[Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 46

Björn Dahlroth bjorn.dahlroth at telia.com
Thu Oct 28 11:18:17 PDT 2010


Hello

It seems that salesmen are quite the same all over the world and in all
tradess. Their information has to be taken with many grains of salt.

Best regards

Björn Dahlroth

Sweden

 

  _____  

Från: digestion-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:digestion-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] För Anand Karve
Skickat: den 27 oktober 2010 05:05
Till: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
Ämne: Re: [Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 46

 

Dear Mr. Dahlroth,
At ARTI we collect the gas in a moving drum gas holder, which either floats
on water or on the fluid in the digester. By measuring the height to which
the gas holder has risen, we get a good daily estimate of the volume of the
biogas produced. I saw that in Wardha too the biogas was collected in a
floating drum gas holder, and I assume that that was how they measured the
biogas volume. The 400 cubic meters from 1000 kg was a value calculated from
the figures presented by a commerial firm in India in their advertisement.
This firm fabricates these system. Thus the 400 cubic meters refers neither
to the Wardha output of gas nor to the output of gas from an ARTI biogas
plant.

Yours

A.D.Karve

 

2010/10/26 Björn Dahlroth <bjorn.dahlroth at telia.com>

Hi everybody

Why not go back to the original source of information – that is the plant
itself - and check up the details. The story could be quite different or the
information incomplete from the very beginning.

Bjorn Dahlroth

Sweden

 


  _____  


Från: digestion-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:digestion-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] För Srinivas Kasulla
Skickat: den 26 oktober 2010 09:53
Till: digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org
Ämne: Re: [Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 46

 

Dear All,
Can anyone/or Dr Karve, please guide the list how the gas from wardha plant
or AARTHI's biogas plants is measured?
its really getting confused because earlier it was 540 cubic meter and now
its 400 cubic meter?
The gas generation can be cross checked with the gas measurement systems?



regards
srinivas kasulla

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 8:55 AM,
<digestion-request at lists.bioenergylists.org> wrote:

Send Digestion mailing list submissions to
       digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
 
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
       digestion-request at lists.bioenergylists.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
       digestion-owner at lists.bioenergylists.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Digestion digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40 (Markus Schlattmann)
  2. Re: gasyield indigenious cowdung (Amy and Jim Rankin)
  3. Re: gasyield indigenious cowdung (Anand Karve)
  4. Re: [work] Re:  Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40 (David)
  5. Re: [work] Re: Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40 (Anand Karve)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:28:47 +0200
From: Markus Schlattmann <firmen at schlattmann.de>
To: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
       <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: Re: [Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40
Message-ID: <4CC5E87F.5090702 at schlattmann.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"

Hi,

I still don't believe in those 540 m? from 1000 kg dung. Since we only
just know it "fresh dung", let's try to get a backwards look at it:

Let's say we have 540 m? biogas (dry gas, 0?C, 1013 mbar like literature
values in german tables, if we want to compare this to values given in
those tables).

Let's say we have 60% methane, 40% carbon dioxide (here it doesn't
matter anyway: it's not relevant if a C is in CH4 or in CO2)

So in those 540m? would be 24,1 kmole C.
This corresponds to a mass of about 289 kg.
Considering a C-Content of 43% TS this would lead to a 673 kg fresh matter.
Much to dry for anaerobic digestion.
And this estimation is already done considering ALL of the C from the
substrate (even including all lignin) would be in the biogas. (In own
investigations ~30% of dung material is degradable)

Please correct me, if you find an error.

In comparison in literature tables (e.g. FNR(2004)) is given:
cattle liquid manure, TS 8-11%, VS 75-82 %TS, gas yield: 20-30m? per t
fresh matter, 200-500m? per t VS, 60% CH4
cattle (dry) manure, TS ~25%, VS 68-67 %TS, gas yield: 40-50m? per t
fresh matter, 210-300m? per t VS, 60% CH4
this seems reasonable.

Also the values given by Klaus Peter Hankel in his post today fit into
those values:

indian bovine manure: 18% DS, 83% vDS, 300 l biogas/kgvDS, 60% CH4

Since those 540m? come from a batch digestion, I believe that there's a
higher gas yield per VS than in semi-continuous digestion, since there
is a long period with no addition od fresh, easily degradable matter. So
bacteria have the decision: "starve" or "eat lignin" :).
I also made this experience in own investigations of higher degredation
of fibers, but I don't think this effect is that big, even if the
digestion process is performed over 180 days (see estimation of C above).

If you should come across the original presentation again, please let me
know. I would be interested in the original values and the return of
investment calculations.

And coming back to P. Hankel's values (lets assume 1000 kg fresh matter):
1000 kg fresh matter
180 kg dry matter
77,4 kg C (assuming my value of 43%TS as given above)
149,4 kg volatile solids
with 300 l/kg VS leading to a total gas of 44,8 m? (in the range of
literature values given above)
44,8 m? Biogas corresponds to 24 kg C in the gas
24 kg in the gas is about 31% of C in the substrate (so this would
confirm my above value of about 30% degradation of dung material)
So these values make a perfect sense to me.


Best regards
Markus Schlattmann


Am 25.10.2010 16:42, schrieb Anand Karve:
> Dear Markus,
> it was the weight of fresh dung. Apparently, the system that I saw in
> Wardha was new to me, but not new in India. There already exists a
> commercial firm, which constructs similar systems. A colleague of mine
> showed me a recorded presentation of theirs. The presentation contains
> photographs of the system, tables showing return on investment, and
> data of biogas production. Their claims match those made by Centre of
> Science for Villages in Wardha. Dung contains enough carbon, but it is
> mainly in the form of lignin. Unless one assumes that somehow the
> lignin in the dung gets converted into biogas, one cannot explain the
> high biogas yield.
> Yours
> A.D.Karve
>
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Markus Schlattmann
> <firmen at schlattmann.de <mailto:firmen at schlattmann.de>> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     when you compare the yields based on fresh mass, are you sure
>     you're talking about the same "dung"?
>
>     Here in Central Europe cattle often are kept in stables leading to
>     liquid (~8%TS) manure.
>     In India perhaps "dung" is "dried dung"?
>     Generally, for comapring gas yields of substrates it's better to
>     compare gas yields based on VS, not fresh matter, since water
>     content may vary a lot.
>
>     I can't think that there's a production of 18 times more biogas if
>     we are talking about comparable dung. You may calculate/estimate a
>     C-Balance. If there's one loading, you can't get more C in CH4/CO2
>     out of the system than you have put into it with the
>     substrate/inoculum in the beginning.
>
>     Markus Schlattmann
>
>
>
>
>     Am 24.10.2010 11:31, schrieb Anand Karve:
>>     Dear Mr. Bapat,
>>     the biogas plant in Wardha, which accepts 1000 kg cattle dung as
>>     a one-time load and produces daily 3 cubic meter biogas
>>     continuously over a period of 180 days, was an absolutely novel
>>     system to me. In fact that is why I reported it, because I felt
>>     that somebody in the AD discussion group maight know more about
>>     it. Since neither the British scientists nor any of the Indian
>>     scientists present there could give a scientific explanation to
>>     this phenomenon, I have ventured a plausible explanation. The
>>     Archaea are a very ancient group of organisms. Lignin is produced
>>     by green plants, which evolved much later. Therefore the
>>     methanogens cannot digest lignin. The fact that in Wardha, this
>>     particular biogas plant was producing almost 18 times as much
>>     biogas as would be expected, can be explained by the assumption
>>     that lignin was being digested by some other organisms and the
>>     products of the lignin digesting organisms were being made
>>     available to the mehanogens. But the speculation that some
>>     species of organisms conduct extra-cellular digestion of
>>     cellulose or lignin, and make the products of such digestion
>>     available to the methanogens, is not acceptable to me, because if
>>     such were really the case, one would have used such organisms to
>>     produce sugars from lignocellulosic material and then obtained
>>     alcohol from these sugars. Since nobody has succeeded in doing
>>     this, I feel that the organisms that digest cellulose or lignin
>>     consume the sugars themselves and multiply their own numbers, and
>>     that the methanogens consume these microbes to produce methane. I
>>     am ready to accept any other explanation, if it is logical.
>>     Yours
>>     A.D.Karve
>>
>>     On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Sumedh Bapat
>>     <sumedh.bapat at gmail.com <mailto:sumedh.bapat at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>         Dear Dr. Karve,
>>         I am sorry to comment on this again but I cannot overlook the
>>         discrepancy in the information you have provided here..
>>         */ on October 17 you said : /*
>>         "In any case, once it is accepted that the methanogenic
>>         organisms do not digest the dung directly and that they need
>>         the help of other organisms to digest it, one cannot accept
>>         that dung is the food of the methanogens. It is like saying
>>         that manure applied to a field is human food, because through
>>         a number of biological processes it ultimately ends up into
>>         products, which the humans eat."
>>         */on October 24 you said : /*
>>         "According to text book knowledge, 1000 kg dung should have
>>         produced about 30,000 litres (or 30 cubic meters) biogas. But
>>         this particular biogas plant produces 540 cubic meters of it."
>>
>>         I also happen to notice that both the subjects refer to cow
>>         dung. Now it can be seen that you claim that some other plant
>>         is generating 540 times more gas than your plants.
>>         Do you mean that this 540 m3 gas that you saw, is produced by
>>         Methanogens which have consumed other similar organisms from
>>         the biogas plant , which in turn had "eaten" the Cpw Dung ?
>>         Can you please explain the sudden Biogas Generation manifold
>>         increase from 30 m3 (conventionally known) to 540 m3 ?
>>         /Again/ _ Can you please provide a basis for such a finding ?
>>         Kind Regards,
>>         Sumedh Bapat
>>
>>         On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 12:30 AM,
>>         <digestion-request at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>         <mailto:digestion-request at lists.bioenergylists.org>> wrote:
>>
>>             Send Digestion mailing list submissions to
>>             digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>
>>             To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>>
>>             or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>             digestion-request at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:digestion-request at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>
>>             You can reach the person managing the list at
>>             digestion-owner at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:digestion-owner at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>>
>>             When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is
>>             more specific
>>             than "Re: Contents of Digestion digest..."
>>
>>
>>             Today's Topics:
>>
>>               1. Re: Attachment to previous Article - More scientific
>>             based
>>                  research and questions (Anand Karve)
>>
>>
>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>             Message: 1
>>             Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 02:43:13 +0800
>>             From: Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com
>>             <mailto:adkarve at gmail.com>>
>>             To: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
>>             <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>>
>>             Subject: Re: [Digestion] Attachment to previous Article -
>>             More
>>                    scientific based research and questions
>>             Message-ID:
>>             <AANLkTi=qxog1xd-4Q9JOwVaNpL8S=Bgpc2n=JxY7R5a=@mail.gmail.com
<http://mail.gmail.com/> 
>>             <http://mail.gmail.com/>>
>>             Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>>
>>             Dear Dr. Martin,
>>             I have just returned from a city called Wardha, where I
>>             attended a workshop
>>             arranged jointly by the Research Councils of UK and the
>>             Department of
>>             Science and Technology, Government of India. About 20
>>             scientists each from
>>             UK and India were invited to this meeting.
>>             In the course of field visits organised during the
>>             workshop, Dr. Soham
>>             Pandya, The Director of Centre of Science for Villages,
>>             an NGO in Wardha,
>>             showed us an amazing biogas plant on his campus. This
>>             biogas plant accepts
>>             about 1000 kg cattle dung as a one-time load and produces
>>             daily about 3
>>             cubic meters of biogas, continuously over a period of
>>             about 180 days.  This
>>             is not the only biogas plant constructed by him. Using
>>             funds from the
>>             Department of Science and Technology, He has constructed
>>             a similar biogas
>>             plant in another place called Hingoli, where a one-time
>>             load  of 1000 kg
>>             dung yields biogas continuously for 6 months, to run an
>>             electricity
>>             generator for daily 3 to 4 hours, to provide electric
>>             lighting to all the
>>             houses in the village.  Officials of the Department of
>>             Science and
>>             Technology vouched for the veracity of these claims.
>>             According to text book
>>             knowledge, 1000 kg dung should have produced about 30,000
>>             litres (or 30
>>             cubic meters) biogas. But this particular biogas plant
>>             produces 540 cubic
>>             meters of it.
>>             Neither Dr. Pandya nor any other scientist could give a
>>             scientific explanation to this phenomenally high yield of
>>             biogas. Dung of
>>             Indian cattle consists mainly of lignin (from the veins
>>             and midribs of the
>>             grass and leaves that they feed on) and micro-organisms.
>>             One has to assume
>>             in this case, that there are microbes in the dung that
>>             feed on the lignin
>>             and that the methanogens digested the lignin eating microbes.
>>             Yours
>>             A.D.Karve
>>
>>             On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Duncan Martin
>>             <duncanjmartin at gmail.com
>>             <mailto:duncanjmartin at gmail.com>>wrote:
>>
>>             > Perhaps Dr Karve & I should agree to disagree?
>>             >
>>             > To argue that dung is not food for the methanogens
>>             because they need help
>>             > to digest it is really a semantic quibble. It misses
>>             the point I was
>>             > responding to - that the digestion process is not
>>             *completed *by the act
>>             > of defaecation, it is merely *terminated* for the owner
>>             of the gut in
>>             > question.
>>             >
>>             > I have never seen any serious literature suggesting
>>             that microbes are
>>             > altruistic. However, the principles of commensalism are
>>             well established and
>>             > I see no basis for dismissing them. Moreover, the
>>             complex web of metabolic
>>             > interactions in AD has been extensively researched and
>>             is pretty well
>>             > understood - though I am sure there is more to discover.
>>             >
>>             > Nor have I seen any literature whatsoever suggesting
>>             that the methanogens
>>             > consume other microorganisms. I would be intrigued to
>>             see a proposed
>>             > mechanism.
>>             >
>>             > To dismiss all the textbooks as wrong (see previous
