Effect of biomass co-digestion and application of artificial intelligence in biogas production: A review

References

• Abdallah, M., L. Fernandes, and M. A. Warith (2017) Modeling of biogas generation in bioreactor landfills using neuro-fuzzy system Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Modelling, Simulation and Optimatization Held at: Quebec, Canada
   Google Scholar
• Abdul, S. F., N. S. Md, and M. Norwati. 2017. Modelling of biogas production from banana stem waste with neural networks learning strategies to optimise the production. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 95 (2):15–31.
   Google Scholar
• Aboudi, K., C. J. Álvarez-Gallego, and L. I. Romero-García. 2016. Evaluation of methane generation and process stability from anaerobic codigestion of sugar beet byproduct and cow manure. Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering 121:566–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adegun, I. K., and S. S. Yaru. 2013. Cattle dung biogas as a renewable energy source for rural laboratories. Journal of Sustainable Technology 4 (1):1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Aigbodion, A. I., I. O. Bakare, E. A. Fagbemi, E. O. Abolagba, B. Omonigho, P. O. Ayeke, M. Bausa, and E. Musa. 2018. Viability of biogas production from manure/biomass in Nigeria using fixed dome digester. Universal Journal of Agricultural Research 6 (1):1–8. doi:10.13189/ujar.2018.060101.
   Google Scholar
• Aisien, F. A., and E. T. Aisien. 2020. Biogas from cassava peels waste. Detritus Multidisciplinary Journal of Waste Resources and Residues / 10:100–08. doi:10.31025/2611-4135/2020.13910.
   Google Scholar
• Akinbami, J. F. K., M. O. Ilori, T. O. Oyebisi, I. O. Oyebisi, and O. Adeoti. 2001. Biogas energy use in Nigeria: Current status, future prospects and policy implications. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 5 (1):97–112. doi:10.1016/S1364-0321(00)00005-8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al Imam, M. F. I., M. Z. H. Khan, M. A. R. Sarkar, and S. M. Ali. 2013. Development of biogas processing from cow dung, poultry waste, and water hyacinth. International Journal of Natural and Applied Science 2:3–17.
   Google Scholar
• Ali, M. M., M. Ndongo, B. Bilal, K. Yetilmezsoy, I. Youm, and M. Bahramian. 2020. Mapping of biogas production potential from livestock manures and slaughterhouse waste: A case study for African countries. Elsevier Journal of Cleaner Production 256:120499. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alkhamis, T. M., A. I. Alzoubi, and B. M. Alma’atah. 2021. Biogas production from sheep manure by a simulated underground burial system heated with cascade-controlled solar water heated system, as an indicator of biomass potential contribution to power mix in Jordan. Journal of Environmental Protection 12 (2):125–40. doi:10.4236/jep.2021.122009.
   Google Scholar
• Altunay, P., A. Sever, S. C. Serdar, and T. Abdurrahman. 2008. Prediction of effluent quality of an anaerobic treatment plant under unsteady state through anfis modeling with on-line input variables. Chemical Engineering Journal 145 (1):78–85. doi:10.1016/j.cej.2008.03.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alvarez, R., Lide, and G. Lidén. 2009. Low-Temperature anaerobic digestion of mixtures of llama, cow and sheep manure for improved methane production. Elsevier Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy 33 (3):527–33. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.08.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amare, Z. Y. 2015. The benefits of the use of biogas energy in rural areas in Ethiopia: a case study from the Amhara National Regional State, Fogera District. African Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 9 (4):332–45. doi:10.5897/AJEST2014.1838.
   Google Scholar
• Amekan, Y. 2020. The influence of microbial community dynamics on anaerobic digestion efficiency and stability: a review. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development 9 (1):85–95. doi:10.14710/ijred.9.1.85-95.
   Google Scholar
• Amigun, R. S., H. von Blottnitz, and H. von Blottnitz. 2008. Commercialization of biofuel industry in Africa: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12 (3):690–711. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2006.10.019.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amigun, B., W. Parawira, J. K. Musango, A. O. Aboyade, and A. S. Badmos (2012) Anaerobic biogas generation for rural area energy provision in Africa, Book Chapter accessed on internet https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221928128_Anaerobic_Biogas_Generation_for_Rural_Area_Energy_Provision_in_Africa August 5.
   Google Scholar
• Amirta, R., E. Herawatib, W. Suwinartia, and T. Watanabed (2016) Two-Steps Utilization of Shorea Wood Waste Biomass for the Production of Oyster Mushroom and Biogas – A zero waste approach International Conference on Food, Agriculture and Natural Resources, IC-FANRes 2015 Agriculture and Agricultural Science Procedia 9; 202–08
   Google Scholar
• Annuputtikul, W., and S. Rodtong (2004) Laboratory scale experiments for biogas production from cassava tubers, The Joint International Conference on “Sustainable Energy and Environment (SEE),” Hua Hinm Thailand, December1–3.
   Google Scholar
• Anthony, M. M., and P. C. Wilson. 2009. Biogas technology research in selected sub-Saharan African countries – A review. African Journal of Biotechnology 8 (2):116–25.
   Google Scholar
• Antwi, P., J. Li, P. O. Boadi, and J. Meng 2017. Efficiency of an upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor treating potato starch processing wastewater and related process kinetics, functional microbial community and sludge morphology Bioresource Technology 239pp. 103–14. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2017.04.124.
   Google Scholar
• Arthur, R., M. F. Baidoo, and E. Antwi. 2010. Biogas as a potential renewable energy source: A Ghanaian case study Elsevier. Renewable Energy 13: 1–7.
   Google Scholar
• Asante-Sackey, D., E. K. Tetteh, N. Nkosi, G. O. Baokye, K. O. Ansah Amano, B. B. Boamah, and E. K. Armah. 2018. Effects of inoculum to feedstock ratio in anaerobic digestion for biogas production. International Journal of Hydrology 2 (5):567–71.
   Google Scholar
• Budiyeno, S. J., I. N. Widiasa, and Sunarso. 2010. Kinetics of biogas production rate from cattle manure in batch made. International Journal of Chemical and Biological Engineering 3 (1):39–44.
   Google Scholar
• Bui, V. A., T. Bui, T. M, H. C. Ong, S. Nizetic, V. H. Bui, T. T. X. Nguyen, A. E. Atabani, L. Stepanec, L. H. P. Pham, et al. 2022. Optimizing operation parameters of a spark-ignition engine fueled with biogas-hydrogen blend integrated into biomass-solar hybrid renewable energy system. Energy 252:1–16, 124052. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2022.124052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caputo, A. C., M. Palumbo, P. M. Pelagagge, and F. Scacchia. 2005. Economics of biomass energy utilization in combustion and gasification plants: Effects of logistic variables. Biomass & Bioenergy 28 (1):35–51. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.04.009.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Che-Ithnin, N. H., and H. Hashim. 2019. Predictive modelling for biogas generation from palm oil mill effluent (pome). Chemical Engineering Transactions 72:313–18. doi:10.3303/CET1972053.
   Google Scholar
• Cu, T. T. T., T. X. Nguyen, J. M. Triolo, L. Pedersen, V. D. Le, P. D. Le, and S. G. Sommer. 2015. Biogas Production from Vietnamese Animal Manure. Plant Residues and Organic Waste: Influence of Biomass Composition on Methane Yield Asian-Australas Journal of Animal Science 28 (2):280–89. doi:10.5713/ajas.14.0312.
   Google Scholar
• Cu, T. T. T., T. X. Nguyen, J. M. Triolo, L. Pedersen, V. D. Le, P. D. Le, and S. G. Sommer. 2015. Biogas Production from Vietnamese Animal Manure. Plant Residues and Organic Waste: Influence of Biomass Composition on Methane Yield Asian-Australas Journal of Animal Science 28 (2):280–289. doi:10.5713/ajas.14.0312.
   Google Scholar
• Dahunsi, S. O., C. O. Osueke, T. M. A. Olayanju, and A. I. Lawal. 2019. Co-Digestion of Theobroma cacao (Cocoa) pod husk and poultry manure for energy generation: Effects of pretreatment methods. Biores. Technol 283:229–41.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Das, N. K., J. Chakrabartty, M. Dey, A. K. Sen-Gupta, and M. A. Matin (2021) Present energy scenario and future energy mix of Bangladesh, Energy Strategy Reviews 54;166 – 177. (Accessed online on July 26, 2021).
   Google Scholar
• Debabrata, B., and S. Murugan. 2012. Production and application of biogas as a gaseous fuel for internal combustion engines. International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology (IJERT) 1 (7):432–49.
   Google Scholar
• Demirbas, and A. Demirbas. 2006. Biogas potential of manure and straw mixtures. Energy Sources, Part A 28 (1):71–78. doi:10.1080/009083190889672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dinneya-Onuoha, E., and K. B. Oyoh. 2021. Production, kinetics and purification of biogas from cow-dung and cassava peels. International Journal of Electrical and Power Engineering 15 (1):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Diyoke, C. 2020. Comparative thermo-economic and advanced exergy performance assessment of wind energy for distributed generation in four sites in Nigeria. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development 9 (3):339–51. doi:10.14710/ijred.9.3.339-351.
   Google Scholar
• Elijah, T. I., A. M. Ibifuro, and S. M. Yahaya. 2009. The study of cow dung as co-substrate with rice husk in biogas production. Scientific Research and Essay 4 (9):861–66.
   Google Scholar
• Epelle, E. I., K. S. Desongu, W. Obande, A. A. Adeleke, P. P. Ikubanni, J. A. Okolie, and B. Gunes. 2022. A comprehensive review of hydrogen production and storage: A focus on the role of nanomaterials. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1–34. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.04.227.
   Google Scholar
• Erdirencelebi, D., and S. Yalpir. 2011. Adaptive network fuzzy inference system modeling for the input selection and prediction of anaerobic digestion effluent quality. Applied Mathematical Modelling 35 (8):3821–32. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2011.02.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erdogdu, E. 2008. An expose of bioenergy and its potential and utilization in Turkey. Energy Policy 36 (6):2182–90. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2008.02.041.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eterigho, E. J., M. Musa, A. Ejejigbe, E. Silver, and T. S. Farrow (2021) Biogas production from rumen, municipal waste and co-digested substrates: an opportunity for small and medium scale entrepreneurs (SME) member, IAENG Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2021 WCE, July 7-9, 2021, London, U.K. 1–4
   Google Scholar
• Fabiano, S. O., F. Estevão, Q. Giovane, J. Maria, and O. C. Guimarães. 2019. Comparative analysis of biogas production using artificial neural networks (ANNs) and classical methodologies. American Journal of Engineering Research (AJER) 8 (4):144–53.
   Google Scholar
• Fajobi, M. O., O. A. Lasode, A. A. Adeleke, P. P. Ikubanni, and A. O. Balogun 2022. Investigation of physicochemical characteristics of selected lignocellulose biomass Scientific Reports. 12:2918.
   Google Scholar
• Fakharudin, A. S., M. Sulaiman, and N. Mustapha. 2017. Modelling of biogas production from banana stem waste with neural networks learning strategies to optimise the production. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 95 (2):285–91.
   Google Scholar
• Francis, N. M., M. Joan, and O. Anthony (2015) Biogas Production for Domestic Use, A flexible learning Guide by the Commonwealth of Learning. Accessed on: 21st Jan. 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Gashaw, A., A. Teshita, T. P. Sheahan, C. M. Rice, and S. N. Bhatia. 2014. Co-digestion of Ethiopian food waste with cow dung for biogas production international journal of research (IJR). Annual Review of Virology 1 (7):475–500. doi:10.1146/annurev-virology-031413-085437.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghiasi, M. M., M. Arabloo, A. H. Mohammadi, and T. Barghi. 2016. Application of ANFIS soft computing technique in modeling the CO2 capture with MEA, DEA, and TEA aqueous solutions. International Journal of Greenhouse and Gas Control 49:47–54. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.02.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gielena, D., F. Boshella, D. Sayginb, M. D. Bazilianc, N. Wagnera, and R. Gorini. 2019. The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy Strategy Reviews 24:38–50. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.01.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goberna, M., M. A. Schoen, D. Sperl, B. Wett, and H. Insam. 2010. Mesophilic and thermophilic co-fermentation of cattle excreta and olive mill wastes in pilot anaerobic digesters. Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy 34 (3):340–46. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2009.11.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gopinathan, C., and A. T. Vivek. 2016. Process optimization for enhanced biogas production from mango pulp waste. International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) 5(5) :89–91.
   Google Scholar
• Hoang, A. T., P. S. Varbanov, S. Nizetic, R. Sirohi, A. Pandey, R. Luque, K. H. Ng, and V. V. Pham. 2022. Perspective review on municipal solid waste-to-energy route: characteristics, management strategy, and role in circular economy. Journal of Cleaner Production 359:1–29 131897.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hossain, N., M. H. Hasan, T. M. I. Mahlia, A. H. Shamsuddin, and A. S. Silitonga. 2020. Feasibility of microalgae as a feedstock for alternative fuel in Malaysia: A review. Energy Strategy Reviews 32:100536. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2020.100536.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hussaina, H. 2002. Refining of bio-gas produce from biomass (cow-dung) by removing H₂S and CO₂, 17–20 and 41–43. PGD project. Minna, Nigeria: Federal Univ. of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Ilori, O. M., A. S. Adebusoye, A. K. Lawal, and A. O. Awotiwon. 2007. Production of biogas from banana and plantain peels. Advance Environmental Biological Journal 1 (1):33–38.
   Google Scholar
• Indraj, S. (2012) Use of biogas for cooking purpose in a technical institute: A view point, Proceedings of the National Conference on Trends and Advances in Mechanical Engineering, YMCA University of Science & Technology, Faridabad, Haryana, Oct 19 – 20.
   Google Scholar
• Iniyan, S., and T. R. Jagadeesan. 1997. A comparative study of critical factors influencing the renewable energy systems use in the Indian context. Renewable Energy 3 (3):299–317. doi:10.1016/S0960-1481(97)00006-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jan, P. L., M. Koen, S. Natasa, and E. Berien. 2016. Optimal use of biogas from waste streams. An Assessment of the Potential of Biogas from Digestion in the EU beyond 2020 137–146.
   Google Scholar
• Jaroenpoj, S., Q. J. Yu, and J. Ness. 2014. Development of artificial neural network models for biogas production from co-digestion of leachate and pineapple peel. The Global Environmental Engineers 1 (2):42–47. doi:10.15377/2410-3624.2014.01.02.2.
   Google Scholar
• Jingura, R. M., and R. Matengaifa. 2008. The potential for energy production from crop residues in Zimbabwe. Biomass & Bioenergy 32 (12):1287–92. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.03.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamal, N. A., S. N. Osman, L. D. Yeol, and M. Ab Wahid. 2021. Analysis of biogas production from biomass residue of palm oil mills using an anaerobic batch test. Sains Malaysiana 50 (12):3583–92. doi:10.17576/jsm-2021-5012-10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kana, E. B. G., J. K. Oloke, A. Lateef, and M. O. Adesiyan. 2012. Modeling and optimization of biogas production on saw dust and other co-substrates using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm. Journal of Renewable Energy 46:276–81. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2012.03.027.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kargwal, R., Y. Gupta, M. K. Garg, and K. Malik. 2019. Effect of Different Concentration of Paddy Straw and Cattle Dung on. Biogas Production International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences 8 (7):537–44. doi:10.20546/ijcmas.2019.807.066.
   Google Scholar
• Kayaa, I., M. Çolakb, and F. Terzia. 2019. A comprehensive review of fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodologies for energy policy-making. Energy Strategy Reviews 24:207–28. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.03.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keshavarzi, A., F. Sarmadian, J. Shiri, M. Iqbal, R. Tirado-Corbalá, and E. S. E. Omran. 2017. Application of ANFIS-Based subtractive clustering algorithm in soil cation exchange capacity estimation using soil and remotely sensed data. The Measurements 95:173–80.
   Google Scholar
• Kiely, G., G. Tayfur, C. Dolan, and K. Tanjf. 1997. Physical and mathematical modelling of anaerobic digestion of organic wastes. Water Resources 31 (3):534–40.
   Google Scholar
• Kobra, S., M. K. Seyed, S. H. Fatemeh, and K. M. Farnoush. 2014. Laboratory biogas production from kitchen wastes and applying an adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system as a prediction model. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development 5 (3):16–29.
   Google Scholar
• Kusiak, A., and X. Wei. 2014. Prediction of methane production in wastewater treatment facility: a data-mining approach. ANN Operational Resources 216 (1):71–81. doi:10.1007/s10479-011-1037-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantz, M., S. Mattias, L. Björnsson, and L. Börjesson. 2007. The prospects for an expansion of biogas systems in Sweden - Incentives, barriers and potentials. Energy Policy 35 (3):1830–43. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2006.05.017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levstek, T., and M. Lakota. 2010. The use of artificial neural networks for compounds prediction in biogas from anaerobic digestion – A review. Agricultural Publication 7:15–22.
   Google Scholar
• Li, R., S. Chen, X. Li, and J. S. Lar. 2009. Anaerobic Codigestion of Kitchen Waste with Cattle Manure for. Biogas Production Energy & Fuels 23 (4):178–89. doi:10.1021/ef8008772.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maconachie, R., A. Tanko, and M. Zakariya. 2009. Descending the energy ladder? Oil price shocks and domestic manure and other biomass materials. Biomass & Bioenergy 9:303–14.
   Google Scholar
• Madu, K., and P. I. Onwuamaeze. 2018. Evaluation of Sawdust Concentration on Biogas Production from Sawdust Waste, Cow Dung and Water Hyacinth. Journal of Industrial Technology 3 (1):41–46.
   Google Scholar
• Mahjabeen, S. Z. A., S. Shah, B. Chughtai, Simonetti, and B. Simonetti. 2020. Renewable energy, institutional stability, environment and economic growth nexus of D-8 countries. Energy Strategy Reviews 29:100484. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2020.100484.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makinde, O. A., and L. O. Odokuma. 2015. Comparative study of the biogas potential of plantain and yam peels. Brit. J. Appl. Sci. Technol 9:354–59.
   Google Scholar
• Maleki, A., A. Haghighi, and I. Mahariq. 2021. Machine learning-based approaches for modelling thermophysical properties of hybrid nanofluids: A comprehensive review. Journal of Molecular Liquids 322:114843. doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2020.114843.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manjappa, K. 2014. Use of Eupatorium (Chromolaena odorata L.) in biogas production. International Journal of Scientific and Engineering Research 5 (11):1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Maria, B. (2006) Biogas Production from a System Analytical Perspective, A Published PhD. Dissertation of the Technology and Society Department, Faculty of Engineering at Lund University, Lund Sweden.
   Google Scholar
• Mazo, C. M. G., Y. Olaya, and S. B. Botero. 2020. Investment in renewable energy considering game theory and wind-hydro diversification. Energy Strategy Reviews 28:100447. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2020.100447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mbuligwe, S. E., and G. R. Kassenga. 2004. Feasibility and strategies for anaerobic digestion of solid waste for energy production in DaresSalaam city, Tanzania. Resources Conservation and Recycling 42 (2):183–203. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2004.02.010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mostafaei, M., H. Javadikia, and L. Naderloo. 2016. Modeling the effects of ultrasound power and reactor dimension on the biodiesel production yield: comparison of prediction abilities between response surface methodology (RSM) and adaptive neuro-fuzzy inference system (ANFIS). Energy Study 115:626–36. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2016.09.028.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murulidhar, K. S., and P. B. G. Putta. 2017. Design and fabrication of biogas digester for anaerobic dry fermentation under thermophilic condition. Global Journal of Engineering Science and Researches 12: 133–44.
   Google Scholar
• Nair, V. V., H. Dhar, S. Kumar, A. K. Thalla, S. Mukherjee, and J. W. C. Wong. 2016. Artificial neural network-based modelling to evaluate methane yield from biogas in a laboratory-scale anaerobic bioreactor. Bioresource Technology 217:90–99. doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2016.03.046.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Najafi, B., and S. F. Ardabili. 2018. Application of ANFIS, ANN and logistic methods in estimating biogas production from spent mushroom compost (SMC. Resources, Conservation & Recycling 133:169–78. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.02.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayak, S. K., A. T. Hoang, S. Nizetic, X. P. Nguyen, and T. H. Le. 2022. Effects of advanced injection timing and inducted gaseous fuel on performance, combustion and emission characteristics of a diesel engine operated in dual-fuel mode. Fuel 310:1–16 122232. doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2021.122232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuhu, S. K., J. A. Gyang, J. J. Kwarbak, and F. P. Joel. 2018. The synthesis of methane from chicken droppings using locally constructed digester and scrubber. Continental Journal of Engineering Sciences 13 (1):1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Nwokolo, N., P. Mukumba, K. Obileke, and M. Enebe. 2020. Waste to energy: a focus on the impact of substrate type in biogas production. Processes 8 (10):1224. doi:10.3390/pr8101224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ogunkunle, O., K. O. Olatunji, and J. O. Amos. 2018. Comparative Analysis of Co-Digestion of Cow Dung and Jatropha Cake at Ambient Temperature. Journal of Fundamentals of Renewable Energy and Applications 8 (5):23–35. doi:10.4172/2090-4541.1000271.
   Google Scholar
• Oke, E. O., O. Adeyi, A. J. Adeyi, and K. F. Adekunle. 2018. Modelling of grewia mollis stem bark gum extraction yield using neuro-fuzzy technique. International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa 34:70–80. www.scientific.net/JERA.34.70.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Okuo, D. O., M. A. Waheed, and B. O. Bolaji. 2016. Evaluation of biogas yield of selected ratios of cattle, swine, and poultry wastes. International Journal of Green Energy 13 (4):366–72. doi:10.1080/15435075.2014.961460.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olaniyan, A. M., T. T. Olawale, K. P. Alabi, A. E. Adeleke, and S. K. Oyeniyi. 2017. Design, construction and testing of a biogas reactor for production of biogas using cassava peel and cow dung as biomass. Arid Zone Journal of Engineering, Technology and Environment 13 (4):478–88.
   Google Scholar
• Olojede, M. A., O. Ogunkunle, and N. A. Ahmed. 2018. Quality of optimized biogas yields from co-digestion of cattle dung with fresh mass of sunflower leaves, pawpaw and potato peels. Cogent Engineering 5 (1):1–21. doi:10.1080/23311916.2018.1538491.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olorunmaiye, J. A., I. K. Adegun, O. J. Ogunniyi, J. O. Aweda, T. K. Ajiboye, and S. Abdulkareem (2016) Effects of mixing ratios of cow dung, Cassava Peel and Rice Husk On Thermodynamic Properties of Biogas In Anaerobic Digester Proceedings of the iSTEAMS Multidisciplinary Cross-Border Conference University of Professional Studies Accra Ghana
   Google Scholar
• Olugbemide, A. D., A. O. Imasuen, P. O. Oleghe, and J. O. Efosa. 2012. Anaerobic co-digestion of fresh maize leaves with elephant grass. Journal of Applied Science and Environmental Management 16 (1):133–35.
   Google Scholar
• Ononogbo, C., O. C. Nwufo, C. F. Nwaiwu, and J. O. Igbokwe. 2015. An innovative approach to construction and operation of biodigesters: a consideration of floating drum biogas plant. TLEP International Journal of Mechanical Engineering Research 1:1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Ononogbo, C., O. C. Nwufo, G. Nwaji, N. Okoronkwo, A. C, and J. O. Igbokwe. 2016. Effective mixing, parametric and operational consideration in the construction of a floating drum biogas plant. International Journal for Research in Mechanical & Civil Engineering 2 (2):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Oparaku, N. F., A. C. Ofomatah, and E. C. Okoroigwe. 2013. Biodigestion of cassava peels blended with pig dung for methane generation. African Journal of Pig Farming 1 (2):23–27.
   Google Scholar
• Ortega, A., K. Gkoumas, A. Tsakalids, and F. Pekar. 2021. Low-Emission alternative energy for transport in the EU: state of play of research and innovation. Energies 14 (22):7764. doi:10.3390/en14227764.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ousman, R., S. K. Dibaba, S. T. Lahiri, and D. Abhishek. 2016. Experimental and artificial neural network modelling of an up-flow anaerobic contactor (UAC) for biogas production from vinasse. International Journal of Chemical Reactor Engineering 14 (6):1241–54. doi:10.1515/ijcre-2016-0025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oyelaran, O. A., A. E. Adeleke, O. M. Sanusi, B. J. Olorunfemi, and Y. Y. Tudunwada. 2018. Bioconversion of mixed fruit waste as a potential source of. Biogas and Organic Fertilizer International Journal of Integrated Engineering 10 (8):153–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozkaya, B., A. Demir, and B. M. Sinan. 2007. Neural network prediction model for the methane fraction in biogas from field-scale landfill bioreactors. Environmental Modelling Software 22 (6):815–22. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2006.03.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pahlavan, R., M. Omid, and A. Akram. 2012. Energy input-output analysis and application of artificial neural networks for predicting greenhouse basil production. Energy 37 (1):171–76. doi:10.1016/j.energy.2011.11.055.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palacio, J. C. E., J. J. C. S. Santos, M. L. G. Reno, J. C. F. Júnior, M. Carvalho, A. M. M. Reyes, and D. J. R. Orozco. 2019. Municipal solid waste management and energy recovery. In Energy Conversion–Current Technologies and Future Trends. InTech Open, ed. I. H. Al-Bahadly, 127–46. doi:10.5772/intechopen.79235.
   Google Scholar
• Petersson, A., M. H. Thomsen, H. Hauggaard-Nielsen, and A. Thomsen. 2007. Potential bioethanol and biogas production using lignocellulosic biomass from winter rye, oilseed rape and faba bean. Biomass & Bioenergy 31 (11–12):812–19. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.06.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polit, M., M. Estaben, and P. Labat. 2002. A fuzzy model for an anaerobic digester, comparison with experimental results. Engineering Applied Art Intel 15 (5):385–90. doi:10.1016/S0952-1976(02)00091-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Potic, I., T. Joksimovic, U. Milincic, D. Kicovic, and M. Milincic. 2021. Wind energy potential for the electricity production - knjazevac municipality case study (Serbia. Energy Strategy Reviews 33:100589. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2020.100589.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PRB, (2018) Population reference bureau, world population clock, Assessed from 10th August 2018 www.worldometers.info. through the Google Search Engine on Friday
   Google Scholar
• Qdais, H. A., K. B. Hani, and K. Shatnawi. 2010. Modeling and optimization of biogas production from a waste digester using artificial neural network and genetic algorithm. Resources Conservation and Recycling 54 (6):359–63. doi:10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.08.012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rao, S., S. Singh, A. Singh, and M. Sodha. 2000. Bioenergy conversion studies of the organic fraction of MSW. Assessment of Ultimate Bioenergy Production Potential of Municipal Garbage. Appl. Energy 66 (1):11–18.
   Google Scholar
• Rashama, C., G. Ijoma, and T. Matambo. 2019. Biogas generation from by-products of edible oil processing: a review of opportunities, challenges and strategies. Springer Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery Journal 9 (4):803–26. doi:10.1007/s13399-019-00385-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robra, S., R. S. da Cruz, A. M. de Oliveira, J. A. Neto, and J. V. Santos. 2010. Generation of biogas using crude glycerine from biodiesel production as a supplement to cattle slurry. Elsevier Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy 34 (9):1330–35. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.04.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rohjy, H. A., J. J. Aduba, I. H. Manta, and Y. Pamdaya. 2013. Development of anaerobic digester for the production of biogas using poultry and cattle dung: a case study of federal university of technology minna cattle & poultry pen. International Journal of Life Sciences 2 (3):139–49.
   Google Scholar
• Rufai, I. A. 2010. A Review of the Evolution And Development of Anaerobic Digestion Technology. Journal of Engineering and Technology (JET) 5 (1):100–11.
   Google Scholar
• Sabitha, S. G., P. Rupashire, and P. Mathu. 2022. Prognosis of biogas production from sewage treatment plant using machine learning. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) 09 (1):1560–64.
   Google Scholar
• Said, Z., P. Sharma, L. S. Sundar, A. Afzal, and C. Li. 2021. Synthesis, stability, thermophysical properties and AI approach for predictive modelling of Fe3O4 coated MWCNT hybrid nanofluids. Journal of Molecular Liquids 340:117291. doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2021.117291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Said, Z., N. K. Cakmak, P. Sharma, L. S. Sundar, A. Inayata, O. Keklikcioglu, and C. Li. 2022. Synthesis, stability, density, viscosity of ethylene glycol-based ternary hybrid nanofluids: Experimental investigations and model -prediction using modern machine learning techniques. Powder Technology 400:117190. doi:10.1016/j.powtec.2022.117190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakhawat, A., Z. Naseem, N. Zahida, and U. Shumaila. 2013. Impact of biogas technology in the development of rural population. Pakistan Journal of Analytical Environmental Chemic 14 (2):65–74.
   Google Scholar
• Salehi, K., M. Khazraee, F. S. Hoseini, and F. K. Mostafazadeh. 2014. Laboratory Biogas Production from Kitchen Wastes and Applying an Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System as a Prediction Model Laboratory Biogas Production from Kitchen Wastes and Applying an Adaptive Neuro Fuzzy Inference System as a Prediction Model. International Journal of Environmental Science and Development 5 (3):290–93. doi:10.7763/IJESD.2014.V5.494.
   Google Scholar
• Sambo, A. S., A. C. Etonihu, and A. M. Mohammed. 2015. Biogas production from co-digestion of selected agricultural wastes in Nigeria. International Journal of Research – Granthaalayah 3 (11):1–9. doi:10.29121/granthaalayah.v3.i11.2015.2909.
   Google Scholar
• Sandriaty, R., C. Priadi, S. Kurnianingsih, and A. Abdillah. 2018. Potential of biogas production from anaerobic co-digestion of fat. Oil and Grease Waste and Food wasteE3s Web of Conferences 67 (8):02047. doi:10.1051/e3sconf/20186702047.
   Google Scholar
• Shah, F. A., Q. Mahmood, N. Rashid, A. Pervez, I. A. Raja, and M. M. Shah. 2015. Co-digestion, pretreatment and digester design for enhanced methanogenesis. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 42:627–42. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2014.10.053.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shanta, S., M. Paresh, and Ramakant. 2008. Biogas production enhancement by brassica compestries amendment in cattle dung digesters. Elsevier Journal of Biomass and Bioenergy 32 (3):210–15. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2007.09.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharma, P., and A. K. Sharma. 2021. Application of response surface methodology for optimization of fuel injection parameters of a dual fuel engine fuelled with producer gas-biodiesel blends. Energy Sources, Part A: Recovery, Utilization, and Environmental Effects. doi:10.1080/15567036.2021.1892883.
   Google Scholar
• Sharma, P., B. B. Sahoo, Z. Said, H. Hadiyanto, X. P. Nguyen, S. Nizetic, Z. Huang, A. T. Hoang, and C. Li. 2022. Application of machine learning and Box-Behnken design in optimizing engine characteristics operated with a dual-fuel mode of algal biodiesel and waste-derived biogas. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 1–23. doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.04.15.
   Google Scholar
• Shikun, C., Z. Mingyue, M. Heinz-Peter, Z. Xiaoqin, and L. Zifu (2017) Review paper on the development and application of biogas project for domestic sewage treatment in rural china: opportunities and challenges, Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development, Accessed on 4th Jan. 2019
   Google Scholar
• Singh, K. J., and S. S. Sooch. 2004. Comparative study of the economics of different models of family size biogas plants for state of Punjab, India. Energy Conversion and Management 45 (9–10):1329–41. doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2003.09.018.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sittisun, P., N. Tippayawong, and S. Shimpalee. 2019. Gasification of pelletized corn residues with oxygen enriched air and steam. Int. Journal of Renewable Energy Development 8 (3):215–24. doi:10.14710/ijred.8.3.215-224.
   Google Scholar
• Sorathia, H. S., P. P. Rathod, and A. S. Sorathiya. 2012. Bio-gas generation and factors affecting the bio-gas generation. A Review Study International Journal of Advanced Engineering Technology 3 (3):72–78.
   Google Scholar
• Srinivasan, S. 2008. Positive externalities of domestic biogas initiatives: Implications for financing. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 12 (5):1476–84. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2007.01.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suhartini, S., I. Nurika, R. Paul, and L. Melville. 2021. Estimation of biogas production and the emission savings from anaerobic digestion of fruit-based agro-industrial waste and agricultural crops residues. Bioenerg. Res 14 (3):844–59. doi:10.1007/s12155-020-10209-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Surendra, K. C., D. Takara, A. G. Hashimoto, and S. K. Khanal. 2014. Biogas as a sustainable energy source for developing countries. Opportunities and Challenges Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 31:846–59. doi:10.1016/j.rser.2013.12.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sureshkumar, A., and G. M. Tamilselvan. 2020. Supervised learning algorithm for maximizing the productivity of iot enabled smart biogas plant test. Engineering and Management 83:3714–20.
   Google Scholar
• Suyog, V. (2011) Biogas production from kitchen waste, a published B. tech seminar report submitted to the department of biotechnology and medical engineering National Institute of Technology, Rourkela.
   Google Scholar
• Szilágyi, Á., A. Bodor, N. Tolvai, K. L. Kovács, L. Bodai, R. Wirth, Z. Bagi, A. Szepesi, V. Markó, B. Kakuk, et al. 2021. A comparative analysis of biogas production from tomato bio-waste in mesophilic batch and continuous anaerobic digestion systems. PLoS ONE 16 (3):e0248654. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0248654.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taleghani, G., and A. S. Kia. 2005. Technical–economical analysis of the Saveh biogas power plant. Renewable Energy 30 (3):441–46. doi:10.1016/j.renene.2004.06.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tatlidil, F., Z. Bayramoglu, and D. Akturk. 2009. Animal manure as one of the main biogas production resources: case of Turkey. Journal of Animal and Veterinary Advancement 8 (2):2473–76.
   Google Scholar
• Turkdogan-Aydinol, F. I., and K. Yetilmezsoy. 2010. A fuzzy-logic-based model to predict biogas and methane production rates in a pilot-scale mesophilic UASB reactor treating mola. Journal of Hazardous Materials 182 (1–3):460–71. doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.06.054.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uddin, W., K. Ayeshab, Z. Kamran, H. Aun, K. Bilal, I. Saiful, M. Ishfaqa, K. Imran, M. Adild, and K. Hee Je. 2019. Current and future prospects of small hydropower in Pakistan: A survey. Energy Strategy Reviews 24:166–77. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2019.03.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ukpabi, N., O. O. Okorie, J. Isu, and E. Peters. 2017. The production of biogas using cow dung and food waste. International Journal of Materials and Chemistry 7 (2):21–24.
   Google Scholar
• Ukpai, P. A., and M. N. Nnabuchi. 2012. Comparative study of biogas production from cow dung, cow peel and cassava peeling using 45 litres biogas digester. Advances in Applied Science Research 3:1864–69.
   Google Scholar
• Vieira, A. S., R. A. Stewart, R. Lamberts, and C. D. Beal. 2020. Renewable energy and energy conservation area policy (REECAP) framework: A novel methodology for bottom-up and top-down principles integration. Energy Strategy Reviews 32; 100544 (1):56–149. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2141.1975.tb01808.x.
   Google Scholar
• Waewsak, C., A. Nopharatana, and P. Chaiprasert. 2010. Neural-Fuzzy control system application for monitoring process response and control of anaerobic hybrid reactor in wastewater treatment and biogas production. Journal of Environmental Science 22 (12):1883–90. doi:10.1016/S1001-0742(09)60334-X.
   Google Scholar
• Wahyudi, T., T. B. Kurnani, and J. Claney. 2015. Biogas production in dairies farming Indonesia; a challenge for sustainability. International Journal of Renewable Energy Development 4 (3):219–26. doi:10.14710/ijred.4.3.219-226.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, J. 2014. Decentralized biogas technology of anaerobic digestion and farm ecosystem: opportunities and challenges. Review Article 2 (10):1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Wannapokin, A., R. Ramaraj, and Y. Unpaprom. 2017. An investigation of biogas production potential from fallen teak leaves (tectona grandis. Emer Life Science Resources 3 (1):1–10.
   Google Scholar
• Wei, L., K. Qin, M. Xue, C. Yang, J. Jiang, and Q. Zhao 2019. Optimization of the co-digestion of sewage sludge, maize straw and cow manure: Microbial responses and effect of fractional organic characteristics Scientific Reports 9. 2374.
   Google Scholar
• Wipa, P., S. Sureewan, and R. Alissara. 2017. Co-Digestion of Napier Grass and Its Silage with Cow Dung for. Methane Production Energies 10:1654. doi:10.3390/en10101654.
   Google Scholar
• Xiangchengzhen, M., and S. Yilmaz. 2020. Renewable energy cooperation in Northeast Asia: Incentives, mechanisms and challenges. Energy Strategy Reviews 29:100468. doi:10.1016/j.esr.2020.100468.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan, W., H. Tyler, and D. S. Corinne. 2021. Tree-based automated machine learning to predict biogas production for anaerobic co-digestion of organic waste. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng 9:12990–3000. doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.1c04612.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yaru, S. S., K. A. Adewole, and I. K. Adegun (2013) Comparative study of biogas from cattle dung and mixture of cattle dung with plantain peels, 3RDBiennial Engineering Conference Federal University of Technology, Minna, Nigeria, 135–37.
   Google Scholar
• Yaru, S. S., I. K. Adegun, and M. A. Akintunde. 2015. Wobbe index determination of cattle dung biogas. Scientia Agriculture 9 (2):76–82.
   Google Scholar
• Yitayal, A., D. Mekibiband, and A. Araya. 2017. Study on biogas production potential of leaves of justicia schimperiana and macro-nutrients on the slurry. International Journal of Waste Resources 7 (3):217–229.
   Google Scholar
• Yusuf, M. L., A. Debora, and D. E. Ogheneruona. 2011. Ambient temperature kinetic assessment of biogas production from co-digestion of horse and cow dung. Research in Agricultural Engineering 57 (3):97–104. doi:10.17221/25/2010-RAE.
   Google Scholar
• Zerrouki, S., R. Rihanib, K. Lekikota, and I. Ramdhanea. 2021. Enhanced biogas production from anaerobic digestion of wastewater from the fruit juice industry by sonolysis: Experiments and modelling. Water Science & Technology 84 (3):644. doi:10.2166/wst.2021.245.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zulkifi, Z., S. Ismail, M. S. M. Zahari, N. A. Umor, and N. I. A. Aziz. 2015. Screening on biogas optimization of lignocellulose-based materials using enzymatic hydrolysis process. Chemical Engineering Transactions 45:1585–90. doi:10.3303/CET1545265.
   Google Scholar