Removal of Contaminant Gases From Biogas by Chemical Purification Processes

IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm

Email: editoriijme@ipasj.org
ISSN 2321-6441
A Publisher for Research Motivation........
Volume 3, Issue 10, October 2015
Removal of Contaminant Gases from Biogas by

Chemical Purification Processes
Muhammad Rashed Al Mamun , Shuichi Torii
Department of Mechanical System Engineering,
Graduate School of Science and Technology,
Kumamoto University, 2-39-1 Kurokami, Kumamoto, 860-8555 Japan
ABSTRACT
Biogas generated from biomass sources can be utilized as a renewable fuel to achieve ambitious targets as biofuel for internal
combustion engines. This process was achieved in combined absorption and adsorption chemical way. The absorption and
adsorption were employed by aqueous solutions of Ca(OH)2 and Fe0, activated carbon, silica gel and Na2SO4 respectively. Test
results revealed that the aqueous solution used was effective in reacting with CO2 in biogas (over 90% removal efficiency),
creating CH4 enriched fuel in Test 1 and Test 2. H2S was reduced to 12 ppm and 47 ppm with the derived nanomaterial
activated carbon and Fe0 adsorbent respectively which are below the standard required limit. The maximum 98 % H2O
concentration removal efficiency was realized in T1 by treating silica gel. This study represents a 60% improvement in the CH4
content from the initial average value of 60% to above 95% for both tests. Saturation was reached in about 180 min, 200 min
and 180 min treated with Ca(OH)2, Fe0, activated carbon, silica gel and Na2SO4 for removal of CO2, H2S and H2O respectively.
This technique proved to be a promising and feasible system for biogas purification.
Keywords: Renewable energy, Biogas, Purification, Methane
1. INTRODUCTION
The essential role of energy within our society and all development activities forces us to continually search for energy
resources. Since fossil fuels are being depleted and strategic of global warming reasons, sustainable alternatives are
becoming popular [1]. The Kyoto Protocol has explicitly defined methane as one of the six key greenhouse gases where
the global warming potential of methane is 25 times higher than that of carbon dioxide [2]. Unfortunately, the complete
worldwide energy supply cannot be substituted by alternatives at once, creating our current dependency on fossil fuels.
To ensure a sufficient energy supply in the future, a transition from fossil fuel-based production towards a more
sustainable-based production of energy resources is needed. To achieve this, there is a need for transition resources. A
transition resource is considered less harmful to the environment compared to fossil fuels. A potential transition
resource is biogas a source of energy supply that is produced by digesting biodegradable organic matter in the absence
of oxygen/air [3]. Upgraded biogas has similar properties compared to natural gas and can be used for the same
purposes. The composition of biogas produced from anaerobic digestion (AD) is typically consists of methane (CH4, 4075%) and carbon dioxide (CO2, 15-60%). It also contains trace amounts of other components such as water (H2O, 510%), hydrogen sulfide (H2S, 0.005-2%), siloxanes (0-0.02%), halogenated hydrocarbons (VOC, < 0.6%), ammonia
(NH3, <1%), oxygen (O2, 0-1%), carbon monoxide (CO, <0.6%) and nitrogen (N2, 0-2%), its composition varies
depending on the type of biomass and production methods [4] -[9]. Biogas has a higher heating value (HHV) between
15 and 30 MJ/Nm3 [10]. A compound in biogas, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), is corrosive, toxic, and odorous. Exposure to
H2S can be acutely fatal at concentrations between 500 and 1,000 ppm or higher, and the maximum allowable daily
exposure without appreciable risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime is 1.4 ppb [11], although Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations allow concentrations up to 10 ppm for prolonged exposure [12]. H2S
can significantly damage mechanical and electrical equipment used for process control, energy generation, and heat
recovery. The combustion of H2S results in the release of sulfur dioxide, which is a problematic environmental gas
emission. The H2S is an inorganic acid that attacks the surface of metals when they replaced in direct contact. Sulfur
stress cracking corrosive mechanism starts to take place when the H2S concentration is higher than 50 ppm [13].
Results obtained experimentally that H2S in biogas diminishes the life time of the engine by 10 to 15% [14]. The biogas
calorific power is proportional to the CH4 concentration. Therefore, biogas to be used as fuel for internal combustion
engines, it has been recommended a CH4 concentration greater than 90% [4], [15]. However, CO2 has a typical
concentration of ~40%. This high CO2 concentration reduces the engine power output proportionally to its
concentration, limiting the use of biogas such as in power plants and in internal combustion engines [16]. Water also
the leading corrosion causing agent in compressors, gas storage tanks and engines due to reaction with H2S, NH3 and
CO2 to form acids, accumulation in pipes and condensation and/or freezing due to high pressure [17]. It is
recommended that the raw gas be condensed in order to remove water, which can potentially cause problems in the gas
Page 12

ISSN 2321-6441
nozzles. Petrol, diesel, ethanol, biodiesel and methane are examples of fuels used in motor vehicles [18]. Biomethane
has become the most preferred alternative fuel to replace of fossil derived fuels for vehicular use. The market price of
upgrading biogas is nearly 20-30% lower than that of petrol. However, for it to be utilized effectively, purification is
required to remove contaminant which reduces its calorific value and corrosive for metal components.
The composition of the raw biogas varies with feedstock and the variation in purification techniques is influenced by
the intended application. Generally the purification techniques applied in the upgrading of biogas can be classified into:
absorption (physical/chemical), adsorption, membrane separation and cryogenic separation [17], [19]-[20]. Several
drawbacks also have of these methods include selectivity of chemicals used, the high energy requirement for
regeneration, stability of the method, waste liquids impact on environmental, large size equipment and high corrosion
rate. Herein, we reported the removal of CO2, H2S and H2O by treating non toxic nanotechnology because of providing
high surface areas of nanomaterials, developing a nanoscale adsorbent with high adsorption capacity becomes
promising for contaminants removal [21], [22].
The objective of this study is to explore the purification of biogas to match the standard of natural gas that can be used
as vehicle fuel by chemical processes. The study focus on optimize purification process in terms of low energy
consumption and high efficiency giving high methane content in the purified biogas.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS

2.1. Preparation of feedstocks for anaerobic metabolism unit
A piece of equipment which can turn biodegradable waste into usable fuel energy in the absence of oxygen is known as
bio-digester. A laboratory scale batch digester made of 200 L polypropylene tank (used as a reactor) with an air tight
rubber gasket was used for biogas production. Four organic wastes namely: cafeteria waste (CW), vegetable waste (VW)
and fruit waste (FW) was collected from Graduate School of Science and Technology, Kumamoto University, and
Kokai vegetable market, Kumamoto, Japan respectively. Cow manure (CM) was collected from the dairy farm,
Fukuoka, Japan. Then all substrates were crushed into small pieces of 2 mm sizes with mechanical blender except
(CM). The blended sample was mixed with equal proportion CW: VW: FW: CM (1:1:1:1) and diluted with tap water in
a ratio of 1:1 (w/w). The prepared feedstock was fed by a volume of 160 L in the biogas digester.
2.2. Preparation of purification materials
In the laboratory study, all chemicals were reagent grade or above and used without further purification. The
purification materials were used divided into two categories namely: Test 1 (T1) (calcium oxide (CaO), activated
carbon and silica gel) and Test 2 (T2) (calcium oxide (CaO), zero-valent iron (Feo) and sodium sulfate (Na2SO4)) to
evaluate the removal efficiency of CO2, H2S, and H2O from the gas stream and enrichment of methane (CH4)
concentration in purified biogas respectively. All purification reagents were derived from Kanto Chemical Co., Ltd,
JAPAN. Calcium Oxide (CaO), Na2SO4 and silica gel were crushed manually into powder form to increase the internal
surface area. All experiments were conducted with 10 g of chemical reagent. We also changed CaO to Ca(OH)2 to
obtain positive results because unsatisfactory results was investigated due to use of CaO [23]. A concentration of 15%
Ca(OH)2 slurry was prepared for each measurement of both tests. Study conditions for the purification of biogas by
removing contaminant gases as shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Purification conditions of biogas in this study work
Test
Purification
Processes
Materials
Absorption
CaO
T1
Adsorption
Absorption
T2
Uploaded
water (l)
Silica gel
Fe
Gas
flow rate
(l/min)
10
1.5
0-240
1.5
0-240
Time (min)
Pressure
(bar)
Activated
carbon
CaO
Amount of
materials/exp.
(g)
1
-
10
Adsorption
Na2SO4
Page 13


ISSN 2321-6441
2.3. Experimental set up

The experiments have been carried out in laboratory scale set-up schematically as shown in Fig. 1. The set-up consists
of four sections: a metabolism section to generate the desired biogas, raw biogas sampling, a contaminants removal
section to upgrade the biogas and an analysis section. During the study the experiments were operated batch wise with
respect to absorption and adsorption phase. The first section is anaerobic reactor as previously described. The second
section is raw gas collection chamber and raw biogas sampling, the third section is purification and the fourth section is
the purified biogas storage and sampling. The purifying unit consists of three glass flasks (2 L). The first flask contains
aqueous solution of Ca(OH)2 was 10 g per liter of water for T1 and T2, respectively. The raw gas collector flask and
first purifying flask were interconnected by 5 mm diameter 0.4 m long hose pipe. The raw gas storage flask of top
outlet and inlet port of the raw gas sampling bag was interconnected by 5 mm diameter 0.4 m long hose pipe. Under
batch mode conditions, the raw biogas is introduced by 5 mm diameter 0.3 m long glass tubing at 0.3 mm above from
the bottom of the absorber flask as small bubbles through the Ca(OH)2 solution to remove CO2, in both tests. The first,
second and third removal flask was interconnected by 5 mm diameter and 1 m and 1.5 m long U-shaped hose pipe
respectively. Removal of H2S, first and second interconnected hose pipe were filled with activated carbon and zerovalent iron for T1 and T2, respectively. The contaminate biogas enters the H2S removal unit after passing the CO2
capture trap by hose pipe column through the activated carbon and zero-valent iron to remove H2S for test 1 and 2,
respectively.
Figure 1 Schematic of experimental apparatus for purification of biogas.

Similarly, the removal of H2O the second and third U-shaped adsorption hose pipe column was filled with a freshly
prepared powder form of silica gel and Na2SO4 for T1 and T2, respectively. The biogas enters the moisture eliminate
column after passing the H2S removal unit to ensure that the biogas were dry in both tests. As silica gel, and Na2SO4;
activated carbon and zero-valent iron prepared nano materials have significant water and H2S adsorbing capability.
Therefore, biogas flows through these adsorbents from the one end to the other end of the hose. In this regard, both
ends of the hose pipe column were attached by cotton to increases adsorbing capacity. Finally, upgraded methane rich
biogas comes out on the top of the flask with CO2, H2S, and H2O being stripped off. After passing all steps the purified
gas was accumulated in the third flask with H2S, CO2, and H2O being stripped off from the biogas stream. Purified gas
passed on the top of the third flask to the aluminium gas bag (GL Science Inc., Japan) for sampling gas compositions.
All the flasks have their ports were closed with air tight rubber stopper. Biogas samples were collected before and after
it flowed through these substances and CH4 enriched as well as the removal efficiency was investigated as the
percentage of CO2, H2S, and H2O removed from the biogas of each sample. The tests were conducted with a flow rate of
biogas of 1.5 l/min at different times (0-240) minute interval. The design consideration was that there were to be no
energy requirements for the system operation. A flow diagram of biogas purification is given in Fig.2.
Page 14


ISSN 2321-6441
Figure 2 Flow diagram of biogas purification process.

2.4. Sampling and analyses
Gas composition was analyzed off line by gas chromatography (GC-8AIT / C159 R8A SHIMADZU Corporation,
JAPAN) and Testo-350 portable gas analyzer (Testo AG., Germany). The gas chromatograph (GC) was fitted with a
Porapak N 80/100, 274.32 cm, 1/8 mesh 250250145 mm column, a molecular sieve (Mole sieve 5 A 60/80, 182.88
cm, 1/8), maximum temperature 399 C, temperature stability 0.1C a stainless-steel column and a thermal
conductivity detector. Detector type was TCD made by Tungsten rhenium filament. Maximum temperature and
sensitivity of the detector was 400 C and 7000 (mVmL/mg) respectively. Argon (Ar) was used as the carrier gas at a
flow rate of 30 mL/min. The column temperature was 60 and the injector/detector temperatures were 80 and
current 60 (mA). Methane, CO2, H2S, and H2O content of raw biogas and purified biogas were analyzed and compared.
A 5 ml gas tight syringe was used to take raw biogas samples from the gas storage bag after releasing the gas. This was
followed by injecting the biogas sample into the GC [24], [25]. The rate of gas flow, pressure, pH, water content was
measured using gas flow meter, pressure gauge, digital pH meter (HM-25R), and moisture meter (MOC63u),
respectively.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this study the parameters tested were, contact time and initial concentration of CO2, H2S, and H2O content in the gas
stream. Contact time proved to be an important parameter. Even with a contact time of 60 s, the breakthrough curve
resembles the ones characterizing the mass transfer controlled absorption and adsorption processes. The experimental
tests performed led to the following results.
3.1. Removal of CO2 by absorption tests in an aqueous solution of Ca(OH)2
Aqueous solutions of Ca(OH)2 were used as chemical solvents to demonstrate the ability to absorb CO2. The reactor
flask was observed to gradually remove high proportion of CO2 (approximately 90% removal efficiency), resulting in
CH4 enriched biogas. However, this was a time dependent process. These gaseous concentrations were found to
decrease with time. Initially, the liquid solvents reacted rapidly with, and almost completely absorbed CO2 after 240
min. Their concentrations at the outlet stream were practically very small compared to their original values. As the
absorption process proceeded with time, the CO2 was continuously accumulated in the solvents. The end of each run
was determined when the liquid solvent became saturated. The corresponding breakthrough curves obtained are
presented in Fig.3, showing variation of the dimensionless CO2 concentration changes with time. It was found that
Ca(OH)2 to become saturated in about 160 min. The CO2-concentration of biogas decreased gradually 27.2% and 28.5%
to 3.6% and 4.6% at 20 and 240 min treated in T1 and T2, respectively. We observed that the T1 of CO2-concentration
decreased significantly higher than CO2-concentration of T2. The exact reason is that in T1 some volume of CO2
adsorbed and reversibly bound to the surface of activated carbon before come out of the reactor column. However, it can
be seen that the concentration of CO2 concentration reduced sharply in all experiments up to 180 min and the reducing
trends decreased gradually and almost remained stable at 200 to 240 min. As CO2 is an acidic gas; it reacts with
Ca(OH)2 produces a white precipitate of calcium carbonate (detection of carbon dioxide) upon dissolving in water.
Hence, for the absorption of CO2 gas suitable bases have to be used to result an acid-base neutralization reaction
thereby, absorbing and reducing the CO2 content in biogas. These absorption processes also influenced by agitation,
Page 15

ISSN 2321-6441
CO2 Concentration of biogas (%)
turbulence in the gasliquid phase contact time and solution concentration [23]. The relatively fast saturation time
realized in this investigation may be attributed to the fact that biogas used here contained high concentrations of CO2.
T1 CO2 Input Conc (%)
T2 CO2 InputConc (%)
T1 CO2 Output Conc (%)
T2 CO2 Output Conc (%)
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
Time (min)
Figure 3 Input and output CO2-concentration of biogas for T1 and T2.
H2 S Concentration of biogas (ppm)
3.2. Chemical desulphurization of biogas by Adsorption of zero-valent iron and activated carbon
The comparison can be based on the H2S-concentration at the inlet and outlet after a period of time. The removal of
H2S concentration of the tests was modulated by activated carbon and Feo. The activated carbon and Feo were chosen
because of these materials are represents a nanotechnology material providing high surface areas, promising for H2S
removal [21], [22]. When the contact time was 20 min and the flow rate is maintained at 1.5 l/min, for the first
experiment of T1 and T2, the concentrations was reduced 180 ppm and 159 ppm respectively. But upon time passing,
the slope is more with respect to outlet concentration of H2S. The speed of concentration decreases more rapidly at 100
and 120 min than at 180 and 160 min where the speed seems more constant for T1 and T2. The adsorption rate at more
time is increasing more gradually.
T1 H2S Input Conc (ppm)
T2 H2S Input Conc (ppm)
T1 H2S Output Conc (ppm)
T2 H2S Output Conc (ppm)
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0
20
40
60
80
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
Time (min)
Figure 4 Input and output H2S-concentration of biogas for (T1) and (T2).
Page 16

ISSN 2321-6441
As seen in Fig.4, at 240 min the H2S-concentration was less than 50 ppm with respect to the initial concentration of
H2S in the gas for both tests. This is well below the maximum concentration of H2S acceptable for running in internal
combustion engines [26]. The sulfide removal concentration decreased as passing time increased. To see a substantial
remained almost stable in H2S concentration, between the quantities 180 to 240 min for both tests. It is normal that the
adsorption is increased if the time of experiments increases but the adsorbent has a certain limit of H2S adsorption
capacity. However, the comparative results showed that the reduction capability higher in T1 process than T1. It may
have activated carbon is an extremely porous form of carbon and thus it have a very large surface area available for
adsorption [14].
3.3. Adsorption of water vapour by silica gel and Na2SO4
The tests were conducted with the controlled flow rate of biogas directly from the digesters at 1.5 l/min. The H2O
adsorption capacities by the silica gel and Na2SO4 used in the study were compared under variable time conditions. The
first condition was the shortest time where biogas was fed into the adsorption column only 20 min for both tests. Then
time was gradually increased similar to the first conditions means 20 min for each experiment until the optimum result
obtained from both tests. The H2O concentration in the exit from the purified gas sampling unit was measured using an
offline gas analyser. Fig. 5 presents the resulting breakthrough curves for the H2O concentration in the exit biogas
below 1.0% comparing the first adsorption conditions in T1 and T2. In all cases, the H2O concentration decreasing
tendency was found to be very significant, i.e., reaching 0.16% and 0.77% at 240 min study period. However, the
operating times for one batch of adsorbent to keep the H2O concentration below 1.0% varied considerably. The
adsorbent could last for 160 min when the saturation was reached, after which the H2O concentration decreased
negligibly.
The silica gel and Na2SO4 at 20 min was capable of decreasing the H2O-concentration of the gas by approximately
2.85% and 2.3% for T1 and T2 respectively. As silica gel started taking up moisture, they turned blue to pink
gradually. The silica gel might be reactivated after saturation by heating it in an oven at 150 for 3 hours to remove
the adsorbed H2O. The results showed that the T2 removal capability significantly lower than T1 due to the hard
surface of Na2SO4. The other possible reason is that in T1 the activated carbon also adsorbed some water molecules
before entering moisture trapped column of silica gel. We also investigated that the H2O concentration remained almost
stable at 180 to 240 min and then the experiment was stopped.
T1 H2O Input Conc (%)
T2 H2O Input Conc (%)
T1 H2O Output Conc (%)
T2 H2O Output Conc (%)
H2 O Concentration of biogas (%)
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
0
20
40
60
80
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240
Time (min)
Figure 5 Input and output H2O-concentration of biogas for T1 and T2
3.4. Comparable results of removal efficiency
The contaminants of biogas removal efficiency for T1 and T2 increased during the experimental period as shown in
Fig. 6. The results showed that the most efficient performance in T1 was investigated to compare with T2. The
operation of the system in T1 was observed better results than T2 with respect to CO2 removal efficiency although same
material used. A possible reason for this was that in T1 was contained activated carbon which extremely porous and
thus to have a very large surface area for adsorption of H2S simultaneously CO2. However, the removal efficiency of
Page 17

ISSN 2321-6441
CO2 >90%, and 89% at 200 and 180 min and H2O>98% and 90% at 180 min for T1 and T2 respectively. Regarding
these conditions the T1 and T2 are able to achieve removal efficiency of H2S>97%, and 91% at 200 min respectively. It
can be seen that the elimination performance significantly lower in T2 than T1 regarding H2O elimination due to hard
granular form of Na2SO4.
(%) Removal efficiency
100
90
80
70
T1 CO2
60
T1 H2S
50
T1 H2O
40
T2 CO2
30
T2 H2S
20
T2 H2O
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
Time (min)
Figure 6 Removal efficiency of CO2, H2S, and H2O from biogas under the treatments of T1 and T2.
3.5. Methane concentration of purified biogas
Fig. 7 shows that the comparison CH4-concentration enrichment trend of raw gas to purified gas is depicted for T1 and
T2. The result shows that the relative concentration of CH4 purified with proportional to the increasing time of
experiment in both tests. In this study investigated that between 20 to 240 min there was a steady increase in CH4concentration. The average input CH4-concentration was 60% and after purification the concentration of CH4 increased
at treating biogas is 68% and 97% at 20 min and 240 min in test 1 respectively. The enriched CH4-concentration is the
permitted of standard gas grid level. While in test 2, CH4-concentration was increased 64% to 95% at 20 min and 240
min respectively. The highest percentage of methane 97% were possible to avail after treating 240 min in test 1 due to
H2O, CO2 and H2S are removed simultaneously by activated carbon.
T1 CH4 Input Conc (%)
T1 CH4 Output Conc (%)
T2 CH4 Input Conc (%)
T2 CH4 Output Conc (%)
CH4 Concentration of biogas (%)
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
Time (min)
Figure 7 Biogas CH4 Input and output concentration for T1 and T2.
Page 18


ISSN 2321-6441
4. CONCLUSIONS
Combined absorption and adsorption process could offer a feasible option for biogas purifying since carbon capture,
desulphurization and moisture trap occur in the same process. We were applied nanotechnology for removal of H2S and
H2O. Removal of CO2 from biogas by aqueous solution was employed and their absorption characteristics were
examined. Test results indicated that this process was an effective technique over a long operation time, but their
removal capability declined with time. The results showed that the Ca(OH)2 solutions capable to reduce CO2
concentration below 3.6% and 4.6% in the biogas mixture, with a corresponding 240 min treated, can be achieved by
T1 and T2, respectively. The maximum removal efficiency of H2S concentration was 97%, and 91% for treating the
raw biogas with Feo, and activated carbon at 200 min for T1 and T2, respectively. The maximum H2O removal
efficiency was obtained 98% in T1, due to simultaneously remove by activated carbon and silica gel. The CH4
concentration improved above 95% in comparison to the average initial 60% concentration in the raw biogas this
representing an increase in efficiency of up to 60%. The combined process thus opens new and interesting perspectives
for reducing energy crisis.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The first author would like to acknowledge the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology
(MONBUKAGAKUSHO:MEXT for providing the financial support (PhD scholarship) for this research and the
extended help of Thermal engineering laboratory under the Department of Mechanical System Engineering, Kumamoto
University, Japan, for providing the facility for experimentation. We thank our biomass group lab mates for helping
with the measurements.
REFERENCES
[1] W.R.R., Infrastructures, Time to invest, Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam. 2008.
[2] United Nations, Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, United
Nations, New York, NY, USA, 1998.
[3] M. R. Al Mamun, S. Torii, Removal of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) from biogas using zero-valent iron, J. Clean
energy technology, 3(6), 428-432, 2015.
[4] P. Wheeler, T. Jaatinen, A. Lindberg, J.B. Holm-Nielsen, A. Wellinger, A. Pettigrew, Biogas upgrading and
utilisation, IEA Bioenergy Task 24. International Energy Association, Paris, France, 2000.
[5] A. Wellinger, A. Lindberg, Biogas upgrading and utilisation, [Internet] IEA Bioenergy Task 24: Energy from
biological conversion of organic waste, 2005, [cited January 2011].
[6] E. Wheless, J. Pierce, Siloxanes in landfill and digester gas update, [Internet] Whittier (Canada) and Long Beach
(California): Los Angeles Country Sanitation Districts and SCS Energy, (2004), [cited January 2011].
[7] M. Hagen, E. Polman, J. Jensen, A. Myken, O. Jnsson, A. Dahl, Adding gas from biomass to the gas grid, 144.
Malm, Sweden: Swedish Gas Center; pp. Report SCG 118, 2001.
[8] M. Persson, A. Wellinger, Biogas upgrading to vehicle fuel standards and grid injection, IEA Bioenergy [Report],
2006.
[9] K. Krich, A. Augenstein, J. Batmale, J. Benemann, B. Rutledge, D. Salour, Upgrading dairy biogas to biomethane
and other fuels, In: Andrews, K., Editor. Biomethane from dairy waste -A sourcebook for the production and use
of renewable natural gas in California. California: Clear Concepts, 47-69, 2005.
[10] N. Abatzoglou, S. Boivin, A review of biogas purification processes, Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining, 3,
42-71, 2009.
[11] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Toxicological Review of Hydrogen Sulfide (CAS No.7783-06-4), 2003,
Retrieved September 23, 2009 from http://www.epa.gov/ncea/iris/toxreviews/0061-tr.pdf
[12] G. Nagl, Controlling H2S emissions. Chemical Engineering,104(3), 125-131,1997.
[13] D. P. Gosh, Wet H2S cracking problem in oil refinery processes-Material selection and operation control issues,
The 2007 Tri-Service Corrosion Conference, Denver, Colorado, USA, 2007.
[14] M.S. Horikawa, M.L. Rossi, M.L. Gimenes, C.M.M. Costa, M.G.C. da Silva, Chemical absorption of H2S for
biogas purification, Brazilian journal of chemical engineering, 21(3), 415-422, 2004.
[15] M. Harasimowicz, P. Orluk, G. Zakrzewska-Trznadel, A. Chmielewski, Application of polyimide membranes for
biogas purification and enrichment, Journal of Hazardous Materials, 144(3), 698-702, 2007.
[16] U. Marchaim, Biogas processes for sustainable development, FAO, ISBN 92-5-103126-6, Rome, Italy, 1992.
[17] E. Ryckebosch, M.H. Drouillon, H. Vervaeren, Techniques for transformation of biogas to biomethane, Biomass
Bioenergy, 35, 1633-45, 2011.
[18] M. Lantz, M. Svensson, L. Bjrnsson, P. Borjesson, The prospects for an expansion of biogas systems in
SwedenIncentives, barriers and potentials, Energy Policy, 35, 18301843, 2007.
[19] N. Tippayawong, P. Thanompongchart, Biogas quality upgrade by simultaneous removal of CO2 and H2S in a
packed column reactor, Energy, 35, 4531-4535, 2010.
Page 19


ISSN 2321-6441
[20] V. K. Vijay, Water scrubbing based biogas enrichment technology by IIT DELHI: A fit option for low cost small
scale applications, Centre for rural development and Technology, Available online from
http://www.valorgas.soton.ac.uk/Pub_docs/Delhi_Aug_2013/Biogas%20Vehicle%203/biogas%20upgrading813.pdf. [Accessed on 03 February 2014].
[21] X. Q. Li, D. G. Brown, W. X. Zhang, Stabilization of biosolids with nanoscale zero-valent iron (nZVI), Journal
of Nanoparticle Research, 9(2), 233243, 2007.
[22] W. L. Yan, A. A. Herzing, C. J. Kiely, W. Zhang, Nanoscale zero-valent iron (nZVI): aspects of the core-shell
structure and reactions with inorganic species in water, Journal of Contaminant Hydrology, 118(3-4), 96104,
2010.
[23] R. Bajracharya, A. Dhungana, N. Thapaliya, G. Hamal, Purification and compression of biogas: A research
experience, Journal of the Institute of Engineering, 7(1),1-9, 2009.
[24] W. F. Owen, D. C. Stuckev, J. B. Healv, Jr. L. Y Young, P. L. Mccagrv, Bioassay for monitoring biochemical
methane potential and anaerobic toxicity, International Journal of Water Research, 13, 485-92, 1979.
[25] R. H. Zhang, H. M. El-Mashad, K. Hartman, F. Wang, G. Liu, C. Choate, P. Gamble, Characterization of food
waste as feedstock for anaerobic digestion, International Journal of Bioresource Technology, 98 (4), 929935,
2007.
[26] A. Wellinger, A. Lindberg, Biogas upgrading and utilization, IEA Bioenergy Task 24. Paris, France:
International Energy Association, 2000.
AUTHOR
Muhammad Rashed Al Mamun was born on February 8, 1982 in Kaliganj, Dhaka-Gazipur,
Bangladesh. Al Mamun successfully completed B.Sc. in Agricultural Engineering and MS
(Masters) degree in Farm Power and Machinery from Bangladesh Agricultural University,
Mymensingh, Bangladesh in 2005 and 2007 respectively. Now he is studying PhD under the
Department of Advanced Mechanical System Engineering at Kumamoto University, Japan
from April 2013. Before graduation he received secondary high school and high school
certificate from Kaliganj, Gazipur, Bangladesh, in 1997 and 1999 respectively.
He is an ASSISTANT PROFESSOR in the Department of Farm Power and Machinery, Faculty of Agricultural
Engineering and Technology in Sylhet Agricultural University, Sylhet, Bangladesh. Prior to this position, he worked as
a LECTURER for the same University and AGRICULTURAL ENGINEER at the Department of Agricultural
Extension in Ministry of Agriculture, Dhaka, Bangladesh. He also worked as the VISITING Professor at Shahjalal
University of Science and Technology, Forestry Science and Technology School and Agricultural Training Institute in
Syhlet, Bangladesh. He was working in the field of renewable energy based on biomass which supplies energy in rural
areas and developed by improving utilization technology. His research interests include renewable energy, agricultural
machinery, precision agriculture, and GIS based agricultural policy management for sustainable agriculture in rural
areas.
Mr. Al Mamun is a member of Engineering Institute of Bangladesh (IEB), Krishibid Institute of Bangladesh (KIB) and
Asia-Pacific Chemical, Biological & Environmental Engineering Society (APCBEES).
Page 20

Removal of Contaminant Gases From Biogas by Chemical Purification Processes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Removal of Contaminant Gases From Biogas by Chemical Purification Processes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IPASJ International Journal of Mechanical Engineering (IIJME)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJME/IIJME.htm

A Publisher for Research Motivation........

Volume 3, Issue 10, October 2015