DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2023.52775

Modeling anaerobic co-digestion of water hyacinth with ruminal slaughterhouse waste for first order, modified gompertz and logistic kinetic models

1Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, University of Nairobi; P.O. Box 10344-00100, Nairobi, Kenya

2Department of Civil and Construction Engineering, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology; P.O. Box 62000 (00200), Nairobi, Kenya

3Department of Civil & Structural Engineering, Moi University; P.O Box 3900-30100, Eldoret, Kenya

Received: 27 Feb 2023; Revised: 18 Apr 2023; Accepted: 4 May 2023; Published: 15 May 2023.
Editor(s): H Hadiyanto
Open Access Copyright (c) 2023 The Author(s). Published by Centre of Biomass and Renewable Energy (CBIORE)
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Citation Format:
Abstract

Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes), an invasive aquatic weed with large biomass production is of socio-economic and environmental concern in fresh water bodies such as the Lake Victoria in East Africa. Efforts towards its control and removal can be complemented by biogas production for use as energy source. The co-digestion of water hyacinth (WH) with ruminal slaughterhouse waste (RSW) has the potential to improve biogas production from WH through collation of processes parameters such as the C/N and C/P ratios, potassium concentration and buffering capacity. Knowledge of optimum proportion of the RSW as the minor substrate is of both process and operational importance. Moreover, efficient operation of the process requires an understanding of the relationship between the biogas production and the process parameters. Kinetic models can be useful tools for describing the biogas production process in batch reactors. While the first order kinetics models assume that the rate of biogas production is proportional to the concentration of the remaining substrates, other models such as the modified Gompertz and the Logistic models incorporate the lag phase, a key feature of the anaerobic digestion process. This study aimed to establish the optimum proportion of RSW in co-digestion with WH under mesophilic conditions, and apply kinetics models to describe the biogas production. The study conducted batch co-digestion of WH with 0, 10, 20 and 30% RSW proportions at mesophilic temperature of 32ºC. Co-digestion of WH with 30% RSW proportion improved biogas yield by 113% from 19.15 to 40.85 CH4 ml/(gVS) at 50 days of co-digestion. It also exhibited the most stable daily biogas production and the largest biogas yield. The biomethanation data were fitted with the first order kinetics, modified Gompertz and the Logistic models. Biogas production for co-digestion of WH with 30% RSW proportion was best described by the modified Gompertz model with a biogas yield potential, Mo, of 43.2 ml (gVS)-1d-1; maximum biogas production rate, Rm, of 1.50 ml (gVS)-1d-1; and duration of lag, λ, of 3.89 d.

Fulltext View|Download
Keywords: kinetics; modified Gompertz model; logistic model; first order kinetic model; anaerobic digestion
Funding: None

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Original Research Article
Language : EN
Recent articles
Utilization of the spent catalyst as a raw material for rechargeable battery production: The effect of leaching time, type, and concentration of organic acids An investigation of a 3D printed micro-wind turbine for residential power production Techno-economic analysis of fixed versus sun-tracking solar panels More recent articles
Most cited articles
Design and Speed Control of SynRM using Cascade PID Controller with PSO Algorithm Experimental Study on the Production of Karanja Oil Methyl Ester and Its Effect on Diesel Engine Modeling and PSO optimization of Humidifier-Dehumidifier desalination Multi-Feedstocks Biodiesel Production from Esterification of Calophyllum inophyllum Oil, Castor Oil, Palm Oil and Waste Cooking Oil Hydrokinetic Energy Opportunity for Rural Electrification in Nigeria More cited articles
  1. Adiga, S., Ramya, R., Shankar, B.B,, Patil, J.H & Geetha, C.R (2012). Kinetics of Anaerobic Digestion of Water Hyacinth, Poultry Litter, Cow Manure and Primary Sludge: A Comparative Study. 2nd International Conference on Biotechnology and Environment Management IPCBEE vol.42 (2012) IACSIT Press, Singapore. 73-78. https://doi.org/10.7763/IPCBEE. 2012.V42.15
  2. Ali, S.S., Elsamahy, T., Abdelfattah, A., Mustafa, A., Khalil, M.A., Mastropetros, S.G., Kornaros, M., Sun J. & Azab M. (2022). Exploring the potential of anaerobic co-digestion of water hyacinth and cattle dung for enhanced biomethanation and techno-economic feasibility. Fuel, 329(1):125397, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125397
  3. Bakraoui, M., Karouach, F., Ouhammou, B., Aggour, M., Essamri, A. & El Bari, H. (2019). Kinetics study of the methane production from experimental recycled pulp and paper sludge by CSTR technology. Journal of Material Cycles and Waste Management, 1426-1436. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-019-00894-6
  4. Bakraoui, M., Karouach, F., Ouhammou, B., Lahboubi, N., El Gnaoui, Y., Kerrou, O., Aggoura, M., El Bari, H. (2020).Kinetics study of methane production from anaerobic digestion of sludge and wastewater recycled pulp and paperby different models simulation. International Journal of Smart Grid and Clean Energy, 9(1), 170-179. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/946/1/012009
  5. Balmant, W., Oliveira, B.H., Mitchell, D.A., Vargas, J.V.C., Ordonez, J.C. (2014). Optimal operating conditions for maximum biogas production in anaerobic bioreactors. Applied Thermal Engineering, 62(1), 197-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2013.09.033
  6. Bett, M (2012). A review of techniques for management of invasive plant species. University of Eldoret. Unpublished version
  7. Borja, R., Martín, A., Rincon, B. & Raposo, F. (2003). Kinetics for Substrate Utilization and Methane Production during the Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion of Two Phases Olive Pomace (TPOP). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 51(11), 3390-3395. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf021059n
  8. Camacho, G., Ruggeri, C.E., Mangialardi, L., Perisco, M. & Malave A.C.L. (2019). Continuous two-step anaerobic digestion (TSAD) of organic market waste: rationalising process parameters. Int J Energy Environ Eng 10, 413–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40095-019-0312-1
  9. Chen, Y., Cheng, J.J, Creamer, K.S. (2008). Inhibition of anaerobic process, a review. Bioresour Technol. 99, 4044–4064. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2007.01.057
  10. de Oliveira, P.L, Hudebine, D.P, Guillaume, D.P & Verstraete, J.J (2016). A Review of Kinetic Modeling Methodologies for Complex Processes. Oil & Gas Science & Technology - Revue d’IFP Energies nouvelles, Institut Français du Pétrole (IFP), 2016, 71 (3), 45. https://doi.org/10.2516/ogst/2016011hal-01395195
  11. Degaga, A.H. (2018). Water Hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) Biology and its Impacts on Ecosystem, Biodiversity, Economy and Human Well-being. J. Life Sci. Biomed. 8(6), 94-100; www.jlsb.science-line.com
  12. Donoso-Bravo, A., Pérez-Elvira, S.I. & Fdz-polanco, F. (2010). Application of simplified models for anaerobic biodegradability tests. Evaluation of pre-treatment processes. Chemical Engineering Journal, 160(2), 607-614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.03.082
  13. Ehiri, R.C., Ikelle, I.I., Mgbabor,C. & Ogbu, C.C. (2014). Kinetics of Biogas Production from a Mixture of Water Hyacinth (Eichornia Crassipes) and Fresh Rumen Residue. IOSR Journal of Applied Chemistry (IOSR-JAC) 7, (7),36-39. www.iosrjournals.org
  14. Feng, L., Gao, Y., Kou, W., Lang, X., Liu, Y., Li, R., Yu, M., Shao, L & Wang, X. (2017). Application of the Initial Rate Method in Anaerobic Digestion of Kitchen Waste, BioMed Research International, 2017, 3808521. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/3808521
  15. Gavala, H.N., Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B.K. (2003). Kinetics and Modeling of Anaerobic Digestion Process. Adv Biochem Eng Biotechnol., 81, 57-93. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45839-5_3
  16. Hadiyanto, H., Octafalahanda, F. M., Nabila, J., Jati, A. K., Christwardana, M., Kusmiyati, K., & Khoironi, A. (2023). Preliminary Observation of Biogas Production from a Mixture of Cattle Manure and Bagasse Residue in Different Composition Variations. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 12(2), 390-395. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2023.52446
  17. Hassan, S.R, Hung, Y.-T, Dahlan, I & Abdul Aziz, H (2022). Kinetic Study of the Anaerobic Digestion of Recycled Paper Mill Effluent (RPME) by Using a Novel Modified
  18. Anaerobic Hybrid Baffled (MAHB) Reactor. Water, 14(3),390. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14030390
  19. Honlah, E., Yao Segbefia, A., Appiah, D.O., Mensah, M. & Atakora, P.O. (2012). Effects of water hyacinth invasion on the health of the communities, and the education of children along River Tano and Abby-Tano Lagoon in Ghana. Cogent Social Sciences, 5(1): 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2019.1619652
  20. Kim, O. D., Rocha, M. & Maia, P. (2018). A Review of Dynamic Modeling Approaches and Their Application in Computational Strain Optimization for Metabolic Engineering. Frontiers in microbiology, 9, 1690. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.01690
  21. Kossmann, W., Ponitz, U., Habermehl, S., Hoerz, T., Kramer, P., Klingler, B., Kellner, C., Wittur, T., Lopotek, F., Krieg, A., Euler, H. (2007) Biogas digest. Inf Advis Serv Appropr Technol (ISAT) 1,1–46
  22. Lafratta, M., Thorpe, R.B., Ouki, S.K., Shana, A., Germain, E., Willcocks, M., Lee, J. (2021). Development and validation of a dynamic first order kinetics model of a periodically operated well-mixed vessel for anaerobic digestion. Chemical Engineering Journal, 426, 131732, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2021.131732
  23. Li, P., Li, W., Sun, M., Xu, X., Zhang, B. & Sun, Y. (2019). Evaluation of Biochemical Methane Potential and Kinetics on the Anaerobic Digestion of Vegetable Crop Residues. Energies, 12(1), 26; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12010026
  24. Linke, B. (2006). Kinetic study of thermophilic anaerobic digestion of solid wastes from potato processing. Biomass and Bioenergy 30(10), 892-896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2006.02.001
  25. Marineau, E.D., Perryman, M., Lawler, S. & Pratt, P.D. (2019). Management of invasive Water Hyacinth as Both a Nuisance Weed and Invertebrate Habitat. San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science, 17(2), 4, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.15447/sfews.2019v17iss5
  26. Mironga, J.M., Mathooko, J.M. & Onywere, S. (2012). Effect of Water Hyacinth Infestation on the Physicochemical Characteristics of Lake Naivasha. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 2(7); 103-113. http://environmental.ku.ac.ke/images/stories/research/hyacith_lknaivasha.pdf
  27. Mmusi, K., Mudiwa, J., Rakgati, E. & Vishwanathan, V. (2021). Biogas a Sustainable Source of Clean Energy in Sub Saharan Africa: Challenges and Opportunities. J App Mat Sci & Engg Res, 5(1), 7-12
  28. Momodu, A.S., Adepoju, T.D. (2021). System dynamics kinetic model for predicting biogas production in anaerobic condition: Preliminary assessment. Science Progress. 104(4), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1177/00368504211042479
  29. Nguyen, D.D., Chang, S.W., Jeong, S.Y., Jeung, J., Kim, S.S., Guo, W. & Ngo, H.H. (2016). Dry thermophilic semi-continuous anaerobic digestion of food waste: Performance evaluation, modified Gompertz model analysis, and energy balance. Energy Conversion and Management, 128:203-210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2016.09.066
