External resources

Indexed in

last date 30th March 2024

CALL FOR BOOK CHAPTER

Publication charges: 1550 per author

Turnitin report:  300 Rs

Hard copy of Book Price: 3500/-

Plagiarism report: 15% acceptable.

Format of book chapter click here

GPay, phone pay paytm @8556092620

account detail


Aims and Scope:

In recent years, algae, including microalgae, macroalgae, and cyanobacteria, as well as microbial enzymes, have garnered significant attention in the field of biotechnology. These photosynthetic organisms offer numerous advantages, ranging from sustainable biomass production to bioremediation, biofuel production, and the creation of high-value biomaterials. This special issue aims to explore the latest advancements in the application of cyanobacteria, microalgae, and macroalgae, with a specific focus on crucial topics such as algae cultivation, strain development and improvement, synthetic biology, stress tolerance, disease management, biomass utilization, and waste treatment.

We invite original research articles and reviews that contribute to the understanding and utilization of cyanobacteria, microalgae, and macroalgae in various biotechnological applications.

The scope of this issue includes, but is not limited to:

  1. Entrepreneurship opportunity for biogas and biofuel sector.
  2. Application of different bio-waste in biofuel production. BOOKED S M BHATT
  3. Biofuel- An Overview- Types, Process (Booked)
  4. Genetically modified strains of lignocellulosic biomass for ethanol production. BOOKED DR DEEPALI
  5. Corn starch for the production of bioethanol.
  6. Biodiesel production using algal biomass.
  7. Biodiesel production using vegetable / algal oil.
  8. Legal perspective and licensing required in the production of biofuels.
  9. The metabolic pathway involved in cellulosic biofuel production.
  10. Innovation in Gobar gas plant technology for dairy.
  11. Electricity production using biogas.
  12. Biofuel demand and global supply using different bio-waste.
  13. Hydrogen gas production technology for biofuel production.
  14. Application of Nano cellulase for production of biofuel.
  15. Application of molasses for biofuel production.
  16. Biogas production in Indian Scenario. booked DR VENNET
  17. Liquid biofuels and their production technology.
  18. Strain selection, development, and genetic engineering of cyanobacteria and algae for biofuel production.
  19. Strain selection, development, and genetic engineering of fungal/microbial cells for high cellulosic production.
  20. Jet biofuel production technology.
  21. Bio briquette production technology using lignocellulosic biomass.
  22. Scope of isobutanol production for biofuel technology.
  23. Small-scale to Pilot-scale production of bioethanol.
  24. Use of lingo-cellulosic biomass for ethanol production. Processing to production.
  25. Biogas/autogas production technology.
  26. Use of kitchen waste for Biogas production.
  27. Production technology of CNG.
  28. Bio-processing and scale-up technology in Biofuel production
  29. Genetically modified thermophilic strain for biofuel productions.
  30. Valorization of algal biomass for biofuels, high-value compounds, and pharmaceuticals.
  31. Waste treatment and resource recovery as biofuel using cyanobacteria, microalgae, and macroalgae.
  32. Application of microalgae in biofuel production.
  33. Algal biomass production technology and their role in sustainable biofuel production.
  34. Life cycle assessment and techno-economic analysis of algal biotechnological processes.
  35. Microbial bioprocessing for biofuel production.
  36. Microalgae for Sustainable Biofuel Production: Harnessing the Potential of Microalgae (booked)
  37. Biological-based bioplastics and biomaterials production.
  38. Algae cultivation techniques and optimization for improved biomass production for biofuel production.

Schedule:

Submission starts: MARCH 30, 2024 (Title). mail id editor@jabaas.com, drsmbhatt@gmail.com

CHAPTER 1 PUBLISHED for book

ISBN 978-93-6039-472-1

BIOGAS PRODUCTION IN INDIAN SCENARIO

         BIOGAS PRODUCTION IN INDIAN SCENARIO

                              Laxman navi1, Vineeth M2, Karthik A N3, Harish M C4

1*PhD scholar, Dept. of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru.

2* PhD scholar, Dept. of Plant Pathology, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru

3*Ph.D. Scholar, Dept. of Agronomy, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru

4* Senior Research Fellow, AICRP for Dryland Agriculture, University of Agricultural Sciences, GKVK, Bengaluru

*Corresponding author e-mail: jeerlavineeth@gmail.com

Abstract

       Cheap, clean, renewable, naturally occurring, and underutilized as an energy source is biogas. It ignites between 650°C and 750°C in temperature range and weights 20 per cent less than air. It burns as a colorless, odorless gas with a blue glow. It typically burns with 60 per cent efficiency in a regular biogas burner and has a caloric value of 20 MJ/m3. India’s vast population means that it has a high energy requirement. Even though India produces less energy than is needed, up to now, forest resources have been used to meet this demand. Furthermore, this demand is increasing at a 4.6 per cent annual rate due to the worldwide shortage of fossil fuel supplies. Biomass seems to be the most viable energy source, despite government exploration of energy production and sources, energy supply security, and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission reduction. To begin with, biomass is a sustainable energy source. Secondly, using anaerobic digestion to convert biomass to bioenergy, such as biogas.

Keywords- Biogas, Methane, Anaerobic digestion, Hydrolysis

Introduction

      The process of anaerobic digestion produces biogas. Reducing the quantity of waste products by turning biodegradable trash into usable fuel is crucial. Additionally, anaerobic digestion helps eliminate microorganisms that cause sickness. Microorganisms break down organic materials in anaerobic digestion when there is no oxygen present, the substance is sealed, and the temperature, pH, and moisture content are all controlled.

History of Biogas in India

1859– First digestion plant was built at leper colony in Bombay, India

1897-Biogas used for lighting at Matunga leper asylum, Bombay.

1946-The first biogas plant designed IARI, Delhi.

1952-Development of the floating dome model, Grama  Laxmi- III by Jashbai Patel.

1962-KVIC’s entry into the field of biogas technology

1977-Development of Janata Model Biogas Plant

1981– Development of National  Project on Biogas Development

2008– Incorporation of BDTC at IIT-Delhi

2009– Bio-CNG production/ utilization-Demonstration of  integrated Technology Package on Biogas- Fertilization Plants (BGFP)

2013 – Bio-CNG production/ utilization forms part of ‘Programme on Energy from Urban, Industrial and Agricultural Wastes/ Residues’

2013/2016– BIS Standard for Biogas Composition/further modification

2017 – Sustainable Alternative Towards Affordable Transportation (SATAT) launched for Bio-CNG/ CBG purchase and dispensation as auto fuel

The biological process that converts organic carbon to CO2 and methane (CH4) involves several steps: acidogenesis, acetogenesis, hydrolysis, and methanogenesis.

Fig. 1. Scheme of anaerobic digestion

Steps involved in biogas production

Hydrolysis

The initial step of hydrolysis involves the breakdown of long chains of complex carbohydrates, proteins, and lipids into shorter forms such as sugars, amino acids, and fatty acids, respectively. This process is relatively slow and has the potential to constrain the overall rate of anaerobic digestion.

C6H10O4+2H2O→C6H12O6+H2[4]

Acidogenesis

In this step, the products of hydrolysis serve as substrates that are subsequently converted into higher organic acids such as propionic acid and butyric acid, which are further metabolized into acetic acid by acidogenic bacteria.

C6H12O6→ 2CH3CH2OH + 2CO2

C6H12O6 + 2H2↔ 2CH3CH2COOH + 2H2O [4]

C6H12O6→ 3CH3COOH

Acetogenesis

The acetogenic bacteria then transform the higher organic acids into acetic acid and hydrogen gas as part of the process.

CH3CH2COO− + 3H2O ↔ CH3COO− + H+ + HCO3− + 3H2

C6H12O6 + 2H2O ↔ 2CH3COOH + 2CO2 + 4H2[4]

CH3CH2OH + 2H2O ↔CH3COO− + 3H2 +H+

Methanogenesis

In the final step, methanogenic bacteria metabolize acids, alcohols, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and hydrogen to produce methane. These bacteria are highly sensitive to their environment, functioning exclusively under strict anaerobic conditions (Lettinga et al. 1980).

CH3COOH → CH4+ CO2

CO2+ 4H2→ CH4 + 2H2O [4]

2CH3CH2OH + CO2→ CH4 + 2CH3COOH

BENEFITS OF BIOGAS ENERGY PRODUCTION—POTENTIAL IN INDIA

      In India, the usage of chemically manufactured fertilizers and fossil fuels is expected to be surpassed by biogas. For instance, 7.3 million tonnes of LPG and 22.7 billion m3 of natural gas (not including natural gas from liquefied petroleum gas, shrinkage, and LPG) were used in 2001–2002. In terms of heat energy, the annual amount is 1.08 × 1012 MJ, which is less than the 1.3 × 1012 MJ potential heat value that may be obtained from the biogas produced annually from animal excrement (Sevilla-Espinosa et al. 2010, Shastry et al. 2010).

     The technology utilized in the production of biogas is more adaptable and valuable in an agro-ecosystem. The biogas can also be used as a fuel in place of firewood, agricultural waste, electricity, and other resources, depending on the kind of activity, availability, and other factors. It therefore supplies energy for lighting and cooking. Following anaerobic digestion, biogas facilities also produce leftover organic waste, which is more nutrient-dense than cattle excrement and typical organic fertilizers since it contains ammonia.

Mix of installed electrical capacity in India

    Source: Central statistical office as on 31st July, 2019

                         Table.1 Replacement values for different fuels by 1m3 of biogas

Types of biogas plants in India

The types of biogas plants commonly used in developing countries are as follows:

(i) Bag digester plant

(ii) Fixed dome digester plant

(iii) Floating drum digester plant

(iv) Vacvina biogas plant

  • Bag digester plant

The bag digester plant, also known as a balloon plant, was first constructed in Taiwan in 1960. Typically, it consists of a plastic or rubber digester bag designed to be UV resistant, often made from materials such as neoprene, rubber, and RMP (red mud plastic). Organic waste, along with slurry, is introduced into the biodigester via inlet and outlet ducts for degradation. Biogas produced accumulates at the top of the bag, although in some instances, it may be collected in a separate bag. Residue is collected in the lower section. Functioning primarily as a plug flow reactor (PFR), the bag digester operates such that materials added daily theoretically move through the digester as a unit mass until the hydraulic retention time (HRT) is achieved. Subsequently, the digested mass exits the digester bag as a unit. A portion of the effluent is reintroduced into the inlet to serve as a seed for re-inoculating the bag digester (Kaparaju et al. 2009).

The advantages of using the bag (balloon) digester are follows:

  • It is the most cost-effective option compared to other types of digesters.
  •  Installation and setup are straightforward and can be completed swiftly within hours.
  • It features simple cleaning mechanisms, making maintenance hassle-free.
  • The digester heats up along with its contents due to thin partitions in the reactor, utilizing sunlight or external heat sources.

The disadvantages of the bag (balloon) digester are as follows:

  • Its lifespan is relatively short, approximately around 5 years.
  • The digester is susceptible to damage and may pose challenges in restoration.
  • Sludge removal and transportation to the field demand significant labor.
  • It necessitates a consistent temperature.
  • Insulating the digester is challenging.
  • It relies on high-quality plastic, particularly PVC.
  • Fixed dome digester

This is a Chinese model biogas plant, first built in China around 1936. In this design, the digestion chamber and gas holder are integrated into a single unit. Examples of this design include Deenbandhu, Chinese fixed dome, CAMARTEC, as well as Janata and Janata II models.

Bacteria within the digester convert biomass into a liquid known as slurry (digested waste) and biogas. The biogas primarily consists of methane (CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2), along with traces of other gases. Once collected in the dome-shaped gas holder, the slurry is transferred to the offset tank. The quantity of slurry produced is contingent upon factors such as the feed loading rate, its utilization, and gas generation. During gas production, the slurry is pressed backward and sideways, then directed to the offset tank. As gas is utilized, slurry is returned from the offset tank to the digester. These reciprocal movements facilitate the mixing of slurry phases, leading to altered phases through gradation mixing. Therefore, according to Stalin (2007), this model is regarded as a mixed digester reactor (CSTR, continuously stirred tank reactor).

The fixed dome digester is relatively inexpensive, making it economically viable with a lifespan of approximately up to 20 years. Because the majority of the structure remains below the earth’s surface, it is safe and able to withstand cold temperatures. Additionally, the fluctuation in temperatures between day and night inside the biodigester is conducive to better biogas production by methanogens.

The advantages of the fixed dome digester are as follows:

  • Despite being low-cost, it offers significant advantages compared to other types.
  • It is reliable and has a lifespan of up to 20 years.
  • With its complete insulation and underground construction, it is considered the optimal digester type for biogas generation in colder climates, such as in countries like Bolivia.

The disadvantages of the fixed dome digester are as follows:

  • Building it in bedrock areas poses significant challenges.
  • Technical skills are crucial for constructing the fixed dome and ensuring proper sealing to prevent gas seepage due to design flaws.
  • The lifespan of the fixed dome digester exceeds that of the Khadi and Village Industries Commission (KVIC) plant.
  • Floating drum digester

This model is commonly referred to as the KVIC model, as it was endorsed and approved by KVIC (Jashu Bhai J. Patel developed the design of the floating drum biogas plant in 1962), and its utilization is widespread in India and around the globe. The main or reactor tank is enclosed by a concrete wall and comprises two components: (i) an inlet for supplying slurry to the tank, and (ii) a stainless steel cylindrical dome positioned atop the slurry, housing an outlet pipe for collecting the gas produced. As the decomposed matter expands, the slurry overflows into the subsequent compartment, which can then be utilized as natural fertilizer.

The floating drum digester offers the advantage of maintaining constant gas pressure due to the weight of the drum. 

However, its disadvantage lies in the use of stainless steel for the construction of the floating chamber, which is costly and requires ongoing maintenance and observation to prevent rusting.

  • VACVINA biogas plant

The VACVINA model represents an advancement from earlier biogas designs such as fixed dome and plastic container types. It features a rectangular-shaped digester constructed with a volume capacity exceeding 5 m3, suitable for smaller animal farms. Animal waste is supplied as feed from a trench located behind or below the animal shed. Biogas produced from the digester is collected and stored in two or three plastic bags, serving as fuel for the kitchen range. The advantages of the VACVINA model include:

  • Its simple design with minimal defects.
  • It is relatively inexpensive to maintain and can be constructed in limited space.
  • Suitable for colder climates due to the underground biogas digester and the external plastic gas reservoir.
  • It has a higher probability of a longer lifespan.

Types of Biogas Reactors

According to Angelidaki and Sanders (2004) and Parawira et al. (2004), achieving biodegradability of organic matter and surplus biogas generation in batch processes can be accomplished through the conventional anaerobic digestion method. This process proves effective due to the controlled and stable supply, as well as the steady state of the bioreactor, thereby maximizing production. The selection and classification of reactors are determined by the mixing of fluid (sludge and substrate) or particulate solid contents in the reactor, as reported by Stalin (2007). High-rate biofilms such as EGSB and UASB are employed for treating organic soluble matter, while slurry and solid wastes are treated in CSTRs (Kato et al. 1997; Angelidaki et al. 2002).

  1. Continuously Stirred Tank Reactor

Demirel and Scherer (2008) documented the successful utilization of CSTR in the anaerobic digestion of energy crops and food remains. In the CSTR process, biomass is suspended in the main liquid and subsequently removed along with the effluent. By maintaining this process for 10–20 days, the hydraulic and sludge retention times become equivalent, thereby preventing the washout of slow-growing methanogens (Boe, 2006). Boe and Angelidaki (2009) observed that a single CSTR produces less CH4 compared to serial CSTRs when using the same industrial slurries or an equivalent volume of manure. Despite this, the CSTR process is practical, simple to operate, and offers numerous advantages (Kaparaju, Serranoa, and Angelidaki 2009).

  1. Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket

The UASB (upflow anaerobic sludge blanket) reactor, developed in the 1970s by Lettinga, van Nelsen, Hobma, et al. (1980), is widely employed for biogas production through the treatment of various wastewater types (Shastry, Nandy, Wate, et al. 2010; Sevilla-Espinosa, Solorzano-Campo, and Bello-Mendoza 2010). In the UASB reactor, an immobilized cell is utilized, retaining biomass while substrate is pumped through, enabling a high organic loading rate. The success of the UASB concept hinges on the formation of a dense sludge bed at the reactor’s bottom, where biological processes occur, facilitated by the accumulation of incoming suspended solids and bacterial growth (Seghezzo, Zeeman, and van Lier 1998). Natural turbulence in UASB systems is induced by influent flow, while biogas formation within the reactor enhances contact between wastewater and biomass.

Developed in the 1970s, the UASB reactor is extensively utilized for biogas production by treating various wastewater types. In the UASB reactor, wastewater is pumped through, leading to an increase in the loading rate and retention of biomass through immobilized cells. (Kaparaju et al. 2009).

The success of the UASB application relies on the formation of a sludge layer created by suspended solids in wastewater, as it is where microbial degradation and digestion of organic matter occur (Seghezzo et al. 1998). The resulting biogas facilitates significant interaction between wastewater and biomass, while influent flow induces natural turbulence in the UASB systems.

  1. Expanded Granular Sludge Bed

De Man et al. (1988) introduced the concept of the expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB) as a modification to the traditional UASB reactor. Both EGSB and UASB utilize granular sludge inoculation; however, adjustments in hydrodynamic settings such as superficial velocity and Ks enhance mixing and contact between sludge and wastewater specifically in the EGSB.

Biogas Plants across  segments

 DefinitionInstalled BaseFuture Potential
    Small Biogas plant  These consist of biogas plants of the size between 1 to 10 cubic meter capacities  A cumulative total of 4.8 million family type biogas plants have been set up in the country    Estimated potential of 12 million family plants
Medium Biogas plantPower generation capacity between 3 KW to 250 KWThere are about 300 small and medium biogas plants (5-25 KW)Currently insignificant to be sized
  Large Biogas plant  Equivalent power generation capacity above 250 KWFew large scale installations, (50- 60 No.) most on demonstration basis:The estimated potential from urban municipal wastes is projected at c. 5000 MW equivalent by 2023
    Industrial & Municipal waste Biogas plant    Plants based on feedstock derived from Industrial and Municipal waste    ~ 40 power projects installed so far  The estimated potential of generation of power from industrial solid and liquid wastes is expected to increase to 2000 MW

PROBLEMS AND ISSUES ENCOUNTERED

  • Technical

       The failure of numerous biogas facilities is often linked to technical operational issues, which can manifest in various forms, including inadequate maintenance, negligence, or equipment deterioration such as rusting over time. A 1995 study analyzing a sample of 24,501 biogas plants across 432 villages in India found that only about 53% of these plants were active. Given the prevalence of technical challenges, the subsequent discussion on planning and policies should be taken into consideration.

  • Input problems

In India, cattle excreta is commonly collected and utilized as the primary feedstock for biogas digesters, while pig and human excreta are deemed unacceptable (UNAPCAEM 2007). Despite approximately 20 per cent of rural households owning four or five cattle, a biogas plant exclusively relying on cow dung requires a similar number of calves per household for optimal operation. Villagers’ reluctance to utilize waste materials other than cattle excrement results in underfed biogas plants, exacerbating the scarcity issue and complicating solutions.

  • Human resources

For the success and sustainability of National Biogas and Manure Management Programme (NBMMP), it is crucial to have well-trained laborers constructing the biogas plants. However, biogas dissemination programs in India often face challenges due to the lack of qualified staff to provide training, supervision, reporting, and program leadership.

  • Shortage of staff for training and developing local capacity.

Reporting

  • Inaccurate reporting of achievements:

Discrepancies were noted in the reporting of data and achievement of goals at the block, district, and state levels by Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO). The PEO highlighted that record-keeping at higher levels lacks authenticity.

• Improper maintenance of reports.

  • Training/Monitoring

              To ensure that troops participating in National Biogas and Manure Management Programme (NBMMP) are well-informed and satisfied with their duties, training plans are essential. 

  • Moreover, systematic monitoring is lacking. Each renewable biogas development training center (RBDTC) is required to conduct random case verifications of 500 biogas plants established in a specified region at predetermined times. However, due to the shortage of administrative manpower, this goal is rarely achieved. The effectiveness of the reporting mechanism is compromised, and progress reports for these biogas plants are often submitted without proper oversight and authorization.
  • Political/Bureaucratic

In India, the FTBP (family-type biogas plants) is a government-funded program that involves multiple states, district bureaus, funding institutions, training centers, and NGOs.

  • Agency multiplicity and procedural delays– Additionally, because the clearance procedure is so drawn out and bureaucratic, firms encounter delays in receiving technical approval for raw materials like steel and cement. The government controls the transportation of steel and cement, which are in short supply in India, and sets the pricing for transportation based on quotas.

Biogas Programme (Phase-I) for FY 2021-22 to 2025-26

A government of India initiative through Ministry of New and Renewable Energy.

  • There is significant potential for setting up biogas plants in India, given the large livestock population of 535.78 million, which includes approximately 302 million bovines (comprising cattle, buffalo, mithun, and yak). The livestock sector makes a substantial contribution to India’s GDP and is expected to grow further. The dissemination of biogas technology represents a boon for Indian farmers, offering both direct and collateral benefits (Fu et al. 2010).
  • Biogas typically comprises about 55-65 per cent methane, 35-44 per cent carbon dioxide, and traces of other gases like hydrogen sulphide, nitrogen, and ammonia. In its raw form, without any purification, biogas can serve as a clean cooking fuel similar to LPG, for lighting, motive power, and electricity generation. It can also substitute diesel in diesel engines, with replacements of up to 80 per cent achievable, and in 100 per cent biogas engines. Moreover, biogas can be purified and upgraded to attain up to 98 per cent methane content purity, transforming it into Compressed Bio-Gas (CBG), suitable for transportation or filling cylinders at high pressures of around 250 bar.
  • Initially, biogas plants were designed for digesting cattle dung. However, technological advancements over time have enabled the bio-methanation of various types of biomass materials and organic wastes. Biogas plant designs are now available in sizes ranging from 1 m3 to over 1000 m3, with multiples of that size possible to achieve larger plant sizes. These plants can be installed for various purposes, including family/household use, small farmers, dairy farmers, and for community, institutional, and industrial/commercial applications, depending on the availability of raw materials.

About the Biogas programme

The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE), Government of India, introduced the National Bioenergy Programme on November 2nd, 2022. MNRE has extended the National Bioenergy Programme for the period from FY 2021-22 to 2025-26, with implementation planned in two phases. Phase-I of the Programme has been approved with a budget outlay of Rs. 858 crore, including Rs. 100 Crore allocated for the Biogas Programme. This funding aims to support the establishment of small (1 m3 to 25 m3 biogas per day) and medium-sized biogas plants, ranging from above 25 m3 to 2500 m3 biogas generation per day. These plants are expected to have corresponding power generation capacities ranging from 3 kW to 250 kW from biogas or raw biogas for thermal energy/cooling applications. (Puyol et al. 2009; Kalogo and Verstraete 1999).

The Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India, launched the Biogas programme with the following objectives:

  • Setting up of biogas plants for clean cooking fuel, lighting, meeting thermal and small power needs of users which results in GHG reduction, improved sanitation, women empowerment and creation of rural employment.
  • Organic enriched Bio-manure: The digested slurry from biogas plants, a rich source of manure, shall benefit farmers in supplementing / reducing of use of chemical fertilizers.

Conclusion

For several decades, biogas has proven to be the most suitable machinery for utilizing available resources efficiently. It is recognized as a clean, hygienic, and cost-effective fuel that is environmentally friendly. With biogas, women in villages no longer need to spend hours gathering firewood for cooking and burning, freeing up time for other activities. Additionally, a smokeless and soot-free kitchen reduces the risk of lung and throat infections for women, enabling them to live longer, healthier lives. Furthermore, biogas has the capacity to fulfill the fuel demands of households, agricultural lands, and industries comprehensively.

References

Angelidaki, I. and W.T.M. Sanders. 2004. Assessment of the anaerobic biodegradability of macro-pollutants. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology 3: 141–158.

Angelidaki, I., L. Ellegaard, A.H. Sorensen, and J.E. Schmidt. 2002. Anaerobic processes. In Environmental Biotechnology, edited by I. Angelidaki, pp. 1–114. Institute of Environment and Resources, Technical University of Denmark (DTU).

Boe, K. 2006. Online monitoring and control of the biogas process. Ph.D. Thesis, Institute of Environment and Resources, Technical University of Denmark (DTU).

Boe, K. and I. Angelidaki. 2009. Serial CSTR digester configuration for improving biogas production from manure. Water Research 43: 166–172.

De Man, A.W.A., A.R.M. Vander Last, and G. Lettinga 1988. The use of EGSB and UASB anaerobic systems for low strength soluble and complex wastewaters at temperatures ranging from 8 to 30 °C. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Anaerobic Digestion, edited by E.R. Hall and P.N. Hobson, pp. 197−209

Demirel, B. and P. Scherer. 2008. Production of methane from sugar beet silage without manure addition by a single-stage anaerobic digestion process. Biomass and Bioenergy 32: 203–209.

Fu, X., N.I. Achu, E. Kreuger, and L. Björnsson. 2010. Comparison of reactor configurations for biogas production from energy crops. In Power and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC), Asia-Pacific, 28-31 March 2010, pp. 1−4.

Kalogo, Y. and W. Verstraete. 1999. Development of anaerobic sludge bed (ASB) reactor technologies for domestic wastewater treatment: Motives and perspectives. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology 15: 523–534.

Kaparaju, P., M. Serranoa, and I. Angelidaki. 2009. Effect of reactor configuration on biogas production from wheat straw hydrolysate. Bioresource Technology 100: 6317–6323.

Kato, T.M., J.A. Field, and G. Lettinga. 1997. The anaerobic treatment of low strength wastewaters in UASB and EGSB reactors. Water Science and Technology 36(6–7): 375–382.

Lettinga, G., A.F.M. van Nelsen, S.W. Hobma, W. de Zeeuw, and A. Klapwijk. 1980. Use of the upflow sludge blanket (USB) reactor concept for biological waste water treatment, especially for anaerobic treatment. Biotechnology and Bioengineering 22: 699–734.

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE). 2007. Family Type Biogas Plants Programme—NBMMP, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy. Details available at http://www.mnre.gov.in/prog-ftbp.htm

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE). 2010a. National Biomass Programme (NBMMP) Details available at http://www.mnre.gov.in/prog-biomasspower.htm

Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE). 2010b. National Biogas and Manure Management Programme (NBMMP). Details available at http://mnre.gov.in/prog-ftbp.htm

Parawira, W., M. Murto, R. Zvauya, and B. Mattiasson. 2004. Anaerobic batch digestion of solid potato waste alone and in combination with sugar beet leaves. Renewable Energy 29(11): 1811–1823.

Programme Evaluation Organisation (PEO). 2002. Evaluation Study on National Project on Biogas Development. Details available at planningcommission.nic.in/reports/peoreport/peoevalu/peo_npbd.pdf

Puyol, D., A.F. Mohedano, J.L. Sanz, and J.J. Rodriguez. 2009. Comparison of UASB and EGSB performance on the anaerobic biodegradation of 2, 4-dichlorophenol. Chemosphere 76: 1192–1198.

Seghezzo, L., G.Zeeman, J.B. van Lier, H.V.M. Hamelers, and G. Lettinga. 1998. A review: the anaerobic treatment of sewage in UASB and EGSB reactors. Bioresource Technology 65: 175–190.

Sevilla-Espinosa, S., M. Solorzano-Campo, and R. Bello-Mendoza. 2010. Performance of staged and non-staged up-flow anaerobic sludge bed (USSB and UASB) reactors treating low strength complex wastewater. Biodegradation 21(5): 737–751.

Shastry, S., T. Nandy, S.R. Wate, and S.N. Kaul. 2010. Hydrogenated vegetable oil industry wastewater treatment using UASB reactor system with recourse to energy recovery. Water, Air, Soil Pollution 208(1–4): 323–333.

Stalin, N. Prabhu. 2007. Performance evaluation of Partial Mixing Anaerobic Digester. ARPN Journal of Applied Sciences 2(3):1−6.

United Nations Asian and Pacific Centre for Agricultural Engineering and Machinery (UNAPCAEM). 2007. Recent developments in biogas technology for poverty reduction and sustainable development. Proceedings of International Seminar on Biogas Technology for Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development. Details available at http://www.unapcaem.org/publication/pub_biogas.htm

cite as:

Vineeth, bhatt, . sheelendra ., navi, . laxman ., Karthik, A. N., & Harish, M. C. (2024). BIOGAS PRODUCTION IN INDIAN SCENARIO. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10736733

Rights

  • cc-by-4.0 iconCreative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
  • Version v110.5281/zenodo.10736733
  • Mar 1, 2024
  • Cite all versions? You can cite all versions by using the DOI 10.5281/zenodo.10736732. This DOI represents all versions, and will always resolve to the latest one. Read more.