Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Development of sustainable approaches for converting the agro-weeds Ludwigia hyssopifolia to biogas production

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aimed to evaluate potential biogas production from Ludwigia hyssopifolia (water primrose) and examine the effect of alkaline pretreatment on samples through biogas production efficiencies. The research was carried out for 45 days of operation from anaerobic mono-digestion of water primrose by using a batch experiment. Pretreatment was applied for substrate using sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution (w/v) at different concentrations (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4%) with 10% of total solids (TS) based on dry matter. The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were captured to investigate the characteristics of the raw material and pretreated biomass. The results showed that the treatment with 2% NaOH has the highest performance in biogas yield (8072.00 mL) and methane content (64.72%). Notably, the increase (3, 4%) or decreasing (0, 1%) NaOH concentration in treating water primrose did not achieve a significant improvement. Further investigation in the power potential of produced biogas was calculated, and the result was 22,382.19 W/m3 power. Consequently, the feasibility of the alkaline pretreatment method for biogas production and achievable potential for energy efficiency indicates that water primrose is appropriate agro-weed biomass for bioenergy applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

E :

amount of heat energy dissipated (J)

M c :

mass of calorimeter (g)

C c :

specific heat capacity of the calorimeter (390 J kg−1 K−1)

Δθ :

change in temperature (°C)

M w :

mass of water (g)

C w :

specific heat capacity of water (4200 J kg−1 K−1)

t :

time taken for the energy to be dissipated (s)

NaOH:

sodium hydroxide

KOH:

potassium hydroxide

Ca(OH)2 :

calcium hydroxide

CH4 :

methane

CO2 :

carbon dioxide

H2 :

hydrogen

N2 :

nitrogen

H2S:

hydrogen sulfide

HRT:

hydraulic retention time

LPG:

liquefied petroleum

TS:

total solids

VS:

volatile solids

References

  1. Manmai N, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2020) Bioethanol production from sunflower stalk: application of chemical and biological pretreatments by response surface methodology (RSM). Biomass Conv Bioref. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00602-7

  2. Vu PT, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2018) Impact and significance of alkaline-oxidant pretreatment on the enzymatic digestibility of Sphenoclea zeylanica for bioethanol production. Bioresour Technol 247:125–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sophanodorn K, Unpaprom Y, Whangchai K, Homdoung N, Dussadee N, Ramaraj R (2020) Environmental management and valorization of cultivated tobacco stalks by combined pretreatment for potential bioethanol production. Biomass Conv Bioref. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00992-8

  4. Vu PT, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2017) Evaluation of bioethanol production from rice field weed biomass. Emergent Life Sci Res 3(2):42–49

    Google Scholar 

  5. Saengsawang B, Bhuyar P, Manmai N, Ponnusamy VK, Ramaraj R, Unpaprom Y (2020) The optimization of oil extraction from macroalgae, Rhizoclonium sp. by chemical methods for efficient conversion into biodiesel. Fuel 274:117841

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ramaraj R, Unpaprom Y (2019) Optimization of pretreatment condition for ethanol production from Cyperus difformis by response surface methodology. 3 Biotech 9(6):218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bhuyar P, Sundararaju S, Rahim MH, Ramaraj R, Maniam GP, Govindan N (2019) Microalgae cultivation using palm oil mill effluent as growth medium for lipid production with the effect of CO2 supply and light intensity. Biomass Conv Bioref 26:1–9

  8. Bhuyar P, Rahim MH, Yusoff MM, Gaanty Pragas Maniam NG (2019) A selective microalgae strain for biodiesel production in relation to higher lipid profile. Maejo Int J Energy Environ Commun 1:8–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pantawong R, Chuanchai A, Thipbunrat P, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2015) Experimental investigation of biogas production from water lettuce, Pistia stratiotes L. Emergent Life Sci Res 1:41–46

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ramaraj R, Dussadee N, Whangchai N, Unpaprom Y (2016) Microalgae biomass as an alternative substrate in biogas production. IJSGE 4:13–19

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ramaraj R, Dussadee N (2015) Biological purification processes for biogas using algae cultures: a review. IJSGE 4:20–32

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ramaraj R, Dussadee N, Whangchai N, Unpaprom Y (2015) Microalgae biomass as an alternative substrate in biogas production. IJSGE 4:13–19

    Google Scholar 

  13. Unpaprom Y, Pimpimol T, Whangchai K, Ramaraj R (2020) Sustainability assessment of water hyacinth with swine dung for biogas production, methane enhancement, and biofertilizer. Biomass Conv Bioref. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00850-72

  14. Wannapokin A, Ramaraj R, Whangchai K, Unpaprom Y (2018) Potential improvement of biogas production from fallen teak leaves with co-digestion of microalgae. 3 Biotech 8:123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Van Tran G, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2019) Methane productivity evaluation of an invasive wetland plant, common reed. Biomass Conv Bioref 10:689–695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-019-00451-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ramaraj R, Unpaprom Y, Dussadee N (2016) Cultivation of green microalga, Chlorella vulgaris, for biogas purification. IJNTR 2:117–122

    Google Scholar 

  17. Chuanchai A, Ramaraj R (2018) Sustainability assessment of biogas production from buffalo grass and dung: biogas purification and bio-fertilizer. 3 Biotech 8(3):151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Atelge MR, Atabani AE, Banu JR, Krisa D, Kaya M, Eskicioglu C, Kumar G, Lee C, Yildiz YŞ, Unalan SE, Mohanasundaram R (2020) A critical review of pretreatment technologies to enhance anaerobic digestion and energy recovery. Fuel 270:117494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Tsapekos P, Kougias PG, Angelidaki I (2015) Anaerobic mono-and co-digestion of mechanically pretreated meadow grass for biogas production. Energy Fuel 29(7):4005–4010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Pang YZ, Liu YP, Li XJ, Wang KS, Yuan HR (2008) Improving biodegradability and biogas production of corn stover through sodium hydroxide solid state pretreatment. Energy Fuel 22(4):2761–2766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association (APHA), Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ummalyma SB, Supriya RD, Sindhu R, Binod P, Nair RB, Pandey A, Gnansounou E (2019) Biological pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass—Current trends and future perspectives. Second and Third Generation of Feedstocks:197–212

  23. Chauhan B, Pame AP, Johnson D (2011) Compensatory growth of ludwigia (Ludwigia hyssopifolia) in response to interference of direct-seeded rice. Weed Sci 59(2):177–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Du J, Qian YT, Xi XL, Jin HM, Kong XP, Zhu N, Ye X (2019) The feasibility of shortening the pretreatment time for improvement of the biogas production rate from rice straw with three chemical agents. BioResources 14(2):3808–3822

    Google Scholar 

  25. Chandra R, Takeuchi H, Hasegawa T, Kumar R (2012) Improving biodegradability and biogas production of wheat straw substrates using sodium hydroxide and hydrothermal pretreatments. Energy 43(1):273–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yang D, Zheng Y, Zhang R (2009) Alkali pretreatment of rice straw for increasing the biodegradability. American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers 095685

  27. Dussadee N, Ramaraj R, Cheunbarn T (2017) Biotechnological application of sustainable biogas production through dry anaerobic digestion of Napier grass. 3 Biotech 7(1):47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Van Tran G, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2019) Effects of co-substrate concentrations on the anaerobic co-digestion of common reed and cow dung. AJARCDE 3(1):28–32

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Dussadee N, Unpaprom Y, Ramaraj R (2016) Grass silage for biogas production. Advances in Silage Production and Utilization 16:153

    Google Scholar 

  30. Koch K, Wichern M, Lübken M, Horn H (2009) Mono fermentation of grass silage by means of loop reactors. Bioresour Technol 100(23):5934–5940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Dareioti MA, Kornaros M (2014) Effect of hydraulic retention time (HRT) on the anaerobic co-digestion of agro-industrial wastes in a two-stage CSTR system. Bioresour Technol 167:407–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pereira RG, de Jesus V (2011) Production and characterization of biogas obtained from biomass of aquatic plants. Renewable Energy Power Qual J:9

  33. Li Y, Zhang R, Liu X, Chen C, Xiao X, Feng L, He Y, Liu G (2013) Evaluating methane production from anaerobic mono-and co-digestion of kitchen waste, corn stover, and chicken manure. Energy Fuel 27(4):2085–2091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Li R, Chen S, Li X (2010) Biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of food waste with dairy manure in a two-phase digestion system. Appl Biochem 160(2):643–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Qiao W, Yan X, Ye J, Sun Y, Wang W, Zhang Z (2011) Evaluation of biogas production from different biomass wastes with/without hydrothermal pretreatment. Renew Energy 36(12):3313–3318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Li X, Liu YH, Zhang X, Ge CM, Piao RZ, Wang WD, Cui ZJ, Zhao HY (2017) Evaluation of biogas production performance and dynamics of the microbial community in different straws. J Microbiol Biotechnol 27(3):524–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Onthong U (2017) Juntarachat N (2017) Evaluation of biogas production potential from raw and processed agricultural wastes. Energy Procedia 138:205–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wei L, Qin K, Ding J, Xue M, Yang C, Jiang J, Zhao Q (2019) Optimization of the co-digestion of sewage sludge, maize straw and cow manure: microbial responses and effect of fractional organic characteristics. Sci Rep 9(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dahunsi OS, Oranusi S, Efeovbokhan EV (2017) Anaerobic mono-digestion of Tithonia diversifolia (Wild Mexican sunflower). Energy Convers Manag 148:128–145

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Pöschl M, Ward S, Owende P (2010) Evaluation of energy efficiency of various biogas production and utilization pathways. Appl Energy 87(11):3305–3321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Balat M, Balat H (2009) Biogas as a renewable energy source—a review. Energy Sources 31(14):1280–1293

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors gratefully acknowledged the School of Renewable Energy, Program in Biotechnology, and Energy Research Center, Maejo University, Chiang Mai, and Center of Excellence in Bioresources for Agriculture, Industry and Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand, for the research facilities to accomplish this experimental study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Renewable Energy, Maejo University, Chiang Mai, 50290, Thailand

    Huyen Thu Thi Nong, Churat Thararux & Rameshprabu Ramaraj

  2. Sustainable Resources & Sustainable Engineering Research Lab, Maejo University, Chiang Mai, 50290, Thailand

    Huyen Thu Thi Nong, Yuwalee Unpaprom & Rameshprabu Ramaraj

  3. Center of Excellence in Bioresources for Agriculture, Industry and Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, 50200, Thailand

    Kanda Whangchai

  4. Program in Biotechnology, Faculty of Science, Maejo University, Chiang Mai, 50290, Thailand

    Yuwalee Unpaprom

Authors
  1. Huyen Thu Thi Nong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kanda Whangchai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuwalee Unpaprom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Churat Thararux
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Rameshprabu Ramaraj
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rameshprabu Ramaraj.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nong, H.T., Whangchai, K., Unpaprom, Y. et al. Development of sustainable approaches for converting the agro-weeds Ludwigia hyssopifolia to biogas production. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 12, 793–801 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01083-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01083-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation