Journal of Energy Research and Reviews

  • About
    • About the Journal
    • Submissions & Author Guideline
    • Accepted Papers
    • Editorial Policy
    • Editorial Board Members
    • Reviewers
    • Propose a Special Issue
    • Reprints
    • Subscription
    • Membership
    • Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
    • Digital Archiving Policy
    • Contact
  • Archives
  • Indexing
  • Publication Charge
  • Submission
  • Testimonials
  • Announcements
Advanced Search
  1. Home
  2. Archives
  3. 2022 - Volume 11 [Issue 2]
  4. Original Research Article

Submit Manuscript


Subscription



  • Home Page
  • Author Guidelines
  • Editorial Board Member
  • Editorial Policy
  • Propose a Special Issue
  • Membership

Biogas Production Potential from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Grape Pomace

  • Klaus Dolle
  • Nicole Weizmann
  • Jydon R. Lang

Journal of Energy Research and Reviews, Page 21-30
DOI: 10.9734/jenrr/2022/v11i230273
Published: 7 May 2022

  • View Article
  • Download
  • Cite
  • References
  • Statistics
  • Share

Abstract


Grape cultivation and wine production has been in practice since 7000 BC in ancient China. Today, top wine producing countries are France, Italy, and Spain, including the United States. New York State is the third largest wine producing state in the US, with over 28 million gallons produced in 2017. Wine pomace, the residue from wine making after pressing could be used for the production of electricity and heat replacing fossil resources. One alternative route could be anaerobic fermentation of wine making residues for the production of electricity and heat from the produced biogas.


This research investigated the cumulative biogas production from anaerobic fermentation of differently prepared red wine grape pomace. Red wine grape pomace was used as received, prepared by blending using a laboratory benchtop blender, refined using a Valley beater apparatus, and cooking the refined red wine grape pomace for 2 hours at 98°C. The pH of each solution was adjusted to 8.50 with 20% Calcium Hydroxide (Ca(OH)2) solution. 300 g of each solution and 30 g of bacteria inoculate was filled into a 500 ml Erlenmeyer flask that contained a magnetic stirrer. The anaerobic fermentation experiment have been run in duplicate, lasted for up to 170 hours, at a temperature of 39°C ± 2°C.


Untreated red wine grape pomace had the lowest cumulative biogas production of 93 ml and 151 ml.


Blended grapes showed a cumulative biogas production of 283 ml and 243 ml respectively. Refined red wine grape pomace generated the highest biogas production with 566 ml and 864 ml, followed by refined and cooked red wine grape pomace with a biogas production of 365 ml and 830 ml. The maximum biogas composition without CO2 was 70% and the minimum biogas composition was 55%.


Pre-treatment such as refining, blending, and heat treatment can increase biogas production and lead to a possible lower retention time in the fermentation vessel due faster biomass conversion.


Keywords:
  • Anaerobic digestion
  • biogas
  • co-digestion
  • energy production
  • fermentation
  • grapes
  • Full Article – PDF
  • Review History

How to Cite

Dolle, K., Weizmann, N., & Lang, J. R. (2022). Biogas Production Potential from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Grape Pomace. Journal of Energy Research and Reviews, 11(2), 21-30. https://doi.org/10.9734/jenrr/2022/v11i230273
  • ACM
  • ACS
  • APA
  • ABNT
  • Chicago
  • Harvard
  • IEEE
  • MLA
  • Turabian
  • Vancouver

References

McKenzie H. Curious and Captivating History of Wine. Usual Wines. Accessed March 18; 2022. Available: https://usualwines.com/blogs/knowledge-base/history-of-wine

McGovern PE. The Origins and Ancient History of Wine. University of Pennsylvania, Museum of Archeology and Anthropology. Retrieved November 20; 2021. Available:https://www.penn.museum/sites/wine.

Standage T. The History of the World in Six Glasses. Walker & Co; 2005.

Amerine MA. Wine. Encyclopedia Britannica. Accessed March 16; 2022. Available: https://www.britannica.com/topic/wine

How big is New York’s wine business? Inside the numbers. Accessed March 16; 2022. Availablehttps://www.newyorkupstate.com/wine-tours/2020/01/how-big-is-new-yorks-wine-business-inside-the-numbers.html

Winemaking From Start to Finish (Told in Pictures).

Available(2019, January 30). Wine Folly. Accessed March 12, 2022. Available:https://winefolly.com/tips/winemaking-from-start-to-finish-told-in-pictures/

Judy R. Yeast and Winemaking: Many Yeasts & Viewpoints. (2017, February 17). Uncorked: The Blog. Accessed March 14; 2022. Available:https://www.cawineclub.com/blog/yeast-and-winemaking-many-yeasts-viewpoints/

World on the Grapevine. Cap management in winemaking; punching, pumping and more. Word on the Grapevine. Accessed March 14, 2022. Available:https://wordonthegrapevine.co.uk/cap-management-winemaking/

Nistor E, Dobrei A, Kiss e, Ciolac V, Eleonora N. Grape pomace as fertilizer. Journal of Horiculture and Biotechnology. 2014;18(2):141-145.

Fabbri A, Bonifazi G, Serranti S. Micro-scale energy valorization of grape marcs in winery production plants. Waste Management. 2005;36:156-165.

From wine waste to safer food packaging. RNZ. Accessed March 15; 2022. Available:https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/ourchangingworld/audio/201827370/from-wine-waste-to-safer-food-packaging

Zheng Y, Lee C, Yu C, Cheng YS, Simmons CW, Zhang R, Jenkins BM, Vander Gheynst JS. Ensilage and Bioconversion of Grape Pomace into Fuel Ethanol. Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 2012;60:11128-11134.

Oliveira F., Doelle K. Anaerobic Digestion of Food Waste to Produce Biogas: A Comparison of Bioreactors to Increase Methane Content – A Review. Journal Food Process Technoloy. 2015;6(8):1-3

Dölle K., Hughes T., Kurzmann DE. From Fossil Fuels to Renewable Biogas Production from biomass Based Feedstock- A Review of Anaerobic Digester Systems. Journal of Energy Research and Reviews. 2020;5(3):1-37.

Dölle K., Hughes T. Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Water Hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) and Cow Manure. Journal of Energy Research and Reviews. 2020;5(3):49-60.

DIN 38414 Schlamm und Sedimente (Guppe S) Bestimmung des Faulverhaltens (S8), German

TAPPI T412 om-06. Moisture in pulp, paper and paperboard.

TAPPI T 200 sp-06. Laboratory beating of pulp (Valley beater method).
  • Abstract View: 103 times
    PDF Download: 52 times

Download Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
  • Linkedin
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • WhatsApp
  • Telegram
Make a Submission / Login
Information
  • For Readers
  • For Authors
  • For Librarians
Current Issue
  • Atom logo
  • RSS2 logo
  • RSS1 logo


© Copyright 2010-Till Date, Journal of Energy Research and Reviews. All rights reserved.