 25°C – 45°C 30 to 40 days

Thermophilic 45°C – 70°C 15 to 20 days

2.3.2 Oxygen

Methanogenic archaea are among the oldest living organisms on the planet, and came into

being about three to four billion years ago, long before the atmosphere as we know it was

10
formed. Even today, therefore, these microorganisms are still reliant on an environment

devoid of oxygen. Most species are killed by even small quantities of oxygen. As a rule,

however, it is impossible to completely prevent the introduction of oxygen into the digester.

The reason why the activity of the methanogenic archaea is not immediately inhibited or

why, in the worst case, they do not all die is that they coexist with oxygen-consuming

bacteria from the preceding stages of degradation. Some of them are what are known as

facultative anaerobic bacteria. These are capable of survival both under the influence of

oxygen and also entirely without oxygen. Provided the oxygen load is not too high, they

consume the oxygen before it damages the methanogenic archaea, which are totally reliant on

an oxygen-free environment. As a rule, therefore, the atmospheric oxygen introduced into the

gas space of the digester for the purposes of biological desulphurisation does not have a

detrimental impact on the formation of methane (Zinder and Koch, 1984; Gulzow, 2010).

2.3.3 pH Value

The pH value of the material is one of the essential factors. Methanogenic bacteria are

sensitive to an acidic condition. This acidic condition could adversely affect the growth of

bacteria and the production of methane (Arsova, 2011). The microorganisms involved in

various stages of decomposition require different pH values for optimum growth. The pH

optimum for hydrolyzing and acid-forming bacteria is in the range from pH 5.2-6.3 (Weilnd

and Grundlgen der Methangarung, 2001). Regardless of whether the system is a single stage

or multi-stage the pH value is established automatically within the system by the alkaline and

acid metabolic products formed in the course of anaerobic decomposition (Kaltschmitt and

Hartman, 2001).

11
2.3.4 Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT)

HRT indicates the mean residence time for solids and liquids wastes remaining in a digester

(reactor) to contact with the microbial biomass (Khanal, 2008a). The HRT can be understood

as the treatment time for a waste to undergo anaerobic digestion, the higher the HRT the

higher the removal efficiency because the biomass has enough time to be in close contact

with the waste, therefore removing high amounts of contaminants from the waste being

treated (Sawyerr et al., 2019).

VR
H RT= ( d ) 2.1
V

Equation 2.1 Hydraulic Retention time

[VR = reactor volume (m3); V = Volume of substrates added daily (m3/d)] (Gulzow, 2010).

The actual retention time will differ from this, because individual components are discharged

from the digester at different rates depending on the degree of mixing, for example as a result

of short-circuit flows. There is a close correlation between the organic loading rate and the

hydraulic retention time. If the composition of the substrate is assumed to remain the same, as

the organic loading rate rises more input is added to the digester, and the retention time is

consequently shortened. In order to be able to maintain the digestion process, the hydraulic

retention time must be chosen such that constant replacement of the reactor contents does not

flush out more microorganisms than can be replenished by new growth during that time (the

doubling rate of some methanogenic archaea, for example, is 10 days or more) (Gulzow,

2010). It should also be borne in mind that with a short retention time the microorganisms

will have little time to degrade the substrate and consequently the gas yield will be

inadequate. It is therefore equally important to adapt the retention time to the specific

decomposition rate of the substrates. If the quantity added per day is known, the necessary

12
reactor volume can be calculated in conjunction with the degradability of the substrate and

the targeted retention time.

2.3.5 Organic Loading Rate (OLR)

The OLR indicates how many kilograms of Volatile Solids [VS, or Organic Dry Matter

(ODM)] can be fed into the digester per m 3 of working volume per unit time (Kaltschmitt and

Streicher 2009). It is expressed as kg VS/(m3.d).

3
BR =(m× c)/(V ¿ ¿ R × 100)[kg .VS /(m . d)]2.2 ¿

Equation 2.2 Organic Loading Rate (Huber, 2016).

[m = amount of substrate loaded per unit of time (kg/d); c = concentration of organic matter

(Volatile matter) %VS; VR = reactor volume].

The organic loading rate can be specified for each stage (gas-tight, insulated and heated

vessel), for the system as a whole (total working volumes of all stages) and with or without

the inclusion of material recirculation. Changing the reference variables can lead to

sometimes widely differing results for the organic loading rate of a plant. To obtain the most

meaningful comparison of the organic loading rates of various biogas plants it is advisable to

determine this parameter for the entire system without considering material recirculation, in

other words exclusively for the fresh substrate.

2.3.6 Mixing

In order to obtain high levels of biogas production there needs to be intensive contact

between bacteria and the substrate, which is generally achieved by thorough mixing in the

digestion tank unless thorough mixing takes place in the digester. After a certain time,

13
demixing of the contents can be observed along with the formation of layers. This is

attributable to the differences in density of the various constituents of the substrates and also

to upthrust from the formation of gas. In this event the bulk of the bacterial mass collects in

the lower layer, as a result of its higher density, whereas the substrate to be decomposed often

collects in the upper layer. In such cases the contact area is limited to the boundary area

between these two layers, and little degradation takes place. Furthermore, some solids float to

the top to form a layer of scum that makes it more difficult for gas to escape. It is important,

therefore, to promote contact between microorganisms and substrate by mixing the contents

of the digestion tank. Excessive mixing should be avoided, however. In particular the bacteria

that form acetic acid (active in acetogenesis) and the archaea in methanogenesis form a close

biotic community that is enormously important if the process of biogas formation is to

proceed undisturbed. If this biotic community is destroyed by excessive shear forces as a

result of intensive stirring, anaerobic decomposition can be negatively affected. A

compromise therefore needs to be found in which both conditions are adequately satisfied. In

practice this is usually achieved with slowly rotating agitators that exert only low shear

forces, but also by the contents of the reactor being mixed thoroughly at certain intervals (i.e.

just for a short, predefined length of time) (Gulzow, 2010).

14
2.3.7 Volatile Fatty Acids (VFA)

During start-up or when there is organic overloading of the digester, high concentrations of

VFA are generally observed. They are usually associated with toxicity and inhibitory effects

(Sawyerr et al., 2019).

2.3.8 Substrates

Many types of substrate (mostly biomass) can be used for biogas production. Complex

substrates take longer time to digest. Variety of feed-stocks that can be used for anaerobic

digestion range from organic residues i.e. agriculture crop residues to waste from animals

(manure), municipal organic waste, industrial waste, sewage sludge, by-products from

production of bioethanol and biodiesel, energy crops and algae etc. (Lantz et al., 2007).

2.3.9 Carbon/Nitrogen Ratio (C/N)

Carbon and nitrogen are the main requirements for the anaerobic bacteria. For good

microbiological activity, ratio of C:N =30:1 is recommended. The variation in the proportion

may slow down the digestion process (Joshi, 2020)

The relationship between the amount of carbon and nitrogen present in organic materials is

expressed in terms of the Carbon/Nitrogen (C/N) ratio. (Yeboah, 2016). Too low value of the

C/N ratio in the substrate causes an increase of ammonia production and this will increase the

pH value of the content in the digester which will affect methanogenesis process. Too high

value of the C/N ratio gives negative effect in protein formation, thus the nitrogen will be

consumed rapidly by methanogens for meeting their protein requirements and will no longer

react on the left over carbon content of the material. As a result, gas production will be low.

Based on studies, the metabolic activity of methanogenic bacteria is possible to be optimized

15
at a C/N ratio around 8 to 20. However, depending on the characteristics of the substrate, the

optimum point can vary (Özmen and Aslanzadeh, 2009). According to Kivaisi and Mtila.

(1998) the optimum C/N ratio for microbial activity involved in bioconversion of vegetable

biomasses to methane is 25-30. Materials with high C/N ratio could be mixed with those of

low C/N ratio to bring the average ratio of the composite input to a desirable level.

2.4 Digesters/Reactor Technology

The links between digester design and the fermentation process are close. Substrate

fermentation can be achieved by processes with full intermixing (stirred tank reactors), plug-

flow processes or special processes.

2.4.1Process with full intermixing (stirred-tank reactors)

Cylindrical, upright stirred-tank reactors are used primarily in agricultural plants for biogas

production. In 2009, this type accounts for about 90% of the installed base. The digester

consists of a tank with concrete bottom and sides made of steel or reinforced concrete. The

tank can be sited either completely or partly sub-grade, or above ground. The cover on top of

the tank is gastight, though the design specifics can vary depending on requirements and

mode of construction. Concrete covers and plastic sheeting are the most common. The

substrate is stirred by agitators sited in or beside the reactor (Gulzow, 2010)

16
Figure 2.2 stirred-tank reactors (Gulzow, 2010)

2.4.2 Plug-flow process

Biogas plants with plug flow – the wet-digestion version also known as a tank through-flow

arrangement – use the expeller effect of fresh substrate in-feed to create a plug flow through a

digester of round or box section. Mixing transverse to the direction of flow is usually

achieved by paddle shafts or specially designed baffles. Virtually all the digesters used in

agricultural plants are of the horizontal type.

Figure 2.3 Plug flow reactor/Digester

17
2.4.3 Batch processes

Batch processes use mobile containers or stationary box-type digesters. These processes have

achieved commercial maturity in recent years and are established on the market. Reinforced-

concrete box digesters are particularly common for fermenting bulk substrates such as maize

and grass silage. In the batch process the digesters are filled with biomass and sealed airtight.

The microorganisms in the seed substrate mixed through the fresh substrate to inoculate it

heat the substrate in the first phase, in which air is fed into the digester. A composting

process associated with the release of heat takes place. When the biomass reaches operating

temperature, the supply of air is shut off. Once the supply of entrained oxygen has been

consumed, microorganisms become active and convert the biomass into biogas as in wet

digestion. The biogas is trapped in the gas headers connected to the digester and piped off for

energy extraction

2.5 Waste Production and Management

When looking at literature related to the subject of waste, such as management system,

statistical reports, legislation documents or scientific papers, categories and classifications of

waste vary, which eventually creates difficulties in identifying and comparing certain waste.

Analysis and discussion of waste quantities often refer to Municipal solid waste (MSW), for

which data is widely available on both local and global levels (Huber, 2019).

18
Figure 2.4 Current and projected global population (United Nations, 2017) and MSW generation

(Kaza et al., 2018; Huber 2019)

A growing number of people on the planet, as well as changing consumption patterns and

increasing wealth at the same time have led to concerning levels of waste generation in the

21st century. As illustrated in Fig 2.2, It is further projected that generation of MSW per

capita will increase in coming decades. Inadequate future plans for handling such large

amounts of waste pose high risks to both environment and humans (Kaza et al., 2018; Huber,

2019).

Disposal and treatment of wastes differs from place to place. A global snapshot regarding

current treatment of waste contradicts the commonly acknowledged concept of a waste-

treatment hierarchy that is specified in the Waste Framework Directive of the European

Union (EU) (EU, 2008). According to this, waste disposal, i.e. land-filling and open dumping

is depicted as the least favourable option among all waste treatment alternatives as illustrated

in Fig 2.3.

19
Figure 2.5 Waste hierarchy according to the EU Waste Framework Directive (Huber, 2019)

Land-filling and dumping drive environmental degradation, pose health risks and cause

losses in the form of green house gas emissions and odours, soil and water contamination

through leaching and unused sources for energy, material and nutrient recovery (EC, 2016;

Ghasemi Ghodrat et al., 2018). Yet, about two thirds of the total amount of MSW is treated

that way, which is widely applied to address highly rising waste generation per capita (Kaza

et al., 2018). Food and green waste represents the largest share of more than half the total

MSW produced (by weight) across the world (Kaza et al., 2018).

Organic waste (OW) in regards to biogas production can be classified into (i) municipal solid,

(ii) manure and (iii) agro-industrial (Di Matteo et al., 2017; Valijanian et al., 2018).

2.5.1 Waste Production and Management in Nigeria

With a population exceeding 180 million (National Bereau of Statistics, 2018), Nigeria

produces one of the largest solid wastes in Africa (Bakare, 2016). Despite the policies and

regulations, solid waste management in the country remains a massive challenge to the

authorities and the entire public.

20
Nigeria generates over 32 million tons of solid wastes yearly, and only a fraction is collected

(Bakare, 2016). Most of these wastes are generated by households and in some cases, by local

industries, individuals and traders who litter the immediate surroundings. Food waste was

found to constitute close to 50 percent of overall municipal solid waste in Nigerian cities

(Nnaji, 2015; Aliyu, 2010). Improper collection and disposal of municipal wastes has led to

different levels of environmental challenge such as blockade of sewers, drain networks and

the choking of water bodies (George, 2010). Although, the country lacks a well-coordinated

waste management system, Solid Waste Management (SWM) is under the purview of

Ministry of Environment at the Federal and State levels and Environmental Health

Department at Local Government level under established legislations and guidelines relating

to waste management. Some of these legislations include: the Harmful Waste Act (Special

Criminal Provisions, etc of 1988), the National Environmental Standards and Regulations

Enforcement Agency (NESREA) Act 2007 (NESREA Act, repealed the Federal

Environmental Protection Act of 1988), Environmental Impact Assessment act of 1992,

National Environmental (Sanitation and Wastes Control) Regulations, 2009 and the National

Environmental Protection Regulations (Pollution Abatement in Industries and Facilities

Generating Waste) (Nwosu and Chukwueloka, 2020).

The handling of SWM in Nigeria calls for immediate attention and the adoption of the best

practicable environmental approach towards preserving the environment. In achieving a

sustainable SWM strategy, all steps of the management process must be fully functional and

effective. They include; solid waste generation and characterization, solid waste collection

and transportation, and solid waste disposal/treatment (Federal Ministry of Environment,

2000).

21
Table 2.2 Waste Management strategy (Nwosu and Chukwueloka, 2020)

S/N Solid Waste Management Strategy Constraint Benefit

1 Traditional Waste Management Heavy reliance on Reasonably Cheap.

Strategy (TWMS). government policies and No technical know-
a.Generation/Characterisation authorities for how is required.
b. Collection, implementation,
c. Transportation and Disposal Segregation of waste is
nearly impossible, no
coordination of the different
steps since they are most
times not exclusive,
Limited public and
environmental awareness,
corruption etc

2 Waste Minimisation Strategy (WMS) expensive, technical

a. Cheap, no technical
a. Waste prevention knowhow is required,
know-how is required.
b. Waste reduction c. corruption, reliance on the
b. No technical know-
Waste reuse government how is required. c. No
d. Waste recycle/recovery technical know-how is
required. d. provides an
alternate source of
revenue and resource
while safeguarding the
environment.
3 Technological Strategy (TcS) a. Technical know-how is Easy and cheap source
Application of Global Positioning required, Expensive, of collection tool
System(GPS) Hardware and Software are especially when
b. Application of Geographical limited covering a large area
Information System (GIS) and population, saves
c. Application of Remote sensing time and energy

2.5.2 Biogas from fruit and vegetable solid waste (FVSW) and Organic MSW (OMSW)

The organic fraction of MSW composition differs greatly. Many factors affect the

composition of MSW, including regional differences, climate differences, the extent to which

recycling is done, the frequency of collection, seasonal change, and cultural practices

(Tchobanoglous et al., 1977; Sawyerr et al., 2019). The sorting system of MSW is not the

only factor that influences the qualities. They are also influenced by various methods used for

quantifying the OMSW. The mechanical sorting of MSW is present in large amounts of

22
suspended, non-biodegradable solids and small pieces of plastic, wood and paper. OMSW

digestion at a mesophilic temperature (35°C) yields a maximum CH 4 ranging from 0.39 to

0.43 m3/kg.VS MSW without paper and wood (Mata-Alvarez et al., 1990) and VS reduction

(VSr) ranging from 63 to 69%. The methane yield of OMSW ranged from 0.11 to 0.16 m 3

kg-VS and VSr was around 30% due to its high ash value (Mata-Alvarez et al., 1990).

The FVSW wastes are characterized by high percentages of moisture (>80%) and VS (>95%)

and have a very high biodegradability percentage. CH 4 yield of FVSW is very high. The

maximum Organic Loading Rate (OLR) to obtain a stable digestion of a variety of FVSW

ranges from 0.8 to 1.6 kg VS mm3/d having an HRT of 32 days (Knol et al. 1978). According

to Hills and Roberts (1982) who reported a failed AD of peach waste, the failure of the

digestion of peach waste is due to inadequate alkalinity levels at 3 kg/m3/d with 20 days

HRT.

According to a study conducted by Stewart et al. (1984) where the biogas yield from the

anaerobic digestion of banana, i.e. damaged fruit and stem, and potato waste was measured

(peelings and rejects). The digestion was done in a 20 litres continuous digester at a

temperature of 35°C. The greatest CH4 yields were obtained from the complete digestion of

the banana waste, which is almost a complete destruction of the VS. For a HRT of 20 days

with OLR 2.5 kg TS/m3/d, the CH4 yield for banana waste was 0.53 m3/kg VS at 100% VS

conversion

2.6 Energy

With the global population swelling and industrialisation on the rise in developing nations,

humanity’s hunger for energy has reached unprecedented levels. More than half of our energy

comes from fossil fuels extracted from deep within the Earth’s crust. It is estimated that since

23
commercial oil drilling began in the 1850s, we have sucked up more than 135 billion tonnes

of crude oil to drive our cars, fuel our power stations and heat our homes. That figure

increases every day. Burning of coal, oil and gas has been inextricably linked to the rising

levels of greenhouse gases in Earth’s atmosphere and is a leading contributor of climate

change.

According to Gray (2013) the energy industry is facing decades of transformation,” according

to a recent report by the World Energy Council. Yet the implications of the changes

underway go far deeper. There are political, economic and social issues at stake, but it may

also require each of us to make some fundamental shifts in our behaviour. There are still a lot

of people around the world – 1.2 billion or so – who do not have access to modern energy

services, explains Jim Watson, director of the UK Energy Research Centre (2011). There are

still an estimated three billion people around the world who cook and heat their homes using

simple stoves or open fires that burn wood, animal dung or coal.

2.6.1 Energy Crisis in Nigeria

For decades, Nigeria has been faced with several formidable energy crises that have not only

undermined her economic growth but also deprived over 50 million populations, the privilege

of sustainable and reliable access to electricity and modern cooking techniques. In recent

times Nigerian citizens have suffered hikes in the cost of cooking gas also the Nigeria power

sector had witnessed a substantial decline in energy production, which forced many

households and businesses to rely on the fossil fuel-based generators to meet the energy

demand. Currently, the available generation capacity is constantly hovering between 3,500

and 5,000 MW for a population of about 200 million people. This is an indication that there is

a wide energy gap between the demand and supply. However, Nigeria is gifted with diverse

24
renewable energy resources that are not being fully exploited to meet her energy future needs

(Okubanjo et al., 2020).

2.7 Extent of Past Research

S/N Title Author Methodology Gap

1. Preparation of Biogas from (Ubwa et al., 2013) The study investigated Did not report any
Plants and Animal Waste biogas potentials of six method of adjusting
different plants, Cow pH for better yield
rumen liquor, Cowpea,
and poultry waste. The
Slurry used was
prepared by mixing 60
g of plants sample with
20 g of chicken
dropping in the ratio of
3:1 W/W (weight for
weight). These were
moistened with varying
volumes of pre –
warmed water at 37℃.

2. Small-scale biogas (Huber, 2019) A techno-economic Did not report any

production from organic assessment served to method of adjusting
waste and application in quantify biogas and pH for better yield
mid-income countries – a liquid digestate
case study of a Lebanese production rates, based
community. on available resources
of organic waste in the
research area. Costs
associated with
installation, operation
and maintenance of the
proposed facility have
been projected based on
present examples of
similar facilities in the
country
3. An Overview of Biogas (Sawyerr et al., 2019) This paper presents an Did not report any
Production: Fundamentals, overview of state-of- method of adjusting
Applications and Future the-art and future pH
Research viewpoints related to
the Anaerobic digestion
process for biogas
production.

4. Guide to biogas; from (Gulzow, 2010) This guide focuses on Did not report any
production to use large scale production method of adjusting
of biogas and uses as pH for better yield
well as process designs
5. Production of biogas from (Yeboah, 2016)
fruit and vegetable wastes

6. Design Of Proposed (Joshi, 2020) Did not report any

25
 Automated Biogas Plant method of adjusting
pH for better yield
7. Generation Of Biogas (Egbere et al., 2010) A study was carried out Did not report any
From Segregates Of to explore the amount method of adjusting
Municipal Solid Wastes In of biogas that could be pH for better yield
Jos, Nigeria. produced using
segregated portions of
municipal solid wastes
(food residue, leaves,
paper and a mixture of
the three segregates) in
Jos city, Nigeria, as
substrates. The
segregates were mixed
with water and cow
dung as inoculums, in
the ratio of 3:3:1 and
subjected to anaerobic
digestion using a
laboratory-biogas
generation system set at
37oC for a period of 25
days
8. Elevated biogas production Achinas and This study aims to Did not report any
from the anaerobic co- Euverink (2019) appraise the method of adjusting
digestion of farmhouse performance of pH for better yield
waste: Insight into the anaerobic digestion of
process performance and different wastes (cow
kinetics manure, food waste and
garden waste) obtained
from a regional
farmhouse. Batch
reactors were
established under
mesophilic conditions
in order to investigate
the impact of ternary
mixtures on the
anaerobic digestion
process performance.
Different mixing ratios
were set in the batch
tests.
9. Comparative study of (Olaoluwa et al., The production of Did not report any
biogas production in 2018) biogas from a method of adjusting
composite of poultry composite of Lemon pH for better yield
droppings and lemon grass and Poultry
grass using pressure droppings was carried
computed from strain out by measuring the
gage rosette total gas pressure
exerted on the surface
of sealed near-
cylindrical plastic
container used as a
digester
10. Biogas Productions from (Musa et al., 2016) Biogas digester with Did not report any
Food waste and a capacity of 0.14m 3 method of adjusting
Functional Working was design. pH for better yield

26
 Methane Gas Digester Foodwaste was used
Design as the feedstock
which was obtained
from Dangote Hall,
Bayero University
Kano. The foodwaste
sample was mashed
and mixed with water
in a ratio 1:2 to form
the slurry. The test
was carried out at an
ambient temperature
between 35 -50C
within a retention
time of three (3) days.
. a gas burner for
checking the
flammability of the
gas produced was
used
11. Multidimensional (Mishra et al., production and Did not report any
approaches of biogas 2021) upgradation of biogas method of adjusting
production and up- rely upon the types of pH for better yield
gradation: Opportunities feedstocks, AD
and challenges condition, microbial
diversity, purification
methods along with
the application of
various additives.
12. Biogas production from (Haryanto et al., Did not report any
anaerobic codigestion of 2018) method of adjusting
cowdung and elephant pH for better yield
grass (Pennisetum
Purpureum) using batch
digester

27
 CHAPTER THREE

MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 Study Area

The study was conducted at the department of Chemical/Petrochemical Engineering, Faculty

of Engineering, Akwa Ibom State University, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria.

3.2 Materials `

The materials used for the experiment are as follows;

i. Digester: A 200 litre anaerobic steel digester was designed (as shown in plate 3.3) for

the production of biogas from slurry feed.

ii. Feedstock (poultry waste): 2 bags (6kg each) of poultry waste from a poultry farm

opposite belma guest house, Ikot Akpaden was obtained at a rate of #500 per bag.

iii. Electronic beam balance

iv. pH meter: A portable eco pH2 tester was used to determine the pH of the substrate

before and after addition of NaOH.

v. NaOH: This was used to improve the pH of the slurry as poultry waste was

discovered to be acidic.

vi. Fittings and valves

vii. Hose

viii. Waste shredder: This was used to reduce the size of the waste into finer particles.

ix. PVC pipes

28
 x. Thermometer (liquid in glass): this was used to take the temperature reading on daily

basis.

xi. Mixing tank: A bucket was used to mix shredded waste with water before feeding into

the digester.

xii. Dryer: This was used to determine the moisture content of the waste.

3.3 Methods

3.3.1 Substrate management

Substrate management consisted of delivery, storage, preparation, and in-feed.

A. Delivery

The waste was collected from poultry farm within the area.

Plate 3.1 Poultry waste

B. Preparation;

i. Slurry preparation

The waste was shredded and slurry was prepared from 10kg of shredded waste to

aid in the easy and faster decomposition of the feedstock.

Required water to waste ratio is 2:1

ii. pH determination

29
 50g of the sample slurry was transferred into a beaker. The slurry was agitated and

left for 24 hours at room temperature. The pH meter was used to measure the

slurry pH.

Plate 3.2 pH setup

iii. NaOH Pre-Treatment

2 litres of 5M NaOH was added to help neutralize the slurry.

iv. Moisture content determination

20g of sample was measured using weighing balance. The sample was heated in a

dryer for 2 hours at temperature of 150℃ and the weight of the dried sample was

recorded when the weight became constant.

x− y
Moisture %= × 100 4.1
y

Where; x = weight of wet sample

y = Weight of dried sample

30
3.3.2 Design and Setup of process

Figure 3.1 Block flow diagram of biogas process

A. Digester design

The Batch type reactor digester was used. In the batch process the digesters are filled with

biomass and sealed airtight. The microorganisms in the feed substrate mixed through the

fresh substrate to inoculate it heat the substrate in the first phase, in which air is fed into the

digester. A composting process associated with the release of heat takes place. When the

biomass reaches operating temperature (30℃), the supply of air is shut off. Once the supply

of entrained oxygen has been consumed, microorganisms become active and convert the

biomass into biogas as in wet digestion.

i. A 200 litres cylindrical shape bioreactor of height 1.2m and diameter 0.9m was

fabricated from galvanized steel due to its strength, durability and stability in the

acid basic environments as well as better mixing of the slurry.

ii. The digester was designed as a batch digester with the capacity of 1.7m3

iii. Two 1mm hole were made at the top of the digester as shown in the figure 3.2

below. One to serve as the biogas outlet and the other to fit in the pressure gauge.

31
 iv. A 5mm hole was made at the top and bottom of digester as shown below, one to

serve as feedstock inlet and the other as sludge outlet.

v. Stirrer plates made of aluminium were fitted inside the bioreactor with handle at

the top of the reactor to stir the slurry content to ensure uniform mixing.

vi. The digester was airtight, painted black and placed above ground level.

The produced biogas is first collected in a 4 litres airtight container containing water which

serves as a scrubber to help purify the gas. The process is based on water displacement

principle system for easy measurement of the value of biogas produced as shown in figure 3.1

Figure 3.2; Digester design

32
 Plate 3.3 Digester

B. Receiver design

A 4 litres plastic container was used as the receiver

Plate 3.4a Receiver design Plate 3.4b General setup

3.3.3 Operation of Digester and Receivers

The digester's lid had a hose attached to it that was fastened into the water container's cover,

which was made of plastic and sealed firmly to stop biogas from escaping. The gas valve on

the other side of the cover was closed. This gas valve was only unlocked when the biogas was

prepared to be tapped. The plastic container was likewise closed and the hose on the side of

33
the plastic container was fastened into the hole in the lid of the plastic containers for the

displaced water.

The feedstock slurry was added to the digester. The digester's cover was then tightened over

it to keep out any air. The water in the plastic container was squeezed by the biogas as it was

created in the digester, and the water was then displaced into the second plastic container

through the hoses. The Digester was stirred on daily basis for proper mixing.

Plate 3.5 Feeding of substrate into digester

3.4 Collection of Data and Analysis

3.4.1 pH determination

The pH of the slurry was measured before and after addition of NaOH to the slurry

3.4.3 Temperature measurement

The temperature of the digester was measured on daily basis using a thermometer

34
3.4.4 Biogas yield/production

The water displacement method was used where the volume of water displaced into the

empty plastic container equal the volume of biogas produced. The volume of water displaced

was measured and recorded on daily basis.

3.4.5 Combustion test

The gas produced was subjected to combustion test by burning it using a Bunsen burner.

Plate 3.6 Combustion setup

3.4.6 Percentage Yield

Percentage yield was calculated by

Mass of gas produced

%Yield= ×100 4.2
Mass of waste feed

3.4.7 Data analysis

MS EXCEL was used in the graphical presentation and analysis of data collected.

35
 CHAPTER FOUR

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the results and discussions of analysed data from the laboratory analysis

and experimental work. The results are presented in tables and graphs.

4.1 pH value

It was observed that the pH value of the feedstock increased after treatment with 5M NaOH.

Feedstock showed to be acidic before and after treatment with 5M of NaOH.

pH value before addition of NaOH = 4.39

pH value after addition of NaOH = 6.68

4.2 Moisture Content

Moisture content of the poultry waste was calculated to give 23.38%. This indicate that the

waste is can be classified as a dry feed.

4.3 Biogas yield and temperature

The volume of biogas and average temperature were monitored and measured on a daily

basis. The temperature for the 20 days HTR was between 27ºC to 34°C. The average

temperature was 28℃.

36
 Biogas yield (ml)
250

200

150
Biogas

Biogas yield (ml)

100

50

0
26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Temperature ℃

Figure 4.1 Biogas yield against temperature

A shown in figure 4.1 above, an ambient temperature of 28℃ gave maximum yield of biogas

followed by 29℃. This show to what extent temperature can affect biogas yield.

4.2 Daily Biogas yield

The volume of biogas produced on a daily basis was monitored and measured. Gas

production began on the 9th day. There was a small and linear increase in the biogas

produced from the 10th day to the 18th day, the biogas production got to its peak on the 18 th

day.

37
 Biogas yield (ml)
2000
1800
1600
1400
Biogas yield (ml)

1200
1000 Biogas yield (ml)
800
600
400
200
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (day)

Figure 4.2 Biogas yield for 20 days HRT

4.3 The total volume of biogas

At the end of the retention period of 20 days, the total volume of gas produced is 1904ml.

throughout the entire anaerobic digestion process, the ambient temperature for digestion

ranged from 27°C to 34°C (Fig 4.1). From (Fig 4.1), 28 ℃ gave highest yield of biogas.

4.4 Percentage Yield

Percent yield of the biogas was calculated and obtained as 24%.

4.5 Combustion

Passing the gas through water helped reduce the CO 2 and water vapour content and increased

combustion. The gas burned with a mix of blue and pale yellow flame as recommended by

(Khalid, 2016). Further purification (removal of CO2) will improve the combustion

characteristics of the gas.

38
 CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.0 Conclusion
The study investigated the biogas yield, effect of temperature, pH of biogas produced from

poultry waste. The study proved that,

i. Poultry waste can be used to produce a generous, useful and clean source of energy

(Biogas)

ii. Temperature and pH play vital role on the yield of biogas

iii. Addition of NaOH helped improve the pH quality of the slurry for a better yield.

5.1 Recommendation
To guide or direct future studies of the study initiated, the following recommendations are

being made,

i. Studies should be done to vary pH of feedstock

ii. Experiments should be carried out to find a means of stabilizing temperature as it can

play a major role in biogas yield especially in areas with large varying temperature

ranges

iii. Studies should be done considering C/N ratios

iv. Comparative studies should be carried out between yield of wet and dry organic waste

39
 REFERENCES

Azzi, E. (2017). Waste Management Systems in Lebanon : The benefits of a waste

crisis for improvement of practices (Dissertation). Retrieved from

http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-214047

Bailey, J. E., & Ollis, D. F. (2018). Biochemical engineering fundamentals. McGraw-

Hill.

Bakare, W. (2016) Solid Waste Management in Nigeria. Bioenergy Consult,

Powering Clean Energy Future.https://www.bioenergyconsult.com/tag/nigeria

European Commission (EC), (2016). Biodegradable waste - Environment - European

Commission [WWW Document]. URL

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/compost/index.htm (accessed 2.6.19).

Ghasemi Ghodrat, A., Tabatabaei, M., Aghbashlo, M., Mussatto, S.I., (2018). Waste

Management Strategies; the State of the Art, in: Tabatabaei, M., Ghanavati, H.

(Eds.), Biogas. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 1–33.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-77335-3_1

Ghosh, S, Henry, M P, and Klass, D L. (2000). Bioconversion of water hyacinth-

Coastal Bermuda grass-MSW-sludge blends to methane. United States.

Gray R. (2013), The biggest energy challenges facing humanity. Grand Challenges.

BBC Futures.

Huber, S., (2019). Small-scale biogas production from organic waste and application

in mid-income countries – a case study of a Lebanese community. Master

thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, No./9, 48 pp,

ECTS/hp

40
Kaltschmitt, M., Streicher, W. (2009). Energie aus Biomasse. In: Kaltschmitt, M.,

Streicher, W. (eds) Regenerative Energien in Österreich. Vieweg+Teubner.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8348-9327-7_9

Kalyuzhnyi, S., Veeken, A., Hamelers, B. (2000), Two-particle model of anaerobic

solid state fermentation. Water Science and Technology, 41, 43-40

Kaza, S., Yao L. C., Bhada-Tata P. and Van Woerden F. (2018). What a Waste 2.0:

A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Urban

Development;. Washington, DC: World Bank. © World Bank.

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30317

Knol, W., Van Der Most, M.M., De Waart, J. (1978). Biogas production by anaerobic

digestion of fruit and vegetable waste. A preliminary study. Journal of the

Science of Food and Agriculture, 29, 822-830

Mata-Alvarez, J., Cecchi, F., Pavan, P., Llabres, P. (1990). The performances of

digesters treating the organic fraction of municipal solid wastes differently

sorted. Biological Wastes, 33, 181-199.

Mccarty, P.L. Smith, D.P. (1986), Anaerobic wastewater treatment

Molino A., Larocca V., Chianese S., Musmarra D. (2018) Biofuels Production by

Biomass Gasification: A Review. Energies. 11(4):811.

https://doi.org/10.3390/en11040811

Molino, A., Nanna, F., Ding, Y., Bikson, B., Braccio, G. (2013b), Biomethane

production by anaerobic digestion of organic waste. Fuel, 103, 1003-1009.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2012.07.070.

41
Mutz, D., Hengevoss, D., Hugi, C.M. and Gross, T. (2017) Waste-to-Energy Options

in Municipal Solid Waste Management. A Guide for Decision Makers in

Developing and Emerging Countries. Eschborn

Nguyen, H. (2012). Biogas Production from Solvent Pretreated Orange Peel. Master

of Science Thesis in the Master’s Program MPISC. Chalmers University Of

Technology, Goteborg, Sweden.

Özmen, P. and Aslanzadeh, S. (2009). Biogas production from municipal waste mixed

with different portions of orange peel. Master thesis in Applied Biotechnology.

University of Borås, Borås.

Philip, D.L. (2008). A Brief History of Biogas. The University of Adelaide,

Australiahttp://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/history/[Accessed 22/10/2015].

Rosa, W. (Ed.), (2017). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable

Development, in: A New Era in Global Health. Springer Publishing Company,

New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826190123.ap02

Sagagi, B. S., B. Garba and Usman N. S. (2009). Studies on biogas production from

fruits and vegetable waste. Bayero journal of pure and applied sciences 2 (1):

115-118.

Sawyerr N., Trois C., Workneh T. and Okudoh V. (2019). An Overview of Biogas

Production: Fundamentals, Applications and Future Research. International

Journal of Energy Economics and Policy. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.32479/ijeep.7375

Speece, R.E. (1996), Anaerobic Biotechnology for Industrial Wastewaters. Nashville:

Archaea Press.

42
Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockstrom, J., Cornell, S.E., Fetzer, I., Bennett, E.M.,

Biggs, R., Carpenter, S.R., de Vries, W., de Wit, C.A., Folke, C., Gerten, D.,

Heinke, J., Mace, G.M., Persson, L.M., Ramanathan, V., Reyers, B., Sorlin,

S., (2015). Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing

planet. Science 347, 1259855–1259855.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

Tchobanoglous, G., Eliassen, R., Theisen, H. (1977), Solid Wastes; Engineering

Principles and Management Issues. New York: McGraw-hill.

Ubwa, S. T., Asemave, K., Oshido, B., & Idoko, A. (2013). Preparation of biogas

from plants and animal waste. International Journal of Science and

Technology, 2(6), 6-7.

Umeghalu, C., Chukwuma, E., Okonkwo, I., Umeh, S. (2012), Potentials for biogas

production in Anambra State of Nigeria using cow dung and poultry

droppings. International Journal of Veterinary Science, 1, 26-30.

43
 Appendix A

Tables
Effect of temperature on biogas yield
Biogas (ml) Temperature (℃)
93 27
153 28
212 28
226 28
212 28
211 29
219 29
146 32
142 33
139 33
151 34

Daily Biogas yield

Time (day) Biogas yield (ml)
1 0
2 0
3 0
4 0
5 0
6 0
7 0
8 0
9 93
10 131
11 224
12 366
13 517
14 728
15 954
16 1186
17 1398
18 1617
19 1748
20 1904
21 1904
22 1904

44
 Appendix B

Calculations
Moisture content

x− y
Moisture %= × 100
y

Where; x = weight of wet sample

y = Weight of dried sample

20−16.21
Moisture %= ×100=23.38 %
16.21

Percentage Yield

Weight of product 2.4

% Yield ¿ × 100= ×100=24 %
Weight of Feed 10

45