The processing and preservation of biogas by utilizing cow manure

Paper Details

Research Paper 13/07/2023
Views (1626)
current_issue_feature_image
publication_file

The processing and preservation of biogas by utilizing cow manure

CO. Molua, DA. Ogwu, AO. Ukpene, M. Edobor, JO. Ataman
Int. J. Biosci. 23(1), 249-254, July 2023.
Copyright Statement: Copyright 2023; The Author(s).
License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Abstract

This study focused on the generation of biogas from cow dung, specifically examining the anaerobic production process using 10kg of cow dung as input. The results indicated that the amount of biogas produced was directly proportional to the quantity of dung used. A cumulative volume of 35.63m2 was obtained, with an average daily production of 7.5m2, suggesting the process was in its final stage. Additionally, the findings revealed that biogas production is influenced by the quantity of dung employed, meaning that a larger amount of dung can potentially yield a greater quantity of biogas. It is recommended that governments in developing countries encourage private organizations to engage in large-scale biogas production and incorporate its development into rural energy policies, considering the abundant availability of cow dung, the primary raw material for biogas production.

Al lmam MFI, Khan MZH, Sarkar MAR, Ali SM. 2013. Development of biogas processing from cow dung, poultry waste, and water hyacinth. International Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences 2(1), 13-17

Bouallagui H, Tuohami Y, Chelkh RB, Hamdi M. 2004. Bioreactor performance in anacrobic digestion of fruit and vegetable wastes. Institut National des Sciences Appliques et deTechnologies. Process Biochemistry 40 (2005), 989-995

Cromwell HC. 1999. Comprehensive studies of solid waste management. State -Department of Registration on water survey, Urbana, Bulletin No. 35, Page 198.

Gunnerson CG, Stukey DC.1986. Integrated resource recovery. Anaerobic digestion: principles and practices for biogas systems (English). World Bank technical paper; no. WTP 49 Washington, D.C.  World Bank Group.

Megonigal JP, Hines ME, Visscher PT. 2004. Anaerobic metabolism: linkages to trace gases and aerobic processes. Pages 317-424. In: Schlesinger WH. Editor). Biogeochemistry. Elsevier Pergamon, Oxford, UK.

Melemey MJ, Bryant MR. 1981. Fuel gas production from biogas. Chemical Rubber Compress Inc., West Palm Beach Florida. Page 26-40.

Moses JBK, Oludolapo AO. 2022. “Biogas Production and Applications in the Sustainable Energy Transition”, Journal of Energy, vol. 2022, Article ID 8750221, 43, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/8750221.

Rohjy HA, Aduba JJ, Manta IH, Pamdaya Y. 2013. Development of anaerobic digester for the production of biogas using poultry and cattle dung: a case study of Federal University of Technology Minna cattle & poultry pen. International Journal of Life Sciences 2(3), 139-149.

Sagagi SB, Garba B, Usman NS. 2009. Studies on biogas production from fruits and vegetable waste. Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 2(1), 115-118.

Samchucks SC. 2004. Biomass Bio-energy. 21* Annual Conference of Association of Microbiologist. Page 102.

Ukpai PA, Nnabuchi MN. 2013. Comparative study of biogas production from cow dung, cowpea and cassava peeling using 45 litres biogas digester. Advances in Applied Science Research 3 (3), 1864-1869

UNEP. 1981. United National Environmental Programmes: Biogas fertilizer system. Technical Reports, Training and Seminar in China. UNEP Nairobi.

World Energy Council, (WEC). 2001. Challenges of rural energy poverty in developing countries. Ulma press Lancaster.Penn.

Yadava LS, Hesse PR. 1981. The development and use of biogas technology in rural areas of asia (A status report 1981). Improving soil fertility through organic recycling. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and United Nations Development Program (UNEP).

Related Articles

In vitro assessment of the anticancer activity of quinaldic acid against human breast cancer cells (MCF-7)

N. Medhavi, S. M. Sivasankaran, K. Selvakumar, K. Harish, S. Manoharan*, Int. J. Biosci. 29(3), 1-10, September 2026.

In silico molecular docking analysis of quinaldic acid against cancer related targets

N. Medhavi, K. Harish, S. M. Sivasankaran, K. Selvakumar, B. Vidhyambigai, S. Manoharan*, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 129-139, August 2026.

First records of Macrogyrodactylus clarii and six species of Quadriacanthus (Monogenea) infecting Clarias gariepinus (Burchell, 1822) across four localities in Senegal

Arfang Diamanka*, Abdou Toure, Sikhou Drame, Cheikh Diop, Ngor Faye, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 118-128, August 2026.

Comparative predictive performance of anthropometric indices and associated risk factors for obesity among Beninese adults: A cross-sectional study

Ganlaky D. Boris, Sègbo Julien A. Gaetan*, Dossou David, Sossa J. Charles, Akpovi D. Casimir, Agbangla Clement, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 105-117, August 2026.

Proximate, mineral and vitamin composition of Uvaria chamae P. Beauv. (Annonaceae) seed flour from Korhogo, northern Côte d’Ivoire

Nyamien Yves Bleouh Jean*, Anon Attoh Hyacinthe, Diallo Koffi, Biego Godi Henri, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 97-104, August 2026.

Acute toxicity of seeds from Sphenostylis stenocarpa (Hochst ex A. Rich.) Harms

Wilfried Zanmenou*, Razack Osseni, Mahouglo Barnabé Houessou, Chimène Agrippine Rodogune Yelouassi, Comlan Kintomagnimessè Célestin Tchekessi, Philippe Sessou, Anatole Laleye, Pierre Dossou-Yovo, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 89-96, August 2026.

Stabilization of cashew apple juice with chitosan: clarification and microbiological quality

Kokora Aya Philomène*, Coulibaly Adama, Cissé Mohamed, Coulibaly Bintou, Konan N’guessan Ysidor, Godi Henri Marius Biego, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 76-88, August 2026.

Implementation and evaluation of limited face to face classes: basis for adoption of health and safety manual

Christian Jude B. Calunsag*, Int. J. Biosci. 29(2), 65-75, August 2026.