Planet of the Humans

[SapphireLightning]

.
Will you be including wood feedstock in your biogas digester? How will you be breaking down the lignin of the lignocellulose? That stuff is really resistant to decomposition.

Feedstocks | Anaerobic Digestion

» Feedstocks | The Official Information Portal on Anaerobic Digestion

www.biogas-info.co.uk

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323258635_Biogas_Production_from_Lignin_via_Anaerobic_Digestion

Microbial biogas production from hydrolysis lignin: insight into lignin structural changes - Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts

Background The emerging cellulosic bioethanol industry will generate huge amounts of lignin-rich residues that may be converted into biogas by anaerobic digestion (AD) to increase the output of energy carriers from the biorefinery plants. The carbohydrates fraction of lignocellulosic biomass is...

biotechnologyforbiofuels.biomedcentral.com

Lignocellulose: A chewy problem - Nature

The inedible parts of plants are feeding the next generation of biofuels. But extracting the energy-containing molecules is a challenging task.

www.nature.com

The Effect of Lignin on Biodegradability - Cornell Composting

compost.css.cornell.edu

Lignocellulose Digestion

" Termite guts: the world's smallest bioreactors "

soil-insects.weebly.com

You should be careful when trying to article dump like that. The first 2 random links you provided to me talked about how it is easy to digest the sugar component of cellulose, but they also want to get energy from the lignins as well, and are articles about how to do that. One of the links did mention that lignins can slightly hinder digestion, but as I would need 30 minutes to an hour of cook fuel with 2 hours being bonus (and considering this would also be to deal with waste and produce fertilizer as well) everything I have seen, whether it be people who have been using such systems for years, as well as all of the maths, it shows that it works. 10 to 20 liters of expected home/farm/etc waste a day will give me more than enough fuel and deal with the waste. You seemed to have latched on to this from the start as though it is some sort of scam (and maybe that self inflating thing is, I only mentioned it in passing), to the point you posted a bunch of links that didn't even truly support your stance.

 

[SapphireLightning]

Clarification: I picked 2 random links you provided, not the first two links as stated above.

 

[David3]

You should be careful when trying to article dump like that. The first 2 random links you provided to me talked about how it is easy to digest the sugar component of cellulose, but they also want to get energy from the lignins as well, and are articles about how to do that. One of the links did mention that lignins can slightly hinder digestion, but as I would need 30 minutes to an hour of cook fuel with 2 hours being bonus (and considering this would also be to deal with waste and produce fertilizer as well) everything I have seen, whether it be people who have been using such systems for years, as well as all of the maths, it shows that it works. 10 to 20 liters of expected home/farm/etc waste a day will give me more than enough fuel and deal with the waste. You seemed to have latched on to this from the start as though it is some sort of scam (and maybe that self inflating thing is, I only mentioned it in passing), to the point you posted a bunch of links that didn't even truly support your stance.

I really apologize - I am very interested in biogas digestion. I didn't really mean to dump articles - I tried to select articles from reputable sources.

The gist of the articles seems to be that the lignocellulose structures in wood tend to "protect" the hemicellulose structures from biodegradation. Until you break down the lignin, it's difficult to access the easier-to-decompose hemicellulose. That's why trees can sufficiently resist biodegradation for hundreds of years. Animals have immune systems to resist microorganism attack, but trees depend on their tough structures.

Definitely! Certain types of home/farm waste are excellent feedstocks for biogas production! However, it looks like wood waste is not a recommended feedstock (unless you have the facilities to pre-treat the wood with heat and acid/enzymes).

Even though my personal attitude sometimes needs improvement (and I'm working on that), my goal is to provide fact-checking. I've worked my entire career in the solar energy and electricity-saving products industries, and I understand the environmental benefits of these and other technologies. However, I've also seen a number of companies that make exaggerated / false claims about their "green" products. As an engineer with 25+ years of experience, I have a lot of experience with technical design and fact-checking.
.

 

[David3]

SapphireLightning, here is a relevant report from the International Energy Agency: https://task37.ieabioenergy.com/fil...load/Technical Brochures/pretreatment_web.pdf .
.

 

[Luis Halson]

You know, you're probably right. It's what I often hear suggested. However, I needed to try the no-inoculant method. To test a theory, you see. I have cultivated yeast using the method I described above (closed container, raisins, water - with swirling twice a day/briefly opening jar then closing), then used the cultivated yeast to ferment fruit/fruit juice.

So I had to try it with just grass and water (in a small jar). I found that it does work, but only when the twice a day swirling/opening/closing action happens and the container is kept sealed in the dark etc(just leaving it sit doesn't do sh*t). Something is breaking down the grass in my jars - because there is flammable gas being produced (albeit a tiny amount) - but there is, and I didn't add any bacteria. However, I've found the agitation (swirling) is necessary. Strange. On the compilation of diy digesters I have some have agitation mechanisms.

Atm, I'm not getting the same action from my digesters, but then I haven't been swirling/disturbing them daily, and it's chill here.

Wild yeast are probably doing that. Interstingly, wild yeast (and your spit and many other cells, especially digestive ones) contain a protein called amylase. It breaks down starch into sugar. This is what happens when grains are malted - amylase digests some of the starch in the grain to make food for (what in nature would be) the growing plant.

Wild yeast are "eating" the starch in your grass forming sugar. Don't know why you're getting a flammable gas. Does it make a squeaky pop when burnt? Or does it re-light a glowing splint?

 

[Nekodaiden]

Wild yeast are probably doing that. Interstingly, wild yeast (and your spit and many other cells, especially digestive ones) contain a protein called amylase. It breaks down starch into sugar. This is what happens when grains are malted - amylase digests some of the starch in the grain to make food for (what in nature would be) the growing plant.

Wild yeast are "eating" the starch in your grass forming sugar. Don't know why you're getting a flammable gas. Does it make a squeaky pop when burnt? Or does it re-light a glowing splint?

You are confusing the starch that comes from a grass seed as opposed to the grass itself. The long blades of green grass do not (as far as I know) contain starch, or very little. However the seeds do. Barley seeds contain high amount of amylase when malted (to convert starch to sugar as you said), but barley grass itself has little to no starch. I have malted barley seeds and used to make wort for beer, so I am very familiar with amylase.

Whatever is slowly breaking down the grass in my jars is something that has arisen from the dead plant matter itself as I added nothing else. I picked the grass while it was still growing and it was just grass, not grass with seed heads.

 

[Luis Halson]

Of course! Nekodaiden, microorganisms are digesting the fibre/cellulose in your grass and releasing methane, which is the flammable gas you’re getting!

 

[David3]

Wild yeast are probably doing that. Interstingly, wild yeast (and your spit and many other cells, especially digestive ones) contain a protein called amylase. It breaks down starch into sugar. This is what happens when grains are malted - amylase digests some of the starch in the grain to make food for (what in nature would be) the growing plant.

Wild yeast are "eating" the starch in your grass forming sugar. Don't know why you're getting a flammable gas. Does it make a squeaky pop when burnt? Or does it re-light a glowing splint?

I'd like to add that the yeast digest the simple sugars that are produced from the amylase-breakdown of starch. When yeast digest sugar in the presence of oxygen, the digestion byproducts are acetic acid (vinegar) and carbon dioxide. When yeast digest sugar in the absence of oxygen, the digestion byproducts are ethyl alcohol (ethanol) and carbon dioxide: Fermented and vegetables. A global perspective. Chapter 3. . The ethanol is flammable, and can be (is) used as a fuel for motor vehicles and cookstoves.



If you've ever seen portable food-heating dishes (chafing dishes) at a party or restaurant, the little flaming can underneath contains gelled alcohol fuel: Sterno - Wikipedia




They also make portable and stationary cookstoves that run on alcohol, though propane stoves have become more popular.
.

 

[Nekodaiden]

Of course! Nekodaiden, microorganisms are digesting the fibre/cellulose in your grass and releasing methane, which is the flammable gas you’re getting!

That's the working presumption. Did you do a little research and then delete your old post to put this one in it's place?

Anyway, like I said I needed to test a theory. The theory being tested is pleomorphism. I did not add bacteria of any kind to the jars. Of course, it's possible some may have gotten in unbeknownst to me (after cutting the grass/while filling the jar with water, while opening lid briefly etc when not sealed), but I certainly didn't purposely add a culture like that which would be found in cow manure or something. The thought was that this is suggested to get things going quicker. Sort of like a yeast cake in a fermenter. I can ferment out a whole batch of beer in a day or two with an established yeast cake, but if I'm just starting with a small packet it takes a week or more. When starting from 0 introduced culture, then whatever bacteria develops (yes develops) will be in response to the conditions or the environment of the organism.

 

[Nekodaiden]

I'd like to add that the yeast digest the sugars that result from the amylase-breakdown of starch. When yeast digest sugar in the present of oxygen, the digestion byproducts are acetic acid (vinegar) and carbon dioxide. When yeast digest sugar in the absence of oxygen, the digestion byproducts are ethyl alcohol (ethanol) and carbon dioxide: Fermented and vegetables. A global perspective. Chapter 3. . The ethyl alcohol is flammable, and can be (is) used as a fuel for motor vehicles and cookstoves.
.

David, stop while you're behind. No offense, mate, but you don't know what you're talking about. While what you say above is true, it is in no way applicable to non-starchy grass in jars filled with water. Amylase breaks down starch, not cellulose. It also requires certain temperatures for this to happen. People who brew beer from scratch know this because the conversions just don't happen at any temp, and conversion doesn't happen even at the right temp with cellulose. Again, amylase converts starch, not cellulose. It's autumn here and the jars aren't sitting in an area even approaching conversion temps that amylase requires.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

Did I not comment on this thread already? I thought I did, but perhaps was another thread or another forum. This movie sucks. They criticise solar inefficiency, but all the footage they have is from 2005 to 2010. Solar panels in 2020 have dramatically improved. Then they use the types of fossil fuel industry talking points that were heavily debunked in about 2010 - e.g. criticising an electric car launch because it runs on coal (even though most of the world apart from China is moving away from coal), And saying that renewable energy adding to the grid doesn't reduce the amount of fossil fuel burnt because you need intermittency backup and so plants have to keep running - totally false. If you have watched this movie please google some of the critical articles or watch the Just Have a Think video about it on Youtube for a more rounded picture. If you haven't watched it, don't bother.

The movie has led to some useful discussion on consumption and population, but if you are interested on that, perhaps follow Extinction Rebellion on FB.

sorry for being a bit late when the discussion went elsewhere

 

[Veganite]

I'm sure there's lots of other sources for those that really want to watch it, but just FYI, it was pulled from YouTube overnight due to a copyright claim. lol. I can't say I liked the movie, or felt it was fact worthy, but I really hate when YouTube does stuff like that. I'd rather let people decide for themselves if it's bad. In a way, removing it will just make people want to watch it all the more.


*

 

[Luis Halson]

I'd like to add that the yeast digest the simple sugars that are produced from the amylase-breakdown of starch. When yeast digest sugar in the presence of oxygen, the digestion byproducts are acetic acid (vinegar) and carbon dioxide. When yeast digest sugar in the absence of oxygen, the digestion byproducts are ethyl alcohol (ethanol) and carbon dioxide: Fermented and vegetables. A global perspective. Chapter 3. . The ethanol is flammable, and can be (is) used as a fuel for motor vehicles and cookstoves.

CORRECTION: Yeast don't make acetic acid. Acetic acid bacteria do (in the presence of oxygen only), which are completely different (yeast aren't even bacteria, they're fungi).

 

[David3]

CORRECTION: Yeast don't make acetic acid. Acetic acid bacteria do (in the presence of oxygen only), which are completely different (yeast aren't even bacteria, they're fungi).

,
No, it’s true! Please see my links.
.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

I'm sure there's lots of other sources for those that really want to watch it, but just FYI, it was pulled from YouTube overnight due to a copyright claim. lol. I can't say I liked the movie, or felt it was fact worthy, but I really hate when YouTube does stuff like that. I'd rather let people decide for themselves if it's bad. In a way, removing it will just make people want to watch it all the more.

If it's a copyright issue it's fair enough. I'm not surprised that the film makers used someone's footage without checking with them. But yes, deleting the movie from youtube is going to help their PR, they may even be allowing youtube to delete it deliberately to keep the movie in the news and ensure its popularity endures with right wing freedom of speech anti mainsteam media types. Of course they will bring it back soon probably without that footage and get back in the news and get more views again.

 

[David3]

I'm sure there's lots of other sources for those that really want to watch it, but just FYI, it was pulled from YouTube overnight due to a copyright claim. lol. I can't say I liked the movie, or felt it was fact worthy, but I really hate when YouTube does stuff like that. I'd rather let people decide for themselves if it's bad. In a way, removing it will just make people want to watch it all the more.


*

.
The general public lacks the education to evaluate the movie accurately.

This 2019 Pew Research Center study showed that many Americans do not understand basic math, chemistry, physics, geology, and biology: What Americans Know About Science

And look at these poll results, also from the Pew Research Center:



Link: Confidence in leaders of the military has gone up; confidence in some other institutions is declining
.