Comparative Analysis on Bioelectricity Production by Using a Multi-Chambered Biomass

 

Shrikant Rajendrakumar Soni, Anagha Vasant Somalkar, Ashish Vilas Mane

^1,3Department of Environmental Science, Fergusson College (Autonomous), Pune 04 Affiliated to Savitribai Phule Pune University, Maharashtra, India

²Department of Environmental science, MIT- World Peace University, Pune, Maharashtra, 411038, India

 

ABSTRACT:

The study investigates the electrical performance of a biomass battery using different biomass substrates. This method of generating electricity can be employed to meet the lighting requirements of rural households using accessible biomass materials. The process involves the anaerobic breakdown of biomass, which produces ions that drive the generation of power. The production of bioelectricity was tested using Azolla with water in a 5:5 ratio, a mixture of  Azolla and cow dung in a 2.5:2.5:5 ratio with water, Pistia with water in a 5:5 ratio, Pistia combined with cow dung in a 2.5:2.5:5 ratio with water, cow dung in a 5:5 ratio with water, and a blend of Azolla, Pistia, and cow dung with water in a 2:2:2:4 ratio. The biomass battery, designed with multiple chambers, utilized zinc plate and carbon rod electrodes to generate bioelectricity from the substrates. The study compared the substrates based on output voltage, current, internal resistance, power density, and the practicality of each.

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION:

At the present time, there is enormous demand for electricity throughout the globe(1).A worldwide energy upheaval is being observeddue to increasing energy demand and limited funds.It has been observed that unsustainable ways for energy production are polluting while sustainable energy sources are not suitablyused (2). Microbial fuel cell (MFC) is one of the renewable energy sources which convert chemical energy into electrical energy with use of microorganisms(3) . In the past decade, Microbial Fuel Cells (MFC) attracted researchers due to their ability to change organic waste into electric current(1).

 

The increasing interest in biomass energy is largely due to the depletion of conventional fossil fuel sources, and going for search of alternative energy sources. Biomass energy is not only affordable but also provides several benefits over other forms of energy. Microbial fuel cells, an important innovation in this field, convert chemical energy into electrical energy by harnessing bioelectric potentials that range from millivolts to several hundred millivolts. In contrast to traditional electricity, which relies on electron flow, bioelectricity is generated through the movement of ions between electrodes with varying capacities. Microbial fuel cells, the anode reaction involves the breakdown of organic compounds (e.g., C2H4O2 + 2H2O → 2CO2 + 8e- + 8H+), while the cathode reaction results in hydrogen gas formation (8H+ + 8e- → 4H2). Cowdung, richlyaccessible in many rural areas, presents a viable option for electricity generation, especially in remote villages with limited access to power(4). Azolla and Pistia from available from polluted rivers and lakes of larger cities, can be utilized to address energy challenges. Biomass batteries generate electricity through microbial activity and biological processes, offer an efficient and environmentally friendlyalternative to traditional methods. These batteries use zinc plates and carbon electrodes to create a voltage difference that powers LED lamps(5). Adding salt to the battery compartments helps reduce internal resistance and progress conductivity.

 

The present study aims to explore the potentialof generating electricity from Azolla, Pistia, and their mixtures with cowdung, providing a sustainable solution for lighting issues. Biomass batteries offer an innovative and eco-friendly key for energy production by harnessing microbial action and biological processes(6). Utilizing zinc plates and carbon electrodes, these batteries create a voltage difference to power devices like LED lamps. The addition of salt in the battery chambers helps lower internal resistance and enhances conductivity, improving overall performance. This study emphases on the potential of using Azolla and Pistia—rapidly growing aquatic plants with high biomass yield—alongside cow dung to boost microbial activity. Azolla, known for its nitrogen-fixing capabilities, and Pistia, which flourishes in nutrient-rich waters, can significantly improve electricity generation when combined. This approach not only addresses lighting challenges in underserved communities but also promotes waste recycling, offering a sustainable energy solution(7). Single-chamber, air-cathode MFCs containing 30% solids was considered for assessment of the rate of biohydrogen and bioelectricity (8).

 

SIGNIFICANCE:

The study highlights the potential of using biomass resources, such as Azolla, Pistia, and cowdungas renewable energy sources for generating bioelectricity at laboratory scale. This is significant in fulfilling the need for sustainable energy solutions in future. It demonstrates that biomass batteries can provide affordable and practical lighting for rural and underserved areas, utilizing locally available materials. Additionally, the research contributes to advancements in microbial fuel cell technology, paving the way for more efficient and innovative biomass energy solutions

 

OBJECTIVES:

The study emphases on assessing the efficacy of different biomass substrates Azolla, Pistia, Cowdung, and their combinationsin producing bioelectricity using a designed biomass battery technique. It analyzes indicators, including voltage generation, power density, and operational lifespan, to identify the substrate best suited to power a 2V light source.

