Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Anaerobic Co-digestion of Biogenic Wastes Available at Palm Oil Extraction Factory: Assessment of Methane Yield, Estimation of Kinetic Parameters and Understanding the Microbial Diversity

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Anaerobic digestion (AD) is an efficient and eco-friendly process for the biodegradation of various organic biomass which could potentially produce biomethane and results in no waste accumulation. The palm oil industry concurrently produces three types of possible organic pollutants namely palm oil mill effluent (POME), palm empty fruit bunch fiber (PEFF) and oil palm decanter cake (OPDC). Therefore, this work aimed to study the anaerobic mono- and co-digestion of the substrates from palm industry. Results revealed that the co-digestion of PEFF + POME + OPDC resulted in highest cumulative methane yield of 0.40 L CH4/(g VS added); 0.28 L CH4/(g VS added) from PEFF + POME and 0.27 L CH4/(g VS added) from POME + OPDC. The methane content in biogas and volatile solid (VS) reduction from all the mono- and co-digestion experiments were found to be in the range of 69–71.5% and 40–75%, respectively. These results suggest that the co-digestion of these substrates is superior in biogas yield than mono-digestion. Further, the kinetic parameters were evaluated using the modified Gompertz model equation to determine the lag phase of the process and the maximum biogas generation rate from all the reactors, R2 in all the cases was found to be > 0.95. Next-generation sequencing analysis illustrated wide variety of dominant bacterial species belonging to phylum Firmicutes, Bacteroidetes, Proteobacteria and Chloroflexi. Hydrogenotrophic methanogenesis and acetoclastic methanogenesis were the prevailing methane-generating pathway involved that can be confirmed by the abundance of genus Methanospirillum and Methanothrix, Methanosarcina.

Graphical abstract

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kaniapan S, Hassan S, Ya H, PatmaNesan K, Azeem M (2021) The Utilisation of Palm Oil and Oil Palm Residues and the Related Challenges as a Sustainable Alternative in Biofuel, Bioenergy, and Transportation Sector: A Review. Sustainability 13(6):3110. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13063110

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lai O, Lo S, and Akoh C. (2012). Enzymatic and Chemical Modification of Palm Oil, Palm Kernel Oil, and Its Fractions. Palm Oil, 527-543https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-9818936-9-3.50020-4

  3. Embrandiri A, Quaik S, Rupani PF, Srivastava V, Singh P. (2015): Sustainable utilization of oil palm wastes: Opportunities and challenges, in: Waste Management: Challenges, Threats and Opportunities, 217–232.

  4. Vakili M, Rafatullah M, Ibrahim M, Salamatinia B, Gholami Z, Zwain H (2014) A review on composting of oil palm biomass. Environ Dev Sustain 17(4):691–709. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-014-9581-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Abdullah N, and Sulaim F. (2013).The Oil Palm Wastes in Malaysia. Biomass Now - Sustainable Growth And Use. https://doi.org/10.5772/55302

  6. Alhaji M, Sanaullah K, Lim S, Khan A, Hipolito C, Abdullah M et al (2016) Photocatalytic treatment technology for palm oil mill effluent (POME) – A review. Proc Saf Environ Protection 102:673–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2016.05.020

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Sridhar M, &AdeOluwa O. (2009).Palm Oil Industry Residues. Biotechnology For Agro-Industrial Residues Utilisation, 341-355https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9942-7_18

  8. Ahmad, MohdNajib&Mokhtar, Mohd&Baharuddin, Azhari& Hock, Lim & Ali, DrSitiRamlah&Abd-Aziz, Suraini&abdulrahman, nor aini& Hassan, Mohd. (2011). Changes in physicochemical and microbial community during co-composting of oil palm frond with palm oil mill effluent anaerobic sludge. Bioresources. 6 4762–4780. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.6.4.4762-4780

  9. Suksong W, Kongjan P, Prasertsan P, Imai T, O-Thong S (2016) Optimization and microbial community analysis for production of biogas from solid waste residues of palm oil mill industry by solid-state anaerobic digestion. Biores Technol 214:166–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.04.077

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Razak M, Ibrahim M, Yee P, Hassan M, Abd-Aziz S (2012) Utilization of oil palm decanter cake for cellulase and polyoses production. Biotechnol Bioproc Eng 17(3):547–555. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12257-011-0590-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Said MF, Farhana Hamid, N, Al-AaminRazali M, & FathinShamirahDaud N. (2021). Lignocellulosic of Oil Palm Biomass to Chemical Product via Fermentation. Elaeis Guineensis [Working Title]. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99312

  12. Suhartini S, Nurika I, Paul R, Melville L (2020) Estimation of Biogas Production and the Emission Savings from Anaerobic Digestion of Fruit-based Agro-industrial Waste and Agricultural crops residues. Bioenergy Res 14(3):844–859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-020-10209-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tepsour M, Usmanbaha N, Rattanaya T, Jariyaboon R, O-Thong S, Prasertsan P, Kongjan P (2019) Biogas Production from Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunches and Palm Oil Decanter Cake using Solid-State Anaerobic co-Digestion. Energies 12(22):4368. https://doi.org/10.3390/en12224368

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Chaikitkaew S, Kongjan P, O-Thong S (2015) Biogas Production from Biomass Residues of Palm Oil Mill by Solid State Anaerobic Digestion. Energy Procedia 79:838–844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.11.575

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. O-Thong S, Boe K, Angelidaki I (2012) Thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of oil palm empty fruit bunches with palm oil mill effluent for efficient biogas production. Applied Energy 93:648–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.12.092

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sidik U Razali F, Alwi S, Maigari F. (2013). Biogas production through Co-digestion of palm oil mill effluent with cow manure. Nigerian Journal Basic And Applied Sciences, 21(1). https://doi.org/10.4314/njbas.v21i1.12

  17. Yingthavorn N, Noynoo L, Boonkamnerd T, Rakmak N, Siripatana C (2020) Biochemical Methane Potential of Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) Co-Digested with Rubber Latex Effluent (LTE): Effect of POME/LTE Ratio and Temperature. Walailak J Sci Technol (WJST) 17(12):1321–1334. https://doi.org/10.48048/wjst.2021.6495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Liew Z, Chan Y, Ho Z, Yip Y, Teng M, Abbasbin AA et al (2021) Biogas production enhancement by co-digestion of empty fruit bunch (EFB) with palm oil mill effluent (POME): Performance and kinetic evaluation. Renew Energy 179:766–777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.07.073

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bah H, Zhang W, Wu S, Qi D, Kizito S, Dong R (2014) Evaluation of batch anaerobic co-digestion of palm pressed fiber and cattle manure under mesophilic conditions. Waste Manage 34(11):1984–1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.07.015

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mamindlapelli N, Arelli V, Juntupally S, Begum S, Thenkrishnan K, Maddala R, Anupoju G (2021) Understanding the substrate mediated microbial community shift within the anaerobic ecosystems via 16S metagenomic studies. Biores Technol Rep 15:100793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100793

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. APHA (2012) Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  22. Knauth S, Schmidt H, Tippkötter R (2013) Comparison of commercial kits for the extraction of DNA from paddy soils. Lett Appl Microbiol 56(3):222–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/lam.12038

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pramanik S, Suja F, Porhemmat M, Pramanik B (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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. IqbalSyaichurrozi B, Sumardiono S (2014) Kinetic Model of Biogas Yield Production from Vinasse at Various Initial pH: Comparison between Modified Gompertz Model and First Order Kinetic Model. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol 7(13):2798–2805. https://doi.org/10.19026/rjaset.7.602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kelly Orhorhoro E (2017) Experimental Determination of Effect of Total Solid (TS) and Volatile Solid (VS) on Biogas Yield. Am J Modern Energy 3(6):131. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajme.20170306.13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gil A, Siles J, Serrano A, Chica A, Martín M (2018) Effect of variation in the C/[N+P] ratio on anaerobic digestion. Environ Prog Sustainable Energy 38(1):228–236. https://doi.org/10.1002/ep.12922

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Ceron-Vivas A, Cáceres-Cáceres K, Rincón-Pérez A, Cajigas A. (2019). Influence of pH and the C/N ratio on the biogas production of wastewater. RevistaFacultad De Ingeniería Universidad De Antioquia, (92), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.redin.20190627

  28. Kim S, Choi S, Ju H, Jung J (2013) Mesophilic co-digestion of palm oil mill effluent and empty fruit bunches. Environ Technol 34(13–14):2163–2170. https://doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2013.826253

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Nurliyana M, H’ng P, Rasmina H, Kalsom M, Chin K, Lee S et al (2015) Effect of C/N ratio in methane productivity and biodegradability during facultative co-digestion of palm oil mill effluent and empty fruit bunch. Industrial Crops And Products 76:409–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2015.04.047

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Lahboubi N, Kerrou O, Karouach F, Bakraoui M, Schüch A, Schmedemann K. et al. (2020) Methane production from mesophilic fed-batch anaerobic digestion of empty fruit bunch of palm tree. Biomass Convers Bioref. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00864-1

  31. Lee J, Khan M, Tian H, Ee A, Lim E, Dai Y et al (2020) Improving methane yield of oil palm empty fruit bunches by wet oxidation pretreatment: Mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion conditions and the associated global warming potential effects. Energy Conversion Manag 225:113438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.113438

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Lahboubi N, Naim I, Habchi S, Essamri A, Bari H. (2021). Effect of Combined Alkali-Thermal Pretreatment on Methane Potential from BMP of Date Palm Empty Fruit Bunch. Proceedings Of The 1St International Conference On Water Energy Food And Sustainability (Icowefs 2021), 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75315-3_34

  33. Kanchanasuta S, Pisutpaisal N (2016) Waste utilization of palm oil decanter cake on biogas fermentation. Int J Hydrogen Energy 41(35):15661–15666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.04.129

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Rongwang C, Polprasert S, Kanchanasuta S (2017) Effect of Partial Ozonation and Thermal Pretreatment on Biogas Production from Palm Oil Decanter Cake. Chem Eng Trans 57:1987–1992. https://doi.org/10.3303/CET1757332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sayara T, Sánchez A (2019) A Review on Anaerobic Digestion of Lignocellulosic Wastes: Pretreatments and Operational Conditions. Appl Sci 9(21):4655. https://doi.org/10.3390/app9214655

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. 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

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Saelor S, Kongjan P, O-Thong S (2017) Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Palm Oil Mill Effluent and Empty Fruit Bunches. Energy Procedia 138:717–722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.10.206

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Chan Y, Lee H, Selvarajoo A (2021) Comparative study of the synergistic effect of decanter cake (DC) and empty fruit bunch (EFB) as the co-substrates in the anaerobic co-digestion (ACD) of palm oil mill effluent (POME). Environ Challenges 5:100257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envc.2021.100257

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Llamas M, Greses S, Tomás-Pejó E, González-Fernández C (2021) Tuning microbial community in non-conventional two-stage anaerobic bioprocess for microalgae biomass valorization into targeted bioproducts. Biores Technol 337:125387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125387

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hao L, Michaelsen T, Singleton C, Dottorini G, Kirkegaard R, Albertsen M et al (2020) Novel syntrophic bacteria in full-scale anaerobic digesters revealed by genome-centric metatranscriptomics. ISME J 14(4):906–918. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-019-0571-0

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Zhang J, Loh K, Lee J, Wang C, Dai Y, Wah Tong Y. (2017). Three-stage anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and horse manure. Scientific Reports, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01408-w

  42. Ziganshin A, Schmidt T, Scholwin F, Il’inskaya O, Harms H, Kleinsteuber S (2010) Bacteria and archaea involved in anaerobic digestion of distillers grains with solubles. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 89(6):2039–2052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-010-2981-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Jiang C, Peces M, Andersen M, Kucheryavskiy S, Nierychlo M, Yashiro E et al (2021) Characterizing the growing microorganisms at species level in 46 anaerobic digesters at Danish wastewater treatment plants: A six-year survey on microbial community structure and key drivers. Water Res 193:116871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2021.116871

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hattori S (2008) Syntrophic Acetate-Oxidizing Microbes in Methanogenic Environments. Microbes And Environments 23(2):118–127. https://doi.org/10.1264/jsme2.23.118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Solli L, Håvelsrud O, Horn S, Rike A. (2014). A metagenomic study of the microbial communities in four parallel biogas reactors. Biotechnology For Biofuels, 7(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-014-0146-2

  46. Wirth R, Böjti T, Lakatos G, Maróti G, Bagi Z, Rákhely G, Kovács K (2019) Characterization of Core Microbiomes and Functional Profiles of Mesophilic Anaerobic Digesters Fed With Chlorella vulgaris Green Microalgae and Maize Silage. Front Energy Res 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenrg.2019.00111

  47. Chen H, Hao S, Chen Z, O-Thong S, Fan J, Clark J et al (2020) Mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic digestion of aqueous phase generated from hydrothermal liquefaction of cornstalk: Molecular and metabolic insights. Water Res 168:115199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115199

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Jain K, Suryawanshi P, Chaudhari A (2020) Hydrogenotrophic methanogen strain of Methanospirillum from anaerobic digester fed with agro-industrial waste. Biologia 76(1):255–266. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11756-020-00559-y

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Anderson K, Sallis P, Uyanik S. (2003). Anaerobic treatment processes. Handbook Of Water And Wastewater Microbiology, 391-426. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-012470100-7/50025-x

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are thankful to the Director of CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Technology (IICT) for the support for carrying out this research (IICT/Pubs./2022/039). The authors are grateful to Department of Science and Technology (DST) for providing the INSPIRE-SRF fellowship to Mr. Naveen Kumar Mamindlapelli [IF 190106]. The authors are also thankful to Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) for providing the SRF fellowship to Ms. Vijaya Lakshmi Arelli (31/014(2795)/2019-EMR-1). The authors are also thankful to Department of Biotechnology and M/s Global Environmental Services Private Limited (GESPL) for sponsoring the project and financial support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bioengineering and Environmental Sciences (BEES) Group, Department of Energy and Environmental Engineering (DEEE), CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Technology (IICT), Tarnaka Hyderabad, 500007, India

    Naveen Kumar Mamindlapelli, Vijayalakshmi Arelli, Avinash Jukanti, Ramakrishna Maddala & Gangagni Rao Anupoju

  2. Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad-201002, India

    Naveen Kumar Mamindlapelli, Vijayalakshmi Arelli & Gangagni Rao Anupoju

Authors
  1. Naveen Kumar Mamindlapelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vijayalakshmi Arelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Avinash Jukanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ramakrishna Maddala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gangagni Rao Anupoju
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Naveen Kumar Mamindlapelli contributed to methodology, formal analysis and writing—original draft. Vijayalakshmi Arelli and Avinash Jukanti contributed to formal analysis and writing—original draft. Ramakrishna Maddala contributed to review. Gangagni Rao Anupoju contributed to supervision, writing—review and editing and conceptualization.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gangagni Rao Anupoju .

Ethics declarations

Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Highlights

• Anaerobic co-digestion of POME, PEFF and OPDC.

• Highest methane yield of 0.40 L CH4/(g VS added) for co-digestion of POME, PEFF and OPDC.

• Metagenomic studies reveal the microbial diversity.

• Firmicutes are in DIET with hydrogenotrophic methanogens.

• Hydrogenotrophic and acetoclastic methanogenesis are the major CH4 pathway.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kumar Mamindlapelli, N., Arelli, V., Jukanti, A. et al. Anaerobic Co-digestion of Biogenic Wastes Available at Palm Oil Extraction Factory: Assessment of Methane Yield, Estimation of Kinetic Parameters and Understanding the Microbial Diversity. Bioenerg. Res. 16, 213–227 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-022-10472-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-022-10472-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation