Methane production and recovery from wastewater

Mullai, P.; Vishali, S.; Yogeswari, M. K.; López, M. Estefanía; Rene, Eldon R.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-64321-6.00002-1

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Due to different metabolic pathways of bacteria, resulting in g condition hydrogen yield and hydrogen production rate was lower than a condition, even the average biomass concentration was similar. The new reactor geometries should also be intended to increase SRT and mass transfer properties, allowing researchers to better understand the microbe–microbe contact interaction [ 38 , 39 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

High Performance of Biohydrogen Production in Packed-Filter Bioreactor via Optimizing Packed-Filter Position

Chu

Zheng

Chen

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this present investigation, a packed-filter bioreactor was employed to produce hydrogen utilizing an expired soft drink as a substrate. The effects of feeding substrate concentrations ranging from 19.51, 10.19, 5.34, 3.48, to 2.51 g total sugar/L were examined, and the position of the packed filter installed in the bioreactor at dimensionless heights (h/H) of 1/4, 2/4, 3/4, and 4/4 was studied. The results revealed that with a substrate concentration of 20 g total sugar/L and a hydraulic retention time (HRT) of 1 h, a packed filter placed at the half-height position of the bioreactor (h/H 2/4) has the optimal hydrogen production rate, hydrogen yield, and average biomass concentration in the bioreactor, resulting in 55.70 ± 2.42 L/L/d, 0.90 ± 0.06 mol H2/mol hexose, and 17.86 ± 1.09 g VSS/L. When feeding substrate concentrations varied from 20, 10, to 5 g total sugar/L with the packed-filter position at h/H 2/4, Clostridium sp., Clostridium tyrobutyricum, and Bifidobacterium crudilactis were the predominant bacteria community. Finally, it was discovered that the packed-filter bioreactor can produce stable hydrogen in high-strength organic effluent.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Res. Public Health 2021, 18, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 12 also be intended to increase SRT and mass transfer properties, allowing researchers to better understand the microbe-microbe contact interaction [38,39].…”

Section: Microbial Community Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

High Performance of Biohydrogen Production in Packed-Filter Bioreactor via Optimizing Packed-Filter Position

Chu

Zheng

Chen

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The UASB reactor is a widely used for treating high-strength industrial wastewater. Many efforts have also been made to improve the "gas solid liquid" separation inside the bioreactor in order to avoid the loss of fine biomass particles, addition anaerobic reactors could be used to produce biogas by treating wastewaters [6]. In the UASB reactor, at the bottom of the reactor is an anaerobic sludge in the form of suspended granules and wastewater flows upward through the mud blanket.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bio-failure or Bio-fuel? Economic Feasibility of Converting Palm Oil Waste to Biogas

I Prihatiningtyas,

Heryadi,

Arimbi

et al. 2023

IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to investigate the economic feasibility of using an Up-Flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactor to convert liquid waste from palm oil processing plants into biogas containing methane. The study examined total capital investment (TCI), working capital investment (WCI), and production costs at different capacities (3, 30, and 300 liters per day) to determine if the process could generate a profit. The results showed that the biogas production from palm oil industrial liquid waste using the UASB reactor did not result in a profit due to the large capital costs and low biogas production. The implication of this study is that further research is needed to find ways to reduce the capital costs of the process and increase biogas production to make it economically feasible.

show abstract

“…Typically, brewery wastewater treatment has aerobic, anaerobic and combined treatment technologies. In addition, many different methods such as nanofiltration [4], quenched plasma [13], activated sludge process, aerated lagoon, Trickling filter process, Bifiltration towers [12], upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) [12], [14][15][16][17] have been studied. Membrane technology [14], electrochemical method [17], anaerobic fluidized bed reactors [14], Microbial fuel cell [18] and reverse osmosis [19] have been tested.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brewery Effluent Treatment with Conventional and Natural Coagulants

Aremanda¹,

Berhane²,

Daniel³

et al. 2022

equilibrium

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In water scarce countries such as Eritrea, maintaining brewery industry remain ever challenging task. Currently, Asmara breweries is the only beer producing factory consuming 8.46 L of water per every L of beer produced which is notably higher than Brewer’s Association (BA) benchmark and consequently generates 7.53 L of wastewater/L of beer. Bottle cleaning and brewery activities ascertain ample effluent bases. Wastewater from bottle cleaning (BCWW), brewery (BWW) and mixed (MWW) have attributed a wide spectrum of 3500-160000 mg/L of COD and 327-26667 mg/L of BOD5, which are significantly overtops other reported brewery effluents. Physicochemical treatments including coagulation with conventional (alum) and natural (MO seed) flocculants have tested to remove higher COD and BOD5 concentrations of brewery effluents. Optimal coagulant dosage determined by accounting turbidity as a key performance indicator. Alum treatment of BCWW and MO seed flocculation of MWW have resulted in lower turbidity levels of 0.49 and 6.17 NTU at 60 mg/L of dosages respectively. The optimal quantities of 92.2 % and 86.6% (by weight) of water recovered from alum treatment of BCWW and MO seed coagulation of MWW respectively. Higher sludge volumes recorded as a major disadvantage in alum coagulation whereas natural coagulant, MO seed manifested competitive results in removal of COD, BOD5, Chlorine, Nitrogen, Sulphate, Sodium, TDS and TSS along with PH stabilization. In addition, 97.2% of influent turbidity removed through MO seed coagulation treatment, an equipollent to alum despite of four fold increment in potassium levels.

show abstract

Methane production and recovery from wastewater

Cited by 7 publications

References 42 publications

High Performance of Biohydrogen Production in Packed-Filter Bioreactor via Optimizing Packed-Filter Position

High Performance of Biohydrogen Production in Packed-Filter Bioreactor via Optimizing Packed-Filter Position

Bio-failure or Bio-fuel? Economic Feasibility of Converting Palm Oil Waste to Biogas

Brewery Effluent Treatment with Conventional and Natural Coagulants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About