Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.
We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.
To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India:
CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd.
www.cbspd.com
|
customercare@cbspd.com
This chapter demonstrates a biogas renewable energy resource potential study for electric power generation from easily available biogas feedstock materials in four selected case study sites. Under this study, the site used in the model is a rural Kebele in Jama Woreda at 10.548° N, 39.33° E. The common biogas feedstocks considered under this study are animal slurry, human feces and jatropha byproducts whereas the biodiesel is considered from jatropha seed.
Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Wondwosen Wubu
Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
*Address all correspondence to: demsewmitku@gmail.com
1. Introduction
Biogas is a byproduct of biomass which contains methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2) as a main gas component in a 3:2 ratio and it is produced through micro bacterial digestion processes under anaerobic conditions from a variety of organic material from animal, agricultural, industrial and domestic wastes [1]. The biogas production level is depending on the ingredient level in the feedstock. For example; if the material consists of mainly carbohydrates, like glucose and other simple sugars and high-molecular polymers such as cellulose and hemicelluloses, the methane production is low. However, if the fat content is high, the methane production is likewise high (Table 1) [2].
Table 1.
Biogas composition.
Methane and other additional hydrogen compounds make up the combustible part of biogas. Methane is a colorless and odorless gas with a boiling point of −162°C and it burns with a blue flame. At normal temperature and pressure, methane has a density of approximately 0.75 kg/m3. Due to carbon dioxide being somewhat heavier, biogas has a slightly higher density of 1.15–1.25 kg/m3. Pure methane has an upper calorific value of 39.8 MJ/m3 (11.06 kWh/m3) (Table 2) [2].
Substrate
HRT (days)
Solid concentration (%)
Temperature (°C)
Biogas yield (m3/kg VS)
Methane (%)
Sewage sludge
25
6
35
0.52
68
Domestic garbage
30
5
35
0.47
—
Piggery waste
20
6.5
35
0.43
69
Poultry waste
15
6
35
0.5
69
Cattle waste
30
10
35
0.3
58
Canteen waste
20
10
30
0.6
50
Food-market waste
20
4
35
0.75
62
Mango processing waste
20
10
35
0.45
52
Tomato-processing waste
24
4.5
35
0.63
65
Lemon waste
30
4
37
0.72
53
Citrus waste
32
4
37
0.63
62
Banana peel
25
10
37
0.60
55
Pineapple waste
30
4
37
0.37
60
Mixed feed of fruit waste
20
4
37
0.62
50
Table 2.
Potential biogas production from various biomass feedstocks on VS based.
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is a biochemical process during which complex organic matter is decomposed in absence of oxygen, by various types of anaerobic microorganisms. The result of the AD process is the biogas and the digestate. Biogas is a combustible gas, consisting primarily of methane and carbon dioxide. Digestate is the decomposed substrate, resulted from the production of biogas. If the substrate for AD is a homogenous mixture of two or more feedstock types (e.g., animal slurries and organic wastes from food industries), the process is called “co-digestion” and is common to most biogas applications today.
The process of biogas formation is a result of linked process steps, in which the initial material is continuously broken down into smaller units. Specific groups of micro-organisms are involved in each individual step. The simplified diagram of the AD process, shown in Figure 1, highlights the four main process steps: hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis. The process steps quoted in Figure 1 run parallel in time and space, in the digester tank. During hydrolysis, relatively small amounts of biogas are produced. Biogas production reaches its peak during methanogenesis [3].
Figure 1.
Biogas production process by anaerobic digestion.
Methanogenesis is a critical step in the entire anaerobic digestion process, as it is the slowest biochemical reaction of the process. Methanogenesis is severely influenced by operation conditions. Composition of feedstock, feeding rate, temperature, water content, NH3 concentration and pH are examples of factors influencing the methanogenesis process.
Temperature for fermentation will greatly affect biogas production. The AD process can take place at different temperatures, divided into three temperature ranges: psychrophilic (below 20°C), mesophilic (30–42°C), and thermophilic (43–55°C). There is a direct relation between the process temperature and the HRT. The biogas production rate increases with increase the process temperature (Table 3).
Thermal stage
Process Temperature
Minimum HRT
Psychrophilic
< 20° C
70–80 days
Mesophilic
30–42° C
30–40 days
Thermophilic
43–55° C
15–20 days
Table 3.
Biogas production thermal stage and their corresponding retention time [4].
In practice most modern biogas plants operate at thermophilic process temperatures because this process provides many advantages, compared to mesophilic and psychrophilic processes:
Effective destruction of pathogens
Fast grow rate of methanogenic bacteria at higher temperature
Minimization of biogas production period, making the process faster and more efficient
Improve digestibility and availability of substrates
better decomposition and utilization of solid substrates
Increase the chance to separate liquid and solid fractions
The metabolic processes in the production of biogas from different biomass feedstocks are hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis and methanogenesis and their byproducts in the process is represented in the figure below.
In this study thermophilic biogas temperature process is chosen in order to get higher biogas output and to achieve this target flat plate collector can be used to maintain digester process temperature at 55oc.
A biogas plant is a complex installation, consisting of a variety of elements. The layout of such a plant depends to a large extent on the types and amounts of feedstock supplied. Now there are several main types of biogas plants all over the world. Each time it is necessary to find the most suitable type in different case. Public acceptance, cost and energy efficiency are the main criteria to install biogas plant and efficiently utilize the biogas production. In smaller areas with scarcity of biogas feedstock or slurry to use low cost clay, concert or stone masonry made biogas digester.
Installation and operation of a biogas plant is a combination of environmental, safety, economic and technical considerations. Acquiring maximum methane output, by complete digestion of feedstock substrate, would require a long fermentation or digestion time of the material inside the biogas digester and a correspondingly large digester size. The ultimate goal of biogas production is getting the highest possible methane output and having justifiable plant economy. Biogas plants have the following main components and operate with four different process stages [3].
Process stages of biogas production:
Transport, delivery, storage and pre-treatment of feedstocks
Biogas production
Storage of digestate, conditioning and utilization
Storage of biogas, conditioning and utilization.
Main components of biogas plant:
Feedstock pre-storage tank
Substrate mixing Tank
Biogas digester
Post storage tank
Gas holder tank and
CHP system
The amount and type of available feedstock can determine the size, type and design structure of the biogas plant. The amount of biogas feedstock could determine the dimensioning of the digester size, storage capacities and CHP unit (Figure 2).
Figure 2.
Main components and general process flow of biogas production.
The CHP system utilizes the biogas either in heat or electrical energy. The properties of the combustible methane gas (like as shown in Table 4) will affect the operation of the CHP equipment. The combustion nature of the gas must be guaranteed, to prevent damage to the engines. Further treatment and enhancing chemical and physical properties of biogas even possible to use it for other utilizations like as vehicle fuel or in fuel cells application.
No.
Parameter
Symbol
Value
1.
Lower heat value
LHV
≥4 kWh/m3
2.
Sulfur content
S
≤2.2 g/m3 CH4
3.
Hydrogen sulfide
H2S
≤0.15 Vol. %
4.
Chlorine content
Cl
≤100 mg/m3 CH4
5.
Fluoride content
F
≤50 mg/m3 CH4
6.
Dust (3–10 μm)
—
≤10 mg/m3 CH4
7.
Relative humidity
ϕ
<90%
8.
Flow pressure
Pgas
20–100 mbar
9.
Gas pressure fluctuation
—
<±10% of set value
10.
Gas temperature
T
10–50oc
11.
Hydro carbon
HC
<0.4 mg/m3 CH4
12.
Silicon
Si
<10 mg/CH4
Table 4.
Biogas minimum requirement used in an electric engine [3].
The design of the biogas plant includes the design of:
The digester
The gas Holder
Digester heat maintaining system
Siting of biogas plant
To calculate the scale of a biogas plant, certain characteristic parameters are used. These are:
Daily fermentation slurry feeding (Sd), which is an equal mixture of biogas feedstock (animal dung, human feces, poultry waste and jatropha byproduct) with water feed in to the biogas digester.
Retention time (RT), the time by which the fermentation slurry stays in the digester. It is about 2–5 weeks.
Digester loading (R). This parameter indicates the amount of biogas feedstock material per day is fed to the digester or to be digested. It can be measured in kg/m3/day.
Specific gas production per day (Gd), which depends on the retention time, the digestion temperature and the feed material.
4.1. Sizing of biogas digester and gasholder
The size of the digester—the digester volume (VD)—is determined by the length of the retention time (RT) and by the amount of fermentation slurry supplied daily (SD). The amount of fermentation slurry consists of the feed material considered in this study (e.g., cattle dung) and the mixing water.
4.1.1. Sizing of site-A biogas digester and gasholder
Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential from cow dung, oxen dung, donkey, mule, and horse waste, chicken waste, human feces and jatropha byproduct in this study in tons/day is 10.867 = 10,867 kg/day = 15.53 m3/day. Since the average density of animal slurry mix is 700 kg/m3.
Additional 15.53 m3/day water is required for proper digestion of biogas feedstock material to enhance biogas production.
HRT = 20 day, under thermophilic digestion temperature (55°C) the hydraulic retention time of the digestion process becomes short.
The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD.
= 20 day × (15.53 × 2 m3/day) = 621 m3.
Therefore the size of the digester for site A could be 621 m3.
Where, VD = the size of the digester, HRT = hydraulic retention time, and SD is the amount of fermentation slurry (water + feedstock) feed in to the digester per day. Biogas yield in m3/kg of fresh biogas feedstock mix is 1736.4 m3/31850 kg = 0.054 m3/kg; the biogas production rate is 10,867 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 588 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production.
4.1.2. Sizing of site-B biogas digester and gasholder
Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential from cow dung, oxen dung, donkey, mule, and horse waste, chicken waste, human feces and jatropha byproduct of Site-B in tons/day is 9.253 = 9253 kg/day = 13.22 m3/day. Since the average density of animal slurry mix is 700 kg/m3.
Additional 13.22 m3/day water is required for proper digestion process of biogas feedstock material to enhance biogas production.
HRT = 20 day, under thermophilic digestion temperature the hydraulic retention time of the digestion process becomes short.
The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD.
= 20 day × (13.22 × 2 m3/day) = 529 m3. Therefore the size of the digester for site-B is 529 m3. The biogas gas production rate is 9253 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 501 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production.
4.1.3. Sizing of site-C biogas digester and gasholder
Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential from cattle dung, donkey, mule, and horse waste, chicken waste, human feces and jatropha byproduct of site-C in tons/day is 8.82 = 8820 kg/day = 12.6 m3/day, Since the average density of animal slurry mix is 700 kg/m3.
Additional 12.6 m3/day water is required for proper digestion of biogas feedstock material to enhance biogas production.
The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD, HRT = 20 day.
= 20 day × (12.6 × 2 m3/day) = 504 m3.
Therefore the size of the digester for site-C is 504 m3.
The gas production rate is 8820 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 477 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production also.
4.1.4. Sizing of site-D biogas digester and gasholder
Daily average collectable biogas feedstock potential of Site-D in tons/day is 3.091 = 3091 kg/day = 4.42 m3/day, since the average density of animal slurry mix is taken as 700 kg/m3. Additional 4.42 m3/day water is required.
The volume of digester should be, VD = HRT × SD, HRT = 20 day.
= 20 day × (4.42 × 2 m3/day) = 179 m3.
Therefore the size of the digester for site-D is 179 m3.
The gas production rate is 3091 kg/day × 0.054 m3/kg = 168 m3/day. Therefore the size of gasholder should account this daily biogas production.
4.2. Location of biogas plant
The next planning step in a biogas plant project idea is to find a suitable site for the establishment of the plant. The list below shows some important considerations to be made, before choosing the location of the plant: [3].
The site should be located at suitable distance from residential areas in order to avoid inconveniences, nuisance and thereby conflicts related to odors and increased traffic to and from the biogas plant.
The direction of the dominating winds must be considered in order to avoid wind born odors reaching residential areas.
The site should have easy access to infrastructure such as to the electricity grid, in order to facilitate the sale of electricity and to the transport roads in order to facilitate transport of feedstock and digestate.
The soil of the site should be investigated before starting the construction.
The chosen site should not be located in a potential flood affected area.
The size of the site must be suitable for the activities performed and for the amount of biomass supplied.
The site should be located relatively close (central) to the agricultural feedstock production (manure, slurry, energy crops) aiming to minimize distances, time and costs of feedstock transportation.
For cost efficiency reasons, the biogas plant should be located as close as possible to potential users of the produced heat and electricity.
The required site space for a biogas plant cannot be estimated in a simple way. Experience shows that for example a biogas plant of 500 kWel needs an area of approximate 8000 m2. This figure can be used as a guiding value only, as the actual area also depends on the chosen technology [3]. Based on the above criteria of site selection of biogas plant, the location of the biogas plant for each site of the study area is chosen and the detail of it is found in the economic analysis section of the biogas plant in this paper.
Various literatures show that methane yield of jatropha fruit hull is 0.438 m3/kg VS, and the VS is 76% of the TS of the jatropha fruit hull. Methane is 50% of the total biogas yield (1.153 m3/kg). The biogas yield of Jatropha seed presscake is approximately 1 m3/kg of presscake. The biogas yield of jatropha fruit hull is better than the seedcake [5]. Based on the jatropha fact sheet given in Table 5, the biomass, biogas and methane yield potential of the jatropha byproduct is estimated in Tables 6,7 and 8.
Parameter
Unit
Minimum
Average
Maximum
Source
Seed yield
dry ton/hectare/year
0.3
3.15
6
Position Paper on Jatropha Large Scale Project Development, FACT 2007
Fruit hull yield
dry ton/hectare/year
0.2
2.1
4
Rainfall requirements for seed production
mm/year
600
1000
1500
Position Paper on Jatropha Large Scale Project Development, FACT 2007
Oil content of seeds
% of mass
_
34%
40%
Jatropha bio-diesel production and use, W. Achten et al., 2008
Oil yield after pressing
% of mass of seed input
20%
25%
30%
Jatropha handbook, 2010
Presscake yield after pressing
% of mass of seed input
70
75
80
Energy content of Seed
MJ/kg
—
37
—
Table 5.
Jatropha fact sheet.
Biogas feedstock
Jatropha biomass, tons/year
Average jatropha biomass, tons/year
Biogas yield, m3/kg
Methane yield, m3/kg
Total biogas yield, m3
Average biogas yield, m3/year
Average methane yield, m3/year
Presscake
4.2–96
50.1
1
0.5–0.6
4200–96,000
50,100
25,050-30,060
Fruit hull
4–80
42
1.153
0.576–0.69
4612–92,240
48,426
27,894–33,414
Total
8.2–176
92.1
1.07
0.575–0.689
8812–188,240
98,526
52,944–63,474
Table 6.
Jatropha byproduct biomass potential in the study area.
Jatropha biomass (from presscake) = seed yield (ton/hectare) × % of presscake yield during oil production * total land for Jatropha farming (hectare)
Jatropha biomass (from fruit hull) = hull yield (ton/hectare) × total land for Jatropha farming (hectare).
Profile
Jatropha biomass, tons
Biogas yield, m3/kg
Biogas yield, m3
Methane yield, m3/kg
Methane yield, m3
Yearly average
92.1
1.07
98,526
0.575–0.689
52,944–63,474
Daily average
0.253
1.07
270
0.575–0.689
145–174
Table 7.
Jatropha biogas potential of the study area.
Jatropha product
Jatropha oil (liter/year)
Jatropha biogas (m3/year)
Jatropha fertilizer (kg/year)
Jatropha biomass (ton/year)
Product yield
16,090–18,774
98,526
18,420
92.1
Table 8.
Summary of Jatropha potential of the study area.
5.2. Biogas energy potential of the study area from animal dung
A wide range of biomass types can be used as substrates (feedstock) for the production of biogas from AD. The most common biomass categories used in biogas production are listed in Table 9 for this thesis work. To produce biogas from animal manure first we have to check whether we have animal livestock potential sufficient for biogas feedstock production or not. The following Table demonstrates the animal livestock potential for each sites of the study area.
Source: Jama Woreda rural development and Kebele-8 administration office, Nov 2012.
The average fresh manure obtained from, cattle is 4.5 kg/day/head [1, 6, 7], donkey, horse and mule is 10 kg/day/head [6, 7], sheep and goat 1 kg/day/head [6, 7], and chicken is 0.08 kg/day/head [6, 7]. The average biogas yield of cattle, horse, mule, and donkey manure is 0.24 m3/kg DM [2, 3, 8] and pigs, sheep and goat is 0.37 m3/kg DM whereas chicken is 0.4 m3/kg of DM [2, 3, 8]. The dry matter content from the total mass of fresh animal manure and the proportion of methane from the total biogas production is summarized in Table 10 [2, 3, 9] (Table 11).
Biomass source
Average fresh manure, kg/day/head
m3 biogas/kg DM
DM % fresh manure
Methane % biogas
Cattle
4.5
0.24
16.7
65
Pigs
2
0.37
4.4
65
Sheep, goats
1
0.37
30.7
65
Chickens
0.08
0.40
30.7
65
Horse, mule
10
0.24
7
65
Donkey
10
0.24
15
65
Table 10.
Summary of fresh manure, biogas and methane yield of animal livestock.
Total fresh manure potential of the study area (tons/day) = Average fresh manure (kg/day/head) × Total no. of livestock in study area.
Total dry mater (DM) from fresh manure = DM % of fresh manure × Total fresh manure potential of the study area (tons/day).
Total biogas production, m3/day = Biogas m3/kg of DM × Total dry mater (DM) from fresh manure in kg/day.
Total electricity production in kWh/day = electricity production by biogas generator from 1 m3 biogas in kWh × total biogas production in m3/day.
By using biogas generator it is possible to generate 1kWh electricity from 0.7 m3 biogas [42].
Animal livestock
Ave. fresh manure, kg/day/head
Total no. of livestock in study area
Total fresh manure (ton/day)
Total DM (kg/day)
Biogas, m3/kg of DM
Total biogas, m3/day
Electricity production, kWh/day
Cows
4.5
1935
8.708
1455
0.24
350
500
Oxen
4.5
2092
9.414
1573
0.24
378
540
Goats
1
476
0.476
147
0.37
55
79
Sheep
1
5350
5.350
1643
0.37
608
869
Mule
10
29
0.290
24
0.24
6
9
Chicken
0.08
6810
0.545
168
0.40
68
98
Pigs
2
0
0.000
0.00
0.37
0.0
0.0
Horse
10
133
1.330
92
0.24
22
32
Donkey
10
1007
10.070
1511
0.24
363
519
Total animal manure biomass
36.183
6613
0.28
1850
2646
Table 11.
Summary of expected animal manure potential of the study area.
For a given size of plant (rated gas production capacity per day) the amount of feedstock required can be estimated using the biogas yield data provided. The specific biogas consumption in biogas engines is 0.6–0.8 m3/kWh [1]. This specific fuel consumption value can be used to calculate the requirement for biogas for power generation purposes. The expected biomass potential from animal manure of the case study area is 36.2 tons/day and its biogas production capacity is 1850 m3/day. Various literatures show that the collection efficiency of animal manure varies from country to country and region to region.
Most significantly the collection efficiency varies from 50 to 100% [10]. Let as consider collection efficiency of 90% for cattle, donkey, mule, horse, pig and chicken manure, 50% for goat and sheep manure and 100% for human feces based on their difficulty of collecting it. Therefore the biomass potential available for biogas generation is estimated as follows.
The total collectable fresh animal manure biomass potential of the study area is estimated to be 30.235 tons/day and its biogas production capacity is 1398.3 m3/day (Table 12).
Animal livestock
Ave. fresh manure, kg/day/head
Total no. of livestock in study area
Total collectable fresh manure, tons/day
Total collectable DM, kg/day
Biogas, m3/kg of DM
Total biogas, m3/day
Electricity production, kWh/day
Cows
4.5
1935
7.837
1309.5
0.24
315
450
Oxen
4.5
2092
8.473
1415.7
0.24
340
486
Goats
1
476
0.238
73.5
0.37
27.3
39
Sheep
1
5350
2.675
821.5
0.37
304
434.3
Mule
10
29
0.261
21.6
0.24
5.2
7.43
Chicken
0.08
6810
0.491
151.2
0.40
60.5
86.43
Pigs
2
0
0.000
0.00
0.37
0.0
0.0
Horse
10
133
1.197
82.8
0.24
19.9
28.43
Donkey
10
1007
9.063
1360
0.24
326.4
466.3
Total animal manure Biomass
30.235
5235.8
0.27
1398.3
1998
Table 12.
Summary of collectable animal manure potential of the study area.
5.3. Biogas potential of the study area from human feces
Human feces are another feedstock for biogas production in the study area and the potential biogas production from human feces is discussed in this section. Feces are mostly made of water (about 75%). The rest is made of dead bacteria that helped us digest our food, living bacteria, protein, undigested food residue (known as fiber), waste material from food, cellular linings, fats, salts, and substances released from the intestines (such as mucus) and the liver (Table 13).
Population
Site-A
Site-B
Site-C
Site-D
Total
Number of household
390
332
313
100
1135
Average Family per household
4.39 (5)
4.39 (5)
4.39 (5)
4.39 (5)
4.39 (5)
Total population
1950
1660
1565
500
5675
Table 13.
Jama Woreda, Kebele-8 districts population data.
One person produces on average 100–140 g of feces per day, the dry matter content of which is about 25% and its biogas yield of about 0.2 m3/kg DM [11]. The total collectable fresh manure biomass potential of the case study area from humans is estimated to be 0.681 tons/day and its biogas production capacity is 34.05 m3/day. This figure accounts the collection efficiency of human excreta. Table 14 demonstrates the biogas potential of the study area from human feces.
Live stock
Ave. fresh manure, kg/day/head
Total no. of population
Total fresh manure potential (ton/day)
Total DM (kg/day)
Biogas, m3/kg DM
Total biogas, m3/day
Electricity production, kWh/day
Human
0.12
5675
0.681
170.25
0.2
34.05
48.7
Table 14.
Biogas potential of study area from human feces.
5.4. Total biogas potential of the study area
The total biogas potential from Jatropha byproduct, Animal waste and human feces discussed above can be summarized in this section.
Takingthe density of biogas 1.15 kg/m3 and calculating the gasification ratio (the mass of biogas produced per unit mass of feed stock consumed) of the biogas system. From Table 15 the mass of biogas feedstock consumed is 31,850 kg/day and the gas produced is 1736.4 m3/day. Therefore the gasification ratio of biogas feedstock mix is 1736.4 m3/31850 kg = 0.0545 m3/kg = 0.0626 kg/kg.
As we have seen from Table 15, animal manure is the major biogas feedstock constitutes which accounts 97% from the total biogas feedstock potential whereas jatropha byproducts and human excreta constitute 1 and 2% of the total biogas feedstock potential of the study area respectively. However, the share of biogas production from, animal manure is 82%, and human excreta is 2% but biogas production from jatropha byproduct is increase to 16% regardless of its low contribution to the biomass potential since the biogas yield of jatropha byproduct is high as compared to both animal and human manure and this can be summarized in Figure 3 given below.
Animal Livestock
Ave. fresh manure, kg/day/head
Total no. of live stock
Total collectable fresh manure (ton/day)
Total collectable DM (kg/day)
Biogas, m3/kg DM
Total biogas production, m3/day
Electricity yield, kWh/day
Cows
4.5
1935
7.837
1309.5
0.24
315
450
Oxen
4.5
2092
8.473
1415.7
0.24
340
486
Goats
1
476
0.238
73.5
0.37
27.3
39
Sheep
1
5350
2.675
821.5
0.37
304
434.3
Mule
10
29
0.261
21.6
0.24
5.2
7.43
Chicken
0.08
6810
0.491
151.2
0.40
60.5
86.43
Pigs
2
0
0.000
0.00
0.37
0.0
0.0
Horse
10
133
1.197
82.8
0.24
19.9
28.43
Donkey
10
1007
9.063
1360
0.24
326.4
466.3
Human
0.12
5675
0.681
170.25
0.2
34.05
48.7
Jatropha byproduct biomass
0.253
253
1.07
270
386
Total
31.85
5829.3
0.3
1736.4
2481.4
Table 15.
The total biogas and collectable feedstock potential of the study area.
Figure 3.
Biogas feedstock contributions for biogas production in the study area.
5.5. Monthly variation of the biogas feed stock potential
The variation of jatropha byproduct feedstocks is assumed to be constant throughout the year and the potential biomass obtained from it was divided to each site regardless of the total house hold in each of the study area.
However, the biomass obtained from animal is highly depending on the availability and type of the animal feeding material. The animal feeding materials are varying in type and amount from month to month in the study area. In June and July there is enough root grass in addition to the usual animal food, let as consider this value as the annual average in ton/day (the data obtained by multiplying the biomass obtained per animal live stock in ton/day with the total number of animal live stock for each animal group in the district), as a reference frame. In January, February, and December there is excess dry agricultural farm grass for the animal food in the study area and assuming a 5% biomass resource increment is expected from the reference. March and April is a dry season and there is no enough food for the animal so considering a 5% biomass resource decrement from the reference. May, extremely drought month and August, animal grazing area are not permitted for animal food assuming a 10% animal based biomass resource drop is expected. From September to November there is excess animal food and a 10% biomass growth is assumed. Also assuming chicken manure and human feces are constant throughout the year. Taking in to account the assumption listed above the biogas feedstock potential month to month variation is presented in Tables 16–19.
The renewable energy potential of the site is estimated based on the primary data collected directly from the study area and secondary data obtained from various sources. The biogas feedstock mix potential of the study area is found to be 10.9 tons/day, 9.25 tons/day, 8.81 tons/day and 3.09 tons/day for Site-A, Site-B, Site-C and Site-D respectively with a gasification ratio of 0.0626 kg/kg. The study result shows that there is a sufficient biogas feedstock potential for all districts of the study area and the feasibility simulation result demonstrates there is an excess biogas after running a biogas generator in a hybrid system. The excess biogas left unused from a hybrid electric generating unit would go to biogas cooking application for the community cooking loads. Also, the biodiesel potential of the study area from Jatropha is estimated to be 18.5 m3/year.
References
1.Hadagu A. Status and Trends of Ethiopian Rural Electrification Fund; 2006. http://www.bgr.de/geotherm/ArGeoC1/pdf/07%20A.%20Hadgu%20status%20of%20Ethiopian%20Electrification%20fund.pdf
2.Maithel S. Biomass Energy Resource Assessment Handbook—prepared for Asian and Pacific Centre for Transfer of Technology of the United Nations – Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP); September 2009. https://en.calameo.com/read/001424067e8c637721c50
3.Jørgensen PJ. Plan Energi and researcher for a day. In: Biogas – green energy. 2nd ed. Digisource Denmark: Faculty of Agricultural Sciences, Aarhus University; 2009. http://lemvigbiogas.com
4.Al Seadi T, Rutz D, Prassl H, Köttner M, Finsterwalder T, Volk S, Janssen R. Biogas Handbook. Niels Bohrs Vej 9-10, DK-6700 Esbjerg, Denmark: University of Southern Denmark Esbjerg; 2008
5.www.fact-foundation.com
6.Janske van E, André F. Global experience with jatropha cultivation for bioenergy: An assessment of socio-economic and environmental aspects. Heidelberglaan, The Netherlands: Copernicus Institute, Utrecht University, The Netherlands Eindhoven University of Technology
8.Jongschaap REE et al. Claims and Facts on Jatropha curcas L., Global Jatropha curcas Evaluation, Breeding and Propagation Programme. Wageningen UR: Plant Research International; 2007
9.Demirbas A. Conversion of biomass using glycerine to liquid fuel for blending gasoline as alternative engine fuel. Energy Conversion and Management. 2000;41:1741-1748
10.Nicholson FA, Chambers BJ, Williamsb JR, Unwin RJ. Heavy Metal Contents of Livestock Feeds and Animal Manures in England and Wales. Meden Vale, Mans®eld, Nottinghamshire, NG20 9PF, UK: ADAS Gleadthorpe Research Centre; 1999
11.Milbrandt A. Assessment of Biomass Resources in Liberia Prepared for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) under the Liberia Energy Assistance Program (LEAP). Technical Report, NREL/TP-6A2-44808; April 2009. http://www.osti.gov/bridge
Open access peer-reviewed chapter
