Usman Haider 2020 Agri Engg Uaf FSLBD

DESIGN MODIFICATION OF INDIGENIZED FLOATING
DRUM BIOGAS PLANTS FOR UP GRADATION OF

BIOGAS
ENGR. USMAN HAIDER

2003-ag-2343
M.Sc. (Hons.) Agricultural Engineering
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
FARM MACHINERY AND POWER
Department of Farm Machinery and Power

Faculty of Agri. Engg. & Technology
University of Agriculture, Faisalabad
PAKISTAN
2020
i
ii
iii
iv
v
DEDICATED
TO
MY BELOVED PARENTS
& My Loving Teacher
vi
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
All praises and thanks to ALMIGHTY ALLAH, The Compassionate, The merciful, The only creator of the Universe,
and the source of all knowledge and wisdom, WHO blessed me with health, thoughts, talented teachers, co-operative friends and
opportunity to make some contribution to the already existing ocean of knowledge. I offer my humblest thanks to the greatest
social reformers and Madina-tul-Ilm, The Holy Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (May Allah Peace Be Upon Him). I would like to
greatfully and sincerely thank Dr. Anjum Munir on his guidance, understanding, patience and most importantly his friendly attitude
during my post- graduate studies at University of Agriculture Faisalabad. His mentorship was paramount in providing a well-rounded
experience consistent my long-term career goal. He encouraged me to not only grow as an agricultural engineer but as a researcher
and independent thinker. I am not sure many post-graduate students are given the opportunity to develop their own -individuality
and self-sufficiency by being allowed to work with such independence. For everything you ‘have done for me, Boss, I thank you.
I pay my obligations to the indispensable contribution of Dr. Abdul Ghafoor and Dr. Shoukat Ali, members of my supervisory
committee for their excellent supervision, guidance and encouragement, during my PhD at UAF. I also thankful to Dr. Muhammad
Ashraf who helped me making this study possible. I would like to thank all people who helped me in making this study possible.
My grateful thanks are extended to Dr. M. Azhar Ali, Dr. Ali Raza and Dr. Yasir Latif, University of Agriculture Faisalabad,
whom help enabled me to successfully manage my thesis.
Last but not least, I thank my parents and all of my family members for their faith in me and allowing me to be as ambitious as I
wanted. It was under their watchful eye that I gained so much drive and an ability to tackle challenges head on. Some deep
hearted gratitude to the endowment fund secretariat to provide me a ground for the research opportunity
May Allah bless all these people with long, happy, and peaceful life (Ameen)
Usman Haider
vii
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
No. Title Page No.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF ABBRIVATIONS
INTRODUCTION 01
REVIEW OF LITERATURE 08
MATERIALS AND METHODS 17
3.1 Experimental set up of existing 25, 40, 110 and 130m3 biogas plants 18
Calculations of the fermentation chamber of biogas plants 18
3.3 Construction of floating drum biogas digester structure and 21
installation of a biogas plant
3.4 Major Components of the Biogas Plant 22
3.4.1 Feeding tank 23
3.4.2 Digester 23
3.4.3 Gasholder 26
3.4.4 Stirring Mechanism 27
3.4.4.1 Mechanical stirring 26
3.4.4.2 Hydraulic stirring 28
3.4.5 Effluent Storage Reservoir 29
3.4.6 Gas Compressor 29
3.4.7 Submersible pump 30
3.4.8 Gas storage tank 30
3.5 Filtering Units 32
3.5.1 Dehumidifier 32
3.5.2 H2S scrubber 32
3.5.3 Chemical absorption technique 33
3.5.3.1 Effect of Effluents used 34
3.5.3.2 Removal of Carbon dioxide 35
3.5.3.3 Removal of Hydrogen Sulfide(H2S) 35
3.6 Physical Absorption Technique 35
3.6.1 Top section 35
3.6.2 Middle section 35
3.6.3 Bottom section 35
3.6.4 Supporting frame 35
3.6.5 Water supply system 36
3.6.6 Gas flow meter 37
3.6.7 Pressure regulator valve 38
3.7 Genset 38
3.8 Experimental Procedure 39
3.8.1.1 Procedure for data collection 39
3.8.1.2 Optimization of biogas plant 39
3.8.1.3 Dependent variables 39
3.8.1.4 Independent variables 39
3.8.1.5 Working principle of Reverse Blasting Technique (RBT) 39
3.8.1.6 Determination of moisture content and total solids of samples 40
ix
3.8.1.7 Standardization of the solid content of feed material to 10 percent 40
level
3.8.1.8 Performance evaluation of biogas plant 41
3.8.1.9 Biogas analyzer 41
3.9 Data Collection 42
3.10 Statistical Analysis of biogas production 42
3.10.1 Effect of temperature on gas production 42
3.10.2 Effect of pressure on gas production 42
3.10.3 Effect of temperature and pressure on gas production 43
3.11 Statistical Analysis of biogas production by (RBT) 43
3.12 Statistical Analysis of biogas Up-gradation 43
3.13 Economic analysis 43
3.13.1 Fixed cost 43
3.13.2 Taxes 44
3.13.3 Insurance 44
3.13.4 Housing 44
3.13.5 Variable cost 44
3.13.6 Payback period 44
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 45
4.1 Design of Floating Drum Biogas Plant 45
4.1.1 Material Calculation of Biogas Plants 48
4.1.2 Design modification of fermentation Chamber using RBT 49
4.2 Effect of Temperature, Pressure and Feeding rate on Gas Production 50
rate
4.2.1 Combined effect of feeding rate and temperature on biogas 50
production rate
4.2.2 Combined effect of pressure and temperature on biogas production 51
rate
4.2.3 Combined effect of pressure and feeding rate on biogas production 51
rate
4.3 Up gradation of biogas 53
4.3.1 Effect of water temperature on percentage composition of CH4 53
4.3.2 Effect of water temperature on percentage composition of CO2 54
4.3.3 Effect of water temperature on the composition of H2S in ppm 55
4.3.4 Effect of water flow rate on percentage composition of CH4 55
4.3.5 Effect of water flow rate on percentage composition of CO2 56
4.3.6 Effect of water flow rate on the composition of H2S in ppm 57
4.3.7 Effect of water pressure on percentage composition of CH4 58
4.3.8 Effect of water pressure on percentage composition of CO2 59
4.3.9 Effect of water pressure on the composition of H2S in ppm 60
4.4 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on biogas 60
composition
4.4.1 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the percentage 60
composition of CH4
4.4.2 Combine effect of water flow rate and pressure on percentage 61
composition of CO2
4.4.3 Effect of waterflow rate and pressure interaction on H2S ppm 62
4.4.4 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the 63
percentage composition of CH4
x
4.4.5 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on percentage 63
composition of CO2
4.4.6 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the 64
composition of H2S in ppm
4.4.7 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the 65
4.4.8 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on percentage 66
composition of CO2
4.4.9 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the 67
4.4.10 Effect of water flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on 68
the percentage composition of CH4
percentage composition of CO2
the composition of H2S in ppm
4.5 Effect of CaO+ H₂O on Biogas concentration 72
4.5.1 Effect of CaO+ H₂O on CH₄ (%) concentration 72
4.5.2 Effect of CaO+ H₂O on CO2 (%) concentration 73
4.5.3 Effect of CaO+H₂O on H₂S concentration 74
4.6 Effect of NaOH+H₂O on biogas concentration 75
4.6.1 Effect of NaOH+H₂O on CH₄ (%) concentration 75
4.6.2 Effect of NaOH+H₂O on CO₂(%) concentration 76
4.6.3 Effect of NaOH + H₂O on of H₂S in ppm 77
Economics Analysis 79
SUMMARY 83
CONCLUSIONS 85
RECOMMENDATIONS 86
References 87
Appendices 92
xi
LIST OF TABLES
S. No. Title Page No.

3.1 Dimensions of different Inlets of floating drum biogas plants 23
3.2 Dimensions of different digesters of floating drum biogas plants 24
3.3 Height and diameter of biogas up-gradation unit 33
3.4 Biogas production of minimum and maximum levels of independent 42

variables
4.1 Composition CH4, CO2, O2, NH3, CO, H2and H2S of Biogas Plant 49
installed at Dairy Farm, UAF
4.2 Biogas production rate (ANOVA) 52
4.3 ANOVA for percentage concentration of methane (CH4) 71
4.4 ANOVA for percentage concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) 71
4.5 ANOVA for parts per million of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) 72
4.6 Economic analysis of biogas generation (RBT) 81
xii
LIST OF ABBRIVATIONS
RBT Reverse Blasting Technique

RE Renewable energy
HRT Hydraulic Retention Time
GW Giga Watt
KW Kilo Watt
GWh Giga Watt Hour
kWh Kilo Watt Hour
MWh Mega Watt Hour
TWh Tera Watt Hour
mm3 Million cubic meter
DME Dimethyl-Ether
BTP Biogas Technology Program
BSP Biogas Support Program
GHG Green House Gas
CHP Combine Heat and Power
BCR Benefit-Cost Ratio
PCAT Pakistan Council for Appropriate Technology
BSP Biogas Support Program
PDDC Pakistan Dairy Development Company
RSPN Rural Support Program Network
GOP Government of Pakistan
PCRET Pakistan Council of Renewable Energy Technologies
AD Anaerobic digestion
FW Fruit Waste
VFA Volatile fatty acids
CHP Combine Heat and Power
SV Volatile solids
ROI Return Of Investment
SME Small and Medium Enterprizes
CV Calorific Value
EU Eurpeon Union
TJ Tera joule
Md Mass of Dung
Mw Mass of water
Mc Mass of daily charge
Vc Volume of daily charge
Vd Volume of the digester
Vg Volume of the gas
Vu Actual volume
PI Indicated power
Csp Specific gas consumption
Ed Total energy
pd Density of the feeding material
tr Retention time
Vt Total volume
rh/d Ratio height to diameter
xiii
LIST OF FIGURES
S. No. Title Page No.
1.1 Process flow diagram of the biogas plant 05
3.1 Process diagram of floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka 17

Farm UAF and Chawla Farm Faisalabad.
3.2a Process diagram including all major components of biogas plants 22

installed at UAF
3.2b Front view of floating drum biogas plants installed at UAF 23
3.3a Front view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Chawla 26

farm Faisalabad
3.3b Isometric view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Chawla Farm 26
Faisalabad
3.4 Detail drawing with specifications of floating drum biogas plants and 27
gas holder installed at UAF.
3.5 Detail drawing with specifications of Mechanical agitator floating 28

drum biogas plants installed at UAF and Shakargarh Farm
3.6 Detail drawing with specifications of hydraulic stirring biogas plants 28

installed at Chawla and Proka farm UAF.
3.7 Isometric view of Double Piston compressor installed at UAF, Chawla 29

Shakargar and Proka Farm
3.8 Isometric view of Submersible pump installed at UAF, and Chawla 30

Farm.
3.9a Biogas storage vessel (Standing and laying designs) 31
3.9b Isometric view with specifications of gas storage tanks installed at 31

UAF, Chawla, Shakargarh and Proka Farm
3.10 Detail drawing with specifications of H2S Scrubber installed at UAF, 33

Shakargarh, and Chawla Farm Satiana road Faisalabad.
3.11a Schematic design of water scrubbing system 36
3.11b Schematic design of water scrubbing system 37
3.12 Gas flow meter 38
3.13 Pressure regulator valve 38
3.14 Detailed view of gasoline generator installed at a dairy farm, UAF 39
xiv
3.15 Installation of reverse blasting technique inside the digester 40
3.16 Detailed view of BIOGAS 5000 @ Geotech 41
4.1 Estimation of retention time under laboratory conditions 46
4.2 Composition of raw biogas before the scrubber 49
4.3 Effect of feeding rate and digester temperature on biogas production 50
4.4 Effect of pressure and temperature on biogas production 51
4.5 Effect pressure and feeding rate on biogas production 52
4.6 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition 53

of CH4
4.7 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition 54

of CO2.
4.8 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the composition of H2S in 54

ppm
4.9 Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the percentage composition of 55

CH4.
4.10 Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the percentage composition of 56

CO2.
4.11 Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the composition of H2S in 57

ppm
4.12 Effect of water pressure in scrubber on the percentage composition of 57

CH4.
4.13 Effect of water pressure in scrubber on the percentage composition of 58

CO2
4.14 Effect of water Pressure in scrubber on composition of H2S in ppm. 59
4.15 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the percentage 60
composition of CH4.
4.16 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the percentage 61
composition of CO2.
4.17 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the composition 62
of H2S in ppm.
4.18 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage 63

composition of CH4
xv
4.19 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage 64
composition of CO2
4.20 Effect of water temperature and Pressure interaction on composition 65

of H2S in ppm
4.21 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the 66

percentage composition of CH4.


4.24 Effect of water flow rate, pressure and temperature interaction on the 68
4.25 Effect of water flow rate, Pressure and Temperature interaction on 69

percentage composition of CO2.
4.26 Effect of water flow rate, pressure and temperature interaction on 70

composition of H2S in ppm.
4.27 Effect of CaO+ H₂O treatments on CH4 (%) concentration 73
4.28 Effect of CaO+H₂O treatments on CO2 (%) concentration 74
4.29 Effect of CaO+H₂O treatments on H2S (ppm) concentration 75
4.30 Effect of NaOH+H₂O treatments on CH₄ (%) concentration 76
4.31 Effect of NaOH+H₂O treatments on CO₂ (%) concentration 77
4.32 Effect of NaOH+H₂O treatments on H₂S (ppm) concentration 78
4.33a Values between total cost (TC), total revenue (TR) profit (P) and 82
money (PKR)
4.33b Values between total cost (TC), total revenue (TR) profit (P) and 82
money (PKR)
xvi
Abstract
Pakistan is one of the largest milk-producing countries and producing millions of tons of
animal manure (Cows and buffaloes). Therefore, the best utilization of this dung is to
convert it into biogas. Biogas is undoubtedly the best and most affordable renewable energy
resource for agricultural countries like Pakistan. For cooking purposes, raw biogas can be
used directly, but for power generation purposes, biogas should be purified. Many
techniques are being used to purify biogas. In this study, two innovative techniques
including reverse blasting, physical and chemical absorption methods were introduced to
enhance biogas production rate and up-gradation of methane concentration respectively.
The maximum achievable methane concentration is 85.2% at a temperature of incoming
water 15oC and the operating flow rate of water is 30 lpm while operating pressure 6 bar in
the scrubbing unit. The purified biogas is collected from the upper side of the scrubbing
unit. In the chemical absorption technique, low-pressure raw biogas was passed through a
solution of CaO+H2O and NaOH+H20. The physical absorption technique was found the
best technique in terms of maximum methane (CH4%) concentration ensuring up to 85.2%
methane (CH4%) concentration while impurities decrease such as carbon dioxide (CO2%)
13.7% and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) 4.0 ppm respectively. The economic analysis showed
that the payback period of these biogas plants is 25, 40, 110,120, and 130m3 were calculated
for 7 years. This study also provides a fundamental understanding of the usage of biogas
as a natural source. About 170 MWhday-1 energy could be produced utilizing the dung of
171 million livestock animals in Pakistan employing biogas to mitigate the looming energy
crisis of the country in an efficient and environment-friendly alternative way. This study
has been taken up to enhance the efficacy of the floating-drum-type biogas plants by design
modification and various up-gradation techniques to increase the percentage of
composition methane (CH4%). For this purpose, the present study was concluded in three
phases, conducted on seven floating drum biogas plants at the University of Agriculture
Faisalabad, having a capacity of 25m3 and 40m3, Shakargarh agriculture farm Sialkot
having the capacity of 110m3 (2units) installed at Proka Farm having a capacity of 120m3
(02 units) at the University of Agriculture Faisalabad, and 130m3 installed at Chawla Farm
Satiana road. An indigenous reverse blasting technique (RBT) has been used to recycle the
biogas at the bottom of the digester to increase the anaerobic process for biogas production.
This recirculated biogas passed into the digester through a pipe that is being laid at the
bottom of the digester circularly and having fixed nozzles on its surface to exhaust the
pressurized biogas from the bottom towards the top. For the up-gradation of methane
content up to 72.43% methane contents a cylindrical column has been designed by using
CaO+H2O and NaOH+H2O. Another physical absorption technique has been applied for
the up-gradation of biogas to achieve methane content up to 85.2%. The effect of using
different chemicals inside the scrubbing unit has been studied to achieve maximum
methane (CH4%) concentration. Design parameters, such as biomass (kg), biogas flow rate
(m3hr-1), and chemical concentrations (kg) have been used for the performance evaluation
of designed biogas plants. The effect of these parameters has been examined concerning
the percentage composition of methane (CH4%).
Keywords: Biogas, Floating drum type, Reverse blasting, Methanization, Digester
temperature, Packed bed scrubbing unit, Regression analysis, CRD.
xvii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Civilized communities exhibit the distinguishing feature of having abundantly available

energy for domestic, agricultural, industrial, and commercial needs (Saibu and Ampadu,
2015). Since the last decade and a half, Pakistan has been mired in a crippling energy crisis
which has affected the domestic and commercial zones in a humungous manner
economically. The energy sector of Pakistan is highly dependent on primary energy sources
viz fossil fuels. During 2011-12, the consolidated energy harnessed in the country was
approximately equivalent to 64.727 million tons of furnace oil combustion (MTOE)
(Anonymous 2011). This total energy was categorically distributed as 49.5%, furnace oil
30.8%, hydel 12.5%, coal l6.6%, atomic (nuclear) energy 1.9%, LPG 0.5%, and energy
imported stood at 0.1%. The energy crisis resulted in 8-10 hours of daily load shedding in
main cities while 14-18 hours in rural areas. The economic survey for the years (2009–
2010) declared that available energy was reduced significantly during these two years,
which will be reduced more rapidly at the rate of 29.6% during 2021-22 (Maryem et al.,
2013). Moreover, the energy demand is also rapidly growing throughout the world due to
the increasing population, inventions of new technologies, and human comfort
requirements. Currently, about 88% energy demand of the world is met with fossil fuels.
Moreover, it has been estimated profoundly that energy demand will be doubled in the
current century (IEA, 2012)
Different projections showed that renewable energy (RE) resources are more reliable as
compared to fossil fuel, so people must be shifted to these resources in the future to meet
their energy demand (EIA, 2009; Jefferson, 2006). The potential of renewable energy
resources in Pakistan is higher in terms of wind, hydro, biomass, and solar energy, and all
these sources should be utilized appropriately to decrease the unsolicited gap between
energy demands and supply. Load shedding can be transformed into proper load
management by utilizing the above-mentioned resources depending on their availability
and resulting environmental impact. Pakistan achieved the seventh position in the
international world coal ranking, but unfortunately, only 0.79% of energy demand is being
met from coal (Latif and Ramzan, 2014).
The major reason for the shortfall in electricity is causing due to fewer storage levels of
water at different hydropower units (HRP 2011). In rural areas, there are plenty of animals
that are producing a significant quantity for producing biogas. According to (Iqbal, 2014)
1
estimate, each year approximately 81 million tons of crop residue 72 million cows and
buffaloes, and nearly 785 million birds residue produced waste. The per-day production
capacity from animal dung is 360 million kg while that from birds is 30 million kg taken at
a 50% overall efficiency. Above all these are producing approximately nearly 41 million
kWh unit’s electricity daily and if calculated annually it is almost 13,530 GWh per annum.
Being an agricultural country, waste management is a serious concern because around 65-
70% of the population is associated with agriculture thereby producing on an-average 15
billion tons of waste comprising animal dung and crop residue worldwide (Donkin et al.,
2013). There is a lot of potential for extracting energy-generating waste from food
processing industries, but the calculation of its amount cannot be ascertained because of its
dependence upon the use of processing and production technology utilized. Similarly, in
the case of juice producing industry post-harvest losses are up to 50% of the processed fruit.
Apart from that 30% of chicken by-products are not suitable for human consumption, and
are thus dumped as waste during the initial stages of meat processing and cleaning
(Salminen and Rintala, 2002; Forgács et al., 2012).
There are three processes of energy conversion from biomass viz., biochemical, and
thermochemical, and physio-chemical. In a physio-chemical process where bio-fuel/diesel
is produced from energy crops but this method is not so much appreciated as most of the
plant's oils are used as food. In the thermochemical process, big challenges are faced to
create starved oxidation inside the reactor tank as well as the dry biomass fuel is required
inside the reactor. Moreover, a very sophisticated cleaning system is required to prevent
the gas engine valves and cylinder liners and other undesirable impurities. So, out of all the
energy conversion methods from biomass, biogas is the best method that can be used
continuously and successfully without much operating and cleaning challenges and
anaerobic fermentation of organic matter enables the biogas productions. The chemical
composition of biogas implies the type of substrate and the essential operational condition
which are to be maintained during anaerobic digestion processes. The crude biogas mainly
comprises (40-75%) of methane (CH4) and (15-60%) of carbon dioxide (CO2) along with
tertiary ingredients such as Hydrogen sulfide H2S (Krich et al., 2005). The magnificent
calorific value of biogas is the potential energy source that is further helpful in various
applications including vehicle fuel, heat and energy production, feedstock required for
chemical production, and an alternative to natural gas (Biesinger et al., 2011).
(Tippayawong, 2010).
2
Earlier experiences of biogas, in the 1980s, failed due to the flawed construction designs
and techniques employed for making biogas digesters. Later on, plants constructed in the
late 1990s were more thoughtfully constructed and employed the use of technically sound
methodologies duly deliberated by experts and scientists. Despite these improvements, the
number of plants has remained non-significant with no more than a few hundred
constructed annually. The rural community has great potential to utilize its resources but
unfortunately, lack of technologies, research, and development (R&D) in the past has
restricted the use of biogas plants. Although they have many animals that are producing
plenty of dung which is thrown into open space thus causing environmental pollution and
health issues in the community. So, the biogas plants are the only solution for farmers as
well as for the people of the rural community. Pakistan lies in most of the Asian countries
where various biogas programs are being installed annually.
Being an agricultural country with livestock farming making up for an important

component of this form of agriculture (Amjid et al., 2011) reported that around 72 million
animals having around 720 million kg of manure daily that may produce 16.3 million cubic
meters (mm3) biogas on daily basis and further producing 21 million tons of fertilizer on
annual basis. Moreover, the day-to-day gas consumption of the country is around 96.2
million cubic meters(mm3). Meanwhile, the supply deficit of natural gas ranges from 10 -
15% of the total demand during 2011 (Anonymous, 2011a). Globally the number of biogas
plants on a small and domestic scale was around 16 in 2005 (Hamlin, 2012).
Domestic energy demands of around six million houses can be fulfilled by generating 21.35
million cubic meters (mm3) from animal dung. Moreover, 45 million tons of bio-fertilizer
on daily basis can also make our land fertile. Around one million cubic meters (mm3) of
animal manure and almost 55,000 tons of solid waste are generated all over Pakistan and
urban areas respectively, within a day. Therefore, waste disposal and energy demand can
be achieved by biogas production from waste as the best solution to solve these problems.
In light of such a statement, 1200 units have been installed by the Pakistani Government in
2000 under the Biogas Support Program (BSP). The prevalent installation of biogas
digesters in developing countries initiated the early 70’s and almost 04 and 27 million
biogas plants have been working efficiently in India and China, respectively(Shian et al.,
1979).
3
Under such a scenario, it will be difficult to fulfill the energy requirements of the world
solely depending on fossil fuels. Unfortunately, the result of exaggerated fossil fuel burning
for direct combustion or electricity production has resulted in huge carbon emission thus
resulting in environmental pollution, the issue of global warming. To minimize the threats
imposed by global warming and climate change, GHG emanations should be kept to a level
accepted by the global emissions of 1990. (IPCC SRES and Swart, 2000). Another crucial
global challenge is the sustainability of continuous energy supply because most of the
known conventional oil and gas reserves are limited and depleting. Around 21 Chinese
plants were installed by Pakistan Council for Appropriate Technology (PCAT) but unable
to operate efficiently due to mainline gas leakage from cracks in the main plant pipelines.
(Ismail and Talib, 2016). Biogas production can be enhanced using solid substrates such
as the effect of additives, slurry reusing, and recycling by slurry filtrate. The mesophilic
temperature ranging from 28 - 36°C is an extensively acceptable situation that will boost
the gas production rate from solid substrates sufficiently. Efficient plant operation requires
accurate feedstock composition to maintain the C: N ratio in the feed within the optimum
range. Nitrogen is 25–30 times slower than carbon during anaerobic digestion. Carbon
being readily degradable should always be in higher concentration, to fulfill this
requirement, microbes need a 20–30:1 ratio of carbon to nitrogen (C: N) (Blaschek and
Ezeji, 2007).
The use of cattle dung is preferred as an effective starting material due to its higher pH
content and bacterial activity for starting a digestion process. Dust particles and other
materials may enhance the acidity level much higher resulting in the removal of methane-
producing bacteria (Zou, 2006).
Anaerobic digestion (AD) is considered an ecologically friendly process globally for biogas
production by utilizing the surplus volume of organic waste produced by animal dung. In
the first phase which is termed as acidification phase the mixture of manure, biomass, and
organic matter is transformed into dissolved organic links and segregated elements such as
hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and alcoholic components. In the next phase which is coined as
the acetogenic phase, the bifurcated elements are further divided into acetate(acetic acid)
and eventually the biogas is collected containing methane, hydrogen sulfide, carbon
dioxide, and some moisture.
4
Fig. 1.1 Process flow diagram of the biogas plant
There is the possibility of indigenous technology and it can be used as our local resources.
The biogas energy could not be flourished in Pakistan to that extent, which was expected
by the Government agencies. Several reasons are attributing to this issue, mainly the lack
of knowledge about this technology, improper training facilities regarding the installation
and less awareness about benefits, etc. but the most important factor is the non-availability
of methane (CH4) enrich biogas. By solving the issue of methane-enriched biogas, it can
be applied anywhere in the rural areas where animal dung is easily available with the lowest
initial cost.
Biogas desulfurization consisting of physical (Belmabkhout et al., 2009), chemical (Peiffer

and Gade, 2007), or biological principles (Chung et al., 2007) (Lin et al., 2013) can be used
to purify the gas quality. Although the process involved in this treatment such as membrane
separation, water scrubbing, and activated carbon adsorption is efficient but not
economically feasible due to replacement/regeneration costs of the consumed items
(Ryckebosch et al., 2011).
The present study enables the installation of a biogas plant with the increased biological
process during anaerobic digestion and its up-gradation by increasing the methane content
(CH4%). This would become happen due to alternative biochemical composition reactions
to enhance the calorific value of biogas. The existing modification was restricted to a
domestic level to facilitate poor farmers in rural areas rather than help to overcome the
5
entire energy crisis by replacing conventional resources. It has been introduced already, but
all of the former studies were unable to increase the methane concentration (CH4%) to the
desired level. Reverse blasting technique was also employed for the uniform mixing inside
the digester during the biogas production and its up-gradation is necessary by the physical
absorption technique, commonly known as water scrubbing technique, and also by
chemical absorption technique for the improvement of methane concentration (CH4%). The
main objective behind conducting the present study was to enhance the biogas production
for comprehensive and effective adaptation, particularly in remote and electricity-deprived
areas. The particles of carbon dioxide (CO2%), ammonia (NH3%), and hydrogen sulfide
(H2S ppm) are produced in biogas at the time of production. These gases cause severe
damping environmental impact and also reduces the calorific value of produced biogas.
These detrimental gas might be removed water scrubbing which is commonly used at
various biogas globally and regional scale. This research enables the up-gradation of biogas
by chemical absorption technique to enhance the percentage composition of methane
(CH4%) was carried out at Shakargarh Farm, and UAF Biogas Plants installed at Dairy
Farms, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad Pakistan and by physical absorption technique
to enhance the percentage composition of methane (CH4%) was carried out at Chawla dairy
farm, UAF Biogas Plants and also similarly Proka dairy farm University of Agriculture,
Faisalabad Pakistan.
Summarizing the scenario stated above, there was a dire need for the improvisation of
currently used methods of biogas purification and enhancement systems in biogas plants to
utilize the technology at its best. The efficiency of Biogas plants on the industrial scale
might be improved evidently by employing new technologies and pre-treatment techniques.
Anaerobic digestion (AD) might be achieved at its maximum efficiency by adopting several
varieties of enhancing and optimizing techniques, controlling method for improving biogas
quality and quantity. Therefore, an innovative reverse blasting technique is being
introduced in this study that does not only improves the biological process during the
anaerobic digestion but also breaking the scum formation into the digester. This study not
only focuses on the design and development of biogas plants but also emphasizes design
modification using reverse blasting techniques as well as biogas enrichment using physical
absorption and chemical techniques. For result comparison, the data were also taken from
UAF Biogas Plants installed at Dairy Farms, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Biogas
6
Plants, Shakargarh, Chawla Dairy Farm Satiana road Faisalabad in addition to Biogas
Plants, Proka Farm, at the University of Agriculture Faisalabad.
The core objectives to address the above-mentioned problems are given as follows:
Objectives
1. Design modification and performance evaluation of indigenized floating drum

biogas plants.
2. Up-gradation of biogas using physical absorption and chemical techniques.
3. Assessment of technical and economic feasibility of modified biogas plants for

decentralized applications.
7
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE
Kadam and Panwar (2017) investigated to promote the enrichment of biogas and its
applications because it was a renewable source of energy. Biogas is best suited to be used
in industries on a large scale. The purified biogas has been in the spotlight due to the
escalated rise in fossil fuel prices. Biogas has been used to generate electricity in
cogeneration. The crude biogas contains unwanted impurities like carbon dioxide and
hydrogen sulfide. These impurities were filtered to make the bio-methane clean. The author
analyzed that biogas also known as Bio-CNG and directly be used to supply fuel for
transport vehicles. At that time the commercially available cleaning and upgrading
techniques were water scrubbing, pressure swing absorption, and amines scrubbing. Lately,
advanced cleaning techniques have been introduced in the market, but these techniques
were not used on a large scale. Technological improvements and economic considerations
were expected to continue in the future with higher prices for fossil fuels, heat, and
electricity.
Mata Alvarez et al., (2000) observed that the biogas was a mixture of different
gases obtained from anaerobic fermentation bacteria, which could be obtained through four
processes such as hydrolytic, methanogenic, acetogenic, and acidogenic. In
biotechnologies, biogas production was achieved through the decomposition of organic
waste such as food waste, food pulp, animal waste, organic part of the metropolitan waste,
and farming waste was generally referred to as biotechnology. In some countries, various
plants such as corn were grown particularly for anaerobic digestion.
Abdalla and Ammar (2014) stated that FW contains high moisture (> 68%), volatile
matter (> 93%), and high fermentation capacity. The primary composition of food waste
mainly contained proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and cellulose including variable contents of
solid suspension as a function of the source and high demand for chemical oxygen or
chemical application in oxygen. The excess fat system gave higher methane productivity,
but the retention time was too long. In general, food waste contains fewer persistent
pollutants of gravel and sand, etc. The methane increased with excess protein, and reactors
contain excess cellulose and carbohydrate, respectively. However, excess fat and proteins
caused adverse effects due to the accumulation of volatile fatty acids (VFAs), ammonia,
and nitrogen, respectively.
8
Calisea et al., (2015) investigated that the technological cum financial examination
of a cogeneration plant using biogas through an anaerobic digestion plant to produce biogas
designed to be powered by livestock biomass, combined with 330 kW CHP unit co-
generator, existing in the province of Reggio Emilia (Napoli). They identified trends of the
organic volumetric load and the hydraulic retention time (HRT). According to these
authors, the organic volumetric load was steady at approximately 2.4 kg of volatile solid
(SV.m-3day). They also concluded that around 55% of biomass can be achieved, using 0.22
m3kg-1 of volatile solid (SV). They also achieved a daily net production of 5.790 kWh,
while around 2.113 MWh annually.
Ferrer et al., (2011) verified that the economic use of biogas production in low-cost
digesters in the Peruvian Andes (Spain). This research was conducted in the department of
Cajamarca and Cusco respectively in the northern and southern regions of Peruvian Andes.
In this study, volume in the digestive systems was ranged from 2.4 - 7.5 m3while hydraulic
retention time (HRT) was 60 - 90 days. The temperature variations from 20 - 25oC were
reached in the greenhouse. The researchers found that cow dung was producing specific
biomass of about 0.35 m3kg-1vs-1 with about 65% methane (CH4%) in the biogas.
According to the authors, biogas production should be encouraged for daily cooking and
lighting needs, without increasing implementation costs.
Rasheed et al., (2016) specified the financial and technical effects of a novel
industrial bioenergy plant in Pakistan. A bioenergy pilot project sponsored and launched
by a local industry at Phool-Nagar (Patoki) near Lahore. The objective of this study was to
determine the feasibility and technical economical analysis for the production of heat and
electricity. The technical and economic analysis of the reference situation was made
primarily based on cost factors and components. The results of the economic analysis were
considered for other social and industrial studies, based on small and medium-sized
industries randomly selected on Sundar state in Lahore. Cow dung and plant fruit residues
were used as a basic input, while primary products were purified from biogas was methane
(CH4%). The authors also found that the return of investment (ROI) and employment
growth in the SME sector was 15.42% and up to 55% as well as the production of energy
142 MWhyear-1respectively.
Rasheed and Torii (2015) investigated that biogas production improvement and its
up-gradation using various methods. The most common limitations during the digestion of
biomass were the high pH, large hydraulic retention time (HRT), temperature (oC), and
carbon dioxide (CO2%) contaminants with fractions of water vapors (H2O%) and hydrogen
9
sulfide (H2S) contents. To adjust the calorific value (C.V), it was essential by using natural
gas grid or mechanical power for the removal of these contaminants. Due to the high density
of carbon dioxide (CO2%), its removal was essential, by using different techniques such as
a chemical absorption method and pressure swing adsorption method. In addition to iron
chloride and air dosing into the fermentation chamber and adsorption of iron oxide pellets
were used for removal of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) contents. Also, for the removal of water
contents (H2O%), condensation and drying methods were used with foam and dust.
Moreover, this technique could be implemented, and it was discussed concerning economic
and technological issues.
Scarlet et al., (2018) examined the biogas improvements and observations and its
use for various modes in the European Union (EU) at its Member States. In 2015 the
production of biogas had increased in the European Union (EU) ranging between 18 billion
m3 methane (CH4%), i.e. (654 PJ) Peta Joules while expressing his views about half of the
global biogas production illustrated, it could be enhanced by renewable energy policies, in
addition to its, environmental, economic and climatic beneﬁts. For more than 10GW
electricity production in the world, the European Union (EU) leads the world in biogas
having 17,400 biogas plants, in comparison to the worldwide biogas capacity of 15 gig
watts (GW) in 2015 alone. In the EU, biogas delivered 61 tera watt-hour (TWh) of
electricity 127 tera joule (TJ) of heat. About 50% of the total biogas intake in Europe was
designed for the generation of heat. In 2015 Europe was the world,s best producer for bio-
methane which was being used for vehicle fuel and a natural gas grid having 459 plants
producing 1.2 billion m3 and around 697 bio-methane filling stations guaranteed 160
million m3 bio-methane as a fuel. Further new methods were used to enhance the biological
process through ultrasonic treatment and the type of feedstock also played a part in the
improvement of the biogas production process.
Mushtaq et al., (2016) investigated the performance and designed analysis of
ﬂoating drum type portable biogas plants for domestic use in Pakistan as a renewable
energy source for providing heat and electricity. In Pakistan, the livestock owners in remote
areas migrate as per climatic conditions i.e. appropriate for their livestock. The floating
drum type biogas plant was chosen at constant pressure during burning a stove to keep the
supply of gas at a constant rate. In this way, the ratio of dung to water ratio was 1:1 due to
the balance of carbon to nitrogen (C/N) ratio. Moreover, biogas technology offers an
outstanding set of profits because it was a viable source of energy, benefiting the
environment, and offers a method to provide and recycle several landfill wastes. It also
10
improved the health of people who are directly burning the dried manure crusts to cook
food. Furthermore, reduced the need for animal manure, by using other organic wastes such
as human excreta, kitchen waste, weeds, and crop residues, etc.
Agrahari and Tiwari (2011) reported that the elemental study of portable floating
type biogas plant having a capacity of 30 kg slurry for a batch system in which, for the
whole digestion process, the slurry was added once a time. It had been noted that the
production of biogas varied with temperature and hydraulic retention time (HRT)
approximately 85 days. During this period, the slurry range and ambient temperature of the
atmosphere had been found as 26 - 42ºC and 30 - 40ºC respectively. Globally, emissions
mainly CO2 also affected greenhouse gases. A carbon credit was an essential component of
national and international efforts to curb the growth in concentrations of greenhouse gases
(GHGs). In this process, initially, the production rate of biogas was quite rapid during the
first two weeks but afterward, it decreased gradually. During the research, the minimum
and maximum percentage composition of methane (CH4%) and the rate of biogas
production had been carefully noted every week during the entire research period. The net
volume of biogas produced during the research has been 0.378 m3 under three months of
observation. Therefore, the total volume of biogas produced in a year is around (4 × 0.378
m3) 1.512 m3. Hence, the total carbon credits which had been earned in a year were 0.019
units year-1 or € 0.285year-1. To improve the slurry temperature inside the fermentation
chamber, they coated black paint on the surface of the aluminum biogas chamber to
increase the absorption capacity of sunlight on the surface. In another experiment. They
also analyzed the rate of biogas production and the percentage composition of methane
(CH4%) under the greenhouse chamber.
Sathish et al., (2017) examined the performance and investigation of floating dome
anaerobic fermentation chamber with dry and wet feedstock continuously prepared by fiber
material. The appetizer of cow dung was used as inoculum of an anaerobic fermentation
chamber. The most anaerobic microorganisms, comprising methane-forming bacteria,
eliminate in a healthy pH range from 6.8 - 7.5. The anaerobic digestion process presented
another option for transforming waste into energy. The temperature of the fermentation
chamber was kept at 30 - 35ºC. The research was initiated, and the volume of the biogas
was observed every day with the aid of a gas flow meter normally 30 days of hydraulic
retention time (HRT). The pH was measured using a pH redox meter. The percentage
composition of methane (CH4%) was measured by using gas chromatography. The highest
methane contents (CH4%) of 42% were achieved by the fermentation process of dry wheat
11
straw. The results indicated that dry wheat straw could be one of the feedstocks for efficient
biogas generation and waste treatment.
Zieminski and Frac (2012) reported that three positive ways were associated with
biogas generation from organic waste. Firstly, it converted the biomass into a useful fuel
called biogas by a biochemical process. After the decomposition of organic waste, the
byproduct obtained from the outlet of the biogas plant called bio-slurry which was a rich
source of nutrients for the enhancement of soil characteristics. In the end, this biogas
reduced environmental pollution and also decreased the health hazardous effects because
it was a good method for handling organic waste. The biogas that could be produced by
some organic wastes like a waste of paper industry, poultry waste, waste of banana stem,
slaughterhouses wastes, and also animal dung.
Waqar Uddin et al., (2016) reported that Pakistan was facing abysmal energy crises
due to the shortage of oil, water, and gas reservoirs, resulted in a shortage of electricity
from the last ten years. The Pakistani Government spent a large amount of money around
14.5 billion US dollars to import fossil fuels for their energy requirements. Due to the
increasing population, the non-renewable energy sources were not an inappropriate amount
to fulfill the demand. In Pakistan the shortfall of electricity recorded from 14 - 20 hours
day-1, as a result of disturbing life. The production of dung nearly a single cow or buffalo
produces 15 kg day-1. Roughly 1m3 biogas obtained from 6 kg of animal manure. Biogas
offers clean and environment-friendly renewable energy that could support the
environmental unit. On a commercial scale, to defeat electric power shortfall, biogas plants
could be installed for generating inexpensive energy respectively.
Ghafoor et al., (2016) predicted that there was a lot of potential for different crops.
In Punjab, approximately 27.86 million tons of agricultural waste produced 14,782 million
kWh year-1electric power. In the sugar industry the power generation capacity in Pakistan
nearly 3000 MW electricity, however, it was producing only 700 MW. There were different
biomass material and their thermal application values were different.
Raheem et al., (2016) investigated that the situations had been enforced by the
Government of Pakistan to take initiative to shut down the markets every year also two
holidays in a week for saving the power industry and affected business activities. By adding
an oil-based power project like rental power projects for generating energy to meet our
power needs. The cost-benefit ratio of the oil-based project couldn’t be feasible based on
varying oil prices. For energy production, there were several techniques by using a different
type of feedstock like (biomass) which could be used for energy production. By using
12
biomass, it is further divided into two processes. Firstly, in the biochemical process, it is
further divided into three categories namely anaerobic digestion, fermentation, and trans-
esterification. Secondly, in the thermo-chemical process, it was further divided into three
categories namely pyrolysis, combustion, and gasification. Different forms of energy could
be produced at the end product of these processes. The primary digestion substrate is animal
manure for biogas production. The parameters related to quality and quantity depends upon
the type of substrate and their C/N ratio such that food waste and animal dung, these organic
wastes were abundantly available for anaerobic digestion. The author also predicts that the
best feedstock for the production of biogas was chicken manure.
Munawar (2010) stated that in Pakistan by using alternative and renewable sources
of energy could be utilized to overcome the present energy crisis. In Pakistan, the total
available potential of biogas was 14.25 mm3day-1. As the first biogas plant installed in 1959
in Pakistan. In 1974, 10 biogas plants were installed by Pakistan Council for Appropriate
Technology (PCAT) in Azad Jammu and Kashmir. In 1986, the directorate general of
renewable energy resources intended to set up 4000 biogas plants. Similarly, in 2000, the
Biogas Support Program (BSP) initiated 1200 biogas plants, later on, in the year 2006, there
were 10,000 biogas plants. The Pakistan Dairy Development Company (PDDC) installed
556 biogas plants in the year 2009. Similarly, the Rural Support Program Network (RSPN)
had been set up 14,000 biogas plants having the cost of Rs.350 million by the Government
of Pakistan (GOP, 2015). Meanwhile in 2002 Pakistan Council of Renewable Energy
Technologies (PCRET) set up 4016 biogas plants across all over Pakistan to overcome the
current energy crises. In the year 2014, the Ministry of science and technology claimed that
the total potential of biogas in Pakistan was 20,545 m3day-1.
Braun (2007) examined that the major components of biomass employed as a
medium for the production of biogas as they were enclosed carbohydrates fats, proteins,
and hemicelluloses. The biogas quality and its chemical composition including methane
yield (CH4%) normally depended on the type of feedstock, the anaerobic digestion system,
and hydraulic retention time (HRT). There were six important types of Bio-power systems
namely pyrolysis, anaerobic digestion, direct-fired, modular systems co-firing, and
gasification respectively.
Weiland (2010) reported that the production of biogas was classified into two major
classifications. In the wet fermentation process, there were less than 10% of total solids
(TS) during the digestion processes. After digesting the material it was applied to the field
for fertilization. All wet digestion techniques remain accomplished constantly while for dry
13
fermentation; batch and continuously operated techniques were useful. Nowadays, in the
agriculture sector, wet digestion processes lead. It was also shown that the hypothetical
yield of biogas differs from proteins, carbohydrates, and fats depending upon the type of
substrate.
Awan and Khan (2014) described that in Pakistan there were about 51 million
animals that could produce enough energy for 50 million people to meet their cooking
requirements. In Pakistan approximately there were 100 million people lived in rural areas
out of a total of 170 million to meet their cooking/heating needs by a single source.
Furthermore 57.4 million kg nitrogen every day could be obtained by organic matter for
the enrichment of soil fertility.
Budzianowski (2016) investigated that there were different ways of raw and
purified biogas. For commercial purposes, it could be essential for electricity generation
with combined heat and power (CHP) system, as an injection in the gas grids, for cooking
and lighting in rural areas. In industry, biogas could be used for multi-generation like steam,
heating, cooling, electricity, and chemical production. Furthermore, it stabilized the
irregularity of wind, solar, and renewable energy systems. The previously published work
on biogas is classified into three different categories i.e. design development, performance
evaluation, and, its up-gradation.
Ramachandra et al., (2004) stated that Bio-digesters design in an anaerobic digester
could be a reliable method for biogas production and it was not only for waste treatment as
well as for energy production simultaneously. Usually, the mesophilic temperature range
(optimum at 35°C) was being used in operating anaerobic digesters. The present study was
different while the rest of the previously operated biogas plants due to the installation of
the relief valve, which is solely responsible for the internal pressure monitoring of the
digester. They had also been introduced a limit switch to regulate the digester pressure up
to 4 bar, as the pressure increased it automatically shut off to avoid any malfunction range
and pressure.
Abbas et al., (2017) addressed particularly the financial scrutiny of biogas adoption
technology employed by rural farmers from Faisalabad district in Pakistan having biogas
plant capacities 5, 7, 9, 11, 16, 21, and 24 m3respectively. They used the Benefit-Cost Ratio
(BCR) of biogas plants and highlighted the aftermaths of various variables for the inclusion
of biogas technology. They concluded that the Benefit-Cost Ratio (BCR) for 15 m3 biogas
plant was 1.45 for energy substitution benefits, depicting that such projects generated
benefits of 1.45 times the costs and were reasonable. They also observed that biogas plants
14
might be helpful for cooking purposes and to bridge the gap between the supply and
demand as per the required policy.
Komiyama et al., (2006) introduced biogas as a reproducible energy source using
its steam for electricity generation and farm machine fuel. For this purpose, they used
manure collected from seventy cows and installed a biogas model plant at the Field Science
Center, the Obihiro University of Agriculture and Veterinary Medicine in Japan. They
reported that dimethyl ether (CH3OCH3, DME) can be easily synthesized after getting
syngas (CO+H2) by the steam reforming of biogas; they concluded that Dimethyl-ether
possesses characteristics like diesel fuel. Its cetane number was the same as, or even more
favorable than that of diesel fuel. Furthermore, DME was sulfur-free and therefore did not
emit Sox when burned in diesel engines. Moreover, no particulates produced soot which
contained polyaromatics.
Molino et al., (2013) produced Bio-methane as a vehicular fuel by anaerobic
digestion of organic waste generated in the form of heat o electricity. The study area of the
ENEA Trisaia Research Center (TRC) was selected for this study. This research was based
on three series of methodologies. They concluded that an alternative gas source is natural
gas and could be used as a Bio-methane production from biogas plants by using organic
matter. They recommended that if the intended use was for power generation, The biogas
must be scrubbed to removed numerous impurities.
Robert et al., (2012) investigated that the economic and functional tool for assessing
the financial feasibility of farm-based anaerobic digesters (AD). They found a mixed result
of the financial feasibility of anaerobic digesters (AD), which might be due to variation in
size, geographic location, and the type of anaerobic digesters (AD) system, which were not
standardized but rather customized to the individual situation. This study also made a freely
available workbook to determine the financial feasibility of farm-based anaerobic digesters
(AD). They concluded that Investment in anaerobic digesters (AD) was financially feasible
only for the largest dairy farms in Ontario under current electricity prices, which were
approximately six times greater than the wholesale price. Shifting to a dual fuel continuous
system would improve returns.
Akinbami et al., (2012) reported that the status, prospects, and policy implications
of biogas energy in Nigeria. They used three scenario analyses to examine the prospects of
biogas in the country. They stressed the increasing worldwide awareness and concern about
the environmental impacts of fossil fuels coupled with the oil price due to under developing
countries were shifting their consumption trends of energy from fossil fuels to renewable
energy especially biogas. They projected that under a moderate ambitious biogas
technology program (BTP), generated energy from biogas would range between 5.0–171.0J
15
in the period 2000–2030. They recommended that if biogas displaces kerosene oil, at least
between 357–60,952 tons of CO2 per annum would be avoided.
Nyifi et al., (2018) designed and constructed a tube storage device for biogas using
a motorized compressor. This research was carried out at Teaching and Research Farm,
University of Agriculture, Makrudi, Nigeria. The core objective of this study was to design
and develop a simple technique for handling and storing biogas, analyze the biogas
produced by the mixture of cow dung, and finally test the biogas produced to confirm its
flammability. For this purpose, the waste materials fed into the digester were cow dung and
water in 1:2 by mass respectively. The storage device was filled up with biogas by using a
motorized compressor. The system was tested at hydraulic retention times (HRT) of 15, 20,
and 25 days and gas-burning times of 20, 40, and 60 minutes. It was observed that the gas
volume utilized increased with increasing heating time at all the retention times
investigated. The biogas produced in this work was indeed flammable and at a relatively
low-cost production of biogas at optimal conditions was recommended as a panacea to
solving the prevalent environmental issues caused by waste disposal and should be
embraced not only by the government on a large scale but also by an individual on a smaller
scale.
Olaoye et al., (2014) carried out a study regarding the design, fabrication, and
testing of a modified floating drum bio-digester at the Department of Agricultural and
Biosystems Engineering, University of Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. They used a digester
having a 223.5l liters digester tank in combination with a water displacement tank carrying
191l liters of water. They used three constituents for the trials of biogas production testing
as swine dung, water, and elephant grass. Firstly, they made a trail using 1kg of swine dung,
3 kg of water, and 5 kg of elephant grass. Whereas, the second test was carried out using
the ratio of 1kg of swine dung, 2 kg of water, and 5 kg of elephant grass. During the first
test, wastes started producing combustible gas after passing 24 days, while for the second
test, combustible gas was achieved within a couple of days. They achieved the minimum
volume of gas (8.4l) liters on the 24th day and the maximum gas produced was 21.2l liters
on the 29th and 30th days. For the first test, they were able to maintain for test 2 - 19.11
liters in the morning of the 2nd day to 95.57 liters in the afternoon of the 9th day. They
concluded that the greater the concentration, the more rapid gas production using the slurry
with a greater concentration produced more gas than the one with a lower concentration
respectively.
.
16
CHAPTER 3 MATERIAL AND METHODS
This study was carried out for designing, development, and experimental
investigation of floating-drum biogas plants for anaerobic digestion of animal excreta with
water ratio (1:1) to produce biogas. An innovative floating drum biogas plant constructed
at Chawla Farm Satiana road Faisalabad (130 m3) was based on biogas re-circulation with
the help of pneumatic pressure called Reverse Blasting Technique (RBT). The performance
evaluation of 130 m3 biogas plants was compared with the other biogas plants installed at
UAF Dairy Farms, the University of Agriculture Faisalabad, and shakrgarh floating drum
biogas plants having capacities of 25, 40, and 110 m3 respectively.
Biomass
Biogas Digester
Biogas Scrubber
Compressor
Reverse Blasting Gas Flow Valve Biogas Storage Tank
Fig 3.1 Process diagram of floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka Farm UAF
and Chawla Farm Faisalabad.
17
3.1 Experimental setups of existing 25, 40,110, and 130 m3 biogas plants
The floating drum biogas plant was designed based on available waste which was collected
at farm sight. The digester temperature was maintained between 30 - 40°C with the help of
a heat exchanger for better performance. To maintain the optimum Carbon to Nitrogen
(C/N) ratio, animal dung and water were mixed at (1:1) ratio by weight. The purpose of
this study was to conduct experiments for maintaining the temperature in the mesophilic
range. Gensets were employed for introducing electrification at farms. There are more than
500 animals (buffalos & cows) available at the dairy farm UAF, Chawla farm Satiana road
Faisalabad. In this way, the dung was easily available for feeding the digester to produce
biogas after producing biogas it is coupled with a 15kW generator installed at biogas plant
site UAF. In this way, the biogas is passing through the scrubbing system and compressed
with the help of a compressor. Storage tanks were used to store the biogas for a continuous
supply of biogas for power generation. For optimum designs of floating drum biogas plants,
the following design equations were used to calculate the diameter, height, and volume of
the fermentation chamber. The size of an inlet tank was made fixed depending upon the
quantity of dung to be fed into the plant on day-1.
3.2 Calculations of the fermentation chamber of biogas plants
The first step was taken to calculate the mass of daily charge and it was determined
by using the following equation. The total mass of daily charge (Mc). (Tucki et al., 2015)
used the following equation to determine the mass of daily charges.
Mc=Md+Mw (3.1)
Where Mc is the mass daily charge in kg, Md is the mass of dung/biodegradable material in
kg, and Mw is the mass of water in kg.
As the fermentation chamber was designed in terms of volume, so the volume of daily
charge (Vc) was calculated by using the following formula.
Vc= Mc/ρs (3.2)
Where Vc is the volume of daily charge in m3, Mc is the mass daily charge in kg and ρs is
the density of slurry in kgm-3.
18
The volume of the digester (Vd) is a function of retention time and is calculated by using
the following formula. (Jaya and Maurya, 2017; Ogur and Irungu, 2013)
Vd = Vc*tr (3.3)
Where tr is the retention time for complete digestion of the biodegradable material in the
digester/fermentation chamber. The above equation tells the theoretical value of the biogas
plant. Under practical conditions, a provision for sedimentation is also taken into
consideration. So the total volume of the fermentation chamber is calculated using Equation
(3.4).
Vdt = Vd (1+0.1x) (3.4)
Where Vd is the volume of the digester in m3 and x is the provision given an infraction.
The floating drum biogas plants are cylindrical, so the diameter of the plant was calculated
by using Equation (3.5) (Jaya and Maurya, 2017)
3 4𝑉
𝐷 = √𝜋𝑟 𝑑𝑡 (3.5)
ℎ𝐼𝑑
Where rh/d is the height to diameter ratio of the fermentation chamber for the specific
location. The best value of the floating drum biogas plant is taken from 1.25 - 1.50
depending upon the site selected.
The height of the fermentation chamber was calculated by the following equation.
H = rh/d*D (3.6)
Where, rh/d is the height to diameter ratio of the fermentation chamber for the specific
location and its value varies from 1.20 – 1.50 depending upon the specific location of the
biogas plant, and D is the internal diameter of the fermentation chamber.
The amount of gas produced in m3day-1 so the volume of the gas (Vg) in a day is calculated
by using Equation (3.7).
Vg = Md.Vu (3.7)
Where Md is the total mass of dung/biodegradable material in kg, Vu is the actual volume
of biogas produced per unit mass of dung, and it is taken in m3kg-1. This value depends on
the biodegradable material used during the experiments and is equal to 0.05 m3kg-1 for
animal dung of cow and buffalo under laboratory conditions.
19
The total indicated power (Pi) in kW is achievable from the available volume of biogas was
calculated by using Equation (3.8)
Vg
Pi  (3.8)
24C sp
Where Vg is the volume of produced gas in m3hr-1 and Csp is the specific gas consumption
in m3kW-1h-1.
By keeping engine power and time of operation specified for a particular size, the
energy required was determined by the following equation by National Research Council
(NRC, 2003).
E d = Ps t (3.9)
Where Ed is the total energy required in kWh to run the specified size (Ps) of the engine in
kW and t is the time of operation in an hour. Normally 8-12 hours of operating time are
recommended for daily operation. However, this figure can be increased or decreased
according to the energy requirement of the farm. This research was carried out to run a 15
kW (20 hp) engine size for six-hour operation a day. The total energy required in a day was
estimated to be 90 kWh.
The volume of biogas required to obtain 90 kWh energy in a day was calculated by the
following formula.
Vg = EdCsp (3.10)
Where Csp is the specific gas consumption in m3Kw-1h and its value was taken as (0.402
m3W-1h). Under the operational parameter of the plant, the volume of gas required for the
engine operation in a day was calculated to be 36.18 m3 d-1.
The mass of biodegradable material required in a day was calculated using the following
equation.
Vg
Md  (3.11)
Vu
20
Where Md is the mass of biodegradable material required in kg day-1 and Vu is the actual
gas production per unit mass of biodegradable material in m3 kg-1. The animal dung
required in a day was calculated to be 386 kg.
The feeding material was added with (1:1) dung to water ratio, so the total mass of daily
charge material in the fermentation chamber was found to be 772 kg. The specific density
of the material depends upon the condition of raw material and the ratio of water to dung
i.e. (1:1).
Similarly, hydraulic retention time depends on the temperature at the site to enhance the
microbial activity in the mesophilic range. The usual retention time in Punjab province is
taken as 30 days. (Akbulut, 2012)
Therefore, the volume of the digester of the dairy farm biogas plant was calculated to be
22.02 m3. However, it was a theoretical value but under practical conditions, usually, a 10%
provision is provided in design for the settlement of rubbish such as leaves, dust particles
to increase the biogas plant efficiency Therefore the total volume of the fermentation
chamber was calculated to be 24.222m3. So it was decided to construct a 65m3 volume of
the fermentation chamber of the floating drum biogas plant to utilize their organic waste.
The volume of the wall is calculated by the given equation
V= lxbxh (3.12)
Where l is the length of brick in cm (22.86), h is the height of brick in cm (07.62) and
similarly, b is the breadth of brick in cm (10.16).
Therefore, the total no of bricks was calculated by the following formula
No of bricks = 90% x vol of wall/vol of brick (3.13)
3.3Construction of floating drum biogas digester structure and installation of a biogas

plant
The volume of the pit of the floating drum biogas plant having a capacity of 25m 3
is approximately 73m3 was calculated after the selection of the site. The foundation base
(10cm thick). The ratio of the concrete base was taken as (1:2:4) as cement (0.322m3), sand
(0.672m3), and gravels (1.34m3) then filled with concrete and compacted. The upper
portion of the foundation had a smooth plastered surface to prevent seepage. After the
21
foundation had been cured for at least two days, the reinforced circular walls were
constructed. There are about 6200 bricks, which were calculated for the construction of a
floating drum biogas plant having a digester capacity 25m3. A pipe of 15.42cm diameter is
connected between the inlet and the digester at an angle between 45-60o for easy movement
of slurry by the action of gravity inside the digestion tank and on the other side of the
digester, a slurry oozing pipe must install for the disposal of a slurry having 15 cm diameter.
Masonry work was carried out with cement mortar binding to a mixture of sand and cement.
The ratio of mortar varied from 1:4. After completed the brickwork, it is necessary to plaster
the walls of the digestion tank, inlet, agitator, and outlet chambers. A small quantity of
cement 0.127m3, sand 0.688m3 having a ratio (1:4) was applied for plastering. The
plastering mortar had a cement to the sand ratio of (1:4). After curing the structure of the
biogas plant was prepared.
3.4 Major components of the biogas plant
The biogas plant comprises different components viz. feeding chamber,

fermentation chamber, gas holding tank of fiberglass, dehumidifier, scrubbing unit for H2S
removal, compressor, physical and chemical absorption system, effluent storage tank along
with mountings and accessories. A brief description of the items is given below while
schematic drawings of these plants are given in figure 3.2a.
Fig. 3.2a Process diagram including all major components of biogas plants
installed at UAF
22
Fig. 3.2b Front view of floating drum biogas plants installed at UAF
3.4.1 Feeding tank
In the feeding tank, Bio-waste an equivalent proportion of the mixture of water and
dung. i.e. (1:1). The ratio of the concrete base was taken as (1:2:4) as cement (0.0424m3),
sand (0.112m3), and gravels (0.224m3). Each plant had its feeding tank. The level of the
feeding tank was a little bit higher than the level of sludge that was oozing as the material
was easy to digester. A cylindrical shaped PVC pipe (15.42cm) is used to connect the
feeding chamber with the digester. The dimensions of the feeding tanks are shown in Table
3.1 below.
Table 3.1 Dimensions of different Inlets of floating drum biogas plants.
Inlet 25 m3 40 m3 110 m3 120 m3 130 m3

Diameter (m) 1.44 m 1.44 m 1.9 m 2.02 m 1.82 m
Height (m) 1.066 m 1.066 m 0.381 m 1.27 m 1.52 m
Wall thickness (mm) 228 mm 228 mm 228 mm 228 mm 228 mm
Volume (m3) 1.11 m3 1.11 m3 1.076 m3 1.89 m3 3.95 m3
3.4.2 Digester
A digester (Fermentation chamber) is a pit of different volumes to hold the feeding material
for a specific period. These are floating drum biogas plants. There were different digesters
(fermentation chambers) having volumes of 25, 40, 110,120, and 130m3 respectively.
These digesters were constructed fully with sand, cement, gravel, and bricks. The walls of
the fermentation chambers were plastered with a mixture of sand and cement in a ratio of
23
1:4. The base of the fermentation chambers was constructed thick and damp proof to avoid
any possible leakage. By keeping the temperature inside the digester at the optimum range
(30 - 40oC) a Stainless-steel heat exchanger was also coupled with the geyser for continuous
operation of hot water supply to maintain optimum temperature during the winter season.
The stirrer was used to mix the material manually/mechanically in the fermentation
chamber. Another technique for maintaining the anaerobic digestion a circular shape of
PVC pipe (22 mm) circulated at the bottom of the digester by designing on pneumatic
pressure for proper mixing of the dung and water for homogeneous mixture optimum
temperature range about (30 - 40oC). By designing on pneumatic pressure for proper mixing
of the dung and water for homogeneous mixture and their diameter 20 mm in a circular
manner. In Pakistan, there were common problems during installing biogas plants such as
scum formation, drum tilting, clogging of inlet and outlet pipe, and gas leakage problem.
Nowadays, modifications in the digester design are made based on Pneumatic pressure
circularly to provide homogenized mixer and maintain inside digester temperature in the
mesophilic range (30-40°C) to improve their methanogenic process. The above
modifications in the biogas plants have increased the biogas production process by up to
10%. The dimensions of the digesters are shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2 Dimensions of different digesters of floating drum biogas plants.
Design Parameters UAF UAF Shakargarh Proka Chawla

of Different Parts Farm Farm Farm Farm Farm
(25m3) (40m3) (110m3) (120m3) 130m3
Digester
Concrete base dia

4.52m 5.2 m 5.8mm 5.93m 6.4m
(m)
Dig volume (m3) 8.89m3 11.49m3 22.11m3 23.48m3 24.5m3
Diameter (m) 3.30m 3.9 m 4.53m 4.67m 4.78m
Height (m) 3.85m 4.06 m 6.8m 7.005m 7.17m
24
Wall thickness
228mm 228mm 228mm 228mm 228mm
(mm)
Volume (m3) 25m3 40m3 110m3 120m3 130m3
No of
4723 6090.9 11715 12441.8 13009
bricks@529/m3
Cement@1ft3/300
0.4445m3 0.5748m3 1.107m3 1.175m3 1.22m3
bricks
Sand@4ft3/300
1.78m3 2.29m3 4.42m3 4.69m3 4.89m3
bricks
Volume conc base

1.63m3 2.15m3 2.68m3 2.81m3 9m3
m3
Cement, Sand, 1:2:4 1:2:4 1:2:4 1:2:4 1:2:4

Concrete Sum 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7
Bricks 4723 6090.9 11715 12441.5 130011
Cement 0.232m3 1.21m3 0.382m3 0.402m3 0.416m3
Sand 0.453m3 4.152m3 0.767m3 0.8041m3 0.832m3
Concrete 0.931m3 1.43m3 1.53m3 1.60m3 1.70m3
Al-Masri 2001 assessed that by using olive cake as a feeding material instead of animal
dung there was a significant change in the biogas production during anaerobic digestion
ranges 30 to 40 days.
25
1-Inlet tank 2-Digester 3-Gas Holder 4-Effluent storage tank 5-Filtering unit 6-Dehumidifier
7-H2Sscrubber 8-Water scrubber 9-Compressor 10-Gas storage tank 11-RBT (PVC pipes) 12-Generator
Fig. 3.3a Front view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Chawla farm
Faisalabad
Fig. 3.3b Isometric view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Chawla
Farm Faisalabad
3.4.3 Gasholder
Each digester was provided with a floating drum of fiberglass. The diameter of 130m3was
5.89m respectively. The vertical height of the floating drum was 1.67 m. About 60-65%
gas of the daily production was stored in the gas holder, it worked at constant pressure. The
biogas from the gas holder was extracted and sent to the gas storage tank by using
compressors. The gasholder was designed for 75 percent of the volume required for daily
gas production. Hence, the volume of gas to be collected by the gas holder was worked out
to be 0.5 x 0.75 = 0.375 m3day-1.
26
1-Fiber gas holder 2-GI pipe skeleton 3-Canopy tilting
Fig. 3.4 . Detail drawing with specifications of floating drum biogas plants and
gas holder installed at UAF.
3.4.4 Stirring Mechanism
In the stirring mechanism, two types of stirring mechanism were applied to check the best
fit for the homogeneous mixture.
1-Mechanical stirring
2-Hydraulic stirring
3.4.4.1-Mechanical stirring
In the mechanical stirring a stainless steel (S.S) horizontal shaft stirring mechanism having
three arms was provided to mix the feeding material in the digester. It was operated 2 or 3
times per day manually and mechanically. The mixing facilitated the microbes to maintain
their population. It prevented the formation of dead pockets in the digester that increased
plant efficiency. This system is installed at UAF Biogas Plants installed at the main campus
and biogas plants installed at Shakargarh as shown in the figure (3.5).
27
Fig. 3.5. Detail drawing with specifications of Mechanical agitator floating drum
biogas plants installed at UAF and Shakargarh Farm
3.4.4.2 Hydraulic stirring

In the hydraulic stirring a circular shape of PVC pipes circulated at the bottom of the
digester by designing on pneumatic pressure for proper mixing of the dung and water for
homogeneous mixture by maintaining their biological process. These pipes laid at the
bottom of the digester in a circular manner having a diameter of 22mm. This innovative
design based on the reverse blasting technique has been installed at Proka and Chawla
Farms, UAF, and Satiana road Faisalabad as shown in figure (3.6).
Fig 3.6. Detail drawing with specifications of hydraulic stirring biogas plants
installed at Chawla and Proka farm UAF.
28
3.4.5 Effluent Storage Reservoir
The effluent storage reservoirs were constructed, for the collection of slurry coming out
from the fermentation chamber is used as an organic liquid fertilizer for crop production.
3.4.6 Gas Compressors
The gas compressors were used to store the biogas at elevated pressure, and it can be used
at any time when electricity and heat energy are required at the farm level. Two
compressors have been used for storing biogas into storage vessels at a maximum of 10 bar
operating pressure and biogas is used to operate the Gensets employing a pressure reducing
valve. Compressors are installed after the scrubbing unit to compress the purified biogas
into storage vessels. The storage chambers are cylindrical and having 5-10 mm of wall
thickness and biogas can be stored at 10 bar pressure keeping in view the factor of safety.
Shut off switches’ valves have been used to switch on and off the compressors
automatically to maintain the permissible pressure inside the compressor storage vessels.
A double piston V-shape coupled with 1.5 hp motor to maintain the pressure in the vessel.
Limit switches have also been used near the fermentation chambers to de-circuit the
compressor and prevent the gas holder from damage when all the gas has been shifted to
gas storage vessels from the gasholder.
Fig 3.7. Isometric view of Double Piston compressor installed at UAF, Chawla
Shakargarh and Proka Farm
29
3.4.7 Submersible pump
A submersible pump was employed for mixing the animal dung and water for
homogenization. The pump worked in a closed circuit to homogenize the mixture. The
pump takes the material from the feeding chamber and mixes thoroughly before the
material is shifted into the digester. The submersible pump type used is the hermetically
sealed pump operated by pushing rather than pulling fluid during its pumping process.
1- Strainer (Suction line) 2- Impeller box 3- Delivery line
Fig 3.8. Isometric view of Submersible pump installed at UAF, Chawla, Shakargarh
and Proka Farm .
3.4.8 Gas storage tank
The cylindrical storage tanks were used for biogas storage having each volume of 1.5m 3.
The wall thickness of the vessel was 5-10 mm and made of mild steel (M.S). The inlet and
outlet connections of biogas supply lines were 25 mm of mild steel pipe. Hydrostatic tests
at recommended pressure were performed before the commissioning of the storage tanks
to determine the strength of the tanks. The biogas was compressed in the gas storage tanks
at a pressure of 5 bar with the help of a compressor. A pressure relief valve was fitted with
the gas storage vessel to avoid excessive pressure. The detailed view of different storage
tanks installed at different locations is shown in the figure below.
30
1-Biogas storage tank (MS-5mm) 2-Pressure gauge 3-Pressure relief valve
Fig.3.9a. Biogas storage vessel (Standing and laying designs)
Gas storage tank, M.S sheet 5mm thickness, End Connection 25mm, pipe nipple
31
Fig 3.9b. Isometric view with specifications of gas storage tanks installed at
UAF, Chawla, Shakargarh, and Proka Farm
3.5 Filtering units
For the removal of unwanted gases from biogas, dehumidifiers for removing water vapors
(H2O), H2S scrubber for removing H2S, Physical and chemical absorption techniques were
also used for removing carbon dioxide (CO2) and other contaminants, etc. have been used
to clean the biogas to run the engine at a safe working level.
3.5.1 Dehumidifier
Biogas contains moisture contents (3-10%) and will cause corrosion if directly used. To
avoid this problem, a dehumidifier containing silica gel was designed and developed to
absorb the moisture contents present in the biogas.
3.5.2 H2S scrubber

Hydrogen sulfide (H2S) content ranges from 50-5000 ppm in the biogas. Removal of these
contaminants is necessary because these contaminants damage the engine parts during
combustion. The construction of H2S scrubber is the same as that of the dehumidifier but
iron wool is used in it. Iron wools react with the hydrogen sulfide to form iron sulfide. In
this process, hydrogen gas is liberated. The chemical reaction is given below.
Fe+H2S FeS +H2
32
Different components of scrubbers used at UAF Biogas plants, Proka Biogas Plants UAF,
Shakargarh Biogas Plants, and Chawla farm Satiana road Faisalabad are given below.
Fig 3.10. Detail drawing with specifications of H2S Scrubber installed at UAF,
Shakargarh, and Chawla Farm Satiana road Faisalabad.
3.5.3 Chemical absorption technique
The chemical treatment process for upgrading biogas by using different chemicals are given
below. The raw biogas was purified by different chemical processes and a vessel was
designed with the following dimensions.
Table 3.3: Diameter and height of biogas up-gradation unit
Diameter of column (A) 0.462 m

Height of column (A) 1.23 m
Diameter of column (B) 0.462 m
Height of column (B) 1.23 m
The raw biogas entered from the bottom of the scrubbing system in which calcium oxide
reacts with carbon dioxide to form calcium carbonate and calcium oxide reacts with water
give rise calcium hydroxide secondly carbon dioxide reacts with water give rise to carbonic
acid and this carbonic acid again reacts with sodium hydroxide to form sodium bi-carbonate
33
and water and finally sodium hydroxide reacts with carbon dioxide to form sodium
carbonate and, water. As calcium hydroxide reacts with hydrogen sulfide gas, it forms
calcium hydrogen sulfide, calcium sulfide, water, and sulfuric acid and this sulfuric acid
reacts with sodium hydroxide to form sodium-thiosulfate and water similarly sodium
hydroxide reacts with hydrogen sulfide give rise to sodium sulfide and water is achieved.
This is an exothermic reaction in which heat is liberated.
3.5.3.1 Effect of Effluents used

The following effluents were used for the purification process and their effects were studied
concerning methane concentration.
1. CaO
2. NaOH
In this section, A solution of (CaO +H2O) was used inside the column. On the other lower
side raw biogas entered the column. A temperature sensor is also attached to check the
temperature during the exothermic reaction. Secondly on another column containing a
solution of (NaOH + H2O) was also used inside the column in which the biogas passed
from the lower side of the column. By using these chemicals, enriched biogas was achieved
in which the percentage composition of methane (CH4%) was as high as up to 90% which
is equivalent to the natural gas (Sui Northern Gas Pipe Line Limited, Sngpl) having 90%
Methane content (CH4%) which are beneficiary for good engine performance and also the
calorific value of biogas increased so that their heating and thermal applications where
increased.
3.5.3.2 Removal of carbon dioxide (CO2)
CaO + CO2 CaCO3
CaO + H2O Ca (OH)2
Ca (OH)2 + CO2 CaCO3 + H2O
CO2 + H2O H2CO3
H2CO3 + NaOH NaHCO3 +H2O
2NaOH + CO2 Na2CO3 + H2O
3.5.3.3 Removal of Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S)

Ca(OH)2 + 2H2S Ca(HS)2 + 2H2O
Ca(OH)2 + H2S CaS + 2H2O
H2S + H2O H2SO4
34
H2SO4 + 2NaOH Na2SO4 + 2H2O
2NaOH + H2S Na2S + 2H2O
During these chemical processes, the percentage composition of methane was improved by
up to 90%.
3.6 Physical absorption technique
In this phase, a scrubbing unit was designed for the up-gradation of biogas into bio-
methane. The technical analysis includes the evaluation of percentage removal of carbon
dioxide (CO2) and hydrogen sulfide (H2S) as well as to remove the moisture contents (H2O)
so that to enhance the calorific value of methane (CH4). A packed bed scrubber was
designed and optimized for biogas purification absorption having 0.35m packed bed height
for the absorption of carbon dioxide (CO2) at an operating pressure of 1 - 5 bar of biogas
inlet while the flow rate of raw biogas gas calculated to be 1 - 2.5 m3h-1. The diameter and
height of the scrubbing tower were calculated. The effluent used to purify the biogas was
water. Packing was used to enhance the residence time of carbon dioxide (CO2) with water
(H2O). In the scrubbing system, the pressure of the incoming biogas ranges between 1-5
bar while the water showering pressure ranges from 2-6 bar was released to meet the
pressurized gas in the column in a countercurrent way. The percentage composition of
purified biogas was detected in different water flow rates and pressure. The gases coming
out from the scrubbing unit were measured with the help of a biogas analyzer (BIOGAS
5000).
3.6.1 Top section
In this section, the mist of water was used from the top side of the column. A temperature
sensor was also attached to check the temperature and the safety valve was mounted at the
top portion to release the excessive pressure.
3.6.2 Middle section
In this column, two metallic sieves were used to hold the packing material.
3.6.3 Bottom section
In this section, a water storage reservoir and raw biogas were entered in this column. The
outlet connection of the water was also fitted at the lower side of this section.
3.6.4 Supporting frame
It consists of four legs, fabricated with mild steel (MS), grouted firmly in the ground with
cement, sand, and stone gravel mixture, and attached with a purification system.
35
3.6.5 Water supply system
In this system, a screw pump was used to suck water from the water storage tank and
delivered into the purification column. The function of this type of pump was to provide
pressurized water at low discharge. A 25 mm diameter galvanized iron (GI) pipe was also
used for the water supply line.
1-Centrifugal pump + electric motor 2- Rota meter 3- Pressure gauge 4- Water foggers
5-Water drainage 6- Strainer7- water level 8-Raw biogas inlet 9- Purified biogas outlet
Figure 3.11a. Schematic design of water scrubbing system
36
Figure 3.11b. Schematic design of water scrubbing system
3.6.6 Gas flow meter
A mechanical gas flow meter was used to measure the quantity of biogas. Its maximum
discharge was 6 m3h-1 and the minimum discharge was measured about 0.04 m3h-1. Both
storage tanks discharge the gas through the flow meter.
37
Fig 3.12 Gas flow meter
3.6.7 Pressure regulator valve
The pressure regulator valve was used to regulate the gas flow at every gas consumption
point. Without these regulators, gas fluctuation occurs so that gas burners were not given
proper flame. Plastic pipes were also used having a diameter of about 12 mm for the
conveying of gas from one point to another point.
Fig 3.13 Pressure regulator valve
3.7 Genset
For electricity generation, a spark-ignition engine (gasoline engine)was used that converts
mechanical energy into electrical energy for use in an external circuit. This engine was
operated by using upgraded biogas for power production.
38
Fig 3.14 Detailed view of gasoline generator installed at a dairy farm, UAF
3.8 Experimental Procedure
The experiments were started at different locations started on 1st April 2016 and wind-up
on 2nd December 2017. The fresh manure was gathered daily from the cattle shed of the
farm near the biogas plants. The feeding material was mixed with water in an equal ratio
(1:1) before entering the fermentation chamber.
3.8.1.1 Procedure for data collection
The biogas plant was fed every day with the standard required feed material after recording
the daily biogas production. The data regarding gas production was measured in cubic
meters (m3).
3.8.1.2 Optimization of biogas plant
The plant was optimized based on the following independent and dependent variables:
3.8.1.3 Dependent variables
1. Gas production rate
3.8.1.4 Independent variables
1. Feeding ratio
2. Temperature of the digester
3.8.1.5 Working principle of Reverse Blasting Technique (RBT)
An indigenous reverse blasting technique was used (figure 3.13) to enter the biogas back
into the digester to increase the biological process. A pipe of 16 mm diameter was
connected to a storage tank, a pressure regulator valve attached with a compressor, which
39
diverts the required biogas to the bottom of the digester. The biogas was recirculated in the
digester through a pipe, laid at the bottom of the digester in a circular shape, and having
fixed nozzles on its surface to exhaust the pressurized biogas from bottoms towards the top.
This was operated 2 or 3 times per day by passing pressurized biogas from the bottom of
the digester. It prevented from scum formation of dead pockets in the digester increases the
plant efficiency. By this process, anaerobic fermentation occurs rapidly. Therefore, the
mechanical agitator was demolished and the biogas plant economized.
Fig. 3.15: Installation of reverse blasting technique inside the digester

3.8.1.6 Determination of moisture content and total solids of samples
A known quantity of material of each substrate in aluminum boxes and placed in an oven
at 65°C for 7 - 8 hours until the constant reading of weight was obtained. In this method,
the initial weight of the box with the sample before placing it in the oven and after drying
was determined using a precision electrical balance with an accuracy of 0.1 g. From the
observed value of the moisture content of samples as explained in the previous section, the
total solids present in each test sample was determined using the following formula:
Total solids = Weight of test sample - Weight of water content in the sample (3.14)
3.8.1.7 Standardization of the solid content of feed material to 10% level
After determining the moisture content and total solids of each of the samples, the solid
content of the sample was maintained at 10%. To bring the total solid content of each feed
material to a 10% level, the following procedure was followed. The required quantity of
water to be added was calculated using the following equation. (Jaya and Maurya, 2017)
40
(3.15)
Where Q is the quantity of water to be added, X is the initial total solid content of feed
material, Y is the amount of water content in the feed material.
3.8.1.8 Performance evaluation of biogas plant
The results of the pilot size biogas plant fed with substrate studied for a retention period of
30 days during the second phase of experiments.
3.8.1.9 Biogas analyzer
A biogas analyzer (BIOGAS 5000) was used to measure the compositions of biogas. The
analyzer specifically used for measuring farm digester gas composition, for animal dung as
well as food and agriculture wastes. The biogas analyzer consists of different probes for
measuring different gases present in the biogas. It provides the composition of gases as well
as for measuring the temperature and flow rate of biogas. The biogas analyzer has several
electrochemical sensors, which analyze the quantity of Methane (CH4), Carbon dioxide
(CO2), Carbon monoxide (CO), and Nitrogen (N2) in percentage while Hydrogen Sulfide
(H2S) and Ammonia (NH3) in ppm.
Fig 3.16 Detailed view of BIOGAS 5000 @ Geotech
41
3.9 Data Collection
The data were gathered three times a day in 1.9 years. For the production of biogas different
parameters were calculated and the impacts of these parameters were observed like
temperature. The average ambient temperature was also being considered. Feeding rates
were also calculated according to the size and requirement of the biogas plant. A (15 kW)
Spark ignition (SI) engine has been used to fulfill farmhouse and dairy farm electricity
demand. Data of raw biogas production obtained from UAF, Chawla farm Satiana road as
well as Shakargarh Farms. In the up-gradation system, the variation in pressure and flow
rate of showering of water and raw biogas were recorded and their effect was observed.
Note the samples of raw and purified biogas with the help of a biogas analyzer (BIOGAS
5000).
3.10 Statistical analysis of biogas production
To study the independent and combined effect of ambient temperature and pressure on
biogas production in digester during the retention time of 30 days in the substrate of animal
dung (cow & buffalo), a regression analysis was carried out. The regression coefficient
obtained is represented in Table 3.4. Specimen regression models developed for density of
the feeding material are given as under:
Table 3.4 Biogas production of minimum and maximum levels of independent
variables
Parameters Units Minimum Maximum
o
Digester Temperature C 25 40
The density of the Kgm-3 1090 1200
feeding material
Pressure Bar 1.36 3.40
3.10.1 Effect of temperature on gas production
Y = 2.544 + 0.117 X (Jaya and Maurya, 2017)(3.16)
Where,
Y= Gas production, m3day-1
X= Temperature ºC
3.10.2 Effect of pressure on gas production
Y = 2.189 + 24.42 X (Jaya and Maurya, 2017)(3.17)
Where,
42
Y = Gas production m3day-1
X = Pressure bar
3.10.3 Effect of temperature and pressure on gas production
Y = 2.412-0.008 X1 + 24.52 X2. (Jaya and Maurya, 2017) (3.18)
Where,
Y = Gas production m3day-1
X1 = Temperature °C
X2 = Pressure bar
Regression models for the other two substrates i.e. Buffaloes and cows’ dung are given.
3.11 Statistical analysis of biogas Production by (RBT)
Central Composite, Response Surface of “The Design of Expert” Software 7.0® was used
to analyze gas production rate statistically. Three parameters were selected as an
independent variable including feeding rate, temperature, while the gas production rate was
selected dependent variable. The Design of Expert software-generated levels of
independent parameters mentioned above.
3.12. Statistical Analysis for Biogas Up-gradation
The statistical analysis was also performed by using PROG GLM (General Linear Model)
procedures of SAS System (1989) and ANOVA (Two Way Analyses).
3.13 Economic analysis
The economic analysis includes design parameters such as biogas plant specifications and
up-gradation systems having different values were considered such as fixed cost and
variable cost as under.
3.13.1 Fixed cost
The fixed cost contains initial cost, interest, devaluation, insurance, duties, and housing was
calculated by using the given formula.
Depreciation= Initial cost-Salvage value/ No of useful years (3.19)
Salvage value was taken as 10% of the initial cost and years of the useful life of the biogas
plant were assumed to be 15 years. In Pakistan, the rate of interest was taken as 6%
presently, insurance, housing, and taxes charging rate 2% and 1.5% correspondingly to
calculate the amount of interest by using the given formula.
Interest = (Initial cost +Salvage value) * annual interest rate/2 (3.20)
43
3.13.2 Taxes
The machinery is considered personal property and its value is taken at the rate of 36%
of the average amount. Because it is constructed behind the dairy University of Agriculture
Faisalabad. All taxes were paid on the material acquired for the construction of the Biogas
plant and this amount was added to the purchased price. The labor cost was taken as 10%
of the original cost and having a 5% wastage of the average amount. The excavation cost
of the floating drum biogas plant was taken according to the soil condition normally 10%
of the total fixed cost. The prices of the feeding pipe were taken into account according to
the quality and diameter of the pipe normally taken as 1% of the total cost of the project.
3.13.3 Insurance
There are different agricultural types of equipment like tractors, combines, etc are insured.
For the provision of risk of accident damage and theft. Insurance is charged at the rate of
2% of the initial cost of the machine. But the biogas plant was constructed behind the dairy
farm at the University of Agriculture Faisalabad in a safe place. Therefore, no insurance is
required.
3.13.4 Housing
The cost of machinery housing varies according to the climatic conditions and the size of
the machine. It is generally agreed that machines protected from weather require fewer
repairs. The annual charges of housing are 2% of its initial cost. In the case of Biogas plant,
it did not require housing because it should be exposed to the sun for maintaining the
anaerobic process. Therefore, housing only 1.5% of its initial cost.
3.13.5 Variable cost
The variable cost comprises running cost, labor cost, and repair and maintenance charges.
For each site, labor was hired according to the present rate at (PKR. 600/- day-1) for
controlling and operating the biogas plant. The repair and maintenance cost was taken as
90% of its initial cost but it was taken as 50% of its initial cost.
3.13.6 Payback period
The payback period was calculated, the time necessary for whole cash outflows equal to
total cash inflows i.e. the time required for breakeven point.
44
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Pakistan has a huge potential for biogas production using animal waste and crop biomass.
About 70% of the population in Pakistan is directly or indirectly dealing with the
agriculture sector and adoption of bio-energy solutions in rural areas of Pakistan can play
a significant role in rural development and strengthening the economy of the country. The
optimal design of a biogas plant is necessary to maximize biogas production. After optimal
designing of biogas plants, another challenge is methane enrichment. Considering the
availability of the significant resources in the form of animal waste and biomass in the
country, this study was carried out for the design modification and performance evaluation
of indigenized floating drum biogas plants, up-gradation of biogas using physical
absorption and chemical techniques for methane (CH4) enrichment and assessment of
techno-economic feasibility of modified biogas plants for decentralized rural applications.
The study was conducted in the following three phases:
Phase-I: Design modification of the floating drum biogas plant by using reverse blasting
technique (RBT)
Phase-II: Experimental study and performance evaluation of a modified biogas plant using
reverse blasting technique
Phase-III: Feasibility study and economic analysis of RBT biogas plant in comparison to
the conventional biogas plants.
Phase-I
4.1 Design of Floating Drum Biogas Plant
This research was focused on the design and development of floating drum biogas plants
which were installed near the UAF dairy farm, Chawla farm, Shakargarh Biogas plant, and
Proka farm UAF. In this study, all the four sites of biogas plants were designed and
developed using algorithms and formulae presented in Chapter 3. There are two methods
to design the biogas plant. Firstly, based on the availability of animal dung/biodegradable
material and secondly based on the preplanned size of the fermentation chamber for
different applications. In this research, all the floating drum biogas plants have been
designed by keeping in view the animal dung and biodegradable material for the continuous
and successful operation of biogas plants. In all five biogas plants, the same procedure and
methodology have been adopted. For a case study, one of the floating drum biogas plant
having a capacity 25m3 installed at UAF has been presented as given below. There were
about 200 animals in the dairy farm at University of Agriculture Faisalabad around 50%
45
collection of animal dung, the total animal dung available was about 1000kg to be used for
the feeding of biogas plants. Keeping in view the research aspects, it was decided that
different sizes of biogas plants to be developed where 600kg dung will be used in a first
biogas plant and 400kg dung will be used in a second biogas plant. This is not a hard and
fast rule but this distribution can be made based on space available, water table depth, and
utilization of energy for different applications. For an-instant, the detail of design for a
floating drum biogas plant running on 400 kg animal dung is presented below. First of all,
the mass of daily charge was calculated using the dung-water ratio as 1:1 to maintain the
optimum C/N ratio for buffalo and cow dung. However, this dung-water ratio may differ
for different biodegradable materials like silage, food waste, etc.
To calculate the mass of daily charge Eq. 3.1 was calculated to be 800kgday-1. The volume
of daily charge was calculated to be 0.734m3 using Eq. 3.2 where the density of feeding
material was measured to be 1090kgm-3.
The biogas plant is an anaerobic process where microbial activity produces biogas due to
the hydrolysis process, acidogenisis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis processes which
are prolonged for several days keeping in view the location of a site based on the available
temperature conditions. In the tropical site of UAF dairy farm (Latitude 31degree,
Longitude 73 degree). The retention time varied from 20-50 days from tropical to colder
regions. In the tropical condition of Faisalabad, the retention time was determined under
laboratory conditions and was found to be 42 days as shown in Figure 4.1.
Laboratory Biogas Experiment by using crop waste and

cattle dung
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
CH4 % CO2 % O2 %
Figure 4.1. Estimation of retention time under laboratory conditions
46
The theoretical volume of the digester was calculated to be 22.02m3 using Eq.3.3. It is
important to mention here that a 10% provision for sedimentation should be provided. So,
considering a 10% sedimentation provision, the total volume of the digester was calculated
to be 24.222m3 using Eq. 3.4.
Since the floating drum biogas plant involves a cylindrical floating drum, so the diameter
of the digester needs to be calculated. Thus, the diameter of the digester was calculated to
be 2.99 m using Eq. 3.6.
The height to diameter ratio was used to adjust the diameter and height of biogas plants
based on the availability of space and groundwater depth. Normally, the diameter to height
ratio should be maintained between (1.20 - 1.50). In this case, the height to diameter ratio
was taken as 1.19.
After calculating the diameter of a biogas digester, the height of the biogas plant was
calculated to be 3.69 m using Eq. 3.6.
Once, the volume of the digester has been calculated, then the amount of theoretical biogas
produced from the biogas plant can be calculated. The specific gas production per kg of
animal dung was recorded under laboratory conditions and found to be 0.05m3kg-1. So, the
amount of biogas produced from 25m3 biogas plant using 400 kg biodegradable/dung
material was calculated to be 14 m3day-1 using Eq. 3.7. This is a theoretical value of the
biogas produced but it was rather difficult to maintain the ideal conditions due to
temperature variation and other environmental factors, so, the biogas plant efficiency was
found to be 70%. Thus, actual biogas produced under site-specific condition was found to
be 14 m3kg-1day-1. The specific gas consumption for an engine working Otto cycle and
Diesel cycle is 0.60 m3kw-1h-1 and 0.45m3kW-1h-1. For 400kg available animal dung, the
capacity of the fermentation chamber was found to be 25m3and the remaining available
dung using the same procedure as discussed for 40m3 floating drum biogas plant and details
are given in an Appendix A &B. Out of 400kg animal dung, the total biogas produced @
70 % efficiency was calculated to be 14 m3day-1 and continuous power of 33.62 kW can be
generated for Otto cycle and biogas-diesel hybrid engine at 70:30 ratios respectively. This
potential is for daily continuous operation for the engine. However, two storage tanks, each
having 1.5 m3 capacity have also been installed to store the biogas to run even a big capacity
engine to run a tube well or a fodder machine, etc. For 6 hours daily using 8.4 kWh engine
respectively. Both kinds of engines have been installed, one for the tube well operation and
the second for farm electrification.
47
Using a similar procedure and formulae, for 40m3 as well as other floating drum biogas
plants have been designed and developed at UAF, Chawla farm Satiana road and Proka
Farms, UAF having capacities of 120 m3and 130m3. Two more plants were also designed
and installed at Shakargarh having the capacity of each floating drum biogas plant was
110m3.
4.1.1 Material Calculation for Biogas Plants
All the fermentation chambers/digesters are cylindrical in shape and the material estimation
procedure is the same for all kinds of floating drum fermentation chambers. Material
estimation and calculation details for 25 m3 fermentation chamber are given below:
The number of bricks (Nb)are calculated by using Equation 4.1
(4.1)
Where Dmd is the digester mean diameter, Hd is the height of the digester, and Twd is the
wall thickness of the digester. The mean diameter Dmdis calculated by the following
relation.
Dmd= Di +Do/2 (4.2)
Where Di and Do are the inner and outer diameters of the digester.
By substituting values of diameter, height, and wall thickness as detailed in Appendix A,
the volume of wall constructed was calculated to be 8.92 m3 (314.9 ft3) and the number of
bricks was calculated to be 4723 using the standard brick size in Pakistan @15 bricks/ft3.
The amount of cement required was calculated to be 15.7 ft3 using the standard cement
bricks ratio of 1ft3 cement for 300 bricks. The cement-sand ratio for brickwork was taken
as1:4 and the volume of sand was calculated to be 63 ft3. The volume of the concrete base
was calculated to be 57.6 ft3 by taking concrete diameter as 178 in and concrete bed depth
as 4 in. The amount of cement, sand, and concrete was calculated by using equation 4.2 as
8.2, 16.5, and 32.2 ft3 with 1:2:4 respectively.
The volume of Concrete base is calculated using the following equation:
(4.3)
Where Vcb is the volume of a concrete base, Dcb is the diameter of the concrete base and
dcb is the depth of the concrete base. The inner side of the fermentation chamber was
plastered to avoid dead air pockets and for uniform mixing to enhance microbial activity
inside the fermentation chamber. So, the volume of plastering was calculated in the same
way as done for the brick volume and the plastering volume was calculated as 16.9 ft3.
Where 3.4 and 13.5 ft3 of cement and sand were used keeping the optimum cement-sand
ratio as 1:4.
48
In addition to the construction of the fermentation chamber, there are other constructions
and auxiliary components viz., feeding chamber, inlet and outlet sections, construction for
agitator unit, etc. were also constructed and the details are given in Appendix B. For the
25m3 biogas plant, the total number of bricks was calculated to be 6200, and the volume of
cement, sand, and concrete was also calculated using a similar procedure to be 40, 110,
120, and 130 m3 respectively.
4.1.2 Design modification of fermentation Chamber using RBT
After the design, development and installation work of floating drum biogas plants installed
at Dairy Farm, UAF, the composition of biogas was analyzed using a biogas analyzer
(BIOGAS 5000; Error<1%) and the composition of CH4, CO2, NH3, O2, CO, H2 and H2S
of biogas before scrubber unit is given in Table (4. 1).
Table 4.1: Composition CH4, CO2, O2, NH3, CO, H2and H2S of Biogas Plant installed
at Dairy Farm, UAF.
Peak Peak Min
CH4 CO2 O2 CH4 CO2 O2 NH3 CO H2 H2S
% % % % % % ppm ppm Lmh Ppm
45.69 45.5 0.2 54.5 47.3 0.2 >>>> 3 Low 5000
These results helped to analyze the actual composition of methane production which can be
effectively utilized for different applications. It was investigated that the results were not at par
with the international standards as published in various literature (Krich et al., 2005). In
another experiment, the composition of CH4, CO2, O2, CO, H2, and H2S of biogas before the
scrubber unit is given in Figure 4.2.
Figure 4.2. Composition of raw biogas before the scrubber
49
Phase-II
During this phase of the research, the experimental study and performance evaluation of
biogas plants were carried out and the results are discussed below:
4.2Effect of Temperature, Pressure and Feeding rate on Gas Production rate

In this section, the combined effect of temperature (oC), pressure (bar), and feeding
rate(kgm-3 ) on the production of biogas (m3h-1) have been discussed in detail.
4.2.1 Combined effect of feeding rate and temperature on biogas production rate
The biogas production is normally affected by feeding rate and the temperature. The
research was conducted at Chawla dairy farm Satiana road Faisalabad. The raw biogas
production rate was increased by employing pneumatic pressure design commonly called
a reverse blasting technique (RBT) during the anaerobic digestion process. As the
temperature reduces from 40 - 30oC.The gas production reduces from 33 - 28 m3h-1. As the
feeding rate was increased, the gas production rate decreased, and vice versa. Table 4.2
shows that temperature has shown the highest effect on gas production rate followed by
pressure and feeding rate as shown in figure 4.3. The effect of the feeding rate was non-
significant. The interaction of all three variables were also significant.
Fig. 4.3. Effect of feeding rate and digester temperature on biogas production
50
4.2.2 Combined Effect of pressure and temperature on biogas production rate
The floating drum biogas plant was constructed at Chawla dairy Farm Satiana road
Faisalabad in which the capacity of the biogas plant was calculated to be 130m3 where
hydraulic retention time was taken as 30 days according to the climatic conditions of
Faisalabad Punjab. Figure 4.4 shows that as the temperature (oC) increased inside the
digester from 30 - 40oC and pressure increased from 2.5 - 5.5bar of biogas which was
entered from the bottom of the digester to maintain the anaerobic digestion process.
Therefore, in this process, the biogas production rate was increased significantly at the rate
of 31-37 m3h-1. Statistically, the analysis showed that concerning an increase in pressure
and temperature for an optimum range gives a significant increase in biogas production rate
as shown in Table 4.2.
Fig. 4.4. Effect of pressure and temperature on biogas production
4.2.3 Combine effect of pressure and feeding rate on biogas production rate
In this process, anaerobic digestion, the effect of pressure, and feeding rate significantly
affected the biogas production rate because when the pressure of the biogas increased from
2.5 - 5.5 bar the bacterial activity increased and breaking down the scum formation in the
fermentation chamber. Moreover, the biogas production rate was increased from 31-
35m3hr-1 by increasing the feeding ratio from 1:1 - 1:2 for balancing the carbon to nitrogen
ratio (C: N) as shown in Figure 4.5. The statistical analysis of gas production rate in terms
51
of ANOVA was also applied and the results are shown in Table 4.2. The result showed that
feeding ratio and pressure of biogas up to optimum level has a significant effect on biogas
production. In all the cases, the quantity of gas used for RBT was not taken into
consideration but only the effect pressure was analyzed.
Fig. 4.5. Effect of pressure and feeding rate on biogas production
Table 4.2 Biogas production rate (ANOVA)
Source Sum of square Df M.S F-value P-value

Model 188.68 9 20.96 44.27 <0.0001
A-Temperature 114.09 1 114.09 240.91 <0.0001
B-Feeding 1.81 1 1.81 3.83 0.0788
C-Pressure 66.32 1 66.32 140.04 0.0001
AB 0.00 1 0.080 0.00 1.000
AC 0.080 1 1.81 6.17 0.6897
BC 1.81 1 0.65 3.81 0.0794
A2 0.65 1 3.79 1.37 0.2684
B2 3.79 1 0.76 8.01 0.0179
C2 0.76 10 0.47 1.61 0.2330
Lack of it 4.74 5 0.95
Error 0.00 5
Total 193.41 19
52
4.3 Up-gradation of Biogas
4.3.1 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition of CH4
Figure 4.6 shows that the percentage composition of methane gas (CH4%) increased from
63.5 - 85.2% as water temperature decreases from 25- 15oC inside the water scrubbing unit.
The specific increase in methane composition was observed to be 0.4% percent per oC as
the water temperature decreases. Methane composition has shown an inverse relation with
the water temperature inside the scrubbing unit. It is because the cold water has more
tendency to absorb CO2 from the raw biogas due to its high density. It is concluded that the
higher methane composition is achievable during winter due to the availability of low-
temperature water. The statistical analysis indicated that the effect of water temperature,
the percentage composition of methane was observed to be highly significant.
Fig. 4.6. Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition of

CH4
4.3.2 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition of CO2
Figure 4.7 shows that the percentage composition of carbon dioxide gas (CO2%) decreases
from 34.5 - 13.7% as the temperature in the water scrubbing unit decreases from 25-15oC.
The specific decrease in carbon dioxide was found to be 1.25% per oC. Therefore, the
temperature of water in the scrubbing system is directly proportional to the percentage
composition of carbon dioxide (CO2) which is highly significant.
53
CO2
4.3.3 Effect of water temperature in water scrubber on the percentage composition
of H2S
Figure 4.8 shows that the composition of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) decreased from 74 - 44.2
ppm, as the water temperature in the water scrubbing unit decreased from 30 - 20.9oC.
These results are partially consistent with the findings of (Abdurrakhman et al., 2018)in
which the H2S contents were reduced from 0.7-0.5 ppm at 25-15oC inside the scrubber
water temperature. The specific decrease of hydrogen sulfide was found to be 3ppm per oC.
Therefore, the temperature of water showering inside the scrubbing system is inversely
proportional to the composition of hydrogen sulfide (ppm) gas which is highly significant.

H2 S
54
4.3.4 Effect of water flow rate on the percentage composition of CH4
The percentage composition of methane gas increased from 63.5 - 85.3% due to an increase
in the flow rate from 10 - 30 lpm of water inside the column because the flow rate of the
water column is directly proportional to the percentage composition of methane (CH4%)
gas as shown in Figure 4.9. From the ANOVA Table 4.3, it was found that the effect of
flow rate on the percentage composition of methane is significant.
Fig. 4.9. Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the percentage composition of CH4
4.3.5 Effect of water flow rate on the percentage composition of CO2
The water flow rate in the scrubbing system affected the percentage composition of carbon
dioxide. The percentage composition of carbon dioxide decreased from 34.5 - 13.7% as the
flow rate in the water scrubbing system was increased from 10 - 30 lpm as shown in Fig.
4.10. Therefore, the percentage composition of carbon dioxide is inversely proportional to
the water flow rate inside the scrubbing unit. From the ANOVA Table 4.4, it was found
that the effect of flow rate on the percentage composition of carbon dioxide is significant.
This is because as the flow of water increases, the solubility of carbon dioxide increases.
The carbon dioxide (CO2%) absorption was found to be 24%. in the raw biogas. According
to wellinger and Lindberg (2000), CO2 absorption increases by increasing the water flow
rate in the scrubbing unit.
55
Fig. 4.10. Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the percentage composition of CO2
4.3.6 Effect of water flow rate on the composition of H2S in ppm
In the water column of the scrubbing unit, the water flow rate also affects the percentage
composition of hydrogen sulfide depending upon the quality of the water. The hydrogen
sulfide was decreased from 60 - 4.0 ppm by increasing the flow rate from 10 - 30 lpm using
a water scrubber as shown in figure 4.11. Although a separate scrubbing unit carrying iron
wool is used to remove hydrogen sulfide from the raw biogas, the use of water in the water
scrubbing unit also helped in removing hydrogen sulfide as well as carbon dioxide. The
removal of H2S is necessary because the presence of hydrogen sulfide in the biogas results
from corrosion problems in the compressors, gas storage tanks, and an-internal combustion
engines. Furthermore, during combustion hydrogen sulfide inside engines results in the
exhaust of sulfur oxides which are hazardous to the environment. The statistically analyzed
results showed that the effect of the water flow rate is significant on the composition of
hydrogen sulfide in the biogas.
56
Fig. 4.11. Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the composition of H2S in ppm
4.3.7 Effect of water pressure on the percentage composition of CH4
From the figure 4.12 given below shows that the percentage composition of methane gas
(CH4%) increased from 63.5 - 85.2% due to an increase of its pressure from 2 - 6 bar of
water inside the column because the pressure of the water column is directly proportional
to the percentage composition of methane (CH4%) which was present in the biogas. From
the ANOVA (Table 4.3), it is evident that the effect of pressure on the percentage
composition of methane is significant.
Fig. 4.12. Effect of water pressure in scrubber on the percentage composition of CH4
57
4.3.8 Effect of water pressure on the percentage composition of CO2
This method involves the use of pressurized water as an absorbent solution for the removal
of carbon dioxide. In this method, the compressed biogas enters from the bottom of the
tower at 0.5 - 1m3h-1 while pressurized water was sprayed at 2 - 6 bar from the top of the
scrubbing unit in a counter flow method. The carbon dioxide (CO2) present in the biogas is
settled at the bottom of the scrubbing unit while the up-graded biogas goes up from the
scrubbing unit. As the presence of carbon dioxide in biogas reduces its calorific value. The
amount of carbon dioxide was controlled by a pressurized water scrubbing system. Figure
4.13 given below shows that the percentage composition of carbon dioxide gas decreases
from 34.5 - 13.7% as increased its pressure of showering water ranges from 2 - 6 bar. The
data collected were statistically analyzed and incorporated in the form of a table. The
analysis shows that the percentage composition of carbon dioxide is significantly reduced
with the 5% significance level. The scenario shows that the percentage composition of
carbon dioxide gas increases with the increase in pressure. The water showering in the
water scrubbing system varies inversely proportional to the absorption of carbon dioxide
gas which is significant.
Fig.4.13. Effect of water pressure on the percentage composition of CO2
58
4.3.9 Effect of water pressure on the composition of H2S
The pressure of water in the water scrubbing system affects the hydrogen sulfide
concentration. From the figure 4.14 shows that the parts per million compositions of
hydrogen sulfide gas decreased from 514 after passing through the scrubbing system was
60- 4.0 ppm as the pressure in the water scrubbing system increases from 2 - 6 bar. The pH
of water normally ranges from 6 - 7 also plays an important role in the up-gradation of
biogas and in reducing H2S concentration in the scrubbing unit. From the ANOVA (Table
4.5), it is evident that the effect of pressure on the percentage composition of hydrogen
sulfide is significant. These results are partially consistent with the findings of Vijay (2007)
where H2S was reduced up to 70% using effluent pressure ranges between 0.6 to 1MPa as
removal of effluent pressure. Therefore, as the pressure of water increases, the
concentration of hydrogen sulfide reduces, and corrosion problems in the storage vessels,
compression pumps, and inside the cylinder-liner of the engines can be minimized.
Moreover, this gas is also hazardous to our environment.
Fig. 4.14 Effect of water pressure on the composition of H2S in ppm
59
4.4 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on biogas composition
4.4.1 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the percentage
composition of CH4
Figure. 4.15 shows that the effect of water flow rate from 10 - 30 lpm and the pressure of
water column ranges from 2 - 6 bar on the percentage composition of methane (CH4%). As
the flow rate increases from 10 - 30 lpm with increasing pressure from 2.0 - 6 bar. The
percentage composition of the methane gas increased from 63.5 - 85.2%. The overall effect
of water flow rate and pressure interaction on methane composition is significant. The
reason for increasing methane content is associated directly with the water flow rate as
more the water flow rate, higher the methane concentration. The same is the case with the
increase in pressure. An increase in pressure and an increase in flow rate cause mist
formation. It has been noticed that more the mist formation inside the scrubbing unit, more
the saturation of gas particles, and ultimately increase in percentage composition of
methane in biogas. The availability of water flow rate (10, 20, and 30 lpm) to the pressure
(2, 4, and 6 bar) interaction varies directly to the percentage composition of methane
content ranges from 63.5, 65.4, 67.5, 70.8, 72.9,75.7,78.3,82.4, and 85.2% respectively.
From the ANOVA (Table 4.3), it was found that the effect of flow rate on the percentage
composition of methane is non-significant. According to Willinger and Lindberg (2000)
stated, about 90% of methane contents (CH4) in the biogas can be achieved in a biogas
plant by increasing water pressure inside the scrubbing unit up to 1MPa pressure and by
maintaining variable water flow rates ranging from 1.5 - 2 m3h-1.
Fig.4.15 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the percentage
composition of CH4
60
4.4.2 Combine effect of water flow rate and pressure on the percentage composition
of CO2
The inlet biogas flow rates were varied from 0.5 - 2 m3h-1 at 2 bar. The percentage
absorption of CO2 rises as the water flow rates increases from 10 to 30 lpm. However, the
percentage absorption of carbon dioxide (CO2%) decreases, as the biogas flow rate
increases. A similar trend has been observed for 2 - 6 bar operating pressures. It was
observed that based on the highest percent of CO2 absorption, the biogas flow rate of 1.5
m3h-1 is optimized under varying column pressures. The effect of gas pressure on percent
absorption of CO2 was determined for different gas flow rates corresponding to water flow
rates and the relationships are shown in the figure. 4.16. The percentage of carbon dioxide
(CO2%) absorption ranged from 65.5 - 76.22% at 2 bar and 77.11 - 86.33% at 6 bar, the
water flow rates of 10, 20, and 30 lpm respectively. According to Willinger and Lindberg
(2000) and Vijay (2007), about 90% of CO2 from biogas can be absorbed for the water flow
rate of 1.5m3h-1 at 10 bar inlet pressure. At 8 - 10 bar pressures, CO2 absorption percent is
found to the same for different water flow rates of 1.75 - 2 m3h-1. Hence, it can be concluded
that the water flow rate of 1.75 m3h-1 can be used optimized as the biogas flow rate of 1.5
m3h-1. The highest carbon dioxide percent absorption of 93.11% was observed at 6 bar
column-operating pressure with a methane purity of 97% in the biogas outlet. It was noted
that as the flow rate of water increases from 10 - 30 lpm with increasing pressure from 2 -
6 bar, the percentage composition of carbon dioxide decreases from 34.5 - 13.7%. When
the water is passed with a higher flow rate it reacts with CO2 resulting in the formation of
carbonic acid (H2CO3). Therefore, the overall effect of water flow rate (lpm) and pressure
(bar) interaction on carbon dioxide (CO2%) composition is non-significant.
Fig. 4.16. Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the percentage
composition of CO2
61
4.4.3 Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on H2S ppm.
The path lines show that the biogas flow rates were varied from 1.5 - 2.5 m3h-1 at a low
operating pressure of 2 bar. The concentration of H2S (ppm) decreases from 60– 4.0 ppm
as it rises the water flow rate from 10 - 30 lpm. The percentage absorption of H2S rises as
the water flow rates increases from 10 - 30 lpm. However, the concentration of H2S ppm
decreases, as the biogas flow rate increases. A similar trend has been observed for 2 - 6 bar
operating pressures. It was observed based on the highest absorption of H2S absorption, the
biogas flow rate of 1.5 m3h-1 was optimal under varying column pressures. The effect of
gas pressure on percent absorption of H2S was determined for different gas flow rates
corresponding to the water flow rate and the relationships are shown in Figure 4.17. The
figure depicts that the higher the pressure, the lower will be the amount of H2S. Therefore,
the composition of H2S decreases from 60– 4.0 ppm with an operating pressure ranges from
2 - 6 bar, and the water flow rates of 10, 20, and 30 lpm respectively. The highest H2S was
observed for the gas flow rate of 1.5 m3h-1 for pressure variation between 2 - 6 bar. The
maximum H2S absorption was recorded to be 4.0 ppm.
Fig.4.17. Effect of water flow rate and pressure interaction on the composition of H2S
n ppm
62
4.4.4 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage
composition of CH4
Figure 4.18 shows that the percentage composition of methane (CH4%) increases from 63.5
- 85.2% due to a decrease in temperature of the water from 25-15oC and increased pressure
from 2 - 6 bar inside the column because the temperature of the water column is inversely
proportional to the percentage composition of methane while the water pressure inside the
column is directly proportional to the increase in the composition of methane. The
composition of methane varies from 63.5, 65.4, 67.5, 70.8, 72.9, 75.7 ,78.3 ,82.4, and
85.2% respectively. The statistical results showed that the overall effect of water
temperature (oC) and pressure (bar) interaction on the percentage composition of methane
(CH4) is significant.
Fig.4.18. Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage

composition of CH4
4.4.5 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage

composition of CO2
It shows as the temperature decreases from 25-15oC inside the water scrubbing tower with
increasing pressure from 2 - 6 bar. The percentage composition of carbon dioxide gas
decreases from 34.5 - 13.7%. It was studied that the highest percentage of carbon dioxide
(CO2%) absorption in the biogas at a temperature of water column 15oC was achieved under
varying column pressures. The effect of gas pressure on percentage absorption of carbon
dioxide CO2% was determined for different gas temperatures ranging from 25-30oC
63
corresponding water pressure in relation as shown in the figure. 4.19. It was evident from
the figure that, the higher the pressure, the higher the carbon dioxide (CO2%) percentage
absorption. The percentage composition of carbon dioxide (CO2%) absorption ranged from
65.55 - 76.22% at 2 bar, 77.7 - 85.33% at 6 bar, at the water temperature of 25, 20, and
15oC respectively. The overall effect of water pressure and temperature interaction on
carbon dioxide composition is significant.
Fig.4.19. Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage

composition of CO2
4.4.6 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the composition of

H2S in ppm
The path lines show that as the temperature of the effluent decreases from 25-15oC and the
pressure of effluent inside the scrubbing unit increase from 2 - 6 bar while the biogas flow
rates were varied from 0.5 - 1m3h-1 passing from the bottom of the scrubbing unit. The
concentration of H2S (ppm) decreases from 60 - 4.0 ppm as rises the pressure of water from
2 - 8 bar. The percentage absorption of H2S increases as the pressure increases. However,
the results of removal efficiency of H2S were varied from 60,40, and 4.0 ppm at different
pressure of water columns and vary the flow of incoming biogas it also reveals that the
removal efficiency of hydrogen sulfide contents from biogas was 95% at the maximum
64
level of adsorption having a temperature of the water column was 15oC as shown in figure
4.20. Results have shown in ANOVA (table 4.5) that the effect of water temperature and
pressure inside the scrubbing unit on the composition of hydrogen sulfide is non-
significant. It also showed that the desulfurization of water scrubbing equipment should be
established in the circulating water system to get stable removal efficiency. Water in the
column adsorbed hydrogen sulfide was emissions into the tank and the clean water of the
circulating water system was flown into the column by a pump that makes sure the
desulfurization of water scrubbing.
Fig 4.20. Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the composition of
H2S in ppm
4.4.7 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the percentage
composition of CH4
The path lines show the effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the
percentage composition of methane (CH4%) which is present in the biogas. During the
process of up-gradation of biogas with a water scrubbing unit the percentage composition
of methane gas increases from 63.5 - 85.2%. Due to the variation in water temperature from
25-15oC with increasing flow rate from 10 - 30 lpm. From, figure 4.21 shows that the
percentage composition of methane (CH4) was achieved varied from 63.5, 65.4, 67.5, 70.8,
72.9, 75.7, 78.3, 82.4, and 85.2% respectively. The best performance of the scrubber was
65
found at 15oC inflow water temperature having pH ranges 6 - 7 during this scrubbing
process. The overall effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on methane
composition is non-significant.
Fig. 4.21. Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the percentage
composition of CH4
4.4.8 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the percentage
composition of CO2
The effect of water temperature on percentage absorption of CO2 was determined for
different gas flow rates corresponding water flow rate and their relationships shown in
Figure 4.22. As the temperature of water decreases from 25- 15oC, the percentage
composition of carbon dioxide (CO2%) gas decreases from 34.5 - 13.7%. According to
Virendra K Vijay (2007) the variation of inlet flow rates 1 - 3m3h-1 at 1.0 MPa pressure.
The gas flow rates at the inlet were varied from 0.5 to 2 m3h-1and with an increased water
flow rate from 10 - 30 lpm. The percentage absorption of carbon dioxide CO2% raised from
65.55 - 76.22% at 10 lpm, and 77.7 - 85.33% at 30 lpm, on specific temperatures of 25, 20,
and 15oC respectively. The highest percentage of carbon dioxide (CO2%) absorption was
observed at the gas flow rate of 1.5 m3h-1 for a different variation of water flow 10, 20, and
30 lpm. The overall effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on carbon dioxide
composition is non-significant as shown in ANOVA (table 4.4). The experiments have
shown that the high flow rate (lpm) of water in the scrubber and low temperatures (oC) is
favorable to reduce the percentage composition of carbon dioxide (CO2%) in the biogas.
66
Fig.4.22 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the percentage
composition of CO2
4.4.9 Effect of flow rate and temperature interaction on the composition of H 2S in
ppm
It shows as the temperature of water decreases from 25 - 15oC with increasing pressure
from 2 - 6 bar. The percentage composition of hydrogen sulfide gas decreases from 60 ppm
– 4.0 ppm. From the ANOVA (table 4.5), it was found that the effect of flow rate (lpm) and
temperature (oC) interaction on the composition of hydrogen sulfide (H2Sppm) is non-
significant. The overall effect of pressure and temperature interaction on hydrogen sulfide
composition is shown in figure 4.23.
Fig 4.23. Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the composition
of H2S in ppm
67
4.4.10 Effect of water flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on the
It shows the effect of water flow rate (lpm), pressure (bar), and temperature (oC) interaction
on the percentage composition of methane (CH4) as shown in figure 4.24, the path lines
showed that the effect of flow rate (lpm) was lowered as compared to the effect of pressure
(bar) and temperature (oC) on the percentage composition of methane gas (CH4%). As the
water flow rate increases from 10 - 30 lpm and pressure increases from 2 - 6 bar, while
water temperature decreases from 25 - 15oC, the percentage composition of methane
increased from 63.5 – 85.2%. The maximum methane was found at 30 lpm water flow rate,
with 6bar operating pressure and 15oC while the minimum methane was found at 10 lpm
water flow rate with 2 bar operating pressure and 25oC temperature of the scrubber. This is
because the density of water increases by decreasing the water temperature which tends to
absorb more carbon dioxide (CO2) and other hazardous gases from the raw biogas. The
results have depicted that the water temperature has a significant effect on methane
enrichment, but flow rate and pressure have a non-significant effect during the water
scrubbing process.
Fig. 4.24. Effect of water flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on the
68
4.4.11 Effect of water flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on the
The path line shows that the effect of water flow rate, it's pressure, and temperature affects
the percentage composition of carbon dioxide. As the flow rate increases from 10 - 30 lpm
with a pressure range from 2 - 6 bar while the temperature decreases from 25 - 15oC
respectively. These results are partially consistent with the findings of JI. Eze (2010)
designed a 6 m high tower with spherical plastic balls packing up to 2.5m at operating
pressure 5.88 bar and raw biogas flow rate of 2m3h-1. Furthermore, water was circulated
through the tower. He examined the removal of CO2 was up to 87.6% from the raw biogas.
The percentage composition of carbon dioxide gas decreases from 34.5 – 13.7%. As a
minimum the flow rate 10 lpm, pressure 2 bar, and the temperature (oC) of the water
scrubbing unit up to 25oC. The CO2% percentage was 87.3% with the maximum absorption
of water at 30 lpm flow rate (lpm), pressure 6 bar, and temperature 15oC. This is because
the density of water increases by decreasing the water temperature which tends to absorb
more carbon dioxide from the raw biogas. Moreover, this gas can also hazardous to our
environment. The overall effect of flow rate (lpm), pressure (bar), and temperature (oC)
interaction on carbon dioxide composition (CO2) is non-significant.
Fig4.25. Effect of water flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on the
69
4.4.12 Effect of flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on the composition
of H2S in ppm
The path line shows that the effect of flow rate (lpm) varies from 10 - 30 lpm as compared
to the effect of pressure (bar) and temperature (oC) on the percentage composition of
hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm). The flow rate and pressure of water increase from 10 - 30 lpm
and 2 - 6 bar while the temperature of water drops from 25-15oC respectively. The overall
percentage composition of hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm) gas decreases from 60– 4.0ppm.
The overall effect of flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on hydrogen sulfide
composition (H2S ppm) is non-significant.
Fig 4.26. Effect of water flow rate, pressure, and temperature interaction on the
composition of H2Sinppm
70
Table 4.3ANOVA for percentage concentration of methane (CH4)
Source d.f SS MS F-value

T 2 623.27 311.63 6695.62**
P 2 58.64 29.32 629.99*
F 2 4.29 2.14 46.16*
T ˣP 4 16.09 4.02 86.43*
T ˣF 4 1.01 0.25 5.44
PˣF 4 0.21 0.05 1.16N.S
T ˣPˣF 8 1.71 0.21 4.61
Error 54
Total 81
Table 4.4 ANOVA for percentage concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2)

T 2 127.69 63.84 2522.77**
P 2 23.14 11.57 457.21*
F 2 2.1 1.05 41.5*
T ˣP 4 12.09 3.02 119.47*
T ˣF 4 0.86 0.215 8.53
PˣF 4 0.22 0.05 2.2
T ˣP ˣF 8 0.57 0.07 2.89
Error 54
Total 81
71
Table 4.5 ANOVA for parts per million of hydrogen sulfide (H2S)

T 2 189226.09 9463.049 5475.05**
P 2 895.728 447.864 259.12*
F 2 48.32 24.16 13.98
T ˣP 4 85.53 21.382 12.37
T ˣF 4 19.604 4.901 2.84
PˣF 4 9.53 2.382 1.38
T ˣPˣF 8 11.432 1.429 0.83N.S
Error 54
Total 81
NS=Non-significant(P>0.05);*=Significant(P<0.05);**=Highly significant(P<0.01)
4.5 Effect of CaO+ H₂O on Biogas concentration
4.5.1 Effect of CaO+ H₂O on CH₄ (%) concentration

The raw biogas contains 52.6% ± 0.7% methane. The methane concentration slightly
increased when it reaches the storage tank (but it was not significantly different from that
of raw biogas) as some of the water contents along with CO2 were removed through the
drain valve from time to time to prevent the storage tanks from corrosion due to the
presence of moisture contents (H2O) and CO2 inside it. It is evident from figure 4.27 that
the methane concentration (CH4%) increased from 54.1 - 69.5% as the depth of the water
column increased from 15 - 45 cm using up to 4 kg of CaO which clearly shows that the
chemical absorption method has a significant effect on methane concentration. The figure
also shows that there is a significant effect as the water column depth rises so the contact
area and retention time increases by adding more water up to a certain limit. The horizontal
axis shows the methane concentration increases. When CaO concentration increased from
1 - 4kg, and water column depth increases up to 45cm the methane (CH4%) concentration
increased from 54.1 - 69.5% which indicates that chemical treatment has a highly
significant effect on methane concentration followed by a chemical adsorption method.
72
R.B stands for “Raw Biogas” and B.T stands for “Before Treatment”
Fig. 4.27 Effect of CaO+H2O treatments on CH4 (%) concentration
4.5.2 Effect of CaO+H₂O on CO₂% concentration
In this study, the CaO + H2O solution was used as a chemical solvent to show the ability to
absorb carbon dioxide (CO2%) from the gas stream. It is a useful method to remove carbon
dioxide (CO2%) from biogas. The calcium oxide (slaked lime) solution is used to promote
the chemical reactions. In this reaction, Ca(OH)2 solution is used to absorb CO2 to form
CaCO3 and H2O. In the chemical reaction, first Water (H2O) and calcium oxide (CaO) will
react to form Calcium Hydroxide Ca(OH)2. This is an exothermic process in which heat is
liberated during a chemical process for the purification of biogas. Thereafter, the system is
closed, and the biogas is passed through the reactor where CO2 gas reacts with Ca(OH)2 to
form CaCO3. Similarly, it was also observed that the maximum column height up to
saturation point (45 cm) was favorable for good absorption of CO2 due to increased surface
area to handle more gas molecules for the chemical reaction of which were treated for CO2
free biogas, nevertheless, the product is retained in the reactor tank. So, the carbon dioxide
(CO2%) concentration in biogas decreases from around (46.6% ±5%) to 5% by adding 1 -
4 kg of CaO with changing of the depth of water column increased from 15 - 45 cm that
clearly shows the chemical absorption method has a significant effect on carbon dioxide
(CO2%) concentration respectively which indicates that chemical treatment calcium oxide
(CaO) has a highly significant effect on carbon dioxide (CO2%) concentration followed by
73
chemical treatment. These experiments were conducted at Shakargarh Biogas Plants having
a size of 110 m3 and the maximum gas flow rate was recorded as 3.2 m3h-1 and the average
value of biogas was found to be 2.5 m3h-1.
Fig 4.28. Effect of CaO and H2O treatments on CO2 (%) concentration
4.5.3 Effect of CaO + H₂O on H₂S concentration
Several experiments were conducted to investigate the effect of “CaO + H₂O” on H₂S
concentration in ppm. The solution of CaO and H2O is first converted to Ca(OH)2. When
biogas is passed through this solution in the reaction tank, the product of CAS and H2O are
formed as detailed below:
Ca(OH)2 + H2S CAS + 2H2O
The raw biogas contains 514 ppm hydrogen sulfide. The hydrogen sulfide concentration
was reduced abruptly when it was passed through the chemical absorption tower. It is
evident from figure 4.29 that the hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm) concentration decreased from
514 - 18 ppm as the depth of the water column increased from 15 - 45 cm and the quantity
of CaO was increased from 1 - 4 kg. In the research, CaO and H2O solution was used to
indicate the absorption capacity of H2S from the gas stream and found that it is a useful
technique to remove H2S from biogas. The results have shown that the chemical absorption
74
method using (CaO + H2O) has a highly significant effect on the reduction of hydrogen
sulfide (H2S ppm) concentration.
Fig. 4.29 Effect of CaO+H2O treatments on H2S (ppm) concentration
4.6 Effect of NaOH and H₂O solution on biogas concentration
4.6.1 Effect of NaOH and H₂O solution on CH₄% concentration

In this study, the NaOH and H2O solution was used as a chemical solvent to see the effect
of different weights of NaOH and concentrations of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and water
(H2O) solutions on the concentration of methane (CH4%). In various experiments
conducted, it was observed that the raw biogas contains 53±0.7% methane (CH4%). As
shown in figure 4.30, the methane concentration increased from 54.1 - 72.43% as the depth
of the water column increased from 15 - 45cm when NaOH concentration increased from
1 - 4kg. Therefore, the percentage composition of methane (CH4%) rapidly increases which
clearly shows that the chemical absorption method has a significant effect on methane
(CH4%) concentration. The horizontal axis shows the effect of chemical treatment at
different levels of H2O and NaOH solution while the vertical lines show the percentage
composition of methane (CH4%) respectively which indicates that chemical treatment
(NaOH) has a highly significant effect on methane (CH4%) concentration followed by
chemical treatment
75
Fig.4.30. Effect of NaOH and H₂O solution treatments on CH4 (%) concentration
4.6.2 Effect of NaOH and H₂O on CO₂% concentration
In this study, the NaOH and H2O solution was used to assess the ability to absorb CO2%
from the gas stream. It is a useful method to remove carbon dioxide (CO2%) from biogas
and the solution of NaOH + H2O is used to promote the chemical reactions. In the chemical
reaction, first H2O and CO2 will react to form Carbonic acid (H2CO3) and then carbonic
acid (H2CO3) reacts with NaOH to produce NaHCO3 in the form of molten salt. The results
have shown that carbon dioxide (CO2%) concentration decreased as the quantity of NaOH
+ H2O solution was increased up to 4 kg from 2.5 - 3m3h-1 biogas flow rate. The carbon
dioxide (CO2%) concentration in biogas decreases from around i.e 46.6% ± 5% carbon
dioxide (CO2%) to 23.5% by adding up to 4 kg of NaOH with changing of the depth of
water column increased up to 45cm that clearly shows the chemical absorption method has
a significant effect on carbon dioxide (CO2%) concentration. The results have shown that
the higher the values of weights of NaOH were used, the lower the concentration of carbon
dioxide (CO2%) was obtained. Similarly, results also depict that there was also a significant
reduction of carbon dioxide (CO2%) concentration in the biogas with the increase in water
(H2O) ratio in the material. This is because of the volume of water (H2O) in a sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) in the chemical absorption tower, the retention time of biogas increases
to take part in the chemical reaction. The chemical treatment method using (NaOH) and
76
H2O solution have a highly significant effect in removing the carbon dioxide (CO2%)
concentration in the biogas as shown in figure 4.31.
Fig.4.31. Effect of NaOH and H2O solution treatments on CO2 (%) concentration
4.6.3 Effect of NaOH + H₂O on the concentration of H₂S in ppm

The raw biogas has 514 ppm hydrogen sulfide (H2S). The hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm)
rapidly decreased when it passed through the chemical absorption tower. The hydrogen
sulfide (H2S ppm) concentration decreased from 514 – 14 ppm as the depth of the water
column increased from 15 - 45cm and increasing the quantity of NaOH from 1 - 4kg which
shows that the chemical absorption technique has a significant effect on hydrogen sulfide
(H2S ppm) concentration. This study involves the use of NaOH+H2O solution as a solvent
to indicate the capacity to absorb H2S from the gas stream. It is a useful technique to remove
hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm) from biogas. The solution is used to promote chemical
reactions. As shown in figure 4.32. It is a continuous process in which the density of the
solution changes. It is an exothermic reaction in which heat is liberated during a chemical
process to upgrade biogas when passing out from this chemical scrubber reduces hydrogen
sulfide (H2S ppm) concentration up to 14 ppm shows that the chemical absorption method
has a significant effect on hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm) concentration.
77
Fig. 4.32. Effect of NaOH and H2O treatments on H2S (ppm) concentration
78
Economic Analysis
The economic viability of any technological invention plays the most important role
in its adaptability, especially in developing countries. The initial cost of each biogas plant
was 22143$. It was estimated that an amount of 3570$ is required, including all
maintenance and running expenses, for operating each biogas plant. Maintenance charges
and for operating floating drum biogas unit. A single man was hired to further also for
security purposes, a security guard was also hired during the night for caring for the biogas
unit having price 300,000 Rsyear-1 having increment at the rate of 5% per annum. In the
first year, the total cost of the biogas unit (fixed+ variable) cost was 13461$. Similarly, the
second and third year. During the research, the gas production on an average was found to
be 60m3day-1 with a price having Rs/- 35m-3. According to the oil and gas regulatory
authority (OGRA) prices.
To check the feasibility of the project, a cost-benefit analysis was applied. The
following table showed that the total cost, total revenue, and total profit were calculated
during the working life of the biogas plants. It was estimated that the biogas plants worked
for 10 years efficiently.
In the figure, 4.33a plotted a graph between total cost, total revenue, and total profit.
On the x-axis lies the number of years, while total expenditures (TE), total revenue (TR),
and total profit (TP) on the y-axis shown the amount of money in rupees. The black line
represents total expenditures (TE) which includes labor cost, repair, and maintenance cost,
and the principle amount. The fixed cost (FC) is being constant along with time. Variable
cost increases at the rate of 5% per annum with time as the plant is getting older more
maintenance and repair are required. The red line represents the total revenue (TR), i.e the
amount saved/profit. Initially, the revenue is zero, but with time revenue increases. The
point at which the total revenue line cuts the variable cost /total expenditure line this point
is known as the break-even point. At this point, the amount invested is the payback, after
that profit started. On the break-even point, the line is drawn parallel to the y-axis and
perpendicular to the x-axis at this time, the payback period of the biogas system. The blue
line represents the net profit line which indicates that after eight years, the floating drum
biogas plants give free energy.
The time in which the total cost of the floating drum biogas plant was found to be equated
by the Revenue produced from the biogas plant is known as the payback period. It is
calculated by the following formula.
79
Payback period = Initial investment/Cash inflow.
Payback period = A + [B]/C
A = The last period with negative cumulative cash flow
B = The absolute value of cumulative cash flow at the end of period A
C = The total cash flow during the period.
Therefore
The total life of the biogas plant = 15 years
Payback period of the biogas plant = 5.07 years
So, the installation of the biogas plant was found to be feasible according to the climatic
condition in the Punjab province of Pakistan.
In table 4.5 economic analyses of biogas generation are presented. It revealed that
the total fixed cost is 445450 rupees nearly 104 rupees hr-1is saved in terms of methane
(CH4%) gas charges. The whole system has a payback period of 8years and 11 months
beyond which the user shall be able to gain biogas at much less cost as compared with other
fuels.
80
Table 4.6 Economic analysis of biogas generation (RBT)
Year Total Exp Total Profit Net Profit
1 3616000 750000 -2866000
2 3776000 1515000 -2261000
3 3939000 2295300 -1643700
4 4105300 3091206 -1014094
5 4275230 3903030 -372200
6 4449153 4731091 281937.7
7 4627468 5575713 948244.2
8 4810615 6437227 1626612
9 4999077 7315971 2316895
10 5193384 8212291 3018906
11 5394123 9126537 3732414
12 5601935 10059067 4457132
13 5817529 11010249 5192720
14 6041681 11980454 5938772
15 6275250 12970063 6694813
81
Fig. 4.33a. Values between total cost (TC), total revenue (TR), profit (P), and
money (PKR)
Fig. 4.33b. Values between total cost (TC), total revenue (TR), profit (P), and
money (PKR)
82
Chapter-5 SUMMARY
Biogas played an important role in the energy sector by using animal manure as a source
of raw material. Biogas production from the anaerobic digestion of animal waste cannot be
used directly as a fuel. The biogas comprises methane (CH4), carbon dioxide (CO2),
Hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and traces of water vapors (H2O), which reduces the quality of
biogas as a fuel. It is recommended to enhance the quality of biogas by applying various
techniques for the improvement of methane (CH4%) contents up to the natural gas level.
Pakistan is already meeting 1.5% of its energy requirements from Biomass, while
consumption is the an-average rate of 5% per annum increases. About 62% of biomass
users are living in the rural areas which use 24% wood as biomass. Conversely, in urban
areas, 14% of biomass consumers consume 12% of the wood for their living, while the rest
of the 66% of users burn natural gas as a domestic and commercial fuel. Millions of people
produce a huge amount of waste in the form of animal dung, cotton sticks, rice husks, etc.
up to 50.000 tons day-1. Such waste can be converted into energy to avoid further depletion
of limited resources. Several years ago, scientists found some acceptable ways to obtain
renewable energy from biodegradable waste. Pakistan is an-agricultural country that has a
great potential to exploit biomass for the production of biogas. Biogas has been a major
source of energy in rural areas even before the exploitation of fossil fuels like petrol, diesel,
kerosene oil, coal, etc. Pakistan generates about 50 million metric tons of waste from crops,
animals, and poultry (Nazir et al., 1987). This waste can be used as feeding material for
biogas plants. In Pakistan nearly159 million animals producing almost 652 million kg of
manure daily from cattle that can be used to generate 16.3 million m3 biogas per day and
21 million tons of biofertilizer per year. That compensates for approximately 20% of
nitrogen and 66% of phosphorus required in the crop fields. Biogas technology resolves
both these objectives: anaerobic decomposition of wet manure of cattle results in fuel
(biogas) and organic fertilizer (sludge). Other sources like (hydel, coal, solar) are available
intermittently.
About 5000-7000 MW shortfall of electricity which has been caused by daily load shedding
from 3-4 h in urban areas while 8-12 h in rural areas. The frequent load shedding has been
paralyzed by the industrial sector as well as the economic growth of the country adversely.
Biogas is a viable energy solution to address the rural area for thermal and electric needs
by utilizing animal dung and other bio-degradable material. The present study deals with
83
the design, development, and performance evaluation of floating drum biogas plants and
up-gradation of biogas during this research it was found that the design of floating drum
biogas plants was firstly calculated by mass of daily charge based on the availability of
biodegradable waste such as animal manure having (1:1). After the calculation of the total
volume of the digester like (25m3), it was found that the amount of biogas was calculated
to be 14 m3day-1 for 70% plant efficiency. After taking the data results were taken regarding
efficiency and cost per hour operation of each system it was observed that the cost of a
biogas plant for energy generation was 2.36$h-1. The comprehensive economic analysis
was carried out using different parameters such as capital cost, operational cost, labor cost,
material cost, etc. Our analysis proposed a payback period of seven years based on current
commercial electricity units which are almost $ 0.25kWh-1.
By using biogas as a fuel, it is necessary to enhance its calorific value up to natural gas.
The calorific value of biogas can be improved by removing CO2 and other hazardous gases
called bio-methane for power generation. There are two different techniques by applying
the up-gradation of biogas, namely water scrubbing technique and chemical absorption
technique.
The water scrubbing technique is used for the removal of harmful and undesirable gases
like H2S and CO2 etc. Pressurized water is used as an absorbent for the removal of these
harmful gases. The raw biogas was entered from the bottom of the scrubbing tower flowing
towards the upper side of the tower in a counter flow manner. While pressurized water is
flowing from the top side of the scrubbing system to form mist at a pressure variation from
2 - 6 bar. The water scrubbing involves the physical absorption of (CO2) and (H2S) in the
water at high pressure and flow rate with a temperature drop of water inside the scrubbing
unit. The carbon dioxide saturated with water in continuously drawn from the bottom of
the column resulting bio-methane gas exit from the top surface of the scrubbing tower. The
raw biogas was treated with different water pressures (bar), flow rates (lpm), and
temperatures (oC) to determine the efficient findings.
In chemical absorption process is used for the removal of these impurities which decreases
the calorific value of bio-methane. During this process, the interaction of H2S, CO2, and
water vapors removal efficiency at different column height concerning no of days was taken
as significant in this experiment. The data were recorded after 3 days gave the least results
in terms of H2S, CO2, and H2O removal for biogas purification. The maximum H2S, CO2,
84
and H2O removal were observed in treatment when data was recorded after 30 minutes
followed by data recorded after 45 minutes and 60 minutes respectively. The technical
operational problems include improper mixing of feeding and low temperature inside the
digester, leakage of main gas valves, leakage of biogas storage tanks, clogging of inlet and
outlet biogas tanks, scum formation occurs inside the bio-digester, the engine produces
explosive sound intermittently and unable to take up the load and take lesser air during
combustion. The maximum percentage composition of bio-methane (CH4%) was 85.2% in
2.75m column height and 45.72cm in diameter. The composition of biogas was checked by
a portable biogas analyzer (BIOGAS5000).
CONCLUSIONS
After analysis of the results of an experiment, it was concluded that maximum biogas
production was 47m3 recorded at 39oC and 17% RH. Increases the biogas production rate
due to optimum temperature ranges from (35 - 45oC) inside the biogas digester. Minimum
biogas production was noted at a temperature of 30oC, their relative humidity of 47% was
noted. Stirring is compulsory to break the scum formation inside the fermentation chamber.
The effect of flow rate was very low as compared to the effect of pressure and temperature
on the percentage composition of methane gas (CH4%), carbon dioxide (CO2%) hydrogen
sulfide (H2S ppm), and moisture contents (H2O%). The overall effect of pressure
temperature and flow rate interaction on methane (CH4%) composition was significantly
increased whereas carbon dioxide (CO2%) hydrogen sulfide (H2S ppm) and water contents
(H2O%) was significantly decreased. As the temperature was decreased from 25- 15oC with
pressure increases from 2 – 6 bar while the flow rate of water increases from 10 - 30 lpm,
the percentage composition of methane gas was increased from 63.5 - 85.2%, and the
percentage composition of carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide and moisture contents was
decreased from 34 to 13.7%, from 5000-4 ppm and 10 to 0 %.
The effect of (NaOH+H2O) was significantly affected by methane concentration (CH4%)

as compared to the water scrubbing and other chemical treatments. The percentage
composition of methane gas was increased from 52 – 72.43% while other contaminants
such as carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and moisture contents were significant decreases.
The biogas plant was designed on a daily feeding rate but it is still being operated under
load capacity. The cost analysis showed that the per hour cost of biogas to run the Genset
engine operated at farm load was $3.12.
85
Biogas production was enough to meet the requirement of electricity generation. At the
university dairy farm, there were more than 200 animals so their potential for biogas
production was doubled than their current situation.
By adapting the pneumatic pressure design of floating drum biogas plants, the biogas was
recirculated in the digester through a pipe, laid on the bottom of the digester in a circular
shape, and having fixed nozzles on its surface to exhaust the pressurized biogas from
bottoms towards the top. It was concluded that the biogas production process not only
improves the bacterial activity but also prevents scum formation of dead pockets and, their
cost of installation is also reduced for shorter hydraulic retention time (HRT) to improve
the efficiency of the biogas plant.
Recommendations and Suggestions
The following recommendations are suggested
1-The feeding-rate should be provided at an optimum level i.e (1:1) to balance their carbon/
nitrogen ratio.
2-It is necessary to maintain the inside digester temperature especially in the winter season
for better growth of microbial activity.
3-For proper maintenance temperature inside the digester it is essential to install heat
exchanger and pneumatic pressure design (RBT) also install shut off valve for ON and Off
the system.
4-For conversion of biogas into bio-methane and improve the quality of methane it should
be compulsory to install a water scrubber as well as apply a chemical absorption technique.
5- After getting bio-methane it should be necessary to store it in to vessel to continue the

supply of gas to the Genset engine.
86
REFERENCES
Abdurrakhman, A., Kurniawan, D. and Adhim, M.M. 2018 The Effect of Temperature
Variation on Water Scrubber System to Optimize Biogas Purification.E 35 web of
conferences 42:01006 (http://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/201884201006).
Agrahari,R.,and P. Tiwari. 2011. Parametric study of portable floating type biogas
plant.World Renewable Energy congress.57:404-410.
Amjid, S.S., M.Q. Bilal, M.S. Nazir, and A. Hussain. 2011. Biogas, renewable energy
resource for Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 15:2833-2837.
Akinbami, L.J., C.M. Bailey, C.A. Johnson, M.E. King, X. Liu, J.E. Moorman and H.S.
Zahran. 2012. Trends in asthma prevalence, health care use, and mortality in the
United States. 2001-2010.
Anonymous. 2011. Ministry of petroleum and natural resources, Government of Pakistan.
〈http://www.mpnr.gov.pk〉.
Abbas, Y., M. Mubeena, and A. Hassan. 2016. Future prospects of biogas in Pakistan. 4th
International Conference on Energy, Environment, and Sustainable Development.
Al-Masri. 2001. Changes in biogas production due to different ratios of some animal and
agricultural waste. Bioresource Technology. 77(1): 97-100.
Anonymous. 2011a. The state of Pakistan’s economy. State bank of Pakistan. P: 31.
Abdalla, S, and M. Ammar. 2014. Food Processing Wastes: Characteristics, treatments,
and utilization. Journal of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences. 7: 71-84.
Akbulut, A. 2012. Techno-economic analysis of electricity and heat generation from farm-
scale biogas plant: Çiçekdağı case study. Energy 44(1), 381-390.
Awan, A. B., and Z. A. Khan. 2014. Recent progress in renewable energy – Remedy of the
energy crisis in Pakistan. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews.
33(2014):236-253.
Braun, R. 2007 Anaerobic digestion: a multi-faceted process for energy, environmental
management, and rural development. In: RanalliP (ed) Improvement of crop plants
for industrial end uses. Springer, Dordrecht pp. 335-415.
Budzianowski, W. M. 2016. A review of potential innovations for production,
conditioning, and utilization of biogas with the multiple-criteria assessment.
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 54: 1148-1171.
Biesinger, M.C., B.P. Payne, A.P. Grosvenor, L.W. Lau, A.R. Gerson, and R.S.C. Smart.
2011. Resolving surface chemical states in XPS analysis of first-row transition
87
metals, oxides, and hydroxides: Cr, mn, fe, co, and ni. Applied Surface Science.
257:2717-2730.
Belmabkhout, Y., G. De Weireld, and A. Sayari. 2009. Amine-bearing mesoporous silica
for CO2 and H2S removal from natural gas and biogas. Langmuir 25:13275–13278
Donkin, S.S., P.H. Doane, and M.J. Cecava. 2013. Expanding the role of crop residues and
biofuel co-products as ruminant feedstuffs. Anim. Front. 3(2): 54-60
Eze, I.A., and K.E. Agbo. 2010. Maximizing the potentials of biogas through upgrading.
American Journal of Scientific and Industrial Research. 13:604.609.
Ferrer, I., M. Garfı, E. Uggetti, L.F. Martı, A. Calderon, and E. Velo. 2011. Biogas
production in low-cost household digesters at the Peruvian Andes. Biomass and
Bioenergy. 35:1668-1674
EIA. 2009. Energy information administration. U.S. Department of Energy. International
energy outlook.
Jaya, S., and S.K. Maurya. 2017. Design and development of a portable household biogas
plant. International Journal of Agricultural Engineering. 10(1):208-214.
National Research Council. 2003. Ad hoc committee on air emissions from animal feeding,
O Air Emissions from Animal Feeding Operations: Current Knowledge, Future
Needs vol xxi (Washington, DC: National Academies Press) p 263 [3] Doorn M R
J,
Forgacs, A. L., M.N. Kent, M.K. Makley, B. Mets, N. DelRaso, G.L. Jahns, L.D. Burgoon,
T.R. Zachareweski, and N.V. Reo. 2012. Comparative metabolomics and genomic
analyses of TCDD-elicited metabolic disruption in mouse and rat liver. Toxicol.
Sci. 125:41–55.
Hamlin, A. 2012. Assessment of Social and Economic Impacts of Biogas Digesters in Rural
Kenya. Independent Study Project (ISP) Collection. Paper 1247.
HRP. 2011. “Hydropower Resources of Pakistan”. Private Power and Infrastructure Board,
http://www.ppib.gov.pk/Hydro.pdf.
Chung, T.-S., L.Y. Jiang, Y. Li and S. Kulprathipanja. 2007. Mixed matrix membranes
(mmms) comprising organic polymers with dispersed inorganic fillers for gas
separation. Progress in polymer science. 32:483-507.
Latif, A., and N. Ramzan. 2014. A review of renewable energy resources in Pakistan.
Journal of Global Innovations in Agricultural and Social Sciences. 2:127-132.
88
Mata-Alvarez, J., S. Mace, and P. Llabres. 2000. Anaerobic digestion of organic solid
wastes. An overview of research achievements and perspectives. Bioresource
technology. 74:3-16.
Meryem, S.S., S.S. Ahmad, and N. Aziz. 2013. Evaluation of biomass potential for
renewable energy in Pakistan using the leap model. Inter. Jour. of Emerging Trends
in Eng. and Develop. 1:243-249.
IPCC SRES, N.N, and R. Swart. 2000. Special report on emissions scenarios: A special
report of working group iii of the intergovernmental panel on climate change:
Cambridge University Press Cambridge, UK.
Saibu, S.W., and M.A. Ofosu. 2015. Effectiveness of biogas production from slaughter
waste using two mixing ratios (waste: water ratio of 1:1 and 1:2) 5, (2).
Ghafoor, A., T. Rehman, A. Munir, M. Ahmad, and M. Iqbal. 2016. Current status and
overview of renewable energy potential in Pakistan for continuous energy
sustainability. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 60: 1332-1342.
Raheem, A., M. Y. Hassan, and R. Shakoor. 2016. Bioenergy from anaerobic digestion in
Pakistan: Potential, development, and prospects. Renewable and Sustainable
Energy Reviews. 59(2016): 264-275.
Munawar, S. A. 2010. Energy and renewable energy scenario of Pakistan. Renew Sustain
Energy 14: 354-63.
IEA.EUH and book CHP Markets. Cross-Border Bioenergy Working Group under an
Intelligent Energy Europe program 2012.
Iqbal, M.N., A. Muhammad, A.A. Anjum, K.A. Shahzad, M.A. Ali, and S. Ali. 2014.
Prevalence of Gastrothylaxcrumenifer in the gastro intestine of Bubalusbubalis.
Veterinaria, 1: 28-31
Komiyama, M., T. Misonou, S. Takeuchi, B. Umets, and B. Takahashi. 2006. Biogas as a
reproducible energy source: Its steam reforming for electricity generation and farm
machine fuel International Congress Series 1293.
Molino, F. Nanna, Y. Ding, B. Bikson, G. Braccioa. 2013. Biome thane production by
anaerobic digestion of organic waste. Fuel 103 (1003duction)
Mushtaq, K., A.A. Zaidi, S.J. Askari. 2016. Design and performance analysis of floating
dome type portable biogas plant for domestic use in Pakistan. Sustainable Energy
Technologies and Assessments 21–25
Ogur, E., and P. Irungu. 2013. Design of a Biogas Generator. International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, 3, 630-635.
89
Ramachandra, T.V., G. Kamakshi, and B.V. Shruthi. 2004. Bioresource status in
Karnataka. Renew. Sust. Energy. Rev., 8: 1-47
Sathish, A. Parthiban, S. Venugopal, V.M.J. Prakash. 2017. Performance and Analysis of
Floating dome anaerobic digester with wet and dry Feedstock. IOP Conf. Series:
Materials Science and Engineering 183
Ismail, Z.Z. and A. R. Talib. 2016. Recycled medical cotton industry waste as a source of
biogas recovery. Journal of Cleaner Production. 112(5):4413-4418.
Jefferson M. 2006. Sustainable energy development: performance and prospects, Renew
Energy. 31:71-82.
Lin, W.C., Y.P. Chen, C.P. Tseng. 2013. Pilot-scale chemical-biological system for
efficient H2S removal from biogas. Bioresource. Technol., 135:283-291.
Nyifi., I.A., S.V. Irtwange, and T. Bako. 2018. Design and Construction of a Tube Storage
Device for Biogas Using Motorized Compressor. International Journal of Science
and Qualitative Analysis; 4(1): 20-26
Robert, C.A. D. Hilborn, and A. Weersink. 2013. An economic and functional tool for
assessing the financial feasibility of farm-based anaerobic digesters. 51:85-92.
Ryckebosch, E., M. Drouillon, H. Vervaeren. 2011. Review Techniques for the
transformation of biogas to biomethane. Biomass and Bioenergy 35:1633-1645.
Shian, S.T., M.C. Chang, Y.T. Ye and W. Chang. 1979. The construction of simple biogas
digesters in the province of Szechwan, China. Agric. Wastes 1:247-258.
Tucki, K., R. Mruk, and P. Piatkowski. 2015. Design of digester biogas tank. Part I.: Biogas
Calculator-Tool to perform biogas energy calculations. Teka Komisji Motoryzacjii
Energetic Rolnictwa. 15(1):75-82.
Tippayawong, N., and P. Thanompongchart. 2010. Biogas quality upgrade by simultaneous
removal of CO2 and H2S in a packed column reactor. Energy. 35(12):4531-4535.
Virendra, K.V. 2007. Biogas refining for production of Bio-Methane and its bottling for
automotive applications and holistic development. Proceedings of an international
symposium on eco Topia science.
Waqar Uddin, B. Khan, N. Shaukat, M. Majid, G. Mujtaba, A. Mehmood, S. M. Ali, U.
Younas, M. Anwar, and A. M. Almeshal. 2016. Biogas potential for electric power
generation in Pakistan: A survey, Renewable, and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 54:
25-33.
Willinger, A., and A. Lindberg. 1999. Biogas upgrading and utilization. IEA Bioenergy
Task 24: Energy from Biological conversion of organic waste. 1999.
90
Zou, H. 2006. The adaptive lasso and its oracle properties. Journal of the American
statistical association. 101:1418-1429.
Salminen, E., and J. Rintala. 2002. Anaerobic digestion of organic solid poultry
slaughterhouse waste – a review. Bioresource. Technol. 83, 13–26
Ezeji, T.C., Qureshi, N.; Blaschek, H.P. 2007 Butanol Production from Agricultural
Residues: Impact of Degradation Products on Clostridium heijerinckii Growth and
Butanol Fermentation. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 97(6), 1460 - 1469.
Peiffer, S., Gade, W., 2007. Reactivity of ferric oxides toward H2S at low pH.
Environmental Science and Technology 41, 3159-3164.
Kadam, R. and N. Panwar. 2017. Recent advancements in biogas enrichment and its
applications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 73:892-903.
Calise, F., Cremonesi, C., di Vast Girardi, G. d. N., and Acadia, M. D. 2015. Technical and
economic analysis of a cogeneration plant fueled by biogas produced from livestock
biomass. Energy Procedia, 82, 666-673.
Rasheed, R., A. Yasar, A.B. Tabinda, N. Khan, Y. Su and M. Afzal. 2016. Techno-
economic impacts of innovative commercial industrial-scale bioenergy plant in
Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Agricultural Sciences. 53.
Olaoye, J., Oyeleke, I., and K. Adeniran. 2014. Design, Construction, and Testing of a
Modified Floating Drum Bio-digester. International Soil Tillage Research
Organization (ISTRO) Nigeria Symposium, Akure, Nigeria.149-161.
Al Mamun, M. R., and S. Torii. 2015. Removal of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) from biogas
using zero-valent iron. Journal of Clean Energy Technologies, 3(6), 428-432.
Muhammed, R. and Shuichitorri. 2015. Enhancement of production and up-gradation of
biogas by using different techniques a review ISSN 0974-5904, Volume 08, No. 02
Weiland, P. 2010. Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Applied microbiology
and biotechnology, 85(4), 849-860
Scarlat, N., J.F. Dallemand and M. Banja. 2018. Possible impact of 2020 bioenergy targets
on European Union land use. A scenario-based assessment from national renewable
energy action plans proposals. Renew Sust Energy Rev 18:595–606.
Ziemiński. K. and M. Frąc. 2012. Methane fermentation process as anaerobic digestion of
biomass: Transformations, stages and microorganisms African Journal of
Biotechnology Vol. 11(18), pp. 4127-4139.
91
Appendix A Design parameters of the different size of Floating drum biogas
plants
Design Parameters of Different Site
Parts UAF Farm Shakargarh Proka Farm Chawla
Farm Farm
(25m3) (40m3) (110m3) (120m3) (130m3)
Digester
Concrete base dia (m) 4.35m 5.0 m 5.8m 6.2m 6.4m
Dig volume (m3) 8.89m3 11.49m3 22.11m3 23.4 m3 24.5m3
Diameter (m) 3.30m 3.9 m 4.53m 4.67m 4.78m
Height (m) 3.85m 4.06 m 6.8m 7.005m 7.17m
Wall thickness (mm) 228mm 228mm 228mm 228mm 228mm
Volume (m3) 25m3 40m3 110m3 120m3 130m3
No of bricks@529/m3 4723 6090.9 11596 13011 13009
Cement@.0283m3300-1bricks 0.4445m3 0.5748m3 1.09m3 1.22m3 1.22 m3
Sand@ 0.113 m3300-1 bricks 1.78m3 2.29m3 4.37m3 4.89m3 4.89 m3
Volume of concrete base m3 1.53m3 2.15m3 7.34 m3 8.74m3 9m3
Cement, Sand, Concrete Sum 1:2:4 1:2:4 1:2:4 1:2:4 1:2:4
1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7 1+2+4=7
Bricks 4723 6090.9 11597 12240 13011
Cement (m3) 0.322m3 0.351m3 0.379m3 0.433m3 0.416m3
Sand (m3) 0.672m3 0.878m3 0.758m3 0.864m3 0.832m3
Concrete (m3) 1.34m3 1.75m3 1.50m3 1.7 0m3 1.70m3
Inlet
Diameter (m) 1.44m 1.44m 1.7m 2.028m 1.82m
Height (m) 1.066m 1.066m 1.43m 1.27m 1.52m
Wall thickness (mm) 228mm 228mm 228mm 228m 228mm
Volume (m3) 1.71m3 1.71m3 3.24m3 4.10m3 3.95m3
Volume of concrete base m3 0.272m3 0.272m3 2.75m3 2.80m3 2.84m3
Cement m3 0.0475m3 0.0475m3 0.58m3 0.494m3 0.67m3
Sand m3 0.119m3 0.119m3 1.18m3 1.22m3 1.24m3
Concrete m3 0.239m3 0.239m3 2.40m3 2.44m3 2.49m3
No of bricks@529m-3 587.5 587.5 1713 2169 1502
Cement@0.0283m3300-1bricks 0.056m3 0.056m3 0.595m3 0.70 m3 0.67 m3
Sand @ 0.113 m3300-1 bricks. 0.220m3 0.220m3 1.41m3 1.79 m3 1.72 m3
Volume of concrete base m3 1.6m3 1.79m3 7.41m3 8.76 m3 9 m3
Diameter (m) 1.905m 1.905m 1.905m 2.028m
Height (m) 0.381m 0.381m 0.381m 0.381m
Wall thickness (m) 228mm 228mm 228mm 228mm 228mm
Volume (m3) 0.521m3 0.521m 0.521m3
No of bricks@ 529m-3 276 no 276 no 276 no
Cement@0.0283m3300-1bricks 0.025m3 0.025m3 0.025m3
Sand @ 0.113 m3300-1 bricks. 0.104m3 0.104m3 0.104m3
RCC-D
Diameter (m) 1.905m 1.905m 1.905m
Thickness (mm) 76mm 76mm 76mm
Rcc-c Volume m3 0.218m3 0.218m3 0.218m3
Cement:sand:concrete1:2:4)
Cement (m3) 0.03m3 0.03m3 0.03m3
Sand (m3) 0.062m3 0.062m3 0.062m3
Concrete (m3) 0.124m3 0.124m3 0.124m3
Sum (m3) 0.216m3 0.216m3 0.216m3
Sum of ratios (1:2:3) (1+2+4)= (1+2+4)= (1+2+4)=7
7 7
92
Agitator well
Side –A 1.143m 1.143m 1.143m
Side-B 0.9144m 0.9144m 0.9144m
Side-C 0.9144m 0.9144m 0.9144m
Depth (m) 2.79m 2.79m 2.79m
Concrete base (m3) 0.134m3 0.134m3 0.134m3
Length 1.44m 1.44m 1.44m
Width 0.9144m 0.9144m 0.914m
Thickness 0.101m 0.101m 0.101m
Volume (m3) 0.948m3 0.948m3 0.948m3
No of bricks 502.7 502.7 502.7
Cement@0.0283m3300- 0.049m3 0.049m3 0.0481m3
1
Bricks
Sand (m3) 0.039 0.039 0.039
Concrete (m3) 0.0274 0.0274 0.0274
Sum (m3) 0.115 0.115 0.115
Digging cost @ Rs0.5/-(m-3)
Pit digging
Depth, m 4.064m 4.318m 6.07m 6.9m 6.9m
Diameter, m 4.775m 5.461m 7.05m 9m 9m
Pit digging volume m3 72m3 100 m3 202.2m3 421m3 421m3
Plaster (1:4)
Digester
Depth, m 3.14 m 3.78 m 3.78m 4.77m 4.03m3
Height, m 3.81m 4.064 m 6.60 m 6.98 m 6.64 m3
Thickness, mm 12.7mm 12.7mm 12.7mm 12.7 mm 12.7mm
Volume (m3) 0.47m3 0.61m3 0.996 m3 1.33m3 1.064m3
Cement (m3) 0.096m3 0.121 m3 0.198 m3 0.266 m3 0.21 m3
Sand (m3) 0.379m3 0.489 m3 0.79 m3 1.06 m3 0.85m3
Feeder
Diameter m 1.44 m 1.44 m 1.70m 1.74 1.80m
Height m 1.068 m 1.06 m 1.39m 1.44 1.47m
Thickness 25.4 mm 25.4 mm 25.4 mm 25.4mm 25.4mm
Volume (m3) 0.092 m3 0.062 m3 0.996m3 1.04m3 1.06m3
Cement (m3) 0.011m3 0.011m3 0.016m3 0.0190m3 0.0198m3
Sand (m3) 0.0481m3 0.048m3 0.079m3 0.083m3 0.084m3
Sum 0.0591m3 0.0591m3 0.095m3 0.102m3 0.1038m3
Agitator
A 0.9144m 0.9144 m 0.9144m
B 0.9144m 0.9144 m 0.9144m
C 0.9144 m 0.9144 m 0.9144m
D 2.79 m 2.79 m 2.79 m
T 12.7 mm 12.7mm 12.7 mm
Volume (m3) 0.096 m3 0.096 m3 0.096m3
Cement (m3) 0.0198 m3 0.0198 m3 0.0198m3
Sand (m3) 0.0792 m3 0.0792 m3 0.0792m3
Summary
Bricks, no 6089 no 7460 no 13113 no 12240 no 14000nos
Cement (m3) 0.975 m3 1.21 m3 2.60 m3 1.98m3 2.03m3
Sand (m3) 3.35 m3 4.15 m3 8.5m3 7.3m3 7.5 m3
Concrete (m3) 1.09 m3 1.43 m3 1.98m3 1.9m3 2m3
93
Digester dimensions Value Concrete work required Values Unit
Diameter, in 155 Digester volume, ft3 406.1 ft3
Height, in 160 No. of Bricks (@15/ft3) 6090.9

ft3
Wall thickness, inch 9 Cement (@1 ft3/300 bricks) 20.3
ft3
3
Concrete base diameter, in 205 Sand (@4 ft /300 bricks) 81.2
ft3
PI 3.141 Volume concrete base, ft3 76.5
Bricks = 15/ft3 15 Cement:Sand:Concrete (1:2:4)

Cement 1 10.9 ft3
Concrete thickness, inch 4 Sand 2 21.9 ft3
Concrete 4 43.7 ft3
Total 7
Inlet dimension Values Inlet dimensions Values Units
Wall diameter, inch 57 Inlet A - Volume, ft3 39.2 ft3
Wall thickness, inch 9 No. of Bricks (@15/ft3) 587.5

Cement (@1 ft3/300 bricks) 2.0 ft3
Wall height, inch 42
Sand (@4 ft3/300 bricks) 7.8 ft3
The total bricks, cement, sand, and gravel are calculated using excel software for biogas design and
the values are given below:
Total bricks = 7457, Cement = 43 ft3, Sand = 146 ft3 and Gravel = 51 ft3
Feeding/Slurry Pipe Length 175 in (@ Rupees 20 / inch) Values Units
Digging Cost (@ PKR 50/ft3

Depth,
Pit Digging inch 170 Pit volume, ft3 3571 ft3
Diameter, Pit digging cost,
inch 215 (@PKR 10/ft3) 35710 Rs
Plaster (1:4)
Digester D 149 Volume ft3 21.7 ft3
94
160 Cement, 1 4.3 ft3
0.5 Sand, 4 17.3 ft3
Feeder 57 Volume ft3 2.2 ft3
42 Cement 0.4 ft3
0.5 Sand 1.7 ft3
Unit cost, PKR Total Cost, PKR
PKR per 1000 bricks 6500 48471
PKR per ft3 550 23658
PKR per ft3 20 2933
PKR per ft3 50 2540
Total net cost, PKR (without tax) 77603
Taxes 36% of the cost 27937
Labor 10% of the cost 7760
Wastage, 5%^ of cost 3880
Excavation cost of biogas plant 35710
Floating-drum cost with tax 200000
Feeding/slurry pipe 3500
Steel, kg 466.20 Rate PKR/kg 110 51282.36
Total cost of civil work 407673
95
Product Name Product Size Quantity(No.)
U-PVC pipe 20 mm 35
U-PVC-T 20 mm 60
Nickle-nozzles 0.5 mm 55
U-PVC-Elbows 20 mm 16
GI-Handle valve 20 mm 02
Pressure-gauge 10 mm 01
Storage tank 40 m3 01
Compressor 2.5 ton 01
Limit switch 01
Amount
Product Name Product Size (m3) Material Quantity
(PKR)
Dehumidifier 0.04 Mild steel 01 35000
Iron scrubber 0.04 Mild steel 01 30000

Chemical purification
0.20 Mild steel 01 45000
system
Water scrubbing unit 1.012 Stainless Steel 01 60000
Rotameter 01 5000
Centrifugal pump 01 18500
Pressure gauges 01 650
Measuring scale 01 2800
Water level 01 1400
Showers Stainless steel 03 550
Purified biogas
40 m3 Mild steel 02 250000
Storage tank
Stove 01 2200
96
Gas meter 01 6500
Pressure gauges 02 700
Safety valves 02 2250
Pressure regulator
01 5500
valve
G.I Fitting Product Size Quantity (No.) Amount (PKR.)
G.I Pipe 30 m 8 2500
G.I pipe nipple 20 mm 20 2200
G.I pipe union 20 mm 15 1800
G.I pipe elbows 20 mm 32 3300
G.I pipe T 20 mm 10 1500
Copper bush 6 mm 10 1700
Clumps 12 450
97
Statistix 8.1 02-Jul-18,
2:18:48 PM
Analysis of Variance Table for V004
Source DF SS MS F P
V003 2 1.777 0.889
V001 3 816.990 272.330 3951.73 0.0000
V002 2 43.494 21.747 315.57 0.0000
V001*V002 6 27.753 4.625 67.12 0.0000
Error 22 1.516 0.069
Total 35 891.530
Grand Mean 65.247 CV 0.40

Annexure-I
Table 1 Analysis of Variance of effect of calcium oxide (CaO) and depth of water
(H2O) on methane concentration
Source DF SS MS F P
Treatments 2 1.77 0.88
Chemical (CaO) 3 816.99 272.33 3951.73 0.00
Depth of Water 2 43.94 21.74 315.57 0.00

(H2O)
CaO x H2O 6 27.75 4.62 67.12 0.00
Error 22 1.51 0.069
Total 35 891.53
98
Statistix 8.1 02-Jul-18, 2:04:30 PM
Tukey HSD All-Pairwise Comparisons Test of V004 for V001
V001 Mean Homogeneous Groups
4 69.467 A
3 68.456 B
2 65.722 C
1 57.344 D
Alpha 0.05 Standard Error for Comparison 0.1238

Critical Q Value 3.928 Critical Value for Comparison 0.3437
Error term used: V003*V001*V002, 22 DF
All 4 means are significantly different from one another.

3 66.575 A
2 65.283 B
1 63.883 C

Tukey HSD All-Pairwise Comparisons Test of V004 for V001*V002
V001 V002 Mean Homogeneous Groups

4 3 69.800 A
4 2 69.500 AB
4 1 69.100 ABC
3 3 68.867 BC
3 2 68.500 CD
3 1 68.000 DE
2 3 67.300 E
2 2 65.767 F
2 1 64.100 G
1 3 60.333 H
1 2 57.367 I
1 1 54.333 J

There are 10 groups (A, B, etc.) in which the means
are not significantly different from one another.
99
Statistix 8.1 02-Jul-18,
2:17:02 PM
Source DF SS MS F P
V003 2 5.42 2.708
V001 3 1162.13 387.377 1856.26 0.0000
V002 2 88.38 44.188 211.74 0.0000
V001*V002 6 18.52 3.087 14.79 0.0000
Error 22 4.59 0.209
Total 35 1279.03
Table 1 Analysis of Variance of effect of calcium oxide (CaO) and depth of water
(H2O) on carbon dioxide concentration
Source DF SS MS F P
Chemical (CaO) 3 1162.13 387.77 1856.26 0.00
Depth of Water 2 88.38 44.18 211.74 0.00

(H2O)
CaO x H2O 6 18.52 3.08 14.79 0.00
Error 22 4.59 0.20
Total 35 1279.03
100
1 36.533 A
2 33.144 B
3 27.133 C
4 21.700 D
1 31.333 A
2 30.000 B
3 27.550 C

1 1 37.533 A
1 2 36.567 AB
1 3 35.500 BC
2 1 34.633 CD
2 2 33.833 D
2 3 30.967 E
3 1 28.500 F
3 2 27.300 F
3 3 25.600 G
4 1 24.667 G
4 2 22.300 H
4 3 18.133 I

101
Source DF SS MS F P
V003 2 6.51 3.257
V001 3 1212.05 404.017 1466.86 0.0000
V002 2 81.73 40.867 148.38 0.0000
V001*V002 6 9.50 1.583 5.75 0.0010
Error 22 6.06 0.275
Total 35 1315.86
Table 1 Analysis of Variance of the effect of calcium oxide (CaO) and depth of
water (H2O) on sulfur dioxide concentration
Source DF SS MS F P
Chemical (CaO) 3 1212.05 404.01 1466.86 0.00
Depth of Water 2 81.73 40.86 148.38 0.00

(H2O)
CaO x H2O 6 9.50 1.58 5.75 0.00
Error 22 6.06 0.27
Total 35 1315.86
102

1 22.167 A
2 15.489 B
3 11.022 C
4 6.444 D


1 15.717 A
2 13.583 B
3 12.042 C


1 1 25.167 A
1 2 21.833 B
1 3 19.500 C
2 1 17.300 D
2 2 15.500 E
2 3 13.667 F
3 1 12.400 F
3 2 10.667 G
3 3 10.000 G
4 1 8.000 H
4 2 6.333 I
4 3 5.000 I

103
Source DF SS MS F P
V003 2 3.065 1.532
V001 3 384.576 128.192 1363.52 0.0000
V002 2 31.462 15.731 167.32 0.0000
V001*V002 6 15.529 2.588 27.53 0.0000
Error 22 2.068 0.094
Total 35 436.700
Table 1 Analysis of Variance of effect of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and depth of

water (H2O) on methane concentration
Source DF SS MS F P
Chemical (NaOH) 3 384.57 128.19 1363.52 0.00
Depth of Water 2 31.46 15.73 167.32 0.00

(H2O)
NaOH x H2O 6 15.52 2.58 27.53 0.00
Error 22 2.06 0.09
Total 35 436.70
104

4 71.789 A
3 70.378 B
2 67.533 C
1 63.233 D


3 69.325 A
2 68.333 B
1 67.042 C


4 3 72.433 A
4 2 71.600 AB
4 1 71.333 BC
3 3 70.900 BC
3 2 70.500 CD
3 1 69.733 D
2 3 68.367 E
2 2 67.767 E
2 1 66.467 F
1 3 65.600 F
1 2 63.467 G
1 1 60.633 H

105
Source DF SS MS F P
V003 2 4.235 2.118
V001 3 525.110 175.037 203.55 0.0000
V002 2 70.260 35.130 40.85 0.0000
V001*V002 6 109.464 18.244 21.22 0.0000
Error 22 18.918 0.860
Total 35 727.987

water (H2O) on carbon dioxide concentration
Source DF SS MS F P
Chemical (NaOH) 3 525.11 175.03 203.55 0.00
Depth of Water 2 70.26 35.13 40.85 0.00

(H2O)
NaOH x H2O 6 109.46 18.24 21.22 0.00
Error 22 18.91 0.86
Total 35 727.98
106
Statistix 8.1 02-Jul-18, 2:22:26
PM

1 34.778 A
2 27.067 B
3 25.933 BC
4 25.256 C


1 29.508 A
2 28.958 A
3 26.308 B

There are 2 groups (A and B) in which the means
1 1 39.167 A
1 2 36.267 B
1 3 28.900 C
2 1 27.500 CD
2 2 27.000 CDE
2 3 26.700 CDE
4 2 26.600 CDE
3 1 26.500 CDE
3 2 25.967 DE
3 3 25.333 DE
4 1 24.867 DE
4 3 24.300 E

107
Source DF SS MS F P
V003 2 63.43 31.72
V001 3 5196.99 1732.33 168.57 0.0000
V002 2 390.48 195.24 19.00 0.0000
V001*V002 6 326.83 54.47 5.30 0.0016
Error 22 226.09 10.28
Total 35 6203.82

water (H2O) on Sulphur dioxide concentration
Source DF SS MS F P
Chemical (NaOH) 3 5196.99 1732.33 168.57 0.00
Depth of Water 2 390.48 195.24 19.00 0.00

(H2O)
NaOH x H2O 6 326.83 54.47 5.30 0.00
Error 22 226.09 10.28
Total 35 6203.82
108

1 40.878 A
2 19.711 B
3 15.467 C
4 8.744 D


1 24.900 A
2 21.800 A
3 16.900 B

There are 2 groups (A and B) in which the means

1 1 46.500 A
1 2 45.800 A
1 3 30.333 B
2 1 25.500 BC
2 2 17.000 CD
2 3 16.633 CD
3 1 15.700 D
3 2 15.400 D
3 3 15.300 D
4 1 11.900 DE
4 2 9.000 DE
4 3 5.333 E

109
APPENDIX B
App.1. Isometric view of floating drum biogas plants installed at UAF

1-Feeding tank 2-Digester 3-Gas Holder 4-Stirring Mechanism 5-Effluent storage tank6-Gas compressor 7-Centrifugal pump 8-Gas
storage tank 9-Filtering unit 10-Dehumidifier 11-Iron scrubber 12-Water scrubber 13Generator
App.2. Isometric view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka farm UAF
110
1-Feeding tank 2-Digester 3-Gas Holder 4-Stirring Mechanism (Gear motor +Mechanical stirrer). 5-Effluent
storage tank 6-Filtering unit 7-Dehumidifier 8-Iron scrubber 9-Water scrubber 10-Gas compressor 11- Gas storage tank(no 2)
11-Generator
App3a. Front view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Shakargarh.
App.3b. Isometric view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Shakargarh
111
Appendix B
App. 4a. Sectional view of the fermentation chamber and inlet floating drum biogas installed
at Uaf Faisalabad
App. 4b. Top view of the fermentation chamber and inlet floating drum biogas plants
installed at Uaf Faisalabad
112
App. 5a. Sectional view of the fermentation chamber and inlet floating drum biogas installed
at Uaf Faisalabad
App. 5b. Sectional view of the fermentation chamber and inlet floating drum biogas installed
at Uaf Faisalabad
113
App. 6a. Top and sectional view of bearing compline of floating drum biogas plants
installed at Uaf, Faisalabad
114
App. 6b. Top and Sectional view of the stirrer coupling of floating drum biogas plants
115
App. 6c. Sectional view of the stirrer blade side coupling of floating drum biogas installed
at Uaf, Faisalabad.
App.6d. Bearings with couplings of inlet feeding mixer of floating drum biogas plants
installed at UAF, Faisalabad.
116
App. 6e Mechanical agitator inside the fermentation chamber of floating drum biogas plants
App.7. Detail drawing with specifications of floating drum biogas holder installed at UAF.
117
App.8a. Sectional view of the fermentation chamber and feeding tank installed at Proka
Farm, Faisalabad.
App.8b. Top view of the fermentation chamber installed at Proka Farms, Faisalabad.
118
App.9. Sectional view of the Reverse blasting technique (RBT) inside the fermentation
chamber installed at Proka Farms, Faisalabad.
App.10a. Isometric view of gasholder of the floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka
Farms, Faisalabad.
119
App.10b. Sectional view of gasholder of the floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka
Farm, Faisalabad.
App.10c. Top view of the gasholder of the floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka
Farms, Faisalabad.
120
App.11. Isometric view of gasholder supporting arm of the floating drum biogas plants
installed at Proka Farms, Faisalabad.
121
App.12. Sectional view of gas distributor of the floating drum biogas plants installed at
Uaf and Proka farm Faisalabad
App. 13. Sectional view of feeding tank, digester, and slurry pond of the floating drum biogas
plants installed at Proka farm Uaf and Shakar garh farm Sialkot.
122
App. 14. Sectional view of the complete up gradation and biogas storage system installed at
Uaf, Proka farm Faisalabad and Shakargarh farm Sialkot.
App.15. Detailed drawing of a dehumidifier of the floating drum biogas plants installed at
Proka farm Uaf Faisalabad
123
App.16.Sectional view of detailed floating drum biogas pants at Proka farm Uaf Faisalabad
124

Usman Haider 2020 Agri Engg Uaf FSLBD

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Usman Haider 2020 Agri Engg Uaf FSLBD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DESIGN MODIFICATION OF INDIGENIZED FLOATING

DRUM BIOGAS PLANTS FOR UP GRADATION OF

ENGR. USMAN HAIDER

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement

for the degree of

FARM MACHINERY AND POWER

Department of Farm Machinery and Power

No. Title Page No.

S. No. Title Page No.

3.2 Dimensions of different digesters of floating drum biogas plants 24

3.3 Height and diameter of biogas up-gradation unit 33

3.4 Biogas production of minimum and maximum levels of independent 42

4.3 ANOVA for percentage concentration of methane (CH4) 71

4.4 ANOVA for percentage concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) 71

4.5 ANOVA for parts per million of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) 72

4.6 Economic analysis of biogas generation (RBT) 81

RBT Reverse Blasting Technique

S. No. Title Page No.

1.1 Process flow diagram of the biogas plant 05

3.1 Process diagram of floating drum biogas plants installed at Proka 17

3.2a Process diagram including all major components of biogas plants 22

3.3a Front view of floating drum biogas plants installed at Chawla 26

3.5 Detail drawing with specifications of Mechanical agitator floating 28

3.6 Detail drawing with specifications of hydraulic stirring biogas plants 28

3.7 Isometric view of Double Piston compressor installed at UAF, Chawla 29

3.8 Isometric view of Submersible pump installed at UAF, and Chawla 30

3.9a Biogas storage vessel (Standing and laying designs) 31

3.9b Isometric view with specifications of gas storage tanks installed at 31

3.10 Detail drawing with specifications of H2S Scrubber installed at UAF, 33

3.11a Schematic design of water scrubbing system 36

3.11b Schematic design of water scrubbing system 37

3.12 Gas flow meter 38

3.13 Pressure regulator valve 38

3.14 Detailed view of gasoline generator installed at a dairy farm, UAF 39

3.16 Detailed view of BIOGAS 5000 @ Geotech 41

4.1 Estimation of retention time under laboratory conditions 46

4.2 Composition of raw biogas before the scrubber 49

4.3 Effect of feeding rate and digester temperature on biogas production 50

4.4 Effect of pressure and temperature on biogas production 51

4.5 Effect pressure and feeding rate on biogas production 52

4.6 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition 53

4.7 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the percentage composition 54

4.8 Effect of water temperature in scrubber on the composition of H2S in 54

4.9 Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the percentage composition of 55

4.10 Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the percentage composition of 56

4.11 Effect of water flow rate in scrubber on the composition of H2S in 57

4.12 Effect of water pressure in scrubber on the percentage composition of 57

4.13 Effect of water pressure in scrubber on the percentage composition of 58

4.14 Effect of water Pressure in scrubber on composition of H2S in ppm. 59

4.18 Effect of water temperature and pressure interaction on the percentage 63

4.20 Effect of water temperature and Pressure interaction on composition 65

4.21 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the 66

4.22 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the 67

4.23 Effect of water flow rate and temperature interaction on the 67

4.25 Effect of water flow rate, Pressure and Temperature interaction on 69

4.26 Effect of water flow rate, pressure and temperature interaction on 70

4.27 Effect of CaO+ H₂O treatments on CH4 (%) concentration 73

4.28 Effect of CaO+H₂O treatments on CO2 (%) concentration 74

4.29 Effect of CaO+H₂O treatments on H2S (ppm) concentration 75

4.30 Effect of NaOH+H₂O treatments on CH₄ (%) concentration 76

4.31 Effect of NaOH+H₂O treatments on CO₂ (%) concentration 77

4.32 Effect of NaOH+H₂O treatments on H₂S (ppm) concentration 78

Civilized communities exhibit the distinguishing feature of having abundantly available