4.7 Review

Valuable Compound Extraction, Anaerobic Digestion, and Composting: A Leading Biorefinery Approach for Agricultural Wastes

期刊

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 66, 期 32, 页码 8451-8468

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b02667

关键词

biorefinery approach; valuable compound extraction; anaerobic digestion; composting; agricultural waste

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [CTM2017-83870-R, AGL2016-79088R]
  2. European Social Fund (ESF)
  3. Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness Ramon y Cajal Programme [RyC 2012-10456]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In a society where the environmental conscience is gaining attention, it is necessary to evaluate the potential valorization options for agricultural biomass to create a change in the perception of the waste agricultural biomass from waste to resource. In that sense, the biorefinery approach has been proposed as the roadway to increase profit of the agricultural sector and, at the same time, ensure environmental sustainability. The biorefinery approach integrates biomass conversion processes to produce fuels, power, and chemicals from biomass. The present review is focused on the extraction of value-added compounds, anaerobic digestion, and composting of agricultural waste as the biorefinery approach. This biorefinery approach is, nevertheless, seen as a less innovative configuration compared to other biorefinery configurations, such as bioethanol production or white biotechnology. However, any of these processes has been widely proposed as a single operation unit for agricultural waste valorization, and a thoughtful review on possible single or joint application has not been available in the literature up to now. The aim is to review the previous and current literature about the potential valorization of agricultural waste biomass, focusing on valuable compound extraction, anaerobic digestion, and composting of agricultural waste, whether they are not, partially, or fully integrated.

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