>>             postings) is unhelpful,
>>             > at best. Who could only say that unless he had read
>>             every one of them? Of
>>             > course, there are mistakes - even in the best books -
>>             if only because
>>             > science moves on, so any book becomes outdated. And
>>             there are indeed some
>>             > layman's guides to AD that include some odd ideas - but
>>             who would take them
>>             > as serious guides to the science?
>>             >
>>             > When we find such errors, let us use this forum to
>>             report them - giving
>>             > exact references. But lets not confuse newcomers to the
>>             field by dismissing
>>             > every other source of information as rubbish.
>>             >
>>             > Finally, let us accept that each of us is entitled to
>>             his opinion - but
>>             > lets reserve this forum for the fruits of practical
>>             experience and
>>             > evidence-based information.
>>             >
>>             > I suggest we draw a line under the present debate.
>>             >
>>             > Duncan Martin, PhD, MCIWM, MIChemE, MIEI
>>             > Cloughjordan Ecovillage
>>             > Ireland
>>             >
>>             > On 17 October 2010 16:39, Anand Karve
>>             <adkarve at gmail.com <mailto:adkarve at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>             >
>>             >> Dear Duncan,
>>             >> I dont believe in the theory of a chain of
>>             micro-organisms, with one
>>             >> species converting the cellulose into glucose, another
>>             converting the
>>             >> glucose into an organic acid (e.g. citric acid), still
>>             another converting
>>             >> the organic acid into acetic acid and ultimately the
>>             acetic acid being
>>             >> converted by the methanogenic organisms into carbon
>>             dioxide and methane. If
>>             >> this were true, one would have by now isolated the
>>             organism that converted
>>             >> cellulose into glucose and used the glucose to produce
>>             alcohol. Cellulose is
>>             >> the most ubiquitously found organic compount in the
>>             world and with this
>>             >> simple process, one would have produced unlimited
>>             quantity of liquid fuel.
>>             >> But even today, the conversion of cellulose into
>>             glucose is achieved in any
>>             >> industrial process by using a cellulolytic enzyme
>>             extracted from a
>>             >> cellulolytic organism. The reason for this is, that
>>             the glucose converted by
>>             >> the organism from cellulose is consumed by the same
>>             organism. And once it is
>>             >> consumed by an organism, it is converted into its cell
>>             all the way down to
>>             >> carbon dioxide. The micro-organisms in the gut of an
>>             animal cannot be
>>             >> expected to be so altruistic as to predigest the food
>>             and suply it to the
>>             >> methanogens. I feel that the methanogenic organisms
>>             consume the fellow
>>             >> micro-organisms in the gut of animals and digest them
>>             to produce methane and
>>             >> carbon dioxide. Such dog-eat-dog reactions occur also
>>             in the soil supplied
>>             >> with organic matter.
>>             >>         In any case, once it is accepted that the
>>             methanogenic organisms
>>             >> do not digest the dung directly and that they need the
>>             help of other
>>             >> organisms to digest it, one cannot accept that dung is
>>             the food of the
>>             >> methanogens. It is like saying that manure applied to
>>             a field is human food,
>>             >> because through a number of biological processes it
>>             ultimately ends up into
>>             >> products, which the humans eat.
>>             >> Yours
>>             >> A.D.Karve
>>             >>   On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 4:27 PM, Duncan Martin
>>             <duncanjmartin at gmail.com <mailto:duncanjmartin at gmail.com>
>>             >> > wrote:
>>             >>
>>             >>>
>>             >>> Yes, the gut methanogens do, in a sense, eat what the
>>             animal eats.
>>             >>> However, it would be more accurate to say that their
>>             diet is derived from
>>             >>> what the animal eats. The methanogens in the gut of a
>>             cow are surrounded by
>>             >>> celluose and other biopolymers but they cannot digest
>>             them. They live on the
>>             >>> waste products of other microbial processes. The web
>>             of metabolic
>>             >>> interactions is well known.
>>             >>>
>>             >>> Where I would "hoot out" Dr Karve is his belief that
>>             dung cannot serve as
>>             >>> food for the methanogens because they are "thrown
>>             out" of the body along
>>             >>> with the dung. I don't understand the logic here.
>>             >>>
>>             >>>
>>             >>>
>>             >> _______________________________________________
>>             >> Digestion mailing list
>>             >>
>>             >> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>             >> Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:Digestion at bioenergylists.org>
>>             >>
>>             >> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the
>>             web page
>>             >>
>>             >>
>>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>>             >>
>>             >> for more information about digestion, see
>>             >> Beginner's Guide to Biogas
>>             >> http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
>>             >> and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>>             >>
>>             >>
>>             >>
>>             >
>>             > _______________________________________________
>>             > Digestion mailing list
>>             >
>>             > to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>             > Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:Digestion at bioenergylists.org>
>>             >
>>             > to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web
>>             page
>>             >
>>             >
>>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>>             >
>>             > for more information about digestion, see
>>             > Beginner's Guide to Biogas
>>             > http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
>>             > and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>>             >
>>             >
>>             >
>>
>>
>>             --
>>             ***
>>             Dr. A.D. Karve
>>             President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
>>
>>             *Please change my email address in your records to:
>>             adkarve at gmail.com <mailto:adkarve at gmail.com> *
>>             -------------- next part --------------
>>             An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>>             URL:
>>
<http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.or
g/attachments/20101024/49a74dc6/attachment-0001.html>
>>
>>             ------------------------------
>>
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             Digestion mailing list
>>
>>             to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>             Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>>             <mailto:Digestion at bioenergylists.org>
>>
>>             to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>>
>>             for more information about digestion, see
>>             Beginner's Guide to Biogas
>>             http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
>>             and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>             End of Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40
>>             ****************************************
>>
>>
>>
>>         _______________________________________________
>>         Digestion mailing list
>>
>>         to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>         Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>>         <mailto:Digestion at bioenergylists.org>
>>
>>         to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>>
>>         for more information about digestion, see
>>         Beginner's Guide to Biogas
>>         http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
>>         and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     --
>>     ***
>>     Dr. A.D. Karve
>>     President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
>>
>>     *Please change my email address in your records to:
>>     adkarve at gmail.com <mailto:adkarve at gmail.com> *
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Digestion mailing list
>>
>>     to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>>     Digestion at bioenergylists.org  <mailto:Digestion at bioenergylists.org>
>>
>>     to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>>
>>     for more information about digestion, see
>>     Beginner's Guide to Biogas
>>     http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
>>     and the Biogas Wikihttp://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>>
>
>
>     --
>
>     Mit freundlichen Gr??en,
>     Markus Schlattmann
>
>     --------------------------------------
>     schlattmann sustainables
>     schlattmann.de <http://schlattmann.de/>   <http://schlattmann.de/>
>
>     Dipl.-Ing. agr. Markus Schlattmann
>     Gr?nseiboldsdorfer Weg 5
>     85416 Langenbach
>
>     Tel.: +49 (0)8761 72162-60
>     Fax.: +49 (0)8761 72162-61
>
>     E-Mail: firmen at schlattmann de
>     Web:www.schlattmann.de <http://www.schlattmann.de/>
<http://www.schlattmann.de/>
>     -------------------------------------
>
>     Die Informationen in dieser E-Mail und im Anhang sind vertraulich und
>     nur f?r den/die benannten Empf?nger bestimmt. ?ffnen, Nutzen oder
>     Verbreiten durch unautorisierte Personen ist untersagt. Falls Sie
nicht
>     der Empf?nger oder eine entsprechend autorisierte Person sind,
>     informieren Sie bitte den Absender und vernichten Sie die Nachricht.
>
>
>     The information in this email and in any attachment is confidential
and
>     intended only for the attention and use of the recipient(s) as
>     addressed. It must not be disclosed, used or disseminated by any
>     unauthorized person. If you are not the intended recipient or
>     accordingly authorized, please contact the sender and delete the
>     message.
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Digestion mailing list
>
>     to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
>     Digestion at bioenergylists.org <mailto:Digestion at bioenergylists.org>
>
>     to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>
>     for more information about digestion, see
>     Beginner's Guide to Biogas
>     http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
>     and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> ***
> Dr. A.D. Karve
> President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)
>
> *Please change my email address in your records to: adkarve at gmail.com
> <mailto:adkarve at gmail.com> *
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digestion mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>
> for more information about digestion, see
> Beginner's Guide to Biogas
> http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
> and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>


--

Mit freundlichen Gr??en,
Markus Schlattmann

--------------------------------------
schlattmann sustainables
schlattmann.de <http://schlattmann.de/> 

Dipl.-Ing. agr. Markus Schlattmann
Gr?nseiboldsdorfer Weg 5
85416 Langenbach

Tel.: +49 (0)8761 72162-60
Fax.: +49 (0)8761 72162-61

E-Mail: firmen at schlattmann de
Web:www.schlattmann.de <http://www.schlattmann.de/> 
-------------------------------------

Die Informationen in dieser E-Mail und im Anhang sind vertraulich und
nur f?r den/die benannten Empf?nger bestimmt. ?ffnen, Nutzen oder
Verbreiten durch unautorisierte Personen ist untersagt. Falls Sie nicht
der Empf?nger oder eine entsprechend autorisierte Person sind,
informieren Sie bitte den Absender und vernichten Sie die Nachricht.


The information in this email and in any attachment is confidential and
intended only for the attention and use of the recipient(s) as
addressed. It must not be disclosed, used or disseminated by any
unauthorized person. If you are not the intended recipient or
accordingly authorized, please contact the sender and delete the
message.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.or
g/attachments/20101025/1bd5a61f/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 15:32:05 -0500
From: "Amy and Jim Rankin" <ajrankin at hughes.net>
To: "For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion"
       <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: Re: [Digestion] gasyield indigenious cowdung
Message-ID: <8E3EDE97467C41C79E09B32310B756C6 at RankinPC>
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
       reply-type=original


>
> 540 M3 from 1000 Kg of cow dung ?
> Is it possible that  there is an error in measurement ? OR an enthusiastic
> overstatement  by the gentleman ?
> ( If cow dung or the flora present in /alongwith it had so much of energy
> value ,,,, it would create so many possibilities )

While I have nothing to compare that value to, I assume that this is a
"batch" process digester, has a very long retention time and very likely has
only a small amount of water included to maximise the digestable content of
the system.  It is unlikely that the gas yield can be compared to
continuously fed - flow through digesters (which usually have higher water
content requirements and become economically prohibitive to build for
comparable retention times).  In other words, completely the opposite of the
sugar/highly digestable substrate type digester Dr Karve deals with and very
different from most other digesters as well.

Our experience with a highly and rapidly digestable substrate,  cheese whey,
shows the expected tendency to rapicly acidify and pickle the digester if
the loading rate is increased rapidly.  The best solution at hand seems to
be reinnoculation with cattle manure slurry at regular intervals as well as
maintenance of a minimal feed rate in the off season as much as possible to
avoid starting from zero when the cheese plant opens up full capacity in the
winter time. The rate of operation in the off season is not strictly
profitable, but is being tried this year for several reasons including
maintenance of the digester function.

We have some experience using cheese whey as fertilizer and have never seen
any great benefit to the grass it was applied to beyond the small
protein/Nitrogen content.  Perhaps the level of salt ( NaCl ) included has
some inhibitory effect on the soil microbes and prevent their rapid growth
or perhaps the compaction caused by the trucks applying the whey was a
problem.  In some instances the grass was burned by the application of the
whey and took some time to recover, so any or all of these could be
confusing factors that prevent seeing the result of the lactose sugar
applied.

Jim

James R Rankin, DVM
Cedarcrest Farms, Inc
Faunsdale, Alabama USA





------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 08:36:54 +0800
From: Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com>
To: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
       <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: Re: [Digestion] gasyield indigenious cowdung
Message-ID:
       <AANLkTinA91pO+5_vrjk6G0y06HdXedd7QROY86S05MRb at mail.gmail.com
<mailto:AANLkTinA91pO%2B5_vrjk6G0y06HdXedd7QROY86S05MRb at mail.gmail.com> >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear Mr. Hankel,
 I had already reported that there was a  firm in India, which constructed
biogas plants of this type.  The figures calculated from the data presented
by the firm showed that it took 2.5 kg dung to generate 1 cubic meter of
biogas. Based on this calculation, one would get about 400 cubic meters of
biogas from 1000 kg dung . This is also an unbelievably high value. The firm
recommends emptying and refilling the digester once every 4 to 5 months and
not 6 months.
I think that the dung used in the biogas plant in Centre of Science for
Villages in Wardha could have been stored outside over a certain period of
time, so that it lost some moisture. Secondly, when the dung is collected
from the stall, it also contains a certain quantity of straw and fodder
residues.  I don't think that it was accurately weighed before filling it
into the biogas plant. The 1000 kg weight of dung reported to us was an
approximation, based on the size of the digester tank.
Yours
A.D.Karve

