IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i12p4506-d186537.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biohydrogen Production from Food Waste: Influence of the Inoculum-To-Substrate Ratio

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanna Cappai

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, P.za D’Armi 1, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

  • Giorgia De Gioannis

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, P.za D’Armi 1, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

  • Aldo Muntoni

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, P.za D’Armi 1, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

  • Daniela Spiga

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture, University of Cagliari, P.za D’Armi 1, 09123 Cagliari, Italy)

  • Maria Rosaria Boni

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Roma, Italy)

  • Alessandra Polettini

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Roma, Italy)

  • Raffaella Pomi

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Roma, Italy)

  • Andreina Rossi

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Via Eudossiana 18, 00184 Roma, Italy)

Abstract

In this study, the influence of the inoculum-to-substrate ratio (ISR) on dark fermentative hydrogen production from food waste (FW) was evaluated. ISR values ranging from 0.05 to 0.25 g VS inoculum /g VS substrate were investigated by performing batch tests at T = 39 °C and pH = 6.5, the latter being the optimal value identified based on a previous study. The ISR was found to affect the fermentation process, clearly showing that an adequate ISR is essential in order to optimise the process kinetics and the H 2 yield. An ISR of 0.14 proved to optimum, leading to a maximum H 2 yield of 88.8 L H 2 /kg VS FW and a maximum production rate of 10.8 L H 2 /kg VS FW ∙h. The analysis of the fermentation products indicated that the observed highest H 2 production mostly derived from the typical acetate/butyrate-type fermentation.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanna Cappai & Giorgia De Gioannis & Aldo Muntoni & Daniela Spiga & Maria Rosaria Boni & Alessandra Polettini & Raffaella Pomi & Andreina Rossi, 2018. "Biohydrogen Production from Food Waste: Influence of the Inoculum-To-Substrate Ratio," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4506-:d:186537
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4506/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/12/4506/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Costa, J.C. & Oliveira, J.V. & Alves, M.M., 2016. "Response surface design to study the influence of inoculum, particle size and inoculum to substrate ratio on the methane production from Ulex sp," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB), pages 1071-1077.
    2. Zhang, Cunsheng & Su, Haijia & Baeyens, Jan & Tan, Tianwei, 2014. "Reviewing the anaerobic digestion of food waste for biogas production," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 383-392.
    3. Stanislaus, Mishma S. & Zhang, Nan & Yuan, Yue & Zheng, Hanying & Zhao, Chenyu & Hu, Xiaohong & Zhu, Qi & Yang, Yingnan, 2018. "Improvement of biohydrogen production by optimization of pretreatment method and substrate to inoculum ratio from microalgal biomass and digested sludge," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 670-677.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. D’ Silva, Tinku Casper & Isha, Adya & Chandra, Ram & Vijay, Virendra Kumar & Subbarao, Paruchuri Mohan V. & Kumar, Ritunesh & Chaudhary, Ved Prakash & Singh, Harjit & Khan, Abid Ali & Tyagi, Vinay Kum, 2021. "Enhancing methane production in anaerobic digestion through hydrogen assisted pathways – A state-of-the-art review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    2. Lirio María Reyna-Gómez & Carlos Eduardo Molina-Guerrero & Juan Manuel Alfaro & Santiago Iván Suárez Vázquez & Armando Robledo-Olivo & Arquímedes Cruz-López, 2019. "Effect of Carbon/Nitrogen Ratio, Temperature, and Inoculum Source on Hydrogen Production from Dark Codigestion of Fruit Peels and Sewage Sludge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-13, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abhinav Choudhury & Stephanie Lansing, 2019. "Methane and Hydrogen Sulfide Production from Co-Digestion of Gummy Waste with a Food Waste, Grease Waste, and Dairy Manure Mixture," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-12, November.
    2. Zhang, Jingxin & Li, Wangliang & Lee, Jonathan & Loh, Kai-Chee & Dai, Yanjun & Tong, Yen Wah, 2017. "Enhancement of biogas production in anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and waste activated sludge by biological co-pretreatment," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 479-486.
    3. Senghor, A. & Dioh, R.M.N. & Müller, C. & Youm, I., 2017. "Cereal crops for biogas production: A review of possible impact of elevated CO2," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 548-554.
    4. Li, Yangyang & Jin, Yiying & Li, Hailong & Borrion, Aiduan & Yu, Zhixin & Li, Jinhui, 2018. "Kinetic studies on organic degradation and its impacts on improving methane production during anaerobic digestion of food waste," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 136-147.
    5. Pérez-Rodríguez, N. & García-Bernet, D. & Domínguez, J.M., 2017. "Extrusion and enzymatic hydrolysis as pretreatments on corn cob for biogas production," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 597-603.
    6. Sun, Chihe & Xia, Ao & Liao, Qiang & Fu, Qian & Huang, Yun & Zhu, Xun, 2019. "Life-cycle assessment of biohythane production via two-stage anaerobic fermentation from microalgae and food waste," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 395-410.
    7. A. Sinan Akturk & Goksel N. Demirer, 2020. "Improved Food Waste Stabilization and Valorization by Anaerobic Digestion Through Supplementation of Conductive Materials and Trace Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-11, June.
    8. Zhang, Jingxin & Hu, Qiang & Qu, Yiyuan & Dai, Yanjun & He, Yiliang & Wang, Chi-Hwa & Tong, Yen Wah, 2020. "Integrating food waste sorting system with anaerobic digestion and gasification for hydrogen and methane co-production," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 257(C).
    9. Awasthi, Mukesh Kumar & Ferreira, Jorge A. & Sirohi, Ranjna & Sarsaiya, Surendra & Khoshnevisan, Benyamin & Baladi, Samin & Sindhu, Raveendran & Binod, Parameswaran & Pandey, Ashok & Juneja, Ankita & , 2021. "A critical review on the development stage of biorefinery systems towards the management of apple processing-derived waste," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    10. Salah Jellali & Yassine Charabi & Muhammad Usman & Abdullah Al-Badi & Mejdi Jeguirim, 2021. "Investigations on Biogas Recovery from Anaerobic Digestion of Raw Sludge and Its Mixture with Agri-Food Wastes: Application to the Largest Industrial Estate in Oman," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-20, March.
    11. Zhang, Cunsheng & Kang, Xinxin & Wang, Fenghuan & Tian, Yufei & Liu, Tao & Su, Yanyan & Qian, Tingting & Zhang, Yifeng, 2020. "Valorization of food waste for cost-effective reducing sugar recovery in a two-stage enzymatic hydrolysis platform," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    12. Kim, Jung-Hun & Oh, Jeong-Ik & Tsang, Yiu Fai & Park, Young-Kwon & Lee, Jechan & Kwon, Eilhann E., 2020. "CO2-assisted catalytic pyrolysis of digestate with steel slag," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    13. Jasmine Sie Ming Tiong & Yi Jing Chan & Jun Wei Lim & Mardawani Mohamad & Chii-Dong Ho & Anisa Ur Rahmah & Worapon Kiatkittipong & Wipoo Sriseubsai & Izumi Kumakiri, 2021. "Simulation and Optimization of Anaerobic Co-Digestion of Food Waste with Palm Oil Mill Effluent for Biogas Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-22, December.
    14. Wang, Haoqi & Zhang, Siduo & Bi, Xiaotao & Clift, Roland, 2020. "Greenhouse gas emission reduction potential and cost of bioenergy in British Columbia, Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    15. Baena-Moreno, Francisco M. & Sebastia-Saez, Daniel & Pastor-Pérez, Laura & Reina, Tomas Ramirez, 2021. "Analysis of the potential for biogas upgrading to syngas via catalytic reforming in the United Kingdom," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    16. Mancini, Enrico & Tian, Hailin & Angelidaki, Irini & Fotidis, Ioannis A., 2021. "The implications of using organic-rich industrial wastewater as biomethanation feedstocks," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    17. Chen, Ting & Shen, Dongsheng & Jin, Yiying & Li, Hailong & Yu, Zhixin & Feng, Huajun & Long, Yuyang & Yin, Jun, 2017. "Comprehensive evaluation of environ-economic benefits of anaerobic digestion technology in an integrated food waste-based methane plant using a fuzzy mathematical model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 208(C), pages 666-677.
    18. Shi, Yi & Xu, Jiuping, 2023. "A multi-objective approach to kitchen waste and excess sludge co-digestion for biomethane production with anaerobic digestion," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 262(PA).
    19. Ganzoury, Mohamed A. & Allam, Nageh K., 2015. "Impact of nanotechnology on biogas production: A mini-review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1392-1404.
    20. Di Maria, Francesco & Sisani, Federico & Contini, Stefano, 2018. "Are EU waste-to-energy technologies effective for exploiting the energy in bio-waste?," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 230(C), pages 1557-1572.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:12:p:4506-:d:186537. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.