Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Application fuzzy DEMATEL methodology to investigate some technical parameters of biochemical methane potential (BMP) test produced vegetable waste anaerobic biogas

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the transition to renewable energy systems is accelerating, anaerobic digestion, which is one of the methods of energy recovery from organic substrates, continues to be studied with great interest by scientists. Anaerobic digestion research and applications are mostly carried out with biochemical methane potential (BMP) tests to decide the methane potency of sewage sludge, energy crops, and organic wastes. Unlike long and costly continually reactor experiments, actually, BMP tests are cumulative and can be performed with a relatively low investment of materials, technical labor, and also time. For the BMP to give accurate results, the effect of all the tools and technical parameters used in the implementation of the BMP should be well understood. In such situations, it is very useful to apply fuzzy logic methods in multi-criteria decision-making stages when more than one parameter changes at the same time. Therefore, in this study, fifteen parameters were determined and analyzed with the fuzzy DEMATEL (decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory) method to understand the cause-effect mechanism of the technical parameters of BMP. As a result of these analyses, it was seen that the material of the reactor (ri-cj value of 0.55), the particle size (ri-cj value of 0.43), the effect of mixing (ri-cj value of 0.32), and the amount of the total solids (TSA) (ri-cj value of 0.25) had a high effect in the causal sense. It was observed that the first-order parameter (material of reactor) was 27% stronger than the second-order (the particle size) parameter in terms of causality. Likewise, the second-order parameter is 34% stronger than the third-order parameter (the effect of mixing) in terms of cause effect. In addition, it was understood that the most effective parameters in the mechanism of effect were pH (ri + cj value of 3.41), C/N ratio (ri + cj value of 3.26), and temperature (ri + cj value of 3.07), respectively. Besides, high methane yield is seen in mesophilic conditions. The average cumulative biogas yield of the reactor is 282.1 NmL/g VS. The highest percentage of methane formed in the biogas occurred on the 21st day. Briefly, this study is important to provide a facilitating way for researchers working on BMP to understand the cause-effect mechanism of system technical requirements.

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
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  • Abdullah, L., & Zulkifli, N. (2015). Integration of fuzzy AHP and interval type-2 fuzzy DEMATEL: An application to human resource management. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(9), 4397–4409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.01.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abunde Neba, F., Asiedu, N. Y., Addo, A., & Seidu, R. (2020). Attainable regions and fuzzy multi-criteria decisions: Modeling a novel configuration of methane bioreactor using experimental limits of operation. Bioresource Technology, 295, 122273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.122273

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ansari, F. A., Wahal, S., Gupta, S. K., Rawat, I., & Bux, F. (2017). A comparative study on biochemical methane potential of algal substrates: Implications of biomass pre-treatment and product extraction. Bioresource Technology, 234, 320–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.03.068

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • APHA (American Public Health Association). (2012). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (twenty-second ed.), American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation, Washington DC.

  • Başhan, V., & Demirel, H. (2018). Evaluation of critical operational faults of marine diesel generator engines by using DEMATEL method. Journal of ETA Maritime Science, 6(2), 119–128. https://doi.org/10.5505/jems.2018.24865

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Başhan, V., & Demirel, H. (2019). Application of fuzzy dematel technique to assess most common critical operational faults of marine boilers. Politeknik Dergisi, 22(3), 545–555. https://doi.org/10.2339/politeknik.426644

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Başhan, V., & Ust, Y. (2019). Application of fuzzy dematel method to analyse s-CO2 Brayton power systems. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-191133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Başhan, V., Ust, Y., Balkanli, E., & Eren Figen, H. (2020). A mixed algorithm for investigation the effects of the preparation processes during the catalyst synthesis with sol–gel method and coating. Journal of Sol-Gel Science and Technology, 96(1), 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10971-020-05371-3

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bernacchi, S., Rittmann, S., H. Seifert, A., Krajete, A., Herwig, C., & 1 Institute of Chemical Engineering, Research Area Biochemical Engineering, Vienna University of Technology, Gumpendorferstraße 1a, 1060 Vienna, Austria. (2014). Experimental methods for screening parameters influencing the growth to product yield (Y(x/CH4)) of a biological methane production (BMP) process performed with Methanothermobacter marburgensis. AIMS Bioengineering, 1(2), 72–87. https://doi.org/10.3934/bioeng.2014.2.72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, M., Lagerkvist, A., & Morgan-Sagastume, F. (2012). The effects of substrate pre-treatment on anaerobic digestion systems: A review. Waste Management, 32(9), 1634–1650.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Casallas-Ojeda, M. R., Marmolejo-Rebellón, L. F., & Torres-Lozada, P. (2020). Evaluation of simultaneous incidence of head space and temperature on biochemical methane potential in food waste. Cogent Engineering, 7(1), 1729514. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2020.1729514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Çetinkaya, A. Y., & Yetilmezsoy, K. (2019). Evaluation of anaerobic biodegradability potential and comparative kinetics of different agro-industrial substrates using a new hybrid computational coding scheme. Journal of Cleaner Production, 238, 117921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.117921

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekhar, K., Mehrez, I., Kumar, G., & Kim, S.-H. (2021). Relative evaluation of acid, alkali, and hydrothermal pretreatment influence on biochemical methane potential of date biomass. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering, 9(5), 106031. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2021.106031

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chen-Yi, H., Ke-Ting, C., & Gwo-Hshiung, T. (2007). FMCDM with Fuzzy DEMA℡ Approach for Customers’ Choice Behavior Model. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 9(4).

  • Choi, Y., Ryu, J., & Lee, S. R. (2020). Influence of carbon type and carbon to nitrogen ratio on the biochemical methane potential, pH, and ammonia nitrogen in anaerobic digestion. Journal of Animal Science and Technology, 62(1), 74–83. https://doi.org/10.5187/jast.2020.62.1.74

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Cruces, V. F., García-Depraect, O., & León-Becerril, E. (2020). Effect of lactate fermentation type on the biochemical methane potential of tequila vinasse. BioEnergy Research, 13(2), 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-020-10093-z

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • dos Santos, L. A., Valença, R. B., da Silva, L. C. S., de Holanda, S. H., & B., Silva, A. F. V. da, Jucá, J. F. T., & Santos, A. F. M. S. (2020). Methane generation potential through anaerobic digestion of fruit waste. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120389. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120389

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ewunie, G. A., Yigezu, Z. D., & Morken, J. (2021). Biochemical methane potential of Jatropha curcas fruit shell: Comparative effect of mechanical, steam explosion and alkaline pretreatments. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-020-01159-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Facchin, V., Cavinato, C., Fatone, F., Pavan, P., Cecchi, F., & Bolzonella, D. (2013). Effect of trace element supplementation on the mesophilic anaerobic digestion of foodwaste in batch trials: The influence of inoculum origin. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 70, 71–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Giwa, A. S., Zhang, X., Memon, A. G., & Ali, N. (2021). Co-Digestion of Household Black Water with Kitchen Waste for a Sustainable Decentralized Waste Management: Biochemical Methane Potential and Mixing Ratios Effects. Environmental Engineering Science, 38(9), 877–885. https://doi.org/10.1089/ees.2020.0276

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gu, Y. M., Park, S. Y., Park, J. Y., Sang, B.-I., Jeon, B. S., Kim, H., & Lee, J. H. (2021). Impact of Attrition Ball-Mill on Characteristics and Biochemical Methane Potential of Food Waste. Energies, 14(8), 2085. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082085

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gumus, A. T., Yayla, A. Y., Çelik, E., & Yildiz, A. (2013). A combined fuzzy-AHP and fuzzy-GRA methodology for hydrogen energy storage method selection in Turkey. Energies, 6(6), 3017–3032. https://doi.org/10.3390/en6063017

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gunaseelan, V. N. (2004). Biochemical methane potential of fruits and vegetable solid waste feedstocks. Biomass and Bioenergy, 26(4), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.08.006

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Justesen, C. G., Astals, S., Mortensen, J. R., Thorsen, R., Koch, K., Weinrich, S., et al. (2019). Development and validation of a low-cost gas density method for measuring biochemical methane potential (BMP). Water, 11(12), 2431. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11122431

