A Dissertation Submitted to the Institute of Science, Nagpur

As a partial Fulfilment of Degree of Master of Science in

Environmental Science

Submitted by

Miss. Varada Aalok Risaldar

M.Sc.-II year

(Environmental Science)

Under the Guidance Of

Mrs. Shilpa Bhajni

 CERTIFICATE

This is to certified that Dissertation entitled “ upgradation”

that is being submitted by Miss. Varada Aalok Risaldar in fulfilment of Degree
of Master of Science (Environmental Science), during the academic session
2023-2024 in the Department of Environmental Science, Institute of Science,
Civil Lines Nagpur is carried out under my guidance and supervision.

The results embodied in this project dissertation have been not

submitted to any other university or institute for the award of any degree or
diploma.

Name of the HOD Name of the Guide

Dr. Mohammad Idrees M. Siddiqui Mrs. Shilpa Bhajni

Department of Environmental Science Department of Environmental Science

Institute of science, Nagpur Institute of Science, Nagpur

 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that the work entitled “up” was carried out by me for the Masters of
Science degree in Environmental Science and submitted to the Institute of Science, Nagpur.
The project work is carried out at Environmental Science department, Institute of Science,
Nagpur under the guidance of Mrs. Shilpa Bhajni.

For the present project dissertation, which I am submitting to the University, no degree or
diploma distinction has been conferred on me before, either in this or in any other University.

Place: Nagpur Miss. Varada Aalok Risaldar

Date: / / 2024 M.Sc. II Year (Environmental Science)

Institute of Science, Nagpur

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I express my respectable obeisance to Nature for his shower of blessing on me in every step
of my life. Any creativity is possible only after the involvement of many minds and beautifies
it. Feelings cannot be expressed in words because those are transfer into were formalities
must be completed. My acknowledgment is innumerable that what I am expressing here.

I place on record my profound record of gratitude and indebtedness to my guide Mrs. Shilpa
Bhajni, faculty of Department of Environmental Science, Institute of Science, Nagpur. I
am thankful for her expert guidance, constant encouragement, affectionate advices, most
valuable suggestion and help without which this work could not have reached its final stage.

I am very thankful to Dr. Mohammad Idrees Siddiqui sir, Head of the Department of
Environmental Science, Institute of Science, Nagpur for his cooperation, expert guidance,
most valuable suggestions, and constructive criticism during the course of my dissertation
work.

On my personal note, heartfelt respect and love to my parents, my father Mr. Aalok Y
Risaldar my mother Mrs. Megha A Risaldar and my brother Mr. Nitish A Risaldar and
my special thanks to my grandparents for support, love, inspiration, unshakable confidence
unstinted support with me, without which would not have come up this level.

I am thankful to all who’s directly and indirectly supported and helped me in completing my
thesis in time.

Place: Nagpur Miss. Varada Aalok Risaldar

Date: / /2024 M.Sc.II Year (Environmental Science)

Institute of science, Nagpur

CONTENT
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
INTRODUCTION
According to Food and Agricultural organization (FAO, 2011) of the United Nations, kitchen
waste is global issue, nearly 103 billion tons of food is waste globally.( 10) Whereas in India
40% of produced food is wasted and this costs one lakh crore rupees per year. Disposal of
kitchen waste in open dump causes public hazards and disease such as malaria, typhoid,
cholera. Also it emits unpleasant odour and methane which is major source of Green House
gas.(12 ) Kitchen waste contains a large amount of moisture content by which it is not
capable of mechanism such as pyrolysis and incineration as they are less capable of
recovering energy.( 12) Kitchen waste includes not only the uneaten food from the sources
like canteen, restaurants, weddings but also the leftover food material from our households
and the subsequent materials which are used for the preparation of food material.( 13)
Kitchen waste contains some typical characteristic such as moisture content of 70-90%,
carbon to nitrogen (C/N) of 14.7-18.1 and volatile solids to total solids (VS/TS) of 82-92%.
(50) Anaerobic digestion is based on the physical and chemical characteristic of organic
waste as for the production of biogas.(50) The biodegradation of feedstock is based on how
much gas is produced and amount of solids that are reduced in the anaerobic digestion.
Organic waste material generally consists of adequate amount of nutrients crucial for growth
and metabolism of anaerobic bacteria in biogas production.(51)

Biogas is a renewable source of energy which is obtained from the organic waste. This
organic matter includes municipal Waste , agricultural waste , animal manure, and food
waste. This biogas production goes through a series of microbial reactions. the produced gas
contains main components such as methane(CH4) and carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen
sulfide (H2S) and ammonia (NH3) these gases are present in small amounts in the biogas. For
the production of biogas a sealed container is needed which is called as digester.( 48 ) In this
digester microbial reactions takes place in which anaerobic condition is present where
microorganisms breakdown into simpler compounds, this process is known as anaerobic
digestion. This produced biogas is used as a energy source for heating , electricity generation
and vehicle fuel.

The biogas production involves stages such as pre-treatment in which organic

waste is crushed or grounded to increase its surface area for microbial action. Second is
anaerobic digestion in which pre-treated matter is placed in the digester where complex
molecules were broken down into simpler molecules. Third is biogas collection in which
produced biogas is collected and stored. And the last is Digestate management, Digestate is
the residue left after the production of biogas, which is used as a nutrient rich fertilizer.

Biogas is a gaseous mixture produced from the decomposition of organic particles by

microorganism in anaerobic digestion. It consists of Methane (50-75%), Carbon-dioxide (25-
45%), sulphide, water, oxygen, nitrogen, and other trace gases depending on its origin.
Biogas can be produced from various sources like commercial composting, cattle farm
manure, landfills, sewage sludge anaerobic, corn straw, and more.(45)
Impurities like CO2 and H2S must be removed before biogas can be used for heating,
cooking, biofuel in vehicles, electricity generation, and chemical industries as raw material.
Upgraded biogas not only reduces greenhouse gas emissions but also has environmental
advantages. Countries like the United States, India, China, and Germany have already
benefitted from using upgraded biogas.(49)

Various methods for upgrading raw biogas are available, including chemical, physical, or
biological processes. Some widely used methods include amine scrubbing, water scrubbing,
membrane-based processes, chemical absorption, pressure swing adsorption, and cryogenic
process. The most common use of biogas obtained from small reactors (anaerobic digesters)
in developing countries is for household cooking and lighting purposes. In agricultural-based
countries like Nepal, biomethane can significantly impact the country's use of alternative
energy sources.(51)

Envipower Energy and Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd., Pragati Biogas Energy Pvt. Ltd., and Gandaki
Urja Pvt. Ltd. are some of the biogas upgrading plants situated in Nepal. The plant generates
biogas from garbage, chicken manure, cow dung, and agricultural remains.

Organic waste

Organic waste is materials, which are of plant and animal origin. This organic waste includes
the remains of dead plants and animals as well as the waste generated by the animals e.g.
dung. They are biodegradable i.e. they can be broken down by microorganisms from complex
molecules into smaller molecules.(9) This organic waste which is also known as feedstock
includes agricultural waste such as crop residues and straw, which are rich in organic matter
and can be readily available for digestion. Another common feedstock used is food waste,
including kitchen waste and food processing waste, as it contains high levels of organic
material that can be efficiently converted into biogas. Animal manure, such as cow, pig or
poultry manure, is a valuable feedstock for co-digestion due to its high nutrient content and
biodegradability. Energy crops, such as maize, sorghum, or grasses, are also utilized as
feedstock in co-digestion as they contain high biomass productivity.(37) The bacteria present
in the waste act on the complex molecules such as proteins, fats and carbohydrates and break
them down to simpler molecules like ammonia, carbon dioxide and nitrides.( 6 ) They are
considers as nuisance because of their odour, ph. and temperature and their effect on the
environment. As the decomposition occurs, oxygen is used up. Treatment of organic waste
involves the reducing of the odour level, the quantity and stabilizing the organic waste before
disposal.( 3 )

Biogas

Biogas can be produced from various types of widely available organic feedstock such as
animal manure and slurries, wastewater and sewage sludge, municipal solid waste , organic
waste from dairy production and food industry, agricultural biomass , lignocellulosic
residues, organic waste from households as well as energy crops. biogas is produced by the
action of anaerobic microorganisms on organic matter. The metabolize the organic matter
with the aid of enzymes. Energy production from fossil fuels becomes more and more
problematic since these resources are running short and burning of coal, oil and natural gas is
connected with emission of greenhouse gas Carbon Dioxide. It is intended to enhance the
proportion of biomass for energy production. Biogas consist of methane, Carbon Dioxide and
low amounts of other gases. the production of biogas requires complete absence of oxygen.
The gas which is also known as marsh gas, sewage gas, and dun gas is colorless and
flammable with a characteristic odour. The gas rises slowly in the air as dissipates with
methane which is slightly lighter than air and carbon oxide which is heavier than air. The
amount of produced gas per kg of the material used also depends on the type of the material.
The quality of biogas also depends on the ratio of (C/N) of the material. Biogas is used for
heating, cooking and running of the machinery. For the purpose of electricity production gas
is used in purified way. For this upgradation of gas is done, by removing carbon dioxide
content completely from the gas making it pure methane. Carbon oxide and Ammonia both
are removed by passing it through a solution of calcium hydroxide. Hydrogen sulphide is
removed by passing the gas through calcium chloride. For cooking purposes gas can be used
without scrubbing as scrubbing only involve removal of H2S and water.

Methane

The complete importance of biogas is because of methane present in it. As methane is the
main component of biogas as well as methane is the main component of greenhouse gas. it
makes major constituents of the gas making up ( 45-80% ) of the biogas. ( 1 ) It has a
molecular formula of CH4 , having 16 gm of molecular mass. It also called as marsh gas
because it is formed by the anaerobic decomposition of organic waste or vegetable matter in a
swampy land. Methane is a gas at room temperature, having a boiling point of -16 O C and a
melting point of -180OC. it is a colorless, test less and odorless gas. it has density of 0.65
g/dm3 at 20o C and therefore its less dense that air.

Aerobic digester/Reactor

The biogas reactor is a tank used for producing biogas through anaerobic decomposition of
organic materials. A bacterial culture, found in cow manure, is necessary for methane
production. The reactor is a sealed tank with gas storage made from concrete or other
materials. The substrate is stirred to ensure continuous movement and a favorable
environment for microorganisms. Heat pipes can be used to maintain the right temperature in
the reactor, and isolation is necessary to avoid heat loss. The process can be mesophilic or
thermophilic, with thermophilic being 25%-50% more active due to higher temperatures. The
degradation time is shorter in thermophilic processes, but good control is crucial. A rotary
device or pump is used to mix the substrate in the reactor, ensuring optimal temperature and
better contact between organisms and organic material. Smooth rotation is desirable to ensure
optimal collaboration between microorganisms. The temperature of the process can be
mesophilic or thermophilic, with thermophilic processes requiring better control.
Anaerobic digesters are enclosed container from which oxygen has been restricted with an
outlet for gas. The for a oxygen-deprived environment for the decomposition of organic
matter. The produced gas by the decomposition of the organic matter leaves the gas outlet
provided on the digester.( 7 ) Digester can be fixed dome shaped or can be constructed from
drums, tins, concrete, bottle, etc. the size of the digester depends on the scale of the operation.
It is basically the air-tight container with an outlet for gas. The Gas can be collected directly
from the digester or with gas collector containers.

1.1 Biomethanation

It Is the Biological Process That Breaks down the Organic Matter with the Help of Anaerobic
Microorganisms in the absence of Oxygen. In The Treatment the Basic Principle Is Used
Which Is The Breakdown Of Or Conversion Of Complex Organic Compounds Into Simpler
Molecules. This Treatment Is Also Known As Anaerobic Digestion. This Anaerobic
Digestion Occurs Is Several Stages those are Hydrolysis, Acidogenesis, Acetogenesis,
Methanogenesis. The anaerobic digestion process dependent on the interaction between the
microorganisms that are able to carry out four mentioned stages of digestion. This digestion
occurs in a single stage batch reactor in which all the organic matter is loaded simultaneously,
and all four stages are allowed to occur sequentially. Then the compost is emptied after the
required retention time or after the production or required biogas.

Hydrolysis: - The process of hydrolysis serves the purpose of conversion of organic

macromolecules into its smaller compounds. Anaerobic digesters typically use organic
biomass that contains complex polymers which are inaccessible to microorganisms without
being further broken down through hydrolysis. This break down of microorganisms can be
utilized further by acidogenic bacteria.

Hydrolysis can exist as an electrochemical process but in anaerobic digestion it mostly

exists as a biological process. In this hydrolytic bacteria are able to secret extracellular
bacteria that are able to convert carbohydrates, lipids , and proteins into sugars , amino acids
and long chain fatty acids. The products of hydrolysis are able to diffuse through the cell
membranes of acidogenic microorganisms after the enzymatic cleavage. Enzymes are often
added to enhance the hydrolysis of these carbohydrates.

Hydrolysis and Methanogenesis are rate-determining steps as demonstrated by prior

research but it depends on the ratio of hydrolytic to methanogenic microorganisms. Due to
the importance of hydrolysis in the anaerobic digestion , a great deal of attention has been
turned towards methods for speeding hydrolysis in anaerobic digestion.

Acidogenesis: - In this step of acidogenesis the products from hydrolysis are absorbed
through cell membranes and the acidogenic microorganisms are able to produce intermediate
volatile fatty acids (VFAs) and other products. VFAs are produced by the metabolism of
acidogenic strain. VFAs constitute a class of organic acids such as acetates, propionate and
butyrate. The specific concentration of produced matter in this stage may depend on the
condition of the digester. The concentration of matter can fluctuate significantly for digesters
operating at different pH, with different studies showing different results.

As compared to other stages acidogenesis proceeds at faster rate than all other
stages of anaerobic digestion. With the rapidity of this stage, the production of VFAs creates
direct precursors for the final stage which is Methanogenesis. On the other hand VFA
acidification is widely reported to because of digester failure. Also in anaerobic digestion by
the breakdown of amino acid, ammonia is produced which works as an inhibitor in this
process.

Acetogenesis: - In this process these higher VFAs and other intermediates get converted into
acetate and hydrogen, carbon dioxide and ammonia. With the production of acetate through
acetogenesis, a portion of original substrate has already been rendered into a suitable
substrate for Methanogenesis.
While acetogenesis is the producer of hydrogen, it raises the discussion of syntrophic
relationship that is present in the anaerobic digestion as hydrogen occurs transfers between
species. By this relationship an excessive partial pressure is produced which causes damage
to acitogenic microorganisms. In this hydrogenotrophic methanogens are present due to
which hydrogen is able to rapidly consume while maintaining hydrogen partial pressure at a
favorable level to acetogenesis by creating metabolic reaction.

Methanogenesis: - It is the final stage of anaerobic digestion, in which the accessible

byproducts are consumed by methanogenic microorganisms to produce methane.
Methanogenesis microorganisms represents a group of anaerobic archaea, they contain
acute sensitivity of methanogenic microorganisms to oxygen.

Methanogenic microorganisms tends to require higher pH , then the

previous stages of anaerobic digestion with regards to environmental conditions. In anaerobic
digestion methanogens have a significantly slower regeneration time than other
microorganism, upwards of 5-16 days.

1.2 History of upgradation technologies

Biogas has a long history, dating back to ancient times for heating and lighting. The modern
development of biogas began in the 19th century with the work of scientists like Alessandro
Volta and Humphry Davy. The first large-scale biogas plants were built in Europe in the early
20th century for wastewater treatment, using simple, low-pressure gas storage and
combustion systems. The development of the Kaldnes-Biofilm and other fixed-film processes
in the mid-1900s improved biogas production and quality, laying the foundation for modern
biogas upgradation technologies.

Research into biogas upgradation technologies intensified in the 1970s-1980s, with

membrane-based technologies emerging like pressure swing adsorption and membrane
separation. Then The focus shifted towards improving efficiency and cost-effectiveness in the
produced biogas in 1990s-2000s, leading to the commercialization of new technologies for
cleaning or upgradation like water scrubbing, amine scrubbing, and cryogenic distillation.

Currently, biogas upgradation technologies focus on improving energy efficiency, reducing

costs, and enhancing the purity of the upgraded biogas. Advanced technologies like chemical
absorption, adsorption, and membrane separation are being developed to meet these goals.(2)

1.3 Biogas upgradation

Anaerobic digestion is a waste management process that recycles organic waste material to
create biogas, also known as biomethane. Biomethane is a natural gas used for electricity
production, heating, and as a fuel for vehicles with motors. The process begins with
pretreatment processes, followed by the breakdown of bacteria in food waste. After the
digestion process, a post-treatment process called co-digestion increases the production of
methane from low yield.

Various types of food waste, including mixed food waste rich in fibers, sugars, fats, oils, and
carbohydrates, are suitable for anaerobic digestion. Mixed food wastes, rich in fibers, sugars,
fats, oils, and carbohydrates, are promising materials for the AD process and biogas
production.

The depletion of fossil fuels, environmental issues, and new regulations have led researchers
to explore environmental friendly alternatives from natural resources. Anaerobic digestion of
organic resources produces biogas, a mixture of methane and carbon dioxide, with trace
components like water vapor, hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen.
Biogas is used in heating, cooking, lighting, and power production. However, cleaning biogas
from impurities like CO2 and H2S can extend its applications.

Biogas is upgraded to biomethane, which contains 95% methane and is used as vehicle fuel.
Upgradation of biogas is important as it decreases methane released in the atmosphere. The
process involves cleaning, upgrading, and removing unnecessary components of biogas. The
final product is called biomethane, which has CH₄ and CO₂ without H₂S.

Various physico-chemical and biological technologies are being developed for biogas
upgradation, aiming to enrich the methane content above 90% and enhance its calorific value
up to 35.3 MJ/m³. This is primarily for meeting fuel standards for vehicles, natural gas grid
injection, chemical production, and fuel cell applications. Enriched biogas is compressed,
stocked, and transported to the desired location for utilization. Additionally, the use of
enriched biogas reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

The current trends and development of biomethane production from food waste, focusing on
the circular economy and techno-economic analysis. The study focuses on the collection, pre-
treatment, production, purification, upgradation, and circular bio economy of food waste.

The importance of biogas production as an alternative to fossil fuels. The biogas produced
from food waste is a simple process that purifies into methane, which is used in various
applications such as heat, electricity, and vehicle fuel. Different types of food waste are
collected and processed into biogas, which is essential for human use and as an alternative to
fossil fuels.

The upgradation and purification of biogas, including five types of upgradation processes,
such as physical scrubbing, chemical scrubbing, pressure swing adsorption, membrane
separation, and cryogenic separation. The upgradation process and purity level also represent
the biomethane quality. After the upgradation process, 99% purity of biomethane is
separated. Upgradation is necessary which means to increase the composition of CH4 to
above 95% .the enriched biogas then should be stored and compressed to about 200 bar
pressure. This compressed gas is utilized in vehicles and stationary engines.
Figure 1. (Kougias PG, Angelidaki I. Biogas and its opportunities – a review. Front Environ
Sci Eng 2018;12:14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-018-1037-8.)

Food waste is primarily used for biomethane production due to its easy breakdown compared
to other waste. Biomethane is flexible and easy to storeable fuel, suitable for electricity,
heating, and as a substitute for natural gas when compressed with vehicle fuel. When
compressed, biomethane is used for vehicles as fuels.

Natural gas, a clean, environment-friendly fuel, could be explored as an alternative to petrol

and diesel to lighten the import burden. Natural gas in compressed form is already being used
successfully as vehicle fuel in many countries, such as Argentina, Pakistan, and India. It has a
higher octane number and lower cetane number, making it superior fuel than petrol. It is more
economical due to its lower production cost, operating and maintenance costs, and reduced
air pollution problems.

The India Hydrocarbon Vision 2025 identifies natural gas as the fuel for the future, with
natural gas demand growing at a rate of 6.5% per year and forecasted to rise to 84 Billion
Cubic Meter (BCM) against domestic production by 2006-07 and 114 BCM against domestic
production by 2011-12. To bridge this gap, public and private sector companies are exploring
gas import options, such as LNG and natural gas imports from neighboring countries. Biogas
has better characteristics than natural gas, especially during times of energy crisis.

Biogas, a bio-fuel, has the potential to provide a sustainable solution to the oil crisis in India,
displacing oil use in transport and agriculture. India's tropical location and high livestock
population make it an ideal choice for biogas production. Cattle dung, used as cooking fuel or
compost, can be used through biomethanation to produce biogas as clean fuel and digested
slurry as good-quality compost. Biogas is produced by anaerobic digestion of biological
wastes like cattle dung, vegetable wastes, sheep and poultry droppings, municipal solid
waste, and land fill. India has the potential to generate 6.38 x 1010 m 3 of biogas from 980
million tons of cattle dung produced annually, with a heat value of 1.3 x 10 12 MJ.
Additionally, 350 million tons of compost would be produced. Biogas can replace a
substantial level of gaseous fossil fuel and chemical fertilizer consumption in India.

Biogas can be improved by enriching its methane content up to the natural gas level. After
methane enrichment and compression, biogas can be used as vehicle fuel like CNG. Over and
above, biogas has lower emission levels than natural gas and diesel. Biogas has better
characteristics than natural gas, especially during times of energy crisis.

Biogas cleaning and upgrading technologies are derived from natural gas purification
industry, allowing the separation of undesirable contaminants like CO 2 and H2S from biogas
using physical, chemical, and biological methods. These technologies can be applied within
the framework of five general technologies.

1. Solvent scrubbing is a method that enhances the selective absorption of biogas

contaminants using water or other organic liquids.

2. Adsorption processes use porous sorbent materials for selective absorption.

3. Cryogenic separation uses different liquidation conditions under high pressures and low
temperatures. Hydrogenation processes reduce CO 2 with H2, either chemically or
biologically.

4. Membrane separation uses semi-permeable membranes to separate biogas components

based on their effective size.

These technologies are relatively new and not widely applied compared to other
technologies.

1.4 Upgradation technologies

In the past few years biogas purification and treatment have been the focus of great research.
The frequency of development of biogas plants, their biomethane output, electric capacity
and raw biogas upgrading plants have been risen dramatically. Biogas generally undergoes
two treatment processes such as cleaning and upgrading. Biogas cleaning is process of
removal of moisture, hydrogen sulphide, ammonia and other toxic compounds. Biogas
cleaning is generally the first step involved in biogas upgrading process. Biogas can be used
as an alternate for natural gas as when biogas is upgraded to biomethane it increases the
concentration of methane (CH4) and separates carbon dioxide (CO2) from it. The six physical
/chemical technologies for CO2 separation that are commercially ready are water scrubbing,
pressure swing adsorption, organic scrubbing, chemical scrubbing, cryogenic separation, and
membrane separation. However, biological and hybrid biogas technologies are still under
research and development. Upgradation refers to the process of increasing methane content
present in the biogas to produce a gas similar to natural gas or meet such standards for
injection into the natural gas grid. The main goal of upgradation is to use a biogas as a
renewable fuel by increasing the energy content and improving the quality of gas.(45)

1.5 Necessity of Upgradation

The increasing use of fossil fuels as a primary energy source has led to a crisis in global
energy and environmental problems. The global consumption of energy is predicted to
increase nearly threefold in the next thirty years, with massive carbon dioxide emissions
during fossil fuel combustion raising concerns about energy sustainability and environmental
protection. The current rate of CO2 release is over 1000 kg/s, and the imbalance between
emissions and sinks is responsible for the increasing CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
To reduce greenhouse gas emissions while generating economic value, extensive research is
needed to develop various carbon utilization technologies suitable for utilizing the abundance
of carbon waste in the atmosphere.

The global industrial emissions of carbon dioxide reached an all-time high in 2018 and are
unlikely to decrease soon. The growing demand for oil and natural gas has overshadowed the
development of renewable energy, and fossil-fuel infrastructure continues to expand,
particularly in developing countries. The fear of the worst effects of global warming, such as
extreme weather, rising sea levels, plant and animal extinctions, ocean acidification, climate
shifts, and social upheaval, will be inevitable. One solution is the utilization of bio-natural
gas as a substitute for fossil fuels. Biogas reduces carbon dioxide emissions while capturing
methane, ensuring a cleaner environment. However, there is room for improvement in
upgrading biogas techniques and utilizing its by-products to prevent waste release into the
environment. Biogas's place in waste management has been solidified and will continue to
evolve in the coming years.

Biogas, produced by anaerobic digestion (AD), primarily consists of methane (50-60%) and
carbon dioxide (30-40%). The quality of biogas depends on the substrate used and the
digester's pH. Other impurities include hydrogen sulfide (H 2S), water vapors (H2O), nitrogen
gas (N2), and oxygen (O2). These impurities are influenced by various parameters and
sources, such as water vapors (5-10%) from liquid media evaporation.

Biogas, particularly bio-CH4, is a valuable source of energy and fuel. However, it is

important to remove contaminants such as nitrogen dioxide (N 2), hydrogen peroxide (H2S),
oxygen (O2), and siloxane (SiO4) from the digester, especially when running on thermophilic
conditions. These contaminants can cause damage to the metallurgical parts of the grid unit
and sulfur oxide emissions after burning. H2S in raw biogas can cause pipelines, IC engines,
and boilers to corrode. When used in IC engines, Si particles may form on the engine walls,
causing deterioration of exhaust pipes and catalytic converters. Biogas with ammonia and
halogenated hydrocarbons also has poor ignition qualities and can cause corrosion in engines
and gas pipelines after burning. Proper treatment of these impurities is crucial for the safe and
efficient use of biogas.

1.6 Biogas upgradation technologies

In the past few years biogas purification and treatment have been the focus of great research.
The frequency of development of biogas plants, their biomethane output, electric capacity
and raw biogas upgrading plants have been risen dramatically. Biogas generally undergoes
two treatment processes such as cleaning and upgrading. Biogas cleaning is process of
removal of moisture, hydrogen sulphide, ammonia and other toxic compounds. Biogas
cleaning is generally the first step involved in biogas upgrading process. Biogas can be used
as an alternate for natural gas as when biogas is upgraded to biomethane it increases the
concentration of methane (CH4) and separates carbon dioxide (CO2) from it. Several
techniques for biogas purification or upgradation are developed for cleaning biogas to utilize
it fruitfully. The application of biogas in different sectors ( domestic and industrial) only
depends on the anaerobic digestion and the quality of biogas. high purity of biomethane is
much needed, for the applications such as running off engines, gas grinding or instruments.
Therefore, enhancement in the purity of biogas through several upgradation approaches such
as physical, chemical, and biological methods was shown in Fig.

Figure 2. Upgradation technologies ( M. K. Mahla et al. )

1.6.1 Physicochemical upgradation

Various chemical, physical and combination of both upgradation technologies are in practice
and are evolving day by day. Methods which are used in continuation for upgradation of
biogas like chemical and water scrubbing by absorption, separation by methane filtration,
carbon molecular and activated carbon sieve, cryogenic separation and pressure swing
adsorption .

• chemical absorption using amine/alkaline solutions

As a chemical scrubber amine solutions can be used for biogas upgradation process. Aqueous
amine solution, for example tri-ethanolamine, or mono- , di-ethanolamine, can be bind with
co2 as well as h2s molecules. This can be useful in removing of co2 and h2s . the structure of
amine scrubbing contains two major units, an absorbent and stripper unit, shown in the given
figure below

While biogas with 1-2 bar pressure flows from the bottom of the tank, amine /alkaline
solution passes through the absorption column from the top in a counter current manner. The
exothermic reaction is carried out there, and CO 2 and H2S get bound into the solvent.
Afterward, the stripping unit came into the action trapped CO2 and H2S rich amine/alkaline
solution is directed to the stripping unit for regeneration. Stripping unit is attached with boiler
with pressure bars of 1.5-3. The chemical bond breaks down by the heat applied which might
be formed in the absorbent column, in this generation of vapor takes place which later turns
into fluid. Then in the scrubbing technique, CO2 and H2S are trapped by recirculating the
steam into condenser and stripper. This resulted in cooling of vapor for release of entrapped
impurities. Instead of only amines, aqueous alkaline salt solution such as sodium, potassium
and calcium hydroxides react CO2 and H2S. These can be utilized for the chemical scrubbing.
Sodium hydroxide salts have more absorption ability as compared to mono-ethanolamine;
sodium hydroxide is more feasible for the process as there are several demerits of chemical
scrubbing like toxic nature of solvents that can be harmful to humans and the environment.

• Physical absorption via Water scrubbing

The process of water scrubbing technology is based on the theory of physical adsorption.
Because of the solubility of H2S is more remarkable than CO2 the co-removal of H2S is also
achieved in this process. This technique works on the premise of physical adsorption of H2S
AND CO2. The solubility of methane is 26, at a temperature of 250 C, which is 76 times
lower thane carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide. While water is spread from the top
compressed biogas flows upward. With the help of appropriate packing material the contact
time for absorption can be increased. The absorption process of co2 occurs at a pressure in
the range of 10 bar (34). The solubility of co2 increases in water with time. The product
outcome from the top of the column is biomethane which is enriched with methane greater
than 90%. While, the absorbed co2 and h2s is collected in the flash vessel and then at
atmospheric pressure channeled to a desorption tank. The process requires a lot of energy for
compressing the biogas, regenerating water, and circulating the water through pumps.
Upgraded biogas is stored after the process of drying and compression up to 200 bar, and
further, it can be utilised in various applications.(33)

• Pressure swing adsorption

Pressure Swing Adsorption (PSA) is the second most employed techniques for biogas
upgrading. Several companies develop and commercialize this technology: Carbotech
(www.carbotech.de), Acrona (www.acrona-systems.com), Cirmac (www.cirmac.com),
Gasrec (www.gasrec.co.uk), Xebec Inc (www.xebecinc.com), Guild Associates
(www.moleculargate.com), etc. Small scale plants (flowrate of 10 m3/hour of biogas) are in
operation, but this technology is also available for much higher flowrates (10000 m3/hour of
biogas) (34) (35).

The fundamental principle behind the pressure swing adsorption process is selective
adsorption of gaseous components according to their molecular size. The adsorbent
frequently used in this process are zeolite, activated carbon, and molecular sieve. Amongst all
adsorbents, zeolites are used primarily due to their properties. The PSA process is affected by
several factors such as adsorbent porosity, partial pressure of adsorbate, and interaction
forces. Adsorption, depressurization, desorption, and pressurization sequences are used to
regenerate the molecular sieves material in vertical columns filled with absorbents. The four
main stages of a typical PSA operating cycle are: (27)

1) Adsorption:-The process of adsorption involves feeding biogas at a pressure range of 3-8

bars from a column, which selectively absorbs CO2, O2, or N2 by the adsorbent material.
This process typically involves multiple adsorption columns to maintain continuous
operation.

2) Depressurization:-During the depressurization stage, the adsorption vessel is depressurized

to atmospheric pressure and near vacuum conditions. The initial pressure is reduced to
approximately 3-4 bars before reaching atmospheric pressure.

3) Regeneration or purge:-In the regeneration or purge stage, almost atmospheric pressure is

applied to the column or even vacuum. This process ensures the biogas is directed to the next
column, which has been previously regenerated. The desorbed gas from the sorbent medium
contains CO2 and some CH4. To reduce the amount of CO2 in the desorbed gas, a purge step
is performed, recycling some purified CH4 to displace CO2. The regeneration step changes
the off-gas composition with applied depressurization, causing the concentration of released
CH4 to increase at high pressures. At lower pressures, most CO2 is desorbed. The off-gas
from the initial decompression stage is piped back to the raw biogas inlet to reduce CH4 loss.
The off-gas from later regeneration steps is rich in CO2, which can be directed to the next
adsorption stage or vented directly to the atmosphere. The exiting gas from the CO2 saturated
column is directed to the adjacent regenerated adsorption column, which is depressurized to
almost atmospheric pressure. The off-gas, a mixture of CO2/CH4, is released and recycled
back to the inlet of the PSA system to reduce energy consumption. The saturated column is
treated with upgraded biogas to complete the regeneration of adsorbent material.

4) Pressurization or pressure build up:-The regeneration process in biogas production

involves adsorption at low pressure, which requires increasing the pressure to restart a new
cycle. The adsorption column is then re-pressurized step-wise to the final operating
adsorption pressure. The final pressure build-up is achieved with the feed gas inlet. Before
compression and treatment with the PSA process, a pre-treatment stage using activated
carbon to remove H2S and a pre-drying step to remove humidity is conducted. H2S removal
is the preliminary step, as it is harmful to the sorbent media and irreversible adsorption. PSA
technology is recommended for various biogas flow rates, but not for higher ones (>2000
Nm3/h).

To increase CO2 retention inside the pores, column pressurization and biogas feeding is
frequently performed at 4-10 bars. Methane-rich gas went through the pressured column
while CO2 was adsorbed. System suppliers offer benefits such as product gas quality of 96 to
98 percent methane, the ability to separate oxygen and nitrogen from methane, being a
primary upgrading system or polisher for other approaches, no need for scrubbing water or
chemicals, small footprint and height requirements, ability to handle some biogas impurities
with ease, and economic performance in a wide range of flow rates.(25-26-27-34-54)

1.6.2 Membrane separation process

This technique focuses on the principle of keeping the size of pores fixed according to the
size of CO2 and H2S so that CH4 cannot pass through the membrane. Membrane separation
is the easy to process, cheap and advantageous molecular based technology for biogas
upgradation. Yet, some of the CH4 molecules can pass through the membrane so the purity
and the accuracy of the membrane are mandatory. (50)

1.6.3 Cryogenic separation process

The temperature regulation separation strategy can be utilized for separation of gases. CH4
and CO2 have different boiling point of -780C AND -1600C. Raw biogas can be separated
under desired pressure by cooling the mixture. Under known boiling temperature gases like
N2, O2, and siloxanes can be removed from biogas with the help of condensation and
distillation. (55)
1.6.4 Biological methods

When the anaerobic microorganisms are involved in anaerobic digestion of different types of
substrates, it gives a product of raw biogas. For the elimination of constituent impurities the
raw biogas can be subsequently refined. There are two major groups that were reported as
well as still in practice for biogas upgradation, e.g., photoautotrophic and chemoautotrophic.
Both groups are useful for biogas upgradation and depends on the surrounding environment.
(54)

Hydrogenotrophic methanogens were mostly reported for uptake of co2 and utilize h2 for the
translation of co2 and ch4 based on the reaction below

4H2 + CO2 CH4 + 2H2O

Solar and wind energy can be used for hydrolysis due to water hydrolysis's H2 requirement.
This H2 can be difficult to store due to its low energy density. H2-directed biogas upgrading
methods can be biological in-situ or ex-situ, with ex situ upgrading requiring CO2
removal.(54)

1.7 Literature Review

Various feedstocks

A number of studies have examined the production of biogas from organic kitchen waste by
anaerobic digestion using cow dung and pig dung (Okareh et al., 2012; lissen et al., 2004).
Both substrates generated biogas although the quantity and frequency of the gas produced
were minimal which was as a result of the substrates used. (Deressa et al., 2015) explored
the production of biogas from fruit and vegetable wastes mixed with cow manure in
anaerobic digester. The total solid, volatile solids, moisture content and ash content of the
waste were examined. The material used as feed were avocado, papaya, mango, tomatoes,
banana peel and cow manure. Varying volumes of digesters were employed for biogas
generation. The combustibility of the gas generated was tested. The anaerobic digestion of
fruit and vegetable wastes mixed with different wastes took 55days to produce biogas (for
complete digestion). Upon adjustment of the factors affecting anaerobic digestion process,
it is felt that co digestion between food wastes and cow manure produces biogas without
the need of nutrient or chemical addition to the system. Biogas production from citrus
wastes by membrane bioreactor was conducted by Wikandari et al.,2014. The experiments
were carried out in thermophilic conditions at 550C and hydraulic retention time of 30days.
The results obtained showed the highest organic loading rate was successful to produce
methane at 0.33 Nm3/kg while the traditional free cell reactor reduced its methane
production to 0.05Nm3/kg. Approximately 73% of the theoretical methane yield was
achieved using the membrane bioreactor. While rapid acidification and inhibition by D-
limonene were the major challenges of biogas production from citrus waste.(Mohan and
Jagadeesan, 2013) attempted to optimize various parameters in order to determine the
most favorable recipe for maximum biogas production from digested food waste.

The biogas yields have been determined using batch anaerobic thermophillic
digestion test for a period of 90 days. Characteristic oscillation was observed in the rate of
methane production which may be due to the presence of methylotrophic population in the
activated sludge, which uses methane as a carbon source for their growth. The total biogas
generated in the system over the experimental period was the sum of methane and carbon
dioxide. Biogas produced from the decomposition of food wastes was a mixture of 76%
methane and 24% carbon dioxide. Vegetable wastes (banana stem, cabbage and ladies
finger) were anaerobically digested in a fed batch laboratory scale reactor at mesophilic
conditions (350C) which was carried out by (Velmurugan and Alwar2011). The organic
loading rate (OLR) was maintained at 2.25g/l with a hydraulic Retention time (HRT) of
30days. The average methane content in the biogas was 65% and the methane yield was
0.387ml.

Other studies have looked at generation of biogas from food and fruits waste rather
than using cow dung a substrate (Pune, 2003). The results showed that just 2 kg of each
substrate produced about 500 g of methane and reaction was completed within 24 hours
while conventional biogas system using cattle dung required about 40 kg of feedstock to
produce the same quantity of methane and required about 40 kg for a complete reaction,
thus the process is 20 times more efficient. Chen et al., 2010 investigated the potential of
five types of food waste for biogas generation. The wastes were from a soup processing
plant, a cafeteria, a commercial kitchen, a fish farm and grease trap collection services.
Anaerobic potentials of such food wastes individually and in mixtures were conducted at
mesophilic 350C and thermophillic temperatures 500C. The results indicated that it was
necessary to use chemical such as NaOH to control the pH of the anaerobic digester. Hence
this project intends to use a number of chemicals for more yield and efficiency. Biogas
production from anaerobic digestion kitchen waste using cow dung as innocula was
conducted by (Eleri et al., 2014). This was done by inoculating the processed kitchen waste
with both the pre-digested sample, and the kitchen waste alone served as the control. The
digestion was carried out at room temperature 35 ± 20C for 14 days. From the results, the
quantity of biogas in cm3 produced by the substrate were as follows; pre-digested cow dung
138.6 cm3, undigested cow dung 13.7 cm3, kitchen waste alone 3.2 cm3, a significant
difference (p≥0.05) was also observed in biogas production from kitchen waste using the
pre-digested and undigested inoculum.

(Knol et al., 1987) studied different fruit wastes and vegetable wastes in a continuously
stirred tank reactor. The wastes used include spinach waste, asparagus peels, French bean
waste, strawberry slurry, apple pulp, apple slurry, carrot waste and green pea slurry. All the
wastes were operated with a capacity of 1l and temperature of 330C. spinach was operated
with 0.83-1.18 g organic loading rate gave a methane yield of 0.316l/g. asparagus peels,
French bean waste, strawberry slurry, apple pulp, apple slurry, carrot waste and green pea
slurry with organic loading rate of 0.74-1.06, 0.96-1.15, 1.02-1.15, 1.02-1.60, 0.83-1.15, 0.8-
0.9 and 8.87-1.25g/l respectively resulted in a methane yield of 0.219, 0.343, 0.261, 0.308,
0.281, 0.417 and 0.310l/g.
Table 1. Availability of biogas from agricultural residue (Iftikhar A Raja et al. 2021)

Agriculture Residue Yield (m3/ ton)

Whole crop (wheat) 180-210
Grain (oats, rye, barley, wheat ) 300-550
Whole crop(oats, rye, barley Maize) 80-332
Grass Silage (6mm) 120-215
Beet leaves, fresh grass 39-70
Rapeseed 550-650
Sugar beet 235-380
Maize grain 270
Sunflower 154-400
Sorghum 295-372
Potatoes 276-400
Straw 242–324
Peas 390
Rhubarb 320-490
Turnip 314
Sugar Beet 236–381
Barley 353–658

Cow dung as a feedstock

Cow dung (CD) is a traditional feedstock for producing biogas for domestic cooking in rural
areas. Cattle dung is rich in methanogens, such as Methanobacterium, which aid in digestion of
cellulose and decomposition of organic matter. A study by (Xma R. Pote et al. 2023) comparing
cowdung and poultry droppings aimed to determine the yield of biogas, retention period, and
methane content. Thy studied that daily gas production rapidly increases and peaks on the fourth
day, then declines. After seven days, the total volume of biogas produced from cow slurry is around
200 ml, with an average quantity of 28.7 ml/day.(Xma R. Pote et al. 2023). The effects of parameters
 and pretreatment affecting the co-digestion of kitchen waste and animal manure in different
scientific databases within 2001–2020 were searched, and related information was obtained. Animal
manure has 72–93% volatile solid, low total solid (TS) content which ranges between 5 and 9%, and
high water content, while kitchen waste contains 85–96% volatile solid (VS) and high amount of
water content.(oludare odejobi et al. 2021)

Table2. Summary of the results of anaerobic co-digestion of kitchen waste with animal
manure.(oludare odejobi et al. 2021)

Co-digestion HRT (day) Temp TS VS pH C-N Mixing ratio CH4 yield

(o C) (%) (%) ratio
Kitchen waste + cattle manure na 35 na na 7.4 na 1:1 0.3108
Cafeteria waste+ cow dung 40 35 8 na na na 50:50 0.460
Kitchen waste + cattle dung 35 na 8.30 65 5.69 na 0.0022
MSW (vegetable, fruit, and 55 35 8 na 7.3 33:1 33.3:33.3:33.3 0.00000037
kitchen)+poultry waste+ cow
manure

kitchen waste+ cattle manure 12 35 na 71.9 4.9- na 3:1 0.233

7.3
kitchen waste + cow manure 13 37 na na na na 4:1 0.00007

Anaerobic digestion is a promising method for managing kitchen waste and animal manure, resulting
in high methane/biogas yield. However, it faces challenges in obtaining a substrate free of
contaminants and stability due to VFA accumulation. Operating and inhibiting parameters, such as
pH, temperature, mixing ratio, hydraulic retention time, ammonia, heavy metals, C-N ratio, and VFA,
affect biogas production performance. By taking Substrate II- Poultry Droppings: The amount of
biogas produced from poultry waste slurry is almost 415 ml with an average biogas production of
about 68.1 ml/day. Similarly, from a study the amount of biogas production in 6 days was studied.
The results are as follows. The feedstock used was cow dung, food waste and organic waste.

Table 3. Comparison of gas generation (Xma R. Pote)

Sr. No Type of waste Amount of gas generated ( in m3 )

Attempt 1 attempt 2 attempt 3 attempt 4
1 organic waste 0.28 0.28 0.27 0.27
2 food waste 0.3 0.32 0.34 0.32
3 cow dung 0.32 0.34 0.37 0.37

Cow dung produced 0.35 m3 of biogas, Food waste produced 0.32m3 of biogas and Fresh Organic
waste produced 0.27 m3 of biogas. The complete observation was carried out at room temperature
in the absence of sunlight. The volume of Biogas generated was less compared with the past studies
conducted under sunlight (outdoor). Hence,(Xma R. Pote et al.) Proves that temperature is a major
factor which influences the generation of Biogas.

Water scrubbing system involves physical absorption of CO2 and H2S in water at high
pressure with very little change is temperature. Easiest and cheapest method involving is use of
pressurized water as absorbent. The composition of biogas can be increased by providing raw biogas
at an average pressure of 5 to 6 bars at a fixed flow rate. At pressure of 9 to 10 bars, maximum
purity is obtained, as show in the table below (paulose paulose et al. 2018). Out of several methods
of enrichment, water scrubbing is found to be a simple, low- cost and suitable method for
enrichment of biogas in rural area. In water scrubbing, generally packed bed scrubber are used for
absorption of impurities in pressurized water. (paulose et al. 2018) suggested that a packed bed
scrubber of 150 mm diameter and 3500 mm packed bed column height was designed for enrichment
of biogas which removed 99% of CO2 present in biogas. There are two types of water absorption
processes in the liquid stream; single pass absorption and regenerative absorption [A.A. Werkneh et
al. 2022]. In single pass process (without regeneration), the washing water is used only once and the
wastewater produced not only emits carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, but also hydrogen
sulphide and methane. Having this justification, this technique is advantageous in that the inlet
water is free from carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulphide. As it was note by (Allegue and Hinge
2012), this system is primarily used with biogas from wastewater treatment plant since they have
access to the large supply of onsite water and wastewater treatment. Drawback of single pass
technique is it requires huge amount of water which produces large amount of wastewater that has
to be treated. It is non profitable and not eco-friendly (A.A. Werkneh). While in regenerative
scrubbing the water is regenerated through desorption after biogas is subjected to washing. By
comparing single pass and regenerative processes (Hullu et al., 2008; Lopez et al., 2012), and most
cases, the regenerative absorption is preferable which gives more than 97% of biomethane. (Lopez
et al., 2012).

Pressure swing adsorption (PAS), is a sequential setup consisting of adsorption,

depressurization, desorption, and pressurization as well as the molecular sieves material. This
method is preferred for gas cooling and H2S removal before CO2 adsorption because the molecular
sieves are capable of entrapping H2S irreversibly (Awe et al. 2017). This technique reported total
CH4 upgradation in 96-98% range, with very little methane loss, i.e., 2-4% (Thran et al. 2017). In this
to increase CO2 retention inside the pores, column pressurization and biogas feeding is
frequently performed at 4-10 bar. Methane rich gas went through the pressured column while CO2
is absorbed. The off-gas must be treated to avoid releasing methane into the atmosphere or using it
for combustion. This technology has several advantages including low energy consumption, cheap
investment needs, and small system (Augelletti et al., 2017). While (Ayub Golmakani et al. 2023)
evaluates the performance of a range of configuration for biogas separation, including pressure
swing adsorption (PAS), pressure vacuum swing adsorption (PVSA), and twin double bed PAS, by
dynamic modeling. It was found that required energy for a twin double bed PSA to produce
biomethane with 87% purity is 930 kj /kg CH4 with 90% recovery, compared to 916 kj / kg CH4 and
76% recovery for a PVSA process. In processes with moderate vacuum requirements (>0.5 bar), a
PVSA should be utilized when a high purity biomethane product is desirable. On the other hand, to
minimize CH4 loss and enhance recovery, a twin double-bed PSA should be employed (Ayub
Golmakani et al. 2023).

Membrane separation is an easy process, cheap and advantageous molecular based

technology. Optimization and enrichment of the membrane separation technique were attempted
by (Basu et al. 2010) and (Scholz et al. 2013) for commercial application. Maximum suitability was
exhibited by polyimide and cellulose acetate-based membranes for biogas upgradation. Selective for
CO2 polyvinyl amine /poly-vinyl alcohol blend membrane was applied and tested. Under optimum
condition, this blended membrane can result in 98% CH4 purity with 99% recovery [Deng and Hagg
2010]. Membrane separation occurs in a variety of designs, with typical operating pressures ranging
from 7 to 20 bar (Peppers et al. 2019), resulting in higher pressure in the produced biomethane
(Hoyeret al., 2016). As a general overview, the membrane suitability is 20 times permeable to carbon
dioxide than to methane. From membrane separation, the exhaust gas rich in carbon dioxide can be
produced with high purity with 99.9% carbon dioxide being achieved (which can be used in beverage
and food industries) (Esposito et al., 2019); after cooling to -30 C, oxygen, nitrogen, and trace
methane are being separated (Nguyenet al., 2020). The membrane technique allows the separation
of pollutants, mainly, carbon dioxide as well as hydrogen sulphide, water, and ammonia that are
transported through a thin layer membrane, and methane is retained owing to the difference in
affinity or/and particle size (Allegue and Hinge, 2012).

Aqueous alkaline salt solution as well as amine solvents is used in the process of chemical
absorption. Many researchers utilize aqueous alkaline salts rather than amines. In the chemical
scrubbing technology, the final methane content in the output gas can reach up to 99% of purity due
to the fact that chemical reaction is strongly selective, thus the methane loss can be lower than 0.1%
(Angelidaki et al. 2018).

Cryogenic separation is an emerging technology (Lopez et al., 2012) and its principle is
implemented in 4 phases: drying, compression, gas cleaning, and carbon dioxide removal. First, the
incoming biogas is compressed to 17–26 bar pressure, consequently cooled to 25 C (Allegue and
Hinge, 2012). Carbon dioxide is removed in two stages: first, the biogas is cooled to lower
temperatures (50 and -59 C), and up to 30–40% of the carbon dioxide is removed as liquid. In a
subsequent phase, the retaining gas stream is cooled to 85 C to solidify carbon dioxide (Allegue and
Hinge, 2012), allowing carbon dioxide to be separated from the biogas in solid or liquid form, while
methane accumulates in the gas phase and the separated carbon dioxide is clean and used/sold for
further applications (Biernat and Samson-Bręk, 2011). The advantage of cryogenic treatment is the
possibility to produce biogas with a high CH4 content of up to 99%, while it also uses a lot of
technological equipment (i.e. compressors, heat exchangers, and tur-bines) and the substantial
demand for equipment makes this treatment extremely expensive (Biernat and Samson-Bręk, 2011).
However, the disadvantage of this technique is that higher energy is needed (mainly up to 10% of
methane produced) for compression and refrigeration of the raw biogas, while if the produced
biomethane is going to be liquefied (at 125 C and 15 bars), the energy required to condense the
initial biogas can be recovered (Nguyen et al., 2020).

Biological Method for Biogas Upgrading Major attraction for biological biogas upgrading
technologies is the conversion of CO2 into other energy containing products or value-added
products. For instance, chemoautotrophic type of biogas upgradation methods are based on
hydrogenotrophic methanogen reaction, in which H2 reacts with CO2 to produce CH4, as shown in
the following equation (Song et al. 2017):
 4H2 + CO2 → CH4 + H2O G = −130.7 kJ/mol

Results have shown that by this upgradation technique, CH4 content of biogas can be increased from
60 to 96%, while H2 and H2S are not detectable (Wylock and Budzianowski 2017). However, H2
production and storage are big concerns with this technology. Though biological biogas upgradation
technologies have been experimentally proven, they are at an early stage of pilot or full-scale
implementation.

Table 4. Comparisons between the biogas upgrading and cleaning technologies in removing
carbon dioxide and other impurities (Adapted from Allegue and Hinge, 2012; Sutherland et
al., 2019; Nguyen et al., 2020; Bose et al., 2020; Carranza-Abaid et al., 2021).

Method Opportunity Limitations

Water scrubbing - Its capacity is adjustable by - High pressure (4–10 bars),

varying the temperature and methane loss (up to 5% by vol.), and
pressure energy consumption (is up to 0.2–
- Several plants are operated 0.5 kWh/Nm3 of biogas)
worldwide (simple operation, - Pretreatment and drying of
cheap biomethane required
and simple method) - Clogging occurred due to the
- H2S (>300/500 ppmv) and growth of bacteria
ammonia co-removal (tolerance - Medium content of biomethane
for produced, H2S (when >300/500
 impurities) ppmv) damages the equipment
- No additional heat required - Higher water consumption (even
- Environmental friendly and low- within the regeneration process)
cost solvent - Loading and absorbent rate is too
- Low operating cost low (water is less selective), and a
- Achieved 95–99% biomethane possibility to cause foaming
purity
Pressure swing - No chemicals and no heat - Medium amount of biomethane
adsorption demand required produced with medium/higher
- Cheap and compact technology, CH4 loss exist
several plants are under - “Extensive process control” and
operation, the use of valves often required
easy operation - Pretreatment required for H2S and
- Co-adsorption of N2 and O2 H2O, and attained 1–9%
together with CO2 methane loss
- Achieved 95–99% biomethane
purity
Physical organic - Methane loss is low and coarse - Relatively expensive operation
scrubbers pretreatment step is required and investment cost
- Produces higher content of - Difficulty in operation (can be
methane (energetic and more reduced when the dilution of glycol
auspicious than water) with water exists)
- Co-removal of hydrogen - Boiling required to avoid
sulphide, ammonia and other incomplete regeneration
impurities
- Achieved 95–99% biomethane
purity
Amine-based chemical - Higher efficiency of methane - Quite an expensive investment
absorption content required
- Process is carried out without -High demand of heat required for
pressure and no moving regeneration
 components -Causes corrosion, poisoning and
required except lower decomposition of amines by oxygen
- Low demand of electricity occurred
- Methane loss is very low -Salts precipitation exists and
- Dissolves more CO2 per unit of foaming possibility
water (when compared with - Pretreatment required for
water) hydrogen sulphide removal
- Achieved >99% biomethane - Lower working pressure (1 bar)
purity and required heat
- Process handling is complex and
attained 1–2% methane loss
Membrane technology - Easy operation and - Medium methane contents
construction, and low produced, while multiple stages are
maintenance needed to achieve higher methane
- No moving components purity
required except blower, no - Medium to higher (10–15%) losses
demand of heat of methane (depending on
or no chemical required, higher membrane configuration)
reliability - Purity of methane is compromised
- Small footprint and low weight with the amount of upgraded
- Modular configuration needed biogas
even at lower volume rates, - Requires petty operational
Minor experience for an improved
gas flows as treated without membrane
proportional increment of the technology
cost - Membrane cost is expensive, H2S
- Acquired pure CO2 to be used removal step is required or
in industrial applications pretreatment should be required
- Gas-liquid provides cheap - It is not suitable for biogas having
operation and investment cost many unknown contaminants
- Achieved 95–99% biomethane (like from landfill)
 purity - Unsure membrane durability and
- Low operational and moderate low selectivity of membrane
initial costs
- Easy process handling when
compared with others
Cryogenic separation - Achieved higher methane - Expensive operation and
content in the upgraded biogas investment cost required
-Lower methane loss exists - Further removal step required for
-No chemicals added, and carbon siloxanes, hydrogen sulphide and
dioxide produced as a byproduct other impurities
- Requires lower extra cost of - Technical skill is very demanding
energy to “reach liquid and the process handling is
biomethane” complex
- Achieved up to 99% - The technology is still emerging
biomethane recovery potential - Pretreatment required and needs
higher working pressure (40 bar)
- Higher operational and initial
costs. Methane loss is up to 1–2%

(A.A Werkneh et al.) stated that commercial technologies for removing biogas impurities
include pressure swing adsorption, membrane separation, water scrubbers, chemical
scrubbers, physical organic solvent scrubbers, cryogenic separation, and emerging
biotechnological platforms like photo bioreactor and bio catalysis. These methods remove
carbon dioxide and other impurities simultaneously, but require pre-treatment and post-
treatment. Water scrubbing reduces H2S levels but has limitations in removing organic sulfur
fractions. Membrane and cryogenic separation offer higher purity standards, but micro-algae-
based photo bioreactor systems are promising alternatives. Further research is needed to
integrate these technologies.
Industrial scale of biogas upgrading technologies

Environmental concerns and government subsidies have led to an increase in

biogas plants, resulting in an increase in biogas upgradation units. The global biomethane
market, valued at USD 0.62 billion in 2017, is expected to reach $4.96 billion by 2026. Many
nations aim to replace natural gas with biomethane for domestic use by 2026, with France
aiming to generate 8 TWh of energy from biomethane by 2023. Biomethane is predicted to
become a significant green and clean renewable energy source in the coming years, with
Sweden aiming to use biomethane 100% as a transportation fuel by 2028. Table 5. presents
the investment and capital costs of various biogas upgrading technologies. Water scrubbing is
the most commonly used technique, but its increased water needs pose a significant barrier.
Recycling secondary and tertiary effluent can lower the cost of water cleansing. Membrane
separation technology has seen a rise in usage, from 92 plants in 2015 to 173 plants in 2019.
It offers advantages such as flexible design, a smaller fragment, sturdy architecture, and
minimal footprint. Advancements in material science and engineering have further enhanced
membrane performance, and the application of membrane separation technologies is expected
to continue growing. Other biogas upgrading methods, such as pressure swing adsorption,
chemical scrub, organic physical cleaning, and cryogenic separation, have seen a decrease in
commercial use (S.J. Malik et al. 2018)

Table 5 . Estimated operating and capital investment of different upgradation technologies (54)

Aims and objectives

• To analyze the technologies for biogas upgradation

• To study the techno-economic feasibility of upgradation technology of biogas in
India.
• The relevance of biogas upgradation in sustainable development.
 CHAPTER 2

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Material and Methods
Optimization of biogas and Methane yield

The adoption of alternative energy technologies is becoming widely recognized as one of the
most effective ways to achieve the development of sustainable energy. One technique is to
change the substances that are abundant in organic material that biodegrades into valuable
material. This includes anaerobic digestion, a straightforward yet intricate conversion
process. Organic waste items, such as dried leaves from forests, flowers, and fruits, as well as
animal waste materials like cow dung and chicken excrement, as well as byproducts of the
dairy and food sectors, can all be used to produce biogas.( 22 ) Our kitchen's finely shredded
vegetable waste can also be utilized to create biogas. as well as cooked food includes rice and
wheat bread is also used for biogas production. This feedstock also includes co-digestion of
different materials for better and faster production of methane gas. This co-digested feedstock
includes kitchen waste mixed with cow dung, fruit waste mixes with cow dung for gas yield(
27)

Biogas yield and upgradation can be improved with different means as reported by different
authors, this includes: pre-treatments, Co-digestion, Temperature, Organic loading rate, and
reactor design. For upgradation different process given which are being used as per the cost
economics and availability of various factors.( 29)

Pre –treatment of substrate for methane production

To improve the effectiveness and quality of the biogas produced, pre-treating substrates
for methane generation involves a number of procedures. These include of reducing size,
mixing, adjusting pH, controlling temperature, enhancing hydrolysis, managing inhibitors,
improving anaerobic digestion, and providing post-digestion treatment. Size reduction makes
more surface area available for microbial activity, and mixing ensures that the feedstock is
homogeneous and uniform. Methanogenic bacteria may thrive in an ideal habitat created by
adjusting pH with acids or bases(39).
Different researchers have examined the application of different pre-treatment techniques
to enhance the bio digestion of feedstock and enhance the methane release (40). The selection
of pre-treatment techniques depends on the physicochemical characteristics and structural
arrangement of the feedstock; and it is expected to improve the formation of organic
feedstock and still maintain the matter in the process. Biological , chemical, and physical
pre-treatment techniques include enzyme, fungi, acid, alkali, ionic liquids, ozonolysis, size
reduction, extrusion, steam explosion, liquid hot water, etc. (46). Pre-treatment of substrate
before anaerobic digestion has the same objectives with pre-treatment before ethanol
production, the only difference is that since the microorganisms is involved, anaerobic
digestion is able to breakdown crystalline cellulose structures and hemicellulose; and pre-
treatment can be less expensive.
In general, the objectives of pre-treatment are to

i. Ease the approachability of the Enzyme to the cellulose and hemicellulose and
lead to degradation of feedstock.;
ii. Avoid degradation or carbohydrate loss;
iii. Eliminate the release of possible inhibitors;
iv. Be economical, and
v. Reduce the possible impact on the environment (47)

Physical / mechanical pre-treatment

Physical/mechanical pre-treatment of lignocellulose feedstock is an essential step in

enhancing the bio digestion ability, particle compaction and arrangement, enzymatic
accessibility, and total conversion of lignocellulosic feedstock into biogas without the
production of toxic substance (48). The technique also produces new surface area, enhances
flow characteristics; and improves the porosity and bulk density of the materials.

Milling or size reduction

Milling and size reduction cellulose crystallinity can be reduced with the use of mechanical
milling/ grinding which comprise of milling, grinding, and chipping methods. Substrate sizes
of 10-30 mm only can be achieved with grinding and milling (49). The main focus of the size
reduction is to reduce feedstock particle size (11). This improves the surface area of the
substrate and reduce the level of polymerization (50).

Some pre-treatment methods required size reduction of the feed stock to a particular level
before pre-treatment (51). Milling or size reduction can be the only pre-treatment method for
some lignocellulosic-rich materials that are easy to degrade. The milling type and duration,
and feedstock structure will influence the improvement in particular surface area, net
polymerization level, and final cellulose crystallinity reduction. There are different milling
techniques (hammer, vibratory, colloid and two-roll milling) and all of them can be employed
to increase the bio digestion of lignocellulosic feedstock (50). Vibratory ball milling has been
adjusted to be the most efficient in cellulose crystallinity reduction and increase the bio
digestion of spruce and aspen chips when compared with the ordinary milling process.
Likewise, wet disk milling has been a preferred mechanical pretreatment technique, because
energy required is low. Disk milling increases cellulose hydrolysis by generating fibers and is
more efficient in comparison with hammer milling that generates finer particles (52).(
Jekayinfa et al.) (28) reported that different size of groundnut shell had different effects on
biogas yields and there is a specific size of groundnut shells will have negative effects on the
biogas release. Rice straw treated with size reduction showed an increase in methane
production; however, combining other pretreatment methods with size reduction will give
better results (53). About 5-25% improvement in methane released was recorded when
municipal solid wastes were pretreated with size reduction (29). Spruce milled released six
times higher methane in comparison to spruce chip, whereas spruce milled pretreated with N-
methylmorphine-N-oxide (NNMO) gives 200% higher methane content when compared with
spruce chips (54).The adverse effect of extensive milling technique is high energy required
which leads to higher pretreatment costs and makes it inappropriate in some cases(55).
Nevertheless, studies have shown that size reduction less than 0.4 mm had no noticeable
influence on hydrolysis rate and biogas released (49).

Extrusion

In extrusion pretreatment, feedstock is allowed to undergo heat, compression, and shear

force, and this leads to physical destruction and chemical modification of the feedstock while
going through the extruder. Extruder design has single or twin screw that twists into a firm
barrel that has temperature control apparatus. The feedstock experience friction and energetic
shearing that leads to increase in pressure and temperature when pass through the barrel. At
the exit of the barrel, the feedstock will experience pressure release and this will result in
structural alteration of the feedstock which will enhance bio digestion during the subsequent
process (56). Extrusion of pelleted hay for optimization of biogas released was investigated
by Marousek (57), and it was reported that optimum biogas yield of 405 m3/ton TS that has
52.3% methane and 33% improvement in biogas yield when compared with control was
recorded when pressure was 1.3 MPa with reaction time of 7 min and 8% dry matter. In a
related research, organic fraction of the municipal solid waste was pretreated with extruction
method, improved biogas released of 800 L/kg VS which was about 60% methane content
was reported by (Novarino and Zanetti et al.) (58).

Biogas yield from different lignocellulose materials that were pretreated mechanically is as
shown in the table 6. The table shows that there is no particular particle size of lignocellulose
materials that is applicable for the optimum biogas yield of all the available feedstock. It can
be observed that when the particle size of water hyacinth was reduced from 1.0 to 0.05 mm,
the yield increased from 10 to 16% (59). Whereas when wheat straw particle size was
reduced from 1.2 to 3.0 mm, there was a decrease of 19.1 mL/ g VS in the biogas yield. It can
also be inferred that at 0.3 mm particle size, different biomass produced different result.
There was an increase of 4.6 mL/g VS when rice straw was pretreated to 0.3 mm particle size
(59), while the biogas yield was increased by 77.8 mL/g VS when wheat straw was pretreated
to the same 0.3 mm (59) particle size. Likewise it was shown that different mechanical
pretreatment methods also have different effects on the same lignocellulose biomass. wheat
straw was treated with two different mechanical methods of size reduction and high
hydrostatic pressure, and results indicated that the biogas yield was improved by 22.40% for
size reduction (59), while the biogas yield from high hydrostatic pressure treatment was
increased by 42.02%. Although, this can still be research further with the use of the same bio-
digester.(60)
 Table 6. Different mechanical pretreatment applied to the biogas production and yield

S/N Biomass pretreatment Anaerobic YBP YAP

digestion
condition
1 water hyacinth 0.05 mm Digester 0.45 L Increased by
16%
2 water hyacinth 1.0 mm Digester 0.45 L Increased by
16%
3 meadow grass 200 mm Bottle 0.5 L 297 mL/g VS 376 mL/g VS
4 rice straw 0.3 mm Glass reactor 58.1 mL/g VS 62.7 mL/g VS
2L
5 wheat straw 0.3 mm Reactor 2L 167.8 mL/g Vs 245.6 mL /g
VS
6 wheat straw 1.2 mm Reactor 2L 167.8 mL/g VS 264.7 mL/g
VS
7 barley straw 5 mm Glass reactor 240 mL/g VS 370 mL/g VS
2L
8 waste activated ultrasonic semi- 49% increase
sludge pretreatment continuous
reactors(15
days)
9 wheat straw high hydrostatic 31.8 mL 77.9 mL
pressure
10 hyacinthus spp. microwave 137.18 mL/g-sub 221 mL/g-sub
11 groundnut shell 2 mm batch 147.6 line/gem
12 groundnut shell 4 mm batch 180.7
1N/kgFM
13 groundnut shell 6 mm batch 177.3
1N/kgFM
2.3 Chemical pre-treatment

Chemical pretreatment is one of the pretreatment methods that are more popular than
physical and biological methods due to its effectiveness and the ability to improve
biodigestion of complex feedstocks. Hydrochloric acid (HCL), potassium hydroxide (KOH).
Sulfuric acid (H2SO4), Lime (Ca (OH)2), aqueous ammonia (NH3.H2O), Sodium hydroxide
(NaOH), acetic acid (CH3COOH), and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) are some of the
chemicals that has been investigated for the pretreatment of lignocellulose materials before
digestion. (51)

Acidic pretreatment

One of the most popular pretreatment methods for lignocelluloses that were study widely is
acidic pretreatment. Either dilute or strong acid ( H2SO4, HCL OR HNO3 ), pretreatment
have been examined at high temperatures, and combination with other treatment like steam
explosion has been examined also. Acidic pretreatment is a technique used to improve the
biodegradability of organic materials before they undergo anaerobic digestion for biogas
production. It involves treating the feedstock with acidic solutions to lower the pH level and
break down complex organic compounds into simpler forms. The main objectives of acidic
pretreatment include hydrolysis, reducing inhibitory substances, solubilization, and pathogen
reduction.

Hydrolysis breaks down complex organic molecules into simpler compounds, making them
more accessible to microorganisms during anaerobic digestion. Acidic pretreatment can
partially degrade lignin, a polymer found in plant cell walls, reducing its inhibitory effects
and improving biogas production efficiency. Solubilization increases the solubility of organic
compounds, making them more available for microbial degradation, leading to higher biogas
production rates and improved overall efficiency. Because of the corrosive and toxic
properties of the most acids, there is need to construct the digester that can withstand these
characteristics. Rice straw was pretreated with two levels procedures of dilute h2so4 and
aqueous ammonia in percolation mode and the reducing sugar produced was reported to be
90.8 and 96.9%, respectively, showing that lignin and hemicelluloses removal can be
improve with the combination of the two processes. Wheat and rice straw pretreated with
acid technique produced highest sugar contents of 565 and 287 mg/g respectively, without
hydroxymethyl furfural and furfural production. Oxalic acid was employed to pre-treat corn
cobs, the feedstock was heated to a temperature of 168 oC for 26 min and a cumulative sugar
content of 13% was recorded, and low quantity of inhibitors was recorded.(Marzialetti et al.)
investigated the influence of various acids, viz., HCL, H2SO4, HNO3, TFA, AND H3PO4 on
loblolly pine in a batch digester. TFA produced the highest quantity of soluble
monosaccharides at 150 OC and pH of 1.65. when newspaper was treated with acetic and
nitric acid, 80% lignin removal was achieved and rice straw pretreated with propionic and
acetic acid increase the methane by 36% as against that of untreated rice straw. However,
acidic pretreatment has challenges, such as the potential for hazardous use and the need for
careful handling and disposal procedures to prevent environmental contamination.
Controlling acidic pretreatment conditions is crucial to avoid excessive degradation or toxic
byproducts that could inhibit the anaerobic digestion process. Overall, acidic pretreatment
can be a beneficial strategy for improving biodegradability and biogas production efficiency,
but it should be optimized and managed to minimize potential risks.

Alkaline pretreatment

The use of alkaline in lignin removal is very effective, but cellulose concentration remains at
high level. Alkali pre-treatment leads to fiber swelling which creates a larger surface area for
accessibility; it reduces crystallinity and degrades the bond between lignin and carbohydrates
which leads to the interruption of the lignin arrangement. Wheat straw pretreated with
alkaline pretreatment was noticed to release 100% methane yield by 3-58%, 112% increase
was combined together. When calcium hydroxide was used to pre-treat municipal solid
waste, the methane yield was increased by 172%. The quantity of catalyst used for the
pretreatment and purchase price determines the cost of pretreatment; for instance, lime will
cost less compare to sodium hydroxide, together with the expenses of recovery and further
reuse. (dahunsi et al.) Noted that when sorghum bicolor stalk was treated with hydrogen
peroxide, 73% and 42% of lignin and hemicellulose was removed, respectively, and
cellulosic percentage was increased by 23%. The volume of biogas produced was increase by
65% when compared with the substrate pretreated with acid, and the retention period was
reduced by 5 days. Alkali pretreatment method is economical, but the major disadvantage is
its high cost at the downstream processing as the process needs large volume of water to
remove the salts from feedstock and removal process is an awkward process.( Johannes L P
et al. 2024)

Oxidative pre-treatment

The application of oxidizing agents such as ozone, FeCl3, hydrogen peroxide, and oxygen
or air to solubilize the lignin and hemicellulose of lignocellulosic feedstock to enhance
hydrolysis of cellulose is another chemical pretreatment technique. Oxidizing agent like
hydrogen peroxide or pre-acetic acid was dissolved in water and poured on biomass during
oxidative pretreatment. The target are partial breakdown of hemicellulose and identification
of the biomass. For wet oxidation method, oxygen is added inot pretreatment digester at
temperature of up to 200 o and pressure of up to 1.5 MPa. Earlier result was shown that at Ph
higher than 10, hydrogen peroxide addition was most efficient; but below this ph, no
delignification was noticed. Success was also recorded when wheat straw was pretreated with
alkaline peroxide. Sweet sorghum bagasse was treated with various pretreatment techniques
and the most yields were recorded from dilute NaOH and come next is H2O2 pretreatment.
The optimum cellulose hydrolysis output were 74.3% and 90.9%, respectively, and
cumulative sugar produced was 5.9, 9.5, and 19.1%, respectively, higher in comparison with
the untreated experiment. Oxidative pretreatment techniques damage significant percentage
of hemicellulose making them inaccessible for damage significant percentage of
hemicellulose making them inaccessible for digestion and this is the principal challenge of
the method. ( 7 )
Table 7. Different chemical pretreatment applied to the biogas production and yield

2.4 Thermal pretreatment

Thermal pretreatment method is technique whereby the lignocellulose feedstocks are heated
at high temperature. At high temperature of 150-180o C, lignin and hemicellulose begin to
solubilize, and their composition and arrangement are determined by the branching groups of
the hemicellulose. There are different techniques by which this heat pretreatment can be
applied to the lignocellulose feedstock. ( )
Liquid hot water

This technique is also reffered to as hot compressed water and is like steam pretreatment
technique as the name insinuate, water at very high temperature (170-230o C), and pressure (
up to 5 MPa) is applied rather than steam. It hydrolysis hemicellulose and gets rid of lignin
and making cellulose more available while inhibitors at high temperature are avoided. In
decades, pulp industries have been using hot water as pretreatment for lignocellulose. Liquid
hot water pretreatmnet can be applied in three manners: counter co-current, and flow-through
pretreatment. It was reported that at temperatures between 200 and 210o C, methane produced
was reduced and this can be linked to possible production of refractory materials. Rice straw,
japanese ceder, Nipa frond, and Japanese beech were pretreated with two-steps hydrolysis
(step I : 230o C- 10 MPa-15 min; step II: 275o C-10 MPa-15 min), and they were reported to
solubilize at 97.9, 82.3, 92.4, and 92.2% respectively. It has been reported that liquid hot
water has the ability tp pre-treat a good number of feedstock and softwoods inclusive(10);
nevertheless, energy required at the downstream processing is high because of large volume
of water required.

Upgradation methodology

Water scrubbing method

Water scrubbing is a widely used and well-developed technology for removing CO2 and H2S
from biogas, accounting for 41% of the global biogas upgrading market. It is the most widely
implemented for industrial biogas upgrading and can effectively use biogas flow rates
between 500 and 2000 Nm3/h. Water scrubbing is based on the solubility’s of CO2 and CH4
in water, with CO2 having a 26 times higher solubility than CH4 at 25 C. H2S, with a higher
solubility than CH4, can be effectively removed alongside CO 2. H2S concentrations of 300-
2500 ppmv can be tolerated with this technology, but even higher concentrations are
detrimental to the scrubbing system the water scrubber CO2 and other compounds are
physically absorbed in water under the application of high operating pressures (6 to 10 bars)
and low temperatures (up to 40 C). Biogas is initially injected into the absorption column via
the bottom side of the tank, while water is provided from the top side of the tank in a counter-
current flow. Absorption takes place in a packed tower, which is filled with a random packing
material in order to increase the contact interface between the two phases and to promote the
gas-liquid mass transfer. CO2 is mostly absorbed and removed by the dropping water, while
the CH4 stream exits from the top of the washing column and, after a post-drying treatment
step (to remove the excess humidity) and a final refining stage (e.g. by the use of an activated
carbon filter) for the removal of residual VOC subbing system, so removal of H2S is highly
recommended (Petros Gkotsis et al.). Content (Volatile Organic Compounds), it can be
compressed and injected into the natural gas grid. The saturated water, which exits from the
scrubber is rich in CO2, but also contains about 5 to 6% of CH4, which cannot be lost or
directly emitted into the atmosphere. For this reason, the water is directed to a secondary
(flash) column, where the pressure drop at 2 to 4 bars allows the separation and recirculation
of residual CH4. Depending on the water re-use options, two methods are commercially
available: the “single pass scrubbing” (Fig. 3a), which is usually employed, when this water
is derived from sewage treatment plants, and the “regenerative absorption” (Fig. 3b), where
this water can be re-generated by using a secondary desorption (stripping) column with air
supplement in counter-current flow, operating at atmospheric pressure. The typical water
flow needed to upgrade 1000 Nm3/h of raw biogas ranges between 180 and 200 m3/h,
depending on the applied pressure and the water temperature. After the final drying and
refining steps, CH4 can reach up to 99% purity.
Figure 3a. single pass scrubbing
(https://d3i71xaburhd42.cloudfront.net/6171e20066e221d32873ae3522cbeb4bb0dea42e/3)

Figure 3b. Regenerative absorption

(https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353573014/figure/fig2/AS:1051524830605315@1627714464853/Re
generative-pressurized-water-scrubbing-28.png)
Pressure swing adsorption

Pressure swing adsorption (PAS) method contains four vertical columns packed with absorbents; the
elucidation of the method is shown in the fig (4) . It contains sequential setup consisting of adsorption,
depressurization, desorption, and pressurization as well as the molecular sieves material. When a
methane rich gas passed through the pressurized column, the CO2 gets adsorbed by absorbents such
as zeolite, activated charcoal, activated carbon and silica gel. This adsorbent led to the separation of
CO2, N2, O2, and H2S from the biogas. Selective adsorption of CO2 over CH4 can be possible by
feeding gas into a broad specific area containing porous adsorbents material. The CO2 can be easily
absorb on the surface of porous absorbent because a molecule of CH4 is larger than the molecules of
other gas. This method is preferred for gas cooling and H2S removal before CO2 adsorption because
the molecular sieves are capable of entrapping H2S irreversibly ( Awe et al . 2017).

Once absorption reaches a saturation point with absorbed CO2, gas flow is directed to the
depressurized column where pressure is almost at atmospheric level with saturated CO2 column. In
this column high methane containing CO2/CH4 mixture is vacuumed and recycled. It will be then led
back to the PSA inlet.(P.K. Mahla et al.)

Figure 4. Process flow diagram of Pressure swing adsorption (P. K. Mahla et al. 2022)
Cryogenic separation

The equipment’s used in basic cryogenic method are mainly compressors, turbines, cooling devices,
distillation column, etc. as show in the Fig. . initially the raw biogas is dried to avoid the freezing
problem. The dried biogas is compressed to 17-26 bar and cooled at -26o C using a cooling device(
Bauer et al. 2013). further it is compressed to 80 bar and cooled to -55 o C to – 85 o C. Maximum
CO2 is converted to liquid CO2 at -55 o C and the remaining CO2 is solidified at -85 o C . The
dilation column separates CH4 and CO2, and these products are collected in the pure form. The final
product of this process contains CH4 with the purity of more than 97% ( Andrinani et al. 2014;
Kapoor et al. 2019).

Figure5: Process flow diagram of Cryogenic separation

(https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin
Struk/publication/342122702/figure/fig6/AS:901523773075458@1591951425149/Cryogenic-
separation-system-Adapted-from-Baena-Moreno-et-al-2019.png)

Membrane separation

Membrane separations are particularly appealing for biogas upgrading due to their lower energy
consumption, good selectivity, easily engineered modules, and therefore lower costs. High CH4
recovery efficiency can be reached (>96%), while pure CO2 can be obtained. The main disadvantage
of membrane separation is that multiple steps are required to reach high purity. This technology for
biogas upgrading is based on gas dissolution and diffusion into polymer materials (membranes).
When a differential pressure is applied on opposing sides of a polymer lm, gas transport across the
lm (permeation) occurs. The gas rate of permeation is controlled by the solubility coefficient and
diffusion coefficient of the gas-membrane system. Polysulfone, polyimide or polydimethylsiloxane
are the common membrane materials for biogas upgrading. In the mid-1980, Cynara (Natco), Separex
(UOP), and Grace Membrane Systems were already selling membranes made from cellulose acetate
to remove CO2 from CH4 in natural gas.(

Figure 6. Process flow diagram of membrane separation

Biological Upgrading: Photoautotrophic

When the H2 gas comes from outside, it is injected into the AD, where it interacts with carbon di-
oxide to generate methane as a result of the action of methane forming bacteria, which is then
recycled. A second anaerobic reactor containing hydrogenotrophic methanogens is used to remove the
leftover carbon di-oxide from the purified gas [108]. The purified gas, consisting of leftover carbon
di-oxide, injected in the reactor. A portion of the carbon di-oxide alteration could be done during the
first AD process, and the final AD process can be used just for final purification and purification.(
Apoorva Upadhyay et al. 2022)

Figure 7 . Process flow diagram of biological upgradation.( Apoorva Upadhyay et al. 2022)
Microorganisms involved in upgrading process

Classification of microbes for this category depends on the utilization of substrate. Methanogens
can be generally classified into three groups: hydrogenptropic, aceticlastic, and methylotophic.
Methanogenesis process is dependent on various parameters, i.e., pH and Temperature. Likewise,
substrate and anaerobes can also be considered as prime factors ( Ganesh 2014).

The most reported hydrogenotrophic methanogens are Methanobacterium, Aceticlastic methanogens

include Methanosaeta.
 CHAPTER 3

RESULT AND DISCISSION

Result and discussion

Future Biogas Upgradation Technology A comparative

assessment of the merits and demerits of different biogas upgradation technologies may
conclude that rather than using a single technology, a combination of technologies (i.e.,
hybrid technologies) can result in high CH4 enrichment at low operating costs, and low
energy consumption. Researchers have reported that additional techno-economic benefits
could be harvested in case of membrane-PWS or membrane-cryogenic separation hybrid
systems (Makaruk et al. 2010; Shao et al. 2012). Shao et al. (2012) reported that using a
hybrid membrane–temperature swing adsorption technology for bio-methane production
could be beneficial and the techno-economic analysis showed a payback period of 6.8 months
on an investment for processing 200 Nm3/h biogas stream with a yield of 97% methane. It is
expected that more R&D efforts will be focused on hybrid technologies, integrating two or
more technologies to explore their potentials towards improved techno-economic dimension
of biogas upgradation.

Comparative Techno-economic Feasibility of Different Methods Among different biogas

upgradation methods, PSA, pressurized water scrubbing, organic physical and chemical
scrubbing, and membrane separation are most commonly used commercially. Comparative
technical characteristics of these technologies are summarized in Table 1. It should be noted
that selection of the best upgradation technology depends on a number of factors: raw biogas
quality and capacity, desired gas quality for the specific use, energy required to upgrade
biogas to bio-methane (i.e., availability of cheap heat and the electricity at reasonable price),
required skillset and technical support available for selected technology, capital cost,
operating cost etc. (Papacz 2011; Wylock and Budzianowski 2017; Angelidaki et al. 2018). It
is always possible to have a system yielding the minimum methane loss, but with increasing
complexity in the system at the expense of higher energy consumption and investment. In the
EU, pressurized water scrubbing technology for biogas upgradation has the largest share,
followed by PSA and chemical absorption technology (Niesneret al. 2013). According to
Table , cryogenic separation, chemical scrubbing (heat and electricity) and physical
absorption are the most energy-intensive technologies, while water scrubbing technology
demands lesser energy. The efficiency of a particular biogas upgradation method employed
mainly depends on methane purity/loss fraction. Today’s technological developments have
contributed to cheaper and more efficient plants. Table 1. shows that chemical absorption
delivers the highest purity methane or minimum methane loss. However it is concluded that
no definite technology can be ranked as the best one, covering all aspects. As well table 2.
Shows advantages and disadvantages of all the techniques.
Table 8 . Comparison of different biogas upgradation technologies (kadam and panwar
2017; Angelidaki et al. 2018)

Bio-Methane Costs

Overall costs for purified and upgraded biogas (bio-methane) supplies as transport fuel
includes three distinct components: capital costs, operational-and- maintenance costs, and
costs for consumables. These are further categorized as costs associated with biogas
production, biogas upgradation to bio-methane, its compression, and distribution.

Production cost

The cost of biogas production through anaerobic digestion is influenced by the type and
quality of feedstock materials and plant capacity. As plant capacity increases, capital and
O&M costs decrease proportionately. However, costs for consumables, particularly feedstock
supply, may not decrease significantly with increasing plant capacity. Biogas production
from industrial organic waste and residues incurs lower capital costs (25-30%) than energy
crops due to existing facilities for handling and storage. Biogas digesters share the most
significant fraction of total capital costs, followed by buildings, feed-stock storage, pre-
treatment equipment, electrical and control systems, and interest on the invested capital.
Irrespective of the plant type and capacity, biogas digester shares the most significant fraction
of total capital costs (40–45% for energy crops and 55–60% for agricultural or industrial
waste; followed by buildings, feed-stock storage, pre-treatment and feeding equipment,
electrical and control systems and interests on the invested capital. O&M costs typically
include costs for maintenance and repair, labor costs. Heating is essential to maintain optimal
temperature for anaerobic digestion, especially in cold climatic conditions. Heat requirements
are generally lower for dry feedstock (e.g., energy crops) and consequently the heat costs,
compared to using manure or industrial wastewater. Heat demand further increases if the
biogas plant is located in cold climate areas. Besides heat energy, running, monitoring, and
control of different plant equipment requires electrical power, and its consumption mainly
depends on the technology selected for biogas production.

Upgradation cost

Biogas upgradation costs depend on plant capacity; upgradation method selected, the specific
goal of the project (e.g., bio-methane for NG network injection or vehicular application), raw
biogas quality, availability, and price of auxiliary heat and power, environmental regulations
(i.e., CH4 leaks). The biogas upgradation costs for small-scale plants can be significantly
high (US$1.07/m3 of CH4 for a 20 m3/h raw biogas capacity plant (IRENA 2018; Yoo et al.
2003). Availability of cheaper heat and electricity can make energy- intensive technology
cost-effective and adaptable. For instance, biogas upgradation by chemical scrubbing
technology can be more economical than PSA or water scrubbing technology, if cheap heat
energy is available onsite as an auxiliary energy supply. If the upgraded gas is planned to be
injected into a NG network, upgradation technologies operated with relatively high pressures
(e.g., membrane separation) can save injection cost.
Table 9. Advantages and Disadvantages

Technology Advantages Disadvantages

water • High CH4 • high investment and operating cost
scrubbing recovery (96-
98%
• low CH4 losses • high energy consumption
(<2%)
• Efficient and • needs more energy to pump the water and
simple process press the gas
• high technical • requirement of large volume
maturity
• no requirement • requirement of more volume
of chemicals
• low maintaining • clogging because of bacterial growth
and operating
cost
• simultaneous • H2S causes corrosion problems
removal of H2S
and NH3
• easy water • difficulty in the recovery of CO2
regeneration

Pressure • High energy • High CH4 losses (<4%)

swing recovery (96-
adsorption 99%)
• low energy • High investment and operating cost
consumption
• Fast adsorbent • Requirement of other treatments due to
regeneration incomplete scrubbing
• low • Rather complex process
environmental
footprint
• Possible H2S • H2S degrades the adsorbent material
co- removal
• Fast installation • susceptible to fouling
and startup
• chemicals are
not required
• High energy
compactness

Cryogenic • High CH4 recovery • High energy consumption

separation (97-98%)
• low CH4 losses • High investment cost and operating cost
(2%)
 • No requirement • Requirement of lots of process equipment, in
of chemicals the main cooler, heat exchanger, and
compressor
• High CO2
absorption
• Production of
liquid CH4
• H2S removal

Membrane • High CH4 recovery • Frequent replacement of membranes

separation (96-98%)
• Low operating • membrane cost
and maintenance
cost
• Environmentally • H2S removal required
friendly
• No chemicals
required
• Simple operation
and equipment
• Low space
requirement
• Scale-up flexibility

POTENTIAL OF BIO CNG IN INDIA

Any valuable biological resources can be used to produce Bio-CNG. It is estimated that India
has the highest number of cattle in India. If cow dung is properly collected, in the right way,
and used properly, the produced Bio-CNG is likely to take up more than 4.0 millimeters. T of
LPG per year. In addition, some other sources/feedstocks are very important in producing
Bio-CNG that need to be tested in detail such as:

1. Piggery waste, poultry waste, etc.

2. Biomass generated from agro-waste and other such sources straws, bagasse, etc.

3. Industries that can become significant contributors such as Distillery (Alcohol/Ethanol),

food processing industries, etc.

4. MSW, vegetable waste from Mandees and landfills

5. Garden waste, energy crops, etc.

Biogas from Sewage Treatment Plant

The Bio-CNG project has a great advantage in that it can be easily replicated and easily
deployed depending on the availability of feedstock. Power generation from BIOGAS is one
of the best ways to meet the required energy. Energy from Bio-CNG can be easily stored and
is not the same as wind, hydro and solar. The pressure on biogas is exactly the same as the
natural gas found commercially in its composition and energy. Due to the abundance of
biomass in the country, pressed biogas have the potential to replace CNG in automotive,
industrial and commercial use in the coming years. The production capacity of pressed biogas
from various sources in India is estimated at 62 million tons per year and helps to reduce
dependence on crude oil imports. Bio-CNG also has great promise for the efficient
management of municipal solid waste and in addressing the problem of urban air pollution
due to racial burns and carbon emissions. The Bio-CNG process also produces a rich
fertilizer that can be used as a fertilizer. As Bio-CNG has a high calorie value and finds its
use in explosive fats.( Pavan M L et al. 2021)

High potential industries for Biogas:

– Primary: Distillery, Sugar, and Starch (75% Biogas)

– Secondary: Pulp and paper, Milk processing, Slaughter house, and Poultry

Table. 10: BIO-CNG Potential

Biogas India Potential

70 lac kg of CNG/LPG 7 lac full –Tank

1281 MWE Per day cars daily

BIO CNG V/S LPG

The calorific value of Bio-CNG and LPG are nearly the same. LPG takes up more
Oxygen(1.25) than Bio-CNG (1.11).LPG is heavier than air hence, settles down and is a
potential fire threat. Bio-CNG, being lighter gets dispersed in the sir preventing any
dangerous situation. Bio-CNG is cleaner than LPG and does not leave any soot deposits. Bio-
CNG was more economical than commercial LPG. Finding use in Canteens/Pantries, Hotels.(
Pavan M L et al. 2021).

Table 11: Bio CNG V/S LPG

Parameter BIO-CNG Composition LPG Composition

Methane (min) 90% Propane(min) 95%

Moisture (max) 5ppm Butane(max) 4%
Sulphur(max) 16ppm C5 and Higher 2%
Oxygen(max) 0.50% Sulphur(max) 5ppm
Carbon-dioxide(max) 4.00% Free water none
Net Caloric Net Calorific
value(kcal/kg) 11,200-11,500 value(kcal/kg) 11,200

Bio-CNG as Transportation Fuel

The discovery of biogas conversion to bio-CNG as transport fuel depends largely on certain
factors such as economic, technological, environmental and safety. Fuel properties of bio-
CNG are almost identical to normal CNG as well competitive compared to other motor fuels
such as diesel and petrol. The percentage of methane (> 97%) in bio-CNG is higher than in
natural gas (93%) produced in various gas fields. emissions can be reduced up to 90% with
the help of BIO-CNG. The cost required for the production of BIO-CNG is approximately
50% of that of petrol and diesel.

Table 12: Bio CNG V/S FUE

Fuel Calorific value in KJ/Kg Rate/Cost(INR)

CNG 53000 55/-
BIO-CNG 52000 51.5/-
PETROL 48000 94/-
DIESEL 44000 85/-
LPG 49789 14.2/-
STATUS OF BIO CNG PLANT IN INDIA

According to renewable watch research, there are 17 Bio-CNG plants in the country, which
include a total energy of 46,177kg per day. Many of these plants are found in the western and
northern parts of the country, accounting for about 96.5 percent of bio-CNG energy. These
plants are still distributed in nine provinces, Maharashtra is the largest in terms of volume and
the highest number of plants. Gujarat ranks second in ranks, while Rajasthan ranks second in
terms of bio-CNG plants. Maharashtra and Gujarat together account for 63 percent of the
world's bio-CNG. In addition to these 17 plants, the National Agricultural Cooperative
Marketing Federation of India is planning to build a bio-CNG facility near Azad Mandi in
New Delhi, where Indraprastha Gas Limited (IGL) is ready to receive bio-CNG produced
from this plant. In January 2018, the Punjab Bureau of Industrial Promotion and Punjab
Energy Development Agency signed a MoU agreement with Indian Oil Corporation Limited
(IOCL) to establish a biogas and bio-CNG project in the province, with a total investment of
Rs.50 million. The provincial government plans to measure this up to 400 units over the next
few years. The Department of Environment and Environment plans to launch a bio-CNG
plant nationwide at a cost of Rs.70 billion, in partnership with the IOCL, Barat Petroleum
Corporation Limited (Pavan M L et al.)
State-wise installed bio-CNG capacity

OUTLOOK AND CHALLENGES OF BIO CNG TECHNOLOGY

Clearly the use of bio-CNG as a vehicle petrol provides significant economic benefits, in
terms of emissions, and the concept of engine performance. But, they are not successful the
implementation of this technology in a developing country like is a big challenge. The need
for self-sufficiency the number of supplies, equipment upgrades and cost, importance of
technical capacity, and fuel consumption Infrastructure is considered a major obstacle to
Transmission of bio-CNG.

• The cost of installing Bio-CNG is expensive. E.g. producing 400 kg / day of Bio-
CNG requires a significant investment of Rs. 1.65 crores while 5000 kg / day requires
Rs. 16 crores.
• Initial processes such as collection, transportation, and segregation can also reduce
maintenance.
• It can only be installed where bulk waste is produced. It is a challenge to verify the
waste sources of Bio-CNG production and it will not be compatible.
• The production process requires skilled professionals.
• There are no specific standards in India for the installation, operation and
maintenance of these plants.

However, in the near future, the amount of waste generated in urban and rural areas, combined
with government efforts to address this waste, will stimulate bio-CNG growth in India. To date,
MNRE provides financial assistance in the research and development of all plants, including bio-CNG.
Rs 10 million in funding is provided per MW of energy or per unit of bio-CNG from 12,000 cubic
meters of biogas per day, for a total amount of Rs 50 million per project. In addition, the Galvanizing
Organic Bio-Agro Resources Dhan (GOBAR-DHAN) program, which aims to manage and convert
cattle manure and solid waste into compost, fertilizer, biogas and bio-CNG, has been announced in
Union Budget 2018 -19 and will be launched soon. . From April 2020, strict Bharat Stage-VI standards
will be introduced to measure sulfur emissions. These rates will increase the cost of petrol and
diesel, thus making CNG more costly for trucks and buses. Given the amount of garbage generated
in the country, bio-CNG will definitely emerge as a viable option than CNG.
CHAPTER 4

CONCLUSION
Conclusion

There is a large potential of biogas generation to make it an alternative fuel for vehicle and as
cooking gas. In general, biogas is attractive to act as an alternative fuel that could support the
transition of fossil fuels and target on climate change. Biogas for coking, electricity generation and
sanitation control has proven to be technically feasible.

It has been observed that different types of biodegradable waste can be utilized for generation of
power. It involves forest waste, agricultural waste, cowdung, poultry waste and organic waste from
industries. Though the time and conditions required for the conversion processes are different yet it
ensures waste to energy and a cleaner surrounding for people to live. Modern technologies are
enhancing the conversion process and making it simpler to work upon. Accumulation of such waste
leads to harmful surrounding.

The present chapter concludes that upgradation technologies can help to improve utilization and
conversion of methane. As pure CH4 containing biogas is more reliable for utilization at the large
scale application level, biogas must be upgraded for utilization. The developed or developing methods
are able to upgrade biogas at their own efficacy with associated benefits and demerits.
Physicochemical methods are easy to operate but are not cost effective, and biological methods are
slower but given the high recovery of methane it is considered environmentally sustainable.

It has great possibility to be integrated into current energy system in regions with good natural
gas pipelines. Political decisions also stand by the use of renewable energy. Thus, there are clear
trends on biogas market growth. Moreover, it even has the opportunity to replace natural gas and
eventually cut all the GHG emissions. Hence, biogas upgrading is an important process for increasing
its fuel value for commercial applications. The upgrading technologies have been developed through
the years and have become more mature. The upgradation and liquefaction technologies are very
efficient to be applied at large scale in many countries. Cryogenic upgrading is a good choice because
it produces purified biogas in liquid state, but is not commonly used due to its complex operational
process. Although analyzing globally, it seems that this technology may break through within a short
period of time, resolving the existing problems. The specific investment cost for all the technologies
are nearly equal (300-500 Rs/Nm3/h) for upgrading units with raw gas capacities larger than 800-
1000Nm3/h. for smaller units, the specific investment cost increase significantly. Thus, the capacity
of the plant becomes very important parameter for deciding the overall economy of producing bio-
CNG, which is an efficient and sustainable substitute to CNG. Biogas production is increasing
globally, and use of bio-CNG for transportation seems to be an interesting and forthcoming
development of biogas market relates to the execution of new policy matters, but the future will most
probably be fueled by an increasing amount of upgraded biogas.

Future aspects

The application of upgraded biogas is crucial in various fields, and several methods are under
development for commercial use. Biogas can be converted into bio-CNG, fuels, energy, and
value-added products. In situ CO2 to CH4 conversion is a promising area for biogas
upgrading due to its qualities. To improve biogas quality, sustainable, economical, and
environmentally viable physicochemical and biological methods need to be developed to
entrap and utilize carbon dioxide and other impurities from biogas.

The future of biomethane, or upgraded biogas, is promising due to its potential in renewable
energy transition, decarbonization of gas grids, and the circular economy. Biomethane is
expected to grow in transportation, industry, and power generation, contributing to waste
management goals and generating renewable energy. Technological advancements in biogas
upgradation are improving efficiency and reducing costs, making biomethane production
more competitive. Policy support, such as feed-in tariffs, renewable energy certificates, and
tax incentives, is being implemented to support biomethane production. Biomethane can
complement other renewable sources like wind and solar, providing a reliable source of
energy that can be stored and used when needed. Additionally, biomethane production can
enhance energy security by diversifying the energy mix and reducing dependence on
imported fossil fuels. Overall, biomethane is expected to play a significant role in the
transition to a more sustainable energy future.
 CHAPTER 5

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bibliography

1) article: J. E. Castellanos-Sánchez, F. A. Aguilar-Aguilar, R. Hernández‐Altamirano,

2) José Apolonio Venegas Venegas & Deb Raj Aryal (2023): Biogas purification processes:
review
3) and prospects, Biofuels, DOI: 10.1080/17597269.2023.2223801
4) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.10.228
5) Oludolapo Akanni. Olanrewaju, oludolapoo@dut.ac.za (Industrial Engineering Department
Durban University of Technology)
6) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360324589
_An_analytical_hierarchy_process_based_decision_support_system_for_the_selection_of_bi
ogas_up-gradation_technologies/citations.
7) Upadhyay, A.; Kovalev, A.A.; Zhuravleva, E.A.; Kovalev, D.A.; Litti, Y.V.; Masakapalli,
S.K.; Pareek, N.; Vivekanand, V. Recent Development in Physical, Chemical, Biological and
Hybrid Biogas Upgradation Techniques. Sustainability 2023, 15, 476.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su15010476
8) Paritosh, K.; Mathur, S.; Pareek, N.; Vivekanand, V. Enhancing Hydrolysis and Syntropy
Simultaneously in Solid State Anaerobic Digestion: Digester Performance and Techno-
Economic Evaluation. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 338, 125538.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125538.
9) Muñoz, R.; Meier, L.; Diaz, I.; Jeison, D. A Review on the State-of-the-Art of
Physical/Chemical and Biological Technologies for Biogas Upgrading. Rev. Environ. Sci.
Bio/Technol. 2015, 14, 727–759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-015-9379-1.
10) Pertl, A.; Mostbauer, P.; Obersteiner, G. Climate Balance of Biogas Upgrading Systems.
Waste Manag. 2010, 30, 92–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.08.011.
11) Abatzoglou, N.; Boivin, S. A Review of Biogas Purification Processes. Biofuels Bioprod.
Biorefining 2009, 3, 42–71.
12) Adnan, A.I.; Ong, M.Y.; Nomanbhay, S.; Chew, K.W.; Show, P.L. Technologies for Biogas
Upgrading to Biomethane: A Review.
13) Bioengineering 2019, 6, 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/BIOENGINEERING6040092.
14) Sun, Q.; Li, H.; Yan, J.; Liu, L.; Yu, Z.; Yu, X. Selection of Appropriate Biogas Upgrading
Technology-a Review of Biogas Cleaning, Upgrading and Utilisation. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RSER.2015.06.029.
15) Kougias, P.G.; Treu, L.; Benavente, D.P.; Boe, K.; Campanaro, S.; Angelidaki, I. Ex-Situ
Biogas Upgrading and Enhancement in Different Reactor Systems. Bioresour. Technol. 2017,
225, 429–437. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIORTECH.2016.11.124.
16) Persson, M.; Jönsson, O.; Wellinger, A. Biogas Upgrading to Vehicle Fuel Standards and
Grid Injection; Biogas Upgrading IEA Bioenergy Content Biogas Upgrading Task 37-Energy
from Biogas and Landfill Gas by the End of 2006 the Following Nations Were Members of
Task 37; International Energy Agency: Paris, France, 2006.
17) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2017.08.035
18) Jaffrin A, Bentounes N, Joan A, Makhlouf S. Landfill biogas for heating greenhouses and
providing carbon dioxide supplement for plant growth. Biosys Eng 2003;86:113–23.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1537-5110(03)00110-7.
19) Weiland P. Biogas production: current state and perspectives. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol
2010;85(4):849–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00253-009-2246-7.
20) Pertl A, Mostbauer P, Obersteiner G. Climate balance of biogas upgrading system Waste
Manage 2010;30:92–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2009.08.011.
21) Chen X, Vinh-Thang H, Ramirez AA, Rodrigue D, Kaliaguine S. Membrane gas separation
technologies for biogas upgrading. RSC Adv 2015;5(31):24399–448.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/C5RA00666J.
22) Rongwong W, Boributh S, Assabumrungrat S, Laosiripojana N, Jiraratananon R.
Simultaneous absorption of CO2 and H2S from biogas by capillary membrane contactor. J
Memb Sci 2012;392–393:38–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci. 2011.11.050.
23) Tippayawong N, Thanompongchart P. Biogas quality upgrade by simultaneous removal of
CO2 and H2S in a packed column reactor. Energy 2010;35:4531–5.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.04.014.
24) Makaruk A, Miltner M, Harasek M. Membrane biogas upgrading processes for the production
of natural gas substitute. Sep Purif Technol 2010;74:83–92.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2010.05.010.
25) Ko D, Siriwardane R, Biegler LT. Optimization of a pressure-swing adsorption process using
zeolite 13X for CO2 sequestration. Ind Eng Chem Res 2003;42:339–48.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/Ie0204540.
26) Alonso-vicario A, Ochoa-gómez JR, Gil-río S, Gómez-jiménez-aberasturi O.Microporous and
mesoporous materials purification and upgrading of biogas by pressure swing adsorption on
synthetic and natural zeolites. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 2010;134:100–7.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso. 2010.05.014.
27) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322416509_Biogas_Upgradation_Using_Water_Scr
ubbing_TechnologyTERI Energy Data Directory and Yearbook, 2003 /04. Tata Energy
Research Institute, New Delhi, 2004.
28) . Nagaraj R. Compressed natural gas utilization in a multi-cylinder passenger car spark
ignition engine. M Tech. thesis. Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, 1995.
29) Biogas as vehicle fuel, a Trend Setter report. Available on line http://www.novem.nl /default
30) Mathur A N, and Rathore N S. Biogas production, management and utilization. Himanshu
Publications, Delhi, 1992.
31) Mittal K.M. Biogas systems: Principles and Applications. New Age International (P)
Limited, New Delhi, 1996.
32) Khandelwal K C and Mandi S S. Biogas Technology: A Practical Handbook. Tata McGraw-
Hill Publishing Company Ltd., New Delhi, 1986.
33) Vijay V K. Studies on utilization of biogas for improved performance of duel fuel engine. M
E (Ag.) Thesis. CTAE. Ud;aipur, 1989.
34) Golmakani, A.; Wadi, B,Manovi ́c, V.; Nabavi, S.A.Comparative Evaluation of PSA,PVSA,
and Twin PSA Processes for Biogas Upgrading: The Purity, Recovery, and Energy
Consumption Dilemma. Energies 2023, 16, 6840. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16196840
35) Grande, C.A.; Rodrigues, A.E. Layered Vacuum Pressure-Swing Adsorption for Biogas
Upgrading. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2007, 46,7844–7848. [CrossRef]
36) Hemlata U. Karne1*, Aftab A. Sharif1 https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf /202340502002
37) Z. Trad, J. Fontaine, C. Larroche, C. Vial, Renew. Energy 98, 264-282 (2016).
38) 2. N. Kythreotor, G. Florides, S. Tassou, Renew. Energy 71, 701-714 (2014).
39) S. Iqbal, S. Rahaman, M. Rahman, A. Yousuf, Procedia Eng. 90, 657-662 (2014).
40) 4. Z. Yong, Y. Dong, X. Zhang, T. Tan, Renew. Energy 78, 527-530 (2015).
41) 5. N. Curry, P. Pillay, Renew. Energy 41, 200-209 (2012).
42) 6. M. Ellacuriaga, J. G. Cascallana, X. Gomez, Fules. 2, 144-167 (2021).
43) 7. M. Krishania, V. Kumar, V. Vijay, A. Malik, Fuel 106, 1-9 (2013).
44) https://patents.goog;le.com/patent/US20180112142A1/en
45) https://patents.google.com/patent/WO2008115079A1/en
46) Communication in Physical Sciences 2020, 5(4): 619-62
https://journalcps.com/index.php/volumes
47) Santos, M., Grande, C., & Rodrigues, A. (2013). Dynamic study of the pressure swing
adsorption process for biogas upgrading and its responses to feed disturbances. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 52(15), pp. 5445-5454.
48) Lin, Y., Wang, D., Liang, J., & Li, G. (2012). Mesophilic anaerobic co-digestion of pulp and
paper sludge and food waste for methane production in a fed-batch basis. In Environmental
Technology. Taylor and Francis. pp. 2627-2633.
49) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322205567_Energy_Evaluation_and_Qualitative_A
nalysis_of_Biogas_Produced_from_Co-Digesting_Kitchen_Waste_and_Cow_Dung
50) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/375831510_Modelling_simulation_and_optimizatio
n_of_domestic_and_agricultural_wastes-based_anaerobic_digestion_using_Aspen_Plus
51) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.128963
52) https://doi.org/10.48048/tis.2021.1410
53) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/336348584_Study_of_Upgradation_Technologies_t
o_Treat_Biogas_from_Spentwash_to_BioCNG
54) McKinsey, S. Z. (2003). Removal of Hydrogen Sulphide from Biogas using cow-manure
compost. A Thesis Faculty of the Graduate School of Cornell University.
55) 31. Karellas S, Boukis I, Kontopoulos G (2010) Development of an investment decision tool
for biogas production from agricultural waste. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 14:1273–1282.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.12.002
56) Sahu N, Sharma A, Mishra P et al (2017) Evaluation of biogas production potential of kitchen
waste in the presence of. Waste Manage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.08.045
57) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/352302593_Anaerobic_co-
digestion_of_kitchen_waste_and_animal_manure_a_review_of_operating_parameters_inhibit
ing_factors_and_pretreatment_with_their_impact_on_process_performancespices.
58) Gkotsis P et al., Biogas upgrading technologies e Recent advances in membrane-based
processes, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.10.228
59) Grim RG, Huang Z, Guarnieri MT, Ferrell JR, Tao L, Schaidle JA. Transforming the carbon
economy: challenges and opportunities in the convergence of low-cost electricity and
reductive CO2 utilization. Energy Environ Sci 2020;13:472e94.
https://doi.org/10.1039/C9EE02410G.
60) https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342544266_Investigation_of_the_impacts_of_gasol
ine_biogas_and_LPG_fuels_on_engine_performance_and_exhaust_emissions_in_different_t
hrottle_positions_on_SI_engine/citations