On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 11:21 PM, klauspeter Hankel
<kapehankel at gmx.de>wrote:

> I suggest, please calculate based on ...
> indian bovine manure: 18% DS, 83% vDS, 300 l biogas/kgvDS, 60% CH4
>
> and better check the DS and also sometimes the vDS (because of sand and
> soil, if you buy by weight)
>
> warm regards / mit herzlichen Gruessen
>
> Klaus Peter Hankel
>
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 19:04:35 +0530
> From: Awadhoot Bapat <abjobapat at gmail.com>
> To: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
>    <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> Subject: Re: [Digestion] Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40
> Message-ID:
>    <AANLkTi=SQL-3McMa7rnywmCxqLFtubX=geJ8fMaiU09C at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear All ,
>
> 540 M3 from 1000 Kg of cow dung ?
> Is it possible that  there is an error in measurement ? OR an enthusiastic
> overstatement  by the gentleman ?
> ( If cow dung or the flora present in /alongwith it had so much of energy
> value ,,,, it would create so many possibilities )
>
> Regards,
> Avadhut Bapat
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Markus Schlattmann
> <firmen at schlattmann.de>wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > when you compare the yields based on fresh mass, are you sure you're
> > talking about the same "dung"?
> >
> > Here in Central Europe cattle often are kept in stables leading to
liquid
> > (~8%TS) manure.
> > In India perhaps "dung" is "dried dung"?
> > Generally, for comapring gas yields of substrates it's better to compare
> > gas yields based on VS, not fresh matter, since water content may vary a
> > lot.
> >
> > I can't think that there's a production of 18 times more biogas if we
are
> > talking about comparable dung. You may calculate/estimate a C-Balance.
If
> > there's one loading, you can't get more C in CH4/CO2 out of the system
> than
> > you have put into it with the substrate/inoculum in the beginning.
> >
> > Markus Schlattmann
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digestion mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>
>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>
> for more information about digestion, see
> Beginner's Guide to Biogas
> http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
> and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>
>


--
***
Dr. A.D. Karve
President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)

*Please change my email address in your records to: adkarve at gmail.com *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.or
g/attachments/20101026/9ed71817/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2010 18:55:46 -0700
From: David <david at h4c.org>
To: For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
       <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: Re: [Digestion] [work] Re:  Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40
Message-ID: <4CC63522.20008 at h4c.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"


Friends,


On 10/25/2010 1:28 PM, Markus Schlattmann wrote:
> I still don't believe in those 540 m? from 1000 kg dung....

A sensible analysis. Maybe the key to the conundrum is the statement:

> ...the biogas plant in Wardha... accepts 1000 kg cattle dung as a
> one-time load and produces daily 3 cubic meter biogas continuously
> over a period of 180 days...

It is well known that batch digestion does not produce the same amount
of biogas every day. Obviously it takes some time for the ecology of
the digester to get established (during which time, of course, gas
production is low), and it is surely something approaching a law of
biology that the more digestible components of the substrate will be
used up first, and then some of the more recalcitrant materials will--
eventually-- be digested. The succession of these stages offers a
well-known curve, which is either bell-shaped, if it plots daily
production, or a long S (ogee) curve if we are plotting cumulative
production.

In sum, I have no doubt that biogas is produced, and that for a period
of time production is good. Thus I would accept that the reported
plants produce well for a time, but not that they produce the same
amount every day, continuously for six months. But surely the
statement as quoted has to do with genuine enthusiasm, and should not
be taken as a rigorous mathematical description.


While my search turned up a number of references to the organization
in Wardha in connection with biogas, none provided any reference to
these batch digesters, unless they are very large clay pots, as one
reference mentions. It would be salutary to have some literature on
the subject, if any has been produced.



--
David William House
"The Complete Biogas Handbook" |www.completebiogas.com
<http://www.completebiogas.com/> |
/Vahid Biogas/, an alternative energy consultancy |www.vahidbiogas.com
<http://www.vahidbiogas.com/> 

|
"Make no search for water.       But find thirst,
And water from the very ground will burst."
(Rumi, a Persian mystic poet, quoted in /Delight of Hearts/, p. 77)

http://bahai.us/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.or
g/attachments/20101025/a67bdd53/attachment-0001.html>

------------------------------

Message: 5
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:25:32 +0800
From: Anand Karve <adkarve at gmail.com>
To: david at h4c.org, For Discussion of Anaerobic Digestion
       <digestion at lists.bioenergylists.org>
Subject: Re: [Digestion] [work] Re: Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 40
Message-ID:
       <AANLkTimeuv8sS2uHtyWpL3PgOCcOpdFjpG61b8JaCZDs at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

Dear All,
Dr. Soham Pandya, the Director of Centre of Science for Villages, told us
that the biogas generating system being demonstrated at his Institute was
meant for using the dung of a single cow. One accumulates the dung for 6
months, and then loads all of it at once into the biogas digester, as a
one-time feedstock. An Indian cow would produce daily about 6 kg dung.
Therefore, accumulation of 180 days' produce explains the1000 kg that goes
into the digester all at once. The biogas emanating from the digester is
stored by him in a moving drum type gas holder, which floats on water. He
has made this arrangement firstly to be able to deliver the gas to an
electricity generator under a constant pressure, and secondly to know how
much gas is produced daily.
My own explanation of this phenomenon is as follows:  I assume that some of
the micro-organisms in the alimentary canal of herbivorous animals have the
capacity to digest lignin. I also assume that normally their number is quite
low, but in a system, in which only lignin is left after a certain period of
time, the lignin decomposing organisms are the only ones that can survive
and multiply. Therefore, from this point onwards, it is the lignin that
keeps the biogas production going. The lignin digesting organisms must be
rather slow in digesting lignin, because it takes them about 4 to 5 months
to digest the lignin left in the system.
Yours
A.D.Karve

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:55 AM, David <david at h4c.org> wrote:

>
> Friends,
>
>
> On 10/25/2010 1:28 PM, Markus Schlattmann wrote:
>
> I still don't believe in those 540 m? from 1000 kg dung....
>
>
> A sensible analysis. Maybe the key to the conundrum is the statement:
>
> ...the biogas plant in Wardha... accepts 1000 kg cattle dung as a one-time
> load and produces daily 3 cubic meter biogas continuously over a period of
> 180 days...
>
>
> It is well known that batch digestion does not produce the same amount of
> biogas every day. Obviously it takes some time for the ecology of the
> digester to get established (during which time, of course, gas production
is
> low), and it is surely something approaching a law of biology that the
more
> digestible components of the substrate will be used up first, and then
some
> of the more recalcitrant materials will-- eventually-- be digested. The
> succession of these stages offers a well-known curve, which is either
> bell-shaped, if it plots daily production, or a long S (ogee) curve if we
> are plotting cumulative production.
>
> In sum, I have no doubt that biogas is produced, and that for a period of
> time production is good. Thus I would accept that the reported plants
> produce well for a time, but not that they produce the same amount every
> day, continuously for six months. But surely the statement as quoted has
to
> do with genuine enthusiasm, and should not be taken as a rigorous
> mathematical description.
>
>
> While my search turned up a number of references to the organization in
> Wardha in connection with biogas, none provided any reference to these
batch
> digesters, unless they are very large clay pots, as one reference
mentions.
> It would be salutary to have some literature on the subject, if any has
been
> produced.
>
>
>
> --
> David William House
> "The Complete Biogas Handbook" www.completebiogas.com
<http://www.completebiogas.com/> 
> *Vahid Biogas*, an alternative energy consultancy www.vahidbiogas.com
<http://www.vahidbiogas.com/> 
>
> "Make no search for water.       But find thirst,
> And water from the very ground will burst."
> (Rumi, a Persian mystic poet, quoted in *Delight of Hearts*, p. 77)
>
> http://bahai.us/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digestion mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Digestion at bioenergylists.org
>
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
>
>
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org
>
> for more information about digestion, see
> Beginner's Guide to Biogas
> http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
> and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/
>
>
>


--
***
Dr. A.D. Karve
President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)

*Please change my email address in your records to: adkarve at gmail.com *
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.or
g/attachments/20101026/d496ef5d/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Digestion mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Digestion at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org

for more information about digestion, see
Beginner's Guide to Biogas
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/



End of Digestion Digest, Vol 2, Issue 46
****************************************




-- 
SRINIVAS KASULLA
09004689601
09869179601


_______________________________________________
Digestion mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Digestion at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/digestion_lists.bioenergyli
sts.org

for more information about digestion, see
Beginner's Guide to Biogas
http://www.adelaide.edu.au/biogas/
and the Biogas Wiki http://biogas.wikispaces.com/






-- 
***
Dr. A.D. Karve
President, Appropriate Rural Technology Institute (ARTI)

*Please change my email address in your records to: adkarve at gmail.com *




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/digestion_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20101028/50034a12/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Digestion mailing list