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Konrad, O., Hasan, C., Marder, M., Zulian, L., & Guerini Filho, M. (2021). Comparison of two gas volume measurement systems by evaluating biochemical methane potential. Environmental Quality Management, tqem.21776. https://doi.org/10.1002/tqem.21776

  • Li, P., Liu, Z., Zhao, M., Dai, X., & Ruan, W. (2020). Evaluation of Biogas Performance and Process Stability from Food, Kitchen, and Fruit/Vegetable Waste by Mono-, Co-, and Tridigestion. Energy & Fuels, 34(10), 12734–12742. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c02598

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lianhua, L., Dong, L., Yongming, S., Longlong, M., Zhenhong, Y., & Xiaoying, K. (2010). Effect of temperature and solid concentration on anaerobic digestion of rice straw in South China. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 35(13), 7261–7266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liou, J. J., Yen, L., & Tzeng, G.-H. (2008). Building an effective safety management system for airlines. Journal of Air Transport Management, 14(1), 20–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2007.10.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, S., Ehimen, E., Pillai, S. C., Black, A., Tormey, D., & Bartlett, J. (2021). Biogas production from small-scale anaerobic digestion plants on European farms. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 139, 110580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110580

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Olabi, A. G., Nassef, A. M., Rodriguez, C., Abdelkareem, M. A., & Rezk, H. (2020). Application of artificial intelligence to maximize methane production from waste paper. International Journal of Energy Research, 44(12), 9598–9608. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.5446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. Renewable Energy, 36(12), 3313–3318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2011.05.002

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, T. J. (2009). Fuzzy logic with engineering applications. John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seekao, N., Sangsri, S., Rakmak, N., Dechapanya, W., & Siripatana, C. (2021). Co-digestion of palm oil mill effluent with chicken manure and crude glycerol: Biochemical methane potential by monod kinetics. Heliyon, 7(2), e06204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stürmer, B., Leiers, D., Anspach, V., Brügging, E., Scharfy, D., & Wissel, T. (2021). Agricultural biogas production: A regional comparison of technical parameters. Renewable Energy, 164, 171–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.09.074

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suzan, V., & Yavuzer, H. (2020). A Fuzzy Dematel Method To Evaluate The Most Common Diseases In Internal Medicine. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 22(7), 2385–2395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-020-00921-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, M.-L., & Lin, Y. H. (2009). Application of fuzzy DEMATEL to develop a cause and effect model of municipal solid waste management in Metro Manila. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 158(1–4), 519–533. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0601-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ünyay, H., Yılmaz, F., Başar, İA., Altınay Perendeci, N., Çoban, I., & Şahinkaya, E. (2022). Effects of organic loading rate on methane production from switchgrass in batch and semi-continuous stirred tank reactor system. Biomass and Bioenergy, 156, 106306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, B., Nges, I. A., Nistor, M., & Liu, J. (2014). Determination of methane yield of cellulose using different experimental setups. Water Science and Technology, 70(4), 599–604.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ward, A. J., Hobbs, P. J., Holliman, P. J., & Jones, D. L. (2008). Optimisation of the anaerobic digestion of agricultural resources. Bioresource Technology, 99(17), 7928–7940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.02.044

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wu, W.-W., & Lee, Y.-T. (2007). Developing global managers’ competencies using the fuzzy DEMA℡ method. Expert Systems with Applications, 32(2), 499–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1996). Fuzzy sets. In Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, And Fuzzy Systems: Selected Papers by Lotfi A Zadeh (pp. 394–432). World Scientific.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Maritime Faculty, Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering, Bursa Technical University, 16310, Bursa, Turkey

    Veysi Başhan

  2. Civil Engineering Faculty, Environmental Engineering Department, Yildiz Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Afşın Y. Çetinkaya

Authors
  1. Veysi Başhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Afşın Y. Çetinkaya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veysi Başhan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Başhan, V., Çetinkaya, A.Y. Application fuzzy DEMATEL methodology to investigate some technical parameters of biochemical methane potential (BMP) test produced vegetable waste anaerobic biogas. Environ Monit Assess 194, 661 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10330-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-022-10330-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation