Kinetic Study of Alkaline Treatment in the Production of Bio-gas from Cocoa Pod Husks Using a Batch Reactor

Lily Pudjiastuti, Tri Widjaja, Siti Nurkhamidah, Ali Altway, Atha Pahlevi Putra

Abstract

Cocoa pod husk (CPH) is one of the potential plantation wastes used for biogas production. However, the presence of lignin inhibits the production process. Therefore, pretreatment is required to reduce the lignin content. This study investigates the effect of several pretreatment methods on lignin reduction and biogas production enhancement. The study also investigates the kinetic models for biogas production from treated and untreated CPH. The pretreatment exploitation NaOH (N), NaOH with the addition of H2O2 at the same time (NHS) and consecutively (NHC) were administered to cut back lignin content in CPH and enhance methane series yield. The N, NHS, and NHC pretreatments obtained the maximum delignification of 78.10%, 91.42%, and 88.68%. Biogas production from NHS pretreated with CPH led to a better methane yield (0.0389 m3CH4 / kgVS) than the various pretreatments corresponding to 175.59% for CPH without pretreatment and productivity is 0.0009 m3CH4 / kgVS.day. The biogas production kinetic model parameters have been evaluated by fitting experimental data for the treated and untreated cocoa waste. The kinetic models investigated are the one-step first-order kinetic model, two-step first-order kinetic models, Gompertz model, and Transfer Function model. Based on Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) value, the one-step first-order model is more accurate than the two-step first-order model. When compared with other models, the Gompertz model is the best version.

 

Keywords: alkaline treatment, kinetic model, biogas, cocoa pod husk.

 

https://doi.org/10.55463/issn.1674-2974.49.2.5

 


Full Text:

PDF


References


BRITISH PETROLEUM. Statistical Review of World Energy 2020. 2020. https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/energy-economics/statistical-review/bp-stats-review-2020-full-report.pdf

WELLINGER, A., MURPHY, J., and BAXTER, B. The biogas handbook: Science, production and applications. Woodhead, Sawston, 2013. https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC78872

FOUNTAIN A., & HUETZ-ADAMS F. Cocoa Barometer 2018. VOICE Network, Ede, 2018. https://www.voicenetwork.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2018-Cocoa-Barometer.pdf

VRIESMANN L., AMBONI R., and PETKOWICZ C. Cacao pod husks (Theobroma cacao L.): Composition and hot-water-soluble pectins. Industrial Crops and Products, 2011, 34(1), 1173–1181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2011.04.004

ZHENG Y., ZHAO J., XU F., and LI Y. Pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass for enhanced biogas production. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2014, 42, 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2014.01.001

XIAO C., & ANDERSON C. T. Roles of pectin in biomass yield and processing for biofuels. Frontiers in Plant Science, 2013, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2013.00067

WIDJAJA T., NURKAMIDAH S., ALTWAY A., LAKSMI N. M. K., GUSDYARTO B., and ISWANTO T. The effect of alkaline pretreatment on biogas productivity and kinetic from cocoa pod husk waste using batch reactor. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Sustainable Biomass, Lampung, 2019, pp. 164-170. https://doi.org/10.2991/aer.k.210603.028

GOMPERTZ B. On the nature of the function expressive of the law of human mortality, and on a new mode on determining the value of live contingencies. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1825, 115, 513–585. https://www.jstor.org/stable/107756

SOBAMIWA O., & LONGE O. The nutritive value of alkali-treated cocoa husk meal in broiler chick diets. Animal Feed Science and Technology, 1994, 46, 321-330. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-8401%2894%2990149-X

ANGELIDAKI I., ALVES M., BOLZONELLA D., BORZACCONI L., CAMPOS J. L., GUWY A. J., KALYUZHNYI S., JENICEK P., and VAN LIER J. B. Defining the biomethane potential (BMP) of solid organic wastes and energy crops: A proposed protocol for batch assays. Water Science and Technology, 2009, 59(5), 927–934. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2009.040

DÍAZ I., DONOSO-BRAVO A., and FDZ-POLANCO M. Effect of microaerobic conditions on the degradation kinetics of cellulose. Bioresource Technology, 2011, 102(21), 10139–10142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.07.096

ZHANG H., LUO L., LI W., WANG X., SUN Y., SUN Y., and GONG W. Optimization of mixing ratio of ammoniated rice straw and food waste co-digestion and impact of trace element supplementation on biogas production. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 2018, 20(2), 745–753. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-017- 0634-0

ZAHAN Z., OTHMAN M. Z., and MUSTER T. H. Anaerobic digestion/co-digestion kinetic potentials of different agroindustrial wastes: A comparative batch study for C/N optimisation. Waste Management, 2018, 71, 663–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.08.014

GHUFRAN R., & CHARLES B. The use of a specific function to estimate maximum methane production in a batch-fed anaerobic reactor. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, 2004, 79(10), 1174–1178. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.1107

LI K., LIU R., and SUN C. Comparison of anaerobic digestion characteristics and kinetics of four livestock manures with different substrate concentrations. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 198, 133–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.151

YUAN Z., WEN Y., and LI G. Production of bioethanol and value added compounds from wheat straw through combined alkaline/alkaline-peroxide pretreatment. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 259, 228–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.03.044

SHIN H. S., and SONG Y. C. A model for evaluation of anaerobic degradation characteristics of organic waste: Focusing on kinetics, rate-limiting step. Environmental Technology, 1995, 16(8), 775–784. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593331608616316

NGUYEN L. N., NGUYEN A. Q., and NGHIEM L. D. Microbial community in anaerobic digestion system: Progression in microbial ecology. In: BUI X. T., CHIEMCHAISRI C., FUJIOKA T., and VARJANI S. (eds.) Water and Wastewater Treatment Technologies. Energy, Environment, and Sustainability. Springer, Singapore, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3259-3_15

LAMED R., SETTER E., and BAYER E. A. Characterization of a cellulose-binding, cellulase-containing complex in Clostridium thermocellum. Journal of Bacteriology, 1983, 156, 828–836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JB.156.2.828-836.1983

SHIRATORI H., IKENO H., AYAME S., KATAOKA N., MIYA A., HOSONO K., BEPPU T., and UEDA K. Isolation and characterization of a new Clostridium sp. that performs effective cellulosic waste digestion in a thermophilic methanogenic bioreactor. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 2006, 72, 3702–3709. https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.72.5.3702-3709.2006

NANNINGA H. J., & GOTTSCHAL J. C. Properties of Desulfovibrio carbinolicus sp. nov. and other sulfate-reducing bacteria isolated from an anaerobic-purification plant. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1987, 53, 802–809. https://doi.org/10.1128/aem.53.4.802-809.1987

SCHNURER A., & JARVIS A. Microbiological handbook for biogas plants. Swedish Gas Centre, Malmo, 2010. https://www.scirp.org/(S(351jmbntvnsjt1aadkposzje))/reference/ReferencesPapers.aspx?ReferenceID=1437291

WESTERHOLM M., ROOS S., and SCHNÜRER A. Syntrophaceticus schinkii gen. nov., sp. nov., an anaerobic, syntrophic acetate-oxidizing bacterium isolated from a mesophilic anaerobic filter. Federation of European Microbiological Societies Microbiology Letters, 2010, 309(1), 100–104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-6968.2010.02023.x

HATTORI S., KAMAGATA Y., HANADA S., and SHOUN H. Thermacetogenium phaeum gen. nov., sp. nov., a strictly anaerobic, thermophilic, syntrophic acetate-oxidizing bacterium. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, 2000, 50, 1601–1609. https://doi.org/10.1099/00207713-50-4-1601

LEE S.-H., PARK J.-H., KIM S.-H., YU B. J., YOON J.-J., and PARK H.-D. Evidence of syntrophic acetate oxidation by Spirochaetes during anaerobic methane production. Bioresource Technology, 2015, 190, 543–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.02.066

NIELSEN H. B., UELLENDAHL H., and AHRING B. K. Regulation and optimization of the biogas process: propionate as a key parameter. Biomass Bioenergy, 2007, 31, 820–830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.04.004

WANG P., WANG H., QIU Y., REN L., and JIANG B. Microbial characteristics in anaerobic digestion process of food waste for methane production — a review. Bioresource Technology, 2018, 248, 29–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.06.152

WINSOR C. P. The Gompertz curve as a growth curve. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1932, 18(1), 1–8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.18.1.1

ZWIETERING M. H., JONGENBURGER I., ROMBOUTS F. M., and VAN'T RIET K. Modeling of the bacterial growth curve. Applied and Environmental Microbiology, 1990, 56(6), 1875–1881. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC184525/

LAY J. J., LI Y. Y., and NOIKE T. Effect of moisture content and chemical nature on methane fermentation characteristics of municipal solid wastes. Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshu, 1996, 552, 101–108. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscej.1996.552_101


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.