 

DATA AND METHODOLOGY:

Biomass Battery Assembly:

A plastic container with six compartments was utilized for the setup. Each section contains two pairs of electrodes arranged in series. In each chamber, a carbon rod acts as the anode, while a zinc plate serves as the cathode, both connected in series. The entire electrode assembly is secured to the container's lid, facilitating easy filling and emptying of the chambers. The connecting wires link the electrodes to output terminals located on the exterior of the lid, from which the output voltage is measured. A gap between the electrodes and the container's base ensures evendistribution of the biomass substrate throughout the chamber.The microorganisms on and aroundthe surface of the roots oxidize carbon-built exudates, discharge CO2, protons, and electrons(2). The electrochemical act of microbial fuel cells is traditionallymeasuredby linear sweep voltmetry atpredefined potential scan rates (9).

 

Fig -1: Battery Biomass Assembly	Fig. 2: Multi-Chambered Biomass Battery

Analytical procedure:

Azolla is finely chopped and combined with water in a 1:1 ratio. Similarly, Pistia is chopped and mixed with water at a 1:1 ratio, and cow dung is blended with water in the same proportion. Azolla is also mixed with cowdung and water in a 2.5:2.5:5 ratio, while Pistia is combined with cow dung and water in a 2.5:2:5 ratio. Additionally, a mixture of cow dung, chopped azolla, chopped Pistia, and water is prepared in a 2:2:2:4 ratio. Three tablespoons of salt are added to each chamber. These six different substrates are introduced individually into the multi-chambered biomass battery, with each compartment containing carbon rod and zinc plate electrodes. Due to microbial and biological reactions, a voltage difference is generated between the two terminals, which is referred to as bioelectricity.(8)

 

Table 1: Specification Used in Bio-Battery

 

RESULT AND DISCUSSION:

 

Table 2: Voltage, Current, Power and Power Density by Using Azolla (5:5)

 

Table 3: Voltage, Current, Power and Power Density Using Azolla + CowDung (2.5:2.5:5)

 

Table 4: Voltage, Current, Power and Power Density by Using Pistia(5:5)

 

Table 5: Voltage, Current, Power and Power Density by Using Pistia + Cow Dung (2.5:2.5:5)

 

Table 6: Voltage, Current, Power and Power Density by Using Cow Dung (5:5)

 

Table 7: Voltage, Current, Power and Power Density of Azolla + Pistia + Cow Dung (2:2:2:4)

 

Table 8: Internal Resistance of Various Substrates

 

 

Fig.3: Voltage v/s. Day for Different Substrates

 

Fig.4: Power v/s Days for Different Substrates

 

Throughout the experiment, a gradual decrease in both voltage and power output was recorded, as outlined in Tables 2-7. Initially, the peak voltages were 2.2 V for Azolla, 2.1 V for Pistia, 2.7 V for cow dung, 2.4 V for the Azolla, Pistia, and Cowdung mixture, 2.3 V for the Azolla and Cowdung mixture, and 2.2 V for the Pistia and cow dung mixture. Regarding power density, the highest values noted were 0.192 W/m² for Azolla, 0.1508 W/m² for Pistia, 0.2123 W/m² for the Azolla and Cowdung mixture, 0.1831 W/m² for the Pistia and Cowdung mixture, 0.2908 W/m² for cow dung, and 0.2338 W/m² for the Azolla, Pistia, and Cowdung mixture. A 2 V light source could be effectively powered for two weeks using Azolla, Pistia, or the Azolla and Cowdung and Pistia and cow dung mixtures. Conversely, cow dung and the Azolla, Pistia, and Cowdung mixture were capable of sustaining the light source for up to three weeks. Among all the tested substrates, cow dung demonstrated the most reliable and efficient performance, showcasing the highest overall capacity for maintaining consistent power output over time, Research reveals that the MFCs with zincplate anode electrodes generated higher voltage throughout the days evaluated, with peaks of970 mV, Meanwhile, MFC with graphite rod anode resulted in 880 mV maximum(3).

 

The results of this study highlight the critical role of substrate choice in biomass batteries, particularly in terms of microbial effectiveness and energy productivity. Cowdung is seen as the very important leading substrate, yielding the higher voltage and power density. The finding is in supported with studies carried out by other researchers. Organic waste can support sufficient microbial growth, thereby attractive electricity production. The capacity of cow dung to withstand energy for up to three weeks indicates its potential for providing reliable, long-term lighting and other solutions. In difference, the plant-based substrates produced lower outputs, and performance highlights opportunities for improvement. By exploring pretreatment methods for biomass and combination with varied carbonsources, it is possible to boost their energy-generating capacities. This approach could lead to sustainable waste management and renewable energy solutions. Thecomplex microbial community showed significant compositional changes at the anode and cathode over time (10). The results showed kitchen waste without oil separation can be used as a useful substrate in MFC systems to produce value-added products(8). A promising adaptation of MFC is a plant microbial fuel cell (P-MFC)that implements adistinctive plant-microorganism rhizospheric relationship to transform solar energy intobioelectricity(2).For peopleliving near lakes or rivers, Azolla and Pistia offer practical choices for small scale energy generation.

 

CONCLUSION:

In the present study, bioelectricity was effectively generated using various biomass substrates, including Azolla, Pistia, Cowdung, and their combinations. Specifically, Azolla, Pistia, and mixtures of Azolla with Cowdung and Pistia with cow dung were able to power a 2 V light source for up to two weeks before needing replacement. In contrast, the blend of Azolla, Pistia, and Cow dung demonstrated greater longevity, supplying power for a longer duration compared to the individual substrates and simpler combinations. Among all the substrates tested, cow dung proved to be the most efficient, maintaining battery performance for 3-4 weeks without replacement. Overall, these biomass substrates provide a promising and cost-effective way for generating electricity at least at sufficient levels.

 

REFERENCES:

1.      S, Kiarajan Kasipandian. Saigeeth. Bioelectricity Production Using Microbial Fuel Cell- a Review. 2021.

2.      Rukhsar Shaikh, Afshan Rivi , Ram Prasad. Bioelectricity production using plant microbial fuel; present state of art. 2020.

3.      Munfarida, M Munir. A Comparative study oftwo types of anode electrodes in a microbial fuel cell for producing bioelectricity from residential wastewater.

4.      BalatM.Global. Status of biomass energy. energy sources part 1. 2009.

5.      Najafpour G., Rahimnejad M.,Ghoreshi A. The enhancement of a microbial fuel cell for electrical output using me mediators and oxidizing agents. Energy Sources Part A. 2011;33(24):2239-2248..

6.      Sangeetha T., Muthukumara M. Catholyte Performence as an Influencing Factor on Electricity Production in a Dual chambered Microbial fuel cell Employing Food Processing Wastewater . Energy Sources Part A. 2011; 33(16):1514-1522..

7.      Pant, D., Van Bogaert, G., and Vanbroekhoven, K. Bioelectricity Production From Biomass. 2010.

8.      Kafaei, Raheleh.Bioelectricity and biohydrogen production using high solid content of oily kitchen wastes in air cathode microbial fuel cell.

9.      Meahack, A.Gbabo. Performance evaluation of microbial fuel cells for bioelectricity genertion. 2024.

10.   Imologie Meshack Simon, Alfons Weig. Optimization of soil microbial fuel cell for sustainable bioelectricity production. 2022.

11.   Reddy, A. S., and Kumar, R. R. Utilization of Agricultural Residues and Organic Waste for Bioelectricity Production: Recent Developments and Challenges. Waste Management, . 2023.

12.   Comparative Performance of Different Biomass Materials for Bioelectricity Generation. Journal of Power Sources, 249, 340-347. Zhang, L., Zhao, J., and Zhang, X. 2014.

13.   Yuan, Z., Zhang, S., and Wang, J. Performance Evaluation of Various Biomass Materials for Bioelectricity Production in Microbial Fuel Cells. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2022; 341: 130981.

14.   Sharma, P., and Saini, R. K. Comparative Analysis of Bioelectricity Production from Different Biomass Feedstocks Using Microbial Fuel Cells. Bioresource Technology Reports. 2022; 19: 101292.

15.   Kumar, P., and Sharma, S. Utilization of biomass for sustainable energy production in rular ares. 2017.

 

 

Received on 23.09.2024      Revised on 28.10.2024 Accepted on 27.11.2024      Published on 11.12.2024 Available online on December 31, 2024 International Journal of Technology. 2024; 14(2):85-90. DOI: 10.52711/2231-3915.2024.00012 ©A and V Publications All right reserved
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Creative Commons License.