LABORATORY-SCALE STUDY OF BIOGAS COMPOSITION AND HEATING VALUE FROM CO-DIGESTION OF WATER HYACINTH AND CATTLE MANURE
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study investigated the basic characteristics of water hyacinth and cattle manure and compared the composition and volumetric heating value of biogas obtained from different co-digestion ratios. The results were intended to provide preliminary laboratory-scale information for subsequent pilot-scale development and validation. Experiments were conducted using 5-L anaerobic digesters with five water-hyacinth-to-cattle-manure ratios on a dry-weight basis: 100:0, 75:25, 50:50, 25:75, and 0:100. The resulting biogas was analyzed for methane (CH4), carbon dioxide (CO2), oxygen (O2), and hydrogen sulfide (H2S). Based on three gas-composition measurements, the 50:50 ratio produced the highest mean methane fraction under the conditions investigated, at 60.80 ± 0.66%, whereas the corresponding mean CO2, O2, and H2S values were 36.50 ± 0.46%, 1.90 ± 0.10%, and 141.00 ± 3.61 ppm, respectively. Based on its methane fraction, the calculated volumetric heating value of biogas from the 50:50 treatment was 21.77 MJ/m³, the highest among the investigated ratios. A separate scenario-based energy and economic assessment was also performed by assuming a future application-scale biogas production rate of 1.00 m³/day; this value was not measured from the 5-L laboratory digesters. Under assumptions of an initial investment of 18,000 THB, annual operating and maintenance costs of 1,000 THB, and gross annual energy savings of 4,701.20 THB, the annual net cash flow was 3,701.20 THB and the simple payback period was approximately 4.86 years. These laboratory-scale results indicate that the 50:50 ratio provided a comparatively high methane fraction and volumetric heating value under the conditions tested. Measurements of cumulative biogas production, specific methane yield, process stability, and pilot-scale performance are required before conclusions regarding household- or community-scale applicability can be made.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in this journal are copyrighted by the Faculty of Industrial Technology. Nakhon Si Thammarat Rajabhat University
In addition, research results and academic works published in the journal It is the independent opinion of the author. The author is responsible for any legal consequences that may arise from the published article. The editorial team and the journal's production team, we don't always have to agree.
References
Khalid, A. and et al. 2011. "The anaerobic digestion of solid organic waste," Waste Management, 31(8): pp. 1737-1744. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.03.021
International Energy Agency. 2020. Outlook for Biogas and Biomethane: Prospects for Organic Growth. Paris, France: IEA
Rajendran, K., Aslanzadeh, S. and Taherzadeh, M. J. 2012. "Household biogas digesters—A review," Energies, 5(8): pp. 2911-2942. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3390/en5082911
O’Sullivan, C. A. and et al. 2010. "Anaerobic digestion of harvested aquatic weeds: Water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes), cabomba (Cabomba caroliniana) and salvinia (Salvinia molesta)," Ecological Engineering, 36(10): pp. 1459-1468. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoleng.2010.06.027
Priya, P. and et al. 2018. "Biomethanation of water hyacinth biomass," Bioresource Technology, 255: pp. 288-292. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.01.119
Tasnim, F., Iqbal, S. A. and Chowdhury, A. R. 2017. "Biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of cow manure with kitchen waste and water hyacinth," Renewable Energy, 109: pp. 434-439. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.03.044
Omondi, E. A., Njuru, P. G. and Ndiba, P. K. 2019. "Anaerobic co-digestion of water hyacinth (E. crassipes) with ruminal slaughterhouse waste for biogas production," International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 8(3): pp. 253-259. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.8.3.253-259
Rahman, M. M. and et al. 2014. "Hybrid application of biogas and solar resources to fulfill household energy needs: A potentially viable option in rural areas of developing countries," Renewable Energy, 68: pp. 35-45. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.01.030
Garfí, M. and et al. 2012. "Evaluating benefits of low-cost household digesters for rural Andean communities," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(1): pp. 575-581. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.08.023
Ali, S. S. and et al. 2022. "Exploring the potential of anaerobic co-digestion of water hyacinth and cattle dung for enhanced biomethanation and techno-economic feasibility," Fuel, 329: p. 125397. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125397
Soeprijanto, S. and et al. 2021. "The utilization of water hyacinth for biogas production in a plug flow anaerobic digester," International Journal of Renewable Energy Development, 10(1): pp. 27-35. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.14710/ijred.2021.21843
Lerkmahalikhit, Y. and Sasananan, S. 2021. "Enhancement of biogas production potential of water hyacinth (Eichhornia speciosa Kunth) using integrated solar radiation and co-digestion," Srinakharinwirot University Engineering Journal, 16(2): pp. 1-15. [Online]. Available: https://ph02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/sej/article/view/243494 (in Thai)
Kaewpuang, T. and et al. 2025. "High-rate biogas production from water hyacinth via co-digestion with cattle manure: Kinetic assessment, process stabilization, and energy recovery in an invasive-plant biorefinery," Maejo International Journal of Energy and Environmental Communication, 7(2): pp. 64-74. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.54279/mijeec.v7i2.264510
Damrongsak, D. and Chaichana, C. 2020. "Biogas initiative from municipal solid waste in northern Thailand," Energy Reports, 6(Suppl. 2): pp. 428-433. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2019.11.098
Surendra, K. C. and et al. 2014. "Biogas as a sustainable energy source for developing countries: Opportunities and challenges," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 31: pp. 846-859. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.015
International Renewable Energy Agency. 2020. Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2019. Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates: IRENA
Mata-Alvarez, J. and et al. 2014. "A critical review on anaerobic co-digestion achievements between 2010 and 2013," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 36: pp. 412-427. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.04.039
Weiland, P. 2010. "Biogas production: Current state and perspectives," Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 85(4): pp. 849-860. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-009-2246-7
Angelidaki, I. and et al. 2018. "Biogas upgrading and utilization: Current status and perspectives," Biotechnology Advances, 36(2): pp. 452-466. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2018.01.011
Tufaner, F. and Avşar, Y. 2016. "Effects of co-substrate on biogas production from cattle manure: A review," International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 13(9): pp. 2303-2312. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-016-1069-1
