Access to this full-text is provided by MDPI.
Content available from Energies
This content is subject to copyright.
Citation: Abreu, M.; Silva, L.; Ribeiro,
B.; Ferreira, A.; Alves, L.; Paixão,
S.M.; Gouveia, L.; Moura, P.;
Carvalheiro, F.; Duarte, L.C.; et al.
Low Indirect Land Use Change
(ILUC) Energy Crops to Bioenergy
and Biofuels—A Review. Energies
2022,15, 4348. https://doi.org/
10.3390/en15124348
Academic Editors: Fernando
Rubiera González and Covadonga
Pevida García
Received: 6 May 2022
Accepted: 9 June 2022
Published: 14 June 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
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/).
energies
Review
Low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) Energy Crops to
Bioenergy and Biofuels—A Review
Mariana Abreu 1, Luís Silva 1, Belina Ribeiro 1, Alice Ferreira 1, Luís Alves 1, Susana M. Paixão1,
Luísa Gouveia 1, Patrícia Moura 1, Florbela Carvalheiro 1, Luís C. Duarte 1, Ana Luisa Fernando 2,
Alberto Reis 1, * and Francisco Gírio 1
1LNEG—National Laboratory of Energy and Geology, I.P., Bioenergy and Biorefineries Unit, Estrada do Paço
do Lumiar, 22, 1649-038 Lisbon, Portugal; mariana.abreu@lneg.pt (M.A.); luis.silva@lneg.pt (L.S.);
belina.ribeiro@lneg.pt (B.R.); alice.ferreira@lneg.pt (A.F.); luis.alves@lneg.pt (L.A.);
susana.alves@lneg.pt (S.M.P.); luisa.gouveia@lneg.pt (L.G.); patricia.moura@lneg.pt (P.M.);
florbela.carvalheiro@lneg.pt (F.C.); luis.duarte@lneg.pt (L.C.D.); francisco.girio@lneg.pt (F.G.)
2MEtRICs, Departamento de Ciências e Tecnologia da Biomassa, NOVA School of Science and Technology,
Universidade NOVA de Lisboa, 2829-516 Caparica, Portugal; ala@fct.unl.pt
*Correspondence: alberto.reis@lneg.pt
Abstract:
Energy crops are dedicated cultures directed for biofuels, electricity, and heat production.
Due to their tolerance to contaminated lands, they can alleviate and remediate land pollution by the
disposal of toxic elements and polymetallic agents. Moreover, these crops are suitable to be exploited
in marginal soils (e.g., saline), and, therefore, the risk of land-use conflicts due to competition for
food, feed, and fuel is reduced, contributing positively to economic growth, and bringing additional
revenue to landowners. Therefore, further study and investment in R&D is required to link energy
crops to the implementation of biorefineries. The main objective of this study is to present a review
of the potential of selected energy crops for bioenergy and biofuels production, when cultivated
in marginal/degraded/contaminated (MDC) soils (not competing with agriculture), contributing
to avoiding Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) burdens. The selected energy crops are Cynara
cardunculus,Arundo donax,Cannabis sativa,Helianthus tuberosus,Linum usitatissimum,Miscanthus
×
giganteus,Sorghum bicolor,Panicum virgatum,Acacia dealbata,Pinus pinaster,Paulownia tomentosa,
Populus alba,Populus nigra,Salix viminalis, and microalgae cultures. This article is useful for researchers
or entrepreneurs who want to know what kind of crops can produce which biofuels in MDC soils.
Keywords:
herbaceous species; forest crops; microalgae culture; marginal soils; degraded soils;
contaminated soils; chemical process; biochemical technologies; thermochemical process; energy
potential
1. Introduction
Dedicated energy biomass production, the so-called energy crops, has experienced a
rapid expansion in some countries, mostly related to the use of agricultural crops (mainly
annual crops), for liquid biofuels production. Energy crops are species that can be produced
to generate energy as electricity/heat or biofuels, helping to reduce the generation of
greenhouse gases (GHG) mainly by the energy and transport sector [
1
], due to their inherent
photosynthetic capabilities and renewable characteristics. Moreover, their exploitation can
help countries achieve energy security and contribute to local and regional development
and growth [
2
], by serving as a source of income for many agricultural producers [
3
]. In
addition, these species should not be considered for food and feed like tubers, grains, and
maize, among others [
4
], to avoid competition for food, feed, and fuel. Moreover, energy
crops represent alternative biomass for supply to biorefineries. Moreover, lignocellulosic
species for second-generation fuel production [
5
] and non-food species, represent an
important feedstock for many industrial uses.
Energies 2022,15, 4348. https://doi.org/10.3390/en15124348 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies
Energies 2022,15, 4348 2 of 68
The advantages of energy crops are also applicable to lignocellulosic residues (part
of the species not suitable for harvesting), such as straw, bark, leaves, and bagasse from
herbaceous species and long fiber and hardwood from forest species. The reuse of any type
of biomass waste material such as forest waste (e.g., wood waste from the wood industries
and manufacture of pulp and paper), secondary waste (e.g., animal waste, organic material
from food companies, solid waste) and agricultural residues (e.g., short-rotation species,
cereals, among others) [
6
] allow reducing both the fuel load deposited in landfills and
the still latent dependence on fossil-based feedstocks [
7
], creating several environmental,
social, and economic opportunities. To comply with sustainability criteria, energy crops
value chains must present a reduction of GHG emissions when compared to those released
by fossil-based value-chains; the biomass production must not affect or alter negatively
the quality of groundwater, soil, or air, and for this reason, it is necessary to limit or to
avoid the use of chemical products such as fertilizers and pesticides, the biodiversity of the
area where the species are planted must be protected to avoid negative effects directly or
indirectly, and, finally, at the local level, the crops must not compete with the food sector
and, in parallel, should encourage the economic and social growth of the region [6,8,9].
Herbaceous crops, like the giant reed, switchgrass, reed canary grass (Phalaris arundi-
nacea), miscanthus, and perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne) are crop species that can be cut
annually after planting and the rhizomes must be left in the ground to ensure continued
growth, a procedure that can be maintained for 15 years or longer, therefore, they are also
classified as perennial crops. The perennial energy crops (or multi-annual plantations) do
not need the incorporation of considerable quantities of pesticides and fertilizers, they help
to avoid soil erosion, present low soil fertility requirements [
10
], and help in the recycling
of organic components in the soil [
11
]. The short cycle coppice like poplar (Populus spp.),
eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.), paulownia [Paulownia tomentosa (Thunberg) Steudel], and
willow (Salix spp.) are woody species characterized to be fast-growing and can be cut and
regenerated every 3 to 5 years over a 25-year period, with the purpose of obtaining in a
short time high yields for energy generation [
5
]. Microalgae also present high potential as
an energy crop because they can accumulate sugars and oils for later direct conversion to
biofuels (e.g., bioethanol).
These types of crops when grown in soils with low Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC)
risks, namely, soils considered as Marginal/Degraded/Contaminated (MDC), release
environmentally clean emissions, and, as compared with fossil fuels, they once represented
a negative impact on the atmosphere concerning the quantity of produced carbon dioxide
(CO
2
) [
10
]. Yet, these species cannot be cultivated on agricultural terrain with a high carbon
(C) soil quantity [
5
], rather appropriate agricultural and forestry models of these plantation
crops should be created [
4
], and when liquid, solid, and gaseous biofuels are produced (in
some cases), the organic by-products can be used as animal feed and fertilizers [
10
], as a
way of continuing the raw material cycle.
The main objective of this review is to present the potential for bioenergy and biofuels
from energy crops with low ILUC risk. The potential of energy crops must motivate each
producer, entrepreneur, and beneficiary for greater implementation of these species in
the diverse processing options (chemical, biochemical, and thermochemical) to generate
economic, social, and environmental benefits. It is important that energy crops that present
a high potential for bioenergy generation and the recuperation of soils with low ILUC risk
are identified to fulfill one of the world’s goals, the reduction of GHG.
This paper was developed through a bibliographic search of scientific articles to
demonstrate the relevance in several aspects (biofuels, energy, bioproducts, and soils) of
the energy crops detailed here. Although there are many more species considered low
ILUC energy crops, the selection of the species was carried out based on already known
information on crops that grow and adapt to the climatic conditions of Portugal, with
the ability to develop in MDC-type soils and with phytoremediation potential (recovery
of contaminated land) and phytoextraction (reduces the leaching of heavy metals (HMs)
for groundwater) [
12
]. The keywords used were common (e.g., Cardoon) and scientific
Energies 2022,15, 4348 3 of 68
(e.g., Cynara cardunculus L.) names of each species along with the bioenergy, biomass, and
biofuel words. The databases or data sources and journals where the research was carried
out were Science Direct, the open-access website Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing
Institute (MDPI), Wiley Online Library, Springer, and Google to find relevant information
from articles available online. More importance was given to information published in
the last eight years and in magazines related to biomass, bioenergy, biofuels, or similar.
However, there was relevant information from articles preceding the last eight years
because it was referenced in more current articles.
2. Conversion of Low ILUC Risk Energy Crops to Biofuels
2.1. Herbaceous and Other Crops
Herbaceous crops were chosen because they are species that present several envi-
ronmental benefits such as high nutrient and water use efficiencies, erosion control, soil
stabilization, and carbon storage, they contribute to the landscape and biological diversity
and have a low need for inputs, namely fertilizers and pesticides [
10
,
13
–
17
], and help in
the recycling of organic components in the soil [
11
]. For example, miscanthus presents an
extensive and deep rooting system, a lengthy permanence in soil, and the translocation
of nutrients from aerial biomass to the rhizomes at the end of the vegetative cycle, which
reduces the need for high application of fertilizers to ensure growth [
18
]. Jerusalem arti-
choke is a low-energy intensive crop with several advantages over traditional agricultural
crops (grain crops) including rapid growth, elevated biomass generation, and low external
production costs (e.g., it needs a low amount of fertilizer, pesticides, or water [
19
]). All
these species are also more widely known from an agronomic point of view and from a
commercial point of view they are already on the market, some more present than others.
Virginia fanpetals [Sida hermaphrodita (L.) Rusby] is a crop that has aroused great
interest by many researchers, mainly in Northern Europe, because it is a species that easily
adapts to the climatic conditions of these regions and acts as a phytoremediator [
20
] in
contaminated soils with HMs [
21
], soil poor in organic matter, and in rocky and sandy
soils, and it stores carbon in its roots (hence underground) allowing GHG mitigation [
22
].
Sida hermaphrodita has high potential as an energy crop in solid fuel production such
as pellets [
23
] being burned in combustion processes and for biogas (or biomethane)
production [
20
–
22
,
24
], and it is also suitable for the formation of by-products such as fiber,
forage, and in pharmaceutical applications [
20
]. Based on these characteristics, it can be
said that Virginia fanpetals is a potential competitor for the herbaceous energy crops that
are included in this work. Currently, it is not cultivated in the territory of Portugal, so it
can be risky to implement it in the country, however, there is no doubt that for future work,
it would be very interesting to develop a study on the viability of this species in Portugal,
to investigate its possibilities and increase list of new cultures with potential in the territory
as an ILUC crop.
Another advantage of herbaceous crops is that they can be implemented in Wastewater
Treatment Plants (WWTP), e.g., Cynara cardunculus, giant reed, hemp, linseed, and sorghum.
Moreover, some crops can have multi-products, e.g., paper pulp production (giant reed,
hemp, miscanthus, sorghum, and switchgrass species), which can help to alleviate the
excessive exploitation of eucalyptus. These crops, e.g., sorghum, present also the ability
to capture big quantities of CO
2
from the atmosphere, converting it into sugars [
25
], thus
helping to mitigate climate change.
Herbaceous species also present some constraints. For example, crops that have
biomass characteristics that are not favorable for energy use, e.g., cardoon due to the amount
of N. Giant reed is considered invasive, which can legally prevent its implementation as an
energy crop, and for this reason, it is necessary first to use what already exists and then
to implement it in a controlled manner. Some crops also present limited yields with low
rainfall, and this can compromise production in Mediterranean countries. Even for the
production of those crops in soils with low ILUC risk, there are still some barriers to their
promotion for energy purposes: e.g., hemp presents legal impediments to its production in
Energies 2022,15, 4348 4 of 68
many countries, and in other countries, there is a significant market competition in seed use
for food purposes, and the suitability of the stalk to several applications with significant
commercial value should also be noted. Linseed oil can also be used in the production of
vegetable oils for the food sector, a factor that may limit its great expansion as an energy
crop, however, when the plantation is applied in soils not suitable for agriculture, its final
destiny will be always to produce biofuels or by-products.
The chemical composition of the different herbaceous and oilseed crops is presented
in Table 1, for easier comparison between them.
Table 1. Chemical composition of herbaceous and other crops.
Energy Crops Cellulose
(% w w−1)
Hemicellulose
(% w w−1)
Lignin
(% w w−1)
Ash
(% w w−1)
Extractives
(% w w−1)
Other Components
(% w w−1)
Cynara cardunculus
(stalks) [7,26]34 18.5 (14–23) (5–11) (13–21) -
Cynara cardunculus
(seeds) [27]- - - - -
Fat content (17–24),
protein (26–30), and
fiber (20–28)
Arundo donax
[6,28,29](21–45) (7–36) (6.7–34) (2.3–8) (12–22) -
Cannabis sativa [7,30] (33–74) (7.6–16.6) (2.2–29) (2.6–7.6) (3.7–20) (0.3–23.1)
Helianthus tuberosus
(tubers) [6,31–33](28.5–49.4) (10.2–16.8) (14.5–22.2) 4.7 12.1 N (1.45–1.55)
Linum usitatissimum
[34]- - - - -
Fatty acids [stearic
(2–4), palmitic (4–7),
linoleic (35–40), oleic
(25–40), and
α-linolenic (25–60)]
Miscanthus ×
giganteus [6,29](43–58) (16–34) (5.8–11) 2 (9–17) -
Sorghum bicolor
[7,25,35](23.7–44.6) (20–27) (4.4–24.7) 0.4 - -
Panicum virgatum
[7,35–37](31.8–45) (20.3–36)
[xylan (25–27)] (7.4–31.2) (3.2–5.7) - -
As can be seen in Table 1, species such as cardoon and linseed have the potential for
biodiesel production since oil can be obtained from the seeds. Another species that also
has this characteristic, despite not being specified in the table, is hemp, as oil can also be
obtained from the seed. Due to the amount of cellulose and hemicellulose (polysaccharides)
present in each species, all herbaceous species have the potential for second generation
bioethanol production.
For biodiesel production, the species that have potential as raw materials are cardoon,
hemp, Jerusalem artichoke, linseed, and sorghum. Comparing the different crops, hemp is
the one that presents a higher yield in oil. [38,39].
Species such as cardoon, hemp, Jerusalem artichoke, giant reed, miscanthus, sorghum,
and switchgrass can be applied in biochemical technologies (anaerobic digestion (AD)
and alcoholic fermentation) and thermochemical processes (combustion and pyrolysis).
Based on studies and related data, some crops, such as sorghum from ensiled sorghum
forage [
40
,
41
] and giant reed [
42
], show promising potential for AD technology. In the
case of bioethanol, some crops, such as hemp [
43
] and JA species [
44
] have also shown
promising potential. Biohydrogen production is another promising option, for example,
through the exploitation of cardoon and sorghum bark [45].
Herbaceous crops also show promising results with thermochemical processes, such as
pyrolysis of miscanthus [
46
]. Regarding the hydrothermal processes, crops like miscanthus
Energies 2022,15, 4348 5 of 68
and sorghum have shown potential. Through hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL), it is
possible to obtain biochar and bio-oils, with good yields, for example, when sorghum is the
feedstock [41,47].
In the following Sections 2.1.1–2.1.8, a revision of promising options for energy with
different crops are presented.
2.1.1. Cardoon (Cynara cardunculus L.)
Cynara cardunculus is a herbaceous perennial crop [
48
], belonging to the family Aster-
aceae, order Asterales, and class Magnoliopsida [
49
]. The seed productivity can attain
1.3 t ha−1[50].
Traditional use, knowledge, and application of Cynara cardunculus are not recent. In
the Mediterranean regions, aqueous extracts of cardoon flowers are utilized for human
consumption, as coagulants in the traditional fabrication of sheep’s milk cheeses, giving
them unique characteristics of excellence in texture and taste [
51
]. The cardoon residues
can be utilized for the food sector in the generation of natural preservatives and in the case
of oil extracted from the cardoon seed, the surplus material that represents a considerable
amount, namely, 81 g 100 g
−1
of seeds, can be applied as animal feed or as biofertilizer [
52
].
On the other hand, cardoon leaf infusions are known in folk medicine for regulation of
the hepatobiliary system [
53
], as an anti-inflammatory, antiviral, antimicrobial, antioxi-
dant, antihyperglycemic, antidiabetic, antiproliferative, antibacterial, and anti-HCV, among
others [
52
]. The cardoon stalks are utilized in the paper factories due to the fiber content
(cellulose) that can be found in this material [
54
]. Other applications are the use of cardoon
to obtain phytochemical compounds for the pharmaceutical sector (polyphenol-rich sheets
that have also been applied in the cosmetic industry [
55
]), in the fresh green forage pro-
duction for animal feed, and as reinforcement in structural composites, among other wide
variety of uses [
51
]. It is also possible to obtain a great diversity of bioproducts from Cynara
cardunculus, such as biolubricants, bioplastics, fragrances, personal hygiene materials, and
household items, among others [
56
]. New uses have been given to various substances that
make up the different constituent parts of cardoon, such as obtaining dietary fibers, includ-
ing inositol, hemicellulose, inulin (fructose polysaccharide extracted from the roots [
55
])
and cellulose pectin, minerals, and sesquiterpenes lactones such as cynaropicrin, among
others [52].
The cardoon is considered a species with high biomass yield with a huge potential
for bioenergy production, namely, biodiesel (as cardoon is one of the species with the
highest generation of fatty acids) [
57
], biomethane [
58
], and bioethanol [
48
], as well as
other processes such as thermochemical [
48
] like combustion, gasification, and pyroly-
sis [
51
], biohydrogen [
59
], and solid biofuel [
51
,
60
] production. Another application is the
biokerosene generation from cardoon biomass pyrolysis in which it is possible to achieve a
34.72% yield [61].
Biodiesel production from yeast using the cardoon stalks as raw material within a
biorefinery model was studied by Barbanera et al., 2021 being also made a Life Cycle
Assessment (LCA) study from the cradle-to-gate for assessing the environmental factors.
It was concluded that this type of biodiesel has great environmental advantages, as the
emissions of GHG are
−
1.5 g CO
2eq
MJ
−1
, being negative because of the positive credits
that the by-products provide [
62
]. In another study, the obtainment of biodiesel and
biolubricants was studied, also in a biorefinery model from cardoon oil, being applied to
the transesterification process with methanol and other more complex alcohols (e.g., 2-ethyl-
1-hexanol and 2.2-dimethyl-1,3-propanediol). The biolubricants were obtained from fatty
acid methyl esters (FAMEs) from cardoon oil with the most complex alcohols. However,
to ensure that this type of oil is promising on a large scale (biorefinery), it is required to
increase the oxidative capacity of biodiesel (1.35 h). In relation to other materials, the
biolubricant yields that are admissible and higher than 92% are also obtained for products
with high commercial value such as glycerol and in the case of methanol, this can be
reused [63].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 6 of 68
Biomethane production through the anaerobic digestion (AD) process was evaluated
using cardoon as raw material, using two cultivated species and one wild type. The
cultivated species were allowed to obtain higher amounts of both biomass and biomethane,
producing 19.1 and 16.8 t DM (dry matter) ha
−1
year
−1
and a biomethane volume of 4074
and 4162 Nm
3
when compared to 11.8 t DM ha
−1
year
−1
and 2867 Nm
3
of biomethane
obtained with wild cardoon. Therefore, Cynara cardunculus is considered to be an energy
crop with great potential for implementation in biomethane production [64].
The high potential of Cynara cardunculus biomass to produce bioethanol [
65
] has been
well studied. Ethanol-water (EW) pre-treatment was implemented for the fragmentation of
lignocellulosic biomass present in the cardoon to improve the glucose yield after enzymatic
saccharification. A high yield of glucose was obtained (around 72%) after 60 min, at
190
◦
C, with a liquid/solid ratio of 20 L kg
−1
and ethanol concentration of 25%, with
possible retention of glucans greater than 97%, as well as the removal of xylans greater
than 68% and lignin greater than 58% [
66
]. The thermochemical pre-treatment of cardoon
biomass using sodium hydroxide (NaOH) is a very efficient hydrolysis method to obtain
a maximum value of methane yield between 0.5 up to 0.6 L methane g
−1
VS [
67
]. The
alkaline extraction after Cardoon Steam Explosion Pre-treatment (CSEOH) allows for
obtaining an ethanol concentration of 18.7 g L
−1
, with 66.6% of fermentation efficiency
and a yield of 26.6 g ethanol 100 g
−1
CSEOH or 10.1 g ethanol 100 g
−1
of untreated
material (cardoon) [
68
]. In another study, two processes were studied separately after
Steam Explosion (SE) pre-treatment, namely, Semi-Simultaneous Saccharification and
Fermentation (SSSF) and Separate Hydrolysis and Fermentation (SHF). SSSF allowed
obtaining a yield of ethanol of 13.64 g of ethanol 100 g
−1
of cardoon, a value slightly higher
than that of SHF (13.17 g of ethanol 100 g
−1
of cardoon) as well as a shorter processing time
of 24 h for SSSF, when compared to the SHF [69].
Currently, the application of cardoon to Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTP) has
been of great importance. The behavior of the Cynara cardunculus when wastewater (WW)
and digested sewage sludge were applied in a Spanish plantation, specifically, in Alcázar
de San Juan, was evaluated, aiming at the implementation of this technology for thermal
energy production. Five parcels of 100 m
2 w
were evaluated, each one with different
irrigation, namely, drinking water taken as the control, treated WW, 1 t ha
−1
of air-dried
sewage sludge, 2 t ha
−1
of air-dried sewage sludge, and 0.7 t ha
−1
of commercial inorganic
fertilizer. The moisture and heating value (High and Low) of cardoon in each parcel were
determined. The moisture was in the range [2.08–3.63%] and the Lower Heating Value
(LHV) and Higher Heating Value (HHV), were in the following ranges [3.68–3.84) kcal kg
−1
DM (HHV) and [3.41–3.56] kcal kg
−1
DM (LHV), respectively. As the difference was not
significant, they concluded that it is possible to obtain a similar quantity of energy when
the cardoon is irrigated with WW and sewage sludge or commercial fertilizer. The unique
problem that can be found in the sewage sludge is the high salinity, thus, it is important to
make a continuous characterization of this material [70].
In Portugal, cardoon was proposed for guaranteeing high productivity in the terri-
tory, namely, an area of 72,313 ha (0.81% of the total area in Portugal’s mainland which
corresponded only to degraded and marginal lands), with low requirements concern-
ing the soil and water type, and included energy production in several biochemical and
thermochemical technologies [71].
2.1.2. Giant Reed (Arundo donax L.)
Arundo donax L., also known as giant reed (family Poaceae, order Cyperales, and
class Liliopsida), is an erect, reed-like grass, herbaceous, perennial cane, aggressive and
invasive species with the capacity to reproduce quickly, either by seed propagation or by
vegetative propagation, being a primary threat to native riparian habitats worldwide and
out-competing native plant species in the access to soil-water.
Giant reed is a poly-annual culture that presents average yields of 15 to 40 t DM ha
−1
year
−1
[
6
,
28
,
29
]. This species can be applied for energy generation [
72
], paper pulp, and
Energies 2022,15, 4348 7 of 68
fiber production (e.g., cellulose for rayon fabrication), and is widely used as an ornamental
material for basket-work manufacture, barriers to gardens (trellises and garden fences),
crude shelters, construction and roofing materials, livestock fodder, fishing rods, and
arrows. Medicinally, the rhizomes and roots have been used for many uses, and culinary
uses of the young shoots and leaves, and the rhizome have been proposed [
72
,
73
]. It
has been also planted along ditches and drainage canals for erosion control or as a bank
stabilization agent. Although well known as an aggressive invasive species, the wide
commercial applications of Arundo donax wide will contribute to further development and
adoption of this crop, bearing in mind that the exploitation of this species and its invasive
character requires careful reflection [
74
,
75
]. With the constant search for biofuels that is
expected to increase over time, it is anticipated that the latent interest in this giant reed,
considering the high yields it presents, will increase.
Data collected by Corno et al., 2014 show that the giant reed presents major biomass
productivity in comparison with other energy crops, allowing a higher generation of biofuel
and energy per unit area. Therefore, it can substitute other energy crops, with a diminution
in the cost of biomass production. However, there is very little data about the utilization
of Arundo donax for energy and biofuels generation, therefore, so much remains to be
explored [76].
The conversion of A. donax into bioenergy has been carried out either by biochemical
pathways or thermochemical conversion routes. The biomass of A. donax can be used for
three types of bioenergy: solid biofuels (in briquettes and pellets including direct biomass
combustion [
77
]), biogas, and biomethane production has been proposed by [
78
–
80
], and
bioethanol [81–84].
The giant reed represents an adequate species for the biorefineries when its wide
utilities are considered. A dedicated A. donax crop was subjected to hydrothermal pre-
treatment by Di Girolamo, Grigatti, Barbanti, and Angelidaki, 2013 to analyze its potential
for biogas generation. Three different situations were applied: without catalyst, during a
time (24 h) of substrate impregnation, utilizing 2% w w
−1
sulfuric acid (H
2
SO
4
), and instant
incorporation of 2% w w
−1
H
2
SO
4
previous steam cooking for pre-treatment parameters;
temperature between 150
◦
C up to 180
◦
C and time from 10 to 20 min. The results of batch
digestion tests, made with 4 g VS L
−1
on thermophilic conditions, namely 53
◦
C, during
39 days, presented a methane yield of 273 mL g
−1
VS incorporated for unprocessed biomass.
The no catalytic reactions of biomass reached a yield of 23% for a temperature of 180
◦
C
and a duration of 10 min. The reactors that treated catalyzed biomass were experiencing
methanogenic inhibition. This type of inhibition can be caused by the competition with
the sulfate-reducing bacteria (SRB) [
42
]. For Mediterranean conditions, A. donax could
be an interesting choice as feedstock for biogas facilities [
84
], concerning profitability, a
plant size of 300 kW was referred to as the most beneficial for bioenergy production from
Arundo donax.
According to Maucieri et al., 2019, the highest biomass, ethanol (3.5 t ha
−1
), and
methane yields (8227 m
3
ha
−1
) in a four-year study were obtained with Arundo donax
among thirteen pluri-annual herbaceous cultures previously chosen for their potential
biomethane and bioethanol production. This highlighted A. donax as one of the most
interesting species for biofuel production [6].
The pre-treatment of Arundo donax biomass is required for bioethanol production but
as this step has been considered the most energy demanding, this should be accounted for
in any life-cycle energy balance [
84
]. Muthuvelu et al., 2019 evaluated giant reed as a novel
source of sustainable lignocellulosic residues for bioethanol generation utilizing ultrasound-
assisted alkaline pre-treatment. Arundo donax presented 214
±
3 mg g
−1
maximum reducing
sugar release, yielding a fermentation efficiency of 83 ±7% [85].
A microwave–alkali-assisted pre-treatment in one stage has been proposed for A. donax
pre-treatment with some added benefits, such as less energy consumption, fast heating,
and less toxic compound production. The utilization of 5% NaOH solution yielded the
highest sugar monomer yield (6.8 g per 100 g of biomass) [86].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 8 of 68
Ba, Liu, Wang, and Yang, 2020 carried out pyrolysis studies of Arundo donax as feed-
stock and well as a final potential study of giant reed for alternative sources of mate-
rials, energy, and chemicals calculated according to average biomass productivity and
marginal soils area in China. An industrial scale (2000 t day
−1
) would yield 28 MW power,
51.36 t day−1
bio-oil, 555.04 t day
−1
vinegar, and 511.36 t day
−1
biochar from 9 million t of
feedstock obtained in 0.3 million ha of marginal soils at a predicted 30 t ha
−1
year
−1
[
87
].
Moreover, soil remediation and sewage decontamination near aquatic bodies would also
occur as A. donax was an excellent species to advance the quality of water-polluted bodies
and contaminated lands [
88
], which is of particular significance for the further develop-
ment of dedicated biorefineries [
87
]. Finally, Fernando, Barbosa, Costa, and Papazoglou,
2016 concluded that A. donax had the big production levels among nine studied species,
comparatively an energy balance positive together with the lowest GHG emissions, low
nutrient requirements, and the lowest cost per ton of dry biomass or per unit of energy for
Mediterranean conditions [88].
The economics of energy crops have been neglected or, to some extent, limited in the
literature. The economic aspects of A. donax were analyzed from a systematic survey of
publications by Jámbor and Török, 2019. Giant reed was proven to have a high potential for
a cost-effective biomass generation either in marginal or disadvantageous small areas due
to favorable yields and energy balance, high Capital Expenditure (CAPEX) but low Opera-
tional Expenditure (OPEX), making its production attractive and potentially economically
sustainable (biomass supply and generated revenue) [84].
According to the same publication, giant reed presented the second-highest energy
production cost (2.34
€
GJ
−1
), but the highest nutrient-use yield for phosphorus (P) and
nitrogen (N) among several studied energy crops. This suggests that A. donax is a clear
option to utilize further to convert WW (as a source of N and P) into biofuels in the frame
of the circular bioeconomy.
2.1.3. Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)
Hemp is a spring crop plant (herbaceous crop) belonging to the family Cannabaceae,
order Urticales, and class Magnoliopsida. It has a strong soil structuring capacity, with a
strong upright root and its stems are rich in cellulose and lignin. The seeds have a high fat
and protein content. Industrial hemp is grown for its stalk, seed, or both. The interior of the
stalk is made of woody fibers called “Hurds” that represent a cheap cellulosic residue [
89
].
The outer part consists of long bast fibers [
90
]. It is a fast-growing crop [
91
] and is suitable
for production in sandy soils [
92
]. For centuries, hemp fiber has been very important
worldwide, being used in the production of ropes and in the textile sector [
93
], presenting
more advantages than cotton as it does not require as much area for its cultivation and does
not need the incorporation of pesticides and insecticides [94].
Currently, new applications of this species have emerged at the industrial level, the
most relevant being presented below: in paper production of higher quality than that
from wood, thus avoiding deforestation of the forest [
95
]; construction material industries
for the production of sustainable materials specifically isolations from hemp fiber [
96
];
personal uses like essential oils [
97
] which can be used to control insects and pests due to
their insecticidal and antimicrobial action, in the manufacture of soaps, fragrances and can-
dles [
98
]; in the pharmaceutical industry for its compounds such as cannabidiol (CBD) [
97
]
and
∆
-9-tetrahydrocannabinol both extracted from unpollinated flowers [
99
]; chemical
products such as detergents, varnishes, paints [
100
], solvents, printing inks, and biopesti-
cides; in WW treatment; in the animal litter production; in the automotive sector as vehicle
parts and other internal components; in the fashion industry, and; in the production of
jewelry, furniture, nutraceutical, cosmetics (including cosmeceutical), medical and acoustic
products [
98
]. Cannabis sativa can be used for biocomposites production [
101
,
102
] and
innovative and sustainable materials such as bioplastics [
98
], namely in biodegradable
container production with an antibacterial effect [
103
]. In the food industry, seeds can
be extracted from various chemical components such as oil (omega-3 and omega-6 fatty
Energies 2022,15, 4348 9 of 68
acids) and proteins [
99
] used in the natural beverages production [
98
], and the remaining
material is often used after the extraction of the oil from the seed for animal feed due to the
high presence of proteins [
95
]. The sectors linked with Cannabis sativa that are of greater
commercial interest are textile, paper, food, and construction, and those that are under
development are the automotive and cosmetics industries [98].
The application of hemp as a raw material to be used in the new industrial units des-
ignated by biorefineries for biofuel production [
104
] has several advantages. In addition,
it is also a crop used for energy purposes, either for burning, for the biofuels generation
(e.g., bioethanol), and biochemical bioproducts like succinic acid produced in the micro-
bial fermentation stage of sugars from hemp hydrolysate, being an acid that allows the
production of other products with high added value such as biopolymers, green solvents,
and pharmaceutical products [
30
]. It is important to know that 1 t DM of hemp makes it
possible to produce 149 kg of bioethanol and 115 kg of succinic acid [
98
]. In relation to the
high oil content and the biomass amounts that are generated, there are also environmental
sustainability benefits derived either from the possibility of its use as a rotation crop replac-
ing traditional food crops or from the low use of pesticides. Hemp also has the potential of
reducing the amount of pesticides in succeeding crops.
There are other energy uses from industrial hemp. Some of them are [
105
] from chemi-
cal processes, and the biodiesel from cannabis seed oil by the transesterification process
with methanol [
106
,
107
]; in the biochemical process, are the biogas from AD [
108
–
112
] and
bioethanol obtained through fermentation of biomass [
113
], and lastly, for thermochemical
process, the heat from direct combustion utilizing solid fuels [
110
] as briquettes [
97
,
108
] or
pellets produced from cannabis hurds and stems or electricity in systems like Combined
Heat and Power (CHP) from cannabis biomass and pyrolysis [114].
Biodiesel production is possible from the oil seed. Assuming a seed yield of 2 t ha
−1
and an oil seed content of around 35%, and oil yield of approximately 814 L ha
−1
can be
obtained. Due to the high yield of hemp oil in biodiesel (around 97%), a total biodiesel
yield of 789 L ha
−1
is reached [
38
]. Other studies have integrated into a single system the
two types of liquid biofuels production (biodiesel and bioethanol) with Cannabis sativa as
an industrial raw material. Biodiesel was obtained through the extraction of lipids from
the material and followed by transesterification. The remaining biomass, therefore, the
one free of lipids, was submitted to two pre-treatments: a hydrothermal (free of chemical
compounds) and another of disk refining, and finally, enzymatic hydrolysis was applied to
obtain bioethanol [
104
,
115
]. In this type of process, industrial hemp is seen as a solution to
reduce GHG emissions, motivating economic growth at any level [95].
The production of biomethane through AD from hemp crop residues (e.g., parts of the
species such as flowers and hurds) was studied by Matassa, Esposito, Pirozzi, and Papirio,
2020 [
116
]. The highest biochemical methane potential (BMP) obtained was 422
±
20 mL
methane g VS
−1
from pre-treated and crude fibers. However, the many commercial uses of
the crude fibers make their application for biomethane production less appealing. For the
remaining waste material, it was determined that when applying two pre-treatments, one
physical (grinding) and the other alkaline (dilution with NAOH) to the hemp hurds, there
is an increase of 15.9% of BMP (initial value of 239
±
10 mL methane g VS
−1
) and for hemp
flowers mixed with inflorescences when the pre-treatment of dilution with NaOH was
applied, there was a 28.5% increase in BMP (initial value of 118
±
8 mL methane g VS
−1
). In
conclusion, the application of alkaline pre-treatment increases the production of biomethane
(of BMP) and hemp residues represent the potential for its generation [
116
]. Harvest time
influences the amount of material collected as well as the biogas yield obtained [
117
],
therefore, it is important to consider this aspect for further implementation of biomethane
production from hemp.
Two scenarios for bioethanol production and eight scenarios for biomethane genera-
tion from the Cannabis sativa stalks harvested in autumn were evaluated to compare the
gross energy production. Two pre-treatments were applied: a physical one that consisted of
grinding the material and another physical-chemical process with steam. The two scenarios
Energies 2022,15, 4348 10 of 68
to produce bioethanol were as follows: In the first, the stems were subjected to a steam
pre-treatment, and then, with the hexoses produced, a Simultaneous Saccharification and
Fermentation (SSF) was applied (in this step enzymes and yeasts are added) to obtain
bioethanol; the second scenario was the same as the first, with the difference being that
before the SSF, the material is separated into two phases, one liquid and the other solid, with
only ethanol obtained during the solid separation. For the case of biomethane produced by
AD, eight different types of raw materials were used separately: crushed leaves, crushed
stems, milled stems, stems subjected to steam pre-treatment, stems subjected to enzymatic
hydrolysis (pre-treated with steam), the residues obtained in each bioethanol production
scenario, and, finally, the liquid phase not used in the second bioethanol scenario. All mate-
rials that were subjected to steam pre-treatment were allowed to obtain a higher methane
production and, in turn, it was found that the methane yields were very similar in cases
where the materials were or were not pre-hydrolyzed. This study shows that the bioethanol
and biomethane co-production is doubly advantageous (double energy generation) in a
single process because enzymes and yeasts incorporated before SSF for the bioethanol
production can be converted into biomethane [118].
Several studies were carried out in order to maximize the cellulose content, by the use
of steam and enzymes (pectinase), obtaining cellulose contents of about 78% [
119
]. Other
studies confirm that the high cellulose content present in hemp guarantees a much higher
potential for bioethanol production compared to other energy crops like sorghum, kenaf,
and switchgrass [89,120].
To get the highest glucose yield in the enzymatic hydrolysis for transformation into
ethanol, an optimization of steam pre-treatment parameters under different conditions was
performed [
43
], using hemp silage (leaves and stem) and dry hemp. The SSF process was
also applied in both cases. Results showed that the optimal pre-treatment conditions for
both materials maximizing the glucose yield were the saturation with 2% SO
2
before the
steam pre-treatment at 210
◦
C for 5 min. The obtained ethanol yields were 163 g kg
−1
of
ensiled hemp DM and 171 g kg
−1
of dry hemp. These results correspond to the values
between 206 and 216 L ethanol t−1hemp (based on initial dry material).
Four types of hemp were evaluated to obtain bioethanol using three types of pre-
treatments: Liquid Hot Water (LHW), diluted acid (1% H
2
SO
4
), and diluted alkali
(1% NaOH). The LHW allowed obtaining between 85% to 98% of glucan and between 67%
to 71% of xylan. The acid pre-treatment allowed the decomposition of glucan between 5.9%
to 10.6 g L
−1
. The alkaline pre-treatment allowed extracting between 58.6% to 75.3% of
the lignin with lower production of inhibitors, with a high amount of glucose and ethanol
being obtained, unlike the other two pre-treatments where there was a higher production
of compounds inhibitors and low yields of glucose and ethanol due to the amount of
recondensed lignin. In the alkaline pre-treatment (which gave the best results), similar
ethanol yields were obtained for the four typologies of hemp studied [121].
Spectroscopic determination of several distillates from a slow pyrolysis system with
hemp hurds was carried out to evaluate the potential of this process as well as the main
products obtained. Crude distillates were collected in three process stages: drying, roasting,
and slow pyrolysis, with the system at the initial stage at room temperature up to the
maximum operating temperature of 350
◦
C. The slow pyrolysis process allows increasing
the energy yield of biochar by 15%, therefore, it can be seen as a solution to optimize the
quality of the product. Biochar can be used as a fertilizer and soil remedial, in filtering
processes, and as a composite [100].
For a hemp plantation to be initially applied as a phytoremediator for use in the
bioenergy sector such as in transesterification, AD, fermentation, or combustion, it is
necessary to evaluate the presence of HMs, radionuclides, and organic contaminants in
each process [122] as these components can affect the equilibrium of the system.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 11 of 68
2.1.4. Jerusalem Artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.)
Jerusalem artichoke (JA) belonging to the family Asteraceae, order Asterales, and
class Magnoliopsida, have so many names such as sunroot, sunchoke, or topinambur. It
is an herbaceous perennial tuberous plant, despite often being managed as an annual,
with the sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) being included in the identical genus as the
sunroot [19,123,124].
Helianthus tuberosus is a great feedstock to be applied in consolidated bioprocessing,
therefore, each part of the plant can be used, e.g., the aerial biomass (stalk) and the tubers.
The JA tubers are constituted by two types of carbohydrates: inulin which is a linear poly-
mer [D-fructose units that present
β
(2
→
1) bonds, with a terminal of D-glucose molecule
that have a
α
(1
→
2) bond], and sugars such as glucose and fructose; while the cellulose
and hemicellulose are the principal’s carbohydrates located in the aerial part of the species.
Besides the carbohydrates from the whole plant, the tubers present an N content that can be
utilized in the fermentation bioprocesses with the objective of not needing to incorporate
additional nutrients [6,31–33].
Conventionally, JA has been applied for food and feed generation and folk medicine,
for example, inulin soluble dietary fiber used to replace sugar and fat, and also for its anti-
cancer and immune system boosting properties [
125
]. However, for the past two decades,
an awareness of its significant health benefits led to the exploitation of alternative uses such
as the production of functional food ingredients and bioactive compounds. The functional
food ingredients derived mainly from JA tubers, such as inulin, fructooligosaccharides
(FOS) (considered a probiotic for its bifidogenic properties [
126
]), and fructose, are particu-
larly beneficial in the treatment of obesity and diabetes type 2 and are also constituted by a
high protein value, namely, most of the essential amino acids for life. In addition, several
valuable bioactive compounds have been extracted in the aerial part of this species (leaves
and stalks), serving as antifungal, antioxidants and applied in medicine for the treatment as
an anticancer with pharmaceutical effects [
123
,
124
,
127
–
129
], with the inulin considered as
an excipient and stabilizer (as a drug delivery vehicle to reduce the dose amount and side
effects) [
125
]. Another use that can be given to JA is in the production of cement composites
for application in the civil construction sector [33].
Currently, an enhanced interest has arisen in the JA as a potential energy crop for bio-
fuels and bioproducts through biorefinery [
19
,
124
,
127
,
130
–
132
] because it has a diversity of
characteristics that offer great competitive advantages, like a fast-growing species that adapts
very easily to different climatic conditions, with a high yield and amount of inulin [
133
]. With
respect to biofuel production, there are numerous studies describing different approaches
to producing bioethanol from JA tubers
inulin [130,132,134–136]
, from JA stalks [
137
,
138
]
or from the whole plant [
19
,
32
,
124
,
127
,
131
,
139
]. Besides bioethanol, other biofuels have
been obtained through JA fermentations, such as butanol [
124
,
140
],
2,3-butanediol [141,142]
,
single-cell oil, methane from AD (yields up to
≤590 L kg−1
VS) [
131
,
143
–
145
], and biogas
from pyrolysis [
32
]. In addition to biofuels,
Helianthus tuberosus
has been used to produce
several biodata-based chemicals, like various types of acids such as succinic, butyric, citric,
propionic, poly-(L-malic acid), poly-(
γ
-glutamic acid), and L-lactate among other com-
pounds like 5-HMF and sorbitol [
124
,
126
,
132
]. Moreover, JA crop residues can also be
burnt for power and heat generation in the combined form [
19
], and to produce solid
fuels (briquettes and pellets) from the aerial part of the species [
133
]. Indeed, this species
represents a potential biorefinery crop and can be considered a crop with multi-purpose
utilities for the generation of various bioproducts (chemicals and fuels) from the whole
plant (aerial part inclusive of the tubers) providing elevated economic value. Nevertheless,
the advantages of JA as an energy crop for the bioeconomy have only come to light in the
last decade.
Biodiesel production from JA tubers and Chlorella protothecoides microalgae were
studied by Cheng et al., 2009. The tuber hydrolysate was used as a substrate for the
selected microalgae species, to produce lipids in a total of 4 days. After this time, a lipid
concentration of 44% in dry mass was reached, which was extracted and later transesterified
Energies 2022,15, 4348 12 of 68
for the biodiesel generation that consisted of the methyl ester of the linoleic acid, oleic acid,
and cetane acid. However, 82% of biodiesel corresponds to the methyl esters of unsaturated
fatty acids. This study allows us to conclude that it is possible to obtain biodiesel using the
tubers of Helianthus tuberosus as a carbon source in microalgae cultivation, with a reduction
in costs due to the low price of the feedstock [
146
]. In another study, lipid extraction was
also performed using JA tubers hydrolysate as raw material and Rhodosporidium toruloides
Y4 as a culture medium, obtaining a lipid titer of approximately 40 g L
−1
and a number
of cellular lipids close to 57% w w
−1
, being demonstrated once more that the hydrolysate
of the tubers of JA represents a material with high potential for the production of lipids
through microbial pathways or for other biologically based chemical products [147].
In a pilot plant, biogas production was studied using only JA (material available above
ground), and the production was analyzed when the biomass was freshly harvested, dried
in the open air, and stored in silos (ensiled). The measurement of the BMP determined that
the dry biomass in the open air was the one that allowed the production of a greater amount
of biogas (including the largest volume of biomethane), with the ensiled material being
the one with the lowest biogas production. The microbial community inside the reactor
was very similar in both cases (outdoor dry material and ensiled). Thus, it is apparent the
conditions in which the biomass is found to achieve greater biogas production from species
such as JA [148].
In the biofuel production process where the main objective is to produce or increase
the inulin quantity, the removal of the flowers was studied [
149
]. Between 33% and 100%
of the flowers were removed in order to evaluate, for different percentages of removal, the
distribution of carbohydrates in the tubers, a factor that increased the amount of material
produced in the species (from 20.5% to 44.4%), being distributed approximately was 12% to
37% for the stems, 57% to 218% for the leaves, and 29% to 43% for the tubers, with the latter
being where the largest amount of inulin present in the species is concentrated. Removing
the flowers also allowed for reducing the amount of ash (from 25% to 100%) as well as
increasing the calorific value of the tubers (from 33% to 100%). When the flowers were
100% removed, the greatest amount of biomass in the tubers was obtained, being 228 g
tuber plant
−1
, therefore, aiming at producing a greater amount of inulin to subsequently
produce biofuel such as bioethanol, as well as to improve the chemical properties of the
species, the flowers should be removed entirely, and these should be used to produce other
value-added products.
Jerusalem artichoke is a raw material suitable for bioethanol production and other
products such as D-psicose, which allows the production of other types of sugars such as
D-glucose and D-fructose. The process comprises the steps of hydrolysis and enzymatic
conversion, fermentation by yeast, and pervaporation, and, after this last phase, the collec-
tion of D-psicose and bioethanol takes place with an approximate yield of 15 mg mL
−1
and
14 mg mL
−1
. From the 56.47 mg mL
−1
of D-fructose present in 100 mg mL
−1
of Helianthus
tuberosus, 18.2 mg mL
−1
of D-psicose were produced, [
150
], therefore, the products with
high added value can be obtained from a raw material considered to be of low cost.
Jerusalem artichoke ethanol yield reported ranges from 1500 to 11,000 L ha
−1
from
tubers and from 2835 to 11,230 L ha
−1
from aerial biomass [
44
]; while sugarcane ethanol
yield ranges from 2800 to 8764 L ha
−1
and corn ethanol yield ranges from 2000 to
6698 L ha−1[44,132]
. Paixão et al., 2018 made a comparison between the total energy
consumption and the CO
2eq
emissions of the Helianthus tuberosus tubers for the ethanol
production that was produced in the refinery of sugar beet, sugarcane, and corn, con-
cluding that this species represents a feedstock with a high value to be utilized as an
additive in the blend of ethanol/gasoline. Therefore, it represents a promising sustainable
alternative [136].
A Jerusalem artichoke plantation of 1 ha can produce between 18 to 28 t of residual
material specifically for foliage, with the tubers harvested from the species being used for
other purposes. To use these residues at the bioenergy level, they will be subjected to a
pyrolysis process with various heating rates, namely, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 80
◦
C min
−1
, in
Energies 2022,15, 4348 13 of 68
an oxygen-free (inert) atmosphere, reaching better thermal transformation conditions at a
temperature between 270 ◦C to 430 ◦C. At temperatures above 430 ◦C, lignin degradation
and coal formation were achieved. An analysis carried out on the gaseous fraction found
the release of phenols, aldehydes, esters, carboxylic acids, methane, and aromatic hydro-
carbons, therefore, products with a high energy content for energy production, and other
valuable products such as solvents were also verified (toluene and acetic acid). This system
(maintaining the same temperature conditions) can also be extrapolated to an industrial
scale whenever it is optimized to obtain products with high-energy load, bio-oil, and
syngas. Considering this system, it can be said that JA residues (without considering the
tubers) represent a crop with broad advantages for chemical and energy production [151].
2.1.5. Linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.)
Linseed is utilized for linseed oil generation, textile fiber, and seed [
152
] and is an easy
crop to grow, and does not require high soil nutrients.
It also has a high content of unsaturated fatty acids and the seeds have a low cost
when compared to others of the same genus (oily) [
153
]. Flax oil is a relevant vegetable
oil utilized in the food industry (cooking oil) and in other applications like natural oil, the
generation of omega-3 fatty acid obtained from the high content of
α
-linolenic acid, and the
medicinal sector for the control of several diseases as rheumatoid arthritis, blood pressure,
and cholesterol [
154
]. There exists a high interest in Linum usitatissimum for utilization
in dietary supplements and functional foods [
155
], with an increasing need to identify
strategies to increment its productivity to meet the growing demand [
156
]. Flax, apart from
linseed oil production, can also be used as fiber and as feed for livestock [154].
Linseed oil is utilized too for biodiesel generation [
157
–
159
], and its utilization in diesel
engines results in high-performance parameters namely, brake thermal efficiency (BTE), low
brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC), and power output [
160
]. Biodiesel produced from
Linum usitatissimum L. can also be used in blends with other fossil fuels such as petrodiesel
in combustion systems and it has been found that this type of biodiesel achieves high
efficiency at the maximum compression ratio (18:1) without that this could cause engine
problems [
161
]. Characteristics like low volatility, high viscosity, and polyunsaturated
are problems that arise when it is made to be the substitution of vegetable oil for a diesel
engine as fuel. These parameters can be changed with other options such as pyrolysis,
microemulsion, dilution, and transesterification. Several production systems can be applied
for biodiesel generation [152].
Data of linseed oil methyl and ethyl esters such as viscosity and flash point are values
that are strongly reduced after the transesterification phase. Several chemical parameters
of linseed ester fuel were analyzed, being 0.03% free fatty acids value, 27.8 m
eq
kg
−1
for
peroxides, and, lastly, the free glycerol was 0%. After the transesterification reaction, it was
verified that the density value, specifically, of linseed oil and linseed oil methyl ester was
similar to the density of conventional diesel fuel and in relation to other parameters, the
linseed oil heating value was 10% lower than diesel because of the presence of a higher
oxygen content [152].
A high value of polyunsaturated fatty acids characterizes linseed oil fatty acid methyl
esters (LMEs); they oxidize fast, and, therefore, such products can be blended with other
FAMEs to be utilized in diesel machines [
162
]. Linseed oil methyl ester characteristics are
comparable with diesel fuel and present a lower carbon monoxide (CO) emission when
compared to conventional diesel. It is utilized in diesel machines yielding very good results,
like high BTE, high power output, and low BSFC.
Linseed oil was submitted to a continuous transesterification process, in a fixed bed
reactor, using calcium oxide (CaO) as a catalyst, to evaluate the yield of FAMEs under these
conditions. The main idea was to compare the behavior of the system with and without
the presence of the co-solvent, with three variables analyzed: the molar ratio of diethyl
ether (DEE) (co-solvent) in relation to methanol (most relevant variable), the molar ratio
of methanol to oil, and the volumetric flow (ml min
−1
) based on the yield of FAMEs. The
Energies 2022,15, 4348 14 of 68
presence of the co-solvent allowed obtaining the maximum yield of FAMEs (98.08%) with
a molar ratio of DEE to methanol of 1.19:1, a molar ratio of methanol to oil of 9.48:1, and
a volumetric flow of 1.37 mL min
−1
, at a temperature of 30
◦
C and 160 g of CaO. When
the reaction took place without the presence of the DEE, the maximum yield of FAME was
75.83%, therefore, the absence of agitation and incorporation of a co-solvent into the system
effectively increased the yield of FAMEs [
39
]. In another study, the transesterification
process with and without the presence of a co-solvent [tetrahydrofuran (THF)] was also
evaluated, but the agitation was applied in both cases and with a potassium hydroxide
(KOH) catalyst. The effectiveness of the co-solvent in biodiesel production systems from
Linum usitatissimum was demonstrated once more, as it allows a greater mass transfer
between the steps of the system, facilitates the occurrence of the transesterification reaction,
with lower temperatures, reaction time, and agitation rates (40
◦
C, 90 min, and 700 rpm),
achieving a high biodiesel yield (93.15%) and high FAME purity (99.8%). When THF
(co-solvent) is not present, the results are less desirable as it requires higher temperatures,
reaction times, and agitation rates (50
◦
C, 120 min, and 750 rpm), achieving a lower biodiesel
yield (84.3%) and lower purity of FAME (99.7%) [163].
It was published that a maximum biodiesel yield of 93% can be obtained with linseed
oil that presents 4% moisture [
164
]. Thus, there is a research gap in biodiesel generation
from linseed oil, namely in the optimization of the main preparation parameters, like the
reaction temperature (transesterification phase), catalyst proportion, the methanol to oil
ratio (M/O), and the reaction time. The yield of biodiesel production over transesterification
depends on several operating aspects, like the reaction time and temperature, catalyst
weight percent, and alcohol/oil molar ratio.
Linum usitatissimum has been used in the last 40 years as a crop with high potential for
soil phytoremediation [
165
–
167
] and WW, specifically in terrains with a high load of HMs,
being highly resistant to these components [
154
], and managing to store a greater amount
of HMs in the aboveground part of the plant (aerial) and less in the roots.
2.1.6. Miscanthus (Miscanthus ×giganteus Greef et Deu)
Miscanthus spp. is a C4 perennial rhizomatous lignocellulosic crop, with a good
potential for bioenergy, biofuels, and bio-based product generation [
168
,
169
]. The plant
Miscanthus
×
giganteus, belongs to the family Poaceae/Gramineae, order Cyperales, and
class Liliopsida [
170
]. In Europe, this crop is gaining relevance as an energy grass given
its aptitude to grow under a large spectrum of climatic conditions, its high yields, and an
estimated productive lifetime of at least 15 to 20 years [171].
Miscanthus
×
giganteus is an attractive material for many uses, such as thatching,
animal bedding, pulp for paper, fibreboards, nanocellulose production, and inclusion in
composites and building materials, among others [7,170,172,173].
Yet, its most current use is as solid fuel as the heat capacity of the miscanthus biomass
is very high (18.5 GJ Mg
−1
[
174
], LHV of 16.4 GJ Mg
−1
[
175
]). Indeed, the benefits of this
crop rely on the fact that its cultivation on marginal soil and its use for stationary power
and heat generation can attain substantial greenhouse gas emission and non-renewable
energy savings, up to 13 Mg CO
2eq
ha
−1
year
−1
and 230 GJ ha
−1
year
−1
, respectively. In
addition, in relation to energy and GHG emission savings, miscanthus was the crop that
performed better when used in a small CHP, compared with other perennials, namely, giant
reed, cardoon, and switchgrass [
176
]. Moreover, experiments with miscanthus conducted
in a pilot-scale gasification plant also indicated a high potential for energy generation
and friendliness from an ecological standpoint [
177
]. Besides, this crop benefits from the
fact that it presents low ash and nitrogen content (respectively 1.96% and
0.09 % w w−1
DM, [
175
]), which are two important parameters when evaluating the adequacy of biomass
as feedstock for combustion to generate electricity, heat, or CHP. Yet, miscanthus biomass
usually presents a high slagging propensity because of its high chloride (Cl) and potassium
(K) contents when compared to wood biomass, which may limit its conversion with
processes operating at high temperatures, such as combustion and gasification [
175
]. In
Energies 2022,15, 4348 15 of 68
addition, the lower yields and the increase in biomass ash and nitrogen content that can be
achieved when the biomass is being harvested from marginal or contaminated soils can
compromise its technological and economic exploitation [178].
Other conversion technologies of miscanthus to energy can be either thermochemical
(torrefaction, pyrolysis) or biochemical (AD, fermentation to ethanol). In the torrefaction
process, the biomass is pre-treated with heat in an oxygen-free environment, and the result-
ing solid and energy-dense material can be pelletized, being suitable for direct combustion
in boilers, co-firing in large power plants, or gasification to syngas. Hydrothermal car-
bonization (HTC) and slow pyrolysis are the other two pre-treatment processes that can
also be applied to miscanthus. In the study of Wilk and Magdziarz, 2017, the effect of
these pre-treatment processes (slow pyrolysis, torrefaction, and HTC) on the properties of
M. giganteus were analyzed and the results indicated that there was an improvement in
the combustible characteristics of the obtained biochar when compared to raw biomass by
the increment of carbon content. Pyrolysis is a conversion technology where the biomass
is heated rapidly to a high temperature in an oxygen-free environment, converting the
lignocellulosic-rich biomass into pyrolysis oil which can be used for combustion or could be
further upgraded to a range of higher-value products [
179
]. Lakshman, Brassard, Hamelin,
Raghavan, and Godbout, 2021, found out in their study that the optimal pyrolysis parame-
ters to generate a bio-crude oil from miscanthus with a biomass residence time of 81 s, with
a low water content was a temperature of 510
◦
C and a nitrogen flow rate of 5.1 L min
−1
.
The bio-crude oil obtained under these conditions presented a water content of 25.3% and
a higher heating value of 15.8 MJ kg
−1
. The process yields bio-crude oil (18.8%), biochar
(22.1%), the aqueous phase of bio-oil (18.3%), and non-condensable gases (40.8%) [46].
In current commercial digesters, the agricultural residues can be supplemented with a
feed of energy crops (which includes miscanthus). The AD converts biomass/miscanthus
to biogas (with a high methane content), and this biogas can be applied in CHP units or it
can be upgraded to methane, and the remaining digestate can be applied as fertilizer [
180
].
Yet, because the digestion of the lignocellulosic material of miscanthus is difficult due to
the complex chemical structure, its degradability should be increased by using a physical,
chemical, or biochemical pre-treatment. Miscanthus also represents an option for the
second-generation ethanol production. In this case, the cellulosic material needs to be
separated from the lignin and then hydrolyzed to its sugars, for fermentation. Therefore,
the material needs to be pre-treated with biological, chemical, or physical methods, or with
a combination of these methods, to minimize the recalcitrance of lignocellulosic biomass
to transformation into sugars. Different studies are currently being done to optimize the
bioethanol production from miscanthus which can yield between 0.10 and 0.13 L kg
−1
[
181
],
although improved yields can be obtained depending on the chosen pre-treatment and
fermentation strategies.
2.1.7. Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench)
Sorghum (family Poaceae/Gramineae, order Cyperales, and class Liliopsida) is a C4
plant. The most cultivated sorghum varieties are biomass (or energy) sorghum, grain
sorghum, and sweet sorghum, which are distinguished by their chemical composition,
morphological characteristics (size and amount of grain), and applications [
7
,
25
,
35
]. The
specific fractionation of sorghum hemicellulose to obtain xylose-rich solutions which can
be further converted into added-value products can also be a good alternative for using
this abundant resource [
182
]. Although there are not many examples in the literature
regarding the utilization of sorghum pentoses for bioproducts, their conversion to xylitol
was previously reported [183,184].
Sorghum bicolor presents three constituent parts (leaves, panicle, and stalk), and every
part may be utilized for the generation of a diversity of products. In many countries on
the Asian and African continent, sorghum is considered a food crop, specifically sorghum
grains due to its high nutritional value in terms of micronutrients and antioxidants, being
also gluten-free, therefore, it is a food option for those intolerant to this protein, becoming a
Energies 2022,15, 4348 16 of 68
food considered healthy in many developed countries. It also has a high potential for genetic
improvement although this feature has only been partially explored [
25
]. The gasification
process was also studied for the sorghum stover [185] and the sorghum straw [186].
Energy sorghum can be transformed into energy carriers by biochemical processes
like bioethanol [
187
,
188
], and in European temperate regions, also by thermochemical
pathways like gasification, pyrolysis, and combustion, for electricity, heat, biofuel, and
biochar generation [
189
,
190
]. Biochar, for example, has been successfully used for soil
remediation and for the diminution of GHG emissions and as soil fertilizer [
111
,
190
].
Sorghum biomass as well as grains can be used in the production of enzymes, microbial
lipids, bioproducts for industrial use, bioactive compounds to improve human health, and
to be applied as a phytoremediator in contaminated soils [41].
Sorghum oil extracted from grains has a high potential for biodiesel production as
demonstrated by several studies [
191
–
194
]. The alcohols used for the transesterification
reaction were in some cases methanol and in others ethanol, with different molar ratios
of alcohol to oil (e.g., 3:1, 5:1, 6:1, 8:1, 12:1, and 24:1), with temperatures between 30
◦
C
to 67
◦
C, different types of catalysts such as NaOH, KOH, and zinc ethoxide and NaOH
oil weight percentages ranging from 0.25% to 1.5%. The most relevant aspects found in
these studies were that when both methanol and ethanol are used with a NaOH catalyst,
a very similar ester yield is obtained of 92% and 92.9%; when it is applied in a 6:1 molar
ratio and a 1.5 wt% NaOH oil, there is a decrease in the formed ethyl esters caused by soap
formation [
41
]. In another study by Wyatt, Jones, Johnston, and Moreau, 2018, the sorghum
grain bran was subjected to a transesterification process using methanol, with temperatures
of 25
◦
C and 40
◦
C and sodium methoxide (NaOCH
3
) catalyst, where the highest yield of
ester was obtained equal to 98.3% [195].
Sweet sorghum can be separated into three forms: grain, extraction from soluble sugar
broth, and lignocellulosic biomass [
35
]. Wet and dry grains from sorghum distilleries can be
used for the generation of livestock feed and energy [
41
]. Sweet sorghum in India is used to
produce brown sugar and for lighting in remote areas through lanterns that burn bioethanol
(from sorghum). After extracting the juice, the dry fibrous waste material called bagasse
can be used in combustion systems [
196
] to subsequently generate heat and electricity
in CHP systems, produce paper, compost, bioplastics, bioethanol [
197
], butanol, pellets,
plastic, and wood compounds, biofertilizer, and animal fodder [
35
]. The sorghum silage
(from bagasse) can be utilized as food for dairy cattle due to its high amount of minerals
and micronutrients [
197
] and for biogas generation [
198
]. After concentrating the juice in
syrup, the foam produced can be processed to produce biofertilizers and feed cattle. The
material known as vinasse (distilled obtained after the ethanol production from the juice) is
used in AD systems to produce biomethane and as a soil biofertilizer in agricultural areas,
thus seeking to reuse as a residue [197].
Sweet sorghum, in particular, is very interesting because, after the extraction of the
soluble sugar, the residual biomass is a typical lignocellulosic feedstock adequate for
producing: ethanol [
188
,
196
,
199
], methane [
200
], or both [
201
]; AD and biohydrogen
production [
202
], and: biobased products such as butyric acid which can be obtained from
sweet sorghum stalks after being subjected to enzymatic liquefaction using Clostridium
tyrobutyricum, as bacteria, with a possible yield obtained of butyric acid equal to 0.39 g g
−1
consumed sugars [
203
]. As the sweet sorghum stalks contain juice with high sugar content,
the ethanol produced from this juice is claimed to be cheaper than corn ethanol [
204
].
Furthermore, the cost to cultivate sweet sorghum is inferior to sugarcane [
205
,
206
]. These
advantages have certainly contributed to the increased number of works dealing with
ethanol production from sorghum [207–211]. Although despite the important advantages
mentioned, there is still no commercial plant based on this feedstock.
Biogas from different parts of sorghum (ensiled sorghum forage, trunk, sweet sorghum
stalks, among others), has been widely studied. With ensiled sorghum forage [
40
] a
maximum methane yield of 316 mL methane g
−1
VS (Volatile Solids) was obtained using
sludge as inoculum from a plant of sugar [
41
]. Sweet sorghum stalks [
212
] were also
Energies 2022,15, 4348 17 of 68
used as a feedstock for biomethane generation, with a maximum yield of 284.37 mL
methane g
−1
VS being utilized in the sludge from a biogas industrial unit [
41
]. For the
biogas production from the sorghum trunk [
213
], sludge from a WWTP was used as
an inoculum, which obtained a maximum yield of 478 mL biogas g
−1
VS [
41
]. Finally,
with the sludge from a WWTP used as inoculum, a maximum methane yield equal to
303 L methane kg
−1
sorghum biomass was obtained [
41
] using as raw material sweet
sorghum biomass [214].
Bioethanol is the biofuel that presents the largest number of studies using sorghum
as a raw material, most of which are presented in Stamenkovi´c et al., 2020 [
41
]. The juice
extracted from sorghum stalks [
215
,
216
] has a high potential for the formation of bioethanol,
having greater potential than the juice extracted from sugarcane. However, the factors
that limit obtaining a higher yield of bioethanol are the low amount of monomeric sugars,
high cell growth, and the need to clarify the juice. For the broth extracted from sorghum
stalks, the highest maximum yield of bioethanol obtained was 0.51 g g
−1
, in processes
that used the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae and the bacteria Escherichia coli [
41
]. Sorghum
bagasse [
217
] is a by-product that comes from the juice extraction process with a high
amount of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin being pre-treated through several processes
such as washing, drying, milling, sieving, pasteurization, and hydrolysis. Enzymatic
hydrolysis and ammonia fiber expansion were the two hydrolysis methods that allowed
obtaining the highest maximum bioethanol yield of 0.495 g g
−1
using S. cerevisiae as
yeast [
41
]. Sorghum stalks (without leaves) [
218
] are usually dried and ground to be
subsequently hydrolyzed and fermented, with the highest maximum yield of bioethanol
(0.48 g g
−1
) obtained when it was performed a direct fermentation with the fungus Mucor
indicus [
41
]. The sorghum stover [
219
], sorghum grains [
220
], the whole plant [
221
], and
sorghum liquor waste [222] were also studied for bioethanol generation.
Biohydrogen production from different parts of sorghum (sweet sorghum extracts and
syrup, bagasse, stalks, bark, among others) has been widely studied. With the extract of
sweet sorghum [
223
] a maximum hydrogen (H
2
) yield equal to
0.93 ±0.03 mol H2mol−1
glucose was obtained using indigenous microflora as a culture medium in the fermenta-
tion [
41
]. Sweet sorghum syrup was also utilized as a feedstock for biohydrogen generation,
obtaining a maximum yield of 0.68 mol H
2
mol
−1
hexose and using a mixed culture
medium [
224
]. Sorghum stalk was subjected to a fermentation process using mixed anaer-
obic sludge collected from a landfill as inoculum, with the maximum H
2
yield equal to
127.26 mL g−1
TVS (Total Volatile Solids) [
225
]. For the biohydrogen production from
sorghum bark, the bacterium Clostridium beijerinckii was used, which allowed obtain-
ing a maximum yield of 1.051 mol H
2
mol
−1
RS (reducing sugar) [
45
]. With sorghum
bagasse [
226
], a maximum H
2
yield equal to 4.68 mol H
2
kg
−1
degraded substrate was
obtained using as a culture medium the microflora from buffalo manure [
41
]. Finally, using
sludge from a WWTP, a maximum H
2
yield of 47.3 mL g
−1
glucose and xylose [
41
] was
obtained, a process that was subjected to sorghum leaf waste [227].
The thermochemical processes that can be applied to sweet sorghum (stalks or bagasse)
are rapid pyrolysis [
228
–
231
] and the torrefaction [
232
] to the formation of products
with high added value like bio-oil and biochar and finally, hydrothermal liquefaction
(HTL) [233].
The slow pyrolysis process was also applied to sorghum [
234
], sorghum bagasse [
235
],
and sweet sorghum [
236
] to evaluate in the first two the potential production of an aqueous
product such as bio-oil and another solid such as biochar, and in the last one, only biochar
formation. Additionally, for energy sorghum, a conventional pyrolysis process was applied,
in a batch-type reactor operating at high pressure (6.9 bar or 100 psi), to evaluate at 400
◦
C,
500
◦
C, and 600
◦
C, and a heating rate of 4
◦
C min
−1
, the yield of the products obtained in
the different phases (liquid, solid and gaseous) for each temperature. The bio-oil yield was
equal for the three temperatures (400
◦
C, 500
◦
C, and 600
◦
C) being 3 wt%, and for the case
of biochar, the highest yield was obtained at 400
◦
C being 40 wt%, therefore, as the process
temperature increases, the production of the solid product decreases [237].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 18 of 68
Hydrothermal liquefaction was applied to sweet sorghum bagasse to obtain energy
products like biochar and bio-oil. The material was subjected to washing with water and
subsequently dried at room temperature, ground, and sieved. In the HTL process, six
different types of catalysts were used [KOH, Ni/Si-Al, Zeolita Socony Mobil-5 (
ZSM-5
),
potassium carbonate (K
2
CO
3
), formic acid, and nickel phosphide (Ni
2
P)] with some ho-
mogeneous and others heterogeneous, with temperatures between 300
◦
C and 350
◦
C.
According to the results obtained, the best bio-oil yield was obtained with K
2
CO
3
, KOH,
and Ni/Si-Al at 300
◦
C, with values of: 61.8%, 42.3%, and 45%, respectively [
47
]. Regarding
the biochar yields obtained when using these catalysts, the values were approximately 20%,
25%, and 40% [41].
Sorghum has been shown to be an excellent soil decontaminator [
238
]. After the
restoration of the soil has been achieved, the species can be used to produce bioethanol
and other products with high added value. However, as in the study by Xiao et al., 2021,
due to the accumulation of cadmium (Cd) in the stalks, further studies should be carried
out to eliminate the Cd present in the species as it is an element with high mobility and
toxicity, and if the material is used in biorefineries, it can generate pollution [
239
]. For these
reasons, the accumulation of HMs should be in the roots in order to make the aerial part of
the species useful [41].
2.1.8. Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.)
Switchgrass belonging to the family Poaceae/Gramineae, order Cyperales, and class
Liliopsida is considered a C4 plant and perennial grass that develop in hot seasons, able
to grow under different climates, weather conditions, and soil types, with great longevity,
adaptability, and versatility. It has low water and nutritional requirements, needs less
intensive agricultural management practices, needs low herbicide input requirements
together with the capacity to generate biomass that presents a high content of carbohydrates
(cellulose and hemicellulose), and lastly, outstanding resistance against pests and diseases
that occurs naturally in this species [240], with no annual reseeding [241].
Switchgrass has been reported to show a tremendous potential for being a cost-
effective and sustainable bioenergy feedstock. The ethanol obtained from switchgrass
reveals that the energy return is meaningly negative (around 50%) compared to ethanol
from corn [
242
]. The same authors reported the following: for each unit of non-renewable
power input required to generate biofuel obtained from Panicum virgatum, 6.4 units of
renewable power are produced. Considerable benefits from switchgrass cultivation and
processing concerning CO
2
emissions have been highlighted by most LCA studies [
243
–
245
].
Panicum virgatum was recently mentioned in an EU Directive 2018/2001 (RED-II- Annex
IX) list as ‘non-food cellulosic material’ toward the promotion of biogas to be utilized in
the transport sector and in advanced biofuels generation, due to its minimum contribution
of twice its power amount which is not the case for first-generation biofuels. Bustamante-
Silveira, Siri-Prieto, and Carrasco-Letelier, 2021 have analyzed the water footprint (WF) of
different bioethanol cropping systems (maize-wheat-sorghum rotation, continuous sweet
and switchgrass). The latter presented the lowest values per hectare and per liter of ethanol
(12,735 m
3
ha
−1
year
−1
and 3.8 m
3
L
−1
ethanol, respectively), being the best choice for
bioethanol crop generation [246].
Considering energy-based biorefineries, two different conversion pathways can be
used. Following the biochemical conversion pathway, a list of proposed technologies is
as follows: fermentation after pre-treatment and enzymatic hydrolysis unit operations
for bioethanol [
247
] or biomethane [if a dark fermentation (DF) is chosen] or in alterna-
tive AD towards biogas [
240
,
248
]. When directed to fermentation of its sugar fraction,
a pre-treatment step has been suggested to increase the production of fermentable sug-
ars. Depending on the pre-treatment type, glucose and xylose yields have been reported
from 70% up to 90% and from 70% to 100% after hydrolysis, respectively. Considering
pre-treatment followed by hydrolysis, ethanol yielded from 72% to 92% of the theoretical
maximum [
240
,
248
]. The application of an enzymatic hydrolysis step with cellulase and
Energies 2022,15, 4348 19 of 68
b-glucosidase incremented maximum ethanol production by 211.9% when compared with
the control that does not present enzymes [
240
]. Continuous ball milling during fermenta-
tion by Clostridium thermocellum allowed more than 85% total carbohydrate solubilization of
switchgrass without exposing the feedstock to high temperatures or chemicals. This cell dis-
ruption method improved cellulosic-based biofuels production, especially bioethanol [
249
].
Switchgrass was applied to steam explosion pre-treatment in a semi-continuous pre-pilot
reactor to obtain a pre-treated solid with significant digestibility for enzymatic hydrolysis.
The residence time (5–15 min), different temperature conditions (170–200
◦
C), and severity
factors (2.76–4.12) were utilized for steam explosion pre-treatment, which were combined
through a 22-central composite design. The results obtained showed both variables had a
big influence on the process, affecting the structure of the biomass and the saccharification
yield. Considering the values analyzed in this study, the temperature effect was more
eminent than the residence time effect. The best saccharification yield (88.3%) was obtained
with the biomass pre-treated at 200
◦
C for 10 min. A similar result was obtained utilizing
a cellulose pulp (commercial) as raw material for enzymatic hydrolysis, confirming that
the bestt conditions for switchgrass pre-treatment in the pre-pilot scale were satisfactorily
successful [37].
Material and energy balances taken from previous experimental data as well as real
switchgrass compositions and enzymatic hydrolysis loads and yields were the starting
point for a detailed techno-economic study [
250
] and a sensitivity analysis. The economic
viability of liquid hot water pretreated switchgrass biorefinery was evaluated. Under the
scenario of ethanol and electricity coproduction, the generation costs were in the same
order of magnitude as other advanced biofuels with competitive oil prices above 100 $ per
barrel. Moreover, when other high added value co-products such as furfural, acetic acid,
and formic acid are also considered, the minimum ethanol selling point decreased. Plant
size, as well as switchgrass composition strongly affect biorefinery economics [250].
Following the thermochemical conversion pathway, four technological options have
been previously reported: torrefaction, pyrolysis [
251
,
252
], combustion, and gasification,
from which the principal energetic products are solid biomass (torrefied), bio-oil, CHP, and
syngas [248].
Switchgrass was reported to be pelletized to be utilized as a solid biofuel, having a
14.6:1 power output-to-input relation, which is considerably superior than other liquid
biofuel choices from farming [
36
]. Finally, having in mind biobased product biorefineries,
switchgrass can be processed using chemical, physical, and biological conversion routes
in order to obtain fine chemicals, pulp, or fiber for paper production and construction
materials, including proteins, sugars, and pectins [
248
], besides its primary use as forage
production. Other applications include environmental services such as soil conservation
and CO
2
biosequestration due to its remarkable profound root system with a high content
of fiber.
Switchgrass was thermochemically converted through pyrolysis (500
◦
C) or gasifica-
tion (700–800
◦
C) [
253
]. The obtained biochar was proven to be used as an inexpensive
pH buffer and source of mineral as well as trace metal nutrients in acetone-butanol-
ethanol (ABE) fermentation, replacing very expensive conventional buffers, yielding
18.1 g L−1
ABE, which was higher than the control, without biochar. Moreover, using
a non-detoxified switchgrass hydrolysate medium, an ABE production enhancement was
observed (
18.5 g L−1
) compared to the control (10.1 g L
−1
), highlighting savings in the
costly detoxification process [253].
2.2. Forest Crops
Forests crops like the short cycle coppice such ss poplar (Populus spp.), paulownia
[Paulownia tomentosa (Thunberg) Steudel], and willow (Salix spp.) are woody species char-
acterized to be fast-growing, can be cut and regenerated every 3 to 5 years in a 25-year
period, with the purpose of obtaining in a short time high yields for energy generation [
5
].
This species also serves as protection for many more sensitive areas and in a wide diversity
Energies 2022,15, 4348 20 of 68
of soils, avoiding in some cases an increase in erosion. They are highly viable for converting
into bioenergy and can be used to produce a variety of by-products (information that is
confirmed and described in the main text of each culture) which brings numerous advan-
tages for their implementation as feedstock for biorefineries. Based on their characteristics,
namely, low S, N, and Cl amounts, the use of ligneous biomass for energy purposes has
environmental benefits compared to herbaceous biomass, in particular regarding NO
2
emis-
sions. Another advantage is related to a lower risk of corrosion phenomena in combustion
boilers [254].
The advantage of forest crops is that the species like acacia that are invasive crops
could be used for biofuel production because they reduce the occupied area, control the re-
production of this species [
255
], minimize the cost of the removal of this species, and reduce
the fuel load that can generate fires in sensitive areas [
256
]. Acacia dealbata allows a wide
variety of products to be obtained, such as the production of paper pulp, like the paulownia
and willow species. Other advantages of forest crops are that they can reduce erosion in the
areas where they are planted, as seen with the poplar, and their extracts show less inhibitory
effects on the fermentative processes of bioethanol production, with higher efficiency for
conversion into biofuels compared to other species such as pine (softwood) [
257
]. Moreover,
trees like poplar also present a low ash content and a high amount of cellulose (greater
than corn straw and switchgrass [
258
]). These trees can also retain leachate from landfills
and be applied in WW treatment [
259
], as in studies with poplar and willow. Populus nigra
has a high value from a bioeconomic perspective, being widely used in the creation of new
hybrids in Europe such as Populus
×
Euramericana (Populus deltoites
×
Populus nigra), and
they are fast-growing energy crops with greater advantages [
260
]. An advantage of the
willow is that it is an excellent phytoremediator because it removes between 40% and 80%
of nitrate-nitrogen compounds present in groundwater, being a species that serves as a
regulator of the chemical composition of the water and the functioning of the soil [261].
Forest species also present some constraints such as acacia which presents an invasive
character, an aspect that causes a loss of biodiversity by changing ecosystems and creating
competition between species [
262
]. Additionally, acacia requires well-drained soils [
263
].
Pinus pinaster presents a high concentration of N and S, these elements could generate
atmospheric pollutants in combustion systems [
264
]. Moreover, the main species causing
fires in Portugal are Acacia dealbata and Pinus pinaster [
265
]. There are food applications
that use food-grade grown willow, however, willow produced from marginal lands and,
especially contaminated soils, may prevent the usage of its biomass for food and feed
purposes.
The chemical composition of the different forest crops is presented in Table 2, for easier
comparison between them.
Table 2. Chemical composition of forest crops.
Energy Crops Cellulose
(% w w−1)
Hemicellulose
(% w w−1)
Lignin
(% w w−1)
Ash
(% w w−1)
Extractives
(% w w−1)
Other Components
(% w w−1)
Acacia dealbata (wood)
[266,267](42.4–50.9)
(17–29)
[xylan
(16.4–19.3)]
(19.3–20.1) (0.5–1.1) (3.1–5.85) -
Acacia dealbata (bark)
[266,267]19 21.6 18.6 3.3 37.5 -
Acacia dealbata (leaves
and flowers)
[266,267]
43.1 (21.6–22.2)
[xylan: 18.7] 25.9 (0.5–1.1) 8.3 -
Pinus pinaster
[268,269][40–50] [15–24] [25–33] 0.16 2.9 -
Paulownia tomentosa
[270–274](39.2–49) (17.98–28.1) (17.8–37.6) (0.5–4.6) (5.6–8.8) Holocellulose
(39.2–61.5)
Energies 2022,15, 4348 21 of 68
Table 2. Cont.
Energy Crops Cellulose
(% w w−1)
Hemicellulose
(% w w−1)
Lignin
(% w w−1)
Ash
(% w w−1)
Extractives
(% w w−1)
Other Components
(% w w−1)
Populus [258,275] (42–49) (16–23) (21–29) 1.8 - -
Salix viminalis
[276–282](37–56) (13–26.7) (12–37.4) (0.6–2) (6.3–7.75) Holocellulose
(63.7–64.5)
As can be seen in Table 2, all the forest species studied [acacia (wood), maritime pine,
paulownia, poplar, and willow] present a high cellulose and hemicellulose (polysaccha-
rides) content, and therefore they all have the potential for second generation bioethanol
production. All these species also present a high potential for combustion systems because
they present a low ash content facilitating the conditions applied inside the boiler, without
the need for continuous cleaning of the ash.
In biochemical technologies such as AD and alcoholic fermentation, maritime pine,
poplar, and willow have shown potential. However, acacia and paulownia are also con-
sidered suitable raw materials for bioethanol production [
274
]. Some forest species have
also been tested for biohydrogen production, with promising results, e.g., paulownia
stalks [283].
These forest species described in this study have also the potential for energy produc-
tion (electrical, thermal, or both), e.g., in combustion processes as solid fuels (woodchips,
pellets, and briquettes), for example, the ones produced from maritime pine [
284
]. Addi-
tionally, they can be used to produce bio-oil through pyrolysis, e.g., with acacia [
285
] and
paulownia [286].
In relation to other thermochemical systems like gasification, species such as maritime
pine [
287
], poplar [
288
], and willow can serve as a raw material in this process. Or in
hydrothermal process, e.g., with willow.
More details are described in the following Sections 2.2.1–2.2.5.
2.2.1. Acacia (Acacia dealbata L.)
Acacia-mimosa (family Fabaceae/Leguminosae, order Fabales, and class Magnoliop-
sida) with the scientific name Acacia dealbata Link is an allochthonous or introduced woody
tree with a large shrub and erect stem [263].
Acacia-mimosa plays an important commercial role since its wood can be used for the
paper production through the kraft process by the amount of cellulose present in the mate-
rial [
267
], allowing the elaboration of several products like cardboard, the paper for writing
and printing, which gives it a special shine, considered of high quality, and more advanta-
geous than eucalyptus due to the low amount of alkali it presents [
263
], and finally, acacia
wood is also used for the production of construction materials and furniture, compounds
of interest to the medicinal sector [
289
,
290
], xylooligosaccharides [
291
], syringaldehyde,
vanillin [
292
], and solutions rich in glucose [
293
,
294
]. The bark is used for the production of
tannins (substances of plant origin) due to the high amount present in the species (greater
than 74%) [
295
] and other compounds such as absorbents [
296
], those with an antimicrobial
and antioxidant capacity [
266
,
297
] and the anti-quorum sensing [
298
]. In the perfume
industry, flowers are processed to produce fragrances, as well as perfume fixatives [
263
], in
the production of compounds with anti-inflammatory properties [
299
,
300
] as well as other
types of products such as bioherbicides [
301
]. In the ecosystem, the pollen in the flowers
presents a relevant function for the continuity of sleep [
263
]. The extracts from the leaves of
Acacia dealbata are excellent as a raw material in natural products beneficial to health due to
their antioxidant activity [
266
,
302
], and the antimicrobials present in the extract [
302
] are
also used for herbicides production [
301
]. Concerning the timber sector, acacia is consid-
ered of high quality for the manufacture of furniture and poles and is also used as fuel for
heat generation. Two liquid biofuels that can be produced from Acacia dealbata [
263
] are
bioethanol [
303
,
304
] and bio-oil. Some studies researched the implementation of acacia for
Energies 2022,15, 4348 22 of 68
bioproducts and biofuels production in a biorefinery-type system, either from the residual
material of the species [305] or from all constituent parts of the species [306].
Muñoz et al., 2007 studied the pre-treatment with two fungi (Ceriporiopsis subvermispora
and Ganoderma australe) maintained at a temperature of 27
◦
C, moisture of 55% for 30 days,
and the organosolv delignification was performed at 200
◦
C, with 60% of ethanol for 1 h.
In this first phase, the pulp yield in the case of acacia was between 31% and 51% and
obtained 93% of glucan and 2% of lignin. With the objective of producing bioethanol, it
was applied to the pulp material with two process types SSF or SHF being utilized for the
Saccharomyces cerevisiae. For the SHF and SSF processes, the best conversion to bioethanol
was obtained for acacia in the first process from 40% to 48%, and in the second process, it
was 44% to 65%. These results concluded that each stage must be improved to obtain a
higher conversion of this species into bioethanol, namely, in the pre-treatment through a
decrease in the incubation time and in the stage of saccharification/fermentation to utilize
a material with a higher pulp consistency [307].
Another study that evaluated the possibility of producing bioethanol with Acacia
dealbata through a diluted acid pre-treatment, with this phase the most important because
it is where the transformation of the lignocellulosic material in sugars for bioethanol
production occurs. It was evaluated for two different systems: SHF and SSF, which included
a wash with residual Water Insoluble Fraction (WIF). The Acacia dealbata presented a high
potential to produce bioethanol with 10.31 g ethanol L
−1
obtained during 24 h with the
SHF process and with the other process, SSF, it obtained 7.53 g ethanol L
−1
over 48 h, so,
under these conditions, SHF obtained the best results. However, it is possible to obtain
12.18 g ethanol L
−1
when the fermentation is made over the soluble fraction of undiluted
water in parallel with the SHF process [308].
To evaluate the potential of Acacia dealbata in a biorefinery, this species was submitted
to an ionic liquid 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate pre-treatment for 30 min at a tem-
perature of 150
◦
C, with 66% of the xylan (20 times higher when compared to untreated raw
material) recovered and 88% of cellulose (13 times higher than untreated material). The
remaining solid part (substrate) was processed in an enzymatic hydrolysis system (cellulose
conversion) for 48 h, which allowed obtaining high yields of fermentable glucose (carbon
source) suitable for the biofuels generation like bioethanol and other bioproducts [
294
],
therefore, the application of acacia in an industrial scale system such as a biorefinery is
guaranteed.
In Spain, a study was carried out in which several Acacia dealbata plantations were
evaluated (by the high invasive degree of this species in the south of Galiza and north of
Portugal) to characterize the species in relation to the moisture content, volatile percentage,
HHV and LHV to determine its energy potential, in several constituent parts of the species
such as the trunk and the thin leaves and branches. According to the values obtained, the
average moisture content (35.29% for the trunk and 35.22% for the leaves and branches);
volatiles (83.58% for trunks and 77.28% for leaves and branches); ashes (0.80% for the
trunk and 2.32% for the leaves and branches) and HHV when the material is free of water
(without moisture) is 4797.93 kcal kg
−1
for the trunk and 5181.10 kcal kg
−1
for the leaves
and branches. In turn, the LHV is 4478.65 kcal kg
−1
for the trunk and 4865 kcal kg
−1
for the leaves and branches. With these results, the viability of acacia-mimosa as fuel in
combustion systems for heat production or in cogeneration systems, due to the values
obtained of the calorific power [309] is guaranteed.
In Portugal, the main species for producing wood pellets for burn-in boilers is the Pinus
pinaster and for this cause, it is important to compare this type of material with other species
like acacia-mimosa for the quantity of material that can be found in the territory [
262
]. It can
serve as a carbon reservoir because it is a fast-growing species, it also rapidly removes the
carbon present in the atmosphere through CO
2
, mitigating climate change, thus confirming
its potential for the production of material with high carbon content [
310
] such as biochar
that can be obtained through the pyrolysis process at 450 ◦Cfor8h[311].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 23 of 68
An acacia plantation with 2 ha can yield 140 t of biomass for wood pellets production
that has a similar quality to those produced with Pinus Pinaster Aiton and Eucalyptus
globulus L., with the only exception being the amount of Cl which was slightly higher [
255
].
In another study, on the contrary, it was found that the chemical composition (ash content,
N and Cl) of Acacia dealbata and Eucalyptus globulus are the main factors that hinder their
use for producing certified pellets. The use of the waste material of these species serves as
a solution for the collection and reuse of the material, and it should be used in processes
where certified products are not required [
312
], creating a system that complies with the
criteria governed by the circular economy. In a fluidized bed reactor with a turbulent
regime, two different types of pellets were burned: one produced with maritime pine and
the other with acacia-mimosa, and the contaminants [CO
2
, CO, and nitrogen oxides (NO
x
)]
formed in each case were verified and compared. The pellets produced by both species
presented a lower emission of contaminants and a better combustion behavior due to the
type of reactor used (fluidized bed) [313].
Vicente et al., 2019 analyzed the emissions of pellets produced from Acacia seen as
an invasive species in Portugal, specifically located in the coastal areas, to be utilized like
fuel at a residential level. Among the properties evaluated were the particulate matter
PM
10
(anhydrosugars like levoglucosan 284
µ
g g
−1
PM
10
and polyaromatic hydrocarbons
8.77
µ
g g
−1
PM
10
), CO (2468
±
485 mg MJ
−1
), sulfur dioxide (SO
2
) (222
±
115 mg MJ
−1
),
and NO
x
(118
±
14 mg MJ
−1
). All these values were considered elevated because the
acacias trees were grown in zones with high salt concentrations. For this reason, to obtain a
solid fuel from acacia with minor production of emissions, the pre-treatment of the material
before the pelleting including the drying step must be optimized, mixing the acacia with
other materials to obtain a biofuel with other properties, to incorporate additives that allow
major compaction of the particles and to control the air supply during the combustion [
314
].
In another study, Amutio et al., 2013 evaluated several types of wastes from Cytisus mul-
tiflorus (50%) and Spartium junceum (50%) both identified as Bio1, Acacia dealbata identified
as Bio2, and, lastly, Pterospartum tridentatum identified as Bio3 in the pyrolysis technology.
The process occurred in a Conical Spouted Bed Reactor (CSBR), with a temperature of
500
◦
C, continuous biomass input in the system, and continuous removal of the char. In
the liquid phase, the bio-oil (main product) was constituted of water, phenols, ketones,
acids, furans, and a lesser quantity of saccharides, aldehydes, and alcohols. The results
showed that the yield of bio-oil was 79.5% (Bio1), 72.1% (Bio2), and 75.1% (Bio3) being
higher for the Bio1 due to the higher quantity of hemicellulose and cellulose in this species,
that favors the bio-oil production. The char yield was 16.6% for Bio1, 23% (Bio2), and about
20% for Bio3. In the relation to the gas phase, the quantity produced was between 4% and
5% for the three species. These results showed the high benefits of these species for the
bio-oil generation in a CSBR reactor, being possible to maximize the yield of the liquid
phase with high heat and mass transfer rates, a low residence time of the volatile elements,
and continuous removal of char, conditions that were maintained in this process [285].
2.2.2. Maritime Pine (Pinus pinaster Aiton)
Pinus pinaster Aiton is a woody fast-growing species [
315
] belonging to the family
Pinaceae, order Pinales, and class Pinopsida, which requires a lot of insolation and is able
to resist shade only in the first months after germination [316].
This species presents a fundamental function in the economics and rural development
in the commercialization of wood, namely for carpentry in exterior and interior areas
(floors and parquet), as well as in the real estate sector for the high quality of the material,
wood treated for the production of poles, scaffolding shipyards, packaging and pallets for
the storage and transport of goods, bodyworks [
315
], fiber and particle agglomerates in
the phosphorus industry, in the manufacture of fence fencing, toys, blinds [
317
], in the
pulp production through the amount of cellulose present in the trunk, of resin for the
generation of a great range of chemical products by the presence of terpenic oils of good
quality [
318
] and firewood, in their simple form for the production of heat at the domestic
Energies 2022,15, 4348 24 of 68
level. Other uses applied to this species are in the manufacture of poles, furniture, and
building materials like particle boards [
319
] and they serve as shading for recreation and
picnic areas. The resin is utilized to make rosin and turpentine, the main components in
the production of soaps, glues, oils, waxes, medicines, and varnishes. The bark is used to
produce tar [
320
], polyphenols, tannin, antioxidants, adhesives, bio-oil, and particle boards
(from the bark partially liquefied) [321].
Maritime pine can be used for several biofuels production using the biochemical
process like biogas and bioethanol and in thermochemical conversion [
322
] through solid
fuels production of pellets [
323
,
324
] and briquettes in heating, gasification, and pyrolysis
systems. Pinus pinaster is the principal material in the pellets production in Portugal as it
is made of soft wood, an aspect that facilitates grinding, due to its low ash content and
greater amount of extractives when compared to other species such as Eucalyptus [
323
],
and because of the availability of the species in the territory.
Pinus pinaster wood was studied for its viability for biofuel production in a biorefinery.
The pre-treatment for the material was carried out for aqueous fractionation to obtain the
hemicellulose saccharides solution (liquid) and another phase, the solid-state composed
of cellulose and lignin. The liquid solution (constituted for polymeric or oligomeric hemi-
cellulose saccharides) was treated with H
2
SO
4
(up to 4 wt%) and heated (up to 130
◦
C) to
transform substrates into sugars. The saccharification was achieved almost totally under
certain conditions for possible fermentation. After the solid phase (conversion of cellulose)
is mixed in the acid medium under microwave irradiation, levulinic acid is obtained to
produce valeric biofuels and formic acid for further use in the fuel cell. In the case of the
lignin, it was recovered like solid residue using a method with acid [325].
The main species causing fires in Portugal are Genista tridentata,Cistus ladanifer,
Cytisus spp., and Acacia dealbata (species that make up the first mixture), coming from
marginal lands, and Pinus pinaster and Eucalyptus globulus (constituting the second mixture)
integrated into the forest system, therefore, it was proposed to study the fractionation
of each mixture as feedstock in a biorefinery for a year, to assess their potential to pro-
duce biofuels and other bioproducts. Each mixture was subjected to an autohydrolysis
between 190
◦
C and 240
◦
C (non-isothermal conditions) to compare the two: the effects of
fractionation of each mixture (solubilization of hemicellulose in oligosaccharides and the
achieved recovery of lignin and cellulose), the heating values obtained to evaluate their
potential as biofuel, and the behavior of enzymatic cellulose hydrolysis for the glucose
formation. Excellent results were obtained for both mixtures, such as high oligosaccharide
recovery, HHV (the solid part can be used as fuel), and improved glucose obtention (from
45% to 90%) [
265
]. This type of mixture represents a suitable material for biofuel produc-
tion (including bioethanol) and products of high commercial value in a biorefinery-type
installation, being seen as an alternative to reduce the material load causing fires.
A study about the heating values from different species, allowed us to know what
species are most significant to solids biofuel production, namely, wood pellets. It was
evaluated that several species like Castanea sativa,Eucalyptus globulus,Quercus robur,
Salix babylonica,Populus
×
canadensis,Pseudotsuga menziesii, maritime pine, among other
types, were classified as softwoods and hardwoods. The results show that hardwoods had
an HHV between 17,631.66 and 20,809.47 kJ kg
−1
and the softwoods had values ranging
from 19,660.02 to 20,360.45 kJ kg
−1
(the value for the maritime pine is 20,237.89 kJ kg
−1
i.e.,
below the species with the highest HHV). In relation to the LHV, the hardwoods had a value
between 14,411.54 and 17,907.85 kJ kg−1and the softwood values were between 15,629.71
and 16,935.72 kJ kg
−1
, with the last value corresponding to the maritime pine, namely, the
highest LHV. This study considers the Pinus pinaster to be one of several species having the
best conditions for application in the thermochemical processes, mainly, combustion [
326
].
In the District of Bragança in Portugal, a study was conducted on the energy generation
(electricity and heat) from the maritime pine because it is a forest species most common in
this region. The destination of the energy produced includes several sectors (residential,
service, and industrial). The total forest area in Bragança of the Pinus pinaster is 89,024 ha
Energies 2022,15, 4348 25 of 68
with an energy content of 4170.5 TJ. However, consider the data of a power factory, 22% of
efficiency, a heating value of 18 GJ t
−1
, and an operation time of 7200 h year
−1
which can
obtain electricity power of 254.9 GWh. Consider the annual yield of this species, and it can
be concluded that it is possible to supply the Bragança District with almost 49% of energy
and 60% of its electricity demands for each sector, and 84% of the total energy demands of
the several sectors mentioned before [327].
In Spain, the study by Álvarez-Álvarez et al., 2018 was made with the purpose of
investigating the potential of different species including maritime pine. the maritime pine
obtained the values as follows: the highest HHV of 19,366.277 kJ kg
−1
(mean); the lowest
value of ash of 0.602%, and in the ultimate analysis; the percent of C, sulfur (S), and N
were 47.775% C, 0.650% S, and 0.494% N. Once again, it can be concluded the importance
of Pinus pinaster in the energy production for the HHV and ash values, although the high
concentration of N and S are elements that generate atmospheric pollutants [264].
Viana, Rodrigues, Godina, Matias, and Nunes, 2018 performed the analysis and
evaluation of several characteristics such as density, moisture, proximate and ultimate
analysis, HHV, energy density (E
d
), Fuelwood Value Index (FVI), and a dimensional value,
among others. The most important results obtained for the different parts analyzed of the
maritime pine (wood stem, pine needles, and top of the specie) were: 0.22% to 1.92% of
ashes, 19.57 to 21.61 MJ kg
−1
of HHV, 2.06 to 8.9 GJ m
−3
of E
d,
and the values of the FVI
were superior in the case of the wood stem (4658) and top of the species (2861.8). Based on
these results, it is guaranteed that the maritime pine represents a biomass with a very high
potential to create energy in the form of woodchips, briquettes, and pellets [284].
Following the previous study, one of the co-authors, Leonel Nunes, published another
work where the woodchips produced from maritime pine were analyzed but it also incor-
porated the bark. It is important to highlight that in almost all species, the bark contains a
very high amount of inorganic material that contributes to the superior values of the ashes.
Later on, some problems can arise in the industrial boilers and during the combustion as
the bark can cause, the incrustation of the scobs in the bottom of the equipment, a factor
that increases the number of times that it is necessary to undertake maintenance requiring
the boiler to stop [328].
Several types of materials were studied in Spain, like maritime pine pruning (forestry),
grapevine and olive tree pruning (agriculture), and sawdust and marc of grape (industry
residues), for its use in the circulating flow gasifier, to evaluate different typologies of
biomass, independent of the provenance in the same equipment and conditions, with the
objective of determining which materials can be used in gasification systems, whether
combined or not. The results show that agricultural pruning wastes (olive and grapevine)
presented higher gasification efficiency and yield than forestry (Pinus pinaster pruning) and
industrial (marc of grape and sawdust) wastes, therefore, in the case of gasification, the
agricultural wastes are more capable to produce a gas with high potential to be used for
heat production or in the alternative, as power using the gas as working fluid through
internal engines or gas turbines [329].
In Montpellier, two-stage gasifiers with a fixed bed were installed (the equipment
can be used in pyrolysis and gasification) with the Pinus pinaster species as raw material.
The pyrolysis was studied concerning different operational parameters. In relation to the
biomass flow rate, when increased, a low quality of char was obtained. The best efficiency
of the process (involving cracking, the heating value, and quality of the solid phase or
charcoal and the gaseous phase) was obtained between 650
◦
C and 750
◦
C of temperature,
30 min residence time, and 10 and 15 kg h
−1
of biomass flow rate, as the best conditions to
optimize the pyrolysis process and obtain some products with high added value as charcoal
production with an HHV of 33 MJ kg−1and gases with an HHV of 15 MJ Nm−3[287].
2.2.3. Paulownia [Paulownia tomentosa (Thunberg) Steudel]
Paulownia tomentosa is a tree of deciduous hardwood type (family Scrophulariaceae,
order Scrophulariales, and class Magnoliopsida) that grows very fast [
330
]. Its high cellu-
Energies 2022,15, 4348 26 of 68
lose content (about 440 g cellulose kg
−1
) and its rapid growth have led to the development
of studies showing its feasibility for use both in bioenergy and for utilization in the in-
dustry that processes the pulp and in lignin enforcement, combining delignification with
autohydrolysis processes [331,332].
The Paulownia tomentosa leaves, consisting of glycerides, sugars, and flavonoids,
are highly resistant to herbivores [
270
], being a strong species against pest attack. The
C-geranylated flavonoids present in flowers have several functions such as anti-inflammatory,
antimicrobial, and inhibitory on some types of enzymes related to various diseases such as
type 2 diabetes and Alzheimer’s. Terpenoids, also present in flowers, also fulfill several neu-
roprotective functions [
333
] and are cytotoxic, attacking various types of cancer cells [
334
].
A wide variety of essential oils such as benzyl alcohol and 1,2,4-trimethoxybenzene [
270
]
with antibacterial, antiviral, antioxidant, and anti-inflammatory effects were also found in
the flowers [
335
]. The paulownia wood was subjected to the supercritical CO
2
technique,
obtaining an extract that has excellent properties to be used as an insecticide, specifically,
to combat flour larvae [
336
]. Some processes applied to paulownia wood have allowed the
extraction of a greater amount of lignin and extractives such as heat treatment, with temper-
ature conditions equal to 210
◦
C and a time of 3 h, in turn causing the wood to darken [
271
].
Paulownia tomentosa wood also has a great potential for obtaining activated carbon from
a chemical activation method with zinc chloride (ZnCl
2
), the product being used as an
industrial absorbent, namely, in the separation and purification of liquid compounds and
gas, as well as for the control of contamination generated by polluting gases [337].
The energetic valorization of woody species, like paulownia, is possible over its direct
utilization such as solid biomass fuels [
338
] for the electricity and heat production or as
feedstock for biofuels of second-generation [
272
]. Its main use is in wood production for
industrial applications, because of its elevated ignition point, dimensional stability, and
lifetime maintaining its properties [273].
In a biorefinery-type system, two species of paulownia (P. tomentosa and P. elongata)
were analyzed, and the hot water extraction (HWE) pre-treatment was applied to achieve
two major objectives: the first was to extract the largest amount of hemicellulose (liquid
phase), and the second was to access the largest amount of lignin present in the wood. After
the extraction of hemicellulose (first objective) after membrane separation, the recovery of
products such as furfural, acetic acid, methanol, formic acid, hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF),
and lignin extractives occurred. However, the main products obtained at this stage were
through hydrolysis of hemicellulose and part of the cellulose produced in delignification, to
subsequently ferment sugars and produce several neutral solvents such as ethanol, butanol,
and acetone, as well as other products, namely, bioplastics. Before delignification (second
objective), it was possible to use the material for CHP systems, solid fuel production such as
pellets, and reconstituted wood products. Subsequently, in the delignification with acetone
and water in an oxygen atmosphere, lignin and cellulose were produced, the latter being
used for paper production, nanocellulose, and the hydrolysis described above [
339
]. In this
way, the scheme that characterizes this biorefinery is complemented, with paulownia being
a crop with high potential to be applied in this type of industrial unit.
Bioethanol from lignocellulosic crops encompasses higher production costs than us-
ing first-generation technologies. With the idea of converting the process to a system is
economically more favorable, the valuation of paulownia from a biorefinery perspective
is an important asset. As for other woody species, the initial pre-treatment phase is a
determinant of the overall yield of the conversion processes. The use of autohydrolysis
processes allows the solubilization of hemicelluloses. The insoluble phase, consisting of
lignin and cellulose, is subjected to saccharification and fermentation processes, through
two separate processes SHF or in one-step simultaneously SSF. Experimental results for the
valorization of Paulownia tomentosa for bioethanol production allowed a comparison of the
two strategies (SHF and SSF) and the quantification of the global balance and the energy
recovery of the several fractions obtained. After the autohydrolysis process, the liquid
phase consists essentially of xylooligosaccharides (60% of the identified compounds), al-
Energies 2022,15, 4348 27 of 68
lowing a concentration of 15.7 g L
−1
in these compounds. When processing the solid phase,
which contains essentially lignin and glucan, the use of the SSF process at a solids content
of 20% allowed a value of concentration in ethanol of 52.7 g L
−1
, which corresponds to 80%
of the ethanol yield. The obtained results correspond to a possible production between
10,779 and 13,300 L bioethanol ha
−1
year
−1
if the hemicellulosic bioethanol production is
included. The energy analysis of the process revealed that the burning of lignin is decisive
for increasing the energy conversion efficiency, reaching global values above 80% when
this option is taken into account [274].
Biohydrogen production from the leaves and stems of paulownia was studied by
Yi et al., 2020 to make a comparison between this species and wheat straw. The pre-
treatment consisted of an ultra-fine grinding where it was possible to modify the microstruc-
tural, thermal, and optical properties of the biomass, and the biohydrogen production
process was through photo fermentation. After pre-treatment, paulownia stalks showed
a high yield in biohydrogen production (51.75%) when compared to corn straw (20.59%)
caused by the change that the treatment itself caused in the chemical composition of the
materials, namely, in hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin [283].
Based on these characteristics, namely, low S, N, and Cl amounts, the use of ligneous
biomass for energy purposes has environmental benefits compared to herbaceous biomass,
in particular, regarding nitrogen dioxide (NO
2
) and S emissions. Another advantage is
related to a lower risk of corrosion phenomena in combustion boilers [254].
Paulownia flowers have already been studied in the process of pyrolysis (carboniza-
tion) and alkaline activation to produce porous activated carbon used as a supercapacitor.
Due to certain specific properties present in the material, such as its high specific capaci-
tance, it was possible to use the porous activated carbon produced as a mechanism to store
energy through a low-cost and high-performance system [340].
Paulownia tomentosa wood was submitted to a slow pyrolysis process for the bio-oil
production through a fixed bed reactor with the incorporation of N, being studied was
the state of the raw material (particle size) and conditions of the system (temperature,
heating rate, and N flow) and how it interfered in the formation of the products. The
pyrolysis conversion increased with temperature, the maximum conversion value (77.4%)
was obtained at a temperature of 773 K, therefore, at this same temperature, with a heating
rate of 50 K min
−1
, N flow equal to 100 mL min
−1
and a particle diameter ranging between
0.425 and 1 mm, the highest net yield (bio-oil) equal to 54% was obtained. The yields of
pyrolysis products are greatly affected by the system conditions and not by the state of the
raw material [286].
2.2.4. Populus (Populus spp.)
Poplar is a fast-growing species, therefore, an SRWC crop, belonging to the family
Salicaceae, order Salicales, and class Magnoliopsida, being many of the hybrids formed
from European poplars such as Populus tremula L., P. alba L. and P. nigra L. [341].
There are many species of poplars that are used in the bioenergy sector. However,
Populus alba L. (white poplar) and Populus nigra L. (black poplar) are most relevant as an
energy crops. Populus alba L. is little used commercially, however, it is of great interest in
creating a diversity of hybrids for various economic sectors, including bioenergy. At the soil
level, it allows the recovery of land (marginal/degraded) and polluted soils (phytoremedi-
ation with hybrids P. alba
×
tremula and P. tremula
×
alba), in the energy production [
342
] it
can be used as firewood due to its high calorific value 19.133 MJ kg
−1
[
343
] in combustion
systems [344] and lastly, for the liquid biofuel production like bioethanol [345].
There is a strong importance of the hybrids generated between the genera Populus spp.
and Salix spp. as both belong to the same division, class, order, and family. However, the
poplar presents excellent qualities such as energy crop or SRWC due to its physical and
genetic variety, sexual compatibility between several species of the same genus creating
hybrids with different and improved properties, when compared with the species that
originate them, being reproducible in a vegetative way, facilitating their commercialization
Energies 2022,15, 4348 28 of 68
in the bioenergy sector [
346
,
347
] for the several biofuels production from biochemical
conversions like bioethanol [
275
,
348
,
349
] and thermochemical conversions like combus-
tion [
350
], gasification [
351
] and pyrolysis, among others like biobutanol [
352
,
353
]. Other
advantages of the Populus are that in terms of its initial treatment, it is easy to harvest,
handle and store [
354
], a factor that reduces the complexity of the harvesting process, as
well as the expenses associated with it. Other products can be obtained from cellulose such
as textile materials, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals, among others, and also from lignin
such as biopolymers, fertilizers, biopesticides, and vanillin compounds [355].
One of the gases produced in AD systems is hydrogen sulfide (H
2
S) which causes
problems within the reactors. In a digester that processes manure as raw material, two
different experiments were carried out to measure the reduction of H
2
S present in biogas.
In the first experience, three components were added to a gas measurement system: poplar
wood biochar, steam-treated wood chips, and poplar chips (without any extra treatment).
In the second experience, only a biochar sulfate (SO
42−
) was incorporated directly into the
digester. In the first experience, it was necessary for 3 g of poplar wood biochar for every
500 g of manure to guarantee a considerable decrease in H
2
S (final concentration was up to
205 ppm) in biogas, with an absorption of 78% for each gram DM fed, without affecting
the methane production. In the second experience, there was a decrease in H
2
S not caused
by SO
42−
[consumed by sulfur-reducing bacteria (SRB)], but by other mechanisms such as
SRB inhibition, and direct H
2
S absorption, among others. The first experiment suggested
that the poplar wood biochar absorbed H2S in AD systems [356].
In the study by Negro et al., 2003 with Populus nigra L. it was possible to obtain ethanol
through the SSF process with two types of hydrothermal pre-treatment LHW and SE [
357
].
The latter yielded the best results with reaction times and temperature of 4 min and 210
◦
C,
respectively, with a recovery of 95% cellulose and 41% xylose in the liquid, SSF yields of
60% (theoretical), and enzymatic hydrolysis close to 60% [358].
Rosso, Facciotto, Bergante, Vietto, and Nervo, 2013 determined which hybrid from
Populus alba L. and Salix spp. (S. jessoensis,S. matsudana,S. alba and S. fragilis) had greater
advantages to be utilized as a feedstock for the biofuels generation, like bioethanol highly
dependent on cellulose present in the material or others such as heat through combustion
and electricity from CHP type systems. The results showed that some hybrids showed high
values of specific gravity (0.5 g cm
−3
) and others were lower (0.4 g cm
−3
), coinciding with
the results found in the literature. These hybrids have a high potential in the Mediterranean
regions and may guarantee, in the future, a progressive replacement of fossil fuels [359].
As an SRWC species, there are many poplar plantations that can be directed to ther-
mochemical processes like combustion in automatic boilers for heat production, which
is necessary for two-family houses of 15 ODT ha
−1
year
−1
to produce the same amount
of heat as a heating system that uses 7000 L of oil and the steam produced can also be
injected into a high-pressure turbine to generate electrical energy. Concerning gasification,
the gas is fed into a CHP system (joint heat and electricity generation) and the production
of solid fuels such as briquettes. In both systems, the raw material must be in the form of
chips [358].
Bartoli, Rosi, Giovannelli, Frediani, and Frediani, 2016 used a wide variety of fast-
growing poplar clones to produce bio-oil using the Microwave-Assisted Pyrolysis (MAP)
process, with a high heating rate, to obtain a high yield and product quality, which can
also be directed to coal, gas or bio-oil production. The bio-oils obtained showed small
proportions of water up to 17.5% (by weight), low viscosity (lower than those reported
in other studies), and low density (close to 1 mg ml
−1
), being fluid at room temperature
and with yields up to 32% (considered high). Finally, in relation to acetic acid, a high
concentration of 543.3 mg ml
−1
and a yield of 69.9 g kg
−1
were obtained in one of the
trials [360].
In the study of Chen et al., 2016, pyrolysis was evaluated at the laboratory scale using
the sawdust of poplar wood to obtain bio-oil (used as biofuel or bioproduct), biochar (used
as a contaminant absorber, activated carbon as an additive in the soil to improve the quality)
Energies 2022,15, 4348 29 of 68
and non-condensable gases (methane, CO, CO
2
and H
2
used for the formation of syngas
or burned to produce energy) with different heating rates (10
◦
C min
−1
, 30
◦
C min
−1
and
50
◦
C min
−1
), with several temperatures (400
◦
C, 450
◦
C, 500
◦
C, 550
◦
C, and 600
◦
C).
The best results were obtained with the maximum values, being the HHV of the bio-oil
14.39 MJ kg
−1
at 550
◦
C and 50
◦
C min
−1
, the specific surface area was calculated based on
the Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) for the conditions of 600
◦
C and 30
◦
C min
−1
and finally,
the HHV of the non-condensable gas was 14.56 MJ m
−3
at 600
◦
C and 50
◦
C min
−1
. High
mass and energy yields were obtained: for bio-oil at 500
◦
C and with high heating rates; for
biochar with lower temperature and heating rate, and, lastly, for non-condensable gases
with higher temperature and heating rates. Poplar wood sawdust is an industrial residual
material with a high potential to produce biofuels and bioproducts [361].
In a study by Selvi Gökkaya, Çokkuvvetli, Sa ˘glam, Yüksel, and Ballice, 2019, the poplar
chippings were gassed through a hydrothermal process (sub and supercritical water), to
evaluate how the system conditions [temperature (between 300
◦
C and 600
◦
C) and catalytic
variety], with a time reaction of 1 h, affect the conversion yield. The catalysts used were
minerals, commercially available alkaline KOH, dolomite, trona, borax, and those produced
in the laboratory such as ruthenium/activated carbon (Ru/AC), nickel/activated carbon
(Ni/AC), and active carbons impregnated with metals. Each catalyst directs the reaction to
form products of greater interest such as methane and H
2
. As the temperature increased,
the efficiency of the gas phase increased (from 29.7% to 79.3%), with the opposite occurring
in the liquid (from 27.6% to 1.1%) and solid (from 38% to 15.6%). The gaseous compounds
with the highest yields were H
2
with 20.1 mol kg
−1
C and methane with
12.7 mol kg−1C
,
both present in the biomass when the Ru/AC catalyst was applied. The Populus has the
potential as a raw material to be applied in gasification processes for the generation of
gaseous biofuels [288].
Soares Dias et al., 2019 studied nine Populus hybrids from SRWC plantations that were
evaluated in a pyrolysis reactor (fixed bed with several solid catalysts). In another system,
pine bark was used in a non-catalytic reactor, as a comparison. Pyrolysis was applied in
both systems, with temperatures between 425
◦
C and 500
◦
C. In all experiments carried
out on hybrids, the results were similar, with bio-oil production having the best yields
(53%) at 500
◦
C (maximum temperature). All the catalysts used, namely, the basic ones
[magnesium carbonate (MgCO
3
) and sodium carbonate (Na
2
CO
3
)) and acids (H-ZSM-5
and Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC)], reduced the number of acids present in the bio-oil.
For biochar, better yields were obtained (approximately 21% by weight) when applied to
pine bark (containing a greater amount of lignin) in a non-catalytic system, than in the case
of Populus [362].
In a bench-type pyrolytic reactor at two temperatures, namely, 500
◦
C and 600
◦
C,
two biomass typologies were analyzed, namely, poplar (hardwood) and spruce (softwood)
to assess the potential of both species in obtaining bio-oil. The results showed that with
softwood, bio-oil yields of 65.40% (at 500
◦
C) and 71.20% (at 600
◦
C) were obtained, and in
the case of hardwood, these yields were 62.50% (at 500
◦
C) and 68.40% (at 600
◦
C), therefore,
the best results were obtained with softwood at 600
◦
C. When both species were subjected
to a temperature of 500
◦
C, several phenolic compounds were obtained for the case of
softwood, and sugar-rich components, acids, and furans for the case of hardwood. As
methanol was used, it showed greater efficiency in the process when compared with the
water and toluene, as it allowed a greater extraction of chemical compounds (greater than
90%) in bio-oil caused by its high polarity [
363
]. Although the highest yield of bio-oil was
obtained with softwood, it is also considered that poplar has a high potential for liquid
biofuels production like bio-oil.
In Romania, for 10 years (from 1999 to 2009), several agricultural areas (arable and pas-
ture) with an extension of 1.03 million ha were abandoned, without having been converted
into a forest area. If poplars would be planted in these areas, a total amount of energy of
194.3 PJ would be obtained (17.5% of total consumption energy in this country) [364].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 30 of 68
2.2.5. Willow (Salix viminalis L.)
Energy willow (family Salicaceae, order Salicales, and class Magnoliopsida) encom-
passes a great variety of high-yielding genotypes and hybrids cultivars, most notewor-
thy based on the Salix viminalis L., commonly known as basket willow, among other
species [
365
,
366
]. As a culture, it grows everywhere in Europe and it is naturalized in
eastern North America [367].
As a promising energy crop, it is being utilized as a direct source of energy such as a
solid biofuel. Willow presents a significant calorific value, between 17 and 19.5 MJ kg
−1
(dry basis) [
368
], being sold to the final user like wood chips whose cost depends on the
moisture amount and on particle size. Willow use can be further used as a feedstock for
biofuels generation, as it can be an advantageous feedstock for biorefineries.
The conversion of the polysaccharides into biofuels, namely
bioethanol [3,279,369–373]
,
and biogas [
277
] from the material harvested in the vegetative growth stage, which has a
low lignin content and a high amount of soluble elements that favor the AD process, since
with the material still green, the collection process is easier, a factor that reduces costs of
production [
374
], and biobutanol [
375
], has been studied during the past years, since the
1990s, with much of the focus being extensively directed into bioethanol. Willow used in
soil phytoremediation systems has been applied for energy recovery in thermochemical
processes such as gasification [376], pyrolysis [377,378], and combustion [379,380].
As an alternative, autohydrolysis has been studied by other groups [
381
], paying
special attention to the upgrade of hemicellulose which is mainly composed of xylan-type
polysaccharides, substituted with arabinose, mannose, and galactose [
371
]. Under autohy-
drolysis, the hydrolysates obtained mainly contained oligosaccharides, some monosaccha-
rides, and low amounts of sugar degradation products that increased with process severity.
These oligosaccharides may be potentially used as prebiotic food and feed additives, which
are added-value products. Furthermore, oligosaccharides can also be converted into other
added-value products, namely surfactants, such as novel glycosyl surfactants as described
in [
382
]. This work uses microwave-assisted autohydrolysis to produce oligosaccharides
that are later converted into surfactants using the co-produced solid biomass as catalyst
(after a simple activation), in a complete integrated valorization loop.
The food applications may imply the use of food-grade grown willow, however, willow
produced from marginal lands, especially contaminated soils, may prevent the usage of its
biomass for food and feed purposes. A similar discussion can be made for the upgrade of
willow bark, a source of salicin that can be used in pharmaceutical [
383
], nutraceutical, or
cosmetic applications, even though energy willow cultivars typically have a lower content
of salicin as compared to other cultivars [
384
]. Conversely, activated carbon production
does not seem to suffer from this limitation, especially if its applications move away from
food applications. For instance, it is possible to produce activated carbon from willow
leaves [
385
] by pyrolysis, presenting a good capacitive performance as a supercapacitor
electrode, with potential applications in automobiles, buses, trains, cranes, and elevators.
Willow fiber has also been used for paper manufacturing because of the amount of cellulose
that is in the material [386].
The bioethanol ground case considers an overall transformation yield of
310 L ethanol t−1
(dry willow biomass) based on the utilization of steam-explosion [
282
,
369
,
387
] as the pre-
treatment process, conservative cellulose to glucose yield of 75% [
388
], and fermentation
conditions and yields for a Zymomonas mobilis-based process [
389
]. A preliminary LCA [
370
]
showed that willow-based ethanol can be an effective biofuel to help to achieve GHG emis-
sion goals. This can be further enhanced by the utilization of other pre-treatment methods,
and several studies have been carried out to improve the selective recovery of polysac-
charides and lignin from willow biomass. Among others, acid [
375
,
390
], alkali [
277
], and
organosolv pre-treatments have been studied, and higher enzymatic cellulose digestibility
has been achieved, namely for the ethanol-based organosolv, using H
2
SO
4
as catalyst [
391
].
This process enabled to obtain a cellulose digestibility of 87%, a 116% increase over the
Energies 2022,15, 4348 31 of 68
ground case, but the overall sugar recovery is a function of xylose and glucan recovery in
the liquid and solid streams, respectively.
Willow has been shown to be a species with high capacity and potential as a soil
phytoremediation material, storing trace elements [e.g., Cd and zinc (Zn)] in the aerial
part (above the ground) of the species [
392
]. Considering this aspect, willow harvested
in an area contaminated with trace elements of manganese (Mn) and Zn was applied to
a SE pre-treatment to eliminate the contaminating elements present in the material and
to produce bioethanol. The contaminated material was impregnated with H
2
SO
4
(2%
concentration) to be subsequently performed the SE pre-treatment at a temperature of
220
◦
C, with 80% of the trace elements being extracted. The remaining material was again
submitted to a SE pre-treatment but this time at 180
◦
C to be subsequently applied to
the enzymatic hydrolysis process (total time of 75 h) in which a conversion of 80% of the
cellulose into glucose was achieved. Using Saccharomyces cerevisiae, bioethanol was obtained
in the fermentation stage. With this study, bioethanol is guaranteed to be obtained from a
material contaminated (willow) with elements such as Mn and Zn, without any change in
these yeasts and enzymes (biocatalysts) [281].
In another study, a willow plantation was irrigated with WW to assess both the
behavior of the species and the use of these waters in a sustainable way, being seen as a
solution for the WW treatment. The evaluation of the chemical composition of the species
determined that 8% of willows irrigated with WW obtained an increase in the amount of
glucan, a decrease in arabinose and galactose, and no changes in the values corresponding
to xylose, mannose, and lignin. When the pre-treatment with ionic liquid and the enzymatic
saccharification process was applied, it was determined that the yield was not significantly
changed, with an amount greater than 95% of glucose found in the cell wall being emitted
and a recovery of 35% was obtained of lignin, therefore, there was an increase of more than
200% in the yield of the material irrigated with WW. With this study, it can be stated that
it is possible to use this type of water in willow plantations when it is desired to produce
biofuels such as bioethanol in a biorefinery-type facility [393].
For the bio-oil production from willow contaminated with certain HMs, several studies
have been implemented. These studies differ in the type of contaminant present in the
material, the type of pyrolysis reaction, the process conditions regarding temperature
and reaction time, the scale of the process, and whether or not there is a pre-treatment
phase [
394
]. Stals et al., 2010 applied flash-type pyrolysis, at a laboratory scale in a semi-
continuous fluidized bed reactor, with a very fast reaction time and at different temperatures
(between 350
◦
C and 550
◦
C), in a willow contaminated with Cd, copper (Cu), Zn, and lead
(Pb), the best results being obtained at a temperature of 450
◦
C, with a bio-oil yield of 48%,
a temperature at which a smaller amount of contaminating elements (Zn and Cd) were
transferred to the bio-oil, these being reduced to a greater extent when a post-treatment
with a hot gas filter was applied [
395
]. Kuppens et al., 2015 [
396
] studied the rapid pyrolysis
of Cd-contaminated willow at a temperature that lies between 350
◦
C and 650
◦
C in a full-
scale reactor to obtain a bio-oil yield of 65%, suitable for the heat production due to the
LHV obtained, namely, 17 GJ t
−1
, which is subsequently the electrical energy produced in
a CHP system.
Crushed and dried willow that is contaminated with Cd, Cu, chromium (Cr), alu-
minum (Al), magnesium (Mg), Sn, Zn, Pb, nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), iron (Fe), and Mn was
submitted to a gasification process in a fixed bed reactor at laboratory scale, with CO
2
with
a flow of 5.40 L h
−1
being used as gassing agent, at temperatures ranging between 450
◦
C
and 950
◦
C. The temperature at which a complete transfer of elements such as Pb, Cd, and
Zn to the gas phase (syngas) occurred was 750 ◦C [394].
HTL has been studied to obtain the generation of the bio-crude product. Here the
relevance of the pre-treatment process is evidenced. The use of autohydrolysis yielded
interesting results, especially if a two-step dissolution process is applied using a semi-
continuous flow reactor [
278
]. More recently, alkaline pre-treatment enabled the generation
Energies 2022,15, 4348 32 of 68
of a bio-crude with an oxygen amount lower than 8 wt% and a higher concentration of
aromatics and phenolic compounds [397].
2.3. Microalgae
Microalgae are photosynthetic unicellular organisms, many are microscopic, and they
are found naturally in water systems (freshwater, sea, brackish, and WW). These organisms
need the elements of CO
2
, sunlight, and H
2
O to generate lipids, carbohydrates, proteins,
and other types of bioactive components in a short time. Microalgae are mostly divided into
four groups: Chlorophyceae (green algae), Bacillariophyceae (diatoms), Chrysophyceae (golden
algae), and Cyanophyceae (blue algae). This kind of biomass (microalgal) is constituted from
9.5 to 42% lipids, from 17 to 57% carbohydrates, and from 20 to 50% protein, on a dry
weight basis, depending on the species [398] and culture conditions (e.g., [399–401].
The microalgal biomass has a great variety of advantages as a raw material for biofuel
production when compared to traditional biomass resources:
•
Microalgae present an elevated growth rate in a short time when they are compared to
the terrestrial energy crops and it is a culture that can be developed at any time of the
year. Its productivity is by far higher when compared with other cultures, converting
the sunlight and CO
2
into power and doubling in times shorter than 6 h under optimal
conditions. In fact, certain types of species can double their biomass in times as short
as 3.5 h [402];
•
The photosynthesis mechanism in these microorganisms is similar to higher species.
However, they have an elevated photosynthetic efficiency (between 4% and 7.5%) far
above the 0.5% for terrestrial cultures [398];
•
Microalgae implementation needs a low water quantity including the land resort
than the other types of cultures (terrestrial). It can be utilized in marine or freshwater,
brackish and the non-arable land, decreasing the environmental impingement, without
creating competition with food crops [400];
•
This microorganism can get nutrients such as N and P from WW, making available,
in parallel, a solution for the agro-industrial effluents [
400
]; Microalgae is capable of
fixing CO
2
from the environment, however, it can also use the CO
2
of energy plants
and of industrial sources. The typical value of this microorganism is that it can fixate
1.83 kg CO2kg−1(dry algal biomass) [398];
•
Microalgal biomass is utilized to produce many valued products like fuels (inclusive
aviation gas, jet fuel, gasoline, biodiesel, and bioethanol, among others), feed, food,
and other products like nutraceuticals and cosmetics. Waste biomass can be utilized
as fertilizer and feed [398];
•
The possibility of manipulating the biochemical characteristics of the biomass microal-
gal over a variety of developmental conditions [400].
Different microalgae species have been studied for their biofuel generation potential
and in the fixation of CO
2
, to reduce the high production of GHG in the world, caused by
the massive use of fossil fuels [71].
The transformation systems vary with several factors like the desired biofuel product,
the composition of biomass, economics, time, and operation conditions from microalgal-
based biofuels that can be obtained through chemical (Table S1), biochemical (Tables S2–S4),
and thermochemical (Tables S5–S7) conversion pathways [
398
,
400
]. All these tables are
presented in the Supplementary Materials.
At first sight, the high lipid content in some microalgae species makes them a poten-
tially appealing source for biodiesel production. However, high production costs, scalability,
limited growth rates, and the need for stress to induce lipid production are challenges to
industrial-scale microalgae-based biodiesel. Biodiesel production with acid or base catalysts
in a homogeneous phase employs a two-step method: oil extraction using solvents followed
by transesterification, resulting in high water consumption and energy
input [403–406]
. On
the other hand, in situ transesterification is a single-step process, which avoids the need for
a prior oil extraction step [405,407–409] (Table S1).
Energies 2022,15, 4348 33 of 68
Biogas is mainly composed of CH
4
and CO
2
. The biogas yield and quality depend
on the feedstock composition, temperature, pH, solid and hydraulic retention time, and
feeding rate (Table S2). The C:N ratio plays a crucial role in an effective and stable anaerobic
digestion process. The optimal C:N ratio for biogas production ranges between 20:1 and
30:1 [
410
,
411
]. Too low a C:N ratio can be overcome by co-digestion of microalgal biomass
with organic substrates poor in nitrogen, such as sewage sludge [412].
Bioethanol production from algae biomass is based on the fermentation of algal
polysaccharides which are starch, sugar, and cellulose, either through SHF [
413
–
418
] or
SSF [
419
,
420
]. Different bioethanol yields have been reported depending on the feedstock
substrate whole or pre-treated microalgal biomass (Table S3). In 2010, Harun et al. (2010)
showed that lipid-extracted Chlorococum sp. generated a 60% higher ethanol concentration
compared with the dried/intact biomass [414].
In recent years, photobiological H
2
production from algae biomass has become a
novel research field. Some microalgae species, such as Chlamydomonas reinhardtii,Chlorella
sorokiniana,Chlorella vulgaris, and Scenedesmus obliquus, have been shown to be able to
modulate their genetic, enzymatic, and metabolic expression to produce H
2
through bio-
photolysis after S deprivation [
421
–
425
]. Another way to produce H
2
can be through a dark
fermentation process using anaerobic bacteria [426–433] (Table S4).
Gasification is a versatile chemical technology in fair, oxygen, or steam at
700–1000 ◦C
,
producing a mixture of gases known as syngas (mainly composed of H
2
, CO
2,
and
CH
4
) [
434
]. Steam gasification may be a promising way to produce hydrogen from al-
gae [
435
–
437
]. The use of catalysts promotes the production of H
2
while declining tar
formation [
435
,
437
–
440
]. An overview of results obtained from the gasification of algae is
shown in Table S5.
The pyrolysis of microalgae biomass is usually done at temperatures between 300
◦
C
and 700
◦
C but may be performed at lower temperatures using a catalyst [
441
]. The amounts
of gas, oil, and char obtained from pyrolysis of algae biomass can vary considerably
depending on the microalgae species and growth conditions (Table S6). For example,
significant differences were found in bio-oil yields from autotrophic and heterotrophic
C. protothecoides, 16.6 and 57.9%, respectively. A 3.4 times higher heating value was obtained
for heterotrophic compared to autotrophic C. protothecoides [
442
]. Slow pyrolysis is easier to
carry out, producing bio-oil yields between 30% and 60% [
441
,
443
–
447
]. Fast pyrolysis can
reduce the amount of biochar [
448
], and the gaseous product is mainly composed of CH
4
and CO2.
Unlike the previous thermochemical processes, HTL occurs in a wet environment
and, thus, does not require an energy-intensive dewatering step of the biomass [
449
]. HTL
occurs at temperatures ranging between 300 and 400
◦
C [
449
–
457
]. The oil yields from
the different species are n, and on the microalgae chemical composition, differences in
bio-oil yields were reported, ranging from 21% for Porprydium creuntum [
454
], to 66% for
Nannochloropsis sp. [
458
]. An overview of microalgae liquefaction studies is available in
Table S7.
3. Benefits and Constraints of Bioenergy Technologies Applied to Energy Crops
Cultivated in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Various daily anthropogenic activities are known to deteriorate the state of the soil,
increasing its degree of pollution due to the massive discharge of HMs into the environ-
ment [
178
], causing changes in the ecosystem, affecting its balance and the health of all
living beings that subsist in it [
459
]. Among these activities are industries that operate
and produce fossil fuels such as refineries and petrochemicals, those linked to various
sectors such as metallurgy (including foundry), mining (causes excessive soil depletion),
agriculture (due to the incorporation of fertilizers and pesticides in the soil) [
178
], the
automotive industry by the exhaust gases of light or heavy vehicles, urban waste, and
sewage sludge [394], among others.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 34 of 68
For these reasons, many areas, after being productive land for the agricultural and food
sector, have soils that are considered degraded by human action, reducing their organic and
biological load, enriching it with HMs which leads them to be considered contaminated,
or become marginal areas because of the low quality and unproductiveness of the land,
being poor, with poor groundwater quality, as well as inconvenient climatic conditions
and unfavorable reliefs [
460
]. Marginal soils, in some cases, are also abandoned territories
where threatening species often develop that only destroy the soil by excessively absorbing
its nutrients, later causing a decrease in the productivity of any species that wishes to
develop. The countries that present a larger area (greater than 20% of the total area) of land
considered marginal are Norway, Albania, Italy, San Marino, Lithuania, and Portugal [
461
],
standing in the Mediterranean with the biggest amount of abandoned agricultural area and
saline soils [462].
Soil degradation is synonymous with a variety of terms such as contamination or
pollution by HMs, desertification, erosion, wear, salinization, deterioration, undue occu-
pation of invasive species, and abandonment, among many others. However, all these
factors can be characterized into three different typologies, such as biological, physical,
and chemical. The biological one manifests itself when it happens with land thinning or
deforestation, the excessive presence of water often caused by high rainfall, and, finally, the
destruction of biodiversity. The physical occurs when there is a loss of organic material,
mainly carbon, the land relief is affected by external environmental agents causing the
phenomenon known as erosion and, finally, the physical state of the soil is altered, causing
the appearance of a hard and thick layer on the surface, compacting, and waterproofing
the soil. The chemical happens when there is salinization and acidification of the soil, accu-
mulation of HMs, leaching of nutrients (loss of fertile matter), or of HMs into groundwater,
among others [463].
Contaminated soil pollutants in Europe include on average, 35% of HMs, 10% of
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), and 24% of mineral oils, a [
394
]. The origin of
HMs comes both from anthropogenic activities (as explained above) and from processes
that occur naturally at the geological level [
178
]. HMs are characterized by being inorganic
elements such as Cu, Pb, Ni, Zn, Cd, Cr, Fe, Mn, and arsenic (As), among others, with a
density five times higher than in the case of water, as well as presenting a high atomic
weight [
394
] being distributed to the environment by different routes. The soil is where the
greatest storage of HMs occurs, being caused by factors such as precipitation, the humus
present in the soil, and the accumulation of minerals on the surface. The distribution of
HMs can occur in several ways. In biomass, some contaminants are only retained in the
roots, but in other cases, they are later transported to the aerial part of the species (i.e., Cd
and Zn) as in the stems and leaves (i.e., Cr and Pb) [
178
]. When the contaminants remain
in the roots, the aboveground part can be used for bioenergy as the release of metallic
pollutants will not occur, but, in this way, the contaminants remain in the soil. Otherwise,
when the pollutants are no longer in the roots, the decontamination of the soil takes place
there (after a physicochemical analysis), requiring the application of bioenergy treatments
or processes that allow the recovery or elimination of these contaminants located in the
part aerial view of culture.
The benefits and constraints of energy crops from contaminated or marginal soils,
when implemented in conversion processes to produce biofuels, are presented in Table 3,
including applied pre- and post-treatments to reduce the presence of pollutants in the
process or in the products formed.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 35 of 68
Table 3.
Benefits and constraints of bioenergy technologies when energy crops are applied in
contaminated and marginal soils.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
General aspects
Cynara cardunculus has been shown to be an
ideal energy crop to be cultivated and grown
in land with low fertility (marginal [56,462]
and degraded), serving as protection against
soil degradation and erosion caused by
intense rainfall [
55
] improving the fertility of
this type of soil [464].
Cardoon is a species with the capacity to
serve as a phytoremediation plant in the
recovery of soils contaminated with
potentially toxic elements (PTE) [e.g., Pb,
arsenic (As), Cu, Zn, Cd e antimony
(Sb)] [465] and with trace elements [466].
Cardoon was also studied in contaminated
soils with As and Cd, proving to be a species
that tolerates this type of terrain. The Cd was
retained in the aerial part of the plant (old
leaves) and the As in the roots, therefore,
cardoon is a useful crop to extract the Cd
present in soil, and, in the case of land highly
contaminated with As, it serves as a
stabilizer for that land [467,468].
Giant reed presents wide diversity
advantages in relation to other energy crops
such as the adaptation to many
environments, soils, and cultivation
conditions, not requiring fertilizers, and
lastly, the high yields and productivities of
the crop [76].
Giant reed can be applied for the
phytoremediation of contaminated soils
[29,469,470].
Cannabis sativa is a crop that does not require
the incorporation of pesticides and nutrients,
a factor that ensures the proper use of the
soil, prevents the development of weeds, and
allows the extraction of HMs from the soil
[471], and organic contaminants and
radionuclides, acting as an excellent
phytoextractor of contaminants and soil
phytoremediator, namely in the roots.
Helianthus tuberosus is utilized for soil
recuperation in disturbed industrial sites
(e.g., soils such as salting, alkaline,
coal-mining, and oil-polluted) and to prevent
land erosion [130,472,473], and is a species
that resists the attack of pests and the
appearance of diseases [133].
Jerusalem artichoke due to its agronomic
characteristics, like tolerance to salt stresses
and dry conditions, presents a great
Energies 2022,15, 4348 36 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
resistance to frost and plant
diseases [31,474–477], being a species that
tolerates alkaline soils and grows easily in
cold and dry climates [149] including very
high temperatures [133].
Helianthus tuberosus can grow well on
marginal lands [19,143] and in poor
soils [478], therefore avoiding the contest for
arable lands that present food cultures.
One of the HMs that linseed can remove
more easily is Cd, however, it can also
remove metals such as Cu, Zn, Ni, and Pb
from the soil.
Linum usitatissimum is a species that also
tolerates, absorbs, and stores high amounts
of petroleum hydrocarbons present in
contaminated soils, and is widely used in oil
countries in the Middle East. After its
application as a phytoremediation material,
it can be used as a fiber and for the
production of linseed oil [154].
It has been claimed that cultivation of the
miscanthus in marginal [
12
,
460
,
479
–
481
] and
contaminated soils [482–485] has the
potential to restore soil properties, halting
degradation [486], desertification, and
contamination [9,178,462,487].
Some sorghum genes present high
productivity in marginal soils, a low amount
of nutrients, and do not require high water
requirements [41].
Sorghum can grow on land considered
marginal [188] due to the multiple
advantages of this species, such as high
tolerance to water stress, it has short growth
cycles, namely, between 3 to 5 months, and
can achieve high carbon sequestration rates
equal to 50 g m−2day−1[460].
Sorghum has been shown to be an excellent
phytoremediator and phytostabilizer of
contaminated soils [238] due to the several
advantages it presents, such as high biomass
formation, easily adaptable to different types
of environments and withstands various
types of contaminants among them HMs
(such as Cd and Zn), being able to
accumulate them in the species itself,
therefore, decontaminating the soil [41].
Sorghum bicolor is mainly characterized by its
ability to grow in arid soils, being drought
tolerant, producing high biomass yields [41],
and presenting a low need for fertilizer,
therefore, it can develop in marginal
soils [197,488].
For a hemp plantation initially applied as a
phytoremediator to be used in the bioenergy
sector, it is necessary to evaluate the presence
of HMs, radionuclides, and organic
contaminants in each process [122] as these
components can affect the balance of the
system.
Despite the wide advantages of linseed as
soil phytoremediation, as the accumulation
of HMs in the species occurs, its growth is
lower, however, their biomass
formation [154].
In arid areas it is also possible to use WW in
sorghum plantations, being necessary an
adequate use and control of the soil to avoid
the accumulation of sodium (Na) present in
the waters [500] reusing low-quality water
that does not compete with drinking water
and still has some nutrients [501].
Acacia leaves present a high amount of N
that, after falling, nourish the soil and fixes
this nutrient [502]. However, if this
component is very high, it can have harmful
consequences for the ecosystem, increasing
the growth of invasive species that densify
largely the forest, preventing the passage of
water, a factor that increases the degree of
erosion, avoiding the development and
continuity of other species like the
indigenous
Populus when applied as SRWC in
silviculture, it cannot be applied to degraded
soils, as its productivity and yield are low,
and the investment is not very
profitable [503].
Populus to increase productivity in
plantations destined for bioenergy, it is
necessary to apply water, fertilizers, and
examine the appearance of weeds, factors
that increase the overall costs of the
installation. To make it viable and profitable,
one must select the most appropriate hybrids
and apply appropriate silviculture measures
to reduce costs [257].
A benefit is the reduction of GHG emissions
since [504] evaluated that fast-growing
woody species can produce 9 to 161 times
less GHG than coal, producing 14.1 to 85.9
times more energy than coal. The only
disadvantage is the need for irrigation to
ensure the economic viability of the
plantation [505].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 37 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
Acacia is tolerant to soils of little
fertility [263].
Pinus pinaster is considered a species of fast
growth and tolerant to poor soils, being
applied to reforest degraded areas and in the
stabilization of dunes, to protect intensive
plantations (including agricultural fields), in
the conservation of soils mainly in areas at
risk of erosion [320], to combat soil
degradation and control hydrological
systems [489].
Paulownia tomentosa has a high potential to be
implemented in contaminated soils for later
recovery, in abandoned land (previously
used for agriculture) with low water needs,
in soils that may suffer from erosion for its
later stabilization, and in marginal soils [
490
].
Hybrid species of Paulownia (P. tomentosa ×
fortune and P.elongata ×fortune) have great
advantages in the absorption of HMs in
contaminated soils, being seen for its
phytoremediator potential. In these varieties,
the accumulation of K and calcium (Ca)
occurs in the stems, the Pb, Zn, and Cu occur
in the leaves, and the accumulation of Cd,
Na, magnesium (Mg), and Fe is given in the
roots [491].
At the soil level, the Populus is often applied
for phytoremediation in the recovery of
contaminated areas [492] and agricultural
land that has suffered degradation over
time [493], increasing the organic matter in
the soil.
Populus alba L. at the soil level allows the
recovery of land (marginal/degraded) and
polluted soils (phytoremediation with
hybrids Populus alba ×tremula and Populus
tremula ×alba) [342].
Populus alba L. has been shown to have a high
potential for decontaminating water bodies
with high amounts of nitrates (NO3−),
namely, between 100 and 300 mg L−1[367].
In terms of the environment and the soil,
Populus nigra L. plantations reduce the
degree of pollution, balancing the
microclimate [260].
Willow can successfully grow in many types
of soil ranging from periodically flooded to
marginal lands and polluted soils, with the
optimal conditions being well- drained
sandy and wet loamy soil with a pH range of
5.5 to 7.5 [367]. Dry soils are not suitable for
willow cultivation.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 38 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
Currently, willow is used for protecting soils
from water erosion [368] and
phytoremediation [494].
Salix viminalis is applied to marginal
lands [495], in contaminated soils for the
phytoextraction of heavy metals such as As,
Pb, Sb [496], Zn e Cd [497,498] through the
wide extension of its roots and in degraded
soils (poor in nutrients) [499] being in all
cases for its subsequent recovery.
Pre-treatment
General
It allows reducing the quantities of
contaminants [HMs, minerals, persistent
organic pollutants (POPs), among others]
present in the raw material to avoid its
propagation in the following stages of the
process or in the formed products [394].
If the application of pre-treatment is not
efficient in eliminating the contaminants, in
the following steps, the processes that use
catalysts will also be contaminated or the
degradation of biological products may
occur [394].
Phytomining
It allows the recovery of HMs with high
added value at an industrial level (e.g.,
battery production) [506] that are
accumulated in the aerial part, leaves, or
roots of certain species, closing the life cycle
of these metals.
Extraction
treatment
It extracts the HMs found in the waste
material from phytoremediation, using an
extracting agent such as ammonium (acetate,
nitrate, and oxalate), pure water,
ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA),
and H2SO4.
Before submitting the material to the
extracting agent, it can be squeezed to obtain
a liquid phase or heat-treated to obtain a
solid phase, both rich in HMs [507].
When the HMs are in the liquid phase, a
previous treatment is necessary to extract the
metals, for example, the application of a
coagulant in the liquid squeeze to reduce the
concentration of Cd.
Biomass reduction from phytoremediation is
lower when the extraction is applied before
heat treatment [507].
Microbial
treatment
It allows for the microbial stabilization of
biomass as well as the incorporation of
moisture into the organic material and can be
applied under anaerobic (fermentation) and
aerobic (composting) conditions.
When any of the two types of
microorganisms (anaerobic or aerobic) are
used, the decomposition of organic matter
always occurs into substances such as
alcohols, microbial, organic acids, H2O, H2S,
CO2, ammonia (NH3), methane, SO42−,
phosphate (PO42−), as well as an
energy release.
The HMs stored in the extraction solution
can be recycled.
This is a technology that has multiple
advantages, being highly efficient. It has low
energy requirements, and protects the
environment, through different types of
extraction: semi-bionic, microwave,
ultrasonic, and supercritical fluid, among
others [507].
The reduction of biomass from
phytoremediation is lower when a microbial
treatment is applied before heat treatment.
Other methods are recommended when the
content of HMs found in the species is high.
For the reason described above, the microbial
treatment is more efficient for biomass with
low HMs.
Treatment that presents a high risk of
producing secondary contaminants, a factor
that limits its environmental
sustainability [507].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 39 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
Compression
landfill
treatment
It has been widely used, being easy and
simple to apply.
When the species used for phytoremediation
are compressed, a high concentration of HMs
and chelating substances are obtained [507].
Treatment that presents a high risk of
producing secondary contaminants [507], a
factor that limits its environmental
sustainability.
Synthesis of
nanomaterials
(treatment)
This new treatment has a lower cost and
lower environmental impact when compared
to the traditional method of metal
nanoparticles.
The biomass used for phytoremediation can
be reduced up to 100% when this method is
applied.
The reduction of biomass from
phytoremediation is greater when this
treatment is applied as well as other
thermochemical conversion technologies
such as pyrolysis, gasification, and
combustion.
It is a technology with a low level of
second-degree contamination, therefore, in
this sense, it has no environmental
impact [507].
There are not enough studies or applications
of this type of treatment when it comes to
biomass applied in phytoremediation
systems (including its residues), therefore,
containing HMs.
When residues from phytoremediation are
used, the application of this type of treatment
is costly and complicated [507].
Thermochemical
conversion
process
General
Metals such as Zn and Pb can be largely
retained (greater than 90%) in the solid phase
and at temperatures ranging between 220
◦
C
and 900 ◦C.
In the by-products, several metals can be
found, being later used for other applications
as in the case of Zn, used as a catalyst to
obtain furans and acetates; gaseous
by-products can be used as synthesis gas
(high presence of methane and H2);
by-products obtained in the solid phase can
be used as adsorbents for metals (after their
leaching). Finally, the Cd can be applied for
the photodegradation of contaminants
present in water bodies [506].
In any thermochemical process, the main
constraints are the translocation of
contaminants in the different phases of the
products and by-products, as well as the
possibility that they return to the
environment, therefore, to the air, soil, or
water bodies.
The As (metalloid) and Cd (metal) in this
type of process can completely leave the
system at 900 ◦C [506], without its recovery
being possible, causing an environmental
risk.
Combustion
From all the thermo- and biochemical
conversion technologies of contaminated
biomass into energy, combustion presents the
greatest environmental advantages,
especially when compared with pyrolysis
and composting [394].
Some additives incorporated into the system
such as kaolin allow the removal of metals
such as Zn (88.1% removed) and Cd (91.2%)
and others such as activated carbon, allow
the elimination of polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (99%) and metals such as Cd
(97.6%) and Zn (99.1%), all of which are from
the gaseous phase.
Kaolin also helps to lower NOxin the gas
phase to environmentally acceptable levels.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 40 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
In some studies, ash from contaminated
biomass with HMs contains less metal than
the legally permitted limit value, so this type
of ash can be reused as fertilizer for
application in agricultural and forestry
systems and is no longer considered a
hazardous waste [507].
During combustion, NOxcompounds are
formed and released. However, when the
nitrogen uptake of biomass from
contaminated soils is very similar to the
biomass that develops on uncontaminated
soils, the amount of NO
x
emitted will also be
similar in both cases and therefore, cannot be
considered a greater environmental impact
when it comes from contaminated soils [
178
].
When the raw material is contaminated
biomass with HMs and for cases where
energy (heat and electricity in a cogeneration
system) is produced in a closed-type cycle, in
which there are no leaks in the system, the
release of contaminated gases does not occur
to the atmosphere. However, metals can also
be present in the solid phase, requiring
proper treatment of the material.
Miscanthus ×giganteus applied in polluted
soil with several types of HMs such as Cu,
Ni, Zn, Cd, Cr, Pb, and K presents a
diversified distribution of metals throughout
the plant as in the aerial part (stems and
leaves), rhizomes, and roots. Ni and Cr are
not stored throughout the plant and the
remaining metals (with the exception of K)
accumulate mainly in the roots and rhizomes,
a factor that facilitates the use of the aerial
part (the least contaminated) to bioenergy, in
combustion systems by the generation of
contaminants to be lower, mainly in the gas
phase [508].
Arundo donax L. was evaluated in soils
contaminated with several HMs, including
Cu, Cd, and Zn. In the third year of planting,
the giant r managed to remove 2.09 kg ha−1
of Cu from the soil; 0.007 kg ha
−1
of Cd, and
3.87 kg ha−1of Zn. With these results, it is
possible to guarantee the potential of this
species for phytoextraction and later be
applied in energy conversion processes such
as combustion and anaerobic digestion [
509
].
If residues from biomass used for
phytoremediation are burned, many
components such as CO, HMs, NOx, among
others, are released through fly ash causing a
second-degree of contamination. For this
reason, it is necessary to properly handle and
capture the ashes, making them unsuitable
for reuse due to the amount of metals in
them.
Some additives incorporated into the system
prevent part of the HMs from
phytoremediation residues from being
transported to the gaseous phase.
Treatment that presents a high risk of
producing secondary contaminants, a factor
that limits its environmental sustainability.
Regarding biochar as a fertilizer, when it has
high amounts of HMs, these metals may
leach into groundwater and even into the
soil, and for this reason, it is necessary to
carry out a physicochemical analysis of the
biochar (in terms of the amount of HMs) to
ensure environmental safety before its
application [507].When biomass that is
contaminated with HMs is subjected to a
combustion process, strict care is needed to
keep the conditions as controlled as possible
to avoid those metals or other contaminants
are not emitted in gases and fly ash that are
released without any type of control, it being
also required that the solid material is
disposed of the system with due care and
safety [178].
Combustion (also including anaerobic
digestion) are the two technologies that pose
the greatest risk of emitting metals into the
environment without them being fully
retained. When biomass contaminated with
HMs is used, pollutants (metals) are released
into the atmosphere, at the point where
energy is produced [510].
Considering the study by Laval-Gilly et al.,
2017 [508], when high amounts of K are
stored in the aboveground part of the
biomass, this decreases the efficiency of the
combustion process due to the formation of
slag and scale inside the reactor.
Combustion is considered an inappropriate
technology when it comes to biomass from
soils not suitable for agriculture (marginal).
This only happens when yields are low and
there is a higher concentration of ash and N,
which leads to a heavier emission of
pollutants such as NOx, particles in fly ash
and CO2[460].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 41 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
Gasification
When a temperature below 1000 ◦C is
applied, elements such as Pb, As, Cd and Zn
are volatile. However, to prevent this,
compounds such as silicon dioxide (SiO2),
calcium sulfate (CaSO4), and aluminium
oxide (Al2O3) can be incorporated into the
system as they reduce the volatilization of Pb,
Cd, and Zn.
Likewise, when a temperature below 1000
◦
C
is applied, elements such as Cu, Ni, Mn, and
Co are not volatile [507].
Several species including Miscanthus ×
giganteus and Panicum virgatum L.
contaminated with HMs (Zn, Pb, and Cd)
were processed in a fixed bed gasifier that
operates at atmospheric pressure to produce
synthesis gas with a certain calorific value to
be used in cogeneration systems. The species
that best supports the Pb and Zn contained
in the soil is miscanthus, however, both
species have potential as phytostabilizer
material for soils polluted with HMs. The
LHV value of gases obtained with
miscanthus was 3.68 MJ m−3and in the case
of switchgrass, it was 2.77 MJ m−3[511].
Mn is a type of metal that can be condensed
from the gas phase after the application of a
gas cleaning or purification system [394].
The metals found in greater proportion in the
gas phase are Pb, Cd, and Zn.
Factors such as operating conditions
(pressure and temperature), pre and
post-treatment, the type of gasification agent,
the type of reactor (gasifier) used based on
the bed (fixed, fluidized, dragged, among
others), the reactor construction material,
and finally, the chemical speciation of metals,
affect the quality of the synthesis gas and the
distribution of HMs, when contaminated
biomass is used as raw material.
Sometimes high concentrations of HMs such
as Ni, Fe, Cr, Cu, and molybdenum (Mo) are
found in the synthesis gas. This occurs due
to the release of these from the gasifier
caused by several factors such as the type of
material in the reactor, the functioning of the
refrigeration system, and the type of
additives or lubricants, among others [394].
In this system, metal oxides are released from
the contaminated biomass, which must be
stored in the slag and the metals found in fly
ash must be subjected to a cleaning system
such as that are applied in the gas phase of
the combustion process [178].
In the gas phase, there are several HMs,
being present in different ways: Hg and Cd
can be found in large quantities; Co can be
partially or totally in this phase with
temperatures around 500 ◦C and 800 ◦C and
finally, metals such as Zn, Pb, Ni, vanadium,
As, Cd, Cr, and Sb are present when
temperatures are below 500 ◦C [394]. As this
is the phase of interest in this type of system,
a gas cleaning process or separation of these
metals is always necessary.
Pyrolysis
To produce biofuels as well as other forms of
energy such as thermal (heat recovery) and
electrical (large scale), this thermochemical
conversion technology is the most promising
when biomass contaminated with HMs is
used as a raw material [506].
The pyrolysis of leaves and branches of
contaminated species can be carried out
mixed rather than separately, to facilitate the
process and take advantage of all the
constituent parts of the cultures, providing
greater environmental safety [394].
It is advisable for proper implementation of
the process a solid particle size of the
contaminated biomass smaller than 0.50 mm
to guarantee the production of a liquid
product (bio-oil) free of metals as well as the
concentration of volatiles and refractories in
the bio-coal.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 42 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
When Cu-contaminated biomass is treated
(with 1% in the material), the best option is
rapid pyrolysis, in a type of fixed-bed reactor,
and at a temperature of 500 ◦C.
To guarantee the presence of HMs in the
biochar, a fluidized bed reactor can be used
at a temperature of 600 ◦C or flash-type
pyrolysis operating at lower temperatures
can be applied in the same type of reactor
(coupled to a hot gas filter), therefore, around
350 ◦C.
The selection of the optimal operating
temperature will depend on the boiling or
melting point as well as the amount of HMs
present in the biomass. For these reasons, it
is important to emphasize that elements such
as As, Pb, Hg, and Cd are very volatile, Mo,
Zn, Cu, and Ni are semi-volatile and finally,
Cr, vanadium, Co, and Mn are not volatile.
Fast pyrolysis allows the pyrolytic
decomposition of biomass contaminated
with HMs, obtaining a bio-oil with excellent
properties, therefore, high yield and HHV
value as well as low concentration of HMs.
When it is desired to accumulate HMs in the
waste material, the application of pyrolysis is
more promising than in the case of
combustion and gasification [394].
In this type of system, when biomass
contains metals such as Ni, Zn, and Pb, they
react as catalysts, boosting the hydrogenation
reaction to produce organic acids,
accelerating the formation of bio-oil, and
improving its properties.
When residues from biomass used for
phytoremediation are subjected to a
pyrolysis process, there is a distribution of
HMs between the 3 resulting phases (solid,
liquid, and gas) of the system. The HMs
amount in each phase will depend on the
conditions (such as temperature) under
which the process is carried out. For example,
in a pyrolytic system, as the temperature was
increased, the presence of Cr in the bottom
ash was also higher when compared to a
combustion-type system. The amount of Cr
in the gas phase in a pyrolysis process was
slightly lower than the obtained in the
combustion residue of the same biomass at
the same temperature (350 ◦C).
When flash-type pyrolysis is applied, it is
possible to recover part of the HMs in the
solid phase, therefore, in the charcoal.
The incorporation of additives [NaOH,
Al2O3, calcium dihydrogenphosphate
(Ca(H2PO4)2), calcium carbonate (CaCO3),
iron(III) chloride (FeCl3), among others]
Slow pyrolysis of biomass contaminated with
HMs presents a high content of HMs in the
bio-oil (with low yield) and produces a low
amount and variety of organic compounds.
Factors such as particle size, typology of
contaminated biomass, pyrolysis (including
operating conditions), and pre and
post-treatment can affect the transfer of
solids and HMs and the main properties of
bio-oil such as quality, yield, and HHV [394].
When a hyperaccumulator (contaminated
biomass) that contains Ni was used, the
composition of the bio-oil was changed,
forming a greater amount of other
compounds that contained N, such as
triacetoneamine [507].
When this type of system processes
contaminated biomass, great care must be
taken with the coke produced in the solid
phase as it concentrates a large part of the
HMs [178].
Fast pyrolysis systems cannot use different
types of catalysts in the same process because
the catalysts themselves are deactivated.
Other metals such as K, Mg, Na, and Ca that
are stored in lignocellulosic-type biomass
significantly affect pyrolysis processes
because it modifies both the material
structure and the different pyrolytic reaction
pathways [512].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 43 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
allows to reduce the leaching of HMs from
biochar, therefore, these additives can react
with the HMs and produce stable
compounds while the pyrolytic process
takes place.
Some types of biochar can be used as
additives in phytoremediation systems in
soils contaminated with HMs, boosting the
growth of the species, and improving the
biochemical characteristics of the soil.
When the bio-oil has a certain amount of
HMs, it can be removed using different types
of treatments such as extraction, cation
exchange, and separation through solvents,
among others [507].
In the case of biomass contaminated with
metals such as Zn and Cd, this technology
has more advantages when compared to
combustion because it presents a smaller
amount of metals in the exhaust flow (or
outflow of gases) [510].
Pyrolysis allows the storage of up to 80% of
metals in the solid phase (coal) and the
production of a liquid phase (bio-oil) suitable
for bioenergy [510].
Elements contained in biomass such as Ni
and Cu can act as catalysts within a pyrolytic
reactor to produce bio-oil and gaseous
compounds.
Most of the HMs are found in the solid phase
known as biochar, supporting metallic
nanoparticles, used to catalyze and eliminate
contaminants and as an energy converter
and accumulator.
When the metallic nanoparticles production
is required and the biomass consists of
elements with a pyrolytic behavior such as
Ni, Co, Cu, and Zn, the system has a lower
operating cost, is more sustainable, as it
avoids the use of extra chemical components,
simplifying the process.
Fast pyrolysis systems require soluble
catalysts that can penetrate the biomass, to
ensure greater control over biomass
decomposition [512].
The two most suitable technologies for high
productivity of bio-oil and biochar rich in
HMs (Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb, and Ni) are flash and
fast pyrolysis.
Fluidized bed reactors can retain a greater
amount of HMs (Cu, Zn, Cd, Pb, and Ni) in
the solid phase when operating at higher
temperatures and ablative type reactors store
a greater number of metallic pollutants in the
biochar at a lower temperature [513].
When slow pyrolysis is applied to
contaminated biomass (rhizomes of
Energies 2022,15, 4348 44 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
Arundo donax L. and leaves and branches of
Populus nigra L.) with Pb, Zn, Cd, and Cu, it
is possible to achieve a mass and volume
reduction of the material, producing a vapor
phase (fuel) free of pollutants, being the
storage of metals in the solid or biochar
phase. However, when the material contains
essentially Cd, it is required to operate the
reactor at low temperatures (below 430 ◦C)
to obtain a fuel vapor without metals. If the
biomass presents a greater proportion of the
remaining HMs (Pb, Zn, and Cu), the system
must be operated at higher temperatures
(maximum value of 600 ◦C) to produce
charcoal with a greater surface area and
lower mobility of the metals [514].
Grass species such as Panicum virgatum L.
used in phytoremediation systems for soils
polluted with Pb underwent a rapid
pyrolysis process without affecting the
distribution of products in the system by the
presence of the metal [515].
Pyrolysis of the Arundo donax L. species
contaminated with metals such as As, Cd,
and Pb was applied to determine if there was
pollution to the environment. The system
required the incorporation of other
compounds such as CaCO3, NaOH, Al2O3,
and FeCl3to ensure the fixation of metals in
the biochar. The results showed that 97% of
Cd and 37% of As were stabilized in the
biochar using 5% Al2O3, at a temperature of
250 ◦C and a reaction time of 2 h. In the case
of Pb, 57% of it was fixed in biochar using 5%
CaCO3, at 400 ◦Cfor1h[516]. It can be
stated that the giant reed cultivated in
contaminated soils has the potential to be
applied in pyrolysis systems since in most of
the studies, the HMs are retained in the solid
or biochar phase, being possible its later
recovery.
Hydrothermal
The HTL process can be used to chemically
extract as well as separate the HMs from the
bio-oil obtained through pyrolysis when
using biomass contaminated with HMs.
Afterward, the solid residue obtained can be
reused as fertilizer [394].
For a hyperaccumulator with a high
humidity value, a highly efficient system
is HTC.
Elements such as Zn and Pb, in this type of
process, tend to accumulate in more than 50%
of solid waste, the remaining amount being
converted into oxidizable compounds or
more stable residual goods, therefore, at an
environmental level, the ecotoxicity values
were reduced almost entirely [507].
Energies 2022,15, 4348 45 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
HTL is a process that allows the recovery
(greater than 95%) of metals such as Cu and
Cd in the residue obtained in the solid phase,
despite the large amount of C that may still
contain the resulting material.
The HTL has a high potential to process
microalgae and macroalgae used for the
phytoremediation of polluted waters with
HMs, allowing the storage of metals in the
solid phase (compact and inert) to be later
recovered, as well as the production of a
liquid phase (bio-crude) with the proper
characteristics for bioenergy.
The HTL process allows for the breakdown
of macronutrients such as P, N, and K in an
aqueous-type medium to achieve extra
nutrient recovery [510].
When applied to liquefaction in grass species
developed in marginal soils, there are many
advantages found in this type of system as
they present a lower operating cost caused by
the easy disaggregation of the material inside
the reactor at lower temperatures [460].
When compared to other thermochemical
technologies (combustion, gasification, and
pyrolysis) hydrothermal reactions need
higher pressures.
When applied to HTC the reduction of
biomass from phytoremediation is lower
than in other thermochemical technologies.
When a hyper-accumulator containing Ni,
Pb, and Zn is used as raw material, the
metals are retained in the bio-oil, making it
impossible to recover or isolate the HMs.
Both HTC and HTL are technologies that can
present blockages in the reactor’s internal
system, increasing its operating costs [507].
Biochemical
conversion
process
Anaerobic
digestion
Arundo donax L. was evaluated in soils
contaminated with several HMs, including
Cu, Cd, and Zn. In the third year of planting,
the giant reed managed to remove 2.09 kg
ha
−1
of Cu from the soil; 0.007 kg ha
−1
of Cd,
and 3.87 kg ha−1of Zn. With these results, it
is possible to guarantee the potential of this
species for phytoextraction and later be
applied in energy conversion processes such
as anaerobic digestion and combustion [
509
].
Anaerobic digestion (also including
combustion) are the two technologies that
pose the greatest risk of emitting metals to
the environment without them being fully
retained. When biomass contaminated with
HMs is used, pollutants (metals) are released
from other commercial products produced
[510] in this type of system such as the
compost used for agriculture.
Composting
It reduces the organic matter present in the
residual material from phytoremediation,
accumulating the HMs in another fraction
that can later be applied in anaerobic
digestion.
It is a technique used for many centuries,
with low cost and with a closed carbon cycle
because the carbon that is released has
already been captured [506].
Metals can be transferred naturally from the
system by the microbial action itself,
especially when it comes to Hg.
A longer time for composting the material
may be necessary, a factor that leads to the
possible leaching of HMs contaminating the
soil and groundwater [506].
Fermentation
Many studies have confirmed the feasibility
of using biomass when applied for
phytoremediation in the fermentation of
sugars for the formation of bioethanol.
One of the main concerns of the enzymatic
process (saccharification) is whether metals
inhibit the process. However, metals such as
Zn, Ni, and As do not inhibit the process
[506] when compared to other metals.
When studying 3 different types of
pre-treatments such as alkaline (soda),
organosolv, and acid to analyze biomass
(willow wood) contaminated with HMs (Mn,
Zn, and Fe) for the application of a
Energies 2022,15, 4348 46 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
fermentation process for the production of
bioethanol, it was obtained that the best
pre-treatment was acid (temperature of
170 ◦C and 2% w w−1of H2SO4) as it
allowed the efficient extraction of all metals
being recovered in the residual water fluid
forming a clean cellulosic pulp. In the
enzymatic hydrolysis step, the 3 metals did
not show any type of change in the
hydrolysis of polysaccharides [373].
Sorghum bicolor L. Moench was evaluated in
soil contaminated with different
concentrations of Cd for bioethanol
production. Sorghum proved to be an
excellent candidate for bioenergy when soil
Cd concentrations were less than 30 mg kg
−1
,
with another positive aspect being the fact
that Cd is mainly concentrated in the roots
and not in the shoots, therefore, it does not
affect the biomass used for bioenergy
production [517].
The potential of Miscanthus ×giganteus in
soils contaminated with Mn, strontium (Sr),
zirconium (Zr), Zn, As, Pb, Fe, titanium (Ti),
and Cu for bioethanol production was
analyzed. The high concentration of these
metals in the soil, mainly from Mn, Zr, Fe,
and Ti, did not impede the development of
the species, with the concentration of these
metals being higher in the roots and then in
the aerial part (stems and leaves), a factor
that is advantageous for being the
aboveground fraction of interest for
bioenergy. Ti, Cu, Sr, Fe, Mn, and Zn storage
was lower in shoots and the accumulation of
Pb, As and Zr was also almost null [518].
In order to be able to produce bioethanol on
a laboratory scale, a more rigorous control of
the system is necessary, and the biomass (in
some cases) must be subjected to several
treatments to reduce the greatest amount of
contaminants before the fermentation
process.
In the enzymatic process (saccharification),
metals such as Pb are strong inhibitors, and
Cd and Cu are considered to be moderately
inhibitory [506].
Considering the study by Asad et al., 2017
[373] for the alkaline pre-treatment (soda)
with the same temperature (170 ◦C) and 15%
w w−1of NaOH, a low extraction of HMs
(Fe, Zn, and Mn being the recovery of metals
in the same order), with the metals being
mostly in the cellulosic pulp fraction, then in
less proportion in the liquid waste fluid and
finally, the lowest concentration was in lignin.
For the case of organosolv pre-treatment, the
recovery of metals in each fraction was
followed in the same order as in the alkaline
pre-treatment.
Chemical
conversion
Oil transesteri-
fication
The use of biomass when applied for
phytoremediation in the transesterification of
oils for the formation of biodiesel has been
shown to be viable in several studies [506].
Post-treatment
Hot-gas filter
When contaminated biomass is used, there is
an almost zero transfer of metals to the
product of interest, which is bio-oil, being
less than 1 mg kg−1for Pb and Cd and less
than 5 mg kg−1for the Zn and Cu, all at a
temperature of 350 ◦C. It can be said that the
same results are obtained when
uncontaminated (willow) biomass is used.
There is a greater transfer of HMs to
synthesis gas when using a hot gas filter than
in the case of a cyclone [394].
Cyclone
In contaminated biomass with HMs, the best
conditions for the application of the cyclone
in pyrolysis systems is at a temperature of
650 ◦C in order to simultaneously obtain the
recovery of metals and a liquid product
(bio-oil) without the presence of these.
Energies 2022,15, 4348 47 of 68
Table 3. Cont.
Low ILUC Energy Crops Developed in Contaminated and Marginal Soils
Treatment or Conversion Process Benefits Constraints
In a gasifier coupled to a cyclone and
operating at a temperature between 500 ◦C
and 600 ◦C, solid-phase recovery of metals
such as Ni, Zn, Cu, and Pb is possible, with
the sole exception of Cd [394].
Co-combustion
The application of co-combustion
maintaining certain air conditions allows for
the elimination of HMs. This can be seen in
the following aspects:
•High temperatures help volatile HMs
based on the following order
Pb > Cd > Zn.
•When the incorporation of oxygen into
the system was greater, elements such
as Cd and Zn were stored in the bottom
ash [394].
•In the presence of an oxidative-type
atmosphere, Zn was found in the form
of oxides of heavy materials and
therefore they were not easily
volatilized.
•When the incorporation of oxygen into
the system was greater, elements such
as Pb initially increased in the bottom
ash but then subsequently
decreased [394].
Results presented in Table 3show that the production of industrial crops in contami-
nated soils presents higher constraints than in marginal and degraded soils. Pre-treatments
bring advantages to the processing of the contaminated biomass. Microbial treatment
shows high potential and advantages: aerobic or anaerobic microorganisms can be used,
the process presents low environmental impact and requires low amounts of energy, fac-
tors that increase their efficiency. However, this is also the pre-treatment with the most
constraints because its application is only advisable when the amount of HMs present in
the biomass is low, otherwise, it is a process that can lead to the formation of secondary
contaminants, limiting its environmental sustainability.
Of the biochemical processes, fermentation presents several advantages, but also some
constraints. In terms of advantages, it is possible to process a wide variety of biomasses
harvested from a multitude of contaminants without the system being affected or inhibited.
However, certain contaminants/concentrations can inhibit the system.
For thermochemical processes, pyrolysis presents the greatest advantages in the pro-
cessing of contaminated biomass, with a wide variety of HMs such as Cu, Ni, Zn, and Pb,
since they act as catalysts increasing the rate of pyrolytic reaction, favoring the conditions
of the system. Another important factor is that in most cases and depending on the type of
pyrolysis that is applied, metals are recovered in the solid phase resulting from the system,
therefore, in coal, obtaining a bio-oil with a higher degree of purity for application as a
biofuel. The thermochemical process that has the most limitations is combustion due to
the oxidation that occurs in the contaminated biomass, a factor that causes the emission of
components such as CO, HMs, and NOx, among many others through fly ash, generating a
high risk of producing secondary contaminants, requiring greater control and care within
the system.
Finally, from the described post-treatments (hot-gas filter, cyclone, and co-combustion),
and in accordance with the behavior and conditions applied in the system, the three
present several advantages for processing contaminated biomass, with only co-combustion
presenting some limitations.
4. Conclusions
Herbaceous species or those that have a different classification than forest species are
those that are of greater interest to be implemented as energy crops because their use occurs
in the short term and a greater diversity of biofuels (bioenergy sector) and by-products can
be produced considering its implementation in an industrial unit biorefinery-type. The
Energies 2022,15, 4348 48 of 68
common point between the 14 species is that all of them are currently present in Portugal,
so their viability and development in the territory are known.
It can be said that Sorghum bicolor is the species that was tested in the largest vari-
ety of bioenergy technologies (eight) such as chemical (biodiesel), biochemical (biogas or
biomethane, bioethanol, and biohydrogen), and thermochemical (combustion, gasification,
pyrolysis, and HTL) for biofuels production. It also has the potential to grow in contam-
inated soils, managing to absorb certain HMs from the soil as well as growing in areas
unsuitable for agriculture such as marginal soils. Oil extracted from Sorghum bicolor is a
promising material for liquid fuel production such as biodiesel. Cardoon and microalgae
are the other species that have been tested in a larger range of technological applications,
namely, in seven conversion processes of biomass into biofuels. Jerusalem artichoke,
miscanthu, and willow were tested in six different technologies, and in five conversion
processes, four cultures were tested, hemp, switchgrass, maritime pine, and poplar.
Besides bioenergy, the species studied allows the production of a great diversity of
by-products: animal feed; sources of functional compounds, production of paper pulp,
biofertilizers free of synthetic chemical compounds that cause damage to the soil, bioplastics
that allowed reducing the still latent dependence on fossil resources plastics, biolubricants,
and biocomposites, among others. The products can be applied in different sectors such
as construction, automotive, nutraceutical, and cosmetics, among others. Based on these
data, it is confirmed that the energy crops described here not only allowed the recovery of
soils with low ILUC risk, but they also allowed the development of a diversity of sectors
through the production of materials/products with high commercial value, motivating the
fulfillment of the measures implemented by the European Community through the circular
economy.
Non-food energy crops deserve high expectations as the full commercial stage for
bioenergy purposes still faces some constraints. The supply chain development for the
majority of dedicated energy crops still needs development. Cost estimates are strongly
affected by uncertainties derived from different crops, different crop yields, different crop
locations, and different technologies chosen for bioenergy conversion.
The limitations that can still be found depend essentially on the processes of biomass
conversion such as AD which, due to the complexity of the system, can take a long time,
including years, to find the ideal conditions for the system, especially if the biomass has a
high amount of contaminants; in alcoholic fermentation, which requires a pre-treatment
phase that makes the process more expensive, and in most thermochemical processes, since,
in all of these, the formation of a gaseous phase occurs when biomass with a high amount
of nitrogen and chlorides are processed, the formation of contaminants can occur, and in
the case of biochar (solid phase), if it presents a high amount of HMs, it cannot be applied
as soils remediation, therefore, the limitations do not exist only by the type of material that
is being processed, it also depends on the process itself.
As one of the main functions performed by energy crops with low ILUC risk is
precisely the recovery of MDC soils, future studies should also focus on how the recovery
of metals found in the roots or shoots of the species can be carried out or what can be found
in the residual part of some processes, in order to recover these metals and thus comply
with the principles that drive the circular economy, creating a new economic sector that
allows the recycling of metals and thus avoid excessive exploitation of mining areas.
Supplementary Materials:
The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https:
//www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/en15124348/s1, Table S1: Microalgae raw material studied for
chemical conversion (transesterification) pathways towards biofuels; Table S2: Microalgae feedstock
applied for biochemical conversion (anaerobic digestion) pathways towards biofuels; Table S3:
Microalgae feedstock studied for biochemical conversion (alcoholic fermentation) pathways towards
biofuels; Table S4: Microalgae feedstock applied for biochemical conversion (biological H
2
production)
pathways towards biofuels; Table S5: Microalgae raw material studied for thermochemical conversion
(gasification) pathways towards biofuels; Table S6: Microalgae feedstock studied for thermochemical
Energies 2022,15, 4348 49 of 68
conversion (pyrolysis) pathways towards biofuels; Table S7: Microalgae raw material studied for
thermochemical conversion (hydrothermal liquefaction) pathways towards biofuels.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, A.R. and A.L.F.; methodology, A.R. and A.L.F.; validation,
M.A., A.R. and A.L.F.; formal analysis, M.A., A.R. and A.L.F.; investigation, M.A., L.S., B.R., A.F., L.A.,
S.M.P., L.G., P.M., F.C., L.C.D., A.L.F., A.R. and F.G.; resources, M.A., L.S., B.R., A.F., L.A., S.M.P., L.G.,
P.M., F.C., L.C.D., A.L.F., A.R. and F.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A., L.S., B.R., A.F.,
L.A., S.M.P., L.G., P.M., F.C., L.C.D., A.L.F., A.R. and F.G.; writing—review and editing, M.A., A.R.
and A.L.F.; supervision, A.R. and A.L.F.; project administration, A.R. and A.L.F.; funding acquisition,
A.R., A.L.F. and F.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding:
This research was funded by national funding from the FCT, the Foundation for Science and
Technology (Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P-FCT, I.P), and through the individual research
grants of Mariana Abreu (2020.06236.BD). This work was supported by Biomass and Bioenergy Re-
search Infrastructure (BBRI)-LISBOA-01-0145-FEDER-022059, supported by Operational Programme
for Competitiveness and Internationalization (PORTUGAL2020), by Lisbon Portugal Regional Opera-
tional Programme (Lisboa 2020) and by North Portugal Regional Operational Programme (Norte
2020) under the Portugal 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF). This work was supported by the Mechanical Engineering and Resource Sustainability
Center—MEtRICs, which is financed by national funds from FCT/MCTES (UIDB/04077/2020 and
UIDP/04077/2020).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest:
The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or
in the decision to publish the results.
References
1.
Briones, M.J.I.; Elias, D.M.O.; Grant, H.K.; McNamara, N.P. Plant identity control on soil food web structure and C transfers
under perennial bioenergy plantations. Soil Biol. Biochem. 2019,138, 107603. [CrossRef]
2.
Zheng, Y.; Qiu, F. Bioenergy in the Canadian Prairies: Assessment of accessible biomass from agricultural crop residues and
identification of potential biorefinery sites. Biomass Bioenergy 2020,140, 105669. [CrossRef]
3.
Traverso, L.; Colangeli, M.; Morese, M.; Pulighe, G.; Branca, G. Opportunities and constraints for implementation of cellulosic
ethanol value chains in Europe. Biomass Bioenergy 2020,141, 105692. [CrossRef]
4.
Ferreira, S.; Monteiro, E.; Brito, P.; Vilarinho, C. Biomass resources in Portugal: Current status and prospects. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2017,78, 1221–1235. [CrossRef]
5.
Castillo, C.; Baranzelli, C.; Maes, J.; Zulian, G.; Barbosa, A.; Vandecasteele, I.; Mari-Rivero, I.; Vallecillo, S.; Batista e Silva, F.;
Jacobs-Crisioni, C.; et al. An assessment of dedicated energy crops in Europe under the EU Energy Reference Scenario 2013. In
Application of the LUISA Modelling Platform—Updated Configuration 2014; European Union: Brussels, Belgium, 2015.
6.
Maucieri, C.; Camarotto, C.; Florio, G.; Albergo, R.; Ambrico, A.; Trupo, M.; Borin, M. Bioethanol and biomethane potential
production of thirteen pluri-annual herbaceous species. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019,129, 694–701. [CrossRef]
7.
Pires, J.R.A.; Souza, V.G.L.; Fernando, A.L. Valorization of energy crops as a source for nanocellulose production—Current
knowledge and future prospects. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019,140, 111642. [CrossRef]
8. Papazoglou, E.G.; Fernando, A.L. Preliminary studies on the growth, tolerance and phytoremediation ability of sugarbeet (Beta
vulgaris L.) grown on heavy metal contaminated soil. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017,107, 463–471. [CrossRef]
9.
Barbosa, B.; Fernando, A.L. Aided Phytostabilization of Mine Waste. In Bio-Geotechnologies for Mine Site Rehabilitation; Prasad, M.,
Fava, P., SK, M., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2018; pp. 147–157.
10.
Hanzhenko, O. Seemla: Sustainable Exploitation of Biomass for Bioenergy from Marginal Lands in Europe—Catalogue for Bioenergy Crops
and Their Suitability in the Categories of MagLs; Institute of Bioenergy Crops and Sugar Beet National Academy of Agrarian Sciences
of Ukraine (IBCSB NAASU): Kiev, Ukraine, 2016.
11.
Kulig, B.; Gacek, E.; Wojciechowski, R.; Oleksy, A.; Kołodziejczyk, M.; Szewczyk, W.; Klimek-Kopyra, A. Biomass yield and
energy efficiency of willow depending on cultivar, harvesting frequency and planting density. Plant Soil Environ.
2019
,65, 377–386.
[CrossRef]
12.
Pulighe, G.; Bonati, G.; Colangeli, M.; Morese, M.M.; Traverso, L.; Lupia, F.; Khawaja, C.; Janssen, R.; Fava, F. Ongoing and
emerging issues for sustainable bioenergy production on marginal lands in the Mediterranean regions. Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 2019,103, 58–70. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 50 of 68
13.
Cosentino, S.L.; Patanè, C.; Sanzone, E.; Copani, V.; Foti, S. Effects of soil water content and nitrogen supply on the productivity
of Miscanthus ×giganteus Greef et Deu. in a Mediterranean environment. Ind. Crops Prod. 2007,25, 75–88. [CrossRef]
14.
Zatta, A.; Clifton-Brown, J.; Robson, P.; Hastings, A.; Monti, A. Land use change from C3 grassland to C4 Miscanthus: Effects on
soil carbon content and estimated mitigation benefit after six years. GCB Bioenergy 2014,6, 360–370. [CrossRef]
15.
Cosentino, S.L.; Copani, V.; Scalici, G.; Scordia, D.; Testa, G. Soil Erosion Mitigation by Perennial Species Under Mediterranean
Environment. BioEnergy Res. 2015,8, 1538–1547. [CrossRef]
16.
Fernando, A.L.; Rettenmaier, N.; Soldatos, P.; Panoutsou, C. Sustainability of Perennial Crops Production for Bioenergy and
Bioproducts. In Perennial Grasses for Bioenergy and Bioproducts; Alexopoulou, E., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018;
pp. 245–283.
17.
Pin, M.; Vecchiet, A.; Picco, D. Diffusion of a Sustainable EU Model to Produce 1st Generation Ethanol from Sweet Sorghum in
Decentralised Plants. In Proceedings of the 19th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition (EUBCE 2011), Berlin, Germany,
6–10 June 2011; ETA-Florence Renewable Energies: Florence, Italy, 2011.
18.
Fernando, A.L.; Oliveira, J.F. Caracterização do potencial da planta Miscanthus
×
giganteus em Portugal para fins energéticos e
industriais. In Biologia Vegetal e Agro-Industrial; Robalo, M., Ed.; Edições Sílabo: Lisboa, Portugal, 2005; Volume 2, pp. 195–204.
19.
Long, X.H.; Shao, H.B.; Liu, L.; Liu, L.P.; Liu, Z.P. Jerusalem artichoke: A sustainable biomass feedstock for biorefinery. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016,54, 1382–1388. [CrossRef]
20.
Cumplido-Marin, L.; Graves, A.R.; Burgess, P.J.; Morhart, C.; Paris, P.; Jablonowsk, N.D.; Facciotto, G.; Bury, M.; Martens, R.;
Nahm, M. Two Novel Energy Crops: Sida hermaphrodita (L.) Rusby and Silphium perfoliatum L.—State of Knowledge. Agronomy
2020,10, 928. [CrossRef]
21.
Bury, M.; Rusinowski, S.; Sitko, K.; Krzy ˙
zak, J.; Kitczak, T.; Mo˙
zd˙
zer, E.; Siwek, H.; Włodarczyk, M.; Ziele´znik-Rusinowska, P.;
Szada-Borzyszkowska, A.; et al. Physiological status and biomass yield of Sida hermaphrodita (L.) Rusby cultivated on two distinct
marginal lands in Southern and Northern Poland. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021,167, 113502. [CrossRef]
22.
D˛ebowski, M.; Zieli ´nski, M.; Kisielewska, M.; Krzemieniewski, M. Anaerobic Co-digestion of the Energy Crop Sida hermaphrodita
and Microalgae Biomass for Enhanced Biogas Production. Int. J. Environ. Res. 2017,11, 243–250. [CrossRef]
23.
Papamatthaiakis, N.; Laine, A.; Haapala, A.; Ikonen, R.; Kuittinen, S.; Pappinen, A.; Kolström, M.; Mola-Yudego, B. New energy
crop alternatives for Northern Europe: Yield, chemical and physical properties of Giant knotweed (Fallopia sachalinensis var.
‘Igniscum’) and Virginia mallow (Sida hermaphrodita). Fuel 2021,304, 121349. [CrossRef]
24.
Kurucz, E.; Fári, M.G.; Antal, G.; Gabnai, Z.; Popp, J.; Bai, A. Opportunities for the production and economics of Virginia fanpetals
(Sida hermaphrodita). Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018,90, 824–834. [CrossRef]
25.
Rooney, W.L.; Blumenthal, J.; Bean, B.; Mullet, J.E. Designing sorghum as a dedicated bioenergy feedstock. Biofuels Bioprod.
Biorefin. 2007,1, 147–157. [CrossRef]
26.
Lourenço, A.; Neiva, D.M.; Gominho, J.; Curt, M.D.; Fernández, J.; Marques, A.V.; Pereira, H. Biomass production of four Cynara
cardunculus clones and lignin composition analysis. Biomass Bioenergy 2015,76, 86–95. [CrossRef]
27.
Barracosa, P.; Barracosa, M.; Pires, E. Cardoon as a Sustainable Crop for Biomass and Bioactive Compounds Production. Chem.
Biodivers. 2019,16, e1900498. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28.
Oginni, O.; Singh, K. Pyrolysis characteristics of Arundo donax harvested from a reclaimed mine land. Ind. Crops Prod.
2019
,133,
44–53. [CrossRef]
29.
Ge, X.; Xu, F.; Vasco-Correa, J.; Li, Y. Giant reed: A competitive energy crop in comparison with miscanthus. Renew. Sustain.
Energy Rev. 2016,54, 350–362. [CrossRef]
30.
Ji, A.; Jia, L.; Kumar, D.; Yoo, C.G. Recent Advancements in Biological Conversion of Industrial Hemp for Biofuel and Value-Added
Products. Fermentation 2021,7, 6. [CrossRef]
31.
Kim, S.; Park, J.M.; Kim, C.H. Ethanol production using whole plant biomass of jerusalem artichoke by Kluyveromyces marxianus
CBS1555. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2013,169, 1531–1545. [CrossRef]
32.
Kim, S.; Kim, C.H. Evaluation of whole Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) forconsolidated bioprocessing ethanol
production. Renew. Energy 2014,65, 83–91. [CrossRef]
33.
Cabral, M.R.; Nakanishi, E.Y.; Mármol, G.; Palacios, J.; Godbout, S.; Lagacé, R.; Savastano, H.; Fiorelli, J. Potential of Jerusalem
Artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) stalks to produce cement-bonded particleboards. Ind. Crops Prod.
2018
,122, 214–222. [CrossRef]
34.
Singh, D.; Sharma, D.; Soni, S.L.; Sharma, S.; Kumari, D. Chemical compositions, properties, and standards for different generation
biodiesels: A review. Fuel 2019,253, 60–71. [CrossRef]
35.
Appiah-Nkansah, N.B.; Li, J.; Rooney, W.; Wang, D. A review of sweet sorghum as a viable renewable bioenergy crop and its
techno-economic analysis. Renew. Energy 2019,143, 1121–1132. [CrossRef]
36.
Samson, R.; Mani, S.; Boddey, R.; Sokhansanj, S.; Quesada, D.; Urquiaga, S.; Reis, V.; Lem, C.H. The Potential of C 4 Perennial
Grasses for Developing a Global BIOHEAT Industry. CRC. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2005,24, 461–495. [CrossRef]
37.
Bonfiglio, F.; Cagno, M.; Rey, F.; Torres, M.; Böthig, S.; Menéndez, P.; Mussatto, S.I. Pretreatment of switchgrass by steam explosion
in a semi-continuous pre-pilot reactor. Biomass Bioenergy 2019,121, 41–47. [CrossRef]
38.
Alcheikh, A. Advantages and Challenges of Hemp Biodiesel Production: A Comparison of Hemp vs. Other Crops Commonly
Used for Biodiesel Production. Master’s Thesis, University of Gävle, Gävle, Sweden, 2015.
39.
Hashemzadeh Gargari, M.; Sadrameli, S.M. Investigating continuous biodiesel production from linseed oil in the presence of a
Co-solvent and a heterogeneous based catalyst in a packed bed reactor. Energy 2018,148, 888–895. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 51 of 68
40.
Sambusiti, C.; Ficara, E.; Malpei, F.; Steyer, J.P.; Carrère, H. Influence of alkaline pre-treatment conditions on structural features
and methane production from ensiled sorghum forage. Chem. Eng. J. 2012,211–212, 488–492. [CrossRef]
41.
Stamenkovi´c, O.S.; Siliveru, K.; Veljkovi´c, V.B.; Bankovi´c-Ili´c, I.B.; Tasi´c, M.B.; Ciampitti, I.A.; Ðalovi´c, I.G.; Mitrovi´c, P.M.; Sikora,
V.; Prasad, P.V.V. Production of biofuels from sorghum. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020,124, 109769. [CrossRef]
42.
Di Girolamo, G.; Grigatti, M.; Barbanti, L.; Angelidaki, I. Effects of hydrothermal pre-treatments on Giant reed (Arundo donax)
methane yield. Bioresour. Technol. 2013,147, 152–159. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43.
Sipos, B.; Kreuger, E.; Svensson, S.E.; Réczey, K.; Björnsson, L.; Zacchi, G. Steam pretreatment of dry and ensiled industrial hemp
for ethanol production. Biomass Bioenergy 2010,34, 1721–1731. [CrossRef]
44.
Rossini, F.; Provenzano, M.E.; Kuzmanovi´c, L.; Ruggeri, R. Jerusalem Artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.): A versatile and
sustainable crop for renewable energy production in Europe. Agronomy 2019,9, 528. [CrossRef]
45.
Saratale, G.D.; Kshirsagar, S.D.; Saratale, R.G.; Govindwar, S.P.; Oh, M.-K. Fermentative hydrogen production using sorghum
husk as a biomass feedstock and process optimization. Biotechnol. Bioprocess Eng. 2015,20, 733–743. [CrossRef]
46.
Lakshman, V.; Brassard, P.; Hamelin, L.; Raghavan, V.; Godbout, S. Pyrolysis of Miscanthus: Developing the mass balance of a
biorefinery through experimental tests in an auger reactor. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2021,14, 100687. [CrossRef]
47.
Bi, Z.; Zhang, J.; Peterson, E.; Zhu, Z.; Xia, C.; Liang, Y.; Wiltowski, T. Biocrude from pretreated sorghum bagasse through catalytic
hydrothermal liquefaction. Fuel 2017,188, 112–120. [CrossRef]
48.
Serrano, D.; Horvat, A.; Sobrino, C.; Sánchez-Delgado, S. Thermochemical conversion of C. cardunculus L. in nitrate molten salts.
Appl. Therm. Eng. 2019,148, 136–146. [CrossRef]
49. Wiklund, A. The genus Cynara L. (Asteraceae-Cardueae). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 1992,109, 75–123. [CrossRef]
50.
Fernández, J.; Hidalgo, M.; Del Monte, J.P.; Curt, M.D. Cynara cardunculus L. as a perennial crop for non-irrigated lands: Yields
and applications. Acta Hortic. 2005,681, 109–116. [CrossRef]
51.
Gominho, J.; Curt, M.D.; Lourenço, A.; Fernández, J.; Pereira, H. Cynara cardunculus L. as a biomass and multi-purpose crop: A
review of 30 years of research. Biomass Bioenergy J. 2018,109, 257–275. [CrossRef]
52.
Zayed, A.; Farag, M.A. Valorization, extraction optimization and technology advancements of artichoke biowastes: Food and
non-food applications. LWT 2020,132, 109883. [CrossRef]
53.
Barracosa, P.; Oliveira, J.; Barros, M.; Pires, E. Morphological evaluation of cardoon (Cynara cardunculus L.): Assessing biodiversity
for applications based on tradition, innovation and sustainability. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol. 2018,65, 17–28. [CrossRef]
54.
Gominho, J.; Fernandez, J.; Pereira, H. Cynara cardunculus L.—A new fibre crop for pulp and paper production. Ind. Crops Prod.
2001,13, 1–10. [CrossRef]
55.
Neri, U.; Pennelli, B.; Simonetti, G.; Francaviglia, R. Biomass partition and productive aptitude of wild and cultivated cardoon
genotypes (Cynara cardunculus L.) in a marginal land of Central Italy. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017,95, 191–201. [CrossRef]
56.
Pappalardo, H.D.; Toscano, V.; Puglia, G.D.; Genovese, C.; Raccuia, S.A. Cynara cardunculus L. as a Multipurpose Crop for Plant
Secondary Metabolites Production in Marginal Stressed Lands. Front. Plant Sci. 2020,11, 240. [CrossRef]
57.
Sitepu, E.K.; Heimann, K.; Raston, C.L.; Zhang, W. Critical evaluation of process parameters for direct biodiesel production from
diverse feedstock. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020,123, 109762. [CrossRef]
58.
Ferrero, F.; Dinuccio, E.; Rollé, L.; Tabacco, E.; Borreani, G. Suitability of cardoon (Cynara cardunculus L.) harvested at two stages
of maturity to ensiling and methane production. Biomass Bioenergy 2020,142, 105776. [CrossRef]
59.
Zabaniotou, A.; Bitou, P.; Kanellis, T.; Manara, P.; Stavropoulos, G. Investigating Cynara C. biomass gasification producer gas
suitability for CHP, second generation biofuels, and H2 production. Ind. Crops Prod. 2014,61, 308–316. [CrossRef]
60.
Toscano, V.; Sollima, L.; Genovese, C.; Melilli, M.G.; Raccuia, S.A. Pilot plant system for biodiesel and pellet production from
cardoon: Technical and economic feasibility. Acta Hortic. 2016,1147, 429–442. [CrossRef]
61.
Gutiérrez, J.; Galán, C.A.; Suárez, R.; Álvarez-Murillo, A.; González, J.F. Biofuels from cardoon pyrolysis: Extraction and
application of biokerosene/kerosene mixtures in a self-manufactured jet engine. Energy Convers. Manag.
2018
,157, 246–256.
[CrossRef]
62.
Barbanera, M.; Castellini, M.; Tasselli, G.; Turchetti, B.; Cotana, F.; Buzzini, P. Prediction of the environmental impacts of yeast
biodiesel production from cardoon stalks at industrial scale. Fuel 2021,283, 118967. [CrossRef]
63.
Nogales-Delgado, S.; Sánchez, N.; Encinar, J.M. Valorization of Cynara cardunculus L. Oil as the basis of a biorefinery for biodiesel
and biolubricant production. Energies 2020,13, 5085. [CrossRef]
64.
Pesce, G.R.; Negri, M.; Bacenetti, J.; Mauromicale, G. The biomethane, silage and biomass yield obtainable from three accessions
of Cynara cardunculus.Ind. Crops Prod. 2017,103, 233–239. [CrossRef]
65.
Espada, J.J.; Villalobos, H.; Rodríguez, R. Environmental assessment of different technologies for bioethanol production from
Cynara cardunculus: A Life Cycle Assessment study. Biomass Bioenergy 2021,144, 105910. [CrossRef]
66.
Vergara, P.; Ladero, M.; García-Ochoa, F.; Villar, J.C. Valorization of Cynara cardunculus crops by ethanol-water treatment:
Optimization of operating conditions. Ind. Crops Prod. 2018,124, 856–862. [CrossRef]
67.
Mancini, M.; Lanza Volpe, M.; Gatti, B.; Malik, Y.; Moreno, A.C.; Leskovar, D.; Cravero, V. Characterization of cardoon accessions
as feedstock for biodiesel production. Fuel 2019,235, 1287–1293. [CrossRef]
68.
Fernandes, M.C.; Ferro, M.D.; Paulino, A.F.C.; Mendes, J.A.S.; Gravitis, J.; Evtuguin, D.V.; Xavier, A.M.R.B. Enzymatic saccharifi-
cation and bioethanol production from Cynara cardunculus pretreated by steam explosion. Bioresour. Technol.
2015
,186, 309–315.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 52 of 68
69.
Cotana, F.; Cavalaglio, G.; Gelosia, M.; Coccia, V.; Petrozzi, A.; Ingles, D.; Pompili, E. A comparison between SHF and SSSF
processes from cardoon for ethanol production. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015,69, 424–432. [CrossRef]
70.
Mañas, P.; Castro, E.; de las Heras, J. Application of treated wastewater and digested sewage sludge to obtain biomass from
Cynara cardunculus L. J. Clean. Prod. 2014,67, 72–78. [CrossRef]
71.
Abreu, M.; Reis, A.; Moura, P.; Fernando, A.L.; Luís, A.; Quental, L.; Patinha, P.; Gírio, F. Evaluation of the potential of biomass to
energy in Portugal-conclusions from the CONVERTE project. Energies 2020,13, 937. [CrossRef]
72.
Duke, J.A. Handbook of Energy Crops. Available online: https://hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Arundo_donax.
html/hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/duke_energy/Arundo_donax.html (accessed on 17 January 2020).
73.
Duke, J.; Wain, K. Medicinal Plants of the World-Computer Index with More Than 85,000 Entries; Plant genetics and germplasm
Institute, Agriculture Research Services: Beltsville, MD, USA, 2008; pp. 231–239.
74.
Raghu, S.; Anderson, R.C.; Daehler, C.C.; Davis, A.S.; Wiedenmann, R.N.; Simberloff, D.; Mack, R.N. Adding biofuels to the
invasive species fire? Science 2006,313, 1742. [CrossRef]
75. Low, T.; Carol, B. The Weedy Truth About Biofuels; Invasive Species Council: Melbourne, Australia, 2007.
76.
Corno, L.; Pilu, R.; Adani, F. Arundo donax L.: A non-food crop for bioenergy and bio-compound production. Biotechnol. Adv.
2014,32, 1535–1549. [CrossRef]
77.
Dahl, J.; Obernberger, I. Evaluation of the combustion characteristics of four perennial energy crops (Arundo donax,Cynara
cardunculus,Miscanthus
×
giganteus and Panicum virgatum). In Proceedings of the 2nd World Conference on Biomass for Energy,
Industry and Climate Protection, Rome, Italy, 10–14 May 2004; pp. 1265–1270.
78.
Ragaglini, G.; Dragoni, F.; Simone, M.; Bonari, E. Suitability of giant reed (Arundo donax L.) for anaerobic digestion: Effect of
harvest time and frequency on the biomethane yield potential. Bioresour. Technol. 2014,152, 107–115. [CrossRef]
79.
Dell’Omo, P.P.; Spena, V.A. Mechanical pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass to improve biogas production: Comparison of
results for giant reed and wheat straw. Energy 2020,203, 117798. [CrossRef]
80.
Vasmara, C.; Cianchetta, S.; Marchetti, R.; Ceotto, E.; Galletti, S. Potassium Hydroxyde Pre-Treatment Enhances Methane Yield
from Giant Reed (Arundo donax L.). Energies 2021,14, 630. [CrossRef]
81.
De Bari, I.; Liuzzi, F.; Ambrico, A.; Trupo, M. Arundo donax refining to second generation bioethanol and furfural. Processes
2020
,
8, 1591. [CrossRef]
82.
Lemons e Silva, C.F.; Schirmer, M.A.; Maeda, R.N.; Barcelos, C.A.; Pereira, N. Potential of giant reed (Arundo donax L.) for second
generation ethanol production. Electron. J. Biotechnol. 2015,18, 10–15. [CrossRef]
83.
Jaradat, A.A. Genetic resources of energy crops: Biological systems to combat climate change. Aust. J. Crop Sci.
2010
,4, 309–323.
84.
Jámbor, A.; Török, Á. The Economics of Arundo donax—A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability
2019
,11, 4225. [CrossRef]
85.
Muthuvelu, K.S.; Rajarathinam, R.; Kanagaraj, L.P.; Ranganathan, R.V.; Dhanasekaran, K.; Manickam, N.K. Evaluation and
characterization of novel sources of sustainable lignocellulosic residues for bioethanol production using ultrasound-assisted
alkaline pre-treatment. Waste Manag. 2019,87, 368–374. [CrossRef]
86.
Komolwanich, T.; Tatijarern, P.; Prasertwasu, S.; Khumsupan, D.; Chaisuwan, T.; Luengnaruemitchai, A.; Wongkasemjit, S.
Comparative potentiality of Kans grass (Saccharum spontaneum) and Giant reed (Arundo donax) as lignocellulosic feedstocks for
the release of monomeric sugars by microwave/chemical pretreatment. Cellulose 2014,21, 1327–1340. [CrossRef]
87.
Ba, Y.; Liu, F.; Wang, X.; Yang, J. Pyrolysis of C3 energy plant (arundo donax): Thermogravimetry, mechanism, and potential
evaluation. Ind. Crops Prod. 2020,149, 112337. [CrossRef]
88.
Fernando, A.L.; Barbosa, B.; Costa, J.; Papazoglou, E.G. Giant Reed (Arundo donax L.): A Multipurpose Crop Bridging Phy-
toremediation with Sustainable Bioeconomy. In Bioremediation and Bioeconomy; Prasad, M.N.V., Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, 2016; pp. 77–95.
89.
Zhao, J.; Xu, Y.; Wang, W.; Griffin, J.; Roozeboom, K.; Wang, D. Bioconversion of industrial hemp biomass for bioethanol
production: A review. Fuel 2020,281, 118725. [CrossRef]
90.
Johnson, R. Hemp as an Agricultural Commodity; Congressional Research Service (CRS)—USA Government: Washington, DC,
USA, 2018.
91.
DGADR. Cânhamo. Available online: http://guiaexploracoes.dgadr.pt/index.php/producao-vegetal/outros-setores/canhamo
(accessed on 17 January 2020).
92.
European Parliament Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 Establishing a
Common Organisation of the Markets in Agricultural Products and Repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79,
(EC) No 1037/2001; European Union: Brussels, Belgium, 2013; pp. 671–854.
93. Fike, J. Industrial Hemp: Renewed Opportunities for an Ancient Crop. CRC. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 2016,35, 406–424. [CrossRef]
94.
Duque Schumacher, A.G.; Pequito, S.; Pazour, J. Industrial hemp fiber: A sustainable and economical alternative to cotton. J.
Clean. Prod. 2020,268, 122180. [CrossRef]
95.
Parvez, A.M.; Lewis, J.D.; Afzal, M.T. Potential of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) for bioenergy production in Canada: Status,
challenges and outlook. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021,141, 110784. [CrossRef]
96.
Ingrao, C.; Lo Giudice, A.; Bacenetti, J.; Tricase, C.; Dotelli, G.; Fiala, M.; Siracusa, V.; Mbohwa, C. Energy and environmental
assessment of industrial hemp for building applications: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,51, 29–42. [CrossRef]
97.
Kraszkiewicz, A.; Kachel, M.; Parafiniuk, S.; Zaj ˛ac, G.; Niedziółka, I.; Sprawka, M. Assessment of the Possibility of Using Hemp
Biomass (Cannabis sativa L.) for Energy Purposes: A Case Study. Appl. Sci. 2019,9, 4437. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 53 of 68
98.
Crini, G.; Lichtfouse, E.; Chanet, G.; Morin-Crini, N. Applications of hemp in textiles, paper industry, insulation and building
materials, horticulture, animal nutrition, food and beverages, nutraceuticals, cosmetics and hygiene, medicine, agrochemistry,
energy production and environment: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2020,18, 1451–1476. [CrossRef]
99.
Pedrazzi, S.; Santunione, G.; Mustone, M.; Cannazza, G.; Citti, C.; Francia, E.; Allesina, G. Techno-economic study of a small scale
gasifier applied to an indoor hemp farm: From energy savings to biochar effects on productivity. Energy Convers. Manag.
2021
,
228, 113645. [CrossRef]
100.
Salami, A.; Raninen, K.; Heikkinen, J.; Tomppo, L.; Vilppo, T.; Selenius, M.; Raatikainen, O.; Lappalainen, R.; Vepsäläinen, J.
Complementary chemical characterization of distillates obtained from industrial hemp hurds by thermal processing. Ind. Crops
Prod. 2020,155, 112760. [CrossRef]
101.
Peças, P.; Carvalho, H.; Salman, H.; Leite, M. Natural fibre composites and their applications: A review. J. Compos. Sci.
2018
,2, 66.
[CrossRef]
102.
Jami, T.; Karade, S.R.; Singh, L.P. A review of the properties of hemp concrete for green building applications. J. Clean. Prod.
2019
,
239, 117852. [CrossRef]
103.
Khan, B.A.; Chevali, V.S.; Na, H.; Zhu, J.; Warner, P.; Wang, H. Processing and properties of antibacterial silver nanoparticle-loaded
hemp hurd/poly(lactic acid) biocomposites. Compos. Part B Eng. 2016,100, 10–18. [CrossRef]
104.
Viswanathan, M.B.; Cheng, M.H.; Clemente, T.E.; Dweikat, I.; Singh, V. Economic perspective of ethanol and biodiesel coproduc-
tion from industrial hemp. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,299, 126875. [CrossRef]
105.
Prade, T. Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.)—A High-Yielding Energy Crop; Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences: Uppsala,
Sweden, 2011.
106.
Li, S.Y.; Stuart, J.D.; Li, Y.; Parnas, R.S. The feasibility of converting Cannabis sativa L. oil into biodiesel. Bioresour. Technol.
2010
,
101, 8457–8460. [CrossRef]
107.
Ahmad, M.; Ullah, K.; Khan, M.A.; Zafar, M.; Tariq, M.; Ali, S.; Sultana, S. Physicochemical analysis of hemp oil biodiesel: A
promising non edible new source for bioenergy. Energy Sour. Part A Recover. Util. Environ. Eff. 2011,33, 1365–1374. [CrossRef]
108.
Prade, T.; Svensson, S.E.; Mattsson, J.E. Energy balances for biogas and solid biofuel production from industrial hemp. Biomass
Bioenergy 2012,40, 36–52. [CrossRef]
109.
Plöchl, M.; Heiermann, M.; Linke, B.; Schelle, H. Biogas Crops—Part II: Balance of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Energy from
Using Field Crops for Anaerobic Digestion. Agric. Eng. Int. CIGR J. 2009,XI, 1–11.
110.
Prade, T.; Svensson, S.E.; Andersson, A.; Mattsson, J.E. Biomass and energy yield of industrial hemp grown for biogas and solid
fuel. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 3040–3049. [CrossRef]
111.
Laghari, M.; Mirjat, M.S.; Hu, Z.; Fazal, S.; Xiao, B.; Hu, M.; Chen, Z.; Guo, D. Effects of biochar application rate on sandy desert
soil properties and sorghum growth. Catena 2015,135, 313–320. [CrossRef]
112.
Pakarinen, A.; Maijala, P.; Stoddard, F.L.; Santanen, A.; Tuomainen, P.; Kymäläinen, M.; Viikari, L. Evaluation of annual bioenergy
crops in the boreal zone for biogas and ethanol production. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 3071–3078. [CrossRef]
113.
Kuglarz, M.; Gunnarsson, I.B.; Svensson, S.E.; Prade, T.; Johansson, E.; Angelidaki, I. Ethanol production from industrial hemp:
Effect of combined dilute acid/steam pretreatment and economic aspects. Bioresour. Technol. 2014,163, 236–243. [CrossRef]
114.
Branca, C.; Di Blasi, C.; Galgano, A. Experimental analysis about the exploitation of industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa) in pyrolysis.
Fuel Process. Technol. 2017,162, 20–29. [CrossRef]
115.
Viswanathan, M.B.; Park, K.; Cheng, M.H.; Cahoon, E.B.; Dweikat, I.; Clemente, T.; Singh, V. Variability in structural carbohydrates,
lipid composition, and cellulosic sugar production from industrial hemp varieties. Ind. Crops Prod.
2020
,157, 112906. [CrossRef]
116.
Matassa, S.; Esposito, G.; Pirozzi, F.; Papirio, S. Exploring the biomethane potential of different industrial hemp (
Cannabis sativa L.
)
biomass residues. Energies 2020,13, 3361. [CrossRef]
117.
Kreuger, E.; Prade, T.; Escobar, F.; Svensson, S.E.; Englund, J.E.; Björnsson, L. Anaerobic digestion of industrial hemp-Effect of
harvest time on methane energy yield per hectare. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 893–900. [CrossRef]
118.
Kreuger, E.; Sipos, B.; Zacchi, G.; Svensson, S.E.; Björnsson, L. Bioconversion of industrial hemp to ethanol and methane: The
benefits of steam pretreatment and co-production. Bioresour. Technol. 2011,102, 3457–3465. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
119.
Nykter, M.; Kymäläinen, H.R.; Thomsen, A.B.; Lilholt, H.; Koponen, H.; Sjöberg, A.M.; Thygesen, A. Effects of thermal and
enzymatic treatments and harvesting time on the microbial quality and chemical composition of fibre hemp (Cannabis sativa L.).
Biomass Bioenergy 2008,32, 392–399. [CrossRef]
120.
Das, L.; Liu, E.; Saeed, A.; Williams, D.W.; Hu, H.; Li, C.; Ray, A.E.; Shi, J. Industrial hemp as a potential bioenergy crop in
comparison with kenaf, switchgrass and biomass sorghum. Bioresour. Technol. 2017,244, 641–649. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
121.
Zhao, J.; Xu, Y.; Wang, W.; Griffin, J.; Wang, D. Conversion of liquid hot water, acid and alkali pretreated industrial hemp
biomasses to bioethanol. Bioresour. Technol. 2020,309, 123383. [CrossRef]
122.
Rheay, H.T.; Omondi, E.C.; Brewer, C.E. Potential of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) for paired phytoremediation and bioenergy
production. GCB Bioenergy 2021,13, 525–536. [CrossRef]
123.
Kays, S.J.; Nottingham, S.F. Biology and Chemistry of Jerusalem Artichoke. In Biology and Chemistry of Jerusalem Artichoke; CRC
Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA; Taylor and Francis Group: Abingdon, UK, 2007; Volume 44, p. 478, ISBN 9781420044959.
124.
Yang, L.; He, Q.S.; Corscadden, K.; Udenigwe, C.C. The prospects of Jerusalem artichoke in functional food ingredients and
bioenergy production. Biotechnol. Rep. 2015,5, 77–88. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 54 of 68
125.
Barclay, T.; Ginic-Markovic, M.; Cooper, P.; Petrovsky, N. Inulin—A versatile polysaccharide with multiple pharmaceutical and
food chemical uses. J. Excip. Food Chem. 2010,1, 27–50.
126.
Qiu, Y.; Lei, P.; Zhang, Y.; Sha, Y.; Zhan, Y.; Xu, Z.; Li, S.; Xu, H.; Ouyang, P. Recent advances in bio-based multi-products of
agricultural Jerusalem artichoke resources. Biotechnol. Biofuels 2018,11, 151. [CrossRef]
127.
Johansson, E.; Prade, T.; Angelidaki, I.; Svensson, S.E.; Newson, W.R.; Gunnarsson, I.B.; Hovmalm, H.P. Economically viable
components from jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) in a biorefinery concept. Int. J. Mol. Sci.
2015
,16, 8997–9016.
[CrossRef]
128.
Rakhimov, D.A.; Zhauynbaeva, K.S.; Mezhlumyan, L.G.; Salikhov, S.A. Carbohydrates and Proteins from Helianthus tuberosus.
Chem. Nat. Compd. 2014,50, 344–345. [CrossRef]
129.
Baldini, M.; Danuso, F.; Turi, M.; Vannozzi, G.P. Evaluation of new clones of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) for
inulin and sugar yield from stalks and tubers. Ind. Crops Prod. 2004,19, 25–40. [CrossRef]
130.
Li, L.; Li, L.; Wang, Y.; Du, Y.; Qin, S. Biorefinery products from the inulin-containing crop Jerusalem artichoke. Biotechnol. Lett.
2013,35, 471–477. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
131.
Gunnarsson, I.B.; Svensson, S.E.; Johansson, E.; Karakashev, D.; Angelidaki, I. Potential of Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus
tuberosus L.) as a biorefinery crop. Ind. Crops Prod. 2014,56, 231–240. [CrossRef]
132.
Bhagia, S.; Akinosho, H.; Ferreira, J.F.S.; Ragauskas, A.J. Biofuel production from Jerusalem artichoke tuber inulins: A review.
Biofuel Res. J. 2017,4, 587–599. [CrossRef]
133.
Matei, G.; Vlădu
t
,
, V.; Isticioaia, S.; Pânzaru, R.L.; Popa, D. Potential of Jerusalem Artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) as a Biomass
Crop. Agron. J. 2020,LXIII, 387–393.
134.
Ge, X.Y.; Zhang, W.G. A shortcut to the production of high ethanol concentration from jerusalem artichoke tubers. Food Technol.
Biotechnol. 2005,43, 241–246.
135.
Gao, J.; Yuan, W.; Kong, L.; Xiang, R.; Zhong, S. Efficient ethanol production from inulin by two-stage aerate strategy. Biomass
Bioenergy 2015,80, 10–16. [CrossRef]
136.
Paixão, S.M.; Alves, L.; Pacheco, R.; Silva, C.M. Evaluation of Jerusalem artichoke as a sustainable energy crop to bioethanol:
Energy and CO2eq emissions modeling for an industrial scenario. Energy 2018,150, 468–481. [CrossRef]
137.
Song, Y.; Wi, S.G.; Kim, H.M.; Bae, H.J. Cellulosic bioethanol production from Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.) using
hydrogen peroxide-acetic acid (HPAC) pretreatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2016,214, 30–36. [CrossRef]
138.
Li, M.; Wang, J.; Yang, Y.; Xie, G. Alkali-based pretreatments distinctively extract lignin and pectin for enhancing biomass
saccharification by altering cellulose features in sugar-rich Jerusalem artichoke stem. Bioresour. Technol.
2016
,208, 31–41.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
139.
Zhang, C.; Wu, D.; Yang, H.; Ren, H. Production of ethanol from Jerusalem artichoke by mycelial pellets. Sci. Rep.
2019
,9, 18510.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
140.
Sarchami, T.; Rehmann, L. Optimizing enzymatic hydrolysis of inulin from Jerusalem artichoke tubers for fermentative butanol
production. Biomass Bioenergy 2014,69, 175–182. [CrossRef]
141.
Li, Z. Site Suitability Analysis for Biomass Energy Plants Using GIS. Available online: https://sites.tufts.edu/gis/files/2014/11/
Li_Zhaohuan.pdf (accessed on 22 April 2021).
142.
Celi´nska, E.; Grajek, W. Biotechnological production of 2,3-butanediol—Current state and prospects. Biotechnol. Adv.
2009
,27,
715–725. [CrossRef]
143.
Wünsch, K.; Gruber, S.; Claupein, W. Profitability analysis of cropping systems for biogas production on marginal sites in
southwestern Germany. Renew. Energy 2012,45, 213–220. [CrossRef]
144.
Lehtomäki, A.; Viinikainen, T.A.; Rintala, J.A. Screening boreal energy crops and crop residues for methane biofuel production.
Biomass Bioenergy 2008,32, 541–550. [CrossRef]
145.
Emmerling, D.C.; Barton, J. Anaerobic co-digestion of topinambour (Helianthus tuberosus L.) and properties of the remaining
biogas manure. Arch. Agron. Soil Sci. 2007,53, 683–690. [CrossRef]
146.
Cheng, Y.; Zhou, W.; Gao, C.; Lan, K.; Gao, Y.; Wu, Q. Biodiesel production from Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus tuberosus L.)
tuber by heterotrophic microalgae Chlorella protothecoides. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2009,84, 777–781. [CrossRef]
147.
Zhao, X.; Wu, S.; Hu, C.; Wang, Q.; Hua, Y.; Zhao, Z.K. Lipid production from Jerusalem artichoke by Rhodosporidium toruloides
Y4. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010,37, 581–585. [CrossRef]
148.
Ciccoli, R.; Sperandei, M.; Petrazzuolo, F.; Broglia, M.; Chiarini, L.; Correnti, A.; Farneti, A.; Pignatelli, V.; Tabacchioni, S.
Anaerobic digestion of the above ground biomass of Jerusalem Artichoke in a pilot plant: Impact of the preservation method on
the biogas yield and microbial community. Biomass Bioenergy 2018,108, 190–197. [CrossRef]
149.
Gao, K.; Zhang, Z.; Zhu, T.; Coulter, J.A. The influence of flower removal on tuber yield and biomass characteristics of Helianthus
tuberosus L. in a semi-arid area. Ind. Crops Prod. 2020,150, 112374. [CrossRef]
150.
Song, Y.; Oh, C.; Bae, H.J. Simultaneous production of bioethanol and value-added D-psicose from Jerusalem artichoke (Helianthus
tuberosus L.) tubers. Bioresour. Technol. 2017,244, 1068–1072. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
151.
Mehmood, M.A.; Ahmad, M.S.; Liu, Q.; Liu, C.G.; Tahir, M.H.; Aloqbi, A.A.; Tarbiah, N.I.; Alsufiani, H.M.; Gull, M. Helianthus
tuberosus as a promising feedstock for bioenergy and chemicals appraised through pyrolysis, kinetics, and TG-FTIR-MS based
study. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019,194, 37–45. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 55 of 68
152.
Dixit, S.; Kanakraj, S.; Rehman, A. Linseed oil as a potential resource for bio-diesel: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev.
2012
,16,
4415–4421. [CrossRef]
153.
Popa, V.-M.; Gruia, A.; Raba, D.-I.; Dumbrava, D.; Moldovan, C.; Bordean, D.; Mateescu, C. Fatty acids composition and oil
characteristics of linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.) from Romania. J. Agroaliment. Process. Technol. 2012,18, 136–140.
154.
Saleem, M.H.; Ali, S.; Hussain, S.; Kamran, M.; Chattha, M.S.; Ahmad, S.; Aqeel, M.; Rizwan, M.; Aljarba, N.H.; Alkahtani, S.;
et al. Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.): A Potential Candidate for Phytoremediation? Biological and Economical Points of View.
Plants 2020,9, 496. [CrossRef]
155.
Zhang, J.; Xie, Y.; Dang, Z.; Wang, L.; Li, W.; Zhao, W.; Zhao, L.; Dang, Z. Oil content and fatty acid components of oilseed flax
under different environments in China. Agron. J. 2016,108, 365–372. [CrossRef]
156.
Lafond, G.P.; Irvine, B.; Johnston, A.M.; May, W.E.; McAndrew, D.W.; Shirtliffe, S.J.; Stevenson, F.C. Impact of agronomic factors
on seed yield formation and quality in flax. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2008,88, 485–500. [CrossRef]
157.
Blackshaw, R.E.; Johnson, E.N.; Gan, Y.; May, W.E.; McAndrew, D.W.; Barthet, V.; McDonald, T.; Wispinski, D. Alternative oilseed
crops for biodiesel feedstock on the Canadian prairies. Can. J. Plant Sci. 2011,91, 889–896. [CrossRef]
158.
Athar, M.; Zaidi, S. A review of the feedstocks, catalysts, and intensification techniques for sustainable biodiesel production. J.
Environ. Chem. Eng. 2020,8, 104523. [CrossRef]
159.
Tabatabaei, M.; Aghbashlo, M.; Dehhaghi, M.; Panahi, H.K.S.; Mollahosseini, A.; Hosseini, M.; Soufiyan, M.M. Reactor technolo-
gies for biodiesel production and processing: A review. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2019,74, 239–303. [CrossRef]
160.
Moser, B.R. Fuel property enhancement of biodiesel fuels from common and alternative feedstocks via complementary blending.
Renew. Energy 2016,85, 819–825. [CrossRef]
161. Warkhade, G.S.; Babu, A.V. Combustion characteristics of linseed (Linum usitatissimum) methyl ester fuelled biodiesel blends in
variable compression ratio diesel engine. Aust. J. Mech. Eng. 2019,17, 38–51. [CrossRef]
162.
Bacenetti, J.; Restuccia, A.; Schillaci, G.; Failla, S. Biodiesel production from unconventional oilseed crops (Linum usitatissimum L.
and Camelina sativa L.) in Mediterranean conditions: Environmental sustainability assessment. Renew. Energy
2017
,112, 444–456.
[CrossRef]
163.
Taherkhani, M.; Sadrameli, S.M. An improvement and optimization study of biodiesel production from linseed via in-situ
transesterification using a co-solvent. Renew. Energy 2018,119, 787–794. [CrossRef]
164.
Ahmad, T.; Danish, M.; Kale, P.; Geremew, B.; Adeloju, S.B.; Nizami, M.; Ayoub, M. Optimization of process variables for biodiesel
production by transesterification of flaxseed oil and produced biodiesel characterizations. Renew. Energy
2019
,139, 1272–1280.
[CrossRef]
165.
Griga, M.; Bjelková, M. Flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) and Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) as Fibre Crops for Phytoextraction of Heavy
Metals: Biological, Agro-technological and Economical Point of View. In Plant-Based Remediation Processes; Gupta, D.K., Ed.;
Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013; Volume 35, pp. 199–237.
166.
Saleem, M.H.; Fahad, S.; Khan, S.U.; Din, M.; Ullah, A.; Sabagh, A.E.L.; Hossain, A.; Llanes, A.; Liu, L. Copper-induced oxidative
stress, initiation of antioxidants and phytoremediation potential of flax (Linum usitatissimum L.) seedlings grown under the
mixing of two different soils of China. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019,27, 5211–5221. [CrossRef]
167.
Amna; Masood, S.; Syed, J.H.; Munis, M.F.H.; Chaudhary, H.J. Phyto-Extraction of Nickel by Linum usitatissimum in Association
with Glomus intraradices. Int. J. Phytoremed. 2015,17, 981–987.
168.
Fernando, A.L.; Godovikova, V.; Oliveira, J.F.S. Miscanthus
×
giganteus: Contribution to a Sustainable Agriculture of a
Future/Present—Oriented Biomaterial. Mater. Sci. Forum Adv. Mater. Forum II 2004,455–456, 437–441. [CrossRef]
169.
Oliveira, J.S.; Duarte, M.P.; Christian, D.G.; Eppel-Hotz, A.; Fernando, A.L. Environmental aspects of Miscanthus production. In
Miscanthus: For Energy and Fibre; Jones, M.B., Walsh, M., Eds.; James & James (Science Publishers): London, UK, 2001; pp. 172–178,
ISBN 9781849710978.
170.
Lewandowski, I.; Clifton-Brown, J.; Kiesel, A.; Hastings, A.; Iqbal, Y. Miscanthus. In Perennial Grasses for Bioenergy and Bioproducts;
Alexopoulou, E., Ed.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2018; pp. 35–59, ISBN 9780128129012.
171.
Clifton-Brown, J.; Hastings, A.; Mos, M.; McCalmont, J.P.; Ashman, C.; Awty-Carroll, D.; Cerazy, J.; Chiang, Y.-C.; Cosentino, S.;
Cracroft-Eley, W.; et al. Progress in upscaling Miscanthus biomass production for the European bio-economy with seed-based
hybrids. GCB Bioenergy 2017,9, 6–17. [CrossRef]
172.
Danielewicz, D.; Surma-´
Slusarska, B. Miscanthus
×
giganteus stalks as a potential non-wood raw material for the pulp and paper
industry. Influence of pulping and beating conditions on the fibre and paper properties. Ind. Crops Prod.
2019
,141, 111744.
[CrossRef]
173.
Girones, J.; Vo, L.; Arnoult, S.; Brancourt-Hulmel, M.; Navard, P. Miscanthus stem fragment—Reinforced polypropylene
composites: Development of an optimized preparation procedure at small scale and its validation for differentiating genotypes.
Polym. Test. 2016,55, 166–172. [CrossRef]
174.
Okeke, I.J.; Sahoo, K.; Kaliyan, N.; Mani, S. Life cycle assessment of renewable diesel production via anaerobic digestion and
Fischer-Tropsch synthesis from miscanthus grown in strip-mined soils. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,249, 119358. [CrossRef]
175.
Scordia, D.; van den Berg, D.; van Sleen, P.; Alexopoulou, E.; Cosentino, S.L. Are herbaceous perennial grasses suitable feedstock
for thermochemical conversion pathways? Ind. Crops Prod. 2016,91, 350–357. [CrossRef]
176.
Schmidt, T.; Fernando, A.L.; Monti, A.; Rettenmaier, N. Life Cycle Assessment of Bioenergy and Bio-Based Products from
Perennial Grasses Cultivated on Marginal Land in the Mediterranean Region. BioEnergy Res. 2015,8, 1548–1561. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 56 of 68
177.
Couto, N.D.; Silva, V.B.; Monteiro, E.; Rouboa, A.; Brito, P. An experimental and numerical study on the Miscanthus gasification
by using a pilot scale gasifier. Renew. Energy 2017,109, 248–261. [CrossRef]
178.
Barbosa, B.; Costa, J.; Fernando, A.L. Production of Energy Crops in Heavy Metals Contaminated Land: Opportunities and Risks.
In Land Allocation for Biomass Crops; Li, R., Monti, A., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 83–102, ISBN 978-3-319-74536-7.
179.
Wilk, M.; Magdziarz, A. Hydrothermal carbonization, torrefaction and slow pyrolysis of Miscanthus giganteus. Energy
2017
,140,
1292–1304. [CrossRef]
180.
Kiesel, A.; Wagner, M.; Lewandowski, I. Environmental Performance of Miscanthus, Switchgrass and Maize: Can C4 Perennials
Increase the Sustainability of Biogas Production? Sustainalility 2016,9, 5. [CrossRef]
181. Dubis, B.; Bułkowska, K.; Lewandowska, M.; Szempli ´nski, W.; Jankowski, K.J.; Id´zkowski, J.; Kordala, N.; Szyma´nska, K. Effect
of different nitrogen fertilizer treatments on the conversion of Miscanthus
×
giganteus to ethanol. Bioresour. Technol.
2017
,243,
731–737. [CrossRef]
182.
Torrado, I.; Carvalheiro, F.; Duarte, L.C.; Raposo, S.; Gírio, F.M. Optimization of dilute acid hydrolysis for the selective recovery
of hemicellulosic sugars from sorghum straw. In Proceedings of the 1-CIAB—1st Iberoamerican Congress on Biorefineries, Los
Cabos, Mexico, 24–26 October 2012; pp. 557–563.
183.
Sene, L.; Arruda, P.V.; Oliveira, S.M.M.; Felipe, M.G.A. Evaluation of sorghum straw hemicellulosic hydrolysate for biotechnologi-
cal production of xylitol by Candida guilliermondii. Braz. J. Microbiol. 2011,42, 1141–1146. [CrossRef]
184.
Ledezma-Orozco, E.; Ruíz-Salazar, R.; Bustos-Vázquez, G.; Montes-García, N.; Roa-Cordero, V.; Rodríguez-Castillejos, G.
Production of Xylitol from non-detoxified acid hydrolizates from Sorghum straw by Debaryomyces hansenii. Agrociencia
2018
,52,
1095–1106.
185.
James, A.M.; Yuan, W.; Boyette, M.D.; Wang, D. The Effect of Air Flow Rate and Biomass Type on the Performance of an Updraft
Biomass Gasifier. BioResources 2015,10, 3615–3624. [CrossRef]
186.
Qian, K.; Kumar, A.; Patil, K.; Bellmer, D.; Wang, D.; Yuan, W.; Huhnke, R.L. Effects of Biomass Feedstocks and Gasification
Conditions on the Physiochemical Properties of Char. Energies 2013,6, 3972–3986. [CrossRef]
187.
Batog, J.; Frankowski, J.; Wawro, A.; Łacka, A. Bioethanol Production from Biomass of Selected Sorghum Varieties Cultivated as
Main and Second Crop. Energies 2020,13, 6291. [CrossRef]
188.
Diallo, B.; Li, M.; Tang, C.; Ameen, A.; Zhang, W.; Xie, G.H. Biomass yield, chemical composition and theoretical ethanol yield for
different genotypes of energy sorghum cultivated on marginal land in China. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019,137, 221–230. [CrossRef]
189.
Serra, P.; Giuntoli, J.; Agostini, A.; Colauzzi, M.; Amaducci, S. Coupling sorghum biomass and wheat straw to minimise the
environmental impact of bioenergy production. J. Clean. Prod. 2017,154, 242–254. [CrossRef]
190.
Al Chami, Z.; Amer, N.; Smets, K.; Yperman, J.; Carleer, R.; Dumontet, S.; Vangronsveld, J. Evaluation of flash and slow pyrolysis
applied on heavy metal contaminated Sorghum bicolor shoots resulting from phytoremediation. Biomass Bioenergy
2014
,63,
268–279. [CrossRef]
191. Kumar, V.; Kant, P. Study of Physical and Chemical Properties of Biodiesel from Sorghum Oil. Res. J. Chem. Sci. 2013,3, 64–68.
192. Kumar, V.; Kant, P.; Nigam, G.D. Factor Affecting the Preparation of Biodiesel from Sorghum Oil. Pet. Coal 2013,55, 6–11.
193.
Kumar, V.; Kant, P. Differential Studies of Alkali Catalysed Production of Biodiesel from Sorghum Oil. Res. J. Chem. Sci.
2014
,4,
66–70.
194.
Kumar, V.; Kant, P. Biodiesel Production from Sorghum Oil by Transesterification Using Zinc Oxide as Catalyst. Pet. Coal
2014
,56,
35–40.
195.
Wyatt, V.T.; Jones, K.; Johnston, D.B.; Moreau, R.A. Production of Fatty-Acid Methyl Esters Via the In Situ Transesterification of
Grain Sorghum Bran and Sorghum Distiller’s Dried Grains and Solubles. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2018,95, 743–752. [CrossRef]
196.
Nazli, R.I. Evaluation of different sweet sorghum cultivars for bioethanol yield potential and bagasse combustion characteristics
in a semiarid Mediterranean environment. Biomass Bioenergy 2020,139, 105624. [CrossRef]
197.
Mathur, S.; Umakanth, A.V.; Tonapi, V.A.; Sharma, R.; Sharma, M.K. Sweet sorghum as biofuel feedstock: Recent advances and
available resources. Biotechnol. Biofuels 2017,10, 146. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
198.
Windpassinger, S.; Friedt, W.; Frauen, M.; Snowdon, R.; Wittkop, B. Designing adapted sorghum silage types with an enhanced
energy density for biogas generation in temperate Europe. Biomass Bioenergy 2015,81, 496–504. [CrossRef]
199.
Gamawati Adinurani, P.; Rahayu, S.; Sulistiyo Budi, L.; Nindita, A.; Soni, P.; Mel, M. Biomass and Sugar Content of Some Varieties
of Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor L. Moench) on Dry Land Forest as Feedstock Bioethanol. In Proceedings of the 3rd International
Conference on Electrical Systems, Technology and Information (ICESTI 2017), Bali, Indonesia, 26–29 September 2017; EDP
Sciences: Les Ulis, France, 2018; Volume 164, p. 01035.
200.
Hu, Y.; Ma, H.; Shi, C.; Kobayashi, T.; Xu, K.Q. Nutrient augmentation enhances biogas production from sorghum mono-digestion.
Waste Manag. 2021,119, 63–71. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
201.
Gł ˛ab, L.; Sowi´nski, J.; Chmielewska, J.; Prask, H.; Fugol, M.; Szlachta, J. Comparison of the energy efficiency of methane and
ethanol production from sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench) with a variety of feedstock management technologies.
Biomass Bioenergy 2019,129, 105332. [CrossRef]
202.
Antonopoulou, G.; Gavala, H.N.; Skiadas, I.V.; Angelopoulos, K.; Lyberatos, G. Biofuels generation from sweet sorghum:
Fermentative hydrogen production and anaerobic digestion of the remaining biomass. Bioresour. Technol.
2008
,99, 110–119.
[CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 57 of 68
203.
Sjöblom, M.; Matsakas, L.; Christakopoulos, P.; Rova, U. Production of butyric acid by Clostridium tyrobutyricum (ATCC25755)
using sweet sorghum stalks and beet molasses. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015,74, 535–544. [CrossRef]
204.
Dweikat, I.; Weil, C.W.; Moose, S.; Kochian, L.; Mosier, N.; Ileleji, K.; Brown, P.; Peer, W.; Murphy, A.; Taheripour, F.; et al.
Envisioning the transition to a next-generation biofuels industry in the US Midwest. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefin.
2012
,6, 376–386.
[CrossRef]
205.
Reddy, B.V.; Ramesh, S.; Reddy, P.S.; Ramaiah, B.; Salimath, M.; Kachapur, R. Sweet Sorghum—A Potential Alternate Raw
Material for Bio-ethanol and Bio-energy. Int. Crop. Res. Inst. Semi-Arid Trop. 2005,46, 79–86.
206.
Soldatos, P.; Lychnaras, V.; Panoutsou, C.; Cosentino, S.L. Economic viability of energy crops in the EU: The farmer’s point of
view. Biofuels, Bioprod. Biorefin. 2010,4, 637–657. [CrossRef]
207.
Marx, S.; Ndaba, B.; Chiyanzu, I.; Schabort, C. Fuel ethanol production from sweet sorghum bagasse using microwave irradiation.
Biomass Bioenergy 2014,65, 145–150. [CrossRef]
208.
Barcelos, C.A.; Maeda, R.N.; Santa Anna, L.M.M.; Pereira, N. Sweet sorghum as a whole-crop feedstock for ethanol production.
Biomass Bioenergy 2016,94, 46–56. [CrossRef]
209.
Maw, M.J.W.; Houx, J.H.; Fritschi, F.B. Maize, sweet sorghum, and high biomass sorghum ethanol yield comparison on marginal
soils in Midwest USA. Biomass Bioenergy 2017,107, 164–171. [CrossRef]
210.
Szambelan, K.; Nowak, J.; Frankowski, J.; Szwengiel, A.; Jele´n, H.; Burczyk, H. The comprehensive analysis of sorghum cultivated
in Poland for energy purposes: Separate hydrolysis and fermentation and simultaneous saccharification and fermentation
methods and their impact on bioethanol effectiveness and volatile by-products from the. Bioresour. Technol.
2018
,250, 750–757.
[CrossRef]
211.
Boboescu, I.Z.; Damay, J.; Chang, J.K.W.; Beigbeder, J.B.; Duret, X.; Beauchemin, S.; Lalonde, O.; Lavoie, J.M. Ethanol production
from residual lignocellulosic fibers generated through the steam treatment of whole sorghum biomass. Bioresour. Technol.
2019
,
292, 121975. [CrossRef]
212.
Matsakas, L.; Rova, U.; Christakopoulos, P. Evaluation of dried sweet sorghum stalks as raw material for methane production.
Biomed Res. Int. 2014,2014, 731731. [CrossRef]
213.
Zhang, Z.; Zhang, G.; Li, W.; Li, C.; Xu, G. Enhanced biogas production from sorghum stem by co-digestion with cow manure.
Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016,41, 9153–9158. [CrossRef]
214.
Antonopoulou, G.; Lyberatos, G. Effect of Pretreatment of Sweet Sorghum Biomass on Methane Generation. Waste Biomass
Valorization 2012,4, 583–591. [CrossRef]
215.
Laopaiboon, L.; Nuanpeng, S.; Srinophakun, P.; Klanrit, P.; Laopaiboon, P. Ethanol production from sweet sorghum juice
using very high gravity technology: Effects of carbon and nitrogen supplementations. Bioresour. Technol.
2009
,100, 4176–4182.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
216.
Castro, E.; Nieves, I.U.; Rondón, V.; Sagues, W.J.; Fernández-Sandoval, M.T.; Yomano, L.P.; York, S.W.; Erickson, J.; Vermerris, W.
Potential for ethanol production from different sorghum cultivars. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017,109, 367–373. [CrossRef]
217.
Li, B.Z.; Balan, V.; Yuan, Y.J.; Dale, B.E. Process optimization to convert forage and sweet sorghum bagasse to ethanol based on
ammonia fiber expansion (AFEX) pretreatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2010,101, 1285–1292. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
218.
Molaverdi, M.; Karimi, K.; Khanahmadi, M.; Goshadrou, A. Enhanced sweet sorghum stalk to ethanol by fungus Mucor indicus
using solid state fermentation followed by simultaneous saccharification and fermentation. Ind. Crops Prod.
2013
,49, 580–585.
[CrossRef]
219.
Akanksha, K.; Sukumaran, R.K.; Pandey, A.; Rao, S.S.; Binod, P. Material balance studies for the conversion of sorghum stover to
bioethanol. Biomass Bioenergy 2016,85, 48–52. [CrossRef]
220.
Barcelos, C.A.; Maeda, R.N.; Betancur, G.J.V.; Pereira, N., Jr. Ethanol production from sorghum grains [Sorghum bicolor (L.)
Moench]: Evaluation of the enzymatic hydrolysis and the hydrolysate fermentability. Braz. J. Chem. Eng.
2011
,28, 597–604.
[CrossRef]
221.
Guigou, M.; Lareo, C.; Pérez, L.V.; Lluberas, M.E.; Vázquez, D.; Ferrari, M.D. Bioethanol production from sweet sorghum:
Evaluation of post-harvest treatments on sugar extraction and fermentation. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 3058–3062. [CrossRef]
222.
Su, M.Y.; Tzeng, W.S.; Shyu, Y.T. An analysis of feasibility of bioethanol production from Taiwan sorghum liquor waste. Bioresour.
Technol. 2010,101, 6669–6675. [CrossRef]
223.
Antonopoulou, G.; Gavala, H.N.; Skiadas, I.V.; Lyberatos, G. Influence of pH on fermentative hydrogen production from sweet
sorghum extract. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2010,35, 1921–1928. [CrossRef]
224.
Saraphirom, P.; Reungsang, A. Biological hydrogen production from sweet sorghum syrup by mixed cultures using an anaerobic
sequencing batch reactor (ASBR). Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2011,36, 8765–8773. [CrossRef]
225.
Shi, X.-X.; Song, H.-C.; Wang, C.-R.; Tang, R.-S.; Huang, Z.-X.; Gao, T.-R.; Xie, J. Enhanced bio-hydrogen production from sweet
sorghum stalk with alkalization pretreatment by mixed anaerobic cultures. Int. J. Energy Res. 2010,34, 662–672. [CrossRef]
226.
Nagaiah, D.; Chiranjeevi, T.; Srinivas Rao, P.; Uma, A.; Prakasham, R.S. Fermentation of Pretreated High-Biomass Sorghum
Hydrolysates to Biohydrogen by Mixed Consortia. Sugar Tech 2015,18, 266–272. [CrossRef]
227.
Rorke, D.; Gueguim Kana, E.B. Biohydrogen process development on waste sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) leaves: Optimization of
saccharification, hydrogen production and preliminary scale up. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2016,41, 12941–12952. [CrossRef]
228.
Chen, D.E.S.; Liu, L. Analysis of pyrolysis characteristics and kinetics of sweet sorghum bagasse and cotton stalk. J. Therm. Anal.
Calorim. 2017,131, 1899–1909. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 58 of 68
229.
Carvalho, W.S.; Júnior, J.A.; de Oliveira, T.J.P.; Ataíde, C.H. Fast pyrolysis of sweet sorghum bagasse in a fluidized bed reactor:
Product characterization and comparison with vapors generated in analytical pyrolysis. Energy 2017,131, 186–197. [CrossRef]
230.
Yin, R.; Liu, R.; Mei, Y.; Fei, W.; Sun, X. Characterization of bio-oil and bio-char obtained from sweet sorghum bagasse fast
pyrolysis with fractional condensers. Fuel 2013,112, 96–104. [CrossRef]
231.
Carvalho, W.S.; Cunha, I.F.; Pereira, M.S.; Ataíde, C.H. Thermal decomposition profile and product selectivity of analytical
pyrolysis of sweet sorghum bagasse: Effect of addition of inorganic salts. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015,74, 372–380. [CrossRef]
232.
Yue, Y.; Singh, H.; Singh, B.; Mani, S. Torrefaction of sorghum biomass to improve fuel properties. Bioresour. Technol.
2017
,232,
372–379. [CrossRef]
233.
Yan, H.L.; Zong, Z.M.; Li, Z.K.; Kong, J.; Zheng, Q.X.; Li, Y.; Wei, X.Y. Sweet sorghum stalk liquefaction in supercritical methanol:
Effects of operating conditions on product yields and molecular composition of soluble fraction. Fuel Process. Technol. 2017,155,
42–50. [CrossRef]
234.
Cordella, M.; Berrueco, C.; Santarelli, F.; Paterson, N.; Kandiyoti, R.; Millan, M. Yields and ageing of the liquids obtained by slow
pyrolysis of sorghum, switchgrass and corn stalks. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2013,104, 316–324. [CrossRef]
235.
Kotaiah Naik, D.; Monika, K.; Prabhakar, S.; Parthasarathy, R.; Satyavathi, B. Pyrolysis of sorghum bagasse biomass into bio-char
and bio-oil products. J. Therm. Anal. Calorim. 2017,127, 1277–1289. [CrossRef]
236.
Filipovici, A.; Tucu, D.; Bialowiec, A.; Bukowski, P.; Crisan, G.C.; Lica, S.; Pulka, J.; Dyjakon, A.; Debowski, M. Effect of
temperature and heating rate on the char yield in sorghum and straw slow pyrolysis. Rev. Chim. 2017,68, 576–580. [CrossRef]
237.
Santos, B.S.; Capareda, S.C. Energy sorghum pyrolysis using a pressurized batch reactor. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery
2015
,6,
325–334. [CrossRef]
238.
Li, B.; Duan, M.M.; Zeng, X.B.; Zhang, Q.; Xu, C.; Zhu, H.H.; Zhu, Q.H.; Huang, D.Y. Effects of composited organic mobilizing
agents and their application periods on cadmium absorption of Sorghum bicolor L. in a Cd-contaminated soil. Chemosphere
2021
,
263, 128136. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
239.
Xiao, M.Z.; Sun, R.; Du, Z.Y.; Yang, W.B.; Sun, Z.; Yuan, T.Q. A sustainable agricultural strategy integrating Cd-contaminated soils
remediation and bioethanol production using sorghum cultivars. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021,162, 113299. [CrossRef]
240.
Ba¸sar, A.; Kökdemir Ün¸sar, E.; Ünyay, H.; Perendeci, N.A. Ethanol, methane, or both? Enzyme dose impact on ethanol and
methane production from untreated energy crop switchgrass varieties. Renew. Energy 2020,149, 287–297. [CrossRef]
241.
Cheng, F.; Bayat, H.; Jena, U.; Brewer, C.E. Impact of feedstock composition on pyrolysis of low-cost, protein- and lignin-rich
biomass: A review. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2020,147, 104780. [CrossRef]
242.
Schmer, M.R.; Vogel, K.P.; Mitchell, R.B.; Perrin, R.K.; Matson, P.A. Net energy of cellulosic ethanol from switchgrass. PNAS
2008
,
105, 464–469. [CrossRef]
243.
Kim, S.; Dale, B.E. Cumulative Energy and Global Warming Impact from the Production of Biomass for Biobased Products. J. Ind.
Ecol. 2004,7, 147–162. [CrossRef]
244.
Bai, Y.; Luo, L.; Van Der Voet, E. Life cycle assessment of switchgrass-derived ethanol as transport fuel. Int. J. Life Cycle Assess.
2010,15, 468–477. [CrossRef]
245.
Monti, A.; Barbanti, L.; Zatta, A.; Zegada-Lizarazu, W. The contribution of switchgrass in reducing GHG emissions. GCB Bioenergy
2012,4, 420–434. [CrossRef]
246.
Bustamante-Silveira, M.; Siri-Prieto, G.; Carrasco-Letelier, L. Water footprints of bioethanol cropping systems in Uruguay. Agric.
Water Manag. 2021,252, 106870. [CrossRef]
247.
Keshwani, D.R.; Cheng, J.J. Switchgrass for bioethanol and other value-added applications: A review. Bioresour. Technol.
2009
,
100, 1515–1523. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
248.
Alexopoulou, E.; Monti, A.; Elbersen, H.W.; Zegada-Lizarazu, W.; Millioni, D.; Scordia, D.; Zanetti, F.; Papazoglou, E.G.; Christou,
M. 3—Switchgrass: From Production to End Use. In Perennial Grasses for Bioenergy and Bioproducts; Alexopoulou, E., Ed.; Elsevier
Inc.: London, UK, 2018; pp. 61–105, ISBN 9780128129005.
249.
Balch, M.L.; Chamberlain, M.B.; Worthen, R.S.; Holwerda, E.K.; Lynd, L.R. Fermentation with continuous ball milling: Effective-
ness at enhancing solubilization for several cellulosic feedstocks and comparative tolerance of several microorganisms. Biomass
Bioenergy 2020,134, 105468. [CrossRef]
250.
Larnaudie, V.; Ferrari, M.D.; Lareo, C. Techno-economic analysis of a liquid hot water pretreated switchgrass biorefinery: Effect
of solids loading and enzyme dosage on enzymatic hydrolysis. Biomass Bioenergy 2019,130, 105394. [CrossRef]
251.
Mullen, C.A.; Boateng, A.A. Chemical Composition of Bio-oils Produced by Fast Pyrolysis of Two Energy Crops. Energy Fuels
2008,22, 2104–2109. [CrossRef]
252.
Pilon, G.; Lavoie, J.-M. Pyrolysis of Switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.) at Low Temperatures within N 2 and CO 2 Environments:
Product Yield Study. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2013,1, 198–204. [CrossRef]
253.
Sun, X.; Atiyeh, H.K.; Adesanya, Y.; Okonkwo, C.; Zhang, H.; Huhnke, R.L.; Ezeji, T. Feasibility of using biochar as buffer and
mineral nutrients replacement for acetone-butanol-ethanol production from non-detoxified switchgrass hydrolysate. Bioresour.
Technol. 2020,298, 122569. [CrossRef]
254. Vega, D.J.; Dopazo, R.; Ortiz, L. Manual de Cultivos Energéticos; Vigo University: Vigo, Spain, 2010.
255.
Nunes, L.J.R.; Raposo, M.A.M.; Meireles, C.I.R.; Pinto Gomes, C.J.; Almeida Ribeiro, N.M.C. Control of invasive forest species
through the creation of a value chain: Acacia dealbata biomass recovery. Environments 2020,7, 39. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 59 of 68
256.
Stickler, C.M.; Nepstad, D.C.; Coe, M.T.; Mcgrath, D.G.; Rodrigues, H.O.; Walker, W.S.; Soares-Filho, B.S.; Davidson, E.A. The
potential ecological costs and cobenefits of REDD: A critical review and case study from the Amazon region. Glob. Chang. Biol.
2009,15, 2803–2824. [CrossRef]
257.
Davis, J.M. Genetic Improvement of Poplar (Populus spp.) as a Bioenergy Crop. In Genetic Improvement of Bioenergy Crops;
Vermerris, W., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 377–396.
258.
Sannigrahi, P.; Ragauskas, A.; Tuskan, G. Poplar as a feedstock for biofuels: A review of compositional characteristics. Biofuels,
Bioprod. Biorefin. 2010,4, 209–226. [CrossRef]
259.
Stanton, B.; Eaton, J.; Johnson, J.; Rice, D.; Schuette, B.; Moser, B. Hybrid Poplar in the Pacific Northwest: The Effects of
Market-Driven Management. J. For. 2002,100, 28–33.
260.
De Rigo, D.; Enescu, C.M.; Durrant, T.H.; Caudullo, G. Populus nigra. In European Atlas of Forest Tree Species; San-Miguel-Ayanz,
J., de Rigo, D., Caudullo, G., Houston Durrant, T., Mauri, A., Eds.; Publication Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016;
pp. 136–137.
261.
Ferrarini, A.; Fornasier, F.; Serra, P.; Ferrari, F.; Trevisan, M.; Amaducci, S. Impacts of willow and miscanthus bioenergy buffers on
biogeochemical N removal processes along the soil–groundwater continuum. GCB Bioenergy 2017,9, 246–261. [CrossRef]
262. Ehrenfeld, J.G. Ecosystem Consequences of Biological Invasions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2010,41, 59–80. [CrossRef]
263.
CABI. Invasive Species Compendium—Datasheet Report for Acacia dealbata (acacia bernier). Available online: https://www.
cabi.org/ISC/datasheetreport/2207 (accessed on 18 December 2018).
264.
Álvarez-Álvarez, P.; Pizarro, C.; Barrio-Anta, M.; Cámara-Obregón, A.; María Bueno, J.L.; Álvarez, A.; Gutiérrez, I.; Burslem,
D.F.R.P. Evaluation of tree species for biomass energy production in Northwest Spain. Forests 2018,9, 160. [CrossRef]
265.
Pontes, R.; Romaní, A.; Michelin, M.; Domingues, L.; Teixeira, J.; Nunes, J. Comparative autohydrolysis study of two mixtures of
forest and marginal land resources for co-production of biofuels and value-added compounds. Renew. Energy
2018
,128, 20–29.
[CrossRef]
266.
Oliveira, C.S.D.; Moreira, P.; Resende, J.; Cruz, M.T.; Pereira, C.M.F.; Silva, A.M.S.; Santos, S.A.O.; Silvestre, A.J.D. Characterization
and Cytotoxicity Assessment of the Lipophilic Fractions of Different Morphological Parts of Acacia dealbata.Int. J. Mol. Sci.
2020
,
21, 1814. [CrossRef]
267.
López-Hortas, L.; Rodríguez-González, I.; Díaz-Reinoso, B.; Torres, M.D.; Moure, A.; Domínguez, H. Tools for a multiproduct
biorefinery of Acacia dealbata biomass. Ind. Crops Prod. 2021,169, 113655. [CrossRef]
268.
Mendes, C.V.T.; Moreira, R.; Portugal, A.; Carvalho, M.G.V.S. Biorefining of Pinus pinaster Stump Wood for Ethanol Production
and Lignin Recovery. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2021,44, 1043–1050. [CrossRef]
269.
López, M.; Vila, C.; Santos, V.; Parajó, J.C. Manufacture of Platform Chemicals from Pine Wood Polysaccharides in Media
Containing Acidic Ionic Liquids. Polym. 2020,12, 1215. [CrossRef]
270.
Rodríguez-Seoane, P.; Díaz-Reinoso, B.; Moure, A.; Domínguez, H. Potential of Paulownia sp. for biorefinery. Ind. Crops Prod.
2020,155, 112739. [CrossRef]
271.
D’Auria, M.; Mecca, M.; Todaro, L. High temperature treatment allows the detection of episesamin in paulownia wood extractives.
Nat. Prod. Res. 2020,34, 1326–1330. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
272.
Radeva, G.; Valchev, I.; Petrin, S.; Valcheva, E.; Tsekova, P. Kinetic study of the enzyme conversion of steam exploded Paulownia
tomentosa to glucose. BioResources 2021,7, 412–421.
273.
El-Showk, N.; El-Showk, S. The Paulownia Tree an Alternative for Sustainable Forestry. The Farm—Crop Development.org. 2003.
Available online: https://cropdevelopment.org/docs/PaulowniaBooklet_print.pdf (accessed on 20 September 2021).
274.
Domínguez, E.; Romaní, A.; Domingues, L.; Garrote, G. Evaluation of strategies for second generation bioethanol production
from fast growing biomass Paulownia within a biorefinery scheme. Appl. Energy 2017,187, 777–789. [CrossRef]
275.
Santos, J.I.; Fillat, Ú.; Martín-Sampedro, R.; Ballesteros, I.; Manzanares, P.; Ballesteros, M.; Eugenio, M.E.; Ibarra, D. Lignin-
enriched Fermentation Residues from Bioethanol Production of Fast-growing Poplar and Forage Sorghum. BioResources
2015
,10,
5215–5232. [CrossRef]
276.
Szczukowski, S.; Tworkowski, J.; Klasa, A.; Stolarski, M. Productivity and chemical composition of wood tissues of short rotation
willow coppice cultivated on arable land. Plant, Soil Environ. 2002,48, 413–417. [CrossRef]
277.
Alexandropoulou, M.; Antonopoulou, G.; Fragkou, E.; Ntaikou, I.; Lyberatos, G. Fungal pretreatment of willow sawdust and
its combination with alkaline treatment for enhancing biogas production. J. Environ. Manag.
2017
,203, 704–713. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
278.
Hashaikeh, R.; Fang, Z.; Butler, I.S.; Hawari, J.; Kozinski, J.A. Hydrothermal dissolution of willow in hot compressed water as a
model for biomass conversion. Fuel 2007,86, 1614–1622. [CrossRef]
279.
Stephenson, A.L.; Dupree, P.; Scott, S.A.; Dennis, J.S. The environmental and economic sustainability of potential bioethanol from
willow in the UK. Bioresour. Technol. 2010,101, 9612–9623. [CrossRef]
280.
Łukajtis, R.; Rybarczyk, P.; Kucharska, K.; Konopacka-Łyskawa, D.; Słupek, E.; Wychodnik, K.; Kami´nski, M. Optimization of
Saccharification Conditions of Lignocellulosic Biomass under Alkaline Pre-Treatment and Enzymatic Hydrolysis. Energies
2018
,
11, 886. [CrossRef]
281.
Ziegler-Devin, I.; Menana, Z.; Chrusciel, L.; Chalot, M.; Bert, V.; Brosse, N. Steam explosion pretreatment of willow grown on
phytomanaged soils for bioethanol production. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019,140, 111722. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 60 of 68
282.
Eklund, R.; Galbe, M.; Zacchi, G. The influence of SO2 and H2SO4 impregnation of willow prior to steam pretreatment. Bioresour.
Technol. 1995,52, 225–229. [CrossRef]
283.
Yi, W.; Nadeem, F.; Xu, G.; Zhang, Q.; Joshee, N.; Tahir, N. Modifying crystallinity, and thermo-optical characteristics of Paulownia
biomass through ultrafine grinding and evaluation of biohydrogen production potential. J. Clean. Prod.
2020
,269, 122386.
[CrossRef]
284.
Viana, H.F.; Rodrigues, A.M.; Godina, R.; Matias, J.C.D.O.; Nunes, L.J.R. Evaluation of the physical, chemical and thermal
properties of Portuguese maritime pine biomass. Sustainability 2018,10, 2877. [CrossRef]
285.
Amutio, M.; Lopez, G.; Alvarez, J.; Moreira, R.; Duarte, G.; Nunes, J.; Olazar, M.; Bilbao, J. Flash pyrolysis of forestry residues
from the Portuguese Central Inland Region within the framework of the BioREFINA-Ter project. Bioresour. Technol.
2013
,129,
512–518. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
286.
Yorgun, S.; Yildiz, D. Slow pyrolysis of paulownia wood: Effects of pyrolysis parameters on product yields and bio-oil characteri-
zation. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2015,114, 68–78. [CrossRef]
287.
Fassinou, W.F.; Van de Steene, L.; Toure, S.; Volle, G.; Girard, P. Pyrolysis of Pinus pinaster in a two-stage gasifier: Influence of
processing parameters and thermal cracking of tar. Fuel Process. Technol. 2009,90, 75–90. [CrossRef]
288.
Selvi Gökkaya, D.; Çokkuvvetli, T.; Sa˘glam, M.; Yüksel, M.; Ballice, L. Hydrothermal gasification of poplar wood chips with
alkali, mineral, and metal impregnated activated carbon catalysts. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2019,152, 104542. [CrossRef]
289.
De Neergaard, A.; Saarnak, C.; Hill, T.; Khanyile, M.; Berzosa, A.M.; Birch-Thomsen, T. Australian wattle species in the
Drakensberg region of South Africa—An invasive alien or a natural resource? Agric. Syst. 2005,85, 216–233. [CrossRef]
290.
Tejada, M.; Gómez, I.; Fernández-Boy, E.; Díaz, M.-J. Effects of Sewage Sludge and Acacia dealbata Composts on Soil Biochemical
and Chemical Properties. Commun. Soil Sci. Plant Anal. 2014,45, 570–580. [CrossRef]
291.
Yañez, R.; Alonso, J.L.; Díaz, M.J. Influence of bulking agent on sewage sludge composting process. Bioresour. Technol.
2009
,100,
5827–5833. [CrossRef]
292.
Pinto, P.C.R.; Oliveira, C.; Costa, C.A.; Gaspar, A.; Faria, T.; Ataíde, J.; Rodrigues, A.E. Kraft delignification of energy crops in
view of pulp production and lignin valorization. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015,71, 153–162. [CrossRef]
293.
Yáñez, R.; Romaní, A.; Garrote, G.; Alonso, J.L.; Parajó, J.C. Experimental evaluation of alkaline treatment as a method for
enhancing the enzymatic digestibility of autohydrolysed Acacia dealbata.J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol.
2009
,84, 1070–1077.
[CrossRef]
294.
Yáñez, R.; Gómez, B.; Martínez, M.; Gullón, B.; Alonso, J.L. Valorization of an invasive woody species, Acacia dealbata, by means
of Ionic liquid pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2014,89, 1337–1343. [CrossRef]
295.
Reid, D.G.; Bonnet, S.L.; Kemp, G.; Van Der Westhuizen, J.H. Analysis of commercial proanthocyanidins. Part 4: Solid state 13C
NMR as a tool for in situ analysis of proanthocyanidin tannins, in heartwood and bark of quebracho and acacia, and related
species. Phytochemistry 2013,94, 243–248. [CrossRef]
296.
Okoli, B.J.; Shilowa, P.M.; Anyanwu, G.O.; Modise, J.S. Removal of Pb2+ from Water by Synthesized Tannin Resins from Invasive
South African Trees. Water 2018,10, 648. [CrossRef]
297.
Yildiz, S.; Gürgen, A.; Can, Z.; Tabbouche, S.A.; Kiliç, A.O. Some bioactive properties of Acacia dealbata extracts and their potential
utilization in wood protection. Drew. Prace Nauk. Doniesienia Komun. 2018,61, 81–97.
298.
Neiva, D.M.; Luís, Â.; Gominho, J.; Domingues, F.; Duarte, A.P.; Pereira, H. Bark residues valorization potential regarding
antioxidant and antimicrobial extracts. Wood Sci. Technol. 2020,54, 559–585. [CrossRef]
299.
Casas, M.P.; Conde, E.; Ribeiro, D.; Fernandes, E.; Domínguez, H.; Torres, M.D. Bioactive properties of Acacia dealbata flowers
extracts. Waste Biomass Valorization 2019,11, 2549–2557. [CrossRef]
300.
López-Hortas, L.; Falqué, E.; Domínguez, H.; Torres, M.D. Microwave hydrodiffusion and gravity versus conventional distillation
for Acacia dealbata flowers. Recovery of bioactive extracts for cosmetic purposes. J. Clean. Prod. 2020,274, 123143. [CrossRef]
301.
Lorenzo, P.; Reboredo-Durán, J.; Muñoz, L.; Freitas, H.; González, L. Herbicidal properties of the commercial formulation of
methyl cinnamate, a natural compound in the invasive silver wattle (Acacia dealbata). Weed Sci. 2020,68, 69–78. [CrossRef]
302.
Borges, A.; José, H.; Homem, V.; Simões, M. Comparison of techniques and solvents on the antimicrobial and antioxidant potential
of extracts from Acacia dealbata and Olea europaea.Antibiotics 2020,9, 48. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
303.
Meenakshisundaram, S.; Fayeulle, A.; Leonard, E.; Ceballos, C.; Pauss, A. Fiber degradation and carbohydrate production by
combined biological and chemical/physicochemical pretreatment methods of lignocellulosic biomass—A review. Bioresour.
Technol. 2021,331, 125053. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
304.
Domínguez, E.; Romaní, A.; Alonso, J.L.; Parajó, J.C.; Yáñez, R. A biorefinery approach based on fractionation with a cheap
industrial by-product for getting value from an invasive woody species. Bioresour. Technol.
2014
,173, 301–308. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
305.
Carneiro, M.; Moreira, R.; Gominho, J.; Fabião, A. Could control of invasive acacias be a source of biomass for energy under
mediterranean conditions? Chem. Eng. Trans. 2014,37, 187–192.
306.
Correia, R.; Quintela, J.C.; Duarte, M.P.; Gonçalves, M. Insights for the Valorization of Biomass from Portuguese Invasive Acacia
spp. in a Biorefinery Perspective. Forests 2020,11, 1342. [CrossRef]
307.
Muñoz, C.; Mendonça, R.; Baeza, J.; Berlin, A.; Saddler, J.; Freer, J. Bioethanol production from bio-organosolv pulps of Pinus
radiata and Acacia dealbata.J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2007,82, 767–774. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 61 of 68
308.
Ferreira, S.; Gil, N.; Queiroz, J.A.; Duarte, A.P.; Domingues, F.C. An evaluation of the potential of Acacia dealbata as raw material
for bioethanol production. Bioresour. Technol. 2011,102, 4766–4773. [CrossRef]
309.
Valero Gutiérrez del Olmo, E.; Picos Martín, J. Parcelas invadidas por Acacia dealbata Link. Evaluación de su potencial
aprovechamiento incluyendo bioenergía. In Proceedings of the 5
◦
Congresso Forestal Español—Montes y Sociedad: Saber
quéHacer, Centro Municipal de Congresos y Exposiciones de Ávila, Ávila, Spain, 21–25 September 2009; pp. 1–12.
310.
Nunes, L.J.R.; Raposo, M.A.M.; Meireles, C.I.R.; Pinto Gomes, C.J.; Almeida Ribeiro, N.M.C. Carbon Sequestration Potential of
Forest Invasive Species: A Case Study with Acacia dealbata Link. Resources 2021,10, 51. [CrossRef]
311.
Forján, R.; Asensio, V.; Rodríguez-Vila, A.; Covelo, E.F. Contribution of waste and biochar amendment to the sorption of metals in
a copper mine tailing. CATENA 2016,137, 120–125. [CrossRef]
312.
Nunes, L.J.R.; Rodrigues, A.M.; Loureiro, L.M.E.F.; Sá, L.C.R.; Matias, J.C.O. Energy recovery from invasive species: Creation of
value chains to promote control and eradication. Recycling 2021,6, 21. [CrossRef]
313.
Ferreira, T.; Tavares Marques, E.M.; Almeida, D.; Pereira, C.; Paiva, J.; Pinho, C. Monitoring fluidization quality and combustion
efficiency of invasive species pellets. In Proceedings of the 15 th Brazilian Congress of Thermal Sciences and Engineering, Belém,
Brazil, 10–13 November 2014; pp. 10–13.
314.
Vicente, E.D.; Vicente, A.M.; Evtyugina, M.; Carvalho, R.; Tarelho, L.A.C.; Paniagua, S.; Nunes, T.; Otero, M.; Calvo, L.F.; Alves, C.
Emissions from residential pellet combustion of an invasive acacia species. Renew. Energy 2019,140, 319–329. [CrossRef]
315.
Correia, A.; Oliveira, Â.Principais Espécies Florestais com Interesse Para Portugal—Zonas de Influência Atlântica, N.
o
322; Direção-Geral
das Florestas e Ministério da Agricultura—Desenvolvimento Rural e Pescas: Lisboa, Portugal, 2003.
316.
Direção-Geral de Agricultura e Desenvolvimento Rural—DGADR Direcção-Geral dos Recursos Florestais—DGRF. Plano Regional
de Ordenamento Florestal—Baixo Alentejo; DGADR and DGRF: Lisboa, Portugal, 2006.
317.
Oliveira, Â.; Moura, P.; Providência, F.M. Boas Práticas Florestais Para o Pinheiro Bravo—Manual; Centro Pinus: Porto, Portugal, 1999.
318.
Serralves Pinus pinaster Aiton. Available online: http://serralves.ubiprism.pt/species/show/883 (accessed on 20 December 2018).
319.
Santos, A.; Carvalho, A.; Barbosa-Póvoa, A. An economic and environmental comparison between forest wood products—
Uncoated woodfree paper, natural cork stoppers and particle boards. J. Clean. Prod. 2021,296, 126469. [CrossRef]
320.
Viñas, R.A.; Caudullo, G.; Oliveira, S.; De Rigo, D. Pinus pinaster. In European Atlas of Forest Tree Species; San-Miguel-Ayanz, J.,
de Rigo, D., Caudullo, G., Houston Durrant, T., Mauri, A., Eds.; Publication Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016;
pp. 128–129.
321.
Jiang, W.; Adamopoulos, S.; Hosseinpourpia, R.; Žigon, J.; Petriˇc, M.; Šernek, M.; Medved, S. Utilization of partially liquefied bark
for production of particleboards. Appl. Sci. 2020,10, 5253. [CrossRef]
322.
da Costa, T.P.; Quinteiro, P.; Arroja, L.; Dias, A.C. Environmental comparison of forest biomass residues application in Portugal:
Electricity, heat and biofuel. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020,134, 110302. [CrossRef]
323.
Quinteiro, P.; Tarelho, L.; Marques, P.; Martín-Gamboa, M.; Freire, F.; Arroja, L.; Dias, A.C. Life cycle assessment of wood pellets
and wood split logs for residential heating. Sci. Total Environ. 2019,689, 580–589. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
324.
Martín-Gamboa, M.; Dias, L.C.; Quinteiro, P.; Freire, F.; Arroja, L.; Dias, A.C. Multi-criteria and life cycle assessment of wood-based
bioenergy alternatives for residential heating: A sustainability analysis. Energies 2019,12, 4391. [CrossRef]
325.
Rivas, S.; Raspolli-Galletti, A.M.; Antonetti, C.; Santos, V.; Parajó, J.C. Sustainable conversion of Pinus pinaster wood into biofuel
precursors: A biorefinery approach. Fuel 2016,164, 51–58. [CrossRef]
326. Telmo, C.; Lousada, J. Heating values of wood pellets from different species. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 2634–2639. [CrossRef]
327. Azevedo, J.C.; Pinto, M.V.; Escalante, E.; Feliciano, M.; Aranha, J.; Castro, J.P. Potential forest biomass and energy production at
the regional scale: The case of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.) in the district of Bragança, Northeastern Portugal. In Proceedings
of the Recent Researches in Environment, Energy Systems and Sustainability—8th WSEAS International Conference on Energy,
Environment, Ecosystems and Sustainable Development (EEESD’12), Faro, Portugal, 2–4 May 2012; Volume 1, pp. 226–231.
328.
Nunes, L.J.R.; Godina, R.; Matias, J.C.O.; Catalão, J.P.S. Evaluation of the utilization of woodchips as fuel for industrial boilers. J.
Clean. Prod. 2019,223, 270–277. [CrossRef]
329.
Lapuerta, M.; Hernández, J.J.; Pazo, A.; López, J. Gasification and co-gasification of biomass wastes: Effect of the biomass origin
and the gasifier operating conditions. Fuel Process. Technol. 2008,89, 828–837. [CrossRef]
330.
Zhao-Hua, Z.; Ching-Ju, C.; Xin-Yu, L.; Yao Gao, X. Paulownia in China: Cultivation and Utilization; Chinese Academy of Forestry
Staff, Ed.; Asian Network for Biological Sciences and International Development Research Centre: Singapore, 1986; ISBN
9971845466.
331.
López, F.; Pérez, A.; Zamudio, M.A.M.; De Alva, H.E.; García, J.C. Paulownia as raw material for solid biofuel and cellulose pulp.
Biomass Bioenergy 2012,45, 77–86. [CrossRef]
332.
Zamudio, M.A.M.; Alfaro, A.; de Alva, H.E.; García, J.C.; García-Morales, M.; López, F. Biorefinery of paulownia by autohydrolysis
and soda-anthraquinone delignification process. Characterization and application of lignin. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol.
2015
,90,
534–542. [CrossRef]
333.
Kim, S.K.; Cho, S.B.; Moon, H.I. Neuroprotective effects of a sesquiterpene lactone and flavanones from Paulownia tomentosa
Steud. against glutamate-induced neurotoxicity in primary cultured rat cortical cells. Phyther. Res.
2010
,24, 1898–1900. [CrossRef]
334.
Jung, S.; Moon, H.I.; Ohk, J.; Lee, S.; Li, C.; Kim, S.K.; Lee, M.S. Inhibitory effect and mechanism on antiproliferation of
isoatriplicolide tiglate (PCAC) from paulownia coreana. Molecules 2012,17, 5945–5951. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 62 of 68
335.
He, T.; Vaidya, B.; Perry, Z.; Parajuli, P.; Joshee, N. Paulownia as a Medicinal Tree: Traditional Uses and Current Advances. Eur. J.
Med. Plants 2016,14, 1. [CrossRef]
336.
Hori, M.; Aoki, Y.; Shinoda, K.; Chiba, M.; Sasaki, R. Wood volatiles as attractants of the confused flour beetle, Tribolium confusum
(Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae). Sci. Rep. 2019,9, 11544. [CrossRef]
337.
Yorgun, S.; Vural, N.; Demiral, H. Preparation of high-surface area activated carbons from Paulownia wood by ZnCl2 activation.
Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 2009,122, 189–194. [CrossRef]
338.
Qi, Y.; Yang, C.; Hidayat, W.; Jang, J.H.; Kim, N.H. Solid bioenergy properties of Paulownia tomentosa grown in Korea. J. Korean
Wood Sci. Technol. 2016,44, 890–896. [CrossRef]
339.
Gong, C.; Bujanovic, B.M. Impact of hot-water extraction on acetone-water oxygen delignification of Paulownia Spp. and lignin
recovery. Energies 2014,7, 857–873. [CrossRef]
340.
Chang, J.; Gao, Z.; Wang, X.; Wu, D.; Xu, F.; Wang, X.; Guo, Y.; Jiang, K. Activated porous carbon prepared from paulownia flower
for high performance supercapacitor electrodes. Electrochim. Acta 2015,157, 290–298. [CrossRef]
341.
Allwright, M.R.; Payne, A.; Emiliani, G.; Milner, S.; Viger, M.; Rouse, F.; Keurentjes, J.J.B.; Bérard, A.; Wildhagen, H.; Faivre-
Rampant, P.; et al. Biomass traits and candidate genes for bioenergy revealed through association genetics in coppiced European
Populus nigra (L.). Biotechnol. Biofuels 2016,9, 195. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
342.
Caudullo, G.; De Rigo, D. Populus alba. In European Atlas of Forest Tree Species; San-Miguel-Ayanz, J., de Rigo, D., Caudullo, G.,
Houston Durrant, T., Mauri, A., Eds.; Publication Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2016; pp. 134–135.
343. Griu, T.; Lunguleasa, A. The use of the white poplar (Populus alba L.) biomass as fuel. J. For. Res. 2016,27, 719–725. [CrossRef]
344.
CABI. Invasive Species Compendium—Datasheet Report for Populus Alba (Silver-Leaf Poplar). Available online: https://www.
cabi.org/isc/datasheetreport/43426 (accessed on 2 September 2020).
345.
Sim, S.J.; Yong, S.H.; Park, D.J.; Choi, E.; Seol, Y.; Song, H.J.; Jeong, M.J.; Kim, H.G.; Choi, M.S. Influence of inorganic salts on
biomass production, biochemical composition, and bioethanol production of Populus alba. IForest
2020
,13, 566–574. [CrossRef]
346.
González-García, S.; Dias, A.C.; Clermidy, S.; Benoist, A.; Bellon Maurel, V.; Gasol, C.M.; Gabarrell, X.; Arroja, L. Comparative
environmental and energy profiles of potential bioenergy production chains in Southern Europe. J. Clean. Prod.
2014
,76, 42–54.
[CrossRef]
347.
Oliveira, N.; Pérez-Cruzado, C.; Cañellas, I.; Rodríguez-Soalleiro, R.; Sixto, H. Poplar short rotation coppice plantations under
mediterranean conditions: The case of Spain. Forests 2020,11, 1352. [CrossRef]
348.
Porth, I.; El-Kassaby, Y.A. Using Populus as a lignocellulosic feedstock for bioethanol. Biotechnol. J.
2015
,10, 510–524. [CrossRef]
349.
Raud, M.; Kikas, T.; Sippula, O.; Shurpali, N.J. Potentials and challenges in lignocellulosic biofuel production technology. Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019,111, 44–56. [CrossRef]
350.
Tharakan, P.J.; Volk, T.A.; Abrahamson, L.P.; White, E.H. Energy feedstock characteristics of willow and hybrid poplar clones at
harvest age. Biomass Bioenergy 2003,25, 571–580. [CrossRef]
351. Elder, T.; Groom, L.H. Pilot-scale gasification of woody biomass. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 3522–3528. [CrossRef]
352.
Martinez, M.; Duret, X.; Minh, D.P.; Nzihou, A.; Lavoie, J.-M. Conversion of lignocellulosic biomass in biobutanol by a novel
thermal process. Int. J. Energy Prod. Manag. 2019,4, 298–310. [CrossRef]
353.
Zhang, Y.; Xia, C.; Lu, M.; Tu, M. Effect of overliming and activated carbon detoxification on inhibitors removal and butanol
fermentation of poplar prehydrolysates. Biotechnol. Biofuels 2018,11, 178. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
354.
Bryant, N.D.; Pu, Y.; Tschaplinski, T.J.; Tuskan, G.A.; Muchero, W.; Kalluri, U.C.; Yoo, C.G.; Ragauskas, A.J. Transgenic Poplar
Designed for Biofuels. Trends Plant Sci. 2020,25, 881–896. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
355.
Krzy˙
zaniak, M.; Stolarski, M.J.; Warmi´nski, K. Life cycle assessment of poplar production: Environmental impact of different soil
enrichment methods. J. Clean. Prod. 2019,206, 785–796. [CrossRef]
356.
Wang, H.; Larson, R.A.; Runge, T. Impacts to hydrogen sulfide concentrations in biogas when poplar wood chips, steam treated
wood chips, and biochar are added to manure-based anaerobic digestion systems. Bioresour. Technol. Rep.
2019
,7, 100232.
[CrossRef]
357.
Negro, M.J.; Manzanares, P.; Ballesteros, I.; Oliva, J.M.; Cabañas, A.; Ballesteros, M. Hydrothermal Pretreatment Conditions to
Enhance Ethanol Production from Poplar Biomass. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2003,105, 87–100. [CrossRef]
358.
El Bassam, N. Handbook of Bioenergy Crops: A Complete Reference to Species, Development and Applications, 1st ed.; Earthcan Ltd.:
London, UK, 2010; ISBN 9781138975712.
359.
Rosso, L.; Facciotto, G.; Bergante, S.; Vietto, L.; Nervo, G. Selection and testing of Populus alba and Salix spp. as bioenergy
feedstock: Preliminary results. Appl. Energy 2013,102, 87–92. [CrossRef]
360.
Bartoli, M.; Rosi, L.; Giovannelli, A.; Frediani, P.; Frediani, M. Bio-oil from residues of short rotation coppice of poplar using a
microwave assisted pyrolysis. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2016,119, 224–232. [CrossRef]
361.
Chen, D.; Li, Y.; Cen, K.; Luo, M.; Li, H.; Lu, B. Pyrolysis polygeneration of poplar wood: Effect of heating rate and pyrolysis
temperature. Bioresour. Technol. 2016,218, 780–788. [CrossRef]
362.
Soares Dias, A.P.; Rego, F.; Fonseca, F.; Casquilho, M.; Rosa, F.; Rodrigues, A. Catalyzed pyrolysis of SRC poplar biomass. Alkaline
carbonates and zeolites catalysts. Energy 2019,183, 1114–1122. [CrossRef]
363.
Echresh Zadeh, Z.; Abdulkhani, A.; Saha, B. A comparative production and characterisation of fast pyrolysis bio-oil from Populus
and Spruce woods. Energy 2021,214, 118930. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 63 of 68
364.
Werner, C.; Haas, E.; Grote, R.; Gauder, M.; Graeff-Hönninger, S.; Claupein, W.; Butterbach-Bahl, K. Biomass production potential
from Populus short rotation systems in Romania. GCB Bioenergy 2012,4, 642–653. [CrossRef]
365.
Krzy˙
zaniak, M.; Stolarski, M.J.; Szczukowski, S.; Tworkowski, J.; Bieniek, A.; Mleczek, M. Willow biomass obtained from different
soils as a feedstock for energy. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015,75, 114–121. [CrossRef]
366.
Klasnja, B.; Kopitovic, S.; Orlovic, S. Wood and bark of some poplar and willow clones as fuelwood. Biomass Bioenergy
2002
,23,
427–432. [CrossRef]
367.
Bartha, S.; Vajda, B.; Duarte, L.C.; Carvalheiro, F.; Antal, N. Environmental and Economical Assessment Analysis of the Energy Willow;
Les Presses Agronomiques: Gembloux, Belgium, 2017; pp. 9–22.
368. Fijałkowska, D.; Styszko, L. Calorific value of willow biomass. Rocz. Ochr. Sr. 2011,13, 875–890.
369.
Palmqvist, E.; Hahn-Hägerdal, B.; Galbe, M.; Zacchi, G. The effect of water-soluble inhibitors from steam-pretreated willow on
enzymatic hydrolysis and ethanol fermentation. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 1996,19, 470–476. [CrossRef]
370.
Budsberg, E.; Rastogi, M.; Puettmann, M.E.; Caputo, J.; Balogh, S.; Volk, T.A.; Gustafson, R.; Johnson, L. Life-Cycle Assessment
for the Production of Bioethanol from Willow Biomass Crops via Biochemical Conversion. For. Prod. J. Online
2012
,62, 305–313.
[CrossRef]
371.
Sassner, P.; Zacchi, G. Integration options for high energy efficiency and improved economics in a wood-to-ethanol process.
Biotechnol. Biofuels 2008,1, 4. [CrossRef]
372.
Von Sivers, M.; Zacchi, G.; Olsson, L.; Hahn-Hügerdal, B. Cost Analysis of Ethanol Production from Willow Using Recombinant
Escherichia coli. Biotechnol. Prog. 1994,10, 555–560. [CrossRef]
373.
Asad, M.; Menana, Z.; Ziegler-Devin, I.; Bert, V.; Chalot, M.; Herzig, R.; Mench, M.; Brosse, N. Pretreatment of trace element-
enriched biomasses grown on phytomanaged soils for bioethanol production. Ind. Crops Prod. 2017,107, 63–72. [CrossRef]
374.
Kakuk, B.; Bagi, Z.; Rákhely, G.; Maróti, G.; Dudits, D.; Kovács, K.L. Methane production from green and woody biomass using
short rotation willow genotypes for bioenergy generation. Bioresour. Technol. 2021,333, 125223. [CrossRef]
375.
Han, S.H.; Cho, D.H.; Kim, Y.H.; Shin, S.J. Biobutanol production from 2-year-old willow biomass by acid hydrolysis and
acetone-butanol-ethanol fermentation. Energy 2013,61, 13–17. [CrossRef]
376.
Vervaeke, P.; Tack, F.M.G.; Navez, F.; Martin, J.; Verloo, M.G.; Lust, N. Fate of heavy metals during fixed bed downdraft
gasification of willow wood harvested from contaminated sites. Biomass Bioenergy 2006,30, 58–65. [CrossRef]
377.
Lievens, C.; Carleer, R.; Cornelissen, T.; Yperman, J. Fast pyrolysis of heavy metal contaminated willow: Influence of the plant
part. Fuel 2009,88, 1417–1425. [CrossRef]
378.
Mayer, Z.A.; Apfelbacher, A.; Hornung, A. A comparative study on the pyrolysis of metal- and ash-enriched wood and the
combustion properties of the gained char. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2012,96, 196–202. [CrossRef]
379.
Keller, C.; Ludwig, C.; Davoli, F.; Wochele, J. Thermal Treatment of Metal-Enriched Biomass Produced from Heavy Metal
Phytoextraction. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005,39, 3359–3367. [CrossRef]
380.
Delplanque, M.; Collet, S.; Del Gratta, F.; Schnuriger, B.; Gaucher, R.; Robinson, B.; Bert, V. Combustion of Salix used for
phytoextraction: The fate of metals and viability of the processes. Biomass Bioenergy 2013,49, 160–170. [CrossRef]
381.
Bartha, S.; Moniz, P.; Carvalheiro, F.; Duarte, L. Hydrothermal Treatment of Energy Willow Biomass. In Proceedings of the 3rd
Conference on “Smart Energy Systems in Cities and Regions”, Dublin, Ireland, 9–12 April 2018.
382.
Wang, K.; Jiang, J.; Liang, X. Design, synthesis and evaluation of novel glycosyl surfactant—Lignocellulosic hydrolysate esters
from shrub willow. Ind. Crops Prod. 2016,92, 127–135. [CrossRef]
383.
Kammerer, B.; Kahlich, R.; Biegert, C.; Gleiter, C.H.; Heide, L. HPLC-MS/MS analysis of willow bark extracts contained in
pharmaceutical preparations. Phytochem. Anal. 2005,16, 470–478. [CrossRef]
384.
Kenstaviˇcien
˙
e, P.; Nenortien
˙
e, P.; Kiliuvien
˙
e, G.; Ževžikovas, A.; Lukošius, A.; Kazlauskien
˙
e, D. Application of high-performance
liquid chromatography for research of salicin in bark of different varieties of Salix. Medicina 2009,45, 644–651. [CrossRef]
385.
Liu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, G.; Liu, W.; Wang, D.; Dong, Y. Preparation of activated carbon from willow leaves and evaluation in
electric double-layer capacitors. Mater. Lett. 2016,176, 60–63. [CrossRef]
386.
Cheshire, E.; Granzow, S.G.; Makkonen, H.P. Kraft Pulp from Plantation Grown Biomass Willow. In Proceedings of the 3rd
Biennial Conference, Short Rotation Woody Crops—Operations Working Group, Syracuse, NY, USA, 10–13 October 2000.
387.
Eklund, R.; Zacchi, G. Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam-pretreated willow. Enzym. Microb. Technol.
1995
,
17, 255–259. [CrossRef]
388.
Sassner, P.; Galbe, M.; Zacchi, G. Bioethanol production based on simultaneous saccharification and fermentation of steam-
pretreated Salix at high dry-matter content. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2006,39, 756–762. [CrossRef]
389.
Aden, A.; Ruth, M.; Ibsen, K.; Jechura, J.; Neeves, K.; Sheehan, J.; Wallace, B. Lignocellulosic Biomass to Ethanol Process Design and
Economics Utilizing Co-Current Dilute Acid Prehydrolysis and Enzymatic Hydrolysis for Corns Stover; National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL): Golden, CO, USA, 2002.
390.
Yoon, S.Y.; Kim, B.R.; Han, S.H.; Shin, S.J. Different response between woody core and bark of goat willow (Salix caprea L.) to
concentrated phosphoric acid pretreatment followed by enzymatic saccharification. Energy 2015,81, 21–26. [CrossRef]
391.
Huijgen, W.J.J.; Smit, A.T.; Reith, J.H.; Uil, H. Den Catalytic organosolv fractionation of willow wood and wheat straw as
pretreatment for enzymatic cellulose hydrolysis. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2011,86, 1428–1438. [CrossRef]
392.
Šyc, M.; Pohoˇrelý, M.; Kameníková, P.; Habart, J.; Svoboda, K.; Punˇcocháˇr, M. Willow trees from heavy metals phytoextraction as
energy crops. Biomass Bioenergy 2012,37, 106–113. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 64 of 68
393.
Sas, E.; Hennequin, L.M.; Frémont, A.; Jerbi, A.; Legault, N.; Lamontagne, J.; Fagoaga, N.; Sarrazin, M.; Hallett, J.P.; Fennell, P.S.;
et al. Biorefinery potential of sustainable municipal wastewater treatment using fast-growing willow. Sci. Total Environ.
2021
,
792, 148146. [CrossRef]
394.
Dastyar, W.; Raheem, A.; He, J.; Zhao, M. Biofuel Production Using Thermochemical Conversion of Heavy Metal-Contaminated
Biomass (HMCB) Harvested from Phytoextraction Process. Chem. Eng. J. 2019,358, 759–785. [CrossRef]
395.
Stals, M.; Thijssen, E.; Vangronsveld, J.; Carleer, R.; Schreurs, S.; Yperman, J. Flash pyrolysis of heavy metal contaminated biomass
from phytoremediation: Influence of temperature, entrained flow and wood/leaves blended pyrolysis on the behaviour of heavy
metals. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2010,87, 1–7. [CrossRef]
396.
Kuppens, T.; Van Dael, M.; Vanreppelen, K.; Thewys, T.; Yperman, J.; Carleer, R.; Schreurs, S.; Van Passel, S. Techno-economic
assessment of fast pyrolysis for the valorization of short rotation coppice cultivated for phytoextraction. J. Clean. Prod.
2015
,88,
336–344. [CrossRef]
397.
Grigoras, I.F.; Stroe, R.E.; Sintamarean, I.M.; Rosendahl, L.A. Effect of biomass pretreatment on the product distribution and
composition resulting from the hydrothermal liquefaction of short rotation coppice willow. Bioresour. Technol.
2017
,231, 116–123.
[CrossRef]
398.
Raheem, A.; Wan Azlina, W.A.K.G.; Taufiq Yap, Y.H.; Danquah, M.K.; Harun, R. Thermochemical conversion of microalgal
biomass for biofuel production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015,49, 990–999. [CrossRef]
399.
Campenni’, L.; Nobre, B.P.; Santos, C.A.; Oliveira, A.C.; Aires-Barros, M.R.; Palavra, A.M.F.; Gouveia, L. Carotenoid and lipid
production by the autotrophic microalga Chlorella protothecoides under nutritional, salinity, and luminosity stress conditions.
Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2013,97, 1383–1393. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
400.
Brennan, L.; Owende, P. Biofuels from microalgae-A review of technologies for production, processing, and extractions of biofuels
and co-products. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2010,14, 557–577. [CrossRef]
401.
Gouveia, L.; Marques, A.E.; Da Silva, T.L.; Reis, A. Neochloris oleabundans UTEX #1185: A suitable renewable lipid source for
biofuel production. J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2009,36, 821–826.
402.
Rawat, I.; Ranjith Kumar, R.; Mutanda, T.; Bux, F. Biodiesel from microalgae: A critical evaluation from laboratory to large scale
production. Appl. Energy 2013,103, 444–467. [CrossRef]
403. Miao, X.; Wu, Q. Biodiesel production from heterotrophic microalgal oil. Bioresour. Technol. 2006,97, 841–846. [CrossRef]
404.
Johnson, M.B.; Wen, Z. Production of biodiesel fuel from the microalga schizochytrium limacinum by direct transesterification of
algal biomass. Energy Fuels 2009,23, 5179–5183. [CrossRef]
405.
Umdu, E.S.; Tuncer, M.; Seker, E. Transesterification of Nannochloropsis oculata microalga’s lipid to biodiesel on Al2O3 supported
CaO and MgO catalysts. Bioresour. Technol. 2009,100, 2828–2831. [CrossRef]
406.
Ma, Y.; Liu, S.; Wang, Y.; Adhikari, S.; Dempster, T.A.; Wang, Y. Direct biodiesel production from wet microalgae assisted by radio
frequency heating. Fuel 2019,256, 115994. [CrossRef]
407.
Li, P.; Miao, X.; Li, R.; Zhong, J. In situ biodiesel production from fast-growing and high oil content chlorella pyrenoidosa in rice
straw hydrolysate. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2011,2011, 141207. [CrossRef]
408.
Jazzar, S.; Olivares-Carrillo, P.; Pérez de los Ríos, A.; Marzouki, M.N.; Acién-Fernández, F.G.; Fernández-Sevilla, J.M.; Molina-
Grima, E.; Smaali, I.; Quesada-Medina, J. Direct supercritical methanolysis of wet and dry unwashed marine microalgae
(Nannochloropsis gaditana) to biodiesel. Appl. Energy 2015,148, 210–219. [CrossRef]
409.
Malekghasemi, S.; Kariminia, H.R.; Plechkova, N.K.; Ward, V.C.A. Direct transesterification of wet microalgae to biodiesel using
phosphonium carboxylate ionic liquid catalysts. Biomass Bioenergy 2021,150, 106126. [CrossRef]
410. Zamalloa, C.; Boon, N.; Verstraete, W. Anaerobic digestibility of Scenedesmus obliquus and Phaeodactylum tricornutum under
mesophilic and thermophilic conditions. Appl. Energy 2012,92, 733–738. [CrossRef]
411.
Frigon, J.C.; Matteau-Lebrun, F.; Hamani Abdou, R.; McGinn, P.J.; O’Leary, S.J.B.; Guiot, S.R. Screening microalgae strains for
their productivity in methane following anaerobic digestion. Appl. Energy 2013,108, 100–107. [CrossRef]
412.
Du, X.; Tao, Y.; Liu, Y.; Li, H. Stimulating methane production from microalgae by alkaline pretreatment and co-digestion with
sludge. Environ. Technol. 2018,41, 1546–1553. [CrossRef]
413.
Nguyen, M.T.; Choi, S.P.; Lee, J.; Lee, J.H.; Sim, S.J. Hydrothermal acid pretreatment of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii biomass for
ethanol production. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2009,19, 161–166.
414.
Harun, R.; Danquah, M.K.; Forde, G.M. Microalgal biomass as a fermentation feedstock for bioethanol production. J. Chem.
Technol. Biotechnol. 2010,85, 199–203. [CrossRef]
415.
Lee, S.; Oh, Y.; Kim, D.; Kwon, D.; Lee, C.; Lee, J. Converting carbohydrates extracted from marine algae into ethanol using
various ethanolic escherichia coli strains. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2011,164, 878–888. [CrossRef]
416.
Miranda, J.R.; Passarinho, P.C.; Gouveia, L. Bioethanol production from Scenedesmus obliquus sugars: The influence of
photobioreactors and culture conditions on biomass production. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2012,96, 555–564. [CrossRef]
417.
Rempel, A.; de Souza Sossella, F.; Margarites, A.C.; Astolfi, A.L.; Steinmetz, R.L.R.; Kunz, A.; Treichel, H.; Colla, L.M. Bioethanol
from Spirulina platensis biomass and the use of residuals to produce biomethane: An energy efficient approach. Bioresour. Technol.
2019,288, 121588. [CrossRef]
418.
Cardias, B.B.; Trevisol, T.C.; Bertuol, G.G.; Costa, J.A.V.; Santos, L.O. Hydrolyzed Spirulina Biomass and Molasses as Substrate in
Alcoholic Fermentation with Application of Magnetic Fields. Waste Biomass Valorization 2020,12, 175–183. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 65 of 68
419.
Kim, J.K.; Um, B.H.; Kim, T.H. Bioethanol production from micro-algae, Schizocytrium sp., using hydrothermal treatment and
biological conversion. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2012,29, 209–214. [CrossRef]
420.
Luiza Astolfi, A.; Rempel, A.; Cavanhi, V.A.F.; Alves, M.; Deamici, K.M.; Colla, L.M.; Costa, J.A.V. Simultaneous saccharification
and fermentation of Spirulina sp. and corn starch for the production of bioethanol and obtaining biopeptides with high antioxidant
activity. Bioresour. Technol. 2020,301, 122698. [CrossRef]
421.
Zhang, L.; Happe, T.; Melis, A. Biochemical and morphological characterization of sulfur-deprived and H2-producing Chlamy-
domonas reinhardtii (green alga). Planta 2002,214, 552–561. [CrossRef]
422.
Chader, S.; Hacene, H.; Agathos, S.N. Study of hydrogen production by three strains of Chlorella isolated from the soil in the
Algerian Sahara. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2009,34, 4941–4946. [CrossRef]
423.
Tamburic, B.; Zemichael, F.W.; Maitland, G.C.; Hellgardt, K. Parameters affecting the growth and hydrogen production of the
green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2011,36, 7872–7876. [CrossRef]
424.
Rashid, N.; Lee, K.; Mahmood, Q. Bio-hydrogen production by Chlorella vulgaris under diverse photoperiods. Bioresour. Technol.
2011,102, 2101–2104. [CrossRef]
425.
Ruiz-Marin, A.; Canedo-López, Y.; Chávez-Fuentes, P. Biohydrogen production by Chlorella vulgaris and Scenedesmus obliquus
immobilized cultivated in artificial wastewater under different light quality. AMB Express 2020,10, 191. [CrossRef]
426.
Liu, C.; Chang, C.; Cheng, C.; Lee, D. Fermentative hydrogen production by Clostridium butyricum CGS5 using carbohydrate-rich
microalgal biomass as feedstock. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2012,37, 15458–15464. [CrossRef]
427.
Nobre, B.P.; Villalobos, F.; Barragán, B.E.; Oliveira, A.C.; Batista, A.P.; Marques, P.A.S.S.; Mendes, R.L.; Sovová, H.; Palavra, A.F.;
Gouveia, L. A biorefinery from Nannochloropsis sp. microalga—Extraction of oils and pigments. Production of biohydrogen
from the leftover biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 2013,135, 128–136. [CrossRef]
428.
Xia, A.; Cheng, J.; Ding, L.; Lin, R.; Huang, R.; Zhou, J.; Cen, K. Improvement of the energy conversion efficiency of Chlorella
pyrenoidosa biomass by a three-stage process comprising dark fermentation, photofermentation, and methanogenesis. Bioresour.
Technol. 2013,146, 436–443. [CrossRef]
429.
Batista, A.P.; Moura, P.; Marques, P.A.S.S.; Ortigueira, J.; Alves, L.; Gouveia, L. Scenedesmus obliquus as feedstock for biohydrogen
production by Enterobacter aerogenes and Clostridium butyricum. Fuel 2014,117, 537–543. [CrossRef]
430.
Ortigueira, J.; Alves, L.; Gouveia, L.; Moura, P. Third generation biohydrogen production by Clostridium butyricum and adapted
mixed cultures from Scenedesmus obliquus microalga biomass. Fuel 2015,153, 128–134. [CrossRef]
431.
Pacheco, R.; Ferreira, A.F.; Pinto, T.; Nobre, B.P.; Loureiro, D.; Moura, P.; Gouveia, L.; Silva, C.M. The production of pigments &
hydrogen through a Spirogyra sp. biorefinery. Energy Convers. Manag. 2015,89, 789–797.
432.
Ortigueira, J.; Pinto, T.; Gouveia, L.; Moura, P. Production and storage of biohydrogen during sequential batch fermentation of
Spirogyra hydrolyzate by Clostridium butyricum. Energy 2015,88, 528–536. [CrossRef]
433.
Usmanbaha, N.; Jariyaboon, R.; Reungsang, A.; Kongjan, P.; Chu, C.-Y. Optimization of Batch Dark Fermentation of Chlorella sp.
Using Mixed-Cultures for Simultaneous Hydrogen and Butyric Acid Production. Energies 2019,12, 2529. [CrossRef]
434.
Caputo, G.; Dispenza, M.; Rubio, P.; Scargiali, F.; Marotta, G.; Brucato, A. Supercritical water gasification of microalgae and their
constituents in a continuous reactor. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2016,118, 163–170. [CrossRef]
435.
Duman, G.; Uddin, M.A.; Yanik, J. Hydrogen production from algal biomass via steam gasification. Bioresour. Technol.
2014
,166,
24–30. [CrossRef]
436.
Liu, G.; Liao, Y.; Wu, Y.; Ma, X.; Chen, L. Characteristics of microalgae gasification through chemical looping in the presence of
steam. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2017,42, 22730–22742. [CrossRef]
437.
Raheem, A.; Cui, X.; Mangi, F.H.; Memon, A.A.; Ji, G.; Cheng, B.; Dong, W.; Zhao, M. Hydrogen-rich energy recovery from
microalgae (lipid-extracted) via steam catalytic gasification. Algal Res. 2020,52, 102102. [CrossRef]
438.
Guan, Q.; Wei, C.; Ning, P.; Tian, S.; Gu, J. Catalytic Gasification of Algae Nannochloropsis sp. in Sub/Supercritical Water. Procedia
Environ. Sci. 2013,18, 844–848. [CrossRef]
439.
Onwudili, J.A.; Lea-Langton, A.R.; Ross, A.B.; Williams, P.T. Catalytic hydrothermal gasification of algae for hydrogen production:
Composition of reaction products and potential for nutrient recycling. Bioresour. Technol.
2013
,127, 72–80. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
440.
Tiong, L.; Komiyama, M. Supercritical water gasification of microalga Chlorella vulgaris over supported Ru. J. Supercrit. Fluids
2019,144, 1–7. [CrossRef]
441.
Babich, I.V.; van der Hulst, M.; Lefferts, L.; Moulijn, J.A.; O’Connor, P.; Seshan, K. Catalytic pyrolysis of microalgae to high-quality
liquid bio-fuels. Biomass Bioenergy 2011,35, 3199–3207. [CrossRef]
442.
Miao, X.; Wu, Q. High yield bio-oil production from fast pyrolysis by metabolic controlling of Chlorella protothecoides. J.
Biotechnol. 2004,110, 85–93. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
443.
Peng, W.; Wu, Q.; Tu, P. Effects of temperature and holding time on production of renewable fuels from pyrolysis of Chlorella
protothecoides. J. Appl. Phycol. 2000,12, 147–152. [CrossRef]
444.
Pan, P.; Hu, C.; Yang, W.; Li, Y.; Dong, L.; Zhu, L.; Tong, D.; Qing, R.; Fan, Y. The direct pyrolysis and catalytic pyrolysis of
Nannochloropsis sp. residue for renewable bio-oils. Bioresour. Technol. 2010,101, 4593–4599. [CrossRef]
445.
Silva, C.M.; Ferreira, A.F.; Dias, A.P.; Costa, M. A comparison between microalgae virtual biorefinery arrangements for bio-oil
production based on lab-scale results. J. Clean. Prod. 2016,130, 58–67. [CrossRef]
446.
Jamilatun, S.; Budhijanto, B.; Rochmadi, R.; Yuliestyan, A.; Hadiyanto, H.; Budiman, A. Comparative analysis between pyrolysis
products of Spirulina platensis biomass and its residues. Int. J. Renew. Energy Dev. 2019,8, 133–140. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 66 of 68
447.
Aswie, V.; Qadariyah, L.; Mahfud, M. Pyrolysis of Microalgae Chlorella sp. using Activated Carbon as Catalyst for Biofuel
Production. Bull. Chem. React. Eng. Catal. 2021,16, 205–213. [CrossRef]
448.
Wang, K.; Brown, R.C.; Homsy, S.; Martinez, L.; Sidhu, S.S. Fast pyrolysis of microalgae remnants in a fluidized bed reactor for
bio-oil and biochar production. Bioresour. Technol. 2013,127, 494–499. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
449.
Couto, E.A.; Pinto, F.; Varela, F.; Reis, A.; Costa, P.; Calijuri, M.L. Hydrothermal liquefaction of biomass produced from domestic
sewage treatment in high-rate ponds. Renew. Energy 2018,118, 644–653. [CrossRef]
450.
Dote, Y.; Sawayama, S.; Inoue, S.; Minowa, T.; Yokoyama, S. Recovery of liquid fuel from hydrocarbon-rich microalgae by
thermochemical liquefaction. Fuel 1994,73, 1855–1857. [CrossRef]
451.
Minowa, T.; Yokoyama, S.; Kishimoto, M.; Okakura, T. Oil production from algal cells of Dunaliella tertiolecta by direct
thermochemical liquefaction. Fuel 1995,12, 1735–1738. [CrossRef]
452.
Brown, T.M.; Duan, P.; Savage, P.E. Hydrothermal liquefaction and gasification of Nannochloropsis sp. Energy Fuels
2010
,24,
3639–3646. [CrossRef]
453.
Duan, P.; Savage, P.E. Hydrothermal liquefaction of a microalga with heterogeneous catalysts. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
2011
,50,
52–61. [CrossRef]
454.
Biller, P.; Ross, A.B. Potential yields and properties of oil from the hydrothermal liquefaction of microalgae with different
biochemical content. Bioresour. Technol. 2011,102, 215–225. [CrossRef]
455.
Garcia Alba, L.; Torri, C.; Samorì, C.; Van Der Spek, J.; Fabbri, D.; Kersten, S.R.A.; Brilman, D.W.F. Hydrothermal treatment (HTT)
of microalgae: Evaluation of the process as conversion method in an algae biorefinery concept. Energy Fuels
2012
,26, 642–657.
[CrossRef]
456.
Biller, P.; Sharma, B.K.; Kunwar, B.; Ross, A.B. Hydroprocessing of bio-crude from continuous hydrothermal liquefaction of
microalgae. Fuel 2015,159, 197–205. [CrossRef]
457.
Han, Y.; Hoekman, S.K.; Cui, Z.; Jena, U.; Das, P. Hydrothermal liquefaction of marine microalgae biomass using co-solvents.
Algal Res. 2019,38, 101421. [CrossRef]
458.
Faeth, J.L.; Valdez, P.J.; Savage, P.E. Fast hydrothermal liquefaction of nannochloropsis sp. to produce biocrude. Energy Fuels
2013
,
27, 1391–1398. [CrossRef]
459.
Barbosa, B.; Boléo, S.; Sidella, S.; Costa, J.; Duarte, M.P.; Mendes, B.; Cosentino, S.L.; Fernando, A.L. Phytoremediation of
Heavy Metal-Contaminated Soils Using the Perennial Energy Crops Miscanthus spp. and Arundo donax L. Bioenergy Res.
2015
,8,
1500–1511. [CrossRef]
460.
Mehmood, M.A.; Ibrahim, M.; Rashid, U.; Nawaz, M.; Ali, S.; Hussain, A.; Gull, M. Biomass production for bioenergy using
marginal lands | Elsevier Enhanced Reader. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2017,9, 3–21. [CrossRef]
461.
Gerwin, W.; Repmann, F.; Galatsidas, S.; Vlachaki, D.; Gounaris, N.; Baumgarten, W.; Volkmann, C.; Keramitzis, D.; Kiourtsis, F.;
Freese, D. Assessment and quantification of marginal lands for biomass production in Europe using soil-quality indicators. SOIL
2018,4, 267–290. [CrossRef]
462.
Fernando, A.L.; Costa, J.; Barbosa, B.; Monti, A.; Rettenmaier, N. Environmental impact assessment of perennial crops cultivation
on marginal soils in the Mediterranean Region. Biomass Bioenergy 2018,111, 174–186. [CrossRef]
463.
Sameena, P.; Puthur, J.T. Heavy Metal Phytoremediation by Bioenergy Plants and Associated Tolerance Mechanisms. Soil Sediment
Contam. 2021,30, 253–274.
464. Ierna, A.; Sortino, O.; Mauromicale, G. Biomass, seed and energy yield of Cynara cardunculus L. as affected by environment and
season. Agronomy 2020,10, 1548. [CrossRef]
465.
Garau, M.; Castaldi, P.; Patteri, G.; Roggero, P.P.; Garau, G. Evaluation of Cynara cardunculus L. and municipal solid waste compost
for aided phytoremediation of multi potentially toxic element–contaminated soils. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res.
2021
,28, 3253–3265.
[CrossRef]
466.
Madejón, P.; Domínguez, M.T.; Fernández-Boy, E.; Paneque, P.; Girón, I.; Madejón, E. Soil hydraulic properties as the main driver
in the establishment of biomass crops in contaminated soils. J. Environ. Manag. 2019,233, 812–822. [CrossRef]
467.
Llugany, M.; Miralles, R.; Corrales, I.; Barceló, J.; Poschenrieder, C. Cynara cardunculus a potentially useful plant for remediation
of soils polluted with cadmium or arsenic. J. Geochem. Explor. 2012,123, 122–127. [CrossRef]
468.
Sánchez-Pardo, B.; Cantero, C.; Zornoza, P. Alleviation of arsenic stress in cardoon plants via the supply of a low cadmium
concentration. Environ. Exp. Bot. 2015,109, 229–234. [CrossRef]
469.
Sidella, S.; Consentino, S.L.; Fernando, A.L.; Costa, J.; Barbosa, B. Phytoremediation of soils contaminated with lead by arundo
donax L. In WASTES–Solutions, Treatments and Opportunities II; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2018.
470.
Liu, Y.N.; Xiao, X.Y.; Guo, Z.H. Identification of indicators of giant reed (Arundo donax L.) ecotypes for phytoremediation of
metal-contaminated soil in a non-ferrous mining and smelting area in southern China. Ecol. Indic.
2019
,101, 249–260. [CrossRef]
471.
Praspaliauskas, M.; Žaltauskait
˙
e, J.; Pedišius, N.; Stri
¯
ugas, N. Comprehensive evaluation of sewage sludge and sewage sludge
char soil amendment impact on the industrial hemp growth performance and heavy metal accumulation. Ind. Crops Prod.
2020
,
150, 112396. [CrossRef]
472.
Heuzé, V.; Tran, G.; Chapoutot, P.; Bastianelli, D.; Lebas, F. Feedipedia. Available online: https://agritrop.cirad.fr/582540/1/ID5
82540.pdf (accessed on 1 January 2020).
473.
Fang, Y.R.; Liu, J.A.; Steinberger, Y.; Xie, G.H. Energy use efficiency and economic feasibility of Jerusalem artichoke production on
arid and coastal saline lands. Ind. Crops Prod. 2018,117, 131–139. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 67 of 68
474.
Negro, M.; Ballesteros, I.; Manzanares, P.; Oliva, J.; Saez, F.; Ballesteros, M. Inulin containing biomass for ethanol production.
Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2006,129–132, 922–932. [CrossRef]
475.
Gengmao, Z.; Mehta, S.K.; Zhaopu, L. Use of saline aquaculture wastewater to irrigate salt-tolerant Jerusalem artichoke and
sunflower in semiarid coastal zones of China. Agric. Water Manag. 2010,97, 1987–1993. [CrossRef]
476.
Zhang, T.; Chi, Z.; Zhao, C.H.; Chi, Z.M.; Gong, F. Bioethanol production from hydrolysates of inulin and the tuber meal of
Jerusalem artichoke by Saccharomyces sp. W0. Bioresour. Technol. 2010,101, 8166–8170. [CrossRef]
477.
Hu, N.; Yuan, B.; Sun, J.; Wang, S.A.; Li, F.L. Thermotolerant Kluyveromyces marxianus and Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains
representing potentials for bioethanol production from Jerusalem artichoke by consolidated bioprocessing. Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol. 2012,95, 1359–1368. [CrossRef]
478.
Monti, A.; Amaducci, M.T.; Venturi, G. Growth response, leaf gas exchange and fructans accumulation of Jerusalem artichoke
(Helianthus tuberosus L.) as affected by different water regimes. Eur. J. Agron. 2005,23, 136–145. [CrossRef]
479.
Xue, S.; Lewandowski, I.; Wang, X.; Yi, Z. Assessment of the production potentials of Miscanthus on marginal land in China.
Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016,54, 932–943. [CrossRef]
480. Usmani, R.A. Potential for energy and biofuel from biomass in India. Renew. Energy 2020,155, 921–930. [CrossRef]
481.
Zheng, C.; Iqbal, Y.; Labonte, N.; Sun, G.; Feng, H.; Yi, Z.; Xiao, L. Performance of switchgrass and Miscanthus genotypes on
marginal land in the Yellow River Delta. Ind. Crops Prod. 2019,141, 111773. [CrossRef]
482.
Rusinowski, S.; Krzy˙
zak, J.; Sitko, K.; Kalaji, H.M.; Jensen, E.; Pogrzeba, M. Cultivation of C4 perennial energy grasses on heavy
metal contaminated arable land: Impact on soil, biomass, and photosynthetic traits. Environ. Pollut.
2019
,250, 300–311. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
483.
Dauber, J.; Brown, C.; Fernando, A.L.; Finnan, J.; Krasuska, E.; Ponitka, J.; Styles, D.; Thrän, D.; Van Groenigen, K.J.; Weih, M.;
et al. Bioenergy from “surplus” land: Environmental and socio-economic implications. BioRisk 2012,7, 5. [CrossRef]
484.
Fernando, A.L.; Boléo, S.; Barbosa, B.; Costa, J.; Duarte, M.P.; Monti, A. Perennial Grass Production Opportunities on Marginal
Mediterranean Land. Bioenergy Res. 2015,8, 1523–1537. [CrossRef]
485.
Von Cossel, M.; Wagner, M.; Lask, J.; Magenau, E.; Bauerle, A.; Cossel, V.; Warrach-Sagi, K.; Elbersen, B.; Staritsky, I.; Van Eupen,
M.; et al. Prospects of Bioenergy Cropping Systems for A More Social-Ecologically Sound Bioeconomy. Agronomy
2019
,9, 605.
[CrossRef]
486.
Fijalkowski, K.; Rosikon, K.; Grobelak, A.; Hutchison, D.; Kacprzak, M.J. Modification of properties of energy crops under Polish
condition as an effect of sewage sludge application onto degraded soil. J. Environ. Manag. 2018,217, 509–519. [CrossRef]
487.
Von Cossel, M.; Lewandowski, I.; Elbersen, B.; Staritsky, I.; Van Eupen, M.; Iqbal, Y.; Mantel, S.; Scordia, D.; Testa, G.; Cosentino,
S.L.; et al. Marginal agricultural land low-input systems for biomass production. Energies 2019,12, 3123. [CrossRef]
488.
Patel, B.; Patel, A.; Gami, B.; Patel, P. Energy balance, GHG emission and economy for cultivation of high biomass verities of
bamboo, sorghum and pearl millet as energy crops at marginal ecologies of Gujarat state in India. Renew. Energy
2020
,148,
816–823. [CrossRef]
489.
Rodrigues de Sousa, E.M. Pinheiro-Bravo: A Conífera Mais Abundante em Portugal. Available online: https://florestas.pt/
conhecer/pinheiro-bravo-a-conifera-mais-abundante-em-portugal/ (accessed on 8 July 2021).
490.
Direção Nacional das Fileiras Florestais Culturas Energéticas Florestais—Primeira Abordagem do Levantamento da Situação
Actual. Available online: http://www2.icnf.pt/portal/florestas/fileiras/resource/doc/biom/biomass-gtce-jun10 (accessed on
16 November 2018).
491.
Tzvetkova, N.; Miladinova, K.; Ivanova, K.; Georgieva, T.; Geneva, M.; Markovska, Y. Possibility for using of two Paulownia lines
as a tool for remediation of heavy metal contaminated soil—PubMed. J. Environ. Biol. 2015,36, 145–151.
492.
Kiser, L.C.; Fox, T.R. Short-rotation Woody Crop Biomass Production for Bioenergy. In Biofuel Crop Sustainability; Singh, B.P., Ed.;
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Oxford, UK, 2013; pp. 205–238, ISBN 9781118635797.
493. Blanco-Canqui, H. Energy Crops and Their Implications on Soil and Environment. Agron. J. 2010,102, 403–419. [CrossRef]
494. Dimitriou, I.; Aronsson, P. Willows for energy and phytoremediation in Sweden. Unasylva 2005,56, 47–50.
495.
Stolarski, M.J.; Szczukowski, S.; Tworkowski, J.; Krzy˙
zaniak, M. Extensive willow biomass production on marginal land. Pol. J.
Environ. Stud. 2019,28, 4359–4367. [CrossRef]
496.
Bart, S.; Motelica Heino, M.; Miard, F.; Joussein, E.; Soubrand, M.; Bourgerie, S.; Morabito, D. Phytostabilization of As, Sb and Pb
by two willow species (S. viminalis and S. purpurea) on former mine technosols. CATENA 2016,136, 44–52.
497.
Janssen, J.; Weyens, N.; Croes, S.; Beckers, B.; Meiresonne, L.; Van Peteghem, P.; Carleer, R.; Vangronsveld, J. Phytoremediation of
Metal Contaminated Soil Using Willow: Exploiting Plant-Associated Bacteria to Improve Biomass Production and Metal Uptake.
Int. J. Phytoremed. 2015,17, 1123–1136. [CrossRef]
498.
Dimitriou, I.; Mola-Yudego, B.; Aronsson, P.; Eriksson, J. Changes in Organic Carbon and Trace Elements in the Soil of Willow
Short-Rotation Coppice Plantations. Bioenergy Res. 2012,5, 563–572. [CrossRef]
499.
Salam, M.M.A.; Mohsin, M.; Pulkkinen, P.; Pelkonen, P.; Pappinen, A. Effects of soil amendments on the growth response and
phytoextraction capability of a willow variety (S. viminalis
×
S. schwerinii
×
S. dasyclados) grown in contaminated soils. Ecotoxicol.
Environ. Saf. 2019,171, 753–770. [CrossRef]
500.
Chaganti, V.N.; Ganjegunte, G.; Niu, G.; Ulery, A.; Flynn, R.; Enciso, J.M.; Meki, M.N.; Kiniry, J.R. Effects of treated urban
wastewater irrigation on bioenergy sorghum and soil quality. Agric. Water Manag. 2020,228, 105894. [CrossRef]
Energies 2022,15, 4348 68 of 68
501.
Maucieri, C.; Cavallaro, V.; Caruso, C.; Borin, M.; Milani, M.; Barbera, A.C. Sorghum biomass production for energy purpose
using treated urban wastewater and different fertilization in a mediterranean environment. Agriculture 2016,6, 67. [CrossRef]
502.
Invasoras Acacia Dealbata (Mimosa). Available online: http://invasoras.pt/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Acacia-dealbata.pdf
(accessed on 23 October 2017).
503.
Dickmann, D.I. Silviculture and biology of short-rotation woody crops in temperate regions: Then and now. Biomass Bioenergy
2006,30, 696–705. [CrossRef]
504.
Djomo, S.N.; Kasmioui, O.E.; Ceulemans, R. Energy and greenhouse gas balance of bioenergy production from poplar and willow:
A review. GCB Bioenergy 2011,3, 181–197. [CrossRef]
505.
Williams, P.R.D.; Inman, D.; Aden, A.; Heath, G.A. Environmental and sustainability factors associated with next-generation
biofuels in the U.S.: What do we really know? Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009,43, 4763–4775. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
506.
Vázquez Núñez, E.; Fernández-Luqueño, F.; Peña-Castro, J.M.; Vera-Reyes, I. Coupling Plant Biomass Derived from Phytoremedi-
ation of Potential Toxic-Metal-Polluted Soils to Bioenergy Production and High-Value by-Products—A Review. Appl. Sci.
2021
,
11, 2982.
507.
Liu, Z.; Tran, K.Q. A review on disposal and utilization of phytoremediation plants containing heavy metals. Ecotoxicol. Environ.
Saf. 2021,226, 112821. [CrossRef]
508.
Laval-Gilly, P.; Henry, S.; Mazziotti, M.; Bonnefoy, A.; Comel, A.; Falla, J. Miscanthus
×
giganteus Composition in Metals and
Potassium After Culture on Polluted Soil and Its Use as Biofuel. Bioenergy Res. 2017,10, 846–852. [CrossRef]
509.
Danelli, T.; Sepulcri, A.; Masetti, G.; Colombo, F.; Sangiorgio, S.; Cassani, E.; Anelli, S.; Adani, F.; Pilu, R. Arundo donax L. Biomass
Production in a Polluted Area: Effects of Two Harvest Timings on Heavy Metals Uptake. Appl. Sci. 2021,11, 1147. [CrossRef]
510.
Raikova, S.; Piccini, M.; Surman, M.K.; Allen, M.J.; Chuck, C.J. Making light work of heavy metal contamination: The potential
for coupling bioremediation with bioenergy production. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2019,94, 3064–3072. [CrossRef]
511.
Uchman, W.; Skorek-Osikowska, A.; Werle, S. Evaluation of the potential of the production of electricity and heat using energy
crops with phytoremediation features. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017,126, 194–203. [CrossRef]
512.
Liu, W.J.; Li, W.W.; Jiang, H.; Yu, H.Q. Fates of Chemical Elements in Biomass during Its Pyrolysis. Chem. Rev.
2017
,117,
6367–6398. [CrossRef]
513.
Dilks, R.T.; Monette, F.; Glaus, M. The major parameters on biomass pyrolysis for hyperaccumulative plants—A review.
Chemosphere 2016,146, 385–395. [CrossRef]
514.
Grottola, C.M.; Giudicianni, P.; Pindozzi, S.; Stanzione, F.; Faugno, S.; Fagnano, M.; Fiorentino, N.; Ragucci, R. Steam assisted
slow pyrolysis of contaminated biomasses: Effect of plant parts and process temperature on heavy metals fate. Waste Manag.
2019,85, 232–241. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
515.
Balsamo, R.A.; Kelly, W.J.; Satrio, J.A.; Ruiz-Felix, M.N.; Fetterman, M.; Wynn, R.; Hagel, K. Utilization of Grasses for Potential
Biofuel Production and Phytoremediation of Heavy Metal Contaminated Soils. Int. J. Phytoremed.
2014
,17, 448–455. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
516.
Liu, Y.; Guo, Z.; Sun, Y.; Shi, W.; Han, Z.; Xiao, X.; Zeng, P. Stabilization of heavy metals in biochar pyrolyzed from phytoremedi-
ated giant reed (Arundo donax) biomass. Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China 2017,27, 656–665. [CrossRef]
517.
Tian, Y.L.; Zhang, H.Y.; Guo, W.; Wei, X.F. Morphological Responses, Biomass Yield, and Bioenergy Potential of Sweet Sorghum
Cultivated in Cadmium-Contaminated Soil for Biofuel. Int. J. Green Energy 2014,12, 577–584. [CrossRef]
518.
Pidlisnyuk, V.; Trögl, J.; Stefanovska, T.; Shapoval, P.; Erickson, L. Preliminary Results on Growing Second Generation Biofuel
Crop Miscanthus ×giganteus at The Polluted Military Site in Ukraine. Nov. Biotechnol. Chim. 2016,15, 77–84. [CrossRef]
Content uploaded by Mariana Abreu
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Mariana Abreu on Jun 19, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
