1. Air Pollution Control
 Specific to Methane Digestion in the
landfill
 Skill towards bioremediation for air
pollution
 Engineering skills for Methane
digester design

2. Study of Methane
Digestion in a Newly
Designed Biofilter

3. Specific Objectives:
 To design a methane biofilter
 To find out the suitable material
to maximize the bio-digestion
of methane.
 To develop a relation between
biomass growth and methane
consumption efficiency.

4. Experimental setup for the methane
biofilter

5. Another view of the experimental
setup

6. a] Schematic diagram of the experimental
Biofilter Column and [b] Top View

7. Different properties of filter materials
Parameter Compost Sawdust Sand
Bulk Density (kg/m3) 568 168 1310
Water Content (%) 37 8.7 0.6
Ignition loss (%) 45 98 3
pH 7.2 6.8 7.8

8. [a] Gas collection balloons, [b] Solution
extracted from compost, sawdust, and sand

9. [a] Gas Chromatograph, [b] GC
Syringe opening

10. [a] Seeded BOD bottles, [b] DO
and pH measurement

11. Chemical Oxygen Demand
Analysis

12. [a] Centrifuge Tubes, [b] Bio-Rad
Bradford Kit, [c] Standard Cuvettes, [d]
Sample Cuvettes

13. Methanotrophs Plate Count
Analysis

14. Methanotrophs Plate Count
Analysis

15. Initial experimental conditions of
the selected three media
Description of parameters Compost Sawdust Sand
Methane supply concentration (%) 2.70 2.70 2.70
Packed bed depth (cm) 50 50 50
Moisture content (cm3/cm3) 0.372 0.414 0.044
Biofilter volume (m3) 0.115 0.115 0.115
Bulk density of filter (kg/ m3) 568 183 1310
Methane mass flow rate (g/m3/hr) 3.4×10-3 3.4×10-3 3.4×10-3
COD status of filter (mg/L) 4842 3626 122
BOD status of filter (mg/L) 457 256 17
Biomass density (g/ m3) 876 408 32

16. Fig. 5.2: Specific capacity of methane digestion in different materials
40.00
35.00
30.00
25.00
Sp. methane digestion (g/m3/hr)
20.00
15.00
Linear (Compost) y = -0.7886x + 33.03
10.00
Linear (Saw dust) y = -0.2992x + 21.43
5.00 Linear (Sand)
y = -0.2677x + 20.685
0.00
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time period (week)

17. Fig. 5.3: Trends of temperature rise in different biofilters wrt inlet temperature
40
TempCompost TempSaw dust TempSand
35
30
0 C)
25
Filter bed temp (
20
15
10
5
0
20.7 21.1 21.8 19 17.7 21.2 18.7 21.6 21 19.9 20.7
0
Inlet temperature ( C)

18. Fig. 5.4: Relationship betw een methane digestion and temperature rise in different biofilters
1 20.0
DigestionCompost DigestionSaw dust DigestionSand
1 00.0
%)
80.0
Methane digestion (
60.0
40.0
20.0
0.0
25 29 27 25 22 24 22 23 21 20 21
28 30 31 25 24 28 24 24 22 22 22
27 35 36 27 26 30 26 26 24 24 23
0C)
Filter beds temperature (

19. Fig. 5.6: Methane digestion Vs moisture content in the Sawdust medium
80.00
70.00
60.00
50.00
Methane Digestion (%)
40.00
Poly. (Saw dust) y = 233.15x2 - 140.78x + 75.629
30.00
20.00
10.00
0.00
0.360 0.380 0.400 0.420 0.440 0.460 0.480 0.500 0.520
Volumetric moisture content (m 3/m 3)

20. Fig. 5.8: Trends of biomass contents at different filter media
1400
1200 Compost
Saw dust
1000 Sand
3)
800
Biomass (g/m
600
400
200
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time period (week)

21. Fig. 5.10: Relationship between biomass contents and methane digestion rates in sawdust filter
700
Saw dust
600
Pow er (Saw dust)
3)
500
y = 631.31x-0.7693
400 R2 = 0.8938
Biomass content (g/m
300
200
100
0
17.0 21.4 23.3 18.9 19.0 24.2 19.2 22.8 21.3 17.8 14.4
Methane digestion rate (g/m 3/hr)

22. Fig. 5.11: Relationship between biomass contents and methane digestion rates in sand filter
50
45 Sand
y = 40.477x -0.1626
40 Pow er (Sand)
3)
R2 = 0.9088
35
30
25
Biomass content (g/m
20
15
10
5
0
19.9 21.2 21.8 19.5 18.9 19.7 17.3 18.9 19.5 21.1 14.9
Methane digestion rate (g/m 3/hr)

23. Fig. 5.13: Trends of BOD removal status in different filter media
500
Compost
450
Sawdust
400 Sand
Power (Compost)
350
Power (Sawdust)
300 Power (Sand)
BOD status (mg/L)
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time period (week)

24. Fig. 5.12: Trends of COD removal status in different filter media
6000
Compost
Sawdust
5000
Sand
Power (Compost)
4000 Power (Sawdust)
Power (Sand)
COD status (mg/L)
3000
2000
1000
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time period (week)

25. Fig. 5.14: Trends of bacterial population at different filter media
Compost
Saw dust
Sand
250
200
150 0
(10 4)
Bacterial population
1
100 2 Time period (week)
4
50 5
6
7
0 8
Compost Saw dust Sand 9

26. Conclusion
 The methane digestion efficiency in the sawdust
medium was 60% with the biomass content of
238 g/m3 while the compost medium had 86%
with 539 g/m3 biomass.
 The overall results indicated that the sawdust
material can be used for minimizing methane
transfer rate from the landfill.
 The digestions efficiency in the sawdust could be
accelerated by incorporating necessary nutrients
in the beginning of the experiment.