Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biogas generation from kitchen and vegetable waste in replacement of traditional method and its future forecasting by using ARIMA model

  • Article
  • Published:
Waste Disposal & Sustainable Energy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nowadays, traditional energy resources are going into a vulnerable condition gradually. On that note biogas is an emerging subsidiary solution. Generally, cow-dung is used as a basic raw material to produce biogas. In this study, various forms of putrescible waste like kitchen and vegetable waste were giving emphasis to produce biogas as a replacement of cow dung as well as good management of putrescible waste. 2000 kg of kitchen and 1050 kg of vegetable waste were used in a biogas plant continuously for 15 days with a waste/water ratio of 1:1.5. Average 133.33 kg of kitchen and 70 kg of vegetable waste generated 2.27 kg and 1.17 kg of biogas per day respectively. Moreover, the average time of burning of biogas for kitchen and vegetable waste was 7.92 h. and 4.08 h. per day in some respects. The benefit–cost ratio was greater than 1 for both cases that’s why it can be reckoned as an efficacious process. Autoregressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model was performed to forecast the amount of biogas generation for kitchen and vegetable waste for the next 10 years. The residual sum of square (RSS) value of the ARIMA model for kitchen and vegetable waste was 0.028437 and 0.139524 respectively which indicates accuracy. Finally, predictions of the amount of biogas generation are plotted with a 95% confidence interval. The forecast indicates that biogas from kitchen waste is more proficient than vegetable waste for the next 10 years. So, this putrescible waste can be a prominent raw material for next-gen biogas production.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(Source: Google Earth)

Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abubakar, B.S.U.I., and Ismail, N. 2012. Anaerobic digestion of cow dung for biogas production. ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences 2012: 5.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gielen, D., Boshell, F., Saygin, D., et al. 2019. The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy Strategy Review. 24: 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Miyajima, T., Wada, E., Hanba, Y.T., et al. 1997. Anaerobic mineralization of indigenous organic matters and methanogenesis in tropical wetland soils. Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta. 61 (17): 3739–3751. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7037(97)00189-0.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Neshat, S.A., Mohammadi, M., Najafpour, G.D., et al. 2017. Anaerobic co-digestion of animal manures and lignocellulosic residues as a potent approach for sustainable biogas production. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 79: 308–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.137.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Ahmed, M.A., Roy, P., Al Bari, A., et al. 2019. Conversion of cow dung to biogas as renewable energy through mesophilic anaerobic digestion by using silica gel as catalyst. In International Conference on Mechanical Engineering and Renewable Energy 2019 (ICMERE2019). CUET, Chittagong, 11-13 December, 2019.

  6. Nasini, L., De Luca, G., Ricci, A., et al. 2016. Gas emissions during olive mill waste composting under static pile conditions. International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation. 107: 70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2015.11.001.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Harun, N., Hassan, Z., Zainol, N., et al. 2019. Anaerobic digestion process of food waste for biogas production: a simulation approach. Chemical Engineering and Technology. 42 (9): 1834–1839. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.201800637.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Krishna, D., and Kalamdhad, A.S. 2014. Pre-treatment and anaerobic digestion of food waste for high rate methane production—a review. Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering. 2 (3): 1821–1830. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2014.07.024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Vavilin, V.A., Rytow, S.V., and Lokshina, L.Y. 1995. Modelling hydrogen partial pressure change as a result of competition between the butyric and propionic groups of acidogenic bacteria. Bioresource Technology. 54 (2): 171–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-8524(95)00127-1.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ahmed, M.R., Hossain, M.A., and Islam, M.N. 2017. Prediction of solid waste generation rate and determination of future waste characteristics at south-western region of Bangladesh using artificial neural network. WasteSafe KUET, Khulna, Bangladesh, 25-27 February 2017, pp. 24–26.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Afroz, R., Hanaki, K., and Tudin, R. 2011. Factors affecting waste generation: A study in a waste management program in Dhaka City. Bangladesh. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment. 179 (1–4): 509–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-010-1753-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Adi, A.J., and Noor, Z.M. 2009. Waste recycling: utilization of coffee grounds and kitchen waste in vermicomposting. Bioresource Technology. 100 (2): 1027–1030. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2008.07.024.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Alvarez, R., and Lidén, G. 2008. Semi-continuous co-digestion of solid slaughterhouse waste, manure, and fruit and vegetable waste. Renewable Energy. 33 (4): 726–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2007.05.001.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Bouallagui, H., Ben Cheikh, R., Marouani, L., et al. 2003. Mesophilic biogas production from fruit and vegetable waste in a tubular digester. Bioresource Technology. 86 (1): 85–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(02)00097-4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Yasar, A., Nazir, S., Tabinda, A.B., et al. 2017. Socio-economic, health and agriculture benefits of rural household biogas plants in energy scarce developing countries: a case study from Pakistan. Renewable Energy. 108: 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2017.02.044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Poeschl, M., Ward, S., and Owende, P. 2012. Environmental impacts of biogas deployment—part I: life cycle inventory for evaluation of production process emissions to air. Journal of Cleaner Production. 24: 168–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.10.039.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhang, P.G. 2003. Time series forecasting using a hybrid ARIMA and neural network model. Neurocomputing. 50: 159–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-2312(01)00702-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pai, P.F., and Lin, C.S. 2005. A hybrid ARIMA and support vector machines model in stock price forecasting. Omega. 33 (6): 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2004.07.024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Sirdah, M.M., Laham, N.A.A., and Madhoun, R.A.E. 2013. Possible health effects of liquefied petroleum gas on workers at filling and distribution stations of Gaza governorates. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal. 19 (3): 289–294. https://doi.org/10.26719/2013.19.3.289 .

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Paolini, V., Petracchini, F., Segreto, M., et al. 2018. Environmental impact of biogas: A short review of current knowledge. Journal of Environmental Science and Health Part A Toxic/Hazardous Substances and Environmental Engineering. 53 (10): 899–906. https://doi.org/10.1080/10934529.2018.1459076.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Odngam, S., Khaewnak, N., Dolwichai, T., et al. 2014. A comparative study on gasoline, LPG and biogas affecting the dynamic responses of SI engine. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering. 309: 927-932. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-55038-6_140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kougias, P.G., and Angelidaki, I. 2018. Biogas and its opportunities—a review. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering. 12 (3): 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-018-1037-8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Graciano, V., Vargas, J.V.C., and Ordonez, J.C. 2016. Modeling and simulation of diesel, biodiesel and biogas mixtures driven compression ignition internal combustion engines. International Journal of Energy Research. 40 (1): 100–111. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.3286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pipatmanomai, S., Kaewluan, S., and Vitidsant, T. 2009. Economic assessment of biogas-to-electricity generation system with H2S removal by activated carbon in small pig farm. Applied Energy. 86 (5): 669–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.07.007.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Mussoline, W., Esposito, G., Lens, P., et al. 2012. Design considerations for a farm-scale biogas plant based on pilot-scale anaerobic digesters loaded with rice straw and piggery wastewater. Biomass and Bioenergy. 46: 469–478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.07.013.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. LGED. 2019. Design of Biogas Plant, Dhaka. Available at: https://sswm.info/sites/default/files/reference_attachments/BRC%20ny%20Design%20Biogas%20Plant.pdf. Accessed 10 Aug 2020.

  27. Ahmed, T., Uddin, J., and Kobayashi, A. 2014. Dairy cattle’s contribution to biogas production and farmers’ livelihood. Japanese Journal of Farm Management 52 (3): 89–94. https://doi.org/10.11300/fmsj.52.3_89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author expresses the profound gratitude, indebtedness and heartiest thanks to honorable Dr. Ganesh Chandra Saha, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Dhaka University of Engineering & Technology (DUET), for his valuable and patient advice, sympathetic assistance, constant encouragement, guidance, co-operation and supervision of all stages of the project work. The author also wants to give a special to the staffs from four different residential halls as well as the people who helped to complete this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Dhaka International University, Dhaka, Bangladesh

    Pranta Roy & Md. Hakimuzzaman Shah

  2. Ingram School of Engineering, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX, 78666, USA

    Md. Ashik Ahmed

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, Khulna University of Engineering and Technology, Khulna, Bangladesh

    Pranta Roy & Md. Ashik Ahmed

Authors
  1. Pranta Roy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Md. Ashik Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Md. Hakimuzzaman Shah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Md. Ashik Ahmed.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors also declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roy, P., Ahmed, M.A. & Shah, M.H. Biogas generation from kitchen and vegetable waste in replacement of traditional method and its future forecasting by using ARIMA model. Waste Dispos. Sustain. Energy 3, 165–175 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42768-021-00070-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42768-021-00070-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation