Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experimental evaluation of biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of cactus cladodes, cow dung, and goat manure

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Anaerobic co-digestion of organic wastes and plant biomass generates an environmentally friendly energy source. Anaerobic co-digestion of cow dung (CD), goat manure (GM), and cactus cladodes (CC) was investigated under mesophilic laboratory conditions. A 14-day-long daily biogas production potential and methane content were evaluated for the three substrates co-digested at different mix ratios. Physicochemical properties showed significant differences between the raw and digested substrates. Biogas production started after the first day of anaerobic digestion for all substrates, with the peak observed near day fourteen. The anaerobic co-digestion of 66.7% GM and 33.3% CC substrate mixture produced the highest biogas yield. The cumulative biogas production study also revealed that the same substrate combination achieved better biogas yield. The anaerobic digestion of CD, GM, and CC showed a significant increase in biogas yield followed by a reduction in volatile and total solid contents. The 100% CC, 33.3% CC + 66.7% CD, 33.3% CC + 66.7% GM, and 33.33% CC + 33.33% CD + 33.33% GM anaerobic digestions achieved biogas with methane content (%) of 56.02, 72.6, 56.65, and 67.95, respectively. The 33.33% CC + 33.33% CD + 33.33% GM anaerobic co-digestion achieved the highest methane content compared to other substrates. The CC + CD + GM and CC + GM mixtures had a C/N ratio ranging from 20 to 30, contributing to better biogas yield with more methane content than substrates deviating from such a ratio. For all substrates, the methane content of the biogas ranged from 50 to 72.6%. The study also revealed that the co-digestion of CC with GM resulted in a better cummulative biogas yield and cumulative methane content.

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
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and materials

Data and materials that support the findings of this study are available in the manuscript but additional data shall be available from the corresponding author upon request.

References

  • Adebayo AO, Jekayinfa SO (2015) Anaerobic digestion of selected animal wastes for biogas production in a fed-batch reactor at mesophilic temperature. J Multidiscip Eng Sci Technol 2:1875–1880

    Google Scholar 

  • APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, twenty, 1st edn. American Public Health Association, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Assefa A, Egigu MC, Kebede A (2014) Thermal and chemical pre-treatments of cow dung and poultry litter enhance biogas production in batch fermentation. Int J Sci Technol Res 3:165–170

    Google Scholar 

  • Belay JB, Ali AY (2018) Study on the biogas energy potential of cactus (Opuntia Ficus-Indica (L.) Mill). Ethiop J Sci Sustain Develop 5:83–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Belay JB, Ali AY (2019) Study on the biogas energy potential of cactus (Opuntia Ficus-Indica (L.) Mill). Ethiop J Sci Sustain Develop 5(2):83–92

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouallagui H, Lahdheb H, Ben RE, Rachdi B, Hamdi M (2009) Improvement of fruit and vegetable waste anaerobic digestion performance and stability with co-substrates addition. J Environ Manage 90:1844–1849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.002

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrò PS, Catalán E, Folino A, Sánchez A, Komilis D (2017) Effect of three pretreatment techniques on the chemical composition and on the methane yields of Opuntia ficus-indica ( prickly pear ) biomass. Waste Manag Res 36:17–29

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chen Y, Cheng JJ, Creamer KS (2008) Inhibition of anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour Technol 99:4044–4064

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Costa JC, Barbosa SG, Alves MM, Sousa DZ (2012) Thermochemical pre- and biological co-treatments to improve hydrolysis and methane production from poultry litter. Bioresour Technol 111:141–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.02.047

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cruz G, Santiago PA, Braz CEM, Seleghim P, Crnkovic PM (2018) Investigation into the physical–chemical properties of chemically pretreated sugarcane bagasse. J Therm Anal Calorim 132:1039–1053

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cucina M, Pezzolla D, Tacconi C, Gigliotti G (2021) Anaerobic co-digestion of a lignocellulosic residue with different organic wastes: relationship between biomethane yield, soluble organic matter and process stability. Biomass Bioenergy 153:106209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106209

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Devlin DC, Esteves SRR, Dinsdale RM, Guwy AJ (2011) The effect of acid pretreatment on the anaerobic digestion and dewatering of waste activated sludge. Bioresour Technol 102:4076–4082. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.12.043

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dioha IJ (2023) Effect of carbon to nitrogen ratio on biogas production

  • El-mashad HM, Zeeman G, Van LWKP (2004) Effect of temperature and temperature fluctuation on thermophilic anaerobic digestion of cattle manure. Bioresour Technol 95:191–201

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Elsayed M, Andres Y, Blel W (2022) Anaerobic co-digestion of linen, sugar beet pulp, and wheat straw with cow manure: effects of mixing ratio and transient change of co-substrate. Biomass Convers Biorefinery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-021-02229-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fulford D (1988) Running a biogas programme: a handbook. Intermediate Technology Publications

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gashaw A (2014) Anaerobic co-digestion of biodegradable municipal solid waste with human excreta for biogas production: a review. Am J Appl Chem 2:55–62

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gashaw A (2016) Co-digestion of municipal organic wastes with night soil and cow dung for biogas production: a review. Afr J Biotechnol 15:32–44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gebrekidan T, Egigu MC, Muthuswamy M (2014) Efficiency of biogas production from cactus fruit peel co-digestion with cow dung. Effic Biogas Prod from Cactus Fruit Peel Co-Digestion with Cow Dung 2:916–923

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerardi H (2003) The microbiology of anaerobic digesters. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • González R, Blanco D, Cascallana JG, Carrillo-Peña D, Gómez X (2021) Anaerobic co-digestion of sheep manure and waste from a potato processing factory: techno-economic analysis. Fermentation 7(4):235. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation7040235

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Hagos K, Zong J, Li D, Liu C, Lu X (2016) Anaerobic co-digestion process for biogas production: progress, challenges and perspectives. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagos K, Zong J, Li D, Liu C, Lu X (2017) Anaerobic co-digestion process for biogas production: progress, challenges and perspectives. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 76:1485–1496

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ibro MK, Ancha VR, Lemma DB (2022) Impacts of anaerobic co-digestion on different influencing parameters: a critical review. Sustainability 14:9387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jigar E, Sulaiman H, Asfaw A, Bairu A (2011) Study on renewable biogas energy production from Cladodes of Opuntia Ficus Indica. J Food Agric Sci 1:44–48

    Google Scholar 

  • Kacprzak A, Krzystek L, Ledakowicz S (2010) Co-digestion of agricultural and industrial wastes. Chem Pap 64:127–131

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kamp LM, Bermúdez Forn E (2016) Ethiopia’s emerging domestic biogas sector: current status, bottlenecks and drivers. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 60:475–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.01.068

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelif M, Venkata I, Ancha R, Beyene D, Markus L (2023) Enhancing biogas production from food waste and water hyacinth: effect of co substrates and inoculum ratios. Biomass Convers Biorefinery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-023-05193-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalid A, Arshad M, Anjum M, Mahmood T, Dawson L (2011) The anaerobic digestion of solid organic waste. Waste Manag 31:1737–1744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.03.021

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kumari K, Suresh S, Arisutha S, Sudhakar K (2018) Anaerobic co-digestion of different wastes in a UASB reactor. Waste Manag 77:545–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.05.007

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Legesse D, Vallet-coulomb C (2003) Hydrological response of a catchment to climate and land use changes in tropical Africa: case study South Central Ethiopia. J Hydrol 275:67–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lin J, Zuo J, Gan L et al (2011) Effects of mixture ratio on anaerobic co-digestion with frussit and vegetable waste and food waste of China. J Environ Sci 23:1403–1408. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(10)60572-4

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Macias-Corral M, Samani Z, Hanson A et al (2008) Anaerobic digestion of municipal solid waste and agricultural waste and the effect of co-digestion with dairy cow manure. Bioresour Technol 99:8288–8293

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mahanta P, Saha UK, Dewan A, Kalita P, Buragohain B (2005) Biogas digester : a discussion on factors affecting biogas production and field investigation of a novel duplex digester. J Solar Energy Soc India 15:1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Malik WA, Javed S (2021) Biochemical characterization of cellulase from bacillus subtilis strain and its effect on digestibility and structural modifications of lignocellulose rich biomass. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 9:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchaim U, Food, of the United Nations AO (1992) Biogas processes for sustainable development [Internet]. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (Biogas Processes for Sustainable Development). Available from: https://books.google.com.et/books?id=rsRRt84yQpgC

  • Mengistu MG, Simane B, Eshete G, Workneh TS (2015) A review on biogas technology and its contributions to sustainable rural livelihood in Ethiopia. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 48:306–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.026

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Menta T (2020) Evaluation of biogas production from the co-digestion of banana fruit peels and poultry manure. J Energy Technol Policy 10:22–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Messerli MA, Amaral-Zettler LA, Zettler E, Jung SK, Smith PJS, Sogin ML (2005) Life at acidic pH imposes an increased energetic cost for a eukaryotic acidophile. J Exp Biol 208:2569–2579

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Moshi AP, Nyandele JP, Ndossi HP, Eva SM, Hosea KM (2015) Feasibility of bioethanol production from tubers of Dioscorea sansibarensis and Pyrenacantha kaurabassana. Bioresour Technol 196:613–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.028

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mukumba P, Makaka G, Mamphweli S (2016) Anaerobic digestion of donkey dung for biogas production. S Afr J Sci 112:1–4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthangya M, Hashim SO, Amana JM, Mshandete AM, Kivaisi AK (2013) Auditing and characterisation of sisal processing waste: a bioresource for value addition. J Agric Biol Sci 8:518–524

    Google Scholar 

  • Myovela H, Mshandete AM, Imathiu S (2019) Enhancement of anaerobic batch digestion of spineless cacti (Opuntia ficus indica) feedstock by aerobic pre-treatment 18:12–22

  • NBPE (2021) NBPE: Programme implementation document draft version. Ethiop Rural Energy Dev Promot Cent 2008:1–118

    Google Scholar 

  • Neshat SA, Mohammadi M, Najafpour GD, Lahijani P (2017) Anaerobic co-digestion of animal manures and lignocellulosic residues as a potent approach for sustainable biogas production. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 79:308–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz-laurel H, Rössel-kipping D (2014) Energía CDPL energy production balance for biogas generation from cac-tus prickly in a staged biorefinery, pp 6–10

  • Prabhu AV, Raja SA, Avinash A, Pugazhendhi A (2020) Parametric optimization of biogas potential in anaerobic co-digestion of biomass wastes. Fuel. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2020.119574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sadaka SS, Engler CR (2003) Effects of initial total solids on composting of raw manure with biogas recovery. Compost Sci Util 11:361–369

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarker S, Lamb JJ, Hjelme DR, Lien KM (2019) A review of the role of critical parameters in the design and operation of biogas production plants. Appl Sci 9:1915

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scarlat N, Dallemand J, Biogas FF (2018) Developments and perspectives in Europe. Renew Energy 129:457–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shah FA, Mahmood Q, Rashid N, Pervez A, Raja IA (2015) Co-digestion, pretreatment and digester design for enhanced methanogenesis. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 42:627–642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Simioni T, Agustini CB, Dettmer A, Gutterres M (2022) Anaerobic co-digestion of tannery wastes and untreated/pretreated oat straw. Bioenergy Res 15:589–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-021-10285-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tesfay AH, Hailu MH, Gebrerufael FA, Adaramola MS (2021) Implementation and status of biogas technology in Ethiopia—case of Tigray Region. Momona Ethiop J Sci 12:257–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wen Z, Frear C, Chen S (2007) Anaerobic digestion of liquid dairy manure using a sequential continuous-stirred tank reactor system. J Chem Technol Biotech 766:758–766

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yadvika S, Sreekrishnan TR, Kohli S, Rana V (2004) Enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates using different techniques—a review. Bioresour Technol 95:1–10

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yang G, Li Y, Zhen F et al (2021) Bioresource technology biochemical methane potential prediction for mixed feedstocks of straw and manure in anaerobic co-digestion. Bioresour Technol 326:124745. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.124745

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang T, Liu L, Song Z et al (2013) Biogas production by co-digestion of goat manure with three crop residues. PLoS ONE 8:1–7

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang T, Mao C, Zhai N, Wang X, Yang G (2015) Influence of initial pH on thermophilic anaerobic co-digestion of swine manure and maize stalk. Waste Manag 35:119–126

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to Jimma University, Research and publication office and Jimma Institute of Technology, Center of Excellence for the financial support to conduct this study.

Funding

A small financial support was received from Jimma Institute of Technology, Center of Excellence and office of Research and publication (Award No.: RPD 350762022) to conduct this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Jimma Institute of Technology, Jimma University, P.O.Box 378, Jimma, Ethiopia

    Mathewos Melore Fetta, Venkata Ramayya Ancha & Fikadu Kifle Fantaye

  2. Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Jimma University, Jimma Institute of Technology, P.O.Box: 378, Jimma, Ethiopia

    Dejene Beyene Lemma

Authors
  1. Mathewos Melore Fetta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Venkata Ramayya Ancha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fikadu Kifle Fantaye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Dejene Beyene Lemma
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study design. Instrumental setup, data collection, and analysis were carried out by MM, FK, and DB. Data analysis and interpretation were carried out by MM, and VR. The manuscript was written by DB, FK. and VR. All authors read and approved the manuscript before submitted to the journal.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dejene Beyene Lemma.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This declaration is not applicable since the study does not involve human and/or animal participants.

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 (e.g. a society or other partner) 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

Fetta, M.M., Ancha, V.R., Fantaye, F.K. et al. Experimental evaluation of biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of cactus cladodes, cow dung, and goat manure. Braz. J. Chem. Eng. (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43153-024-00437-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43153-024-00437-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation