ARTICLE IN PRESS

Biosystems Engineering (2004) 87 (3), 345–353 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2003.11.013
SE}Structures and Environment

Design of A Solar Thermophilic Anaerobic Reactor for Small Farms

Hamed M. El-Mashad; Wilko K.P. van Loon; Grietje Zeeman; Gerard P.A. Bot; Gatze Lettinga
Department of Agrotechnology and Food Sciences, Wageningen University, Mansholtlaan 10, Wageningen 6708 PA, Netherlands; e-mail of
corresponding author: Hamed.Elmashad@wur.nl

(Received 22 April 2003; accepted in revised form 26 November 2003; published online 29 January 2004)

A 10 m3 completely stirred tank reactor has been designed for anaerobic treatment of liquid cow manure under
thermophilic conditions (508C), using a solar heating system mounted on the reactor roof. Simulation models
for two systems have been developed. The first system consists of loose components and in the second system
the components are integrated. Each of the two systems includes a heat recovery unit to heat the influent by
extracting heat from the effluent. The integrated system includes an extra chamber for the pumps and the heat
recovery unit, which are in the same insulating cover as the reactor and the solar collector. The control system
is based on simple on/off strategy. An auxiliary heater, operated with the produced biogas, can be used during
cold months. The measured and calculated design parameters are presented. The simulation results show that
the temperature fluctuation of the reactor during the night is less than 18C, which is too small to harm the
microbial activity. The results show that an annual net thermal energy production and overall annual energy
efficiency of 100 and 95%, respectively, could be obtained from the integrated system.
# 2003 Silsoe Research Institute. All rights reserved
Published by Elsevier Ltd

1. Introduction mesophilic treatment (Van Lier, 1995). Electricity, oil or

The depletion of conventional energy sources, to-
gether with the rapid population growth, has forced the
search for renewable energy sources. Anaerobic diges-
tion can be used to enable biogas to be produced from
agricultural manure. This technology has many benefits
from environmental, agricultural and sustainability
viewpoints (Van Velsen & Lettinga, 1980; De Baere,
2000).
Temperature is an important factor that may
affect the performance of anaerobic digestion. Anaero-
bic digestion can be achieved under psychrophilic (5
258C), mesophilic (25–408C) and thermophilic (>458C)
conditions. Digestion under thermophilic conditions has
many advantages, compared to psychrophilic and
mesophilic conditions, such as higher metabolic rates
(Van Lier, 1995) and a higher destruction rate of both
pathogens and weed seeds (Larsen et al., 1994). The
latter advantage is important where the effluent is to be
used as a hygienic fertiliser representing a by-product of
the digestion process. On the other hand, thermophilic
treatment demands higher energy input compared to
1537-5110/$30.00
part of the biogas produced during the process is used to
keep the reactor at the desired temperature. The use of
such fuel is uneconomical (Axaopoulos et al., 2001).
Using solar energy or other renewable sources to heat
the reactor is a good alternative, because these sources
are environmentally friendly. However, there are still
significant gaps between the costs of these sources and
that of traditional ones (Sims, 2004).
According to El-Mashad et al. (2003) the use of solar
energy for heating anaerobic reactor represents a kind of
solar energy storage in the form of biogas. Axaopoulos
et al. (2001) presented a mathematical model and
experimental study on a solar-heated anaerobic digester
treating swine manure at 358C. Alkhamis et al. (2000)
experimented with the use of solar energy for heating a
bioreactor. To maintain a constant temperature of 408C
in the water jacket around the bioreactor, a propor-
tional-integral-differential (PID) controller was de-
signed, installed and tested. Florides et al. (2002)
stated that computer modelling of thermal systems
offers a number of advantages. The most important
were the elimination of the expense of building
345 # 2003 Silsoe Research Institute. All rights reserved
Published by Elsevier Ltd
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
346 H.M. EL-MASHAD ET AL.
Notation
A surface area of the reactor heat exchanger, m2
Cpair specific heat of air in pump chamber,
J kg
1 K
1
Cpg specific heat of the biogas, J kg
1 K
1
Cpm specific heat of manure, J kg
1 K
1
Cpw specific heat of water, J kg
1 K
1
E effectiveness of the heat exchanger, dimension-
less
IT solar flux on a tilted surface, W m
2
Qaux auxiliary heat add to the reactor, W
Qb bottom heat loss from the solar collector to
the biogas, W
Qc heat losses from the pump chamber to the
reactor, W
Qea electrical energy consumption in agitation, W
Qep rate of heat gain from the pumps, W
Qgb heat losses from the liquid via biogas bubbles,
W collector to environment, W m
2 K
1
Qgc heat losses by convection from the liquid to
biogas, W
Qlg heat losses from the gas volume to ambient, W
Qlm heat losses from the effective volume of the
reactor, W
Qlossc heat losses from the pump chamber to
ambient, W
Qman heat required to heat up the pre-heated
manure to the reactor temperature, W
Qr heat recovered from the effluent, W
prototypes, the optimisation of system components,
estimation of the amount of energy delivered from the
system, and prediction of temperature variations of the
system.
In Egypt, about 70% of the livestock farms are small
or medium sized (5 15 adult cattle) (Tabana, 2000). On
farm digestion is preferable to prevent long distance
transportation of manure, so small or medium size
reactors are required. Small reactors obtain higher
energy efficiency after incorporation of a solar heating
system than larger ones (El-Mashad et al., 2003). The
results of El-Mashad et al. (2003) showed that it is
possible to increase the annual specific net thermal
energy production by about 15% by mounting a solar
collector on the reactor roof. The system studied was for
a 10 m3 completely stirred tank reactor (CSTR) (treating
manure produced from 10 cows) insulated with 30 cm
straw loam (straw loam is a cheap building material
consisting of straw and loam) and without heat recovery
from the effluent. The dynamic behaviour of the system
related to the environmental and operational distur-
bances was not studied.
Qsid sides losses from the solar collector, W
Qtop top losses from the solar collector, W
Qu useful heat gain rate from the collector, W
t time, s
Tch temperature of the air in the pump chamber,
8C
Tamb ambient temperature, 8C
Tin water inlet temperature to the solar collector,
8C
Tout water outlet temperature from the solar
collector, 8C
Tg biogas temperature, 8C
Tpreh temperature of preheated manure, 8C
TR operation temperature of the reactor, 8C
U overall heat transfer coefficient of the reactor
heat exchanger, W m
2 K
1
UL overall heat loss coefficient from the solar
Ur overall heat loss coefficient from the reactor to
environment, W m
2 K
1
V effective reactor volume, m3
Vch volume of the pump chamber, m3
Vg biogas volume, m3
r manure density, kg m
3
rg biogas density, kg m
3
rair density of air in pump chamber, kg m
3
fm flow rate of water inside the solar collector,
kg s
1
In the present study, designs for two different
configurations of the solar thermophilic anaerobic
reactor (STAR) have been modelled. In both
systems, cattle manure was treated in a CSTR
of 10 m3 at thermophilic conditions (508C). To keep
the systems as simple as possible, the systems have
been designed without heat storage during night.
This leads to systems that are subjected to
daily temperature fluctuation. The dynamic behaviour
of the system, interrelated to the effect on the activity
of bacteria, was incorporated. The simulation used
the Egyptian situation as an example for Mediterranean
and subtropical conditions. The main objective
was to design a thermophilic CSTR with high-energy
efficiency including a simple and reliable control
strategy. In the optimisation, the following aspects were
considered:
(1) the effect of adding a heat recovery unit, which is
indicated as an option in Fig. 1, to heat the influent
by extracting the heat from the effluent, on the
system performance;
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
SOLAR REACTOR FOR SMALL FARMS 347

nents were calculated according to the equations

1 Biogas presented by Duffie and Beckman (1974, 1991) and
Sukhatme (1997). These calculations were based on
assumptions that the collector was tilted at an angle
equal to the latitude angle and was facing south (i.e.
azimuth angle of 0). Biogas production rate was
2
estimated based on the results of earlier experiments
(El-Mashad et al., 2003) assuming that the biogas
8
Influent contains 40% carbon dioxide.
5 4
3 7
The hourly ambient temperature has been obtained
by fitting the available (minimum, maximum and
5 Effluent
(a) 6 average) measured daily temperatures by a sine function
(El-Mashad et al., 2003).

1 Biogas
9 3. Mathematical model of the studied systems

3.1. System configuration

Schematic diagrams of the systems studied are shown

8
2 in Fig. 1. The loose components configuration [Fig. 1(a)]
6 consists of a CSTR system, a heat recovery unit, a
Influent
5 4
3
7 The raw manure is pumped through the heat recovery
(b) Effluent
Fig. 1. A schematic of the systems configuration in which the
heat recovery can be left out; with (a) the loose components
system and (b) the integrated one: 1, solar collector; 2, agitator;
3, heat exchanger; 4, auxiliary heater; 5, control; 6, pump; 7,
heat recovery unit; 8, insulating cover; 9, extra gas volume
(2) a simple control system using part of the biogas
produced as an auxiliary heating source during cold
months; and
(3) an integrated design including an extra chamber
for pumping system and heat recovery, all in
the same insulating cover of the reactor and
solar collector, aimed at the reuse of the heat
produced from both the pumping system and
stirring motor.
2. Measurements
To perform the model study many parameters were
needed. Most physical, chemical and rheological char-
acteristics of the manure used in the simulation were
measured or calculated as described by El-Mashad et al.
(2003).
The available measured data for solar energy were the
monthly average daily solar radiation on a horizontal
surface and the monthly average daily hours of bright
sunshine (CLAC, 1997). The different radiation compo-
pumping system and a separate flat plate solar collector.
unit, where it is preheated by extracting heat from the
effluent. The reactor is kept at the desired temperature
by using hot water from the solar collector. If the water
temperature is lower than 508C the water flow to the
system is stopped. The system is insulated by 10 cm
bricks and 11 cm rock wool. The biogas produced is
directly taken out from the reactor.
The integrated system [Fig. 1(b)] consists of the same
components as the loose components one but the solar
collector is mounted on the reactor roof. In addition,
this system includes an extra gas volume, and an extra
chamber for pumps and the heat recovery installation.
The purpose of this pump chamber is to recover part of
the heat produced during pump operation. All the
components of this integrated system are included in one
insulating cover.
Figure 2 shows a diagram for the overall heat balance
of the integrated system including the state variables. An
analogous diagram for the loose components system can
be drawn after eliminating the gas volume and the pump
chamber.
3.2. Solar collector
As the time constant of the reactor is much larger
compared to that for the solar collector, the solar
collector is assumed to operate at steady state. The time
constant is defined as the product of the heat capacity of
the manure and the thermal resistance of the reactor
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
348 H.M. EL-MASHAD ET AL.
IT
Qtop
Solar collector Qsid
Qb Qea
Qgc
Tg Qgb Qlg Tamb
Qep
Qu
Qaux
TR
Qc
Qlm
Qlossc Tch Qr Reactor
Fig. 2. Overall heat balance diagram including all temperatures
and heat flows: Tamb, Tch, Tg and TR, ambient, air in pump
chamber, biogas and reactor temperatures, respectively; IT, solar
flux on a tilted surface; Qtop, top losses from the solar collector;
Qsid, sides losses from the solar collector; Qb, bottom heat loss
from the solar collector; Qea, electrical energy consumption in
agitation; Qgb, heat losses from the liquid via biogas bubbles;
Qgc, heat losses by convection from the liquid to biogas; Qu,
useful heat gain rate from the collector; Qlg, heat losses from
biogas volume to ambient; Qaux, auxiliary heat add to the
reactor; Qlm, heat losses from the effective volume of the reactor
to environment; Qep, rate of heat gain from the pumps; Qlossc,
heat losses from the pump chamber to environment; Qc, heat
losses from the pump chamber to the reactor; Qr, heat recovered
from the effluent
with insulation. The heat gain from the solar collector
system can be calculated from the Hottel–Whillier–Bliss
equation (Duffie & Beckman, 1974; Sukhatme, 1997).
The value for overall heat loss coefficient for the solar
collector UL in W m
2 K
1 was calculated from the sum
of the loss coefficients through the top; the sides and the
bottom (Sukhatme, 1997).
Since the inlet and outlet temperatures of the solar
collector Tin and Tout in 8C are dynamic and interrelated,
the Simulink tool in the Matlab program (version 5.3.1)
was used to calculate both parameters by formulating
another energy balance around the reactor heat
exchanger. To do so, the inlet temperature to the
reactor heat exchanger was assumed to be equal to the
outlet temperature from the solar collector and vice
versa. From this heat balance, an equation to calculate
Tin can be written as follows:
  

UA
Tin ¼ Tout þ ðTR
Tout Þ 1
exp ð1Þ
fm Cpw
where: TR is the reactor temperature in 8C; U is overall
heat transfer coefficient of the reactor heat exchanger in
W m
2 K
1; A is surface area of the reactor heat
exchanger in m2; fm is flow rate of water inside the
solar collector in kg s
1; and Cpw is specific heat of water
in J kg
1 K
1.
To obtain the maximum possible radiation on a tilted
surface, the tilt angle of the collector was chosen to
maximise the sum of three radiation sources compo-
nents: direct beam radiation; diffuse sky radiation and
diffuse radiation reflected from the ground (Duffie &
Beckman, 1974). Al-Ismaily and Probert (1995) used a
simplified correlation to calculate the optimal tilt
angle. The yearly-optimal tilt angle was obtained by
averaging the monthly optimal tilt angle for the whole
year. For Cairo, this angle was almost equal to the
latitude (3018).
The solar system array consisted of three parallel flat
plate solar collectors with a total surface area of 6 m2.
The flow rate of the water in the collector was
50 l h
1 m
2.
3.3. Heat exchangers
To calculate the required heat exchanger length (i.e.
the heat exchanging surface area) inside the reactor, the
overall heat transfer resistance per unit of length was
calculated. This resistance was calculated based on the
film resistance inside the heat exchanger; the conduction
resistance of the heat exchanger walls and the resistance
of heat convection inside the reactor. The convective
heat transfer coefficients have been calculated based on
the proper Nusselt number correlations. The logarith-
mic mean temperature difference for the heat exchanger
is calculated from the wrap-around heat exchanger
(Dahl & Davidson, 1995). To calculate the logarithmic
mean temperature difference, the yearly average tem-
peratures of the inlet and outlet flow of the solar
collector were assumed to be constant at 60 and 708C,
respectively.
For the heat recovery of the outgoing manure, a
coaxial heat exchanger was applied. The warm outgoing
manure flows in the central tube, while the cold ingoing
manure flows in the outer cylinder.
In the design calculations for the heat recovery unit,
some assumptions were made: the counter flow heat
exchanger consisted of a single-wall; the overall heat
transfer coefficient was constant; equal volume flow in
both directions occurred; the heat losses to surroundings
are included; and the cold manure enters the heat
recovery unit at ambient temperature.
The same procedures used for the heat exchanger
inside the reactor were also used to estimate the required
length of the heat recovery unit, considering the
appropriate correlations for the heat transfer coefficient
calculation. A very low mass flow of 2083 l [manure]
h
1 was calculated corresponding to the applied
hydraulic retention time of 20 days.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
SOLAR REACTOR FOR SMALL FARMS
By using the assumptions above, a heat balance
including the surrounding heat losses was made
along the heat recovery unit. The equations of
such heat balance were solved numerically to
calculate the temperature of the pre-heated manure
Tpreh in 8C and the temperature of the discharge manure.
From these calculations, the relative effectiveness E
of the heat exchanger was calculated as defined by
Smith (1997).
To calculate the effectiveness, a yearly average of the
inlet manure and both the ambient air temperature and
the air temperature inside the pump chamber were used.
A calculated annual effectiveness of 60% was used to
estimate the hourly temperature of the preheated
manure Tpreh as follows:
Tpreh ¼ ETR þ ð1
EÞTamb ð2Þ
where Tamb is ambient temperature in 8C.
3.4. The reactor
Although in the experimental installation the system
was fed once daily, Varel et al. (1977) mentioned that
greater efficiencies might be obtained with continuous
feeding. In the modelled CSTR system, the reactor is
kept at a constant working volume (i.e. the amount of
manure added to the reactor equals to the amount
withdrawn from it) and at a uniform temperature.
However, the temperature is time dependent.
For the model of the integrated system, three heat
balances were formulated, for the reactor effective
volume, the extra gas volume, and the pump chamber,
respectively. For the effective volume the following heat
balance was formulated:
dTR
rVCpm ¼
Qman þ Qu þ Qaux
Qlm
dt
þ Qc
Qgb
Qgc ð3Þ
where: r is manure density in kg m
3; V is effective
reactor volume in m3; Cpm is specific heat of manure in
J kg
1 K
1; and t is time in s.
The accumulation of heat in the reactor is caused by
the energy needed to heat the manure from the pre-
heated temperature to the reactor temperature Qman in
W, heat gain from the solar collector Qu in W, the
auxiliary heat Qaux in W and the losses to the
surroundings Qlm in W. In addition, the manure is in
thermal contact with the pump chamber, giving heat
loss Qc in W, and with the gas volume, giving heat losses
Qgb in W and Qgc in W. It was assumed that the heat
capacity of the reactor material is neglected compared to
the heat capacity of the manure itself. A similar heat
balance for the loose components system can be
349
formulated after eliminating the heat terms concerning
the extra gas volume and pump chamber.
The extra gas volume exchanges heat directly with the
back of the solar collector Qb in W and with the
surroundings Qlg in W. The extra gas volume gains
energy from the agitation motor Qea in W and from the
effective volume of the reactor Qgb in W and Qgc in W:
dTg
rg Vg Cpg ¼ Qb þ Qgb þ Qea þ Qgc
Qlg ð4Þ
dt
where: rg is biogas density in kg m
3; Vg is biogas
volume in m3; Cpg is specific heat of biogas in
J kg
1 K
1; and Tg is biogas temperature in 8C.
Hill (1983) used the data of Chen and Hashimoto
(1981) of 288 W m
3 for the tank mixing and assumed
transfer and electrical motor efficiencies of 60%. This
amount of power was also used to calculate the energy
consumption for mixing in the present study, assuming
the agitator is operated for 10% of the time.
The heat balance of the air inside the pump chamber
includes the heat gain from the pumps motor Qep in W,
the heat exchange with environment Qlossc in W and
with the reactor Qc as follows:
dTch
rair Vch Cpair ¼ Qep
Qlossc
Qc ð5Þ
dt
where: rair is density of air in pump chamber; Vch is
volume of the pump chamber in m3; Cpair is specific heat
of air in pump chamber in J kg
1 K
1; and Tch is
temperature of the air in the pump chamber in 8C.
As the time constant (i.e. thermal resistance multi-
plied with heat capacity) of both the biogas volume and
the air inside the pump chamber is very small compared
to that of the reactor, it was assumed that these were at
quasi-steady state. The temperatures of both the biogas
and the air inside the pump chamber were obtained by
solving their equations explicitly. The power of the
manure pumps and the solar collectors pumps were
calculated based on the total heads required for the
liquid flow and assuming a pumping efficiency of 50%
(Hill, 1983). Table 1 shows the parameters used in the
simulation of the systems.
3.5. The control system
Temperature has to be controlled because it affects the
performance of the biomethanation process. An on/off
differential controller was used to control the system.
Van Straten and Van Boxtel (1996) mentioned that on/
off control is widely used. The main reasons are the low
costs; the simple controller rules, which are easy to
implement in hardware logic; and the intuitive appeal
and easy understanding. In the present study, the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
350 H.M. EL-MASHAD ET AL.

Table 1
Design parameters of the systems
Parameter Value
Loose components system Integrated system
Reactor
Volume, m3 10 10
Reactor height, m 166 166
Reactor diameter, m 277 277
Overall heat transfer from the reactor to ambient, W m
2 K
1 033 033
Area of heat losses from the gas volume, m2 } 623
Area covered by solar collector, m2 } 488
Volume of the pumps chamber, m3 } 10
Heat loss area of the pumps chamber, m2 } 487
Chamber surface attached to the reactor, m2 } 109
Heat exchanger
Material thermal conductivity (steel), W m
1 K
1 50 50
Overall heat transfer coefficient, W m
2 K
1 2467 2467
Outer diameter of the pipe, m 0058 0058
Inner diameter of the pipe, m 0051 0051
Length of the heat exchanger, m 235 235

control system can be divided into three subsystems as 3.0

Hourly absorbed energy, MJ m−2

follows.
(a) The solar collector is controlled by starting its
pump to operate when the hourly heat gain is
positive.
(b) The flow valve of hot water into the reactor begins
to open when the outlet temperature of the solar
collector Tout is equal or higher than 508C. The flow
stops when Tout is less than 508C or the reactor
temperature exceeds 508C.
(c) The auxiliary heater starts to operate if the reactor
temperature is below its set point of 458C. The power
of the auxiliary heater is large enough to keep a
constant temperature of 458C, which is the lower
limit for thermophilic conditions (Van Lier, 1995).
4. Results and discussion
The model solution was worked out in Matlab +
Simulink software. The block-oriented solution of the
model for both systems studied is available. Buz"as et al.
(1998) mentioned that for solar thermal systems, the
block-oriented solution seems to be reliable as it
provides a high flexibility in the case of changing the
system layout.
4.1. The solar heating system
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
−0.5 Time, h
Fig. 3. The daily variation of hourly average absorbed energy on
the solar collector at a tilt angle of 3018 under Egyptian
situation: *, March; m, June; *, September; }, December
(i.e. day number 75, 162, 258 and 344). As can be seen, the
longest and the shortest days are in June and December,
respectively. The absorbed energy increases during the
day to reach the maximum at around noon, then declines;
however, the maximum hourly value during the year is
found in September around noon and not in June. This
may be attributed to the fact that the solar incident angle
at the collector at noon is smaller at a larger tilt angle in
winter and vice versa in summer (Fig. 4). The chosen tilt
angle, in fact, does not adversely affect the system
efficiency. It was chosen to maximise the energy absorbed
during the winter when most energy is needed.

As mentioned before, the solar system array mounted 4.2. The heat recovery unit
on a tilt angle of 301o and faces due south. Figure 3
shows the hourly absorbed energy of the monthly Figure 5 shows the pre-heated manure temperature
average day in March; June; September and December after passing the heat recovery unit. As can be seen, by
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
SOLAR REACTOR FOR SMALL FARMS 351

3.0 51
Hourly absorbed energy, MJ m−2

Reactor temperature, °C
2.5 50

2.0 49

1.5 48

1.0 47

0.5 46

0 45
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
−0.5 Time, h Time, h

Fig. 4. Effect of tilt angle of the solar collector on hourly
average absorbed energy under Egyptian situation during
summer and winter: *, June at tilt angle 198; m, June at tilt
angle 3118; *, September at tilt angle 198; }, September at tilt
angle 3118
Fig. 6. Daily profile of the reactor temperature: *, loose
components system in June; ^, loose components system in
December; *, integrated system in June; }, integrated system
in December

46 temperature follows the seasonal and daily changes in

solar flux. It can also be seen that the reactor
Preheated temperature, °C

44
42
40
38
36
34
32
30
0 5 10
Time, h
Fig. 5. Temperature of pre-heated manure: *, March; m, June;
*, September; }, December
using the heat recovery unit, the influent temperature
can be increased by about 10–208C, depending on the
raw manure temperature and/or ambient temperature.
The smallest increase of the raw manure temperature
coincides with the highest ambient air temperature,
because the driving force of heat transfer in this case is
small. Furthermore, it can also be seen from Fig. 5 that
the highest pre-heated manure temperatures can be
obtained during the months, which have high ambient
air temperature. This may be due to smaller heat losses
and higher raw manure temperatures. The necessity of
heat recovery is discussed in Section 4.4.
temperature profiles are almost the same in June for
both studied systems. The ambient temperature affects
the reactor temperature because it influences the levels
of pre-heated temperature and the heat losses. It can
also be seen that the daily temperature fluctuation is less
than 18C and the seasonal variation is less than 58C. It
can be expected that the effect of the daily temperature
fluctuation on the methane production rate is negligible
(El-Mashad et al., 2003). With respect to seasonal
15 20 25 variation, Angelidaki and Ahring (1994) found that the
stepwise temperature decrease from 55 to 51, 46 and
408C did not produce significant changes in the reactor
performance. Furthermore, after each change in the
temperature, the level of biogas production was found
to swiftly to re-establish at the same level as at 558C.
From these results, it can be expected that the system
studied can be operated successfully under seasonal
variations of solar energy without a significant reduction
in the activity of the bacteria. Moreover, the simulation
showed that the on/off control strategy could be applied
with great reliability in such multi-component systems.
Figure 7 shows the temperature of the air inside the
pump chamber in the integrated system. As can be seen,
the temperature of the air reaches a maximum of about
468C and a minimum of about 188C. The maximum
temperature occurs around noon. The increase of the air
temperature inside the chamber coincides with the start
of the solar collector pump operation.

4.3. The reactor

4.4. System evaluation
Figure 6 shows the hourly reactor temperature profile
during the monthly average day of June and December Based on the presented model, the system with and
for both systems studied. As can be seen the reactor without heat recovery is evaluated. The evaluation is
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
352 H.M. EL-MASHAD ET AL.

based on annual energy input from different sources
together with the temperature variations. Table 2 shows
the amount of energy from each source for both systems
as well as the effect on the system performance of adding
the heat recovery unit. The model results show that with
heat recovery, no auxiliary heat is required for the
integrated system. This means that the specific net
thermal energy production is 100% (El-Mashad et al.,
2003). The annual potential energy production was
calculated to be 114 GJ m
3 [reactor] yr
1 based on a
methane production rate of 839 l [CH4] m
3 [reactor]
day
1 (El-Mashad et al., 2003). The electrical energy
consumption is translated into thermal energy assuming
a conversion factor for fossil-fuel equivalence of
electricity of 1108 kJ W
1 h
1 (Singh, 1978). The results
of El-Mashad et al. (2003), showed that the specific net
thermal energy production of about 93% could be
obtained from a 10 m3 CSTR (without heat recovery,
pump chamber or the control system) insulated with
10 cm bricks together with 11 cm of rock wool (i.e. the
50
Pump chamber temperature, °C
overall heat transfer coefficient of the reactor insulation
was 033 W m
2 K
1).
In the case of the system without the heat recovery
unit, lower reactor temperatures are obtained (Table 2).
This in turn increases the driving force for heat gain
from the solar collector. It can also be seen that the heat
recovery unit affects the average and minimum hourly
temperatures of the reactor content considerably.
From a process technological point of view, the
integrated system is recommended. However, the
integrated system will be more expensive due to the
higher construction cost for inclusion of biogas volume
and pumps chamber.
5. Conclusions
Two simulation models for two solar thermophilic
anaerobic reactors have been carried out. The first system
is a loose components system and the second is an
integrated system, with all components inside the same
insulating cover. A heat recovery unit was included as an
option in both systems to extract some heat from the

45 effluent to heat the influent. Based on the simulation

results using the Egyptian climatic conditions as a
40
representative example of Mediterranean and subtropical
35 conditions, the following conclusions can be formulated.
30 (1) The annual electrical energy consumption is
25 488 kWh m
3. Using the integrated system, an
overall energy efficiency of 95% can be achieved
20
by using the solar heating system and a heat
15 recovery unit.
0 5 10 15 20 25 (2) Using a heat recovery unit raises the input
Time, h temperature of fresh manure by about 10–208C
Fig. 7. Pump chamber temperature: m, June; }, December dependent on the ambient temperature.

Table 2
The annual performance of the 10 m3 anaerobic digester in terms of energy input and system temperatures with a calculated potential
energy production of 114 GJ yr
1
Parameter Loose components system Integrated system
With heat Without heat With heat Without heat
recovery recovery recovery recovery
Solar energy, GJ 2019 2116 2001 2081
Heat recovery unit, GJ 1173 } 1196 }
Pumps and agitator, GJ (electrical) 176 176 176 176
Pumps and agitator, GJ (thermal equivalent) 543 543 543 543
Auxiliary heater, GJ 091 542 0.0 433
Total energy input, GJ (thermal equivalent) 3826 3201 374 3057
Annual average temperature of the reactor, 8C 482* 4544 4913 4635
Minimum reactor temperature, 8C 448 365 457 394
Annual average temperature of the biogas, 8C } } 5114 4836
Annual average temperature of pump chamber air, 8C } } 309 299
*
Standard deviation.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
SOLAR REACTOR FOR SMALL FARMS
(3) A maximum daily temperature fluctuation of less
than 18C can be realised in both systems.
(4) A maximum annual temperature reduction of about
58C can be realised in both systems. This is
dependent on the seasonal variations of both
ambient temperature and solar flux.
(5) The on/off control can be applied effectively in such
multi-component systems.
(6) The integrated system can be recommended from
the process technological and energetical point of
view with respect to the loose components system.
Moreover, operation and maintenance of both
systems are equal.
(7) From the sustainability point of view, the incor-
poration of solar energy in biogas production unit
increases the beneficial potential of anaerobic
digestion in environmental pollution and resource
conservation with respect to conventional heating
system.
Acknowledgements
This research was facilitated by a grant from the
Egyptian ministry of higher education to the first
author. We wish to thank Dr A.J.B. van Boxtel for
valuable discussions.
References
Al-Ismaily H A; Probert S D (1995). Solar-desalination
prospects for the sultanate of Oman. Applied Energy, 52,
341–368
Alkhamis T M; El-Khazali R; Kablan M M; Alhusein M A
(2000). Heating of a biogas reactor using a solar energy
system with temperature control unit. Solar Energy, 69 (3),
239–247
Angelidaki I; Ahring B K (1994). Anaerobic thermophilic
digestion of manure at different ammonia loads: the effect of
temperature. Water Research, 28 (3), 727–731
Axaopoulos P; Panagakis P; Tsavdaris A; Georgakakis D
(2001). Simulation and experimental performance of a
solar-heated anaerobic digester. Solar Energy, 70 (2),
155–164
Buz"as J; Farkas I; Bir!o A; N!emeth R (1998). Modeling and
simulation of a solar thermal system. Mathematics and
Computer in Simulation, 48, 33–46
Chen Y R; Hashimoto A G (1981). Energy requirements for
anaerobic fermentation of livestock wastes. In: Livestock
353
Waste: A Renewable Resource (Smith R J, ed.) ASAE
publication No.2–81, ASAE, St Joseph, MI, USA
CLAC (1997). Monthly solar radiation and sunshine hours.
Central Laboratory for Agricultural Climate, Egypt. http://
www.clac.edu.eg/
Dahl S D; Davidson J H (1995). Comparison of natural
convection heat exchangers for solar water heating. Pro-
ceedings of Solar, 95. The 1995 American Solar Energy
Society Annual Conference, 15–20 July, Minneapolis, MN,
USA
De Baere L (2000). Anaerobic digestion of solid waste: state-
of-the-art. Water Science and Technology, 41 (3), 283–290
Duffie J A; Beckman W A (1974). Solar Energy Thermal
Processes. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA
Duffie J A; Beckman W A (1991). Solar Engineering of
Thermal Processes (2nd Edn.). Wiley, New York, USA
El-Mashad H M; van Loon W K P; Zeeman G (2003). A model
of solar energy utilisation in the anaerobic digestion of cattle
manure. Biosystems Engineering, 84 (2), 231–238
Florides G A; Kalogirou S A; Tassou S A; Wrobel L C (2002).
Modelling and simulation of an absorption solar cooling
system for Cyprus. Solar Energy, 72 (1), 43–51
Hill D T (1983). Energy consumption relationships for
mesophilic and thermophilic digestion of animal manures.
Transaction of the ASAE, 26 (3), 841–848
Larsen H E; Munch B; Schlundt J (1994). Use of indicators for
monitoring the reduction of pathogens in animal waste
treated in biogas plants. Zentralblatt Fu. r Hygiene Und
Umweltmedizin, 195 (5–6), 544–555
Sims R E H (2004). Renewable energy: a response to climate
change. Solar Energy, 76, 9–17
Singh R P (1978). Energy accounting in food process
operations. Food Technology, 32 (4), 40–46
Smith E M (1997). Thermal Design of Heat Exchangers, A
Numerical Approach, Direct Sizing & Stepwise Rating.
John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK
Sukhatme S P (1997). Solar Energy Principles of Thermal
Collection and Storage (2nd Edn.). Tata McGraw-Hill
Publishing Company Ltd., New Delhi, India
Tabana A (2000). Development of a decision support system
for individual dairy farms in mixed irrigated farming
systems in the Nile delta. PhD Thesis, Wageningen
University, Wageningen, The Netherlands
Van Lier J B (1995). Thermophilic anaerobic wastewater
treatment; temperature aspects and process stability. PhD
Thesis, Wageningen Agricultural University, Wageningen,
The Netherlands
Van Straten G; Van Boxtel A J B (1996). Progress in process
operation by goal oriented advanced control. Annual
Reviews in Control, 20, 209–223
Van Velsen A F M; Lettinga G (1980). Effect of feed
composition on digester performance. In: Anaerobic Diges-
tion (Stafford D A; Wheatley B I; Hughes D E, eds). Applied
Science Publishers Ltd., London, UK
Varel V H; Isaacson H R; Bryant M P (1977). Thermophilic
methane production from cattle waste. Applied and
Environmental Microbiology, 33 (2), 298–307