Next Article in Journal
Parallel Hybrid Electric Vehicle Modelling and Model Predictive Control
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of Natural Weathering on Stabilization of Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, and Pb) in MSWI Bottom Ash
Previous Article in Journal
Anti-Yeast Synergistic Effects and Mode of Action of Australian Native Plant Essential Oils
Previous Article in Special Issue
Environmental and Economic Evaluation of Mechanical Biological Treatment System for Municipal Waste Considering the Political Framework in Ichihara City
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Applied Sciences
Volume 11
Issue 22
10.3390/app112210671
applsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Dairy Waste and Potential of Small-Scale Biogas Digester for Rural Energy in India

by
Prachi Pandey
1,
Aditya Pandey
2,
Long Yan
3,
Dengshan Wang
3,
Vinay Pandey
4,
Bhim Charan Meikap
5,
Jiang Huo
6,
Ruihong Zhang
1 and
Pramod K. Pandey
6,*
1
Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA
2
Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology Allahabad, Prayagraj 211004, India
3
Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture (BIOMA), No. 13, Section 4, South Renmin Road, Wuhou District, Chengdu 610041, China
4
Department of Agricultural Engineering, College of Agriculture and Research Station, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Kurud, Raipur 492012, India
5
Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur 721302, India
6
Department of Population Health and Reproduction, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11(22), 10671; https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210671
Submission received: 4 October 2021 / Revised: 17 October 2021 / Accepted: 23 October 2021 / Published: 12 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Trends in Waste Management Models)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
In order to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, related global warming and dependency on fossil fuels, it is crucial to promote the uses of renewable energy, and conversion of biomass and organic waste into energy sources. In many parts of the world, a substantial increase in efforts for the conversion of waste into energy is currently being observed. Specifically, biogas technology has been emphasized for the conversion of animal waste into biomethane/biogas because livestock waste is considered to be a substantial source of ambient greenhouse gases, causing climate change. While biogas technology, an anerobic process to convert livestock waste into biogas, is promoted in both developed and developing countries, this review article is focused on improving our existing understanding of small-scale biogas technology and relevance of this technology in rural environment of India. A thorough review research has been performed to gather the information on livestock population, manure production, and potential of biogas technology in India to provide a wholistic information. A summary of the financial supports facilitated by various agencies, the cost of biogas plants, potential uses, and potential challenges in the dissemination of biogas technology in India has been discussed in this study. We anticipate that the data and interpretation provided here will help in understanding the scope of biogas technology in India and will help in formulating the policies which will support the implementation of biogas technologies in developing countries.

1. Introduction

India is the world’s second most populous country with more than 1.27 billion people. In terms of land area, India is the seventh largest country in the world with 3.28 million square kilometer [1]. While comparing population densities of the top 5 most populous countries (China, India, United States, Indonesia, and Brazil), the population density of China, India, United States, Indonesia, and Brazil are 149/km2, 424/km2, 36/km2, 145/km2, and 25/km2, respectively [2]. Farmers in India are either small or marginal. About 68% of famers own less than 1 hectare of land. Based on 2016 Economic Survey, in many India’s states, the average annual income of a farming family is less than 300 USD [3]. The majority of India’s population lives in villages. Approximately 70% of India’s population resides in small to medium sizes villages, with population ranging from 100–1000. Based on a 2011 Census Report of Government of India, currently 800 million people live in around 600,000 villages [4]. According to a World Bank Report, more than 40% India’s workforce is engaged in Agriculture [5]. The average Indian household consisted of 5.4 people in rural areas and 5.2 people in urban areas [6]. India had 192 million households in 2001 [6]. A United Nations report described that economic growth over past several decades in India led to significant declines in poverty, and also resulted in increased economic inequality [7]. For the top 5 most populous countries, Gross Domestic Product (GDP)/capita in 2020 was 10,500 USD, 1900 USD, 63,543 USD, 3869 USD, and 6796 USD for China, India, USA, Indonesia, and Brazil, respectively [8].
Dairy is the top-ranking commodity in India, and based on Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) report, India has transformed from a country with shortage of milk to a leading milk producer [9]. An Economic Survey Report estimated that approximately 198.4 million tonnes of milk were produced in India in 2019–2020 [10]. FAO reported that per capita milk availability in India was 130 g/day in 1950–51, which increased to 374 g/day in 2017–18 [11]. Dairy animals are a regular source of income and cash in India and women often play a crucial role in milk production in rural areas [12]. In general, milk is produced by smallholders in India, and milk production is crucial for household livelihoods, food security, and nutrition. According to FAO, India is the world’s largest milk producer, with 22% of global production followed by the United States of America and China [9]. While New Zealand and United States of America are the highest milk surplus countries, FAO outlined that China, Italy, the Russian-Federation, Mexico, Indonesia are the countries with the highest milk deficit [9].
While milk production is crucial for the economy and food security in developing countries as well in developed countries, it also produces livestock waste such as manure. Livestock affects environment, and for sustainable development in agriculture, it is crucial to understand the linkages between livestock industry and environment, and adopt best practices to reduce livestock’s environmental impact [13]. In order to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement, the World Health Organization (WHO) suggests achieving zero hunger, while tackling global warming and climate change by improving livestock system management which involves improving animal waste management [14,15]. Studies showed that integrated manure management that involves optimal handling of livestock manure (collection, storage, and treatment) results in conversion of manure into valuable resource [16,17,18]. In addition, manure can be source of biogas production, and subsequent uses (Figure 1) [19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. Nutrients and organic matter of manure are essential for soil health and fertility. Manure is a valuable soil amendment, and can be used for enriching the soil nutrients [26,27,28,29,30,31,32].

2. Livestock Population and Manure Production in India

The animal-agriculture system, which involves rearing cows, buffalo, sheep, goat, pig, and chickens at a small scale, is an integral part of India. Livestock such as cows and buffalo are the main milk producing animals, which constitutes 59% of the total livestock population in India [33]. Over the past 6–8 decades, cattle population in India steadily increased (Figure 2) [34]. The livestock population in India is approximately 512 million, which involves 200 million dairy cows and 105 million buffalo [35]. Considering dairy cows produces around 10 kg/day of manure, manure production from cows could be around 730 million tonnes annually. Annual production of manure from buffalo could be around 574 million tonnes, considering the manure production from buffalos is around 15 kg/day. Descriptive information considering the total livestock population (top five species) and corresponding manure production is described in Table 1.

3. Utilization of Livestock Waste and Renewable Energy Consumption Pattern in Rural India

Conventionally, livestock waste is used for various purposes such as a source of fuel for cooking, and fertilizer. More recently, livestock waste has been used to feed small-scale biogas digester for producing biogas (Table 2). Subsequently, biogas is used as source of energy for cooking and lighting [37,38]. Substantial untapped potential exists in rural areas in terms of livestock, which can be further explored through biogas technology [37]. Biogas, which contains 60–70% methane is not only useful as a cooking fuel but also can be utilized as a transportation fuel [37,39,40]. While the use of biogas as a transportation fuel has been explored, currently biogas uses for transportation is limited [41,42]. In rural India, energy consumption can be disintegrated into 3 sectors: (1) domestic/household; (2) agriculture; and (3) transportation [41,43,44,45,46,47]. Traditionally, livestock and livestock waste has contributed to all three sectors (Figure 3).
In the domestic sector, the major tasks which require energy are cooking and lighting. For cooking purposes, wood, dung, and agriculture residues are used often [41,47]. However, when available, biogas might be used for cooking purposes. For lighting purpose, the two other sources of energy in rural areas are electricity and kerosene (Figure 3).
In the agriculture sector, water pumping and agricultural operations such as plowing and harvesting are major drivers for energy demand in rural India. For water pumping, electricity and diesel are two major energy sources [37,41,48]. The use of biogas for water pumping has been explored when available. Conventionally, the use of livestock for agricultural operations such as plowing, harvesting, and more recently the uses of diesel and electricity has increased. In the transportation sector, bullock carts (based on livestock power) were popular in India, in addition to the limited uses of tractors (run by diesel). Recently, the uses of animal for transportation have declined substantially, replaced by the uses of internal combustion engine-based transportation vehicles that requires diesel. Considerable potential exists for the uses of biogas as transportation fuel in India [42,43,44].
In the past two decades, the use of electricity has increased, and it has surpassed the use of kerosene in rural areas. In rural areas, between 2006–2007, the use of electricity and kerosene in terms of energy were 56% and 42%, respectively [6]. In rural households, average electricity demand is about 39 kWh/month, which is 50% of India average residential consumption [47].
A study by the World Bank reported that about 65.53% of population live in India, and 92.9% of the rural population has access to electricity (in 2018), and 41% of rural population has access to clean fuel-based technologies for cooking purposes [48]. In 2015, India obtained 15.34% of total electricity from renewable sources. Electricity demand in a village is about 1826 kWh/day, and the majority of it is used for household activities. The low consumption of electricity in rural areas in India is potentially due to the uses of fewer appliances, which require electricity such as refrigerators, electric burner, and mixer/grinders [42,47,48].
In agriculture purpose, electricity is mainly used for irrigation. More than 18 million irrigation pumps are working across India, which are run by electricity [48,49]. In cases where electricity is not available, pumps are run by diesel fuel (Figure 3) [50]. As shown in Figure 3, in each sector of energy consumption (domestic, agriculture, and transportation), biogas can play a substantial role in the use of existing technologies currently available for converting biogas produced from animal waste into electricity (with the help of generator) and transportation fuel (i.e., bio-CNG). The use of compressed natural gas (CNG) produced from biogas (bio-CNG) can be used as an alternative fuel to transportation fuels. Further, bio-CNG causes low greenhouse gas emission.
Applsci 11 10671 g003 550
Figure 3. Energy consumption in domestic, agriculture, and transportation sectors of India, and livestock contribution (data source: [42,43,45,48,50].
Figure 3. Energy consumption in domestic, agriculture, and transportation sectors of India, and livestock contribution (data source: [42,43,45,48,50].
Applsci 11 10671 g003
Table
Table 2. Livestock waste and waste utilization for various purposes in India.
Table 2. Livestock waste and waste utilization for various purposes in India.
Livestock TypeProduction of Manure (Million Tonnes/Year)Waste Use as a Source of Cooking EnergyWaste Use as a Source of FertilizerWaste Use for Biogas Production Using Biogas DigesterSource
Cow730YesYesYes[51]
Buffalo574YesYesYes[51]
Chicken6.25–8NoYesYes[52]
Sheep3.28NoYesYes[53]
Goat93.06NoYesYes[54]
In addition, bio-gasification, which is a conversion of biomass into biogas, could assist further in meeting the energy demand for domestic, agriculture, and transportation fuel purposes. For bio-gasification, the required biomass is abundantly available in the majority of the rural regions in many countries. One of the challenges in the implementation of bio-gasification is the level of technology expertise required for the operation of bio-gasification plants. Compared to anaerobic digesters, which have minimal moving parts and require minimal maintenance, the bio-gasification process involves multiple thermo-chemical reactions and successful operations requires advanced scientific and technological skills, particularly when gaseous products of bio-gasification are converted into electricity using generator. In many developing countries, attempts to install of bio-gasification plants were not very successful because plants were often dysfunctional or below the optimal capacity due to the lack of maintenance of the gas engines.

4. Biogas Promotion and Various Biogas Model Types Population in India

In India, the substantial uses of biogas energy and installations of biogas plants started in 1981–1982, when a National Project on Biogas Development (NPBD) was launched by the Ministry of Non-Conventional Energy Sources (MNES) [55,56]. Under this program, the installation of small-size biogas plants, which can be operated using 2–4 livestock were popularized. Substantial portions of expenditures incurred during installations of these plants were covered by the MNES [55]. The NPBD projects incentivized households to accept biogas technology, workers help in construction, and implementing agencies support the dissemination of biogas technologies in India. This was a crucial initiative by MNES since fossil fuel-based energy sources such as liquid petroleum gas were not commonly available in rural areas of India [57,58].
The nation-wide implementation of NPBD project helped in the installation of biogas plants across India. The top five provinces, which have the largest number of small size biogas plants are Maharashtra, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh. Biogas plant numbers and livestock populations in these provinces are shown in Table 3. The largest number of biogas plants (about a million) are installed in various rural parts of Maharashtra. In Madhya Pradesh, the number of biogas plants are approximately 376,221 [58,59,60].
In India, multiple types of small-scale biogas digesters have been promoted. These can be divided into two major types: (1) floating type biogas plants; and (2) fixed dome types. Both floating and fixed dome types of biogas plants are semicontinuous types (Figure 4). A typical floating drum type biogas plant (Figure 5) involves a floating chamber, a manure chamber, feed inlet, and effluent outlets. In fixed dome-type biogas plants, a chamber/head space, which holds biogas, is fixed type (Figure 6). These fixed dome-type biogas plants also involve feed inlet, effluent outlets, and a chamber to house manure in anaerobic environment.
Figure 5 shows a typical floating drum type biogas plant, which can vary in size between 1–10 m3. This is also known as KVIC type. There are 4 different types of floating drum-based biogas plants (Figure 3): (1) KVIC; (2) Pragati; (3) Ganesh; and (4) ferro cement floating drum. A biogas collector, which is under floating conditions and collects the gas; depending on the biogas volume and pressure, it moves upwards and downwards, which regulates biogas pressure at the biogas outlets (Figure 4). In general, floating drum is built of metals, and concrete is used to build chamber for housing livestock waste under anaerobic conditions.
Fixed dome biogas plant design is shown in Figure 6. In contrast to the floating drum, in the fixed dome gas the chamber/head space is fixed and an outlet is provided in the top of fixed dome for gas. The anaerobic chamber, which houses livestock waste in anaerobic conditions, is built using concrete. Inlet and outlets of fixed dome and floating drome are similar in nature.
While comparing the efficiency of the fixed dome and floating dome biogas plants, studies showed that gas losses are higher in a floating dome type of digester, particularly when biogas was used to run a diesel engine. Fixed dome type of biogas plants has lower biogas losses. Further, the cost of construction of the floating drum digesters are almost twice to that of fixed dome type of digesters. In addition, the constructions of floating drum type of digesters require advanced technical skills in operations and maintenance. This could be one possible reason for the more popularity of fixed dome digester compared to the floating drum digester. One advantage of floating drum digesters is that this they do not often require mixing/agitation. Due to the inherent mixing in floating type digesters, the biogas production in floating drum digesters are expected to be slightly superior compared to fixed dome type. However, a detailed comparative study where these two different types of digesters (floating and fixed domes) of various sizes are compared for rates of biogas production and efficiencies is yet to be conducted. Both in India and China, the majority of the biogas plants (small sizes) are fixed dome type digesters.

5. Limitation in Biogas Production and Future Biogas Potential in India

While biogas technology is a robust and well-proven technique for converting animal waste into biogas, multiple challenges exist in India for large scale adaptations. Both technical and non-technological barriers exist [41], which hinders the dissemination of biogas technology in India. One of the major barriers is economic in rural areas. Biogas technology adaptations in urban areas are limited because, previously, the majority of livestock populations were in rural areas. However, currently a large number of small to medium size dairy industries, which house 10–100 dairy cows, are located in the vicinity of urban areas, where biogas digesters can play crucial role in treating animal waste, removing odor problems, creating a better environment for livestock, and converting livestock waste into biogas, a source of renewable energy.
Here, it is important to clarify the definition of rural versus urban areas in the context of India because the definition of rural and urban areas differ from one country to the next. In India, rural areas are defined (based on national sample survey organizations) as the living environment where the population density is up to 400 per square kilometer. On the other hand, urban areas are defined cities with a population of more than 5000. An additional criteria for urban areas is that 75% of male workforce in the city should be engaged in non-agriculture activities. In urban areas, the availability of livestock waste could be low, however, combining the food waste (often available abundantly) with livestock to operate these digesters can also improve the biogas production as it can enhance the food waste recycling and control the excessive influx of food waste into landfills.
Currently, livestock living environments and sanitation in livestock housing requires improvement in many dairy farms in India. A new National Biogas and Organic Manure Program (NNBOMP) has been launched to promote the installation of biogas plants of sizes between 1 and 25 m3 with the objective of providing green and clean renewable energy source for domestic purposes [61,62]. Considering the livestock population in India, a substantial potential exists for producing biogas and organic fertilizer generated by biogas plants. An estimation showed that around 302.23 million livestock heads can produce 33,000 million m3 biogas considering collection recovery of cattle dung of 70%. Recently, multiple biogas-based projects with the aim of producing power have been installed, with power generation capacities of 212 kW and a corresponding biogas generation capacity of 1805 m3/day, which can be seen as positive development in terms of biogas technology adaptions. Recently waste-to-energy projects are commissioned, and existing capacity is to produce biogas of 702,508 m3 per day and 84,759 kg per day of compressed biogas, and 141 MW of biogas-based electric power per day [62,63]. Currently, the cumulative total of 316 biogas-based projects are in operation with a total power generation capacity of 7.166 MW, however, considering the potential of biogas productions existing capacity is substantially low [55,56,57]. Relatively, the cost of constructions of biogas plants in India vary between $102 USD to $479 for 1 m3 to 25 m3, respectively, which is an affordable investment considering the benefits of biogas plants [63]. Large-scale biogas plants (>5000 m3), which can use livestock waste and other organic waste including municipal waste can be used for converting organic waste into renewable energy is yet to be explored in India at large scale [41]. The use of biogas for transportation requires additional processes such as scrubbing, compression and upgradation of biogas, which can replace existing fossil-based transport fuel is yet to be achieved [42,43]. In terms of manpower, for the construction and operations of biogas plants, substantial resources exist, however, strategies for training relevant personal, and long-term planning are required in order to trap this underutilized potential in India.

6. Future Perspective for Biogas Technology in India

Considering the livestock population in India and growing demand for milk production, technologies which help treating animal waste and converting animal waste into renewable energy have substantial scope for development and implementation, and biogas technology is one of them. One of the major advantages in using biogas technology for treating animal waste is that it is relatively simple to develop, easily scalable, and produces a source of energy, and demand for energy in India is consistently increasing. Research showed that biogas potential in India ranges from 310–655 billion m3 per year by 2040 [64]. Reports indicate that India may require more than 5000 compressed biogas plants (CPG) by 2023 [65]. Currently, the limited infrastructure of building large-scale biogas plants and compressing of biogas exist in India. The primary purpose of the planned CPG biogas plants is to increase the availability and affordability of renewable transport fuels and identify sustainable alternative energy source [65]. Approximately 600 million tons of biowaste is produced in India, which has the potential to increase compressed natural gas (CNG) production by 25 times and replace 50% of the total fuel imports [66]. In India, 3 different sizes of biogas plants are installed: (1) small size biogas plants; (2) medium size biogas plants; (3) large-scale (i.e., industrial size biogas plants. The current trend of dairy farms in India showed that dairy farm structure is evolving, and medium-size dairy (up to 50 cows) farm numbers are increasing, while smaller size (conventional) dairy farms with 1–5 milking animals are decreasing [67]. In many regions, the growth in medium-size dairy farms is about 30% per year [67,68]. Often when sizes of dairy farms increase, it requires improved manure management, and anaerobic digesters/biogas plants can play a crucial role in improving the manure management. The number of dairy farms in India is more than 75 million, which are more than any other countries in the world [69,70]. Based on a report by FAO, South Asia (including India) and European Union (EU)-25 are the largest dairy regions accounting for more than 44% global milk production [70,71]. The largest population of bovine in the world live in India, which accounts for 22% global milk production [70,71], and the production of animal waste in the dairy industry is unavoidable. A recent 19th Livestock Census reported that livestock population in India is about 512 million, which potentially produces 1095 million metric tons (MT) manure per year [71,72]. When manure management in the livestock environment is poor, it negatively affects livestock health, milk production, and poses risk to public and animal health [73,74]. In many developing countries such as India, substantial improvement in manure management is needed to enhance livestock living conditions and reduce the negative impacts of manure in environment and mitigate the public and animal health risk, and anaerobic digester/biogas plant technology can assist in improving the manure management and reducing the adverse impacts of manure in environment [74,75].
To disseminate biogas technology for conversion of animal waste, food waste, and biomass/organic waste into biogas (a renewable energy source), the availability of technologies can be considered sufficient. A range of technologies for converting biogas into electricity and transportation fuels are currently available. Challenges, however, in the adaptation of biogas technology include the required investment, operational cost, and economic benefits of biogas production. The use of biogas as a transportation fuel is relatively new and yet to be adapted at a large scale, however, it is an attractive alternative [76] to improve the biogas market and consumptions, which can provide a better financial return compared to the use of biogas as a source of heat.
The cost of biogas plant construction/production, operational cost of biogas plants, and cost/benefits of biogas plants is likely to change substantially from one country to the other and, particularly, there could be a huge difference in the cost of construction in developing countries versus developed countries due to the cost of labor and required materials. Existing reports suggest [77] that total production cost for a biogas plant (i.e., essential installations except land) is about 50–75 USD/m3. Out of this, approximately 30–40% of the total cost is the digester. The running cost is equally important because operation of large-scale digester requires more human hours in supervision, disposal, gas distribution, administration, acquisition of parts, and feeding of the digesters. With the help of technology, automation can reduce the requirement of human hours, however, it will increase the production and installation costs. While calculating the capital costs, it is important to consider interest rate and lifetime of biogas plants (which is around 15–20 years) [77]. Studies available for biogas plants in California, USA suggest that the estimated total cost for dairy biogas to biomethane plants can vary from $8.12 USD–$11.82 USD/1000 ft3 [78]. Life-cycle cost analysis of the operations of anerobic digesters in Iowa, USA, suggest that the capital cost of the digester attached to a 2400 head of cattle operation is about $3.12 million USD. Internal rate of return was 4.56%, when cattle waste was co-digested with glycerin and corn husk that has 950 kW of electric generation capacity [79]. The operational cost was mainly due to the labor and maintenance, which is about 67% of the cost of the digester.
In developing countries such as India, the high capital cost is the key barrier to adapt the biogas technology in rural areas [41]. The cost involves for the construction, labor, and equipment to complete the installation is high considering rural household incomes, which is low. Currently, the installation cost of family size biogas plants is approximately $348 USD, and government often provides $123–$200 USD subsidies (20–40% of the total installation cost) [80]. Without financial supports many households may not be able to adapt the biogas technologies in many developing counties. The large-scale adaptation of biogas technologies in both developing and developed countries is likely to be driven by subsidies and support from various government agencies under current situations.

7. Conclusions

This study was conducted to improve existing understating of biogas program in India. Both small-scale and large-scale biogas potential have been reviewed in considering with livestock population and livestock waste. Livestock waste production in India is enormous, and currently only a small fraction of this waste is used for biogas productions. This limited capability and untapped biogas not only reduces the renewable energy source in the forms of biomethane but also the emission of biogas into the air causes greenhouse gases in atmosphere, which are reportedly responsible for global warming and climate change. In general, biogas technology is mature and has been developed for small dairy farms as well as large-scale dairy farms, and biogas can be converted into various forms of useful fuel (i.e., electricity, transportation fuel, and natural gas). Improvement in existing planning, financial support, implementation, and evaluation and monitoring is needed to use the potential of biogas technology and livestock waste in India.

Author Contributions

P.P., A.P., V.P. and J.H. were involved in data collection, and preparing first draft of manuscript. V.P., L.Y., D.W. and P.K.P. were involved in conceptualization of manuscript and provided inputs during manuscript preparation. B.C.M., R.Z., P.K.P., V.P. were involved in critical reviewing of manuscript and provided feedback to improve the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not Applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not Applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Authors acknowledge Biogas Institute of Ministry of Agriculture (BIOMA), No. 13, Section 4, South Renmin Road, Wuhou District, Chengdu, China for supporting this work.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest. The funders have no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Garg, P. Energy scenario and vision 2020 in India. J. Sustain. Energy Environ. 2012, 3, 7–17. [Google Scholar]
  2. Countries of the World by Population. 2021. Available online: https://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/population-by-country.htm (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  3. BBC. What Has Brought India’s Farmers to the Streets? Available online: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-55157574 (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  4. Census Report 2011, Government of India. Available online: https://censusindia.gov.in/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  5. BBC. India Farmer Protests: How Rural Incomes Have Struggled to Keep Up. Available online: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-55413499 (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  6. PRB. How People in India ‘Really Live’. Available online: https://www.prb.org/resources/how-people-in-india-really-live/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  7. United Nations University Research Brief. Inequality in Rural India. Available online: https://www.wider.unu.edu/publication/inequality-rural-india (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  8. Pew Research Center. World Population by Income. Available online: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/interactives/global-population-by-income/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  9. FAO. Gateway to Dairy Production and Products. Available online: http://www.fao.org/dairy-production-products/production/en/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  10. Economic Survey: Milk Production Rises by Five Percent to 198.4 Million Tonnes in 2019–2020. Available online: https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/economy/agriculture/economic-survey-milk-production-rises-by-five-percent-to-198-4-million-tonnes-in-2019-20/articleshow/80585416.cms?from=mdr (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  11. Business World. Dairy Products in India: Where Does India Stand? 2021. Available online: http://www.businessworld.in/article/Dairy-Products-In-India-Where-Does-India-Stand-/05-01-2021-361921/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  12. FAO. India: Increasing Demand Challenges the Dairy Sector. 2021. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i0588e/I0588E05.htm (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  13. FAO. Livestock and the Environment. 2021. Available online: http://www.fao.org/livestock-environment/en/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  14. WHO. As More Go Hungry and Malnutrition Persists, Achieving Zero Hunger by 2030 in Doubt, UN Report Warns. Available online: https://www.who.int/news/item/13-07-2020-as-more-go-hungry-and-malnutrition-persists-achieving-zero-hunger-by-2030-in-doubt-un-report-warns (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  15. FAO. Hunger and Food Insecurity. 2021. Available online: http://www.fao.org/hunger/en/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  16. FAO. Manure Helps Feed the World. Integrated Manure Management Demonstrates Manure Is A Valuable Resource. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/bl516e/bl516e.pdf (accessed on 9 September 2021).
  17. Bloomfield, E. Gender and Livelihoods Impacts of Clean Cookstoves in South Asia; Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves: Washington, DC, USA, 2015; Available online: https://www.cleancookingalliance.org/binary-data/RESOURCE/file/000/000/363-1.pdf (accessed on 2 September 2021).
  18. Munandar, F.G.; Hayati, Y.R.; Munawar, A.I. Crop-Cattle Integrated Farming System: An Alternative of Climatic Change Mitigation. J. Anim. Sci. Technol. 2015, 38, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Pandey, P.K.; Ndegwa, P.M.; Alldredge, J.R.; Pitts, M.; Soupir, M.L. Modeling effects of granules on the start-up of anaerobic digestion of dairy wastewater with Langmuir and extended Freundlich equations. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2010, 33, 833–845. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Pandey, P.K.; Soupir, M.L. Escherichia coli inactivation kinetics in anaerobic digestion of dairy manure under moderate, mesophilic and thermophilic temperatures. AMB Express 2011, 1, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  21. Pandey, P.K.; Ndegwa, P.M.; Soupir, M.L.; Alldredge, R.J.; Pitts, M.J. Efficacies of inocula on the startup of anaerobic reactors treating dairy manure under stirred and unstirred conditions. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35, 2705–2720. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Angelidaki, I.; Ellegaard, L. Codigestion of manure and organic wastes in centralized biogas plants. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2003, 109, 95–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Aggarangsi, P.; Tippayawong, N.; Moran, J.C.; Rerkkriangkrai, P. Overview of livestock biogas technology development and implementation in Thailand. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2013, 17, 371–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Noorollahi, Y.; Kheirrouz, M.; Asl, H.F.; Yousefi, H.; Hajinezhad, A. Biogas production potential from livestock manure in Iran. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 50, 748–754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Chowdhury, T.; Chowdhury, H.; Hossain, N.; Ahmed, A.; Hossen, M.S.; Chowdhury, P.; Thirugnanasambandam, M.; Saidur, R. Latest advancements on livestock waste management and biogas production: Bangladesh’s perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 272, 122818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Eghball, B.; Wienhold, B.J.; Gilley, J.E.; Eigenberg, R.A. Mineralization of manure nutrients. J. Soil Water Conserv. 2002, 57, 470–473. [Google Scholar]
  27. Ferguson, R.B.; Nienaber, J.A.; Eigenberg, R.A.; Woodbury, B.L. Long-term effects of sustained beef feedlot manure application on soil nutrients, corn silage yield, and nutrient uptake. J. Environ. Qual. 2005, 34, 1672–1681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Pedaprolu, R.; Panwar, N.R.; Singh, A.R.; Ramana, S.; Rao, A.S. Impact of organic-manure combinations on the productivity and soil quality in different cropping systems in central India. J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci. 2009, 172, 577–585. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hati, K.M.; Mandal, K.G.; Misra, A.K.; Ghosh, P.K.; Bandyopadhyay, K.K. Effect of inorganic fertilizer and farmyard manure on soil physical properties, root distribution, and water-use efficiency of soybean in Vertisols of central India. Bioresour. Technol. 2006, 97, 2182–2188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Parham, J.; Deng, S.; Raun, W.; Johnson, G. Long-term cattle manure application in soil. Biol. Fertil. Soils 2002, 35, 328–337. [Google Scholar]
  31. El-Akabawy, M.A. Effect of some biofertilizers and farmyard manure on yield and nutrient uptake of Egyptian clover grown on loamy sand soil. Egypt. J. Agric. Res. 2000, 78, 1811–1820. [Google Scholar]
  32. Rasoulzadeh, A.; Yaghoubi, A. Effect of cattle manure on soil physical properties on a sandy clay loam soil in North-West Iran. J. Food Agric. Environ. 2010, 8, 976–979. [Google Scholar]
  33. Feroze, S.M.; Raju, V.T.; Singh, R.; Tripathi, A.K. Status of livestock sector: A micro study of North Eastern India. Indian J. Hill Farming 2010, 23, 43–51. [Google Scholar]
  34. Sonavale, K.P.; Shaikh, M.R.; Kadam, M.M.; Pokharkar, V.G. Livestock sector in India: A critical analysis. Asian J. Agric. Ext. Econ. Sociol. 2020, 38, 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Thiruvenkadan, A.K.; Rajendran, R.; Muralidharan, J. Buffalo genetic resources of India and their conservation. Buffalo Bull 2013, 32, 227–235. [Google Scholar]
  36. National Dairy Development Board. Livestock Population in India by Species. 2021. Available online: https://www.nddb.coop/information/stats/pop (accessed on 6 September 2021).
  37. Kaur, G.; Brar, Y.S.; Kothari, D.P. Potential of livestock generated biomass: Untapped energy source in India. Energies 2017, 10, 847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Khaiwal, R.; Maninder, K.S.; Suman, M.; Siby, J. Trend in household energy consumption pattern in India: A case study on the influence of socio-cultural factors for the choice of clean fuel use. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 213, 1024–1034. [Google Scholar]
  39. Murphy, J.D.; McKeogh, E. Technical, economic and environmental analysis of energy production from municipal solid waste. Renew. Energy 2004, 29, 1043–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Qie, S.; Hailong, L.; Jinying, Y.; Longcheng, L.; Zhixin, Y.; Xinhai, Y. Selection of appropriate biogas upgrading technology-a review of biogas cleaning, upgrading and utilisation. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 51, 521–532. [Google Scholar]
  41. Mittal, S.; Ahlgren, E.O.; Shukla, P.R. Barriers to biogas dissemination in India: A review. Energy Policy 2018, 112, 361–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Vijay, V.K.; Kapoor, R.; Trivedi, A.; Vijay, V. Biogas as clean fuel for cooking and transportation needs in India. In Advances in Bioprocess Technology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 257–275. [Google Scholar]
  43. Jha, B.; Kapoor, R.; Vijay, V.; Vijay, V.K.; Chandra, R. Biogas: A sustainable and potential fuel for transport application. J. Biofuels Bioenergy 2015, 1, 28–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kapdi, S.S.; Vijay, V.K.; Rajesh, S.K.; Prasad, R. Biogas scrubbing, compression and storage: Perspective and prospectus in Indian context. Renew. Energy 2005, 30, 1195–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Sinha, C.S.; Sinha, S.; Joshi, V. Energy use in the rural areas of India: Setting up a rural energy data base. Biomass Bioenergy 1998, 14, 489–503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Kowsari, R.; Zerriffi, H. Three dimensional energy profile: A conceptual framework for assessing household energy use. Energy Policy 2011, 39, 7505–7517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Rockefeller Foundation. Rural Electrification in India: Customer Behaviour and Demand. 2021. Available online: https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/report/rural-electrification-india-customer-behaviour-demand/ (accessed on 1 September 2021).
  48. Choudhuri, P.; Desai, S. Gender inequalities and household fuel choice in India. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 265, 121487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. ICRISAT. Smart Villages. Energy and Agriculture for Smart Villages in India. 2016. Available online: https://e4sv.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Energy-and-Agriculture-for-Smart-Villages-in-India.compressed.pdf (accessed on 9 May 2021).
  50. Bhatia, R. Diffusion of renewable energy technologies in developing countries: A case study of biogas engines in India. World Dev. 1990, 18, 575–590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairying. Government of India Report. Available online: https://dahd.nic.in/related-links/chapter-v-part-2 (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  52. Using Chicken Manure Fertilizer in Your Garden. Available online: https://www.gardeningknowhow.com/composting/manures/chicken-manure-fertilizer.htm (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  53. A Guide to Compost Sheep Manure for Organic Fertilizer. Available online: https://organicfertilizermachine.com/eco-solutions/compost-sheep-manure-organic-fertilizer.html (accessed on 6 September 2021).
  54. Agri Farming. Goat Manure Advantages and Disadvantages. Available online: https://www.agrifarming.in/goat-manure-advantages-and-disadvantages (accessed on 5 September 2021).
  55. Tomar, S.S. Status of biogas plant in India. Renew. Energy 1994, 5, 829–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Khan, E.U.; Martin, A.R. Review of biogas digester technology in rural Bangladesh. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 62, 247–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Zia, S.; Sreekrishnan, T.R. Biogas: An evolutionary perspective in the Indian context. In Green Fuels Technology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 431–443. [Google Scholar]
  58. Azeem Hafiz, P.A.; Rashid, A.R.; Muhamed, S.A.; Sharukh, M. Study of Biogas as a Sustainable Energy Source in India. Int. J. Res. Mech. Eng. 2016, 4, 58–62. [Google Scholar]
  59. Statista. Number of Biogas Plants across India, as of March 2020, by State. 2020. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/941298/india-number-of-biogas-plants-by-state/ (accessed on 7 September 2021).
  60. Livestock Census. Available online: https://vikaspedia.in/agriculture/agri-directory/reports-and-policy-briefs/20th-livestock-census (accessed on 2 September 2021).
  61. Bharti, V. India’s Programmes and Incentives Being Implemented to Support Biogas Systems; Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Government of India: New Delhi, India, 2019. Available online: https://globalmethane.org/documents/01_India%27s%20programmes%20and%20incentives%20being%20implemented%20to%20support%20biogas%20systems_Vijay%20Barthi_MNRE.pdf (accessed on 25 September 2021).
  62. Narale, P.D.; Kharpude, S.N.; Seveda, M.S. Biogas Production, Utilization and Entrepreneurship Opportunities. In Bioenergy Engineering, 1st ed.; CRC Press: London, UK, 2021; pp. 17–34. [Google Scholar]
  63. MNRE. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy: Methane Reduction Policies. 2021. Available online: https://www.globalmethane.org/challenge/mnre.html#:~:text=The%20New%20National%20Biogas%20and%20Organic%20Manure%20Programme,1%20to%2025%20%20m%203%20per%20day (accessed on 25 September 2021).
  64. Mittal, S.; Ahlgren, E.O.; Shukla, P.R. Future biogas resource potential in India: A bottom-up analysis. Renew. Energy 2019, 141, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Bioenergy Insight. India to Build 5000 Biogas Plants by 2023. 2018. Available online: https://www.bioenergy-news.com/news/india-to-build-5000-biogas-plants-by-2023/ (accessed on 18 September 2021).
  66. OkCredit. What Is the Future of the Biogas Industry in India? 2021. Available online: https://okcredit.in/blog/the-future-of-biogas-industry-in-india/ (accessed on 18 September 2021).
  67. Market Trends. Dairy Farms in India Become Bigger. 2017. Available online: https://www.dairyglobal.net/Market-trends/Articles/2017/12/Dairy-farms-in-India-become-bigger-226874E/ (accessed on 18 September 2021).
  68. FAO. Global Dairy Sector: Status and Trends. 2021. Available online: http://www.fao.org/3/i1522e/i1522e02.pdf (accessed on 18 September 2021).
  69. Quartz. India’s 75 Million Dairy Farms Now Produce More Milk than All of the European Union. 2014. Available online: https://qz.com/235085/india-75-million-dairy-farms-now-make-more-milk-than-all-of-the-european-union/ (accessed on 18 September 2021).
  70. The Vegan Review. Inside India’s World-Leading Dairy Industry. 2020. Available online: https://theveganreview.com/inside-indias-world-leading-dairy-industry/ (accessed on 18 September 2021).
  71. Parihar, S.S.; Saini, K.P.S.; Lakhani, G.P.; Jain, A.; Roy, B.; Ghosh, S.; Aharwal, B. Livestock waste management: A review. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 2019, 7, 384–393. [Google Scholar]
  72. Pandey, P.K.; Kass, P.H.; Soupir, M.L. Contamination of water resources by pathogenic bacteria. AMB Express 2014, 4, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. Pandey, P.K.; Biswas, S.; Vaddella, V.K.; Soupir, M.L. Escherichia coli persistence kinetics in dairy manure at moderate, mesophilic, and thermophilic temperatures under aerobic and anaerobic environments. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2015, 38, 457–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Pandey, P.K.; Soupir, M.L. Assessing the impacts of E. coli laden streambed sediment on E. coli loads over a range of flows and sediment characteristics. J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc. 2013, 49, 1261–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Pandey, P.K.; Soupir, M.L. Impacts of temperatures on biogas production in dairy manure anaerobic digestion. International Journal of Engineering and Technology. Int. J. Eng. Technol. 2012, 4, 629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Siya, A.W.; Yasin, M.; Ali, I.; Hussain, Z.; Asiam, M.; Khan, M. Performance evaluation of fixed dome and floating type biogas digesters for tubewell operation with dual fuel approach in Pakistan. Int. J. Innov. Appl. Stud. 2015, 10, 1225–1232. [Google Scholar]
  77. Javier, D.; Helbig, F.; Pfisterer, A.N. Humanitarian Energy Decarbonisation Webinar Series—Technical Trainings and Tools for Energy System Design. 2021. Available online: https://energypedia.info/wiki/Costs_of_a_Biogas_Plant#Production_Costs (accessed on 16 October 2021).
  78. Krich, K.; Augenstein, D.; Batmale, J.P.; Benemann, J.; Rutledge, B.; Salour, D. Biomethane from Dairy Waste. 2005. Available online: https://suscon.org/pdfs/cowpower/biomethaneSourcebook/Full_Report.pdf (accessed on 10 October 2021).
  79. Aui, A.; Wright, M.M. Life Cycle Cost Analysis of the Operations of Anaerobic Digesters in Iowa. 2018. Available online: http://www.iowabiogasmodel.us/Anaerobic_Digestion_LCA_Final_Report.pdf (accessed on 16 October 2021).
  80. Samar, K.K.; Sharma, D.; Meena, E. The Solid State Biogas Plant: A Boon for Water Scarce Areas Akshay Urja Ministry of New and Renewable Energy; Government of India: New Delhi, India, 2016.
Applsci 11 10671 g001 550
Figure 1. Livestock, manure, and biogas production (integration of livestock waste).
Figure 1. Livestock, manure, and biogas production (integration of livestock waste).
Applsci 11 10671 g001
Applsci 11 10671 g002 550
Figure 2. Steady increase in total bovine population (cattle, adult cattle, buffalo, and adult buffalo) between 1950 and 2019 are shown (data source: National Dairy Development Board [36]).
Figure 2. Steady increase in total bovine population (cattle, adult cattle, buffalo, and adult buffalo) between 1950 and 2019 are shown (data source: National Dairy Development Board [36]).
Applsci 11 10671 g002
Applsci 11 10671 g004 550
Figure 4. Classification of various types of biogas plants in India.
Figure 4. Classification of various types of biogas plants in India.
Applsci 11 10671 g004
Applsci 11 10671 g005 550
Figure 5. Floating dome types of biogas plants in India.
Figure 5. Floating dome types of biogas plants in India.
Applsci 11 10671 g005
Applsci 11 10671 g006 550
Figure 6. Fixed dome types of biogas plants in India.
Figure 6. Fixed dome types of biogas plants in India.
Applsci 11 10671 g006
Table
Table 1. Livestock population in India, and manure production (top five species population).
Table 1. Livestock population in India, and manure production (top five species population).
Animal TypeNumbers (Millions)Manure (Million kg/Day)Manure (Tonnes/Year)Remarks and References
Cow192.5 1405.25730 millionAnnual manure production was calculated based on number of animals and manure production per animals. Average cow numbers were obtained from National Dairy Development Board Database [13,14,36].
Buffalo109.9 802.27574 millionAnnual manure production was calculated based on number of animals and manure production per animals. Average cow numbers were obtained from National Dairy Development Board Database [13,14,36].
Poultry851.8 0.0171–0.02196.25–8 millionAnnual manure production was calculated based on number of animals and manure production per animals. Average cow numbers were obtained from National Dairy Development Board Database [13,14,36].
Sheep74.31.813.2833 millionAnnual manure production was calculated based on number of animals and manure production per animals. Average cow numbers were obtained from National Dairy Development Board Database [14,36].
Goat148.90.62593.0625 millionAnnual manure production was calculated based on number of animals and manure production per animals. Average cow numbers were obtained from National Dairy Development Board Database [36].
Table
Table 3. Top five provinces with largest number of biogas plants in India.
Table 3. Top five provinces with largest number of biogas plants in India.
State/Province NamesBiogas Plant NumberLivestock Number (Million)Sources
Maharashtra924,09233[37,55,59,60]
Karnataka510,94229
Uttar Pradesh440,94967.8
Gujrat435,28726.9
Madhya Pradesh376,22140.6
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Pandey, P.; Pandey, A.; Yan, L.; Wang, D.; Pandey, V.; Meikap, B.C.; Huo, J.; Zhang, R.; Pandey, P.K. Dairy Waste and Potential of Small-Scale Biogas Digester for Rural Energy in India. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10671. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210671

AMA Style

Pandey P, Pandey A, Yan L, Wang D, Pandey V, Meikap BC, Huo J, Zhang R, Pandey PK. Dairy Waste and Potential of Small-Scale Biogas Digester for Rural Energy in India. Applied Sciences. 2021; 11(22):10671. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210671

Chicago/Turabian Style

Pandey, Prachi, Aditya Pandey, Long Yan, Dengshan Wang, Vinay Pandey, Bhim Charan Meikap, Jiang Huo, Ruihong Zhang, and Pramod K. Pandey. 2021. "Dairy Waste and Potential of Small-Scale Biogas Digester for Rural Energy in India" Applied Sciences 11, no. 22: 10671. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210671

APA Style

Pandey, P., Pandey, A., Yan, L., Wang, D., Pandey, V., Meikap, B. C., Huo, J., Zhang, R., & Pandey, P. K. (2021). Dairy Waste and Potential of Small-Scale Biogas Digester for Rural Energy in India. Applied Sciences, 11(22), 10671. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112210671

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop