ENERGY ANALYSIS OF

BIOGAS SYSTEM
Presented
By
Mohd. Arif
University Polytechnic
Faculty of Engineering and Technology
Jamia Millia Islamia
Central University
New Delhi
Abstract

A survey has been carried out in Punjab Agricultural University,

Ludhiana, Punjab. From the survey, the present energy analysis of
biogas system has been worked out for different plants capacities and
different models viz. horizontal vertical biogas plants and Deenbandhu.
An effort has been made to estimate the embodied energy from the
building materials used in construction of the biogas plants. Energy pay
back time has been evaluated using embodied energy and energy
output. Economics and cost analysis has also been carried out. Results
are compared with various models.
Objectives

„ The waste disposal is a global environmental

problem.
„ Energy from waste as an alternative to fossil
fuels provides an important contribution
towards the reduction in landfill disposal and
global warming.
„ Energy recovery from waste provides a
double environmental benefit. Firstly, the
diversion of waste from landfill.
„ secondly, the recovery of energy, displacing
fossil fuel alternatives and reducing green
house gas emissions.
„ To tackle climate change, there is an urgent
need to reduce energy use by adopting more
efficient technologies and to generate from
sources that release much less or no carbon
dioxide causing global warming.
Introduction

„ Biogas plants may be classified in several ways

depending upon the plant design and mode of
working.
„ In India are popularly known as the KVIC or the
conventional type and Deenbandhu model.
„ Digesters can also be vertical and horizontal
displacement types depending on the orientation of
digester.
„ The horizontal plants are suited for high ground
water level or rocky areas.
„ Deenbandhu is a low cost fixed dome biogas plant
model.
Literature Survey

¾ Chandra (2007) discussed distributed energy

systems based on renewable energy resources like
solar, wind, hydro and bio-waste and compared on
the basis of energy pay back time.
¾ Embodied energy of building materials in India had
been presented by Chani et al. (2003) and
comparative analysis were also carried out to gauge
the energy efficiency of the walling elements and to
identify the most suitable option (Das and Kandpal
1997).
¾ An approach was developed by Reddy et al.
(1979) to reduce the size and cost of the
biogas system.
¾ Venkatarama Reddy (2004) described a brief
history of building materials, energy
consumption in manufacture and
transportation of some common and
alternative building materials and the
implication on environment.
¾ Various biogas plants models for different
plants size have been surveyed in the
country (TERI, source, 1982).
¾ Ram Chandra (2002) carried out a life cycle
costing technique taking into account the time
value of the money to meet as much as
electric energy demand as possible by an
optimal decentralized mix of photovoltaic,
biogas generator and biomass gasifier
generator.
9A life cycle analysis for each energy service
analyzed will start with identification of the primary
energy source and progress through the appropriate
steps for energy conversion and transportation up to
the final devices providing energy service (Tester et
al., 2006).
Figure 1 shows the overview of the life cycle analysis
of a biomethanization.
Life cycle analysis of biomethanization
Methodology

Equations:

‰ Embodied energy = ∑ mi ei
Where mi = quantity of materials used in
constructing biogas plants in kg

ei = energy density of the material in MJ/kg

Table: Energy density of materials used in plants
Materials Embododied Energy
(MJ/kg)
Brick 1.8
Cement 6.7
Stone chips 0.08
Sand 0.08
Coarse sand 0.08
Iron bar 29.06
Steel 32
PVC pipe 49.97
½” G.I. pipe 11.83
„ Net energy output = HV.S.G
Where HV = Heating value of fuel, in MJ/m3
S = Capacity of biogas plant in m3
G = Gas production per day in m3 per
biogas plant capacity
ƒ Energy pay back time
(EPBT) = Embodied energy/Energy output
„ Money pay back time in years
(MPBT) = Input cost / Running cost per unit time
where
Initial cost = ∑z c i i
zi = quantity of materials used
ci = unit cost of materials in Indian Rupees
 Table 1. Embodied energy, net energy output and EPBT for
different models and plants size.

Sl. Horizontal Type Vertical Type Biogas

No. Net Energy Biogas Plants Plants
Plants Size Output
(MJ/day) Embodied EPBT Embodied EPBT
(m3)
Energy (years) Energy (years)
(MJ) (MJ)
1 2.83 31.152 31939.4 2.809 26412.914 2.323

2 4.25 46.75 37471.1 2.196 31122.914 1.824

3 7.08 77.88 45452.6 1.599 38374.094 1.350

4 14.02 154.22 86585.8 1.538 74734.202 1.330

 Table 2. Input cost and MPBT for different models
and plants size.

Horizontal Type Biogas Vertical Type Biogas Plants

Sl. Plants Size Plants
No. ( m3 )
Input Cost MPBT(years) Input Cost MPBT(years)
(Rs.) (Rs.)
1 2.83 31939.4 1.80 29810 1.54
2 4.25 37471.1 1.55 39655 1.36
3 7.08 45452.6 1.12 48535 0.99
4 14.02 86585.8 0.91 76998 0.80
Table 3. Embodied energy, net energy output, EPBT, life cycle
cost and MPBT of Deenbandhu model for three
plants size available

Sl. Plants Size Embodied Net Energy EPBT Life Cycle MPBT
No ( m3 ) Energy Output (years) Cost (Rs.) (years)
(MJ) (MJ/day)

1 2
7239.17 22 0.902 8655 1.15

2 3 8800.53 33 0.731 10605 0.94

3 4
11458.8 44 0.714 13480 0.89
Results & Discussion
3
2.5
EPBT(yrs)

2 2

EPBT(years)
1.5
1
1
0 0.5
0 5 10 15
0
Cubic Capacity of Plants 0 5 10 15
Plants Size (cubic metre)
Figur2. Variation of EPBT with
biogas plant size of Figur3. Variation of EPBT with biogas
Horizontal type plant. plant size of Vertical type plant
 2.00
M o n e y P a y B a c k T im e ( y r s )
2.00

M P B T (y e a rs )
1.50
1.50
1.00 1.00

0.50 0.50
0.00
0.00
0 5 10 15
0 5 10 15
Cubic Capacity of Biogas Plants(cubic metre)
Cubic Capacity of Biogas Plants(cubic metre)

Figure 4. Money Pay Back Time of Figure 5. Money Pay Back Time of
Horizontal biogas plan w.r.t. Vertical biogas plant w.r.t.
plant size. plant size
 1
1.5
M P B T (y rs )

0.8
1

EPBT(Yrs)
0.6
0.5

0 0.4
0 2 4
0.2
Cubic Capacity of Biogas Plants(cubic metres) 1 2 3 4 5

Cubic Capacity of Biogas Plants (cubic metre)

Figure6. Money Pay Back Time Figure 7. Variation of EPBT with

of Deenbandhu model biogas plant size of
Deenbandhu model
Conclusion

„ EPBT decreases as the biogas plant size

increases.
„ MPBT also decreases in same manner with
increase the plants size of the models.
References
„ Chani, P.S., Najamuddin and Kaushik, S.K., 2003,Comparative analysis of embodied energy
„ rates for walling elements in India, IE (I) Journal-AR, 87, 47-50.
„ Chandra A., 2007, Distributed Energy Systems: Energy Pay Back Time and Environmental Benefits, Proceeding of 3rd International
Conference on Solar Radiation and Day Lighting, 269-277.
„ Das A. and T.C. Kandpal, 1997, Energy Environment Implications of Cement Manufacturing in India: A scenario Analysis, Int J of Energy
Research, 21(4), 299-308.
„ Kandpal T. C., A. Kumar, and P. Purohit, 2002, CO2 mitigation potential of renewable energy technologies for domestic cooking in India,
Proceedings of the National Conference on Advances in Contemporary Physics and Energy, 390-401.
„ Khandelwal K. C. and S. S. Mahdi, 1986, Biogas Technology: A practical Handbook, Tata McGraw-Hill Publishing Company Ltd., New
Delhi, India.
„ Mathur J., 1998,Energy and Emission Analysis of Selected Energy Systems in India, Master of Technology Thesis, Centre for Energy
Studies, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India.
„ Moulik T.K. and U.K.Srivastava, Biogas Plants at the Village Level: Problems and Prospects in Gujrat, Centre for Management in
Agriculture, IIM, Ahmadabad, source TERI.
„ Mittal K.M., 1985,Biogas Systems: Principles and Applications, TERI, Habitat Place, Lodhi Road, New Delhi.
„ Prasad, C. R. and Sathyanarayan, 1979, S. R. Studies in biogas technology, Part III, Thermal
„ analysis of biogas plants, Proceedings of Indian Acad. Sci., Part 3, 377-386.
„ Purohit P., A. Kumar, S. Rana and T.C. Kandpal, 2002,Using Renewable Energy Technologies for Domestic Cooking in India: A
Methodology for Potential Estimation, Renewable Energy, 26(2), 235-246.
„ Ram Chandra, 2002, Meeting electrical energy needs of typical villages in the state of Madhya
„ Pradesh by an optimal mix of decentralized renewable energy technologies, Proceedings of the
„ National Conference on Advances in Contemporary Physics and Energy, 402-425.
„ Reddy A. K. N., C. R Prasad, P. Rajabapaiah and S. P. C. Sathyanarayan, 1979, Proceeding of Indian Acad. Sci. C 2 (3), 387.
„ Rubab S., and T.C. Kandpal, 1996, A Methodology for Financial Evaluation of Biogas Technology in India Using Cost Functions, Biomass
and Bioenergy, 10,11-23.
„ Venkatarama Reddy B.V., 2004, Sustainable building technologies, Current Science, 87(7), 890-907.
„ Tester J.W., E.M.Drake, M.J. Driscoll, M.W. Golay and W.A. Peters, 2006,Sustainable Energy: Choosing Among Options, Prantice-Hall of
India Pvt. Ltd. Publishing House, New Delhi.
„ TERI, 1994, Biogas: A source of Rural Employment, Tata Energy Research Institute, New Delhi, 36.
„ Tiwari, G.N., and Ghosal, M.K., 2005,Renewable Energy Resources: Basic Principles and Applications, Narosa
„ TERI, 1982, Source: Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, 38.
THANK YOU