4.7 Review

A comprehensive review on recent biological innovations to improve biogas production, Part 1: Upstream strategies

期刊

RENEWABLE ENERGY
卷 146, 期 -, 页码 1204-1220

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2019.07.037

关键词

Anaerobic digestion; Biogas production; Upstream strategy; Biological treatment; Lignocellulose; Pretreatment

资金

  1. University Technology MARA (UiTM)
  2. Biofuel Research Team (BRTeam)
  3. Iranian Biofuels Society (IBS)
  4. Agricultural Biotechnology Research Institute of Iran (ABRII)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reviews the innovations and optimizations in biogas production from the biological perspective reported by recently published patents and research works. The proposed biological strategies can be categorized into three different groups, i.e., upstream, mainstream, and downstream approaches. In the first part of this review, upstream strategies, including pretreatments by fungal, microbial consortium, and enzymatic as well as some other biological methods including microaeration, composting, ensiling, and genetic and metabolic engineering are discussed in detail. The impacts of upstream strategies on biogas production as well as their potentials in further improving the biogas industry are comprehensively scrutinized. Despite their promising impacts on biogas production, such biological innovations are time-consuming and require extra equipment and facilities that should be addressed in future studies. Overall, most information on biogas production has been generated through lab-scale investigations and not by commercial plants, undermining the commercial value of these data for the right decision-making. Pilot data would be necessary for techno-economic analyses with acceptable accuracies. Therefore, the future efforts should be directed toward providing the missing data for re-engineering designs, calculations, and life cycle assessment (LCA) of the newly designed biogas plants. (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据