Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using a novel continuous bioreactor in enhancing the biogas production

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

Abstract

Since fossil fuel resources are depleting and their consumption is associated with environmental pollution, researchers in the energy section are searching for a proper alternative. Biogas is one of these potent replacements. Constant composition and volumetric rate are some of the challenges in using biogas. In this study, a novel, easily portable continuous bioreactor was designed and constructed to produce biogas at constant composition and volumetric rate for human uses. Sugar beet waste and anaerobic sludge were used as substrate and inoculum to produce biogas, respectively. Five parameters, i.e., hydraulic retention time (HRT), organic loading rate (OLR), pH, biogas volume, and methane composition, were measured and compared. The results obtained from the continuous bioreactor were compared with the results obtained from the batch reactors under the same operating conditions. The measurement revealed that the continuous reactor had an excellent performance in terms of biogas purity and volumetric rate. The suitable and preferable HRT and OLR were 18 days and 34.86 g VS/day, respectively. After 18 days of operation (start-up period), the biogas production process inside the continuous bioreactor was stable, reaching about 411.2 mL STD/g VS per day. The unique design of the horizontal continuous bioreactor makes it possible to convert biodegradable wastes to biogas quickly. Also, the biogas from the continuous bioreactor contained about 53% methane without any purification process at suitable conditions, i.e., TS = 8.35%.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

All the data analyzed are included in the published articles presented in the references part.

References

  1. Beiki H, Dadvar M, Halladj R (2009) Pore network model for catalytic dehydration of methanol at particle level. AIChE J 55(2):442–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Beiki H, Soukhtanlou E (2019) Improvement of salt gradient solar ponds’ performance using nanoparticles inside the storage layer. Appl Nanosci 9(2):243–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Beiki H, Soukhtanlou E (2020) Determination of optimum insulation thicknesses for salinity gradient solar pond’s bottom wall under different climate conditions. SN Appl Sci 2(7):1284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Nourollahi I et al (2022) Investigating the simultaneous effect of effective parameters on the performance of salinity gradient solar ponds using Taguchi analysis: determination of optimum thickness of the middle layer. Alex Eng J 61(7):5607–5619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Torres A et al (2021) Biogas production from anaerobic digestion of solid microalgae residues generated on different processes of microalgae-to-biofuel production. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-01898-9

  6. Mohanty A et al (2021) A critical review on biogas production from edible and non-edible oil cakes. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-01292-5

  7. Mbachu VM et al (2021) Modelling sustainability of a demand-based biomass to biogas conversion system: a biomimicry feedstock inventory-based approach. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-01581-z

  8. Mahla SK et al (2020) Separate effect of biodiesel, n-butanol, and biogas on performance and emission characteristics of diesel engine: a review. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01056-7

  9. Keramati M, Beiki H (2017) The effect of pH adjustment together with different substrate to inoculum ratios on biogas production from sugar beet wastes in an anaerobic digester. J Energy Manag Technol 1(2):6–11

    Google Scholar 

  10. Katariya HG, Patolia HP (2021) Advances in biogas cleaning, enrichment, and utilization technologies: a way forward. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-01750-0

  11. Janke L et al (2016) Comparison of start-up strategies and process performance during semi-continuous anaerobic digestion of sugarcane filter cake co-digested with bagasse. Waste Manage 48:199–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Treichel H, Fongaro G (2019) Improving biogas production: Technological challenges, alternative sources, future developments. Vol. 9. Springer, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  13. Beiki H, Keramati M (2019) Improvement of methane production from sugar beet wastes using TiO2 and Fe3O4 nanoparticles and chitosan micropowder additives. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 189(1):13–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Prabhu AV et al (2021) Performance and emission evaluation of dual fuel CI engine using preheated biogas-air mixture. Sci Total Environ 754:142389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Janke L et al (2017) Optimization of semi-continuous anaerobic digestion of sugarcane straw co-digested with filter cake: effects of macronutrients supplementation on conversion kinetics. Biores Technol 245:35–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Carballa M et al (2011) Correlations between molecular and operational parameters in continuous lab-scale anaerobic reactors. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 89(2):303–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Han S et al (2016) Reactor performances and microbial communities of biogas reactors: effects of inoculum sources. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 100(2):987–995

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. de Aquino S, Fuess LT, Pires EC (2017) Media arrangement impacts cell growth in anaerobic fixed-bed reactors treating sugarcane vinasse: structured vs. randomic biomass immobilization. Bioresour Technol 235:219–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hutnan M et al (2001) Two-step pilot-scale anaerobic treatment of sugar beet pulp. Pol J Environ Stud 10(4):237–244

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fuess LT et al (2017) Thermophilic two-phase anaerobic digestion using an innovative fixed-bed reactor for enhanced organic matter removal and bioenergy recovery from sugarcane vinasse. Appl Energy 189:480–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Petracchini F et al (2018) A novel pilot scale multistage semidry anaerobic digestion reactor to treat food waste and cow manure. Int J Environ Sci Technol 15(9):1999–2008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Michalopoulos I et al (2019) Anaerobic co-digestion in a pilot-scale periodic anaerobic baffled reactor (PABR) and composting of animal by-products and whey. Waste Biomass Valori 10(6):1469–1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Buitrón G, Martínez-Valdez FJ, Ojeda F (2019) Biogas production from a highly organic loaded winery effluent through a two-stage process. BioEnergy Research 12(3):714–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chatterjee P, Ghangrekar MM, Rao S (2019) Biogas production from partially digested septic tank sludge and its kinetics. Waste Biomass Valori 10(2):387–398

    Google Scholar 

  25. Warade H, Daryapurkar R, Nagarnaik PB (2019) Assessment of Biogas Production from Energy Crop UsingAnimal Manure as Co-substrate Through Portable Reactor. Smart Technologies for Energy, Environment andSustainable Development. Springer, pp 165–174

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Ramaswamy J, SiddareddyVemareddy P (2015) Production of biogas using small-scale plug flow reactor and sizing calculation for biodegradable solid waste. Renew: Wind Water Solar 2(1):6

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zeng Z et al (2019) Performance and working mechanism of a novel anaerobic self-flotation reactor for treating wastewater with high suspended solids. Environ Sci Pollut Res

  28. VijinPrabhu A et al (2021) Parametric optimization of biogas potential in anaerobic co-digestion of biomass wastes. Fuel 288:119574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Beiki H, Esfahany M, Etesami N (2013) Turbulent mass transfer of Al2O3 and TiO2 electrolyte nanofluids in circular tube. Microfluid Nanofluid 15(4):501–508

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Zareei S, Khodaei J (2017) Modeling and optimization of biogas production from cow manure and maize straw using an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system. Renew Energy 114:423–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Syaichurrozi I, Sumardiono S (2014) Effect of total solid content to biogas production rate from Vinasse (RESEARCH NOTE). Int J Eng 27(2):177–184

    Google Scholar 

  32. Holman JP, Gajda WJ (2001) Experimental methods for engineers, vol 2. McGraw-Hill, New York

  33. Ihara I et al (2020) Field testing of a small-scale anaerobic digester with liquid dairy manure and other organic wastes at an urban dairy farm. J Mater Cycles Waste Manage 22(5):1382–1389

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 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. Biores Technol 167:407–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Li Y et al (2014) Anaerobic co-digestion of chicken manure and corn stover in batch and continuously stirred tank reactor (CSTR). Biores Technol 156:342–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kafle GK, Kim SH (2013) Anaerobic treatment of apple waste with swine manure for biogas production: batch and continuous operation. Appl Energy 103:61–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Abbas I et al (2020) Development and performance evaluation of small size household portable biogas plant for domestic use. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-00956-y

Download references

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grants from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemical Engineering, Quchan University of Technology, 94771-67335, Quchan, Iran

    Mohammad Amui Khorshidi, Hossein Beiki & Mojtaba Kanvisi

Authors
  1. Mohammad Amui Khorshidi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hossein Beiki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mojtaba Kanvisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study’s conception and design. MAkh: setup design and construction, material preparation, data collection, experiment operation, validation, and writing (original) draft. HB: methodology, conceptualization, experiment design and operation, validation, visualization, data curation, writing (review), and editing. MK: methodology, conceptualization, setup design and construction, experiment design and operation, validation, and data curation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hossein Beiki.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

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

Highlights

• Constructing portable continuous bioreactor to produce biogas from sugar beet waste.

• Unprocessed chopped parts of sugar beet from the factory have been used as substrate.

• The best total solid loading to produce the highest biogas was 8.35%.

• The suitable and preferable HRT and OLR were 18 days and 34.86 g VS/day.

• At stable condition, the produced biogas was 411.2 mL STD/g VS per day.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amui Khorshidi, M., Beiki, H. & Kanvisi, M. Using a novel continuous bioreactor in enhancing the biogas production. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 14, 901–908 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-02445-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-02445-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation