ARTICLE IN PRESS

Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx

Review paper

Enhancement of biogas production from solid substrates

using different techniques––a review
Yadvika a, Santosh a,*
, T.R. Sreekrishnan b, Sangeeta Kohli c, Vineet Rana a

a
Centre for Rural Development & Technology, I.I.T., Delhi 1100016, India
b
Department for Biochemical Engineering & Biotechnology, I.I.T., Delhi 1100016, India
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, I.I.T., Delhi 1100016, India
Received 31 July 2003; received in revised form 18 August 2003

Abstract
Biogas, a clean and renewable form of energy could very well substitute (especially in the rural sector) for conventional sources of
energy (fossil fuels, oil, etc.) which are causing ecological–environmental problems and at the same time depleting at a faster rate.
Despite its numerous advantages, the potential of biogas technology could not be fully harnessed or tapped as certain constraints are
also associated with it. Most common among these are: the large hydraulic retention time of 30–50 days, low gas production in
winter, etc. Therefore, efforts are needed to remove its various limitations so as to popularize this technology in the rural areas.
Researchers have tried different techniques to enhance gas production. This paper reviews the various techniques, which could be
used to enhance the gas production rate from solid substrates.
Ó 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords: Biogas production rate; Additives; Anaerobic filters; HRT

1. Introduction for the treatment of industrial wastes and stabilization of

In today’s energy demanding life style, need for
exploring and exploiting new sources of energy which
are renewable as well as eco-friendly is a must. In rural
areas of developing countries various cellulosic biomass
(cattle dung, agricultural residues, etc.) are available in
plenty which have a very good potential to cater to the
energy demand, especially in the domestic sector. In
India alone, there are an estimated over 250 million
cattle and if one third of the dung produced annually
from these is available for production of biogas, more
than 12 million biogas plants can be installed (Kashyap
et al., 2003). Biogas technology offers a very attractive
route to utilize certain categories of biomass for meeting
partial energy needs. In fact proper functioning of bio-
gas system can provide multiple benefits to the users and
the community resulting in resource conservation and
environmental protection.
Biogas is a product of anaerobic degradation of or-
ganic substrates, which is one of the oldest processes used
*
Corresponding author. Fax: +91-11-26591121.
E-mail address: santoshsatya_iitd@hotmail.com (Santosh).
sludges. Since it is carried out by a consortium of
microorganisms and depends on various factors like pH,
temperature, HRT, C/N ratio, etc., it is a relatively slow
process. Lack of process stability, low loading rates, slow
recovery after failure and specific requirements for waste
composition are some of the other limitations associated
with it (Van der Berg and Kennedy, 1983). Anaerobic
fermentation being a slow process, a large HRT of 30–50
days is used in conventional biogas plants. This leads to a
large volume of the digester and hence high cost of the
system. The decrease in gas generation during winter
season has been reported which, poses a serious problem
in the practical application of this technology. Kalia and
Singh (1996) found that biogas production reduced from
around 1700 l/day in May–July to around 99l/d in Jan-
uary–February. All this has resulted in restricted popu-
larization of biogas technology in rural areas. Thus there
is a need to improve the overall efficiency of anaerobic
digestion process in the biogas plants. This could be done
by several methods such as optimizing the various
operational parameters, satisfying the nutritional
requirements of microbes (Lettinga et al., 1980; Wilkie
and Colleran, 1986), using different biological and
chemical additives and by manipulating the feed pro-

0960-8524/$ - see front matter Ó 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2004.02.010
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
2 Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
portions (Sanders and Bloodgood, 1965; Nyns, 1986).
Recirculation of digested slurry (washed out microbes)
back into the reactor and modification in the design of
existing biogas plants are some of the other ways to
improve the gas production in biogas plants. Recently,
efforts have been made to either reduce the HRT or en-
hance biogas production for the same HRT by incor-
porating fixed film matrices in the reactors, which help to
retain microbes in the reactors. Recently ultrasonifica-
tion of wastewater has been found to enhance the re-
moval of COD by almost 10% (McDermott et al., 2001).
A review of Indian advances in biogas technology was
prepared by Singh and Maheshwari (1995). This paper
presented a comprehensive view of the various methods,
which could be used to enhance the gas production rate
from the solid substrates.
2. Process and mechanism of biomethanation
The anaerobic biological conversion of organic mat-
ter occurs in three steps. The first step involves the en-
zyme-mediated transformation of insoluble organic
material and higher molecular mass compounds such as
lipids, polysaccharides, proteins, fats, nucleic acids, etc.
into soluble organic materials, i.e. to compounds suit-
able for the use as source of energy and cell carbon such
as monosaccharides, amino acids and other simple or-
ganic compounds. This step is called the hydrolysis and
is carried out by strict anaerobes such as Bactericides,
Clostridia and facultative bacteria such as Streptococci,
etc. In the second step, acidogenesis, another group of
microorganisms ferments the break-down products to
acetic acid, hydrogen, carbon dioxide and other lower
weight simple volatile organic acids like propionic acid
and butyric acid which are in turn converted to acetic
acid. In the third step, these acetic acid, hydrogen and
carbon dioxide are converted into a mixture of methane
and carbon dioxide by the methanogenic bacteria (ace-
tate utilizers like Methanosarcina spp. and Methanothrix
spp. and hydrogen and formate utilizing species like
Methanobacterium, Methanococcus, etc.).The three
stages of methane fermentation are shown in Fig. 1.
H2
COMPLEX CH4
ORGANICS
ACETIC
ACID
HYDROLYSIS ACIDOGENESIS METHANE
AND AND DEHYDRO- FERMENTATION
FERMENTATION -GENATION
Fig. 1. Different stages of methane fermentation.
3. Techniques for enhancing biogas production
Different methods used to enhance biogas production
can be classified into the following categories:
ii(i) Use of additives
i(ii) Recycling of slurry and slurry filtrate
(iii) Variation in operational parameters like tempera-
ture, hydraulic retention time (HRT) and particle
size of the substrate
(iv) Use of fixed film/biofilters
3.1. Use of additives
Some attempts have been made in the past to increase
gas production by stimulating the microbial activity
using various biological and chemical additives under
different operating conditions. Biological additives in-
clude different plants, weeds (Gunaseelan, 1987), crop
residues, microbial cultures, etc., which are available
naturally in the surroundings. As such, generally these
are of less significance in terms of their use in the hab-
itat, however if used as additives in biogas plant could
improve its performance significantly. The suitability of
an additive is expected to be strongly dependent on the
type of substrate.
3.1.1. Green biomass
Powdered leaves of some plants and legumes (like
Gulmohar, Leucacena leucocephala, Acacia auriculifor-
mis, Dalbergia sisoo and Eucalyptus tereticonius) have
been found to stimulate biogas production between 18%
and 40% (SPOBD, China, 1979; Chowdhry et al., 1994).
Increase in biogas production due to certain additives
appears to be due to adsorption of the substrate on the
surface of the additives. This can lead to high-localized
substrate concentration and a more favourable envi-
ronment for growth of microbes (Chandra and Gupta,
1997). The additives also help to maintain favourable
conditions for rapid gas production in the reactor, such
as pH, inhibition/promotion of acetogenesis and meth-
anogenesis for the best yield, etc. Alkali treated (1%
NaOH for 7 days) plant residues (lantana, wheat straw,
apple leaf litter and peach leaf litter) when used as a
supplement to cattle dung resulted in almost twofold
increase in biogas and CH4 production (Dar and Tan-
don, 1987). Partially decomposed ageratum produced
43% and Euphorbia tirucalli L. produced 14% more gas
as compared to pure cattle dung (Kalia and Kanwar,
1989; Rajasekaran et al., 1989). Trujillo et al. (1993)
found that the addition of the tomato-plant wastes to
the rabbit wastes in proportion higher than 40% im-
proved the methane production. Crop residues like
maize stalks, rice straw, cotton stalks, wheat straw and
water hyacinth each enriched with partially digested
cattle dung enhanced gas production in the range of 10–
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
80% (El Shinnawi et al., 1989; Somayaji and Khanna,
1994). Babu et al. (1994) observed improvement in
biomethanation of mango processing wastes by several
folds by the addition of extracts of seeds of Nirmali,
common bean, black gram, guar and guargum at the
rate of 1500 ppm. Mixture of Pistia stratiotes and
cowdung (1:1) gave a biogas yield of 0.62 m3 /(m3 day)
(CH4 ¼ 76.8%, HRT ¼ 15 days) (Zennaki et al., 1998).
Recently Sharma (2002) observed an increase of 40–80%
in biogas production on addition of 1% onion storage
waste (OSW) to cattle dung in a 400-l floating drum
biogas reactor.
3.1.2. Microbial strains
Strains of some bacteria and fungi have also been
found to enhance gas production by stimulating the
activity of particular enzymes. Cellulolytic strains of
bacteria like actinomycetes and mixed consortia have
been found to improve biogas production in the range of
8.4–44% from cattle dung (Tirumale and Nand, 1994;
Attar et al., 1998). All the strains exhibited a range of
activity of all the enzymes involved in cellulose degra-
dation, viz. C1 enzyme, exglucanase, endoglucanase, b-
glucosidase. It seemed that endoglucanase activity was
of central importance for the hydrolysis of cellulose.
Geeta et al. (1994) found that sugarcane bagasse pre-
treated with Phanerochaete chrysosporium for 3 weeks
under ambient temperature conditions produced higher
gas with cattle excreta. Dohanyos et al. (1997) examined
the use of cell lysate as a stimulating agent in anaerobic
degradation of municipal raw sludge, excess activated
sludge and their mixture. The effect of lysate is caused by
the still remaining activity of released enzymes and by
the stimulating properties of other compounds that are
present inside the cells. The improvement of CH4 yield
from thickened activated sludge ranged from 8.1% to
86.4% while in case of a mixture of thickened activated
sludge and primary sludge it was found to vary from 0%
to 24%.
3.1.3. Inorganic additives
Several inorganic additives that improve gas pro-
duction have also been reported. Shimizu (1992) claimed
that higher concentration of bacteria could be retained
in the digester by the addition of metal cations since
cations increase the density of the bacteria, which are
capable of aggregating by themselves. Wong and
Cheung (1995) found that the plant with a higher con-
tent of heavy metals (Cr, Cu, Ni and Zn) had a higher
CH4 yield than the control. The addition of iron salts at
various concentrations [FeSO4 (50 mM), FeCl3 (70 lM)]
have been found to enhance gas production rate
(Wodzinski et al., 1983; Patel et al., 1993; Rao and
Seenayya, 1994; Clark and Hillman, 1995). Nickel ions
(2.5 and 5 ppm) enhanced biogas up to 54% due to the
activity of Ni-dependent metallo-enzymes involved in
3
biogas production (Geeta et al., 1990). Addition of rock
phosphate (RP) proved superior to single super phos-
phate (SSP) while digesting rice straw in batch fer-
menters (Bardiya and Gaur, 1997). Malik et al. (1987)
obtained an increase of 8–11% by the addition of urea
and diammonium phosphate (DAP).
Certain adsorbents are also reported to improve gas
production for example Madamwar and Mithal (1986)
obtained a maximum enhancement of over 150% with
higher CH4 content (65% CH4 ) on addition of 10 g/l
commercial pectin. According to Kumar et al. (1987)
commercial charcoal Darco G-60 resulted in 17% and
34.7% increase in biogas in batch and semi continuous
fermenters, respectively. Also, the locally produced
wood charcoal (16% enhancement in biogas) was found
as good as the commercial charcoal in batch digesters.
Patel et al. (1992) found a trend of enhanced gas pro-
duction with high CH4 content and lower effluent BOD
and COD with increasing doses of different adsorbents
(gelatin, polyvinyl alcohol, powdered activated
charcoal, pectin, kaolin, silica gel, aluminium powder,
bentonite and tale powder) on anaerobic digestion of
water-hyacinth-cattle dung. They observed (Patel and
Madamwar, 1994) a twofold increase in gas production
on addition of 4 g/l silica gel, with CH4 content of 72.8%
as compared to control (62%). Process stability in-
creased with increasing levels of silica gel, indicating that
volatile acids were consumed at a faster rate in the
presence of an adsorbent.
Using Ca and Mg salts as energy supplements, CH4
production was enhanced and foaming was avoided
(Mathiesen, 1989). Dhawale (1996) found 25–35%
enhancement in anaerobic digestion of manure by the
addition of Eosin blue dye at 0.1 lM concentration.
Gaddy (1994) found a new method for improving the
performance of anaerobic digestion of solid substrate. It
involved the addition of at least 1-chelating agent
(preferably 1–100 lM, especially 10 lM) 1:2 diamino-
cyclohexane-N,N, tetraacetic acid, EDTA, citric acid or
nitrilotriacetic acid (NTA)) and at least one nutrient
(preferably 1–5000 lM (10 lM)) of iron, sulfide, sele-
nium or nickel, especially FeSO4 , FeCl2 , SeO2 or NiCl2 )
to a solid substrate for solubilizing solid nutrients to
enhance bacterial growth. Methane production can be
increased or smaller digesters can be used to achieve the
same methane production. Faster start up, greater sta-
bility and more rapid recovery from upsets were possible
by using this new method.
3.2. Gas enhancement through recycling of digested
slurry/slurry filtrate
The recirculation of digested slurry back into the
reactor has been shown to improve the gas production
marginally, since the microbes washed away are rein-
troduced back into the reactor, thereby providing an
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
4 Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
additional microbial population. The recycling of the
digested slurry along with filtrate has also been tried out
to conserve water and to enhance biogas production
(Malik and Dahiya, 1990; Santosh et al., 1999). Kanwar
and Guleri (1994) reported that about 60–65% more
biogas production can be obtained by simply recycling
the digested slurry in 1 m3 plug flow type pilot plants.
They suggested that recycling of digested slurry along
with fresh dung might help in overcoming the problem
of underfed biogas plants as well as in maintaining
higher gas production in winter season. They encoun-
tered no other problems like precipitation of substrate,
increase in acidity/alkalinity and ammonia toxicity.
Brummeler et al. (1992) suggested that leachate recycling
resulted in faster digestion rate while anaerobically
digesting solid organic waste in a biocell (pilot scale, 35
°C). Scaling did not affect the rate of process, provided
leachate recycling was done at a rate of 0.3 m3 /(m3 day).
An increase of up to 18.8% in gas production (CH4 ¼
80%) was observed by Malik and Tauro (1995) when
predigested slurry was used along with 10% effluent
slurry recycling in a 1 m3 daily fed floating drum biogas
digester (pilot plant, HRT ¼ 30 day). A 10-fold and
threefold increase in the degradation rate of mannitol
and lactic acid was observed by Jarvis et al. (1995) when
liquid recirculation (LR) was initiated in a silage-fed-
two-phase biogas plant. The number of hydrogeno-
trophic methanogens increased 10-fold while there was
an increase of ninefold in their activity. Liquefaction of
cellulose and hemicellulose was low from the start of
recirculation (3% and 20% reduction respectively) and
was not affected by Santosh et al. (1999) carried out
experiments on a plant of 1 cu.m capacity and found
that recycling of 50% slurry filtrate along with 10% di-
gested slurry can lead to about 50% water conservation
and 10% increase in gas production.
3.3. Variation in operational parameters
The performance of biogas plant can be controlled by
studying and monitoring the variation in parameters like
pH, temperature, loading rate, agitation, etc. Any
drastic change in these can adversely affect the biogas
production. So these parameters should be varied within
a desirable range to operate the biogas plant efficiently.
3.3.1. Temperature
3.3.1.1. Effect of temperature on biogas production.
Temperature inside the digester has a major effect on
the biogas production process. There are different tem-
perature ranges during which anaerobic fermentation
can be carried out: psychrophilic (<30 °C), mesophilic
(30–40 °C) and thermophilic (50–60 °C). However,
anaerobes are most active in the mesophilic and thermo-
philic temperature range (Mital, 1996; Umetsu et al.,
1992; Maurya et al., 1994; Takizawa et al., 1994; Desai
and Madamwar, 1994; Zennaki et al., 1996). The length
of fermentation period is dependent on temperature.
Angelidaki and Ahring (1994) observed that when the
NH3 load was high, reducing temperature below 55 °C
resulted in an increase of biogas yield and better process
stability, as shown by the reduced VFA concentration.
Garba (1996) observed that methanogens were very
sensitive to sudden thermal changes, therefore, any
drastic change in temperature should be avoided.
Nozhevnikova et al. (1999) proposed a two step anaer-
obic treatment of cattle dung i.e. (i) acidogenic fer-
mentation at high temperature (55–82 °C), and (ii)
separation of solid and liquid fractions and treating the
liquid manure under low temperature conditions (5–20
°C). Long term adaptation of active psychrophilic
microbial communities was found to be essential for
efficient treatment of cattle dung at low temperature
(Nozhevnikova et al., 1999; Meher et al., 1994). Re-
cently a review paper on biomethanation under psy-
chrophilic conditions has been published (Kashyap et
al., 2003).
3.3.1.2. Installation technique for getting optimum tem-
perature conditions. Most of the remedies mentioned in
the literature to enhance biogas production are aimed at
increasing the digester temperature to mesophilic range
(i.e. optimum temperature). It is noted that systematic
studies on biomethanation by psychrophilic microflora
are lacking (Kashyap et al., 2003). Some precautions
taken during the installation of biogas plants and
coating them with insulating materials also helps in
keeping the temperature in the digester within the de-
sired range (Molnar and Bartha, 1989). In order to in-
crease gas yield, it is preferred to construct biogas plants
sun-facing and in a manner as to protect them from cold
winds. Biogas plants should be covered with locally
available crop residues for minimizing heat losses from
the plants. A simple technique of charcoal coating of
ground around the digester had been found to improve
gas production in KVIC biogas plant by 7–15% (Anand
and Singh, 1993). Installation of PVC greenhouse type
structure over a biogas plant allowed solar heating of
the substrate from 18 to about 37 °C. It was possible to
obtain substantial increase in gas yield on a typical
winter day by covering the gas holder with a transparent
polyethylene sheet during sunshine hours and using a
movable insulating material during the off-sunshine
hours (Bansal, 1988; Tiwari et al., 1988). Desai (1988)
found that if the temperature of digester content could
be maintained at 40 °C then it was possible to reduce the
HRT by over 40%. They found solar ponds to be helpful
in preventing heat losses during night and in maintain-
ing digester temperature at desired level. Solar assisted
biogas plants achieve higher gas yield particularly dur-
ing winter months (Tiwari and Chandra, 1986). Hot
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
water used in the slurry preparation also helps to im-
prove the gas production.
3.3.2. pH
pH is an important parameter affecting the growth of
microbes during anaerobic fermentation. pH of the di-
gester should be kept within a desired range of 6.8–7.2
by feeding it at an optimum loading rate. The amount of
carbon dioxide and volatile fatty acids produced during
the anaerobic process affects the pH of the digester
contents. For an anaerobic fermentation to proceed
normally, concentration of volatile fatty acids, acetic
acid in particular should be below 2000 mg/l. Jain and
Mattiasson (1998) found that above pH 5.0, the effi-
ciency of CH4 production was more than 75%. The two-
phase anaerobic reactor using cheese whey and dairy
manure as substrate operated as a single-phase reactor
when the pH was not controlled while when pH of whey
was controlled in the methanogenic stage, it operated as
a two-stage two-phase reactor (Ghaly, 1996). The major
problem related to drastic reduction in pH due to rapid
acidification of onion storage waste (OSW) was over-
come by Sharma (2002) by mixing cattle dung with
OSW in a suitable ratio so that medium is well buffered
to take care of acid accumulation.
3.3.3. Pretreatment
Feedstocks sometimes require pretreatment to in-
crease the methane yield in the anaerobic digestion
process. Pretreatment breaks down the complex organic
structure into simpler molecules which, are then more
susceptible to microbial degradation. Pretreatment
could be done in any of the following ways:
ii(i) Pretreating the feedstock with alkali or acid
i(ii) Predigestion of fresh substrate
(iii) Thermochemical pretreatment
(iv) Ultrasonic pretreatment
i(v) Ensilage of feed
Dar and Tandon (1987) observed an improvement of
31–42% in microbial digestibility and an almost twofold
increase in biogas when alkali treated (1% NaOH for 7
days) plant residues were used as a supplement to cattle
dung. Predigestion of fresh cattle slurry in a batch sys-
tem for 1–2 days at 30–35 °C increased acetate pro-
duction and the use of this slurry as a feed material for
anaerobic digesters increased biogas production by 17–
19% and CH4 content from 68–75% to 75–86% (Singh
et al., 1983). Patel et al. (1993) found that thermo-
chemical pretreatment of water hyacinth improved
biomethanation and the best results were obtained when
water hyacinth was treated at pH 11.0 and at 121 °C.
Ultrasonic pretreatment of waste activated sludge for 30
min resulted in a 64% increase in methane production
(Wang et al., 1999). Ensilage of mango peel for 6 months
5
helped in the pretreatment of polymeric constituents and
conversion of major components of carbohydrates into
volatile fatty acids. It produced 58% more gas as com-
pared to control (Madhukara et al., 1993).
3.3.4. Particle size
Though particle size is not that important a parame-
ter as temperature or pH of the digester contents, it still
has some influence on gas production. The size of the
feedstock should not be too large otherwise it would
result in the clogging of the digester and also it would be
difficult for microbes to carry out its digestion. Smaller
particles on the other hand would provide large surface
area for adsorbing the substrate that would result in
increased microbial activity and hence increased gas
production. Sharma et al. (1988) found that out of five
particle sizes (0.088, 0.40, 1.0, 6.0 and 30.0 mm), maxi-
mum quantity of biogas was produced from raw mate-
rials of 0.088 and 0.40 mm particle size. Large particles
could be used for succulent materials such as leaves.
However, for other materials such as straws, large par-
ticles could decrease the gas production. The results
suggested that a physical pretreatment such as grinding
could significantly reduce the volume of digester re-
quired, without decreasing biogas production (Golla-
kota and Meher, 1988; Moorhead and Nordstedt, 1993).
3.3.5. C:N ratio
It is necessary to maintain proper composition of the
feedstock for efficient plant operation so that the C:N
ratio in feed remains within desired range. It is generally
found that during anaerobic digestion microorganisms
utilize carbon 25–30 times faster than nitrogen. Thus to
meet this requirement, microbes need a 20–30:1 ratio of
C to N with the largest percentage of the carbon being
readily degradable (Bardiya and Gaur, 1997; Malik
et al., 1987). Waste material that is low in C can be
combined with materials high in N to attain desired C:N
ratio of 30:1 (Barnett, 1978; Fry and Merill, 1973;
Gotass, 1956; Singh, 1974). Some studies also suggested
that C:N ratio varies with temperature. According to
study conducted by Idnani and Laura (1971) biogas
production from 0.5 kg of cow dung was almost doubled
from 17.2 to 31.5 l by addition of 200 ml of urine. Use of
urine soaked waste materials is particularly advanta-
geous during winter months when gas production is
otherwise low.
3.3.6. Agitation
Stirring of digester contents needs to be done to en-
sure intimate contact between microorganisms and
substrate which ultimately results in improved digestion
process. Agitation of digester contents can be carried
out in a number of ways. For instance daily feeding of
slurry instead of periodical gives the desired mixing ef-
fect. Stirring can also be carried out by installing certain
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
6 Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
mixing devices like scraper, piston, etc. in the plant. It is
possible to achieve mixing effect by incorporating a
nozzle for flushing slurry as provided in the German
design of Schmidt–Eggersgluss type biogas plant. Gas
recirculation has also been found to enhance mixing
and thus gas production (Mohanrao, 1974; Aubart and
Farinet, 1983; Van and Faber, 1996). Baier and
Schmidheiny (1997) used mechanical disintegration (wet
milling) to physically disrupt cellular material and ob-
served that net biogas production was enhanced.
3.3.7. Seeding of biogas plant
It is often necessary to introduce enriched seeding
bacteria into the digester for starting up the anaerobic
fermentation process. Generally digested sludge from a
running biogas plant or a municipal digester, material
from well-rotted manure pit, or cow dung slurry is used
as seed. If during the operation volatile fatty acids are
accumulated due to overloading, this can be corrected
by reseeding and temporarily suspending the feeding of
digester or by adding lime in requisite quantities.
Addition of inoculum tends to improve both the gas
yield and methane content in biogas. It is possible to
increase gas yield and reduce retention period by addi-
tion of inoculum (Dangaggo et al., 1996; Kanwar and
Guleri, 1995; Kotsyurbenko et al., 1993).
3.3.8. Organic loading rate (OLR)
Gas production rate is highly dependent on loading
rate. Methane yield was found to increase with reduc-
tion in loading rate (Vartak et al., 1997a). In an another
study carried out in Pennsylvania on a 100 m3 biogas
plant operating on manure, when OLR was varied from
346 kg VS/day to 1030 kg VS/day, gas yield increased
from 67 to 202 m3 /day. There is an optimum feed rate
for a particular size of plant, which will produce maxi-
mum gas and beyond which further increase in the
quantity of substrate will not proportionately produce
more gas. According to Mohanrao (1974), a daily
loading rate of 16 kg VS/m3 of digester capacity pro-
duced 0.04 0.074 m3 of gas/kg of dung fed. A lab-scale
digester operating at different OLRs produced a maxi-
mum yield of 0.36 m3 /kg VS at an OLR of 2.91 kg VS/
m3 /day (Sundrarajan et al., 1997). Based on pilot plant
studies (1 m3 capacity), maximum gas yield was ob-
served for a loading rate of 24 kg dung/m3 digester/day
although percent reduction of VS was only 2/3rd of that
with low loading rate (Mohanrao, 1974).
3.3.9. Hydraulic retention time (HRT)
HRT is the average time spent by the input slurry
inside the digester before it comes out. In tropical
countries like India, HRT varies from 30–50 days while
in countries with colder climate it may go up to 100
days. Shorter retention time is likely to face the risk of
washout of active bacterial population while longer
retention time requires a large volume of the digester
and hence more capital cost. Hence there is a need to
reduce HRT for domestic biogas plants based on solid
substrates. It is possible to carry out methanogenic
fermentation at low HRT’s without stressing the
fermentation process at mesophilic and thermophilic
temperature ranges (Zennaki et al., 1996; Singh et al.,
1995; Garba, 1996). On the other hand Sanchez et al.
(1992) found improvement in organic matter removal on
increasing HRT while anaerobically treating cattle
dung. Desai and Madamwar (1994) observed maximum
gas production of 2.2 l/l/day (CH4 ¼ 62%) at an HRT of
10 days having a loading rate of 6 gTS/l while treating a
mixture of cattle dung, poultry waste and cheese whey in
the ratio of 2:1:3. Baserja (1984) observed that at a TS
concentration of 7%, the duration of digestion could be
reduced to 10 days without compromising the stability
of the process, but the optimum period was 16–20 days.
3.3.10. Solid concentration
The amount of fermentable material of feed in a unit
volume of slurry is defined as solid concentration.
Ordinarily 7–9% solids concentration is best-suited
(Zennaki et al., 1996). The biogas yield increased,
reaching 0.46 m3 /(m3 day) at 37 °C and 0.68 m3 /(m3 day)
at 55 °C respectively. Baserja (1984) reported that the
process was unstable below a total solids level of 7%
(of manure) while a level of 10% caused an overloading
of the fermenter.
3.4. Biofilters/fixed film reactors
Fixed film reactors have been used since long for the
treatment of wastewater where they have helped to re-
duce the HRT from 30–40 days to a few hours (Kloss,
1991). These reactors come under the category of ad-
vanced reactors like UASB, fluidized bed, upflow
anaerobic filters, etc. They help in enhancing the per-
formance of wastewater treatment systems by providing
an increased surface area for attached growth of the
microbes in the form of a fixed film on an inert medium
leading to increased population of microbes in the
reactor and their retention in the digester even after the
digested slurry flows out (Van der Berg and Kennedy,
1983). Fixed film technique has been used commonly for
substrates of very low solids content where filters of very
large surface area are used. However, but the studies are
scanty with substrates of high solids content like cow-
dung slurry. Many criteria need to be considered for
selection of suitable materials for long life of the fixed
film matrix (Young and Song, 1984). The material
should be non-biodegradable. The structure of the fixed
film matrix should also be mechanically stable. Materi-
als should be easily available in the local market at a
reasonable cost. Different materials like nylon sponges,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
PVC, clay pipes, etc. had been used as support medium
for fixed film reactors (Wilkie et al., 1984).
Fixed film reactor packed with sponge nylon as sup-
port performed well in terms of specific biogas produc-
tion rate as compared to conventional reactors. The
results showed good digester productivity as well as
satisfactory sludge stabilization in fixed film digester
(Solicio and Del, 1987; Meier et al., 1993). Vartak et al.
(1997b) found the performance of polyester medium
with its high porosity and surface to volume ratio to be
best both at 37 and 10 °C. It also yielded the maximum
reduction in volatile solids (VS) and COD at 37 °C.
Weiland and Peters (1992) obtained 75% and 25%
reduction in HRT and reactor volume respectively
using plastic support for anaerobic digestion of
screened cattle excrement as compared to conventional
system. It had high accumulation of biomass during the
2-year study and could be operated in a broad range of
loadings with a constant COD removal efficiency and
high process reliability. Raju and Ramaligaiah (1997)
observed a high biogas yield of 0.70 m3 /kg VS added in
PVCP packed reactors (20-day HRT) and COD
reduction was three times more as compared to con-
ventional reactor. Henry (1985) achieved high OLRs
and a considerable reduction in the HRT utilizing
random oriented plastic supports. This single stage
reactor with recycle had many advantages like easy
operation, homogeneous distribution within the reac-
tor, maximum agitation, low risk of clogging or
foaming and ease of control of biological activity by
monitoring sludge activity. Sanchez et al. (1995) used
PVC plastic pipes and ceramic raschig rings and found
that anaerobic fixed bed reactor could work at a high
OLR without clogging. The efficiency of more than
60% in VS reduction and 55% in COD reduction were
obtained at HRTs as low as 6 days.
Raju and Ramaligaiah (1997) used burnt coconut
shells and obtained a high biogas yield of 0.72 m3 /kg VS
added (20 day HRT) while Ganesh Kumar et al. (1996)
achieved an increase of about 40% in gas production by
the addition of broken burnt bricks as carriers for
immobilizing microbes. They suggested that larger
lumps of bricks might be used to avoid clogging in
practice. Sorlini et al. (1990) obtained highest biogas
production (144.0 l/kg VS fed) in the digester with wood
chips while production was almost nil in the digester
with expanded clay. The number of anaerobic cellulo-
lytic bacteria was considerably lower in the bottom
sediment of the wood chip digester than in that of the
expanded clay digester, whereas the number of metha-
nogens was significantly higher. On the other hand
Lomas et al. (1999) found lab and bench scale digesters
packed with straight vertical channels of potter’s clay to
present large biodegradation efficiency and allowed
large organic loads compared with continuously stirred
tank reactor.
7
Sanchez et al. (1994) obtained a predominant pres-
ence of filamentous methanogenic forms closely resem-
bling Methanosaeta (Methanothrix) located on the
outer layer and in the bacterial framework of the bio-
film, when they used six different support materials
(polyurethane, bentonite, diabase, diatomaceous earth,
sepiolite and PVC) for digestion of domestic sludge. The
enhancement of CH4 production was rapid and oc-
curred within 24 h of sludge incubation.
Meier et al. (1993) found that energy substrates
stimulated the attachment of P. aeruginosa and Citro-
bacter amalonaticus significantly as compared to the
fixation behaviour in basal medium without substrates.
This mechanism may be important for retaining meth-
anogenic biomass in anaerobic biofilms and thus could
help to reduce the start-up period of biofilm digesters
and to enhance methanogenesis.
Recently, preliminary work on this concept at pilot
scale (400 l, HRT ¼ 30 day) has been carried out by
Rana et al. (2002) at IIT, Delhi using stone chips and
iron mesh biofilters. For the entire year, the biogas
production from the reactor with iron mesh was con-
sistently higher (17%) than that from the conventional
reactor. However, certain difficulties such as clogging of
the reactor and decay of iron mesh after one year were
encountered during the study.
4. Innovations in digester designs
Limited efforts have been made to improve the de-
signs of reactors to enhance gas production. A high
performance biogas plant was designed and studied by
Aili et al. (1991) for treating chicken manure. The coarse
particles and feathers of the raw chicken manure were
removed in the pretreatment tank. Clear supernatant
was pumped into heating tank and when its temperature
reached to 38–40 °C, the warm liquid was drained into
No. 1 Anaerobic fermenter, then overflowed into No. 2
Anaerobic fermenter (modified UASB) for fermentation
to yield biogas. System started quickly under mesophilic
temperature. Gas production rate was 3.27–3.87 m3 /
m3 day with a maximum value of 4.041 m3 /m3 day.
Methane content was also good. In another study car-
ried out by Wanjun (1992) to overcome the weak points
of cylindrical biogas digesters like difficult discharging,
low gas production rate, etc., a new biogas digester was
designed which doubled the gas yield rate. The gas yield
had a gradual increase every year and it was about 3–5
times of the cylindrical biogas digester. Based on field
measurement, a 6 m3 biogas digester of this design could
produce 1692.6 m3 biogas per year, with a volumetric
gas production rate of 0.98 m3 /m3 day and gas yield rate
amounted to 0.49 m3 /m3 kg TS. Recently Tumchenok
(1996) tested a new bioreactor for anaerobic digestion of
animal or poultry waste as substrate. The digester re-
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
8 Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
sulted in increased methane percentage in biogas. Ku-
mar (1997) developed a new cost effective family type
biogas plant (Konark Model) with high efficiency by
changing its shape to spiral. Gas storage volume was
increased by 50% compared to 33% that of Deenbandhu
and Utkal Model most widely used for their cost effec-
tiveness. Here construction cost was reduced by 10–15%
(with respect to Deenbandhu) if constructed with brick
masonry and by 30–35 % if constructed using ferro-
cement technology. It was structurally sound due to its
spiral shape and covers least surface area. Its gas storage
capacity had been increased and short-circuiting had
been prevented by providing a baffle wall with holes
inside the digester in between inlet pipe and outlet bot-
tom tank.
5. Conclusions and future R&D areas
A critical analysis of literature reveals that there is a
strong possibility to enhance the biogas production
under field conditions. Use of certain inorganic, organic
additives seems to be promising for enhancing biogas
production. Among different types of biomass (plant
and crop residues) used as additives, some have been
found to enhance the gas production manifolds. How-
ever their utility is limited due to the seasonal avail-
ability in different regions. Also, clogging of the reactor
in the long run is another problem observed under field
conditions. Practical aspect of using pure microbial
culture as additives should be looked into, in view of
certain problems especially human health and eco-
dynamics. Further techno-economics of using additives
on daily basis needs to be worked out by further
extensive experimentation at field level.
Recirculation of effluent slurry on daily basis and
stirring of the digester’s contents by using simple tech-
niques for enhancing biogas production seems to be
quite viable under rural conditions.
Keeping various parameters within the desired range
also improves gas production but the practical difficulty
lies in maintaining and monitoring these regularly. It is a
crucial point which needs due consideration since a
slight change in pH or temperature could otherwise re-
sult in reduction of gas production. Similarly formation
of volatile fatty acids beyond a particular range hinders
the methane production. Loading rate and solid con-
centration should be properly balanced and continu-
ously maintained.
As for the fixed film technique, it has certain merits
over the above mentioned methods. Once the material to
be used as carrier has been installed in the reactor, the
reactor can be operated under normal conditions with-
out any daily addition or monitoring. Different materi-
als (stone chips, iron mesh, clay, wood chips, etc.) had
been tried for fixed film reactors depending on their local
availability and mechanical strength in long run. It
would help to reduce HRT considerably resulting in cost
reduction of biogas plant, without compromising on
quantity and quality of biogas. Surprisingly in this
promising research area, using high solids content sub-
strate like cow dung slurry most of the studies have been
carried out at laboratory level only, whereas these
techniques have been successfully tried in the treatment
of wastewater under field conditions. An extensive study
on this aspect is warranted.
Acknowledgements
Authors are grateful to Ministry of Non-conven-
tional Energy Sources (MNES) and CSIR for providing
financial support for carrying out this work.
References
Aili, Kejun, Y., Yaoxin, Z., Guoyuan, F., 1991. Study and design on a
high performance biogas project treating chicken manure. Biogas
Forum 2, 14–19.
Anand, R.C., Singh, R., 1993. A simple technique: charcoal coating
around the digester improves biogas production in winter. Bior-
esour. Technol. 45, 151–152.
Angelidaki, I., Ahring, B.K., 1994. Thermophilic anaerobic digestion
of livestock waste: the effect of ammonia. Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol. 38 (4), 560–564.
Attar, Y., Mhetre, S.T., Shawale, M.D., 1998. Biogas production
enhancement by cellulytic strains of Actinomycetes. Biogas Forum
I (72), 11–15.
Aubart, C., Farinet, J.L., 1983. Anaerobic digestion of pig and cattle
manure in large-scale digesters and power production from biogas.
Symp. Pap. Energy Biomass Wastes VII, 741–766.
Babu, K.S., Nand, K., Srilatha, H.R., Srinath, K., Madhukara, K.,
1994. Improvement in biomethanation of mango processing wastes
by addition of plant derived additives. Biogas Forum III (58), 16–
19.
Baier, U., Schmidheiny, P., 1997. Enhanced anaerobic degradation of
mechanically disintegrated sludge. Water Sci. Technol. 36 (11),
137–143.
Bansal, N.K., 1988. A Techno-economic assessment of solar assisted
biogas systems. Energy Res. 10, 216.
Bardiya, N., Gaur, A.C., 1997. Effects of carbon and nitrogen ratio on
rice straw biomethanation. J. Rural Energy 4 (1–4), 1–16.
Barnett, A., 1978. Biogas technology in the third world: a multi-
disciplinary Review. IDRC, Ottawa, Canada. 51.
Baserja, U., 1984. Biogas production from cowdung: influence of time
and fresh liquid manure. Swiss-Biotech. 2, 19–24.
Brummeler, E.T., Aarnink, M.M.J., Koster, I.W., 1992. Dry anaerobic
digestion of solid organic waste in a biocell reactor at pilot plant
scale. Water Sci. Tech. 25 (7), 301–310.
Chandra, R., Gupta, R.S., 1997. Effect of pectin on anaerobic
digestion of distillery effluent and biomethanogenesis in fed batch
reactor. Indian J. Environ. Protect. 17, 19–23.
Chowdhry, S.D.R., Gupta, S.K, Banergy, S.K., Roy Chowdhry, S.D.,
1994. Evaluation of the potentiality of tree leaves for biogas
production. Indian Forester 120 (8), 720–728.
Clark, P.B., Hillman, P.F., 1995. Enhancement of anaerobic digestion
using duckweed (Lemna minor) enriched with iron. Water Environ.
Manage. J. 10 (2), 92–95.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
Dangaggo, S.M., Aliya, M., Atiku, A.T., 1996. The effect of seeding
with bacteria on biogas production rate. Renew. Energy––An Int.
J. 9 (1–4), 1045–1048.
Dar, H.G., Tandon, S.M., 1987. Biogas production from pretreated
wheat straw, lantana residue, apple and peach leaf litter with cattle
dung. Biol. Wastes 21, 75–83.
Desai, C.K., 1988. Use of solar pond for thermal control of biogas
plant. In: Proceedings of the National Seminar on Solar Energy
and Rural Development, Kolhapur, May 29–31, 1987. Shivaji
University, pp. 83–88.
Desai, M., Madamwar, D., 1994. Anaerobic digestion of a mixture of
cheese whey, poultry waste and cattle dung: a study of the use of
adsorbents to improve digester performance. Environ. Pollut. 86
(3), 337–340.
Dhawale, M.R., 1996. Anaerobic fermentation with chemical inducers
and higher solids for biogas production. Project sponsored by
MNES, 1993–1996, Shivasadan Renewable Energy Research
Institute, Sangli, Maharashtra, India.
Dohanyos, M., Zabranska, J., Jenicek, P., 1997. Enhancement of
sludge anaerobic digestion by using of a special thickening
centrifuge. Water Sci. Tech. Dec. 36 (11), 145–153.
El Shinnawi, M.M., El Tahawi, B.S., El Houssieni, M., Fahmy, S.S.,
1989. Changes of organic constituents of crop residues and poultry
wastes during fermentation for biogas production. MIRCEN––J.
Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 5 (4), 475–486.
Fry, L.J., Merill, 1973. Methane digesters for fuel gas and fertilizer.
Newsletter No. 3, New Alchemy Institute, Santa Cruz, CA.
Gaddy, J.L., 1994. Improving performance of anaerobic solids
digester. US Patent 5342524.
Ganesh Kumar, A.S., Saravanan, S., Subramanian, P., 1996. Biofilters
for biogas. Biogas Forum I (64), 4–5.
Garba, B., 1996. Effect of temperature and retention period on biogas
production from ligrocellulosic material. Renew. Energy––An Int.
J. 9 (1–4), 938–941.
Geeta, G.S., Jagadeesh, K.S., Reddy, T.K.R., 1990. Nickel as an
accelerator of biogas production in water hyacinth (Eichornia
crassipes Solns.). Biomass 21, 157–161.
Geeta, G.S., Suvarna, C.V., Jagdeesh, K.S., 1994. Enhanced methane
production by sugarcane trash pretreated with Phanerochaete
chrysosporium. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 9 (2), 113–117.
Ghaly, A.E., 1996. A comparative study of anaerobic digestion of acid
cheese whey and dairy manure in a two-stage reactor. Bioresour.
Technol. 58 (1), 61–72.
Gollakota, K.G., Meher, K.K., 1988. Effect of particle size, temper-
ature, loading rate and stirring on biogas production from castor
cake. Biol. Wastes 24, 243–249.
Gotass, H.B., 1956. Composting. WHO, Geneva, Switzerland.
Gunaseelan, V.N., 1987. Parthenium as an additive with cattle manure
in biogas production. Biol. Wastes 21, 1095–2002.
Henry, M.M., 1985. Industrial performance of a fixed film anaerobic
digestion process for methane production and stabilization of sugar
distillery and piggery wastes. Energy––Biomass-Wastes, 9, Meet-
ing, pp. 829–855.
Idnani, M.A., Laura, R.D., 1971. Increased production of biogas from
cowdung by adding other agricultural waste materials. J. Sci. Food
Agric., 164–167.
Jain, S.R., Mattiasson, B., 1998. Acclimatization of methanogenic
consortia for low pH biomethanation process. Biotech. Lett. 20 (8),
771–775.
Jarvis, A., Nordberg, A., Mathisen, B., Svensson, B.H., 1995.
Stimulation of conversion rates and bacterial activity in a silage
fed-two-phase biogas process by initiating liquid circulation.
Antonie-Leeuwenhoek-J. Microbiol. 68 (4), 317–327.
Kalia, A.K., Kanwar, S.S., 1989. Anaerobic fermentation of ageratum
for biogas production. Biol. Wastes 32, 155–158.
Kalia, A.K., Singh, S.P., 1996. Performance evaluation of Pragati and
KVIC biogas plant in hilly regions. Biogas Forum 64, 6–10.
9
Kanwar, S.S., Guleri, R.L., 1994. Effect of recycling of digested slurry
on biogas production. Biogas Forum IV (59), 12–13.
Kanwar, S.S., Guleri, R.L., 1995. Biogas production from mixture of
poultry litter and cattle dung with an acclimatised inoculum.
Biogas Forum I (60), 21–23.
Kashyap, D.R., Dadhich, K.S., Sharma, S.K., 2003. Biomethanation
under psychrophilic conditions: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 87
(2003), 147–153.
Kloss, R., 1991. High rate plants for anaerobic treatment of
wastewater and production of biogas. Biogas Forum I (44), 4–14.
Kotsyurbenko, O.R., Nozhevnikova, A.N., Kalyuzhnyy, S.V., Zavar-
zin, G.A., 1993. Methanogenic digestion of cattle manure at low
temperature. Mikrobiologiya 62 (4), 761–771.
Kumar, M.P., 1997. Konark model. Biogas Forum III (70), 11–14.
Kumar, S., Jain, M.C., Choonkar, P.K., 1987. Stimulation of biogas
production from cattle dung by addition of charcoal. Biol. Wastes
20, 209–215.
Lettinga, G., Van Velson, A.F.M., Hobma, S.W., De Zeeuw, W.,
Klapwijk, A., 1980. Use of upflow sludge blanket reactor for
biological wastewater treatment, especially for anaerobic treat-
ment. Biotechnol. Bioengg. XXII (4), 674–699.
Lomas, J.M., Urbano, C., Camarero, L.M., 1999. Evaluation of pilot
scale down flow stationary fixed film anaerobic reactor treating
piggery slurry in the mesophilic range. Biomass Bioenergy 17, 49–
58.
Madamwar, D., Mithal, B.M., 1986. Absorbents in anaerobic diges-
tion of cattle dung. Indian J. Microbiol. 25 (1 and 2), 57–58.
Madhukara, K., Nand, K., Raju, N.R., Srilatha, H.R., 1993. Ensilage
of mango peel for methane generation. Process Biochem. 28 (2),
119–123.
Malik, R.K., Dahiya, D.S., 1990. Biogas production from cattle waste
by recycling of filtered liquid of digested slurry. Urja 28, 30.
Malik, R.K., Singh, R., Tauro, P., 1987. Effect of inorganic supple-
mentation on biogas production. Biol. Wastes 21 (2), 139–142.
Malik, R.K., Tauro, P., 1995. Effect of predigestion and effluent slurry
recycling on biogas production. Indian J. Microbiol. 35 (3), 205–
209.
Mathiesen, N.L., 1989. Ca and/or Mg soap solution in biogas
production. WO Patent 8900548.
Maurya, M.S., Singh, L., Sairam, M., Alam, S.I., 1994. Production of
biogas from night soil: effect of temperature and volatile solids.
Indian J. Microbiol. 34 (3), 223–228.
McDermott, B.L., Chalmer, A.D., Goodwin, J.A., 2001. Ultrasonifi-
cation as pre-treatment method for the enhancement of the
psychrophilic anaerobic digestion of aquaculture effluents. Envi-
ron. Technol. 22 (7), 823–830.
Meher, K.K., Murthy, M.V.S, Gollakota, K.G., 1994. Psychrophilic
anaerobic digestion of human waste. Bioresour. Technol. 50 (2),
103–106.
Meier, S.M., Busch, C., Diekert, G., 1993. The attachment of bacterial
cells to surfaces under anaerobic conditions. Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol. 38 (5), 667–673.
Mital, K., 1996. Biogas Systems-Principles and Applications. New age
International (P) Ltd.
Mohanrao, G.J., 1974. Scientific aspects of cowdung digestion. Khadi
Gramodyog 29 (7), 340–347.
Molnar, L., Bartha, I., 1989. High solids anaerobic fermentation for
biogas and compost production. Biomass 16 (3), 173–182.
Moorhead, K.K., Nordstedt, R.A., 1993. Batch anaerobic digestion of
water hyacinth: effects of particle size, plant nitrogen content and
inoculum volume. Bioresour. Technol. 44 (1), 71–76.
Nozhevnikova, A.N., Lotsyurbenko, O.R., Parshina, S.N., 1999.
Anaerobic manure treatment under extreme temperature condi-
tions. Water Sci. Tech. 40 (1), 215–221.
Nyns, E.J., 1986. In: Rehm, H.J., Reeds, G. (Eds.), Biomethanation
Processes in Biotechnology, vol. 8. VCH press, Weinheim (Federal
Republic of Germany), pp. 207–268.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
10 Yadvika et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2004) xxx–xxx
Patel, V., Desai, M., Madamwar, D., 1993. Thermochemical pretreat-
ment of water hyacinth for improved biomethanation. Appl.
Microbiol. Biotechnol. 42 (1), 67–74.
Patel, V., Madamwar, D., 1994. Anaerobic digestion of a mixture of
cheese whey, poultry waste and cattle dung: a study of the use of
adsorbents to improve digester performance. Environ. Pollut. 86
(3), 337–340.
Patel, V., Patel, A., Madamwar, D., 1992. Effect of adsorbents on
anaerobic digestion of water-hyacinth-cattle dung. Bioresour.
Technol. 40 (2), 179–181.
Rajasekaran, P., Swaminathan, K.R., Jayapragasam, M., 1989. Biogas
production potential of Euphorbia tirucalli L. along with cattle
manure. Biol. Wastes 30, 75–77.
Raju, K., Ramaligaiah, 1997. Methane production from orange
processing waste. Indian J. Environ. Health 39 (1), 20–22.
Rana, V., Santosh, Kohli, S., Yadvika, 2002. Study on use of fixed film
technique for performance enhancement of cowdung based biogas
plants. SESI 12, 93–99.
Rao, P., Seenayya, G., 1994. Improvement of methanogenesis from
cow dung and poultry litter waste digesters by addition of iron.
World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 10 (2), 211–214.
Sanchez, E.P., Weiland, P., Travieso, L., 1992. Effect of hydraulic
retention time on the anaerobic biofilm reactor efficiency applied to
screened cattle waste treatment. Biotechnol. Lett. 14 (7), 635–638.
Sanchez, J.M., Arijo, S., Munoz, M.A., Morinigo, M.A., Borrego, J.J.,
1994. Microbial colonization of different support materials used to
enhance the methanogenic process. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
41 (4), 480–486.
Sanchez, R., Montalvo, S., Travieso, L., Radriguez, X., 1995.
Anaerobic digestion of sewage sludge in an anaerobic fixed bed
digester. Biomass Bioenergy 9 (6), 493–495.
Sanders, F.A., Bloodgood, D.E., 1965. The effect of nitrogen to carbon
ratios on anaerobic decomposition. J. Water Pollut. Contr. Fed.
37, 1741.
Santosh, Vasudevan, P., Chanel, S., 1999. Studies on developing a
model for water conservation in biogas system. Project sponsored
by DST (1996-99), CRDT, IIT, Delhi, India.
Sharma, D.K., 2002. Studies on availability and utilization of onion
storage waste in a rural habitat. Ph.D. thesis, Centre for Rural
Development and Technology, Indian Institute of Technology,
Delhi, India.
Sharma, S.K., Mishra, I.M., Sharma, M.P., Saini, J.S., 1988. Effect of
particle size on biogas generation from biomass residues. Biomass
17, 251–263.
Shimizu, C., 1992. Holding anaerobic bacteria in digestion tank, JP
Patent 4341398.
Singh, H., Maheshwari, R.C., 1995. Indian advances in biogas
technology––review of work done under AICRP on RES. Biogas
Forum 60 (I), 4–16.
Singh, L., Maurya, M.S., Ramana, K.V., Alam, S.I., Singh, L., 1995.
Production of biogas from night soil at psychrophilic temperature.
Bioresour. Technol. 53 (2), 147–149.
Singh, R., Jain, M.K., Tauro, P., 1983. Pre-digestion to improve
production of biogas from cattle waste. Agric. Wastes 6, 167–174.
Singh, R.B., 1974. Biogas Plant: Generating Methane from Organic
Wastes. Gobar Gas Research Station, Ajitmal Etawah. p. 33.
Solicio, C., Del, B.M., 1987. Performance of an anaerobic fixed film
bioreactor for treatment of a settled domestic sewage. Environ.
Congr. Biotechnol. 1, 214–217.
Somayaji, D., Khanna, S., 1994. Biomethanation of rice and wheat
straw. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 10 (5), 521–523.
Sorlini, C., Ranalli, G., Merlo, S., 1990. Microbiological aspects of
anaerobic digestion of swine slurry in upflow fixed bed digesters
with different packing materials. Biol. Wastes 31 (3), 231–239.
SPOBD, 1979. Biogas Technology and Utilization. Chengdu Seminar,
Sichuan Provincial Office of Biogas Development, Sichuan, P.R.
China, 1979.
Sundrarajan, R., Jayanthi, A., Elango, R., 1997. Anaerobic digestion
of organic fractions of municipal solid waste and domestic sewage
of Coimbatore. Indian J. Environ. Health 39 (3), 193–196.
Takizawa, N., Umetsu, K., Takahata, H., Hoshiba, H., 1994.
Temperature effects on continuously expending anaerobic digester
with dairy manure slurry. Res. Bull. Obihiro Univ., Natural Sci. 19
(1), 31–36.
Tirumale, S., Nand, K., 1994. Influence of Anaerobic cellulolytic
bacterial consortia in the anaerobic digesters on biogas production.
Biogas Forum III (58), 12–15.
Tiwari, G.N., Chandra, A., 1986. Solar assisted biogas system: a new
approach. Energy Conserv. Manage. 26 (2), 147–150.
Tiwari, G.N., Rawat, D.K., Chandra, A., 1988. A simple analysis of
conventional biogas plant. Energy Conserv. Manage. 28 (1), 1–4.
Trujillo, D., Perez, J.F., Cerebros, F.J., 1993. Energy recovery from
wastes: anaerobic digestion of tomato plant mixed with rabbit
wastes. Bioresour. Technol. 45 (2), 81–83.
Tumchenok, V.I., 1996. Enriching biogenic gas. Lo-Khabarov, Russia,
CA: Khabarovsk-Mach. Eng. PN: RU-; RU. 2068812; 10.11.96.
Umetsu, K., Takahata, H., Kawamoto, T., 1992. Effect of temperature
on mesophilic anaerobic digestion of dairy cow slurry. Res. Bull.
Obihiro Univ. Ser. I 17 (4), 401–408.
Van der Berg, L., Kennedy, K.J., 1983. Comparison of advanced
anaerobic reactors. In: Proceedings of III International Conference
on Anaerobic digestion, August 1983, Boston, NRCC no. 22613.
Van, D.M., Faber, J., 1996. Anaerobic fermentation of solid organic
waste in a reactor. WO Patent 9607726.
Vartak, D.R., Angler, C.R., Ricke, S.C., McFarland, M.J., 1997a.
Organic loading rate and bio-augmentation effects in psychrophilic
anaerobic digestion of dairy manure. In: ASAE Annual Interna-
tional Meeting, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA, 10–14 August,
Pepr-American Society of Agricultural Engineers.
Vartak, D.R., Engler, C.R., McFarland, M.J., Ricke, S.C., 1997b.
Attached-film media performance in psychrophilic anaerobic
treatment of dairy cattle wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 62, 79–
84.
Wang, Q., Kuninobu, M., Kakimoto, K., Ogawa, H.I., Kato, T., 1999.
Upgrading of anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge by
ultrasonic pretreatment. Bioresour. Technol. 68 (3), 309–313.
Wanjun, Z., 1992. Study on a new design biogas digester. Biogas
Forum 2, 20–23.
Weiland, P., Peters, H., 1992. Evaluation of different high rate systems
for anaerobic treatment of liquid manure. DECHEMA-Biotech-
nology Conference, 1992, 5, Part B. pp. 887–890.
Wilkie, A., Colleran, E., 1986. Pilot scale digestion of pig slurry
supernatant using an upflow anaerobic filter. Environ. Lett. 7, 65–
76.
Wilkie, A., Faherty, G., Colleran, E., 1984. The effect of varying the
support matrix on the anaerobic digestion of pig slurry in the
upflow anaerobic filter design. Energy from Biomass, 2nd E.C.
Conference. pp. 531–535.
Wodzinski, R.J., Himes, M.E., Gennaro, R.N., 1983. Effect of addition
of Fe3þ and Co2þ to dairy manure on methane production. Abstr.
Annu. Meet. Am. Soc. Microbiol., 83 Meeting, p. 243.
Wong, M.H., Cheung, Y.H., 1995. Gas production and digestion
efficiency of sewage sludge containing elevated toxic metals.
Bioresour. Technol. 54 (3), 261–268.
Young, J.C., Song, K.H., 1984. Factors affecting selection of media for
anaerobic filters. In: Proceedings of III International Conference
on Fixed Film Biological Processes, July 1984, Arlington, Virginia.
pp. 229–245.
Zennaki, B.Z., Zadi, A., Lamini, H., Aubinear, M., Boulif, M., 1996.
Methane Fermentation of cattle manure: effects of HRT, temper-
ature & substrate concentration. Tropicultural 14 (4), 134–140.
Zennaki, B.Z., Zaid, A., Bentaya, K., 1998. Anaerobic digestion of
cattle manure mixed with the aquatic used Pistia stratiotes. Cahiers
Agric. 7 (4), 319–321.