  30. Nguyen, T.H., Nguyen, M.K., Le, T., Bui, T.T., Nguyen, T.H., Nguyen, T.Q. & van Ngo, A. (2021). Kinetics of Organic Biodegradation and Biogas Production in the Pilot-Scale Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) for Piggery Wastewater Treatment. Journal of analytical methods in chemistry, Vol. 2021(6):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6641796
  31. Nwosu-obieogu, K., Aguele, F.O., Onyenwoke, A. & Adekunle, K. (2020). Kinetic Model Comparison for Biogas Production from Poultry Manure and Banana Peels. European Journal of Sustainable Development Research, 4(2), 1-5, https://doi.org/10.29333/ejosdr/7595
  32. Omondi, E.A., Ndiba, P.K. & Njuru, P.G. (2019a). Characterization of water hyacinth (E. crassipes) from Lake Victoria and ruminal slaughterhouse waste as co‑substrates in biogas production. SN Applied Sciences, 1, 848-858. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-019-0871-z
  33. Omondi, E.A., Njuru, P.G. & Ndiba, P.K. (2019b). Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Water Hyacinth (E. crassipes) with Ruminal Slaughterhouse Waste for Biogas Production. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 8(3), 253-259. https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.8.3.253-259
  34. Omondi, E.A., Ndiba, P.K., Njuru, P.G. & Abuga, D. (2020). Dynamics of microbial communities in co-digestion of water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) with ruminal slaughterhouse waste under mesophilic conditions. International Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, 12(4), 81-89. https://doi.org/10.5897/IJWREE2020.0946
  35. Oyaro, D.K., Oonge, Z.I. & Odira, P.M. (2021). Kinetic Modelling of Methane Production from Anaerobic Digestion of Banana Wastes. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT), 10(3), 104-109
  36. Patil, J.H., Raj, M.A., Muralidhara, P.L., Desai, S.M. & Mahadeva Raju G.K. (2012). Kinetics of Anaerobic Digestion of Water Hyacinth Using Poultry Litter as Inoculum. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development, 3(2), 94-98. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJESD.2012.V3.195
  37. Pramanik, S.K., Suja, F.B., Porhemmat, M. & Pramanik, B.K. (2019). Performance and Kinetic Model of a Single-Stage Anaerobic Digestion System Operated at Different Successive Operating Stages for the Treatment of Food Waste. Processes, 7(9), 600; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr7090600
  38. Sarker, S., Lamb, J.J., Hjelme, D.R., Lien, K.M. (2019). A Review of the Role of Critical Parameters in the Design and Operation of Biogas Production Plants. Appl. Sci., 9(9), 1915. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9091915
  39. Rabii, A., Aldin, S., Dahman, Y. & Elbeshbishy, E. (2019). A Review on Anaerobic Co-Digestion with a Focus on the Microbial Populations and the Effect of Multi-Stage Digester Configuration. Energies, 12(6), 1106; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12061106
  40. Sulaiman, S.M. & Seswoya, R. (2019). Kinetics Modelling of Batch Anaerobic Co-digestion of Domestic Primary Sewage Sludge and Food Waste in a Stirred Reactor, IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng. 601, 012012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/601/1/012012
  41. Tobo, Y.M., Bartacek, J., Nopens, I. (2020). Linking CFD and Kinetic Models in Anaerobic Digestion Using a Compartmental Model Approach. Processes, 8, 703. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8060703
  42. Wang, J., Liu, B., Sun, M., Chen, F., Terashima, M. & Yasui, H. (2022). A Kinetic Model for Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production of Plant Biomass under High Salinity. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 19(11), 6943. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19116943
  43. Zhang, H., Ann, D., Cao, Y., Tian, Y., He, J. (2021). Modeling the Methane Production Kinetics of Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Agricultural Wastes Using Sigmoidal Functions. Energies 2021, 14, 258. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14020258
  44. Zhu, H., Yang, J. & Xiaowei, C. (2019). Application of Modified Gompertz Model to Study on Biogas production from middle temperature co-digestion of pig manure and dead pigs. E3S Web of Conferences 118:03022. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/201911803022

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2024-04-30 04:16:32

No citation recorded.