EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

An Evaluation of Biogas Potential of Cassava, Yam and Plantain Peel Mixtures Using Theoretical Models and Hohenheim Biogas Yield Test-Based Experiments

Joseph Yankyera Kusi (), Florian Empl, Ralf Müller, Stefan Pelz, Jens Poetsch, Gregor Sailer, Rainer Kirchhof, Nana Sarfo Agyemang Derkyi and Francis Attiogbe
Additional contact information
Joseph Yankyera Kusi: Regional Centre of Energy and Environmental Sustainability (RCEES), University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani P.O. Box 214, Ghana
Florian Empl: Hochschule für Forstwirtschaft Rottenburg, Schadenweiler Hof, 72108 Rottenburg, Germany
Ralf Müller: Hochschule für Forstwirtschaft Rottenburg, Schadenweiler Hof, 72108 Rottenburg, Germany
Stefan Pelz: Hochschule für Forstwirtschaft Rottenburg, Schadenweiler Hof, 72108 Rottenburg, Germany
Jens Poetsch: Hochschule für Forstwirtschaft Rottenburg, Schadenweiler Hof, 72108 Rottenburg, Germany
Gregor Sailer: State Institute of Agricultural Engineering and Bioenergy, University of Hohenheim, Garbenstraße 9, 70599 Stuttgart, Germany
Rainer Kirchhof: Hochschule für Forstwirtschaft Rottenburg, Schadenweiler Hof, 72108 Rottenburg, Germany
Nana Sarfo Agyemang Derkyi: Regional Centre of Energy and Environmental Sustainability (RCEES), University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani P.O. Box 214, Ghana
Francis Attiogbe: Regional Centre of Energy and Environmental Sustainability (RCEES), University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani P.O. Box 214, Ghana

Energies, 2025, vol. 18, issue 4, 1-17

Abstract: This research aimed to evaluate the comparative biogas yields of waste (peels) of selected fibrous materials from the West African region: cassava, plantain, a mixture of cassava, plantain and yam. Three models: The Boyle model, the Modified Boyle’s model, and the Buswell and Müller’s model were used to determine the theoretical maximum biomethane potentials (TMBP), while the Hohenheim Biogas Yield test (D-HBT) was used to undertake a batch test of anaerobic digestion. The samples were co-digested with digested sewage sludge (DSS) for 39 days, with an operating temperature of 37 ± 0.5 °C. The study draws comparisons between the TBMPs and the experimental results, the experimental results of the different substrates, and the experimental results and figures reported in the literature. From the experimental results, plantain peels had the highest biogas yield (468 ± 72 mL/g oTS ), followed by a mixture of yam, cassava and plantain peels (362 ± 31 mL/g oTS ) and cassava peels obtained the least biogas yield (218 ± 19 mL/g oTS ). TMBPS of 204.04, 209.03 and 217.45 CH 4 mL/g oTS were obtained for plantain peels, a mixture of yam, cassava and plantain peels and cassava peels, respectively, evaluated using Boyle’s model. For all the samples, the TMBPS (205.56, 209.03 and 218.45 CH 4 mL /g oTS , respectively) obtained using the Buswell and Mueller model were slightly higher than those obtained by both the Boyle and the modified Boyle’s model (163.23, 167.22 and 174.76 CH 4 mL/g oTS , respectively). While the study result is sufficient to imply that generating biogas from fibrous waste materials in its mixture form is a valuable approach, it is not sufficient to conclude that the use of these waste materials in its naturally occurring mixture form has a technical added advantage in co-digestion over their individual potential. However, future studies could explore this possibility with different fractions of the mixture with a view to optimising generation. The study finds that theoretically modelling the biogas potential of fibrous materials is a good method for biogas evaluation despite having overestimation tendencies, as this challenge could be corrected by applying factors that result in these tendencies, biodegradability indices. The data can, therefore, find use in fibrous waste treatment and waste-to-energy technologies, especially in Africa. This application will not be negatively affected by whether single water streams are used or their mixture.

Keywords: fibrous biomass materials; digested sewage sludge; anaerobic digestion; waste-to-energy; waste treatment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/4/947/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/18/4/947/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:4:p:947-:d:1592476

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().

 
Page updated 2025-03-22
Handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:18:y:2025:i:4:p:947-:d:1592476