From Organic Wastes to Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products for Urban Sustainability and Circular Economy: A Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodological Approach
3. Waste to Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products
3.1. Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products from Urban Wastes/Municipal Solid Wastes
3.2. Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products from Solid Animal Waste (Manure)
3.3. Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products from Biomass Waste/Residues
3.4. Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products from Mixed Feedstock (Biomass Residues, Wastes, Manure Etc.), Catalyst, or/and Integrated Energy Systems
4. Conclusions and Future Perspectives
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
ABE | acetone-butanol-ethanol |
ABNT | Brazilian National Standards Organization |
ACM | Acacia mangium |
ACoD | anaerobic co-digestion |
AD | anaerobic digestion |
AF | anaerobic fermentation |
ASTM | American Society for Testing and Materials |
avg. | average |
BET | Brunauer–Emmett–Teller |
BMP | biochemical methane potential |
BFT | breadfruit tree |
BSG | brewers’ spent grain |
Ca | calcium |
CaSO4 | calcium sulfate (or calcium sulphate) |
CCHP | integrated system for cooling, heating, and power |
CD | cow dung |
CH4 | methane |
CHP | combined heat–power |
CNF | carbon nanofibres |
CO | carbon monoxide |
CO2 | carbon dioxide |
COD | chemical oxygen demand |
CWP | pure cheese whey |
deNOx system | process for NOx emissions removal |
DFL | dry fell leaves |
ECPCH | eucalyptus/parchment/coffee husk |
ECPCH | eucalyptus-parchment-coffee husk |
EDTA | ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid |
EN | European standards |
FAME | fatty acid methyl ester |
FDW | food waste |
FGL | fig tree leaves |
FOBs | forward operating bases |
FORBI | dried household food waste |
FTIR | Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy |
FVW | vegetable and fruit wastes |
GAMS | General Algebraic Modeling System |
gCO2 per produced MJ | grams of carbon dioxide per produced megajoule |
GCV | gross calorific value |
GHGs | greenhouse gas emissions |
Glc | glucose |
gNO per produced MJ | grams of nitric oxide per produced megajoule |
GNW | green waste |
gSO2 per produced MJ | grams of sulfur dioxide per produced megajoule |
GWh | gigawatt hours |
H2 | hydrogen |
HCL | hydrochloric acid |
HTC | hydrothermal carbonization |
HTL | hydrothermal liquefaction |
IASNPs | ionic liquid amphiphilic silica nanoparticles |
IGCC | integrated gasification combined cycle |
In2O3 | indium oxide |
JP | peels from jackfruits |
JS | seeds from jackfruits |
K | potassium |
kJ | kilojoule |
LHV | lower heating value |
LFG | landfill gas |
LIGA or LIG | lignite (Greek) |
MCFA | medium-chain fatty acids |
MCG | Macaranga spp. |
Mg | magnesium |
MH | melon husk |
MJ | megajoule |
ML | machine learning |
MSW | municipal solid waste |
Mt or Mtonnes | megatons |
MWe | megawatts electric power (electricity) |
N | nitrogen |
NaOH | sodium hydroxide |
NHCs | nitrogen heterocyclic compounds |
NHCs | nitrogen heterocyclic compounds |
NL | normal litter |
OBPs | open air burn pits |
OFMSW | and organic fraction of municipal solid waste |
ORC | organic rankine cycle |
PAP | paper waste |
PET | polyethylene terephthalate |
PHA | polyhydroxyalkanoate |
PJ | petajoule |
PM | pig manure |
POME | palm oil mill effluent |
PPW | potato peel waste |
Py-GC MS | pyrolysis gas chromatography/mass spectrometry |
RDF | refuse derived fuel |
REE | rare earth elements |
RF | random forest algorithm |
RH | rice husk |
RSM | response surface methodology |
S | sulfur |
Sar | sargassum |
SCB | sugarcane baggage |
SCFAs | short-chain fatty acids |
SDG | sustainable development goals |
SE | steam explosion |
SEM-EDS or SEM-EDX | scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy |
SHW | slaughterhouse wastes |
SS | sewage sludge |
SVI | sustainable value index |
TGA | thermogravimetric analysis or thermal gravimetric analysis |
TS | total solid |
TVS | total volatile solids |
TW | tea waste |
UASB | upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (reactor) |
v/v | volume per volume |
VCRS | vapor compressor refrigeration system |
VOCs | volatile organic compounds |
VS | volatile solids |
W/BtE or WtE | waste/biomass to energy or waste to energy |
wt.% | weight percent |
XRD | X-ray diffraction |
XRF | X-ray fluorescence |
References
- United Nations. The Sustainable Development Goals Report, SDGs. Available online: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2021/Overview/ (accessed on 18 February 2024).
- Zhou, Z.; Zhang, L. Sustainable waste management and waste to energy: Valuation of energy potential of MSW in the Greater Bay Area of China. Energy Policy 2022, 163, 112857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahmudul, H.M.; Rasul, M.G.; Akbar, D.; Narayanan, R.; Mofijur, M. Food waste as a source of sustainable energy: Technical, economical, environmental and regulatory feasibility analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 166, 112577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tanyi, R.J.; Adaramola, M.S. Bioenergy potential of agricultural crop residues and municipal solid waste in Cameroon. AIMS Energy 2023, 11, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jin, Q.; An, Z.; Damle, A.; Poe, N.; Wu, J.; Wang, H.; Wang, Z.; Huang, H. High Acetone-Butanol-Ethanol Production from Food Waste by Recombinant Clostridium saccharoperbutylacetonicum in Batch and Continuous Immobilized-Cell Fermentation. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 9822–9832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, C.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z.; Wei, W.; Chen, X.; Mannina, G.; Ni, B.J. A novel strategy for efficiently transforming waste activated sludge into medium-chain fatty acid using free nitrous acid. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 862, 160826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cevrim, I.; Caner, A.M. Analysis of Biogas Sources in the Context of Renewable Energy; Erzurum Province as an Example. Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2023, 32, 3053–3062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, Y.; Lyu, T.; Li, D.; Zhang, Z.; Guo, J.; Li, X.; Xiong, W.; Dong, R.; Wang, S. Process mechanisms of nanobubble technology enhanced hydrolytic acidification of anaerobic digestion of lignocellulosic biomass. Chem. Eng. J. 2024, 480, 147956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Osat, M.; Shojaati, F.; Osat, M. A solar-biomass system associated with CO2 capture, power generation and waste heat recovery for syngas production from rice straw and microalgae: Technological, energy, exergy, exergoeconomic and environmental assessments. Appl. Energy 2023, 340, 120999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Honcharuk, I.; Tokarchuk, D.; Gontaruk, Y.; Hreshchuk, H. Bioenergy recycling of household solid waste as a direction for ensuring sustainable development of rural areas. Polityka Energetyczna 2023, 26, 23–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramprasad, C.; Anandhu, A.; Abarna, A. Quantification of Methane Emissions Rate Using Landgem Model and Estimating the Hydrogen Production Potential from Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Site. Nat. Environ. Pollut. Technol. 2023, 22, 1845–1856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dodo, U.A.; Ashigwuike, E.C. In-depth physico-chemical characterisation and estimation of the grid power potential of municipal solid wastes in Abuja city. Energy Nexus 2023, 10, 100192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasileiadou, A.; Zoras, S.; Dimoudi, A. A comprehensive experimental study of municipal solid waste (MSW) as solid biofuel and as composite solid fuel in blends with lignite: Quality characteristics, environmental impact, modeling, and energy cover. Energy Ecol. Environ. 2023, 8, 211–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cesaro, A.; Conte, A.; Carrère, H.; Trably, E.; Paillet, F.; Belgiorno, V. Formic acid pretreatment for enhanced production of bioenergy and biochemicals from organic solid waste. Biomass Bioenergy 2020, 133, 105455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, B.P.D.; Sganzerla, W.G.; Léo, P.; Forster-Carneiro, T.; Martins, G. Determination of the biochemical methane potential of food waste after aerobic storage and aeration pretreatment. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefining 2022, 16, 1733–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Greses, S.; Tomás-Pejó, E.; González-Fernández, C. Food waste valorization into bioenergy and bioproducts through a cascade combination of bioprocesses using anaerobic open mixed cultures. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 372, 105455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Phuthongkhao, P.; Phasin, K.; Boonma, P.; Khunphonoi, R.; Kanchanatip, E.; Suwannaruang, T.; Shivaraju, H.P.; Wantala, K. Preparation and characterization of hydrothermally processed carbonaceous hydrochar from pulp and paper sludge waste. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023, 14, 15493–15510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, X.; Guo, H.; Zhu, T.; Ni, B.J.; Liu, Y. Percarbonate-strengthened ferrate pretreatment for enhancing short-chain fatty acids production from sewage sludge. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 904, 166771. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alidoosti, Z.; Sadegheih, A.; Govindan, K.; Pishvaee, M.S. Sustainable network design of bioenergies generation based on municipal solid waste (MSW) management under uncertainty. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 2023, 15, 013103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, A.A.; Khan, S.U.; Kipperberg, G.; Javed, T.; Ali, M.A.S.; Ullah, R.; Luo, J. Unlocking biogas potential: Spatial analysis, economic viability, and climate resilience in southern regions of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 911, 168810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Posmanik, R.; Darzi, R.; Glicksberg, R.; Shabtay, A.; Cohen-Zinder, M. Hydrothermal conversion of beef cattle manure can enhance energy recovery in confined feedlots. Environ. Sci. Water Res. Technol. 2020, 6, 1125–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latifi, P.; Karrabi, M.; Shahnavaz, B. Estimating the potential of energy generation by anaerobic digestion of slaughterhouse wastes toward sustainable waste management strategy: A case study. Energy Sources Part A Recovery Util. Environ. Eff. 2021. [CrossRef]
- Madrigal, G.; Huaraya, M.; Sancho, T.; Mendieta, O.; Jaimes-Estévez, J. Biochar from bovine manure as a sustainable additive to improve the anaerobic digestion of cheese whey. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2022, 20, 101258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Filho, D.A.S.; de Oliveira, L.R.G.; Penteado, M.C.; Schirmer, W.N.; Sobrinho, M.A.D.M.; Jucá, J.F.T. Energy sustainability of supply centers from the codigestion of organic waste. Detritus 2020, 9, 76–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shaibur, M.R.; Husain, H.; Arpon, S.H. Utilization of cow dung residues of biogas plant for sustainable development of a rural community. Curr. Res. Environ. Sustain. 2021, 3, 100026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabrera-Codony, A.; Ruiz, B.; Gil, R.R.; Popartan, L.A.; Santos-Clotas, E.; Martín, M.J.; Fuente, E. From biocollagenic waste to efficient biogas purification: Applying circular economy in the leather industry. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2021, 21, 101229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christiane, Q.N.S.; Amankwah, E.; Awafo, E.A.; Sodre, S. Valorization of faecal sludge and organic waste in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso to improve sanitation, enhance soil and improve agricultural productivity. Energy Rep. 2023, 9, 4951–4959. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasileiadou, A.; Zoras, S.; Iordanidis, A. Bioenergy production from olive oil mill solid wastes and their blends with lignite: Thermal characterization, kinetics, thermodynamic analysis, and several scenarios for sustainable practices. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023, 13, 5325–5338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasileiadou, A. Energy recovery from brewers’ spent grain combustion/co-combustion with lignite. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2024, 21, 5335–5350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasileiadou, A. Sustainable energy production from grape marc: From thermo-analytical and chemical analysis to kinetic modeling and environmental impact assessment. Energy Ecol. Environ. 2023, 8, 471–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nyakuma, B.B.; Oladokun, O.; Ivase, T.J.P.; Moveh, S.; Otitolaiye, V.O. Energy potential of malaysian forestry waste residues. Pet. Coal 2020, 62, 238–243. [Google Scholar]
- Şen, B. Investigation of the potential of greenhouse post-harvest wastes for bioenergy production and utilization for heating and carbon dioxide application. Environ. Res. Technol. 2022, 5, 272–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Díaz, L.; Señorans, S.; González, L.A.; Escalante, D.J. Assessment of the energy potential of agricultural residues in the Canary Islands: Promoting circular economy through bioenergy production. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 437, 140735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fitri, H.; Gürdil, G.A.K.; Demirel, B.; Cevher, E.Y.; Roubík, H. Biomass potential from agricultural residues for energy utilization in West Nusa Tenggara (WNT), Indonesia. GCB Bioenergy 2023, 15, 1405–1414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Valle, T.M.; Zhu, J.; Jiang, P. Drivers of straw management in rural households: Options for the development of the bioenergy sector in China. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2022, 71, 341–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Holmatov, B.; Schyns, J.F.; Krol, M.S.; Gerbens-Leenes, P.W.; Hoekstra, A.Y. Can crop residues provide fuel for future transport? Limited global residue bioethanol potentials and large associated land, water and carbon footprints. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 149, 111417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brunerová, A.; Roubík, H.; Brožek, M.; Van Dung, D.; Phung, L.D.; Hasanudin, U.; Iryani, D.A.; Herák, D. Briquetting of sugarcane bagasse as a proper waste management technology in Vietnam. Waste Manag. Res. 2020, 38, 1239–1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Proto, A.R.; Palma, A.; Paris, E.; Papandrea, S.F.; Vincenti, B.; Carnevale, M.; Guerriero, E.; Bonofiglio, R.; Gallucci, F. Assessment of wood chip combustion and emission behavior of different agricultural biomasses. Fuel 2021, 289, 119758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alves, J.L.F.; da Silva, J.C.G.; Mumbach, G.D.; Domenico, M.D.; da Silva Filho, V.F.; de Sena, R.F.; Machado, R.A.F.; Marangoni, C. Insights into the bioenergy potential of jackfruit wastes considering their physicochemical properties, bioenergy indicators, combustion behaviors, and emission characteristics. Renew. Energy 2020, 155, 1328–1338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Le, T.M.; Tran, U.P.N.; Duong, Y.H.P.; Nguyen, Q.D.; Tran, V.T.; Mai, P.T.; Le, P.K. Sustainable bioethanol and value-added chemicals production from paddy residues at pilot scale. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2022, 24, 185–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daimary, N.; Eldiehy, K.S.H.; Boruah, P.; Deka, D.; Bora, U.; Kakati, B.K. Potato peels as a sustainable source for biochar, bio-oil and a green heterogeneous catalyst for biodiesel production. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 107108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wallikhani, A.H.; Asakereh, A.; Farrokhian Firouzi, A. Biochar and bioenergy production by pyrolysis of Conocarpus and Eucalyptus wastes: A case study, Khuzestan province, Iran. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 19, 5839–5848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, N.V.; Sawargaonkar, G.; Rani, C.S.; Pasumarthi, R.; Kale, S.; Prakash, T.R.; Triveni, S.; Singh, A.; Davala, M.S.; Khopade, R.; et al. Harnessing the potential of pigeonpea and maize feedstock biochar for carbon sequestration, energy generation, and environmental sustainability. Bioresour. Bioprocess. 2024, 11, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, Z.; Wang, X.J.; Ren, X. Kinetic study of sesame stalk pyrolysis by thermogravimetric analysis. Renew. Energy 2024, 222, 119878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mishra, R.K.; Mohanty, K.; Wang, X. Pyrolysis kinetics behavior and pyrolysate compositions analysis of agriculture waste toward the production of sustainable renewable fuel and chemicals. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 2024, 43, e14357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, T.; Nam, I.H.; Jung, S.; Park, Y.K.; Kwon, E.E. Synthesis of nickel/biochar composite from pyrolysis of Microcystis aeruginosa and its practical use for syngas production. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 300, 122712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwon, D.; Lee, S.S.; Jung, S.; Park, Y.K.; Tsang, Y.F.; Kwon, E.E. CO2 to fuel via pyrolysis of banana peel. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 392, 123774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qureshi, T.; Farooq, M.; Imran, S.; Munir, M.A.; Javed, M.A.; Sohoo, I.; Sultan, M.; Rehman, A.U.; Farhan, M.; Asim, M.; et al. Structural and thermal investigation of lignocellulosic biomass conversion for enhancing sustainable imperative in progressive organic refinery paradigm for waste-to-energy applications. Environ. Res. 2024, 246, 118129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, Q.; Cao, Y.; He, M.; Lei, H.; Song, H.; Alessi, D.S.; Tsang, D.C.W. Improved energy recovery from yard waste by water-starved hydrothermal treatment: Effects of process water and pressure. Bioresour. Technol. 2024, 394, 130211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suárez, L.; Benavente-Ferraces, I.; Plaza, C.; de Pascual-Teresa, S.; Suárez-Ruiz, I.; Centeno, T.A. Hydrothermal carbonization as a sustainable strategy for integral valorisation of apple waste. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 309, 123395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weber, B.; Ayala-Mercado, I.D.; Stadlbauer, E.A. Steam explosion versus hydrothermal carbonization: Evaluation of applicability for pretreatment of semi-solid waste from beverage industries to facilitate on-site biogas production. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2022, 14, 7659–7671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Acaru, S.F.; Abdullah, R.; Lim, R.C. Sustainable Valorization of Wood Residue for the Production of Biofuel Materials Via Continuous Flow Hydrothermal Liquefaction. Waste Biomass Valorization 2023, 14, 3081–3095. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lourenço, V.A.; Nadaleti, W.C.; Vieira, B.M.; Li, H. Investigation of ethyl biodiesel via transesterification of rice bran oil: Bioenergy from residual biomass in Pelotas, Rio Grande do Sul-Brazil. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 144, 111016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daimary, N.; Eldiehy, K.S.H.; Bora, N.; Boruah, P.; Rather, M.A.; Mandal, M.; Bora, U.; Deka, D. Towards integrated sustainable biofuel and chemical production: An application of banana pseudostem ash in the production of biodiesel and recovery of lignin from bamboo leaves. Chemosphere 2023, 314, 137625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alsaiari, M.; Ahmad, M.; Zafar, M.; Harraz, F.A.; Algethami, J.S.; Šljukić, B.; Santos, D.M.F.; Akhtar, M.S. Transformation of waste seed biomass of Cordia myxa into valuable bioenergy through membrane bioreactor using green nanoparticles of indium oxide. Chemosphere 2023, 314, 137604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mahajan, R.; Chandel, S.; Puniya, A.K.; Goel, G. Effect of pretreatments on cellulosic composition and morphology of pine needle for possible utilization as substrate for anaerobic digestion. Biomass Bioenergy 2020, 141, 105705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogundare, O.J.; Olukanni, D.O. Potential recovery of biogas from lime waste after juice extraction using solid–liquid extraction process. Recycling 2020, 5, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Achinas, S.; Euverink, G.J.W. Effect of temperature and organic load on the performance of anaerobic bioreactors treating grasses. Environments 2020, 7, 82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sganzerla, W.G.; Ampese, L.C.; Parisoto, T.A.C.; Forster-Carneiro, T. Process intensification for the recovery of methane-rich biogas from dry anaerobic digestion of açaí seeds. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023, 13, 8101–8114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waseem, W.; Noor, R.S.; Umair, M. The anaerobic transformation of agricultural waste for bioethanol production. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023, 14, 14163–14174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shokrollahi, S.; Shavandi, A.; Valentine Okoro, O.; Denayer, J.F.M.; Karimi, K. Sustainable biorefinery development for valorizing all wastes from date palm agroindustry. Fuel 2024, 358, 130291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kavalopoulos, M.; Stoumpou, V.; Christofi, A.; Mai, S.; Barampouti, E.M.; Moustakas, K.; Malamis, D.; Loizidou, M. Sustainable valorisation pathways mitigating environmental pollution from brewers’ spent grains. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 270, 116069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ranjithkumar, M.; Rajarathinam, R.; Kumar, P.S.; Rangasamy, G.; Gurunathan, B.; Ethiraj, B.; Thanabal, V. Insight into the effective utilization of cotton spinning wastes from textile mills for the production of bioethanol. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 53, 102770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pardilhó, S.; Oliveira, J.; Pires, J.C.; Maia Dias, J. Bioethanol Production from Marine Macroalgae Waste: Optimisation of Thermal acid Hydrolysis. Waste Biomass Valorization 2024, 15, 3639–3649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lapo, B.; Bou, J.J.; Hoyo, J.; Carrillo, M.; Peña, K.; Tzanov, T.; Sastre, A.M. A potential lignocellulosic biomass based on banana waste for critical rare earths recovery from aqueous solutions. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 264, 114409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pandey, A.; Kalamdhad, A.S.; Sharma, Y.C. Sustainable upcycling of sugarcane bagasse into nanofibrillated cellulose utilizing novel green solvents and high intensity ultrasonication. Sustain. Chem. Pharm. 2024, 37, 101373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Finore, I.; Romano, I.; Leone, L.; Di Donato, P.; Nicolaus, B.; Poli, A.; Lama, L. Biomass valorization: Sustainable methods for the production of hemicellulolytic catalysts from thermoanaerobacterium thermostercoris strain buff. Resources 2021, 10, 115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, F.; Xia, A.; Guo, X.; Zhang, W.; Huang, Y.; Zhu, X.; Zhu, X.; Liao, Q. Continuous hydrocarbon fuels production by photoenzymatic decarboxylation of free fatty acids from waste oils. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2023, 11, 110748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burra, K.R.G.; Hernández, I.F.; Castaldi, M.J.; Goff, S.; Gupta, A.K. Effect of Gypsum Waste Inclusion on Gasification of Municipal Solid Waste. J. Energy Resour. Technol. Trans. ASME 2023, 145, 021701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhu, X.; Guo, W.; Luo, Z.; Zhu, X.; Cai, W.; Zhu, X. Combined with co-hydrothermal carbonation of wood waste and food waste digestate for enhanced gasification of wood waste. Fuel 2023, 331, 125789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tiwari, A.K.; Prasad, N.; Kapoor, A.; Arya, A.K.; Pal, D.B. Sustainable valorization of Cascabela thevetia fruit peel and seed waste biomass: Characterization and thermo-kinetic analysis. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023. [CrossRef]
- Okopi, S.I.; Wang, J.; Kong, W.; Yu, Z.; Ndudi, E.A.; Che, L.; Gu, Z.; Xu, F. Valorization of food waste impurities by catalytic co-pyrolysis for production of pyrolysis oil with high energy potential. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2023, 170, 105918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhai, J.; Han, X.; An, Q.; Jiang, X. Insights into the nitrogen transformation process in Maillard reaction of sewage sludge and glucose towards nitrogen resource recovery and environmental sustainability. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2024, 177, 106282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.H.; Jung, S.; Park, Y.K.; Kwon, E.E. CO2-cofed catalytic pyrolysis of tea waste over Ni/SiO2 for the enhanced formation of syngas. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 396, 122637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, M.B.; Khalekuzzaman, M.; Kabir, S.B.; Hossain, M.R.; Alam, M.A. Substituting microalgal biomass with faecal sludge for high-quality biocrude production through co-liquefaction: A sustainable biorefinery approach. Fuel Process. Technol. 2022, 225, 107063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allegue, L.D.; Puyol, D.; Melero, J.A. Food waste valorization by purple phototrophic bacteria and anaerobic digestion after thermal hydrolysis. Biomass Bioenergy 2020, 142, 105803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Song, Y.; Yan, B.; Wu, W.; Zhong, L.; Li, N.; Chen, G.; Hou, L. Hydrothermal carbonization of garden waste by pretreatment with anaerobic digestion to improve hydrohcar performance and energy recovery. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 807, 151014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, M.; Zafar, M. Conversion of waste seed oil of Citrus aurantium into methyl ester via green and recyclable nanoparticles of zirconium oxide in the context of circular bioeconomy approach. Waste Manag. 2021, 136, 310–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cho, S.H.; Jung, S.; Park, Y.K.; Lin, K.Y.A.; Chen, W.H.; Tsang, Y.F.; Kwon, E.E. Biofuel Production as an Example of Virtuous Valorization of Swine Manure. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 13761–13772. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ibrahim, H.H.; Bilsborrow, P.E.; Phan, A.N. Intensification of pre-treatment and fractionation of agricultural residues. Chem. Eng. Process.-Process Intensif. 2021, 159, 108231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Adeniyi, A.G.; Amusa, V.T.; Emenike, E.C.; Iwuozor, K.O. Hybrid biochar production from biomass and pigmented plastic for sustainable waste-to-energy. Emergent Mater. 2023, 6, 1481–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaher, N.E.H.; Engler, N.; Nassour, A.; Nelles, M. Effects of co-substrates’ mixing ratios and loading rate variations on food and agricultural wastes’ anaerobic co-digestion performance. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023, 13, 7051–7066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Talwar, P.; Upadhyay, A.; Verma, N.; Singh, R.; Lindenberger, C.; Pareek, N.; Kovalev, A.A.; Zhuravleva, E.A.; Litti, Y.V.; Masakapalli, S.K.; et al. Utilization of agricultural residues for energy and resource recovery towards a sustainable environment. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2023. [CrossRef]
- Duarte, E.; Fragoso, R.; Smozinski, N.; Tavares, J. Enhancing bioenergy recovery from agro-food biowastes as a strategy to promote circular bioeconomy. J. Sustain. Dev. Energy Water Environ. Syst. 2021, 9, 1080320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aduba, C.C.; Ndukwe, J.K.; Onyejiaka, C.K.; Onyeiwu, S.C.; Moneke, A.N. Integrated Valorization of Cassava Wastes for Production of Bioelectricity, Biogas and Biofertilizer. Waste Biomass Valorization 2023, 14, 4003–4019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Srivastava, G.; Kumar, V.; Tiwari, R.; Patil, R.; Kalamdhad, A.; Goud, V. Anaerobic co-digestion of defatted microalgae residue and rice straw as an emerging trend for waste utilization and sustainable biorefinery development. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2022, 12, 1193–1202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vassalle, L.; Passos, F.; Rosa-Machado, A.T.; Moreira, C.; Reis, M.; Pascoal de Freitas, M.; Ferrer, I.; Mota, C.R. The use of solar pre-treatment as a strategy to improve the anaerobic biodegradability of microalgal biomass in co-digestion with sewage. Chemosphere 2022, 286, 131929. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Antonopoulou, G.; Alexandropoulou, M.; Ntaikou, I.; Lyberatos, G. From waste to fuel: Energy recovery from household food waste via its bioconversion to energy carriers based on microbiological processes. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 732, 139230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kopli, P.N.S.M.; Hassim, M.H.; Asli, U.A.; Wahab, F.A. Biohythane production from pineapple peel using Methanosarcina mazei enhanced with palm oil mill effluent (POME) sludge in single-stage anaerobic digestion. Environ. Qual. Manag. 2023, 33, 95–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kalita, S.; Ohlsson, J.A.; Karlsson Potter, H.; Nordberg, Å.; Sandgren, M.; Hansson, P.A. Energy performance of compressed biomethane gas production from co-digestion of Salix and dairy manure: Factoring differences between Salix varieties. Biotechnol. Biofuels Bioprod. 2023, 16, 165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mohammed, I.S.; Aliyu, M.; Abdullahi, N.A.; Alhaji, I.A. Production of bioenergy from rice-melon husk co-digested with COW dung as inoculant. Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J. 2020, 22, 108–117. [Google Scholar]
- Cucina, M.; Carlet, L.; De Nisi, P.; Somensi, C.A.; Giordano, A.; Adani, F. Degradation of biodegradable bioplastics under thermophilic anaerobic digestion: A full-scale approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 368, 133232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thompson, T.M.; Young, B.R.; Baroutian, S. Enhancing biogas production from caribbean pelagic Sargassum utilising hydrothermal pretreatment and anaerobic co-digestion with food waste. Chemosphere 2021, 275, 130035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hasan, B.; D’Silva, T.C.; Gaur, R.Z.; Singh, G.; Khan, A.A. Evaluating biogas potential of organic fraction of wholesale market wastes in New Delhi, India: Anaerobic co-digestion with sewage sludge and cattle manure. Energy Ecol. Environ. 2023, 9, 365–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rivera-Hernández, Y.; Hernández-Eugenio, G.; Balagurusamy, N.; Espinosa-Solares, T. Sargassum-pig manure co-digestion: An alternative for bioenergy production and treating a polluting coastal waste. Renew. Energy 2022, 199, 1336–1344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- D’Silva, T.C.; Isha, A.; Verma, S.; Shirsath, G.; Chandra, R.; Vijay, V.K.; Subbarao, P.M.V.; Kovács, K.L. Anaerobic co-digestion of dry fallen leaves, fruit/vegetable wastes and cow dung without an active inoculum—A biomethane potential study. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2022, 19, 101189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niedzialkoski, R.K.; Marostica, R.; Damaceno, F.M.; Costa, L.A.D.M.; Costa, M.S.S.D.M. Combination of biological processes for agro-industrial poultry waste management: Effects on vermicomposting and anaerobic digestion. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 297, 113127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tovkach, A.E.; Boyle, J.C.; Nagelli, E.A.; James, C.M.; Sheehan, P.L.; Pfluger, A.R. Structured decision making for assessment of solid waste-to-energy systems for decentralized onsite applications. Environ. Syst. Decis. 2023, 43, 54–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sette, P.; Fernandez, A.; Soria, J.; Rodriguez, R.; Salvatori, D.; Mazza, G. Integral valorization of fruit waste from wine and cider industries. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 242, 118486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, M.S.; Huan, Q.; Yan, M.; Ali, M.; Noor, O.U.; Abid, M. A novel configuration of solar integrated waste-to-energy incineration plant for multi-generational purpose: An effort for achieving maximum performance. Renew. Energy 2022, 194, 604–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moura, P.; Henriques, J.; Alexandre, J.; Oliveira, A.C.; Abreu, M.; Gírio, F.; Catarino, J. Sustainable value methodology to compare the performance of conversion technologies for the production of electricity and heat, energy vectors and biofuels from waste biomass. Clean. Waste Syst. 2022, 3, 100029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madhesh, K.; Devesh, D.R.; Vivin, T.; Praveen Raj, M.; Phelan, P.E.; Vignesh Kumar, V.; Praveen Kumar, G. Analysis and multi-objective evolutionary optimization of Solar-Biogas hybrid system operated cascade Kalina organic Rankine cycle for sustainable cooling and green hydrogen production. Energy Convers. Manag. 2024, 301, 117999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- García Álvaro, A.; Ruiz Palomar, C.; Muñoz Torre, R.; Hermosilla Redondo, D.; de Godos Crespo, I. Hybridization of anaerobic digestion with solar energy: A solution for isolated livestock farms. Energy Convers. Manag. X 2023, 20, 100488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khalil, M.; Dincer, I. Development and assessment of integrated hydrogen and renewable energy systems for a sustainable city. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023, 98, 104794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yong, Z.J.; Bashir, M.J.K.; Hassan, M.S. Biogas and biofertilizer production from organic fraction municipal solid waste for sustainable circular economy and environmental protection in Malaysia. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 776, 145961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khalekuzzaman, M.; Fayshal, M.A.; Adnan, H.M.F. Production of low phenolic naphtha-rich biocrude through co-hydrothermal liquefaction of fecal sludge and organic solid waste using water-ethanol co-solvent. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 436, 140593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, J.; Tang, S.; Song, B.; Jiang, Y.; Zhu, W.; Zhou, W.; Yang, G. Optimization of integrated anaerobic digestion and pyrolysis for biogas, biochar and bio-oil production from the perspective of energy flow. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 872, 162154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zheng, N.Y.; Lee, M.; Lin, Y.L.; Samannan, B. Microwave-assisted wet co-torrefaction of food sludge and lignocellulose biowaste for biochar production and nutrient recovery. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2020, 144, 273–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soltaninejad, A.; Jazini, M.; Karimi, K. Sustainable bioconversion of potato peel wastes into ethanol and biogas using organosolv pretreatment. Chemosphere 2022, 291, 133003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruya, P.M.; Lim, S.S.; Purwadi, R.; Zunita, M. Sustainable hydrogen production from oil palm derived wastes through autothermal operation of supercritical water gasification system. Energy 2020, 208, 118280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sotoodeh, A.F.; Ahmadi, F.; Ghaffarpour, Z.; Ebadollahi, M.; Nasrollahi, H.; Amidpour, M. Performance analyses of a waste-to-energy multigeneration system incorporated with thermoelectric generators. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 49, 101649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sakthi Vignesh, N.; Vimali, E.; Sangeetha, R.; Arumugam, M.; Ashokkumar, B.; Ganeshmoorthy, I.; Varalakshmi, P. Sustainable biofuel from microalgae: Application of lignocellulosic wastes and bio-iron nanoparticle for biodiesel production. Fuel 2020, 278, 118326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Remón, J.; Sevilla-Gasca, R.; Frecha, E.; Pinilla, J.L.; Suelves, I. Direct conversion of almond waste into value-added liquids using carbon-neutral catalysts: Hydrothermal hydrogenation of almond hulls over a Ru/CNF catalyst. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 825, 154044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ravi, R.; de Souza, M.F.; Adriaens, A.; Vingerhoets, R.; Luo, H.; Van Dael, M.; Meers, E. Exploring the environmental consequences of roadside grass as a biogas feedstock in Northwest Europe. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 344, 118538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ayub, A.; Ali Shah, S.F.; Qyyum, M.A.; Habib, D.E.Y.; Murtaza, M.A.; Rehan, M.; Tabatabaei, M.; Aghbashlo, M.; Waqas, M.; Nizami, A.S. Sustainable economic growth potential of biomass-enriched countries through bioenergy production: State-of-the-art assessment using product space model. Front. Energy Res. 2023, 11, 1123262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kowalski, Z.; Kulczycka, J.; Makara, A.; Mondello, G.; Salomone, R. Industrial Symbiosis for Sustainable Management of Meat Waste: The Case of Śmiłowo Eco-Industrial Park, Poland. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 5162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- de Souza, H.J.P.L.; Arantes, M.D.C.; Vidaurre, G.B.; Andrade, C.R.; Carneiro, A.D.C.O.; de Souza, D.P.L.; Protásio, T.D.P. Pelletization of eucalyptus wood and coffee growing wastes: Strategies for biomass valorization and sustainable bioenergy production. Renew. Energy 2020, 149, 128–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vasiliu, L.; Gencel, O.; Damian, I.; Harja, M. Capitalization of tires waste as derived fuel for sustainable cement production. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2023, 56, 103104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deep Singh, A.; Gajera, B.; Sarma, A.K. Appraising the availability of biomass residues in India and their bioenergy potential. Waste Manag. 2022, 152, 38–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, R.; Kumar, V.; Nagpure, A.S. Bio-energy potential of available livestock waste and surplus agriculture crop residue: An analysis of 602 rural districts of India. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 889, 163974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaudhary, V.P.; Chandra, R.; Denis, D.M.; D’Silva, T.C.; Isha, A. Agri-biomass-based bio-energy supply model: An inclusive sustainable and circular economy approach for a self-resilient rural India. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefining 2022, 16, 1284–1296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ocak, S.; Acar, S. Biofuels from wastes in Marmara Region, Turkey: Potentials and constraints. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 66026–66042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ali, A.M.; Nawaz, A.M.; Al-Turaif, H.A.; Shahzad, K. The economic and environmental analysis of energy production from slaughterhouse waste in Saudi Arabia. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 4252–4269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morero, B.; Lorenzon, A.B.; Cafaro, D.C. Integrated management of urban and rural wastes with energy recovery and low carbon emissions. J. Clean. Prod. 2024, 434, 139729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- d’Espiney, A.; Pinheiro, H.M.; Marques, I.P.; Kretzschmar, J.; Cyffka, K.F.; Thrän, D. Biomass and bioenergy potentials of bioresidues: Assessment methodology development and application to the region of Lafões. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2023. [CrossRef]
- Kaushal, R.; Sandhu, S.; Kumar Soni, M. Anaerobic co-digestion of food waste, algae, and cow dung for biogas yield enhancement as a prospective approach for environmental sustainability. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 2022, 52, 102236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Lorena Diniz Chaves, G.; Siman, R.R.; Chang, N.B. Policy analysis for sustainable refuse-derived fuel production in Espírito Santo, Brazil. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 294, 126344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ansari, S.H.; Ahmed, A.; Razzaq, A.; Hildebrandt, D.; Liu, X.; Park, Y.K. Incorporation of solar-thermal energy into a gasification process to co-produce bio-fertilizer and power. Environ. Pollut. 2020, 266, 115103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Altan, H.S.; Orhon, D.; Sözen, S. Energy Recovery Potential of Livestock Waste with Thermal and Biological Technologies: Analysis on Cattle, Sheep, Goat and Chicken Manure. Int. J. Energy Econ. Policy 2022, 12, 39–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zarrinpoor, N. Bioenergy production from agro-livestock waste under uncertainty: A sustainable network design. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2024, 14, 1149–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Zhang, W.; Liu, T.; Yang, L.; Li, H.; Peng, H.; Jiang, S.; Wang, X.; Leng, L. Machine learning aided bio-oil production with high energy recovery and low nitrogen content from hydrothermal liquefaction of biomass with experiment verification. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 425, 130649. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Biomass Residue Source | Method | Enhance Treatment/Additives | Biofuel/Result | Refs. |
---|---|---|---|---|
MSW | Hydrogen production, steam reforming reaction (Vijayawada landfill, solid wastes from Nandigama, Tiruvuru, and Vijayawada), 0.569 kg/capita/day in 2021 with 1,396,853 population, 0.81 kg/capita/day and 6,328,761, in 2040, 3216 kcal/kg, Landfill Gas Emissions Model, LandGEM 3.02 | - | Maximum of 43.3 Gg/y Hydrogen production during 2042 | [11] |
MSW | Physicochemical analysis, grid electricity prospect of Abuja’s, average net calorific value: 18.1 MJ/kg, 0.53 kg/person/day (Nigeria) | - | Energy, reduced CO2 emissions, More than 69% of 257,500 tons/y could produce energy, power, and grid power of 2274.42 MWh, 28.43 MW, and 19.19 MW, respectively, and save 67.5 million metric CO2 t/year. | [12] |
MSW | Combustion, all cities in Greater Bay Area of China, 2 scenarios 15% and 30% efficiency | Best: 31,346 GWh by 2030 & 77,748 GWh by 2060 electricity | [2] | |
4 types of raw MSW: FDW, GNW, PAP, & OFMSW were examined separately | Physicochemical, kinetic, thermodynamic, environmental impact, modelling, energy cover for Greece and Europe, empirical chemical formulas, Maximum potential emission factors, waste generation: Europe 1.18 kg/capita/year in 2017, 1.30 kg/capita/year in 2030, and 1.45 kg/capita/year in 2060. In Greece, 503.7 kg/capita/year in 2017, 491.1 in 2030, and 547.7 in 2060. Primary energy production (in 2017): Europe 758.2 Mtoe/year, Greece 7.5 Mtoe/year. Population (in millions, 2017): Europe 511.8, Greece 10.77 (+13% in 2030, +36% in 2060) | - | Enhanced energy GCV (avg. 15.9 MJ/kg): FDW: 18.9 MJ/kg > OFMSW: 16.6 kJ/kg > PAP: 16.0 kJ/kg > GNW: 12.2 MJ/kg > LIGA: 12.7 MJ/kg, reduced ash/MJ: FDW: 0.0025 kg/MJ > PAP: 0.0042 kg/MJ > OFMSW: 0.0067 kg/MJ > GNW: 0.0144 kg/MJ > LIGA: 0.0307 kg/MJ, reduced CO2, NO and SO2 emissions per MJ, could cover energy demand (0.91 Mtoe/y, up to 12.1% in Greece. 36.8 Mtoe/y, 5% in Europe), a sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [13] |
MSW | Model (multi-objective possibilistic mixed-integer non-linear programming), interactive fuzzy programming was used to address uncertainty in network, General Algebraic Modeling System (GAMS) software Arad Kooh, Iran | - | Economic, environmental, and social sustainability | [19] |
Organic fraction of municipal solid waste | Dark fermentation | Formic acid pretreatment | H2 yield 31.6 mL/gVS with 5% formic acid pretreatment, biochemicals | [14] |
FDW | Biochemical methane potential | Forced continuous aeration pretreatment | CH4, Enhanced TVS of pretreated FDW: 425 NmL CH4/g TVS (samples without pre-processing: 375 NmL CH4/g TVS | [15] |
FDW | Continuous immobilized-cell fermentation | - | ABE, 19.65 g/L ABE, 23-fold better productivity compared to the batch fermentation | [5] |
FDW | 2 anaerobic processes (anaerobic fermentation, AF and then anaerobic digestion, AD) & open mixed cultures | - | Bioproducts (ethanol and Short-chain fatty acids) and bioenergy (CH4 and H2) | [16] |
Household FDW | 6 states, Australia’s potential for sustainable energy, primary energy production 2017–18: 6171.7 PJ, population (2017): 24.4 million, AD, in 2016–17: 2.5 Mt of domestic FDW, 2 kWh of electricity and 7.7 MJ of heat can be generated per m3 of biogas | - | Energy, reduced CO2 emissions, using 10% FDW from Australian could produce 1.22 GWh–35.4 GWh/y, reduction of about 639,850 tons GHG emissions | [3] |
Paper sludge wastes | HTC under controlled conditions | - | High quality carbonaceous hydrochar, substitute the use of lignite | [17] |
SS | Fermentation, and several analytical methods TSS (total suspended solids), VSS (volatile suspended solids), etc. (Tianjin, China) | Ferrate strengthened with percarbonate pretreatment | Increased SCFAs production (under optimal pretreatment: 3670.2 mg COD/L SCFAs production) | [18] |
SS | Novel efficient method using free nitrous acid | Free nitrous acid pretreatment | Medium-chain fatty acids | [6] |
Waste Source | Method | Enhance Treatment/Additives | Biofuel/Result | Refs. |
---|---|---|---|---|
Animal wastes (manure) | Biogas source analysis, in Erzurum (Turkey), between 2002 and 2021, biogas heating value: 22.7 MJ/m3, methane heating value: 36 MJ/m3, efficiency 35%, electricity consumption 919,749.00 MWhe | - | CH4 production, possible to produce 251,977,679 m3 CH4/y, cover 96% of Erzurum province’s annual electricity consumption | [7] |
Livestock farm manure | Spatial and economic analysis | - | Feasible to build biogas plants | [20] |
Beef cattle manure | HTL at 200–300 °C, 60 min | - | Increase energy recovery in higher temperature, biocrude oil: 30–35 MJ/kg | [21] |
Slaughterhouse wastes (SHW) | Combined heat–power (CHP) plants | - | CH4 production and CO2 emissions reduction, ~111 million m3/y CH4 could produce into CHP plants (~1000 GWh electricity), and reduce Iran’s CO2 emissions by 482,000 tons. | [22] |
Pure cheese whey (CWP) | AD | Bovine manure | Biochar/CH4, (358 mL CH4/g VSadd, 2 g biochar/gVS) | [23] |
Inoculating waste with ruminant manures, sludge and mixtures | BMP bench-test biodigesters | - | Biogas production (359 kWh.d−1 of electric power could be produced) | [24] |
Cow dung | Biogas plant, samples from 12 dairy farms, Ziala Village at Tala Sub-District in Satkhira | Biogas production | [25] | |
Biocollagenic waste (leather industry) | Chemical activation at various temperatures and weight ratios | - | Low-cost and sustainable activated carbons, microporous adsorbents. | [26] |
Faecal sludge (FS), abattoir waste, and fruit and vegetable waste | Physicochemical analysis, in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso (Africa) | - | Enhanced soil, biogas production (90% fecal sludge & 10% of fruits and vegetables waste: 29.4 L/kg of biogas, settled sludge and semi-solid material: 54.4 L/kg of biogas with 51% of CH4). | [27] |
Waste Source | Method | Enhance Treatment/ Additives | Biofuel/Results | Refs. |
---|---|---|---|---|
Rice straw | Hydrolytic acidification of AD | CO2 micro-nanobubble, N2- & H2- nanobubble technology | Biogas/Methane (CH4), Nanobubbles (especially CO2 nanobubbles) enhanced H2 yield (74–94 times) | [8] |
Olive stones (OLS) and lignite blends, extracted olive pomace (EOP) (olive oil solid wastes from the oil industry) | 100% olive stones, 100% extracted olive pomace, and several blends with lignite, thermochemical analyses, thermal characterization, kinetics, thermodynamic analysis, and several scenarios for sustainable practices | - | Energy generation, sustainable management, energy cover, energy cover, low ash content (<7 wt.%), high GCV (~21 MJ/kg), and low activation energy. Sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [28] |
BSG alone (raw), BSG blends with lignite in several mixes | Combustion, co-combustion, thermochemical methods, thermal analysis, proximate analysis, ultimate analysis, empirical chemical formulas, case studies for sustainable management, environmental impact, maximum emission factors, kinetic and thermodynamic analysis, ash elemental analysis | Raw BSG, BSG blends with lignite | Energy generation, alternative use of BSG, GCV: 19.05 MJ/kg, ash < 5 wt.%, max gCO2/MJ: 91.9, max gSO2/MJ:1 (lower than lignite), but max potential gNO/MJ emissions: 4.8 (higher than lignite), deNOx system maybe is needed, sustainable management, sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [29] |
Winery solid waste: grape marc (GM) | Combustion, thermochemical methods, kinetic and thermodynamic analysis, ash analysis, etc. | - | GCV: 19.3 MJ/kg, ash: 5.74 wt.%, CaO: 75.5%, MgO:6.8%. promising alternative sustainable solid biofuels (enhanced fuel characteristics, low COx, NOx, SOx emissions per Megajoule) | [30] |
Forestry waste residues breadfruit tree (BFT), Macaranga spp. (MCG), Acacia mangium (ACM), and fig tree (FGL) leaves | Thermochemical analyses | - | Energy recovery, CM for pyrolysis bio-oils and bio-gases, FGL for biochar production | [31] |
Greenhouse post-harvest wastes (stem and leaves of pepper, tomato, and eggplant) | Palletization, thermochemical analysis | - | Bioenergy and CO2 for greenhouse during cold season to photosynthesis | [32] |
Grape residues, potato residues, tomato residues, and banana residues | Potential of biomass residues/wastes and potential energy | - | Renewable energy production for the Canary Islands | [33] |
Several biomass residues (paddy straw, rice, corn straw and kernels, coffee, cacao) | collected data from various sources: Statistics Indonesia, One Data WNT, Department of Agriculture and Plantation of WNT, Department of Energy and Resources, and journal articles | - | Renewable energy production for the West Nusa Tenggara region (Indonesia) | [34] |
Straw | Study on management decisions in rural regions (China) | - | Bioenergy, and sustainable management | [35] |
Non-crop based lignocellulosic biomass by using 123 crop residues in 192 countries | 20 case studies optimistic and realistic | - | Bioethanol production, GHG emission saving | [36] |
Sugarcane | Direct combustion process | High-pressure briquetting technology | Energy content 18.4 MJ/kg, ash 0.97 wt.%, sustainable waste management of sugarcane processing | [37] |
Different pruning residues: citrus, grapevine, olive (wood biomasses) | Combustion (boiler 30 kW, multicyclone filter bags), emission behavior (Italy) | - | LHV: avg. 18–18.7 MJ/kg, grapevine and citrus: high N content | [38] |
Jackfruit peels and seeds waste | Combustion | - | Bioenergy, high heating value (~16.5 MJ/kg), low CO, CO2 and SO2 emissions | [39] |
Paddy wastes (rice straw) | A pilot-scale biorefinery, gasification system | Alkaline pretreatment | Sustainable fuel (bioethanol) and chemical production (pure lignin up to 79%, silica up to 96%, and nutrient), energy efficiency 0.529 > energy efficiency of current process: 0.449, zero-waste biorefinery practice | [40] |
Potato peel wastes (PPW) | Fixed bed pyrolysis reactor (450–550 °C, 30 °C/min heating rate, residence time 30 min) | - | Bio-oil, biochar, and a green catalyst (Potato peel pyrolyzed calcined biochar catalyst) for biodiesel synthesis | [41] |
Conocarpus and Eucalyptus pruning wastes | Pyrolysis | - | Biochar (167,510 tons) and bioenergy production (312 GWh) | [42] |
Maize stalks and pigeon pea | Pyrolysis at 400, 500, 600 °C | - | Lower temperature-produced biochar: suitable for controlling fertilizer nutrients and removing soil contaminants. Higher temperature-produced biochar: comparable to environmental remediation and activated carbon, and reduced polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons | [43] |
Waste from sesame stalks | Thermogravimetric and kinetic analysis, pyrolysis | - | Energy generation, multi-stage reactions in pyrolysis of sesame stalk seems | [44] |
Sugarcane baggage (SCB) | Pyrolysis, several analytical methods (e.g., Py-GC-MS, TGA, XRF, and X-ray fluorescence) | Zeolite catalysts | Enhanced pyrolysis products with zeolite catalysts | [45] |
Microcystis aeruginosa waste (a toxic microalgal biomass) | Synthesis of nickel/biochar composite, CO2-feeding pyrolysis | Nickel/biochar composite (as catalyst in CO2-feeding pyrolysis) | Synthesis of nickel/biochar composite that used as catalyst for syngas production in CO2-feeding pyrolysis | [46] |
Banana peel waste | Pyrolysis | CO2 environment | Syngas production, CO formation at 420 °C | [47] |
Cotton stalk | Pyrolysis and combustion, thermochemical analysis | Acidified 5% wt. HCL | Clean energy generation (eliminate cotton stalk’s undesired amorphous material) | [48] |
Wet biomass waste (yard waste) | HTC with and without N2 pressurization | - | Improved carbon storage in hydrochar, less water consumption | [49] |
Industrial apple waste | HTC | - | By retaining energy (82–96%) and carbon (80–93%) in solids, it creates CO2 neutral solid fuels with ~30 MJ/kg | [50] |
Brewers’ spent grain (BSG), agave bagasse | On-site biogas production, hydrothermal carbonization | HTC and steam explosion (SE) for the pretreatment, and combination | biogas production, 162 to 173 mL/g COD for HTC preprocessing, 316 to 362 mL/g COD for SE pre-processing | [51] |
Wood residue | HTL | Pretreatment with 4% NaOH | Sustainable biofuels, pretreatment enhanced by 1.8 times glucose production | [52] |
Rice oil | Homogeneous basic transesterification | Vegetable oil from grain bran (as a catalyst) | Biodiesel production | [53] |
Pseudostem of bananas, bamboo leaves, waste cooking oil | Heterogenous catalyst, an alkaline solution (from the ash) was used for lignin recovery from bamboo leaves by hydrothermal reaction | Ash (as heterogeneous catalyst in biodiesel production from waste cooking oil) | Biodiesel production, highly alkaline solution, biochar production, 97.6% conversion (of cooking oil waste) into FAME, lignin recovery ~43 wt.% | [54] |
Cordia myxa seed oil | Membrane reactor to generate viable biodiesel, transesterification | Green heterogenous indium oxide (In2O3) nano catalyst with Boerhavia diffusa leaf extract | Enhanced biodiesel yield (up to 95 wt.%), similar to fuels with quality standards ASTM D 6571 & EN14214 | [55] |
Pine needle forest biomass | AD, structural alterations in lignocellulosic complex | Steam explosion, milling, and acid-base-acid treatment | 21.4% enhanced methane production with pretreatment compared to the untreated, the biomass surface was found to contain coalescent materials and lignin droplets that could be utilized as potential nanocomposites | [56] |
Lime fruit waste | Digestion (untreated and pretreated lime waste) in batches under mesophilic conditions (28 d) | Pretreatment using hexane as the solvent in a solid–liquid extraction process | Enhanced (40%) biogas in pretreated waste 93.2 mL/g VS | [57] |
Organic residues generated in grasslands | AD | - | Better waste management system | [58] |
Açaí seeds | AD (dry regime, mesophilic temperature) | CH4 yield 156.65 mL/g TS, enhanced biogas production | [59] | |
Hemp, watermelon, and sugarcane wastes | Biological transformation Anaerobic fermentation | Different treatment pH and temperature | Bioethanol production (optimum values: pH 4.5, and 35 °C) | [60] |
Palm agro-industrial residues (date cake, trunk, leaves, pedicels, seeds, and leaf sheath) | Biorefinery platform, 2 scenarios: I. Maximum lignin generation, II. Maximum bioenergy. | Liquid hot water, ethanol organosolv, and catalyzed ethanol organosolv pretreatments | Enhanced methane, ethanol, and lignin production. I. ethanol: 807 mL/kg, CH4: 903 L/kg, lignin: 528 g/kg residue. II. Energy equal to 1553 mL of gasoline | [61] |
BSG | Dehydration and the recovery of used oil | acid pretreatment enzymatic hydrolysis with CellicCTec2 and fermentation with S. cerevisiae | Enhanced bioethanol and biogas production [raw BSG: 379 ± 19 mL biogas/g, defatted BSG: 235 ± 21 mL biogas/g, and stillage: 168 ± 39 mL biogas/g] | [62] |
10 different textile mill waste from cotton spinning | Saccharification | NaOH pretreatment | Bioethanol production, maximum 65% ethanol in optimal conditions | [63] |
Marine macroalgae waste | Thermal acid hydrolysis, response surface methodology (RSM) | Acid concentration (0.1–2.5% v/v H2SO4) | Enhanced bioethanol production, 2.4 g/L | [64] |
Banana wastes, primarily banana peel, pseudo-stem, and rachis | Rare earth elements (REE) (Nd3+, Eu3+, Y3+, Dy3+, and Tb3+) recovery from aqueous solutions study, the adsorbent materials were characterized using analytical techniques | Ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) as the desorbing solution | 97% of the REE was recovered from the adsorbent, suggesting that banana rachis is a promising renewable bioresource | [65] |
Sugarcane bagasse | Cutting-edge environmentally friendly solvents and intense ultrasonication | - | Nanofibrillated cellulose. | [66] |
Industrial processing residues of tomatoes, fennel, potato, and carrot as carbon sources | Thermoanaerobacterium thermostercoris | Hemicellulolytic enzymes from T. thermostercoris was from giant reed rhizome and cardoon leaves and stems | T. thermostercoris cell biomass production, cellulolytic enzymes, T. thermostercoris could produce biohydrogen and bioethanol directly from raw | [67] |
Waste oils: palm, olive, linseed, sea buckthorn, cottonseed oils | Photoenzymatic decarboxylation of free fatty acids, hydrolysis and decarboxylation using a cascade system | Without using organic solvents | High quality HC biofuels | [68] |
Waste Source | Method | Enhance Treatment/Additives | Biofuel/Results | Refs. |
---|---|---|---|---|
Synthetic MSW & gypsum from drywall wastes | Gasification, thermogravimetric analysis and differential scanning calorimetry, lab-scale fixed bed reactor, 800 °C & 900 °C, 2 different environments | synthetic MSW-gypsum mixtures 1:1 mass ratio | Lower char yields and higher syngas generation, synergistic effect and CaSO4 char oxidation | [69] |
Wood waste hydrochar & food waste digestate | Co-hydrothermal carbonization for enhance the gasification | Co-hydrothermal carbonization | Co-hydrothermal carbonization exhibited a high concentration of metal components, such as Ca and surface functional groups | [70] |
Yellow oleander, fruit seeds & peels from Kaner | Τhermo-kinetic characterization, Kissinger-Akahira-Sunose (KAS) and Flynn-Wall-Ozawa (FWO) methods | - | Activation energy of fruit peels from KAS and FWO: 184.8 kJ/mol & 182.3 kJ/mol, respectively.Activation energy fruit peels from KAS and FWO: 140.1 kJ/mol & 139.2 kJ/mol, respectively. Kaner fruit peels and seeds have a great deal of promise for pyrolysis-based bioenergy production | [71] |
FDW | Pyrolysis pure FDW at 500 °C & co-pyrolysis | With & without different impurities (plastic, chopsticks, eggshell and bones), activated biochar catalysts | Eggshell treatment and activated biochar catalysts significantly boost hydrocarbon production, GCV: 36–44.4 MJ/kg, pyrolysis oil’s could be used as a traditional liquid fuel | [72] |
SS and glucose, 3 blends DSS75Glc25, DSS50Glc50, and DSS25Glc75 | Co-pyrolysis maillard reaction with reducing sugar, thermogravimetric-Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy-mass spectrometry (TG-FTIR-MS) | - | Best appropriate glucose ratio: 50%, nitrogen heterocyclic compounds (NHCs) | [73] |
Tea waste (TW) | Catalytic pyrolysis with CO2 | Ni/SiO2 | Enhanced 28 times more H2 and CO production | [74] |
Microalgae and faecal sludge mixes | Co-hydrothermal liquefaction | Sustainable approach for substituting part of micro-algae with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative fecal sludge | [75] | |
FDW | Closed-loop integrated biorefinery, purple phototrophic bacteria, combined thermal hydrolysis, AD, and photofermentation | Purple phototrophic bacteria-based mixed culture for phototrophic treatment of the hydrolysate | Bioenergy resources recover, value added products:H2, polyhydroxyalkanoates, PHA, protein synthesis from the high nitrogen | [76] |
Garden waste | AD and HTC, combined system | Enhanced energy efficiency, reduced secondary wastes | [77] | |
Waste seed oil from Citrus aurantium | Biodiesel production (methanol:oil 6:1 ratio, reaction time 120 min, 87.5 °C, 0.5 wt.% catalyst) | Recyclable zirconium oxide nanoparticles made from Alternanthera pungens aqueous leaf extract | Sustainable bioenergy | [78] |
Swine manure | transesterification and CO2-assisted pyrolysis | Ni/SiO2 catalyst(2 wt.% and 5 wt.%) | maximize energy recovery and value-added products (biodiesel, biochar, and syngas) | [79] |
Agricultural residues from corn cob and spelt husk yielding | Biomass fractionation, analytical methods | Ultrasound assisted ozone | High purity lignin (~92% with 95% purity) and cellulose pulp (~84% with 78% purity) | [80] |
Dried leaves of Daniella oliveri and polyethylene terephthalate (PET) bottles (weigh radio 9:1) | Low-temperature self-regulated reactor | - | Hybrid biochar production | [81] |
Cattle manure (CM), FDW, wheat straw and mixes | Semi-continuous anaerobic co-digestion | - | Ideal mix W:CM 75:25 revealed 119.97% for OLRs 3.6 kg VS/m3·d | [82] |
Spent mushroom substrate (SMS), mixed agro-waste wheat straw (WS), rice straw (RS), and pearl millet straw (PMS) | AD | Fungal pretreatment, biochar (5%, 7% and 10%) | Enhanced biomethane yield, biochar reduces the overall pretreatment time, avg. CH4 yield: 187 mL/gVS (~83% enhanced compared to untreated SMS of PMS + WS + RS) | [83] |
Livestock manure, mixed SS, non-edible crops, manures, vegetable/fruit wastes, fish canning industry wastes, and coffee wastes | AD | - | Enhanced energy performance (from 30 to 250% for livestock manure and 62 to 539% for mixed SS) | [84] |
Cow dung and cassava wastes (peels, stem, and mill effluent) in blends | AD | - | Effectively bioelectricity and biogas production | [85] |
Defatted microalgae residue (Chlorella CG12 and Desmodesmus GS12), rice straw (RS) | Anaerobic co-digestion | - | Potential for sustainable biorefinery development, increasing biomethane yield 311 mL/g-VS (GS12 + RS) & 382 mL/g-VS (CG12 + RS) | [86] |
Sewage with microalgal biomass | AD co-digestion | Solar pretreatment for biomass solubilization | Enhanced methane production | [87] |
Dried household food waste (FORBI) | AD, bioconversion based on microbiological processes | Higher energy recovery was obtained when fermentation and subsequent AD performed | [88] | |
POME sludge from pineapple peel | AD single-stage system, mesophilic batch process conditions | - | Increased biohythane gas (H2, CH4, and CO2) production | [89] |
Daily animal manure and a variety of Salix (lignocellulosic energy crops, 6 types) | Co-digestion, 1:1 | SO2-catalyzed steam explosion | Enhanced compressed biomethane gas (CBG) production | [90] |
Rice husk (RH), melon husk, (MH) and cow dung (CD), | Co-digestion | Highest biogas yield was found at RH100:MH0, the lowest yield revealed at RH0:MH100 | [91] | |
3 bioplastics wastes: 1 starch-based and 2 polylactic-acid based with SS | AD co-digest | - | Bioplastics’ bio-methane potential: 135 ± 23 NL CH4 kg Volatile Solids−1, AD of bio-plastics can be a sustainable method (biogas production, and leakage reduction) | [92] |
Seaweeds -Caribbean pelagic sargassum (PS)- and FDW blends | Co-digestion | Hydrothermal pretreatment | Enhanced biogas (292.18 ± 8.70 mL/gVS of co-pretreated pelagic Sargassum:FDW, 25:75) and biofertilizer production | [93] |
SS and cattle manure mixes | Evaluating biogas potential, anaerobic co-digestion (mesophilic conditions for 30 d), seasonal variation of fruits, vegetables and agrowastes (FVA) with sewage sludge and cattle manure), New Delhi (India) | - | Radish leaves combined with waste activated sludge (WAS) showed the highest biogas yield (407.2 mL/g VSfed) | [94] |
Sargassum (S) biomass with pig manure (PM) blends | Co-digestion | - | Enhanced biomethane potential, the highest BMP (~441 mL CH4/gVSFed) was found in 50S:50PM blend, (16.8 C:N) | [95] |
Fruit and vegetable wastes (FVW), cow dung (CD) & dry fell leaves (DFL), 12 mixtures | AcoD | In the absence of an active inoculum | Co-digestion revealed several advantageous features, maximum methane yield of 388 ± 131 mL/g VSinput (blend: 40DFL:60FVW), maximum biogas yield: 809 ± 96 mL/g VSinput (blend: 100DFL: 0FVW) | [96] |
Agro-industrial poultry wastes | Combination of bioprocesses: vermicomposting, composting, fraction separation, hydration, and AD | - | High-quality organic fertilizer, high energy recovery | [97] |
Solid waste | 3 gasification & 3 pyrolysis technologies | - | Solid waste to bioenergy, decentralized FOB of 3 sizes: 120-, 1200-, and 12,000-person | [98] |
Apple and grape waste from the cider and wine industries | Extracting bioactive compounds, pyrolyzing/gasifying | - | Value-added chemical products: biochar, activated carbon, fuel applications, soil reinforcement | [99] |
MSW | Integrated solar—waste to energy incineration plant, iso-butane organic Rankine cycle, proton exchange membrane electrolyzer, reverse osmosis system | - | H2 and clean water production (2.87 g/s & 26.96 kg/s, respectively rate production), efficiency: thermal 21.34% & exergy 16.64% | [100] |
Biomass agro-industrial residues, paper mill sludge, slurries and effluents, pulp and, organic fractions of MSW and piggery effluents | Conversion technologies: electricity and heat by combustion, H2 by dark fermentation, bio-oils by pyrolysis or HTL, biogas and synthesis gas by gasification | - | Bioenergy & biofuels production,Final rank: gasification > combustion > AD > (trans)esterification > pyrolysis and fermentation to ethanol > hydrothermal liquefaction > dark fermentation | [101] |
MSW | a novel cascade system of ORC and Kalina using a combination of MSW biogas production and solar energy, 4 regions (Delhi, Guwahati, Chennai, and Mumbai) in India | - | Green hydrogen production and cooling, biogas. Energy ratio 0.76, exergy efficiency 21.6%, total cost $58,677 | [102] |
Livestock farms | Hybrid AD—solar energy, economic analysis for the AD / solar system of 5 locations: Soria (Spain), Iowa (USA), Odense (Denmark), Santa Catarina (Brazil), Laixi (China) | - | Enhanced biomethane/biogas production, lower costs | [103] |
MSW & solid woody biomass | An integrated hydrogen (proton exchange membrane electrolyzer) and renewable energy systems (solar photovoltaics, wind plants, and biomass-based systems),4 communities (Canada, S. Africa, Netherlands, and Denmark) were studied | - | Sustainable cities,Sustainable hydrogen, biogas, and bioethanol production | [104] |
Organic municipal solid waste | Environmental and economic analysis in Malaysia (via AD) | Sustainable biogas and biofertilizer production. Utilizing 50% of the wastes: 3941 MWh/d electricity, 2500 t/d biofertilizer, and 2735 t/d reduced CO2 emissions | [105] | |
Fecal sludge and organic solid waste mixes | Co-liquefication (320 °C, 60 min) | - | Low phenolic naphtha-rich biocrude, low toxicity | [106] |
Grass biomass | Integrated AD and pyrolysis | - | Enhanced biomethane, biogas, biochar, and biooil production | [107] |
Food sludge and 6 lignocellulose biowaste | Co-torrefaction, using micro-wave-assisted | The maximum calorific value, lower ash level, higher carbon content, and enhanced biochar quality achieved by blending sludge with macadamia husk at 25:75 db% | [108] | |
Potato peel wastes (PPW) | Biorefinery which included ethanolic organosolv pretreatment, solvent recovery, enzymatic hydrolysis, ethanolic fermentation, and AD | Organosolv pretreatment using 50–75% (v/v) ethanol solution with/without catalyst (1 wt.% H2SO4) | Biogas, ethanol, 57.9 L CH4/kg dry PPW | [109] |
Rice straw (system 1) and microalgae (system 2) | Gasification and solar energy, heat and power generation, energy, exergy, techno-economic and environmental analysis | - | Syngas production with CO2 capture, system 1 has the potential to produce higher H2 with higher energy efficiency | [9] |
Palm oil mill effluent & empty fruit bunches | Supercritical water gasification | - | H2 production | [110] |
Wastes | waste to energy integrated multi-system for power, heating, cooling and fuel production that contains steam gasifier, Brayton waste heat recovery, organic Rankine, absorption refrigeration systems, domestic heating systems and H2 production, Engineering Equation Solver (EES) software | - | WtE integrated system | [111] |
Lignocellulosic biomass hydrolysate | Hydrolysate | Bio-iron nanoparticles | Enhance microalgal biomass production (enhanced lipid content), FAME recovery, enhanced biodiesel production | [112] |
Almond wastes from almond industries | Carbon-neutral catalysts: Hydrothermal hydrogenation | Ru/CNF catalyst | Value-added liquids | [113] |
Roadside grass clippings, pig manure | Roadside grass clippings as a substitute source on the environment (digested and co-digested with pig manure), Netherlands, and Belgium | - | Biogas production, co-digestion is an eco-friendly method | [114] |
25 biowastes | innovative economic Product Space Model, 7 biomass-enriched countries (USA, Brazil, Argentina, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, China) | - | Economic, social, and environmental benefits of bioenergy production | [115] |
Wastes, pig manure, meat waste, meat bone meal | Ecological industrial park Śmiłowo Eco-Park, (Poland), environmental and economic efficiency among companies, efficient waste, energy, water and material exchange | - | Sustainable waste management & bioenergy, reduced CO2 emissions | [116] |
Olive stones (OLS) and lignite blends, extracted olive pomace (EOP) and lignite blends, in 30–50–70%(olive oil solid wastes from oil industry) | Several OLS blends with lignite, several EOP blends with lignite, thermochemical analyses, thermal characterization, kinetics, thermodynamicanalysis, and several scenarios for sustainable practices for energy cover | - | Energy generation, sustainable management, energy cover,GCV: OLS70 LIG30 > OLS50 LIG50 > EOP70 LIG30 > EOP50 LIG50 > EOP30 LIG70 > OLS30 LIG70 > LIGA, Ash content: OLS blends: 14.6 to 27.8 wt.% & EOP blends: 15.2 to 28.6 wt.%,sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [28] |
BSG blends with lignite in several mixes (70–50–30 wt.%) | Co-combustion, thermochemical methods, thermal analysis, proximate analysis, ultimate analysis, empirical chemical formulas, case studies for sustainable management, environmental impact, maximum emission factors, kinetic and thermodynamic analysis, ash elemental analysis | BSG blends with lignite | Blends revealed higher GCV than lignite, lower ash per produced MJ, lower COx, SOx maximum potential emissions per MJ but higher potential NOx, better fuel characteristics, activation energy: lower in blends (synergy effect)Energy generation, alternative use of BSG, sustainable management, sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative, sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [29] |
Forest biomass (coffee processing & eucalyptus wood) residues blends | Thermochemical methods, 6 blends in different proportion, pellet production | - | Bioenergy generation, eucalyptus-parchment-coffee husk ECPCH pellets: 11.6 GJ/m3, blends shod ~17 MJ/kg | [117] |
3 grape marcblends with lignite (30–50–70 wt.%) | Co-combustion, thermochemical methods, kinetic and thermodynamic analysis, ash analysis, etc. | - | Ash per Megajoule (better>worst): GM: 0.0030 kg/MJ > GM70LIG30: 0.0082 kg/MJ > GM50LIG50: 0.0131 kg/MJ > GM30LIG70: 0.0205 kg/MJ > LIGA: 0.0307 kg/MJ, promising alternative sustainable solid biofuels (enhanced fuel characteristics, low COx, NOx, SOx emissions per Megajoule), sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [30] |
MSW: FDW, GNW, PAP and OFMSW were blended (12 blends) with lignite, in 30–50–70 wt.% | Physicochemical, kinetic, thermodynamic, environmental impact, modelling, energy cover for Greece and Europe, empirical chemical formulas, Maximum potential emission factors | - | GCV: FDW blends 13.9 to 16.6 MJ/kg, GNW blends 12.4 to 13.1 MJ/kg, OFMSW blends 13.4 to 15.3 MJ/kg, PAP blends 13.8 to 17.5. MJ/kg, Enhanced energy, reduced emissions, energy cover, sustainable approach for substituting part of lignite with an eco-friendly, low-cost alternative | [13] |
11% tire waste and coal | Co-incineration in cement plants | With or without raw mill in function | Enhanced energy recovery, reduced CO2 emissions | [118] |
MSW, agricultural residues, and animal manure | Energy demand that can be met in India, avg. MSW calorific value: 1751 kcal/kg, biomass potential: 20 MJ/m3 | - | 1.29 × 103 PJ biogas/year, and 7.79 × 102 PJ cellulosic ethanol/year | [119] |
Livestock waste and agriculture residues | Calculated methods, AD, 602 rural districts of India | Rural India needs 1927 TJ/day (2.75 MJ/capita/day) energy for cooking, livestock wastes could generate 715 TJ/day (1.02 MJ/capita/ day) ~37% of energy demand, using crop residue can generate 2296 TJ/day (3.27 MJ/capita/day) | [120] | |
Agricultural residues & animal waste | Case studies for estimating biogas potential Uttar Pradesh, (India), co-digestion | - | In case of co-digestion of all wastes, a maximum 170,000 m3/year of raw biogas and 222,000 m3/year of upgraded biogas is possible | [121] |
Agricultural and livestock wastes | Theoretical study of potential biofuels and energy cover in Marmara Region, (Turkey) | - | Cover more than half of the electricity demand | [122] |
SHW | Economic feasibility analysis, 2 WtE scenarios, transesterification and AD, Saudi Arabia. By 2030, national economic circle: 288 MSAR (scenario I) and 319 MSAR (scenario II) | - | Sustainable waste management in Saudi Arabia | [123] |
Blends of rural wastes (cattle manure) and MSW urban wastes | 3 case studies (scenarios) | - | Energy recovery, and reduced carbon emissions, Anaerobic co-digestion is preferred in the centralized solution, with a blend of 30% manure and 70% MSW, AD for decentralized designs is appropriate for larger cities (with more than 5 tons of organic waste/day) and feedlots (with more than 30 tons manure) | [124] |
3 biomass residues (municipal wastes, agricultural residues, and forestry residues) | Case studies of the region Lafões (Portugal), biochemical and thermochemical routes | - | Bioenergy, biochemical conversion route revealed 765 TJ/year energy potential while thermochemical route 543 TJ/year | [125] |
MSW & agricultural crop residues (coffee and cocoa husks, maize stalk/husk, wheat straw/husk rice husk/straw, sugar cane baggase, sweet potato peelings, groundnuts shells/husks/straw, straw beans, banana stem, peels, leaves, tops/leaves, cotton stalk) | Biogas production in Cameroon | Significant energy cover demand, (MSW: 26 PJ & agro-waste: 580 PJ, in 2020, in Cameroon), migrate climate change (1,600,000,000 kgCO2) | [4] | |
Cow dung, food waste and algae | Co-digestion in batch-type digester, Stat Ease Design Expert Software 13 | KOH & sodium hydroxide | Increased biogas yield | [126] |
Municipal and industrial waste | A system dynamic modeling analysis | - | Sustainable RDF production | [127] |
Crop residues | Solar biomass-based IGCC system, ASPEN Plus simulation software | Co-production of power & biofertilizer | [128] | |
Livestock mixed wastes: cattle, sheep, goat, and chicken waste | Thermal and biological technologies: combustion, gasification, pyrolysis (at 550 and 750 °C), and AD, a defined design algorithm with important parameters, 7 geographical areas studied in Turkey, ASPEN Plus stimulation | - | Combustion was the most efficient (0.43 MWe/t), followed by gasification and pyrolysis. AD showed a 0.21 MWe/t recovery potential | [129] |
Livestock & agricultural waste (such as maize straw, wheat straw, rice straw, cow and hen manure) | Building biogas plants were studiedfuzzy programming method was utilized to manage the uncertainty | - | bioenergy supply chain network, sale of bioelectricity accounts for ~87% of the network’s overall revenue | [130] |
Biomass with high moisture (algae, sludge, manure, and food waste) | Machine Learning (ML) algorithms taking into account several factors (solvents, process parameters, elemental and biochemical compositions of biomass) from HTL | - | Enhanced energy of bio-oil, reduced Nitrogen content, random forest (RF) algorithm was the best one | [131] |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Vasileiadou, A. From Organic Wastes to Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products for Urban Sustainability and Circular Economy: A Review. Urban Sci. 2024, 8, 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8030121
Vasileiadou A. From Organic Wastes to Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products for Urban Sustainability and Circular Economy: A Review. Urban Science. 2024; 8(3):121. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8030121
Chicago/Turabian StyleVasileiadou, Agapi. 2024. "From Organic Wastes to Bioenergy, Biofuels, and Value-Added Products for Urban Sustainability and Circular Economy: A Review" Urban Science 8, no. 3: 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci8030121