Methane production through anaerobic co-digestion of tropical fruit biomass and urban solid waste

Romero, Hugo; Vega, C.; Feijoó, V.; Villacreses, D.; Sarmiento, C.

doi:10.1016/j.egyr.2020.11.170

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Starting days methane percentage is low because of inhibition of methanogens due to VFAs accumulation [53]. [25,54,55] also shown that methane gas percentage was increased with respect to time due to decrease of carbon dioxide percentage.…”

Section: Biogas and Methane Gas Generationmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effect of chemical composition on the anaerobic co-digestion of source segregated organic fraction of municipal solid wastes

Jakki

Ahammed

Parsai

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently waste to energy projects gaining more attraction due to rapid waste generation due to increased urbanization. Improper municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment resulting in environmental risks such as air pollution, ground, and surface water contamination. Anaerobic digestion (AD) is the best method to treat organic solid waste. Mono-AD of organic fraction of municipal solid wastes (OFMSW) leads to lower methane yield due to the accumulation of volatile fatty acids (VFAs). Mixing of two or more substrates (Co-digestion) dilutes the toxic compounds and increases the methane yield by providing proper environment for microbes. In this study anaerobic co-digestion (AcoD) of source segregated OFMSW (particularly food waste, fruit waste, and vegetable waste) with chicken fecal matter (co-substrate), and cow dung (inoculum) was investigated by using batch studies (Duration of 30 days). AcoD carried out in three different batch reactors viz. R1 (food mix), R2 (vegetable mix), and R3 (fruit mix) feed with substrates (S1& S2) and inoculum (I) (S1: S2: I = 0.5:0.5:2). The methane percentage obtained for reactor R1 was 69.60%, which is higher compared to the other reactors (R2- 61.2%, and R3- 57.37%). R1 reactor had higher methane yield due to its higher lipids (higher VFAs), and proteins (sufficient buffer capacity). R3 reactor had lowest methane yield due to its highest carbohydrates (rapid acidification), and lower proteins (lower buffer capacity). Modified Gompertz model gave better results near to experimental studies. The present study proved that mixing OFMSW with proper co-substrate (protein-rich) increases the methane yield by providing proper buffer capacity.

show abstract

Section: Biogas and Methane Gas Generationmentioning

confidence: 97%

Effect of chemical composition on the anaerobic co-digestion of source segregated organic fraction of municipal solid wastes

Jakki

Ahammed

Parsai

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[ 106 ] Regarding biomethane production, anaerobic digestion is one of the most efficient techniques because of the increase in nutrient recovery and the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. [ 107,108 ]…”

Section: Fvw As Substrates To Obtain Different Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Value‐Added Products from Fruit and Vegetable Wastes: A Review

Sánchez

Laca

et al. 2021

CLEAN Soil Air Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fruit and vegetable wastes (FVW) are some of the most abundant agro‐industrial wastes. This residual biomass can be used to obtain biofuels such as bioethanol, biomethane, biohydrogen, and biobutanol. Additionally, FVW can also be employed as a raw material for recovering bioactive compounds (antioxidants, enzymes, or antibiotics) and to produce organic acids of industrial interest (citric acid, lactic acid, acetic acid). However, the use of these wastes as a substrate to obtain the mentioned value‐added products usually requires several steps, including different pre‐treatments, microbial biotransformation, and separation and purification processes. The aim of this work is to provide an overview of the different products that can be obtained from FVW, as well as the technologies that can be employed in the revalorization procedures.

show abstract

“…Before now, studies relating to septic tank systems are usually and understandably focused on methanogenesis with an emphasis on energy generation from biogas. [26][27][28][29][30] . Others have focussed on characterizing heavy metals in water and wastewater effluent samples and comparing their concentrations with various guideline values.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial analysis of heavy metals in septic tank sewage

Oyem,

Oyem

2023

CaJoST

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heavy metals get to humans through food, water, air, and industrial activities. They arrive at septic tanks through the excretory products of man and undergo anaerobic bioremediation. Effluent and sludge sewage in both chambers of the tank contains various amounts of trace metals. The research analyses the spatial distribution of heavy metals in the effluent and sludge components of the septic tank during bioremediation. Effluent and sludge samples were randomly collected from three study locations in southern Nigeria, and composite samples were made for each of these study locations. Nine trace metals were analysed using standard methods by the American Public Health Association (APHA) for water and wastewater examination. Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, and Cr were the most abundant. Effluent heavy metals concentrations were higher in the inlet chamber. There were strong positive correlation (r = 0.90, 0.99, and 0.99) between the effluent and sludge samples. P-values obtained from the ANOVA at a 0.05 significance level confirmed the correlation values. Multivariate charts and regression analysis gave R2-values in the range of 0.3045 – 0.3724 in the study with a mean value of 0.33. In conclusion, the effluent and sludge samples were strongly correlated and all the metal types analysed were also present in the sludge in similar proportions. The sludge contained significant levels of trace metals with dire implications for the environment.

show abstract

Methane production through anaerobic co-digestion of tropical fruit biomass and urban solid waste

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

Effect of chemical composition on the anaerobic co-digestion of source segregated organic fraction of municipal solid wastes

Effect of chemical composition on the anaerobic co-digestion of source segregated organic fraction of municipal solid wastes

Value‐Added Products from Fruit and Vegetable Wastes: A Review

Spatial analysis of heavy metals in septic tank sewage

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About