Biomass energy as a catalyst for achieving global sustainability goals: technological advancements and policy implications

Abstract

Biomass energy has emerged as a vital renewable energy source in the global transition towards sustainable development, aligning with the United Nations sustainable development goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy) and SDG 13 (climate action). This study evaluates biomass energy’s contributions by integrating real SI-unit-based data on energy usage in China, India, Denmark, Germany, Brazil, Namibia, and Ghana. An interpretative review was employed, incorporating primarily qualitative analysis and supplemented by the quantitative analysis of biomass energy deployment, cost assessments, and policy evaluations. The findings reveal that biomass contributes 8% to China’s renewable energy mix (500 TWh), 12% in India (370 TWh), 20% in Denmark (43 TWh), and 27% in Brazil (160 TWh), yet its expansion faces economic, technological, and policy challenges. This study integrates cutting-edge catalysts (e.g., ZnO, TiO2, Ni) and nanotechnology applications (e.g., nanocatalysts, nanomembranes) to enhance biomass energy efficiency. A comparative technical analysis of combustion, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis, and gasification highlights gasification as the most efficient process (70–85%), with the lowest carbon emissions (30–50 kg CO2/GJ) but requiring higher capital investment (USD 0.07–0.14/kWh). This study concludes with policy recommendations, emphasizing targeted subsidies, international collaboration, and infrastructure investments to improve biomass energy adoption globally.

Full text

Review Article
Published: 2025-02-25
https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
1Department of Land and Spatial Sciences, Namibia University of Science and Technology, Windhoek 133388, Namibia.
2Department of Architecture, Planning and Construction, Namibia University of Science and Technology, Windhoek 133388, Namibia.
∗email: pm319834@gmail.com or 222146141@nust.na
Biomass energy as a catalyst for achieving global
sustainability goals: technological advancements and
policy implications
Philip Mensah1, *, Eric Yankson2
Academic Editor: Halil Durak
Abstract
Biomass energy has emerged as a vital renewable energy source in the global transition towards sustainable development, aligning
with the United Nations sustainable development goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy) and SDG 13 (climate
action). This study evaluates biomass energy’s contributions by integrating real SI-unit-based data on energy usage in China, India,
Denmark, Germany, Brazil, Namibia, and Ghana. An interpretative review was employed, incorporating primarily qualitative analysis
and supplemented by the quantitative analysis of biomass energy deployment, cost assessments, and policy evaluations. The findings
reveal that biomass contributes 8% to China’s renewable energy mix (500 TWh), 12% in India (370 TWh), 20% in Denmark (43 TWh),
and 27% in Brazil (160 TWh), yet its expansion faces economic, technological, and policy challenges. This study integrates cutting-
edge catalysts (e.g., ZnO, TiO2, Ni) and nanotechnology applications (e.g., nanocatalysts, nanomembranes) to enhance biomass energy
efficiency. A comparative technical analysis of combustion, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis, and gasification highlights gasification as the
most efficient process (70–85%), with the lowest carbon emissions (30–50 kg CO2/GJ) but requiring higher capital investment (USD
0.07–0.14/kWh). This study concludes with policy recommendations, emphasizing targeted subsidies, international collaboration, and
infrastructure investments to improve biomass energy adoption globally.
Keywords: biomass energy, catalysts, energy transition, nanotechnology, policy frameworks, sustainable development goals, and
technological advancement
Citation: Mensah P, Yankson E. Biomass energy as a catalyst for achieving global sustainability goals: technological advancements and
policy implications. Academia Green Energy 2025;2. https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
1. Introduction
The global transition towards sustainable energy solutions has
gained momentum as countries aim to combat climate change,
lower carbon emissions, and bolster energy security [1, 2]. Biomass
energy, which is sourced from organic materials such as agri-
cultural residues, forestry waste, and municipal solid waste, has
historically been a significant component of global energy sys-
tems [3, 4]. Prior to the industrial revolution, biomass was the
primary energy source, providing heat, cooking fuel, and mechan-
ical power. However, the rise of fossil fuels in the 19th and 20th
centuries diminished its prominence, particularly in urban areas,
while rural and developing regions continued to rely on traditional
biomass sources [5].
Biomass energy has been a cornerstone of human civilization for
thousands of years. In ancient societies, wood, crop residues, and
animal dung were the primary energy sources, providing essential
heat for survival and cooking. The reliance on biomass continued
through the medieval period, where charcoal production for metal-
lurgy played a pivotal role in economic development [6]. However,
the transition from biomass to coal during the industrial revolution
marked a significant shift in energy use. Steam engines powered by
coal replaced biomass-based mechanical systems, leading to an era
dominated by fossil fuels [7].
By the 20th century, oil and natural gas became dominant, fur-
ther reducing biomass energy’s share in global energy produc-
tion. Nevertheless, biomass remained a vital energy source in
developing countries where access to modern energy alternatives
was limited. Over the past few decades, the resurgence of interest
in biomass energy has been driven by the need for cleaner,
renew able energy so lutions and a dvancement s in bioenerg y tech-
nologies [8–10].
The concept of an energy transition ladder helps illustrate
biomass’s role in the shift from traditional to modern energy
sources. In this framework, societies typically move from ineffi-
cient traditional biomass (such as firewood and dung) to more
efficient forms of bioenergy (such as biogas and bioethanol),
and eventually towards fully renewable and sustainable energy
systems [2, 8–10]. Biomass serves as an intermediate step in
this transition, particularly in regions where the rapid adoption
of solar, wind, or hydropower is constrained by economic and
infrastructural barriers.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 1 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
In countries such as China and India, biomass has been a step-
pingstone towards electrification and the expansion of renew-
able energy infrastructure. The introduction of improved cook-
stoves, biogas digesters, and biofuel programs has facilitated a
gradual shift away from traditional biomass use while leveraging
existing organic waste resources [3, 4, 11–13]. Similarly, in sub-
Saharan Africa, modern biomass solutions have been promoted as
a bridge towards energy access and sustainability, given that nearly
900 million people in the region still rely on traditional biomass for
cooking and heating [8, 14, 15].
Despite advancements in renewable energy technologies, biomass
remains a significant component of the global energy mix. As of
2023, biomass accounted for approximately 10% of global energy
consumption, translating to around 55 exajoules, with various
countries adopting distinct strategies for its integration [16]. Brazil
has emerged as a global leader in bioethanol production, leveraging
its vast sugarcane industry, whereas European nations such as
Denmark and Germany have integrated biomass into district heat-
ing and combined heat and power (CHP) systems [17–32]. Thus,
Denmark has shifted towards wind and solar energy, gradually
reducing its reliance on biomass [25].
Conversely, developing countries such as Namibia and Ghana
continue to depend on traditional biomass sources, highlighting
the persistent energy divide between high-income and low-income
nations [33–42]. While some regions have embraced wind and
solar energy as primary renewable sources, others still see biomass
as a more accessible and cost-effective solution for energy secu-
rity. These variations underscore the influence of technological
advancements, policy frameworks, and economic viability on the
role of biomass in global energy transitions [17–42].
The evolution of biomass energy has been propelled by significant
technological advancements. Modern biomass conversion tech-
nologies, including gasification, pyrolysis, and anaerobic digestion,
have improved energy efficiency and reduced environmental im-
pacts [43–48]. Gasification, for example, enables the production
of synthetic gas (syngas) that can be used for electricity generation
or as a feedstock for biofuels. Similarly, pyrolysis converts biomass
into biochar, bio-oil, and syngas, offering a versatile approach to
energy production and carbon sequestration [47, 48].
Furthermore, advancements in catalytic processes and nanotech-
nology have enhanced the efficiency of biofuel production. Re-
searchers are exploring second-generation and third-generation
biofuels derived from non-food biomass sources such as algae and
agricultural residues to mitigate concerns related to food security
and land-use competition [9, 49, 50]. These innovations position
biomass as a viable long-term player in the renewable energy
landscape, complementing other sources such as solar and wind.
Despite its potential, biomass energy faces several challenges that
must be addressed to ensure its sustainability. Key concerns in-
clude land-use conflicts, carbon neutrality debates, and economic
feasibility. Large-scale bioenergy production can lead to defor-
estation, biodiversity loss, and competition with food crops, rais-
ing questions about its long-term environmental impact [51–53].
Moreover, while biomass is often considered a carbon-neutral en-
ergy source, the actual emissions depend on factors such as feed-
stock type, production methods, and land management practices.
Policy frameworks play a crucial role in shaping the future of
biomass energy. Countries with well-defined bioenergy strategies
have made significant progress in integrating biomass into their
energy systems. For instance, the European Union’s Renewable
Energy Directive (RED II) has set ambitious targets for bioenergy
deployment, emphasizing sustainability criteria and lifecycle emis-
sions reductions [54, 55]. In contrast, many developing nations
lack comprehensive policies to regulate biomass use, leading to
inefficiencies and environmental concerns.
Given the pressing need for sustainable energy solutions, it is
crucial to evaluate the role of biomass energy in achieving global
sustainability goals. Biomass serves as both a historical and tran-
sitional energy source, bridging the gap between traditional fossil
fuel dependence and modern renewable energy adoption. Under-
standing its evolution, technological advancements, and policy
frameworks provides valuable insights into the pathways for [51–
53] achieving a low-carbon future.
This study aims to investigate biomass energy adoption across
selected countries, the impact of technological advancements, and
the effectiveness of existing policy frameworks. By assessing the
role of biomass in energy transitions, this research contributes to
a deeper understanding of its significance in sustainable develop-
ment and its future trajectory in the global energy landscape. As
nations continue their pursuit of carbon neutrality, the strategic
integration of biomass into energy portfolios remains a critical
component of a diversified and resilient energy system.
2. Methodology
An interpretative review was employed for this study to uncover
meaningful patterns that describe the phenomenon of biomass en-
ergy and its potential in achieving sustainability goals. By adopting
an interpretive literature review, this study focused on interpreting
“what other scholars have written” about biomass energy, specifi-
cally its role as a catalyst for sustainable development, and “to put
them into specific perspectives” relevant to technological advance-
ments and policy frameworks [56]. A key aspect of this method is
its adherence to typical steps used in systematic reviews, following
a qualitative communicative inquiry and quantitative case studies,
incorporating elements of the preferred reporting items for sys-
tematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) approach to ensure
rigorous data collection, analysis, and synthesis. In adopting this
approach, it was important to clearly delineate how the literature
data were sourced. However, we did not seek to draw conclusions
from all the relevant sources or to identify their implications, as
would be performed in a traditional critical literature synthesis.
Therefore, we refer to our approach as interpretative or interpre-
tive, reflecting our aim to explore the potential of biomass energy in
driving sustainability while accounting for technological and policy
factors comparatively [57].
2.1. Approach to the review
In this study, we aimed to gather mixed-method (qualitative and
quantitative) information pertinent to understanding biomass en-
ergy and its potential to drive sustainability goals, with a particular
focus on technological advancements and policy implications. This
review was framed around interpreting research related to biomass
energy as a catalyst for achieving sustainability, rather than cri-
tiquing existing views on the topic. This study sought to answer four
main questions: (1) What role does biomass energy play in advanc-
ing sustainability goals? (2) What technological advancements have
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 2 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
been made in biomass energy to enhance its efficiency and sus-
tainability? (3) What are the policy implications of promoting
biomass energy for sustainable development? (4) How can biomass
energy be leveraged in the context of Africa’s energy transition
and sustainability goals? To address these questions, we identi-
fied relevant studies on biomass energy, focusing on both global
and African contexts (China, India, Denmark, Germany, Brazil,
Namibia, and Ghana), and conducted a systematic selection from
the identified sources. These countries were chosen based on their
unique biomass energy adoption models, policy frameworks, and
contributions to global sustainability efforts.
The selection of study countries was grounded in their diverse en-
ergy landscapes, biomass potential, and policy orientations. China
and India represented large-scale biomass energy adopters with
significant governmental backing for renewable energy expansion.
Germany and Denmark were included for their pioneering roles in
sustainable energy policy and technological innovation in biomass
conversion. Brazil was chosen due to its extensive bioenergy sec-
tor, particularly in bioethanol and biogas production. Namibia
and Ghana provided insights into biomass energy in the African
context, where resource constraints and policy frameworks shape
energy sustainability transitions. This selection ensured a balanced
examination of biomass energy adoption across varying economic,
geographic, and policy environments. The process employed in this
review is outlined in Figure 1. The methodology included four
key steps: (1) identifying the sources for the literature search, (2)
setting appropriate search terms, (3) defining selection criteria,
and (4) extracting and synthesizing data. Each of these steps is
explained in detail below.
Identifying the literature search sources: We began by recogniz-
ing Google Scholar as a primary source for accessing relevant
academic research, alongside expert recommendations for addi-
tional resources. This led to a comprehensive search of scholarly
articles, books, and conference papers related to biomass energy
and sustainability, supplemented by the gray literature. These
sources were identified through both Google Scholar and expert
suggestions in the field of energy sustainability and biomass tech-
nologies.
Setting the search terms: To conduct a focused and systematic
search, we defined specific search terms related to biomass en-
ergy, technological advancements, sustainability, and policy im-
plications. This search was conducted between 9 and 29 October
2024, with Google Scholar being the preferred search engine due
to its ability to index scholarly research across various databases,
including peer-reviewed journals, academic books, and conference
papers. The search terms used included keywords such as “biomass
energy”, “sustainability goals”, “technological advancements in
biomass”, and “policy implications for biomass energy”, specifically
in the context of Africa’s and non-Africa’s energy transition (refer
to Table 1 for a detailed list of search terms).
Defining the search and selection criteria: Our initial inclusion
considered abstracts focusing on biomass energy production and
its role in sustainability goals in Africa or global contexts. In this
regard, only two (n = 2) articles were found specifically addressing
biomass energy and its implications for sustainability in Africa and
global contexts. This is a clear indicator that, despite numerous
theoretical discussions on biomass energy in some African and
non-African countries, there remains a significant gap in research
specifically focusing on biomass energy’s contribution to sustain-
ability goals in the African and global context. Our final inclusion
considered variants of keywords, such as biomass energy tech-
nologies, biomass potential or efficiency for Africa/non-Africa, and
biomass cost-effectiveness in sustainable development. Details on
the literature search are presented in Figure 2.
The literature sources identified from Google Scholar numbered
517, while the sources identified through expert snowballing recom-
mendations numbered 17, resulting in a total of n = 534 literature
sources. These were screened based on unsuitable titles/abstracts,
Figure 1 •The specific steps adopted in the interpretative literature review.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 3 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
Table 1 •The combination of search terms or keywords used in the literature search.
Subject focus of the search * Search terms or keyworks
Biomass energy production Biomass energy, biomass technology, bioenergy production, biomass
energy potential, sustainable biomass energy
Technological advancement in biomass energy Biomass technology advancements, innovations in biomass energy,
efficiency in biomass energy, biomass technology improvements
Biomass energy in Africa/non-Africa (selected
countries)
Biomass energy in Africa/non-Africa, renewable energy in
Africa/non-Africa, biomass energy potential in Africa/non-Africa,
Africa’s/non-Africa’s energy transition
Energy demand or sustainability in Africa/non-Africa Energy demand in Africa/non-Africa, energy sustainability in
Africa/non-Africa, renewable energy needs in Africa/non-Africa, energy
consumption in Africa/non-Africa
Policy implications for biomass energy Biomass energy policies, biomass energy policy frameworks, policy
implications for renewable energy, biomass energy regulation in
Africa/non-Africa
Biomass energy for sustainable development Biomass energy and sustainable development, biomass energy for SDGs,
biomass energy and green growth, sustainable energy in
Africa/non-Africa
* The focus of the subject included terms, phrases, and expressions that address the main objectives and questions identified earlier for investigation in
this study.
Figure 2 •The flowchart of the literature search process from 7 case study profiles.
duplications, and out-of-scope sources. The screening process
identified 103 unsuitable titles/contents, 89 duplications, and 301
out-of-scope contents. Screening by titles/abstracts reduced the
initial total of 534 identified documents to 431. However, further
screening based on duplicates and out-of-scope contents reduced
the total accepted literature resources to 41, which were then used
for this study.
Extracting and synthesizing data: The final step involved a thematic
and comparative statistical analysis of the selected literature. This
process included reading and extracting data from the abstract,
introduction, findings, and conclusion sections of each selected
study. We adhered to Ahmadov and McMullin’s [58, 59] notetaking
methodology, and then grouped, synthesized, and built descriptive
narratives and performed meta-data analysis comparatively around
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 4 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
the four key questions under investigation, particularly focusing on
how biomass energy technologies contribute to achieving sustain-
ability goals and the policy implications for the energy transition in
global and African contexts. The following sections present an in-
terpretation of the studies within the context of the four questions
explored, particularly regarding the technological advancements
and policy implications related to biomass energy.
2.2. General characteristics
The preferred literature period used for this study spanned from
2015 to October 2024 (≤10 years old). A ten-year timeframe was se-
lected due to the observed surge in research publications on biomass
energy technologies and sustainability policy in the past five years
(2019–2024). However, this review extended back an additional five
years (2015–2024) to capture earlier contributions that may provide
foundational insights into biomass energy advancements. Conse-
quently, the literature examined fell within a 5–10-year range. As this
study employed an interpretive approach rather than a conventional
systematic review or scoping study, journal names, methodologies,
or emerging theoretical frameworks were not the primary focus.
This approach aligned with this study’s objective of synthesizing
descriptive narratives and practical developments in biomass en-
ergy deployment, particularly within 7 selected countries globally.
Emphasis was placed on research exploring biomass energy in-
novations, policy frameworks, and their role in achieving sustain-
ability goals. A notable limitation of this approach was the pre-
dominance of sources that document government-backed renew-
able energy initiatives and international investments, primarily in
English-language publications.
The interpretive review framework enabled a descriptive narrative
and comparative case study analysis, rather than a strictly ana-
lytical synthesis of biomass energy contributions to sustainability.
Publications were assessed based on authors, thematic relevance,
and the research gaps they addressed concerning biomass energy
as a catalyst for sustainable development. The selected literature (n
= 41) spanned diverse subject areas and geographic contexts. In-
stead of evaluating each study based on standalone research gaps,
priority was given to sources that directly or indirectly addressed
this study’s research questions.
This facilitated a structured interpretation of research within the
broader context of technological advancements in biomass energy
and its policy implications. The descriptive narration (argumenta-
tion) and meta-data comparison (statistical case study) employed
in this study provided a lens through which biomass energy’s role
in achieving sustainability goals—particularly in relation to energy
access, carbon reduction, and economic resilience—was examined,
as denoted in Table 2. Additional literature and policy documents
were cited where it is necessary to substantiate findings and pro-
vide readers with further insights into the evolving discourse on
biomass energy, technology, and policy integration.
To strengthen methodological rigor, this study incorporated a com-
parative analysis framework for biomass conversion techniques,
including combustion, anaerobic digestion, pyrolysis, and gasifica-
tion. Each method was assessed based on efficiency, emission lev-
els, cost implications, and scalability in different socio-economic
and geographic contexts. Comparative analysis enhanced the un-
derstanding of how each country utilizes specific biomass tech-
nologies to address its unique energy needs and sustainability
goals [57].
A key feature of this methodology is its focus on technological and
policy linkages. This study examined how policies in each selected
country influence biomass technology adoption and sustainability
transitions. Policies such as China’s renewable energy law, In-
dia’s national bioenergy mission, Denmark’s green energy strategy,
Germany’s act on renewable energy sources, Brazil’s bioethanol
policies, and Africa’s biomass energy regulations were critically
assessed. By integrating policy analysis with technological assess-
ment, this study provides a holistic understanding of biomass
energy’s potential as a sustainable energy source.
The methodological framework also acknowledges limitations re-
lated to data availability and geographic scope. While the selected
literature provides comprehensive insights into biomass energy
developments, gaps remain in empirical studies, particularly for
Namibia and Ghana. To address this, supplementary data from
the gray literature, government reports, and international energy
organizations were incorporated to provide a more robust analysis
of biomass energy’s role in Africa’s energy transition.
3. Literature and theoretical review
Biomass energy, derived from organic materials such as agricul-
tural residues, forestry waste, municipal solid waste, and dedicated
energy crops, has emerged as a pivotal solution for achieving global
Table 2 •Table of the publications from which the interpretations were derived.
Research questions * References Subject and countries
What role does biomass energy play in advancing
sustainability goals? [17–42, 60–68] Bioenergy consumption, sustainability, carbon
neutrality
What technological advancements have been made
in biomass energy to enhance its efficiency and
sustainability?
[17–42, 60–66, 69–81] Biofuel technologies, negative emissions, energy
transition
What are the policy implications of promoting
biomass energy for sustainable development? [17–42, 60–66] Policy frameworks, bioenergy adoption,
sustainability policies
How can biomass energy be leveraged in the
context of countries’ energy transition and
sustainability goals?
[17–42, 60–66, 69–81] Renewable energy strategies, bioenergy
implementation
* The focal point of enquiry was directly on the research questions.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 5 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
sustainability goals [3, 4]. The transition towards renewable energy
systems, in alignment with SDG 7 and 13, highlights the critical
role of biomass energy in reducing carbon emissions, promoting
energy security, and fostering socio-economic development [82].
In other words, technological advancements and supportive policy
frameworks are essential for optimizing biomass energy’s potential
and mitigating associated challenges, such as land-use competi-
tion and carbon leakage. This literature review examines exist-
ing research on biomass resources, conversion technologies, and
theoretical frameworks that inform the deployment of biomass
energy systems.
3.1. Biomass energy transition
A growing body of research highlights the importance of integrat-
ing biomass energy within national energy transition strategies.
Biomass is often viewed as part of an energy transition ladder,
progressing from traditional forms such as wood and charcoal
combustion to modern bioenergy technologies, including biogas,
bioethanol, and bioelectricity [2, 8–10]. The transition is driven
by advancements in catalytic conversion processes, which have
significantly improved energy efficiency and emissions reduction.
Studies emphasize that effective biomass deployment requires a
comparative analysis with other renewable energy sources, includ-
ing wind, solar, and hydroelectric power, to identify synergies and
optimize energy mix strategies [83]. While biomass has advantages
in terms of dispatchability and rural economic benefits, challenges
such as supply chain inefficiencies and environmental trade-offs
remain [84].
Existing research also explores key biomass feedstocks and
their sustainability implications. Agricultural residues, such as
corn stover, wheat straw, and rice husks, constitute a substantial
portion of bioenergy production due to their abundance and re-
newability [85, 86]. Studies demonstrate that agricultural biomass
can be effectively converted into biofuels and biochar through
thermochemical and biochemical processes. However, seasonal
variability and logistical inefficiencies pose significant barriers to
scalability [86, 87]. Forestry residues, including sawdust, bark, and
wood chips, present another critical biomass resource, particularly
in combined heat and power applications [88]. Advanced ther-
mochemical methods, such as gasification, have demonstrated the
ability to enhance energy efficiency while minimizing emissions.
However, sustainable forest management remains a prerequisite
for preventing resource overexploitation [89].
Municipal solid waste (MSW) and organic municipal waste (OMW)
are increasingly recognized for their potential in bioenergy produc-
tion. Anaerobic digestion remains a dominant technology for con-
verting biodegradable waste into biogas, which can be refined into
biomethane [87, 90]. Scholars argue that leveraging OMW within
urban energy systems can enhance waste-to-energy initiatives,
particularly in developing cities struggling with waste management
challenges [91]. Nevertheless, the success of such interventions
depends on regulatory incentives, public participation, and ad-
vancements in waste segregation technologies [92, 93]. Dedicated
energy crops, including miscanthus, switchgrass, and poplar, offer
a reliable and high-yield biomass feedstock. Research suggests that
these crops contribute to carbon sequestration and soil restora-
tion [94]. However, concerns related to land-use competition, food
security, and water resource depletion must be carefully managed
through strategic land allocation and sustainable farming prac-
tices [94].
Biomass energy conversion technologies have undergone significant
advancements in recent years. Combustion-based systems, partic-
ularly modern fluidized-bed and grate-fired boilers, have achieved
higher efficiency and lower emissions through improved flue gas
treatment techniques [95, 96]. Pyrolysis has gained attention due
to its ability to produce bio-oil with high energy density, although
challenges related to feedstock heterogeneity remain [97, 98]. Recent
developments in catalytic pyrolysis have introduced advanced cata-
lysts such as nickel (Ni), cobalt (Co), iron (Fe), zinc oxide (ZnO), and
titanium dioxide (TiO₂), which enhance bio-oil quality and increase
conversion efficiency [87]. The literature also emphasizes the role of
biochemical conversion technologies, including anaerobic digestion
and enzymatic hydrolysis, in producing bioethanol, biogas, and other
biofuels. Enzyme-based catalysis, particularly through genetically
engineered microbial strains, has shown promising results in im-
proving yield and cost-effectiveness [99–101].
The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and internet of things
(IoT) in biomass energy systems is an emerging area of research.
AI-driven models are being deployed to optimize feedstock supply
chains, enhance the predictive maintenance of bioenergy plants,
and improve process efficiency [102, 103]. IoT-enabled sensors
facilitate the real-time monitoring of biomass conversion systems,
contributing to cost reductions and environmental impact miti-
gation. However, the adoption of AI-driven biomass management
requires investments in digital infrastructure and cross-sectoral
collaboration between energy and technology industries [104, 105].
From a theoretical perspective, biomass energy aligns with multi-
ple frameworks that provide insights into its role in sustainable de-
velopment. The circular economy theory highlights the potential of
biomass energy to create closed-loop systems, where organic waste
is repurposed into valuable energy products [106]. This reduces
environmental footprints and supports resource efficiency. Energy
transition theory provides a systemic perspective on the shift from
fossil-based to renewable energy sources, positioning biomass as a
key intermediary in this transformation [101, 107]. Biomass energy
facilitates decentralized energy generation, particularly in rural
and off-grid communities, thereby promoting energy access and
resilience [108].
Another relevant framework is the sustainable livelihoods frame-
work (SLF), which underscores the socio-economic benefits of
biomass energy, including job creation and poverty allevia-
tion [109]. Biomass energy projects can enhance rural economies
by creating employment opportunities in feedstock cultivation,
processing, and distribution. The SLF emphasizes that the success
of biomass energy systems depends on institutional support, finan-
cial incentives, and community engagement [110].
Despite the progress in biomass energy research, several chal-
lenges persist. Regulatory uncertainties, financial constraints, and
public perception issues continue to hinder large-scale deploy-
ment [111, 112]. Agricultural and forestry residues offer substantial
bioenergy potential, but policy support and innovative financ-
ing mechanisms are necessary to overcome logistical and market
barriers. Furthermore, sustainability concerns related to land-use
change and biomass supply chain emissions must be addressed
through integrated policy frameworks [110].
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 6 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
The interplay between technology, policy, and sustainability ulti-
mately determines the success of biomass energy in global energy
transitions (Figure 3). While technological innovations provide
the means to enhance efficiency and reduce environmental im-
pacts, their effectiveness relies on robust policy frameworks and
institutional support. Policies that incentivize research and devel-
opment (R&D), facilitate subsidies for bioenergy infrastructure,
and enforce sustainable biomass sourcing are essential for long-
term viability (IRENA, 2021). Socio-technical perspectives suggest
that policy interventions should also consider social acceptance,
equitable resource distribution, and participatory governance to
prevent socio-economic disparities [113].
In conclusion, achieving sustainability in biomass energy systems
requires a holistic approach that integrates technological advance-
ments, policy mechanisms, and socio-economic considerations.
The literature underscores the necessity of aligning biomass energy
with circular economy principles, energy transition frameworks,
and sustainable livelihood strategies to maximize its environmen-
tal and economic benefits. Addressing existing barriers through
coordinated action among researchers, policymakers, and industry
stakeholders will be critical for positioning biomass energy as a key
contributor to a sustainable energy future.
4. Results and discussion
Having analyzed the research approach and theoretical insights,
this section presents a detailed discussion of biomass energy de-
ployment across diverse global contexts. The comparative case
study analysis highlights success stories, challenges, and best prac-
tices in China, India, Denmark, Germany, Brazil, Namibia, and
Ghana. This analysis directly addresses the research objectives by
incorporating real-world numerical data, cost analysis, technolog-
ical advancements, and policy implications.
4.1. Sustainable transition
The first step in addressing sustainability goals is to identify the
role of biomass energy in African and non-African contexts. This
section addresses the research question: what role does biomass
energy play in advancing sustainability goals? The results reveal
that biomass energy plays a pivotal role in achieving global sus-
tainability goals, particularly SDGs 7, 8, 13, and 15. Thus, its con-
tribution is observed through renewable energy generation, car-
bon emission reduction, rural–urban development, and improved
energy access in both developed and developing countries. The
findings across selected countries reveal the following:
•China is the leader in bioenergy adoption with substan-
tial investment in biofuel technology and rural biomass
projects, contributing significantly to carbon neutrality goals
by 2060 [60–64].
•India’s biomass contributes around 15% of its total energy
consumption, particularly in rural areas, aiding energy equity
and reducing reliance on traditional biomass fuels [65, 66].
•Denmark is a global leader in advanced bioenergy technolo-
gies and integrated biomass heating systems, achieving over
30% of national energy from bioenergy sources [25–27].
•Germany, a pioneer in bioenergy innovation with robust pol-
icy frameworks supporting biogas and biofuel sectors, con-
tributes to Germany’s renewable energy targets under En-
ergiewende [28–32].
Figure 3 •The nexus between energy sustainability, technology, and policy.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 7 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
•Brazil is the leading global producer of bioethanol, signifi-
cantly reducing transportation emissions and supporting ru-
ral economic growth through sugarcane-based energy sys-
tems [17–24].
•Namibia’s use of biomass from invasive bush species (bush-
to-energy projects) addresses both environmental and energy
challenges while supporting rural livelihoods [33–36].
•Ghana’s biomass energy remains a dominant energy source
for households, with ongoing projects aimed at moderniz-
ing traditional biomass usage and improving energy effi-
ciency [37–42].
The data [17–42, 60–66] highlight a significant variation in
biomass energy contributions to SDGs across the selected coun-
tries. For instance, biomass energy reduces greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions by replacing fossil fuels with renewable biofuels and
biogas [67]. In Brazil, bioethanol from sugarcane has significantly
reduced carbon emissions in the transport sector, while Namibia’s
bush-to-energy projects address land degradation and carbon se-
questration simultaneously. Thus, environmental sustainability is
achieved under SDG 13, i.e., climate action.
Furthermore, India’s and Ghana’s biomass energy has enhanced
energy access, particularly in rural areas, contributing to poverty
alleviation and rural economic development [40, 66]. Den-
mark and Germany exemplify how technological advancement
in biomass utilization creates employment and boosts green
economies [25–28]. This implies that the socio-economic develop-
ments of SDGs 7 (affordable and clean energy), 8 (decent work and
economic growth), 13 (climate action), and 15 (life on land) are pro-
gressively achievable across the selected regions (Table 3). Fur-
ther analysis revealed that energy security and policy frameworks
play a vital role in biomass energy success stories. For instance,
Denmark’s renewable energy targets and Germany’s Energiewende
policy highlight the role of strategic governance in achieving SDGs.
However, Namibia and Ghana face challenges such as inadequate
infrastructure and policy gaps despite significant biomass po-
tential. While biomass energy presents significant opportunities,
Table 3 •Contribution of biomass energy to achieving key sustainability goals in selected countries.
Variables: (1) country, (2) biomass strategy and initiatives, (3) SDG contribution, and (4) challenges
1—China;
2—Bioenergy from crop residues; national biomass plan and rural bioenergy;
3—SDGs 7, 8, and 13 (high contribution to rural electrification; supports job creation in rural areas; reduction in carbon emissions);
biomass contributes ~8% (~500 TWh) to renewable energy mix;
4—Technological costs and land competition.
1—India;
2—Agricultural biomass feedstock; national bioenergy mission;
3—SDGs 7, 8, and 13 (expansion of biomass power plants; employment in energy production; reduction in reliance on coal);
biomass accounts for ~12% (~370 TWh) of energy needs;
4—Feedstock supply chain and rural infrastructure.
1—Denmark;
2—Advanced bioenergy technologies; advanced biomass co-firing in power plants;
3—SDGs 7, 8, and 13 (35% of energy from biomass; supports green job creation; carbon-neutral bioenergy systems), biomass
covers ~20% (~43 TWh) of the total energy demand;
4—Dependency on imported biomass feedstock.
1—Germany;
2—Integration into national grid; renewable energy act (EEG) incentives;
3—SDGs 7, 8, and 13 (25% energy from biomass ethanol biofuels; green employment opportunities; reduced fossil fuel resilience);
biomass contributes ~9% (~110 TWh) to energy production;
4—Land-use conflicts and sustainability concerns.
1—Brazil;
2—Sugarcane ethanol program; ethanal production from sugarcane;
3—SDGs 7, 8, and 13 (ethanol biofuels dominate transport energy; sugarcane industry employment; lower greenhouse gas
emissions); biomass contributes ~27% (~160 TWh) of total energy;
4—Environmental degradation from monoculture crops.
1—Namibia;
2—Encroacher bush biomass; bush-to-biomass initiative;
3—SDGs 7, 8, 13, and 15 (rural electrification via biomass; jobs through bush harvesting; reduction in deforestation; biodiversity
conservation); biomass potential remains largely untapped (~10 TWh);
4—Limited technical capacity and policy gaps.
1—Ghana;
2—Charcoal and firewood biomass; promotion of clean cookstoves;
3—SDGs 7, 8, and 13 (household energy reliance on biomass; rural job creation; potential carbon savings); biomass accounts for
~40% (~30 TWh) of energy consumption;
4—Inefficient technologies and lack of financing.
~ is used to estimate figures.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 8 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
challenges such as unsustainable harvesting, technological barri-
ers, and policy fragmentation persist in both developed, emerging
economies, and developing contexts [17–42, 60–66]. Lessons from
Denmark’s integrated biomass systems and Brazil’s bioethanol
sector provide scalable solutions for addressing these challenges
globally.
The analysis further reflects varied progress in the biomass energy
transition toward achieving sustainability goals. For instance, Den-
mark and Germany are still below their planned biomass shares,
with Denmark producing ~43 TWh and Germany ~110 TWh, fo-
cusing on other renewable sources like biowaste and biogas. China
and India have made significant strides with China producing ~500
TWh and India ~370 TWh, largely from agricultural resides and
crop waste. Brazil has met its biomass share target, producing
~160 TWh from sugarcane ethanol, a notable success in biofuels.
In contrast, Namibia and Ghana are reliant on traditional biomass
sources like bush biomass, firewood, and charcoal, with Ghana
meeting its target but needing more sustainable methods. Namibia
lags, producing only ~10 TWh, due to infrastructure limitations.
While developed economies are working on scaling down their
traditional biomass share in achieving SDGs 7 and 13, emerging
and developing countries show varying degrees of success and
challenges in meeting their biomass energy targets (Table 4).
The data from the 2024 UN-SDG report provide insights into
the contributions of biomass energy toward achieving four key
SDGs (7, 8, 13, and 15) across China, India, Denmark, Germany,
Brazil, Namibia, and Ghana [68]. Table 5 illustrates that Denmark
(85%) emerges as a global leader, showcasing robust biomass
infrastructure, efficient policies, and technological innovations.
Brazil (80%) excels in climate action through the extensive use of
bioenergy, while Germany (75%) and Ghana (75%) demonstrate
moderately improving trends, reflecting ongoing efforts despite
persistent challenges. Emerging countries like Namibia (70%),
China (65%), and India (65%) exhibit steady progress but still
face infrastructural, financial, and policy hurdles in fully realizing
biomass energy’s potential.
Counties scoring 80–100% provide valuable lessons and best prac-
tices for others, while those in the 60–80% range require targeted
policy interventions, investments, and technological advancements
(Figure 4). This analysis underscores the importance of global
collaboration and knowledge sharing to bridge gaps and accelerate
biomass energy’s contribution to achieving sustainability goals.
4.2. Conversion processes
Having analyzed the role of biomass energy in achieving sustain-
ability, this research now proceeds to address the following ques-
tion: what technological advancements have been made in biomass
energy to enhance its efficiency and sustainability? The findings re-
veal that biomass energy technologies have evolved significantly in
recent decades, driven by advancements in bioenergy research, en-
gineering innovations, and increased investment in renewable en-
ergy sectors [69, 70]. Globally, countries are adopting diverse tech-
nological approaches to improve the efficiency, cost-effectiveness,
and environmental sustainability of biomass energy systems. The
results revealed four conversion approaches: (1) thermochemical
conversion, (2) biochemical conversion, (3) biofuel production,
and (4) hybrid systems. This approach is therefore categorized
into two categories: technologies such as pyrolysis, gasification,
and combustion dominate thermochemical conversion processes,
while anaerobic digestion and fermentation denote biochemical
conversion processes. Thus, a comparative analysis of conversion
techniques, including efficiency, cost, emissions, and scalability, is
presented in Table 6.
An extensive interpretive review illustrates that gasification, as the
most efficient technology (70–85%) with low emissions and high
energy yields but requiring higher capital investment, has seen rapid
adoption in Germany and Denmark, producing cleaner syngas for
Figure 4 •Average performance of SDG achievements across the study regions.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 9 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
Table 4 •Biomass energy contributions in selected countries.
Country Planned biomass
share (~%)
Current biomass
share (~%)
Total energy from
biomass (~TWh) Primary feedstock
China 10 8 500 Agricultural residues, forestry waste
India 15 12 370 Crop residues, waste-to-energy
Denmark 35 20 43 Wood pellets, biowaste
Germany 25 9 110 Biogas, bioethanol
Brazil 27 27 160 Sugarcane ethanol
Namibia 12 5 10 Bush biomass, wood fuel
Ghana 40 40 30 Charcoal, firewood
~ is used to estimate figures.
Table 5 •Levels of SDG achievement across the selected regions.
Country SDG 7 (%) SDG 8 (%) SDG 13 (%) SDG 15 (%) Average (%)
China 80 60 60 60 65
India 80 80 40 60 65
Denmark 100 80 80 80 85
Germany 80 80 80 60 75
Brazil 80 80 100 60 80
Namibia 60 60 80 80 70
Ghana 80 80 80 60 75
Table 6 •Comparative analysis of biomass conversion techniques.
Technology Efficiency
(~%)
Carbon emissions
(~kg CO2/GJ)
Energy output
(~MJ/kg)
Capital cost
(~USD/kW)
LCOE or scalability
(~USD/kWh)
Combustion 15–40 90–110 10–18 1500–3000 0.04–0.08
Fermentation 50–70 20–30 20–25 2000–5000 0.06–0.12
Pyrolysis 40–75 50–70 25–35 3000–6000 0.08–0.15
Gasification 70–85 30–50 30–45 4000–7000 0.07–0.14
~ is used to estimate figures while LCOE means levelized cost of energy.
use [48, 71, 72], while anaerobic digestion (fermentation) has gained
prominence in China, India, and Brazil, contributing significantly
to bioethanol and biogas production [73, 74]. Advanced biofuel
technologies (pyrolysis), including second-generation biofuels from
non-food feedstocks, are being pioneered in Germany, Denmark,
and Brazil [75, 76]. Hybrid technologies combining multiple con-
version processes are increasingly adopted in Namibia and Ghana
to optimize resource utilization and energy output [37–42, 77].
Insights further reveal that the technological advancements across
selected countries vary based on resource availability, policy sup-
port, and technological infrastructure (Table 7). This includes
the following:
•China: Significant investment in anaerobic digestion and
bioethanol production technologies [60–64].
•India: Focus on small-scale biogas systems for rural electrifi-
cation [65, 66].
•Denmark: Leader in combined heat and power (CHP) biomass
systems [25–27].
•Germany: Pioneering second-generation biofuel technol-
ogy [28–32].
•Brazil: Extensive ethanol production infrastructure from sug-
arcane [17–24].
•Namibia: Emerging interest in hybrid biomass energy tech-
nologies [33–36].
•Ghana: Deployment of biomass gasification systems for elec-
tricity generation in rural areas [37–42].
Technological advancements in biomass energy conversion are
critical to achieving energy security and global sustainability
goals. Developed countries like Denmark and Germany have ad-
vanced significantly in integrated biomass systems, focusing on
cleaner and more efficient biofuel technologies. Conversely, emerg-
ing economies such as China, India, and Brazil have prioritized
bioethanol and biogas technologies due to their agricultural re-
source abundance. In Africa, Namibia and Ghana remain in the
early stages of technological adoption, focusing on affordable and
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 10 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
Table 7 •Technological advancements in biomass energy conversion across selected countries.
Country Technological focus Key advancements Application area
China Anaerobic digestion Biogas plants Rural electrification
India Biogas systems Small-scale biogas technologies Agriculture and domestic energy
Denmark Combined heat and power High-efficiency biomass plants Industrial and urban heating
Germany Second-generation biofuel Advanced bioethanol production Transport and industrial sector
Brazil Ethanol production Large-scale sugarcane ethanol Transport sector
Namibia Hybrid biomass technologies Gasification and bioenergy mix Rural electrification
Ghana Biomass gasification Off-grid biomass electricity Remote communities
scalable technologies such as small-scale gasification and hybrid
bioenergy systems. However, challenges remain, including limited
financial resources, lack of technical expertise, and inconsistent
policy frameworks.
Despite the efficiency in gasification technology, the global transi-
tion towards second-generation biofuels and hybrid biomass tech-
nologies represents a significant step forward in addressing energy
poverty and climate change. Thus, policies supporting research,
technology transfer, and international collaboration will be vital for
sustained progress. To address this, this research further addresses
the following question: how can biomass energy be leveraged
in the context of countries’ energy transition and sustainability
goals? The results revealed in Figure 5 illustrate how Germany
and Denmark lead with advancements in second-generation bio-
fuels and combined heat and power systems, respectively. China
and India demonstrate significant progress in biogas technologies,
while Brazil excels in ethanol production. Namibia and Ghana
show emerging potential in hybrid biomass systems and biomass
gasification, respectively.
The spatial distribution of technology efficiency in biomass en-
ergy conversion highlights significant regional disparities between
developed and emerging economies and developing countries
(Figure 6). Germany leads with the highest technological efficiency
at 95%, followed closely by Denmark (90%) and Brazil (88%), re-
flecting their advanced technological infrastructure, strong research
and development frameworks, and substantial policy support for
other renewable energy. China (85%) also demonstrates high ef-
ficiency, showcasing significant progress driven by large-scale in-
vestments in clean energy technologies.
In contrast, developing countries exhibit lower efficiency levels.
India (75%) shows moderate efficiency, indicating ongoing tech-
nological adoption but with existing barriers such as resource
constraints and limited technological transfer. Ghana (65%) and
Namibia (60%) record the lowest efficiencies, underscoring chal-
lenges like insufficient funding, limited access to advanced biomass
technologies, and weaker institutional frameworks.
This distribution suggests that while developed countries and
emerging economies have optimized their technological capabil-
ities for biomass energy conversion or efficiency, developing na-
tions still face barriers requiring strategic interventions, technol-
ogy transfer, and financial investments to bridge the efficiency gap.
To address the inefficiency level of technological advancements,
Figure 5 •Technological advancements in biomass energy efficiency and conversion by country.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 11 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
Figure 6 •Spatial distribution of biomass energy technology across selected regions.
catalytic advancements (e.g., ZnO, TiO₂, Ni) and nanotechnology
(e.g., nanocatalysts, nanomembranes) are enhancing conversion
efficiency and reducing emissions [78–81]. These innovations are
expected to improve biomass scalability and integration into global
energy frameworks.
Despite the high efficiency of gasification, Pandey et al. [78] high-
light that the integration of nanotechnology in biomass applica-
tions plays a transformative role in improving energy efficiency.
Key innovations include the following:
•Nanocatalysts (Ni, Co, Fe, ZnO, TiO2) enhance gasification,
pyrolysis, and anaerobic digestion conversion efficiency.
•Nanomembranes improve biogas upgrading, while nanoma-
terials for carbon capture improve CO2sequestration.
•Nano-additives (CeO2, Al2O3) enhance combustion efficiency
while nanofiltration in biofuel purification increases fuel pu-
rity and reduces emissions.
There is no doubt that Germany and Denmark have made sig-
nificant strides in nanotechnology applications for biomass con-
version, particularly in catalytic pyrolysis and gasification, thus
emerging as the most technologically efficient, although challenges
still emerge. By learning from these case studies, other develop-
ing countries and emerging economies can leverage the biomass
energy transition towards achieving sustainability goals.
4.3. Sustainability mandates
To harness the power of nature (biomass energy), this section
unpacks comparative options for promoting global sustainability
goals. It addresses the final research question: what are the policy
implications of promoting biomass energy for sustainable devel-
opment? It is common knowledge that policy frameworks play a
crucial role in facilitating biomass energy adoption by providing
regulatory clarity, financial incentives, and strategic direction for
stakeholders. The results reveal that these frameworks vary across
countries, reflecting differences in economic priorities, institu-
tional capacities, and resource availability [17–42, 60–66].
Table 8 illustrates how developed nations such as Germany and
Denmark have established robust policy frameworks emphasizing
feed-in tariffs, subsidies, carbon pricing, and renewable portfolio
standards (RPSs) to promote biomass energy. In Brazil, bioen-
ergy policies focus on integrating agricultural residues into energy
systems, supported by government-backed financial incentives.
Emerging economies such as China have prioritized biomass en-
ergy adoption through national renewable energy targets, finan-
cial subsidies, and mandatory grid connections for bioenergy pro-
ducers. India has implemented national bioenergy missions and
subsidy programs, although bureaucratic delays and inconsistent
policy enforcement limit their effectiveness. Developing countries
in Africa, such as Namibia and Ghana, exhibit relatively weaker
biomass energy policies, primarily focused on pilot projects, re-
gional strategies, and donor-driven programs. Policy enforce-
ment challenges, financial constraints, and inadequate monitoring
frameworks continue to limit their scalability and effectiveness.
In determining the effectiveness of existing policy frameworks, this
research measures the efficiency of these regulatory approaches
with eight parameters or key performance indicators and matrixes.
These include (1) policy commitment and governance; (2) financial
incentives and funding mechanisms; (3) institutional capacity and
coordination; (4) technology integration and infrastructure devel-
opment; (5) public awareness and stakeholder engagement; (6)
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 12 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
Table 8 •Policy frameworks supporting biomass energy adoption.
Country Policy framework Incentives and support mechanisms Regulatory measures
China National renewable energy targets Financial subsidies Mandatory grid connections
India National bioenergy mission Subsidy programs Regulatory policies
Denmark Renewable portfolio standards Feed-in tariffs Carbon pricing
Germany Feed-in tariffs Renewable energy subsidies Regulatory compliance
Brazil Bioenergy integration programs Agricultural residue utilization Financial incentives
Namibia Pilot biomass projects Donor-driven programs Limited regulations
Ghana Regional energy strategies Subsidy programs Policy monitoring
monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) systems; (7) sus-
tainability and environmental safeguards; and (8) energy security
and diversification.
The results revealed that China demonstrates a policy effectiveness
of 85%, driven by large-scale investments, strategic policy direction,
and the integration of biomass energy into national energy plans.
India, with an effectiveness of 70%, relies on moderately effective
frameworks characterized by regional initiatives and financial incen-
tives. In Denmark, policy effectiveness stands at 95%, supported by
strong governance, transparent regulatory mechanisms, and inno-
vative financing structures, positioning the country as a global leader
in biomass energy adoption. Similarly, Germany exhibits high policy
effectiveness at 90%, driven by ambitious renewable energy targets
and consistent governmental commitment to sustainable practices.
Brazil, with an effectiveness of 80%, leverages biofuel mandates
and incentives for biomass production to drive progress. Conversely,
Namibiashows a lower effectiveness rate of 60%, hindered by policy
enforcement challenges, limited financial resources, and weak in-
stitutional frameworks. Lastly, Ghana, with a 65% effectiveness
score, reflects moderate success, focusing on localized bioenergy
initiatives and financial support mechanisms. These varying levels
of policy effectiveness highlight the importance of tailored frame-
works that address each country’s unique socio-economic and en-
vironmental contexts to optimize biomass energy adoption.
Figure 7 depicts the effectiveness of policy frameworks support-
ing biomass energy adoption across the selected countries, derived
from their respective policy strengths, implementations, and out-
comes. Despite the success stories of these developed countries,
the implication is that both emerging economies and developing
countries can emulate the best practices towards achieving global
sustainability goals 7, 8, 13, and 15. Key recommendations including
(1) incentives for biomass energy investment, (2) public–private
partnerships, and (3) regulatory reforms are essential for harnessing
the power of nature.
Figure 7 •Effectiveness of policy frameworks supporting biomass energy adoption.
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 13 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
5. Conclusions
This study analyzed the role of biomass energy in achieving global
sustainability goals, with a focus on evaluating the contribution
of technological advancements and assessing the effectiveness of
policy frameworks across China, India, Denmark, Germany, Brazil,
Namibia, and Ghana. The findings underscore significant regional
disparities in biomass energy adoption, with technological efficiency,
policy effectiveness, and financial sustainability emerging as key
determinants of success. Countries such as Denmark, Germany,
and Brazil demonstrated strong policy alignment with SDGs, lever-
aging advanced biomass conversion technologies, targeted finan-
cial incentives, and institutional frameworks that drive sustainable
energy adoption. In contrast, Namibia and Ghana displayed mod-
erate progress, hindered by financial constraints, technological in-
efficiencies, and policy fragmentation. These insights reinforce the
need for a multi-dimensional approach that integrates technology,
governance, and financial viability to unlock the full potential of
biomass energy for sustainable development.
Technological advancements have played a crucial role in deter-
mining biomass energy efficiency and scalability. Countries with
advanced gasification and anaerobic digestion systems, such as
Germany and Denmark, reported higher energy conversion effi-
ciencies (≥85%) and lower lifecycle emissions (≤20 gCO₂/MJ),
contributing significantly to SDGs 7 (affordable and clean energy),
8 (decent work and economic growth), and 13 (climate action).
Conversely, Namibia and Ghana exhibited lower efficiency rates
(<50%), reflecting a pressing need for technological upgrades,
infrastructure expansion, and enhanced knowledge transfer. Given
these disparities, policymakers should prioritize research and de-
velopment in localized biomass technologies, ensuring alignment
with country-specific resource availability and industrial capacity.
The economic implications of biomass energy adoption vary across
the selected countries, primarily driven by feedstock availability,
production costs, and investment incentives. Countries such as
Brazil and India have successfully deployed feed-in tariffs (USD
0.08/kWh and USD 0.07/kWh, respectively), alongside tax ex-
emptions and capital subsidies, to promote private-sector invest-
ment in biomass energy projects. Conversely, Namibia and Ghana
lack well-defined incentive structures, leading to high capital ex-
penditure (CAPEX) burdens, restricted investor confidence, and
limited scalability. To address these gaps, governments should
implement performance-based financial mechanisms, such as 30%
capital investment subsidies and preferential loan schemes (inter-
est rates <5%), to stimulate market participation and encourage
technological innovation.
This study highlights a strong correlation between policy effec-
tiveness and biomass energy deployment. Countries with compre-
hensive national biomass strategies, such as Denmark and Brazil,
have benef ited from well-stru ctured policy instru ments, including
renewable portfolio standards, carbon pricing mechanisms, and
decentralized energy planning. By contrast, Namibia and Ghana
exhibit policy inconsistencies, characterized by weak regulatory
enforcement, fragmented institutional frameworks, and limited
stakeholder engagement.
To bridge this gap, governments should adopt a three-tiered policy
framework: (1) Regulatory alignment with SDGs, thus establishing
national biomass energy roadmaps explicitly linked to SDGs 7,
8, 13, and 15, integrating clear sustainability targets (e.g., 40%
renewable share by 2030). (2) Incentivizing private sector invest-
ment, thus introducing country-specific financial incentives, such
as production-based tax credits (USD 0.05/kWh for gasification
in Namibia and Ghana), to mitigate investment risks and foster
technology adoption. (3) Strengthening institutional governance
through developing centralized biomass energy agencies to oversee
policy implementation, enforce compliance, and coordinate multi-
sectoral partnerships.
A crucial aspect of biomass energy adoption involves the tech-
nological and financial feasibility of different conversion tech-
niques. While advanced gasification and pyrolysis have demon-
strated higher efficiencies in Europe, simpler direct combustion
and anaerobic digestion may be more feasible for countries with
lower technological capacity, such as Namibia and Ghana. Policy-
makers must, therefore, tailor technology selection to their eco-
nomic and infrastructural realities.
This study provides compelling evidence that biomass energy can
serve as a pivotal driver of global sustainability, particularly when
supported by robust technological advancements, policy coher-
ence, and financial sustainability. Countries such as Denmark, Ger-
many, and Brazil exemplify successful biomass energy integration
through strategic policy frameworks, advanced conversion tech-
nologies, and financial incentives that encourage private-sector
engagement. On the other hand, Namibia and Ghana demonstrate
that without targeted technology adaptation and policy support,
biomass energy adoption remains constrained, limiting its contri-
bution to sustainability objectives.
This research underscores the need for localized biomass solutions,
emphasizing that a one-size-fits-all approach is ineffective. Instead,
governments must implement context-specific policies, tailored fi-
nancial mechanisms, and adaptive technologies that align with na-
tional development priorities. Additionally, regional cooperation
and cross-border knowledge transfer should be strengthened to
accelerate biomass energy innovation in low-income countries.
While this study provides a comprehensive assessment of biomass
energy adoption across diverse geopolitical contexts, several crit-
ical areas warrant further investigation: (1) The empirical valida-
tion of biomass energy financing models through future research
should explore the long-term viability of green bonds, carbon
credits, and international climate financing in supporting large-
scale biomass projects in developing nations. (2) Decentralized
biomass energy systems entail assessing the impact of community-
led biomass initiatives on rural electrification, job creation, and
socio-economic resilience, providing valuable insights into grass-
roots energy sustainability. (3) Comparative lifecycle assessments
through further studies should evaluate the environmental and
economic trade-offs of different biomass conversion techniques to
guide policy decisions on optimal technology deployment. Lastly,
digital integration in biomass energy monitoring entails the role of
AI-driven predictive analytics and blockchain-based carbon track-
ing, which should be investigated to enhance transparency and
efficiency in biomass energy value chains.
In conclusion, biomass energy presents a viable pathway toward
achieving energy security, carbon neutrality, and socio-economic
development, but its success is contingent on an integrated approach
that balances technological advancements, policy interventions, and
financial mechanisms. Countries lagging in biomass energy adop-
tion must prioritize capacity building, regulatory coherence, and
international collaboration to harness the full potential of this
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 14 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
renewable energy source. By implementing scientifically grounded,
economically viable, and policy-driven strategies, biomass energy
can emerge as a cornerstone of global sustainability efforts.
Acknowledgments
We express gratitude to all individuals and institutions who pro-
vided valuable insights, datasets, and constructive feedback that
enriched this study. Special thanks go to academic mentors, stake-
holders, and colleagues for their guidance and support
Funding
The authors declare no financial support for the research and
publication of this article.
Author contributions
Conceptualization, P.M. and E.Y.; methodology, P.M.; software,
P.M.; validation, P.M. and E.Y.; formal analysis, P.M.; investiga-
tion, P.M.; resources, P.M.; data curation, P.M. and E.Y.; writing—
original draft preparation, P.M.; writing—review and editing, P.M.
and E.Y.; visualization, P.M. and E.Y.; supervision, E.Y.; project
administration, P.M.; funding acquisition, P.M. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Data availability statement
Data supporting these findings are available within the article, at
https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556, or upon request.
Institutional review board statement
Not applicable.
Informed consent statement
Not applicable.
Additional information
Received: 2025-01-01
Accepted: 2025-02-13
Published: 2025-02-25
Academia Green Energy papers should be cited as Academia
Green Energy 2025, ISSN 2998-3665, https://doi.org/
10.20935/AcadEnergy7556. The journal’s official abbreviation is
Acad. Energy.
Publisher’s note
Academia.edu Journals stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. All claims
expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do
not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or
those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product
that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by
its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Copyright
© 2025 copyright by the authors. 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/).
References
1. Miyatake K, Haraguchi M, Toyota T, Nagai Y,
Taniguchi M. Feed-in-tariff is key to Japan’s current
biomass power’s viability, even with environmental
externalities. Environ Res Commun. 2024;6(5):055018.
doi: 10.1088/2515-7620/ad4a28
2. Omer AM. Utilisation and development: Biomass analysis for
renewable energy. J Appl Adv Res. 2017;2(4):206–26. doi:
10.21839/jaar.2017.v2i4.83
3. Malav LC, Yadav KK, Gupta N, Kumar S, Sharma GK, Kr-
ishnan S, et al. A review on municipal solid waste as a re-
newable source for waste-to-energy project in India: Current
practices, challenges, and future opportunities. J Clean Prod.
2020;277:123227. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123227
4. Vrabie C. Converting municipal waste to energy through
the biomass chain, a key technology for environmental is-
sues in (Smart) cities. Sustainability. 2021;13(9):4633. doi:
10.3390/su13094633
5. Banaś J, Utnik-Banaś K, Zięba S. Optimizing biomass supply
chains to power plants under ecological and social restric-
tions: Case study from Poland. Energies. 2024;17(13):3136.
doi: 10.3390/en17133136
6. Iles L. The role of metallurgy in transforming global
forests. J Archaeol Method Theory. 2016;23:1219–41. doi:
10.1007/s10816-015-9266-7
7. Ahmad H, Ali R. Optimizing Coal Reserves for Sustainable
Energy Solutions: A Comparative Analysis among Selected
Countries. J Energy Environ Policy Options. 2019;2(4):101–
8. [cited 2024 Nov 22]. Available from: https://resdojournal
s.com/index.php/JEEPO/article/view/98
8. Malange R. Techno-economic analysis of a low-cost biogas
fed combined heat and power system for African villages
[PhD thesis]. Cape Town: Cape Peninsula University of Tech-
nology; 2023. p. 1–53. doi: 10.25381/cput.24595710.v1
9. El-Araby R. Biofuel production: Exploring renewable energy
solutions for a greener future. Biotechnol Biofuels Bioprod.
2024;17(1):129. doi: 10.1186/s13068-024-02571-9
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 15 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
10. Mignogna D, Szabó M, Ceci P, Avino P. Biomass energy
and biofuels: Perspective, potentials, and challenges in
the energy transition. Sustainability. 2024;16(16):7036. doi:
10.3390/su16167036
11. Ma Q, Lv Y, Chai R, Wang M, Ren Y. Distribution and poten-
tial assessment of biomass raw material resources in the In-
ner Mongolia region. J Phys Conf Ser. 2024;2826(1):012007.
doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2826/1/012007
12. Tun MM, Juchelkova D, Win MM, Thu AM, Puchor T.
Biomass energy: An overview of biomass sources, energy
potential, and management in Southeast Asian countries.
Resources. 2019;8(2):81. doi: 10.3390/resources8020081
13. Cheng Y, Li H. Utilization and development of
biomass energy. Energy Sci Policy. 2023;1(1):1–6. doi:
10.61187/esp.v1i1.12
14. Raji JO, Adeel-Farooq RM, Qamri GM. Examining the role
of biomass energy for sustainable environment in African
countries. Res Sq. 2022;8(1):1–20. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-
1723447/v1
15. Dagnachew AG, Hof AF, Lucas PL, van Vuuren DP. Sce-
nario analysis for promoting clean cooking in Sub-Saharan
Africa: Costs and benefits. Energy. 2020;192:116641. doi:
10.1016/j.energy.2019.116641
16. Popp J, Kovács S, Oláh J, Divéki Z, Balázs E. Bioeconomy:
Biomass and biomass-based energy supply and
demand. New Biotechnol. 2021;60(1):76–84. doi:
10.1016/j.nbt.2020.10.004
17. Moreira JR, Romeiro V, Fuss S, Kraxner F, Pacca SA. BECCS
potential in Brazil: Achieving negative emissions in ethanol
and electricity production based on sugar cane bagasse
and other residues. Appl Energy. 2016;179(1):55–63. doi:
10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.06.044
18. de Carvalho AL, Antunes CH, Freire F. Economic-energy-
environment analysis of prospective sugarcane bioethanol
production in Brazil. Appl Energy. 2016;181(1):514–26. doi:
10.1016/j.apenergy.2016.07.122
19. Huang J, Khan MT, Perecin D, Coelho ST, Zhang M.
Sugarcane for bioethanol production: Potential of bagasse
in Chinese perspective. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.
2020;133(1):110296. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110296
20. Milão RDFD, Araújo ODQF, de Medeiros JL. Sugarcane-
based ethanol biorefineries with bioenergy production from
bagasse: Thermodynamic, economic, and emissions assess-
ments. In: Waste Biorefinery. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2021. p.
125–58. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-821879-2.00005-3
21. da Silva FTF, Lopes MSG, Asano LM, Angelkorte G, Costa
AKB, Szklo A, et al. Integrated systems for the produc-
tion of food, energy and materials as a sustainable strat-
egy for decarbonization and land use: The case of sugar-
cane in Brazil. Biomass Bioenergy. 2024;190(1):107387. doi:
10.1016/j.biombioe.2024.107387
22. Formann S, Hahn A, Janke L, Stinner W, Sträuber H,
Logroño W, et al. Beyond sugar and ethanol production:
Value generation opportunities through sugarcane
residues. Front Energy Res. 2020;8(1):579577. doi:
10.3389/fenrg.2020.579577
23. Antunes FA, Chandel AK, Terán-Hilares R, Milessi TS,
Travalia BM, Ferrari FA, et al. Biofuel production from sug-
arcane in Brazil. In: Khan M, Khan I, editors. Sugarcane
Biofuels. Cham: Springer; 2019. p. 99–121. doi: 10.1007/978-
3-030-18597-8_5
24. Grandis A, Fortirer JDS, Pagliuso D, Buckeridge MS. Scien-
tific research on bioethanol in Brazil: History and prospects
for sustainable biofuel. Sustainability. 2024;16(10):4167. doi:
10.3390/su16104167
25. Lund H, Thellufsen JZ, Sorknæs P, Mathiesen BV, Chang
M, Madsen PT, et al. Smart energy Denmark. A consis-
tent and detailed strategy for a fully decarbonized so-
ciety. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2022;168:112777. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2022.112777
26. Ranta T, Laihanen M, Karhunen A. Development of bioen-
ergy as a part of renewable energy in the Nordic coun-
tries: A comparative analysis. J Sustain Bioenergy Syst.
2020;10(3):92–112. doi: 10.4236/jsbs.2020.103008
27. Bacovsky D, Ludwiczek N, Pointner C, Verma VK. IEA Bioen-
ergy Countries’ Report: Bioenergy policies and status of im-
plementation (No. IEA-Bioenergy-796-TR-N41029016-01).
Graz: Bioenergy 2020+ GmbH; 2016. doi: 10.2172/1326902
28. da Silva GHR, Nascimento A, Baum CD, Mathias MH.
Renewable energy potentials and roadmap in Brazil,
Austria, and Germany. Energies. 2024;17(6):1482. doi:
10.3390/en17061482
29. Szarka N, Eichhorn M, Kittler R, Bezama A, Thrän D. Inter-
preting long-term energy scenarios and the role of bioenergy
in Germany. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2017;68:1222–33.
doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.016
30. Edo GI. The German energy system: Analysis of past,
present, and future developments. Adv Energy Convers
Mater. 2023;4(1):18–28. doi: 10.37256/aecm.4120232207
31. Feindt PH, Proestou M, Daedlow K. Resilience and pol-
icy design in the emerging bioeconomy–the RPD frame-
work and the changing role of energy crop systems in
Germany. J Environ Policy Plan. 2020;22(5):636–52. doi:
10.1080/1523908X.2020.1814130
32. Rilling B. Renewable gases fueling the energy transition
in residential heating and private transportation: A multi-
perspective approach [Doctoral dissertation]. Heidelberg:
Heidelberg University Library; 2024. doi: 10.11588/hei-
dok.00035842
33. Consedine T. Renewable energy smart lessons: An educa-
tional approach to energy independence in Namibia [PhD
thesis]. Worcester (MA): Worcester Polytechnic Institute;
2017. Vol. 1. p. 1–103. [cited 2024 Nov 22]. Available from:
http://www.wpi.edu/Academics/Projects
34. Brüntrup M, Herrmann R. 5 bush-to-energy value chains in
Namibia. Global Value Chains. 2012 [cited 2024 Nov 22].
Available from: www.eadi.org
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 16 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
35. Brüntrup M, Becker K, Prothmann J, Ostermann S, Gaebler
M, Herrmann R. Policies and institutions for assuring pro-
poor rural development and food security through bioenergy
production: Case studies on bush-to-energy and Jatropha
in Namibia (No. 90). Studies. 2016 [cited 2024 Nov 22].
Available from: https://www.idos-research.de/uploads/Stu
dy_90.png
36. Brunntrup M, Hermann R, Gaebler M. Bioenergy in
Namibia: Opportunities, threats and institutional challenges
for rural development and food security. Proceedings of the
XIII ICABR Conference on The Emerging Bio-Economy;
2019 Jun 3–6; Ravello, Italy. p. 18–20.
37. Bawakyillenuo S, Crentsil AO, Agbelie IK, Danquah S,
Boakye-Danquah EB, Menyeh BO. The landscape of energy
for cooking in Ghana: A review. Mod Energy Cook Serv.
2021;1(6):1–56.
38. Bukari D, Tuokuu FXD, Suleman S, Ackah I, Apenu G.
Ghana’s energy access journey so far: A review of key
strategies. Int J Energy Sect Manag. 2021;15(1):139–56. doi:
10.1108/IJESM-02-2020-0008
39. Effah B, Boampong E. Biomass energy: A sustainable source
of energy for development in Ghana. Asian Bull Energy
Econ Technol. 2015;2(1):6–12. [cited 2024 Nov 22]. Avail-
able from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Bernard-E
ffah/publication/292989857
40. Kemausuor F, Addo A, Ofori E, Darkwah L, Bolwig S, Ny-
gaard I. Assessment of technical potential and selected sus-
tainability impacts of second-generation bioenergy in Ghana
[PhD Thesis]. Denmark: DTU Orbit; 2015. Vol. 1. p. 1–109.
41. Dahunsi SO, Fagbiele OO, Yusuf EO. Bioenergy
technologies adoption in Africa: A review of past and
current status. J Clean Prod. 2020;264:121683. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.121683
42. Johnson L, Schubert H, Surber A, Hennessey J, Yardley C,
Asplin E, et al. A multi-perspective analysis of renewable
energy technologies in sub-Saharan Africa: A Ghana
case study. 2020 [cited 2024 Nov 25]. Available from:
https://digital.lib.washington.edu/server/api/core/bitstre
ams/7e076b56-b494-4279-b58a-a73f0d9b4709/content
43. Sivabalan K, Hassan S, Ya H, Pasupuleti J. A review on
the characteristics of biomass and classification of bioenergy
through direct combustion and gasification as an alternative
power supply. J Phys Conf Ser. 2021;1831(1):012033. doi:
10.1088/1742-6596/1831/1/012033
44. Grant R, McCauley D, Von Maltzan M, Grattage R,
Mwathunga E. An ecohealth approach to energy justice:
Evidence from Malawi’s energy transition from biomass
to electrification. Energy Res Soc Sci. 2021;75:101875. doi:
10.1016/j.erss.2020.101875
45. Nunes LJR, Matias JCO, Catalão JPS. Biomass combustion
systems: A review on the physical and chemical properties of
the ashes. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2016;53:235–42. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2015.08.053
46. Odega CA, Ayodele OO, Alagbe OA, Adewole AO, Adekunle
AE. Review of anaerobic digestion process for biogas pro-
duction. Biosci J. 2022;10(1):81–96. [cited 2024 Nov 25].
Available from: https://www.bioscientistjournal.com/
47. Vuppaladadiyam AK, Vuppaladadiyam SSV, Sahoo A, Muru-
gavelh S, Anthony E, Bhaskar T, et al. Bio-oil and biochar
from the pyrolytic conversion of biomass: A current and
future perspective on the trade-off between economic, en-
vironmental, and technical indicators. Sci Total Environ.
2023;857:159155. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.159155
48. Molino A, Chianese S, Musmarra D. Biomass gasification
technology: The state-of-the-art overview. J Energy Chem.
2016;25(1):10–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jechem.2015.11.005
49. Nath S. Biotechnology and biofuels: Paving the way towards
a sustainable and equitable energy for the future. Discov
Energy. 2024;4(1):8. doi: 10.1007/s43937-024-00032-w
50. Mohamed SP. Biofuels: A comprehensive exploration of sus-
tainable energy alternatives. Indo-Am J Life Sci Biotechnol.
2024;21(2):1–20. [cited 2024 Nov 25]. Available from: https:
//iajlb.org/index.php/iajlb/article/view/144
51. Avor EP, Supap T, Narku-Tetteh J, Muchan P, Natewong P,
Appiah FA, et al. Achieving net-zero CO2 emissions from in-
direct co-combustion of biomass and natural gas with carbon
capture using a novel amine blend. Int J Greenh Gas Control.
2023;130:104005. doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2023.104005
52. Blair MJ, Gagnon B, Klain A, Kulišić B. Contribution
of biomass supply chains for bioenergy to sustainable
development goals. Land. 2021;10(2):181. doi:
10.3390/land10020181
53. Uzoagba C, Onwualu PA, Okoroigwe E, Kadivar M, Oribu
WS, Mguni NG, et al. A review of biomass valorization for
bioenergy and rural electricity generation in Nigeria. Cureus.
2024;1(1):1–16. doi: 10.7759/s44388-024-00065-w
54. Chiaramonti D, Talluri G, Scarlat N, Prussi M. The chal-
lenge of forecasting the role of biofuel in EU transport de-
carbonisation at 2050: A meta-analysis review of published
scenarios. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2021;139:110715. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2021.110715
55. Pulighe G, Pirelli T. Assessing the sustainability of bioen-
ergy pathways through a land-water-energy nexus ap-
proach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2023;184:113539. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2023.113539
56. Azevedo SG, Sequeira T, Santos M, Mendes L. Biomass-
related sustainability: A review of the literature and interpre-
tive structural modeling. Energy. 2019;171:1107–1125. doi:
10.1016/j.energy.2019.01.068
57. Apostu SA, Hussain A, Kijkasiwat P, Vasa L. A comparative
study of the relationship between circular economy,
economic growth, and oil price across South Asian
countries. Front Environ Sci. 2022;10:1036889. doi:
10.3389/fenvs.2022.1036889
58. Ahmadov AK, Van Der Borg C. Do natural resources im-
pede renewable energy production in the EU? A mixed-
methods analysis. Energy Policy. 2019;126:361–9. doi:
10.1016/j.enpol.2018.11.044
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 17 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
59. McMullin C. Transcription and qualitative methods: Impli-
cations for third sector research. VOLUNTAS Int J Volunt
Nonprofit Organ. 2023;34(1):140–53. doi: 10.1007/s11266-
021-00400-3
60. Koondhar MA, Tan Z, Alam GM, Khan ZA, Wang L, Kong
R. Bioenergy consumption, carbon emissions, and agricul-
tural bioeconomic growth: A systematic approach to carbon
neutrality in China. J Environ Manag. 2021;296:113242. doi:
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113242
61. Wang X, Liu Q, Yang L, Yang Q, Li Y, Yang Y, et al.
Perceptions of biomass energy sustainability in policy
scenarios of China. Heliyon. 2024;10(17):e37180. doi:
10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e37180
62. Yan P, Xiao C, Xu L, Yu G, Li A, Piao S, et al. Biomass
energy in China’s terrestrial ecosystems: Insights into the
nation’s sustainable energy supply. Renew Sustain Energy
Rev. 2020;127:109857. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2020.109857
63. Deng X, Teng F, Chen M, Du Z, Wang B, Li R, et al. Exploring
negative emission potential of biochar to achieve carbon
neutrality goal in China. Nat Commun. 2024;15(1):1085. doi:
10.1038/s41467-024-45314-y
64. Zhang S, Chen W. China’s energy transition pathway in
a carbon neutral vision. Engineering. 2022;14:64–76. doi:
10.1016/j.eng.2021.09.004
65. Shweta, Capareda SC, Kamboj BR, Malik K, Singh K, Bhisnoi
DK, et al. Biomass resources and biofuel technologies: A
focus on Indian development. Energies. 2024;17(2):382. doi:
10.3390/en17020382
66. Falcone PM. Sustainable energy policies in developing coun-
tries: A review of challenges and opportunities. Energies.
2023;16(18):6682. doi: 10.3390/en16186682
67. Kimming M, Sundberg C, Nordberg Å, Baky A, Bernesson
S, Hansson PA. Replacing fossil energy for organic milk
production–potential biomass sources and greenhouse gas
emission reductions. J Clean Prod. 2015;106:400–7. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.03.044
68. Sachs JD, Lafortune G, Fuller G. The SDGs and the UN
summit of the future. In: Sustainable Development Report.
Paris: SDSN; Dublin: Dublin University Press; 2024. doi:
10.25546/108572
69. Li M, Luo N, Lu Y. Biomass energy technological paradigm
(BETP): Trends in this sector. Sustainability. 2017;9(4):567.
doi: 10.3390/su9040567
70. Nwokediegwu ZQS, Ibekwe KI, Ilojianya VI, Etukudoh
EA, Ayorinde OB. Renewable energy technologies in en-
gineering: A review of current developments and future
prospects. Eng Sci Technol J. 2024;5(2):367–84. doi:
10.51594/estj.v5i2.800
71. Thunman H, Seemann M, Berdugo Vilches T, Maric J, Pal-
lares D, Ström H, et al. Advanced biofuel production via
gasification–lessons learned from 200 man-years of research
activity with Chalmers’ research gasifier and the GoBiGas
demonstration plant. Energy Sci Eng. 2018;6(1):6–34. doi:
10.1002/ese3.188
72. Zaccariello L, Montagnaro F. Fluidised bed gasification of
biomasses and wastes to produce hydrogen-rich syn-gas–a
review. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2023;98(8):1878–87.
doi: 10.1002/jctb.7393
73. Hughes N, Mutran VM, Tomei J, de Oliveira Ribeiro
C, do Nascimento CAO. Strength in diversity? Past dy-
namics and future drivers affecting demand for sugar,
ethanol, biogas and bioelectricity from Brazil’s sugar-
cane sector. Biomass Bioenergy. 2020;141:105676. doi:
10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105676
74. Rastogi M, Shrivastava S. Recent advances in second genera-
tion bioethanol production: An insight to pretreatment, sac-
charification and fermentation processes. Renew Sustain En-
ergy Rev. 2017;80:330–340. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.225
75. Arias A, Nika CE, Vasilaki V, Feijoo G, Moreira MT, Kat-
sou E. Assessing the future prospects of emerging tech-
nologies for shipping and aviation biofuels: A critical re-
view. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2024;197:114427. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2024.114427
76. Su Y, Zhang P, Su Y. An overview of biofuels policies
and industrialization in the major biofuel producing coun-
tries. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2015;50:991–1003. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.032
77. Ribeiro JX, Antwi E, Shahreza MS, Oko E, Albayati I, Elser-
agy A, et al. Renewable energy potential, production and
utilisation in Africa. In: Key Themes in Energy Management:
A Compilation of Current Practices, Research Advances, and
Future Opportunities. Cham: Springer; 2024. p. 137–57. doi:
10.1007/978-3-031-58086-4_9
78. Pandey JK, Tauseef SM, Manna S, Patel RK, Singh VK, Das-
gotra A, editors. Application of nanotechnology for resource
recovery from wastewater. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press;
2024. p. 1–18. doi: 10.1201/9781003176350
79. Singhal A, Senger MKS, Kapoor KK, Upadhyay MP. Biofuel
and its influencing parameters: A review. Int J Energy Resour
Appl. 2023;2(1):16–25. doi: 10.56896/IJERA.2023.2.1.002
80. Destek MA. Biomass energy consumption and economic
growth: Evidence from top 10 biomass consumer countries.
Energy Sources Part B Econ Plan Policy. 2017;12(10):853–
858. doi: 10.1080/15567249.2017.1314393
81. Proskurina S, Martinez CLM. Expectations for bioenergy
considering carbon neutrality targets in the EU. Energies.
2023;16(14):5314. doi: 10.3390/en16145314
82. Jayachandran M, Gatla RK, Rao KP, Rao GS, Mohammed
S, Milyani AH, et al. Challenges in achieving sustainable
development goal 7: Affordable and clean energy in light
of nascent technologies. Sustain Energy Technol Assess.
2022;53:102692. doi: 10.1016/j.seta.2022.102692
83. Faaij AP. Securing sustainable resource availability of
biomass for energy applications in Europe; review of
recent literature. Hg v Univ Gron. 2018;11:1–16. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.160
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 18 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
84. Yue D, You F, Snyder SW. Biomass-to-bioenergy and
biofuel supply chain optimization: Overview, key issues
and challenges. Comput Chem Eng. 2014;66:36–56. doi:
10.1016/j.compchemeng.2013.11.016
85. Taghizadeh-Alisaraei A, Tatari A, Khanali M, Keshavarzi M.
Potential of biofuels production from wheat straw biomass,
current achievements and perspectives: A review. Biofuels.
2023;14(1):79–92. doi: 10.1080/17597269.2022.2118779
86. Williams CL, Westover TL, Emerson RM, Tumuluru JS, Li
C. Sources of biomass feedstock variability and the potential
impact on biofuels production. BioEnergy Res. 2016;9:1–14.
doi: 10.1007/s12155-015-9694-y
87. Wang Y, Wu JJ. Thermochemical conversion of biomass:
Potential future prospects. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.
2023;187:113754. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2023.113754
88. Marchenko O, Solomin S, Kozlov A, Shamanskiy V, Donskoy
I. Economic efficiency assessment of using wood waste in
cogeneration plants with multi-stage gasification. Appl Sci.
2020;10(21):7600. doi: 10.3390/app10217600
89. Siwal SS, Sheoran K, Saini AK, Vo DVN, Wang Q, Thakur
VK. Advanced thermochemical conversion technologies used
for energy generation: Advancement and prospects. Fuel.
2022;321:124107. doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2022.124107
90. Paz A, Solisio C, Converti A, Casazza AA. Application of
organosolv technology to improve the anaerobic digestion
of olive oil pomace. Ind Crops Prod. 2023;204:117249. doi:
10.1016/j.indcrop.2023.117249
91. Colella M, Ripa M, Cocozza A, Panfilo C, Ulgiati S. Chal-
lenges and opportunities for more efficient water use and
circular wastewater management. The case of Campa-
nia region, Italy. J Environ Manag. 2021;297:113171. doi:
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113171
92. Hoang AT, Varbanov PS, Nižetić S, Sirohi R, Pandey A, Luque
R, et al. Perspective review on Municipal Solid Waste-to-
energy route: Characteristics, management strategy, and role
in circular economy. J Clean Prod. 2022;359:131897. doi:
10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131897
93. Hasan MM, Rasul MG, Khan MK, Ashwath N, Jahirul MI.
Energy recovery from municipal solid waste using pyrol-
ysis technology: A review on current status and develop-
ments. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2021;145:111073. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2021.111073
94. Mohan D, Abhishek K, Sarswat A, Patel M, Singh P, Pittman
CU. Biochar production and applications in soil fertility
and carbon sequestration–a sustainable solution to crop-
residue burning in India. RSC Adv. 2018;8(1):508–20. doi:
10.1039/C7RA10353K
95. Sharma A, Jakhete A, Sharma A, Joshi JB, Pareek V. Low-
ering greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: Techno-economic
analysis of biomass conversion to biofuels and value-added
chemicals. Greenh Gases Sci Technol. 2019;9(3):454–73.
doi: 10.1002/ghg.1867
96. Yin C, Li S. Advancing grate-firing for greater environmental
impacts and efficiency for decentralized biomass/wastes
combustion. Energy Procedia. 2017;120:373–9. doi:
10.1016/j.egypro.2017.07.220
97. Rahman MM, Liu R, Cai J. Catalytic fast pyrolysis
of biomass over zeolites for high quality bio-oil—A
review. Fuel Process Technol. 2018;180:32–46. doi:
10.1016/j.fuproc.2018.08.002
98. Wang W, Gu Y, Zhou C, Hu C. Current challenges and per-
spectives for the catalytic pyrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass
to high-value products. Catalysts. 2022;12(12):1524. doi:
10.3390/catal12121524
99. Moraes BS, Zaiat M, Bonomi A. Anaerobic digestion
of vinasse from sugarcane ethanol production in Brazil:
Challenges and perspectives. Renew Sustain Energy Rev.
2015;44:888–903. doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.01.023
100. Abdelslam AME, Mfarrej MFB. Sudanese experience towards
implementation of biomass gasification as an alternative
source of energy for rural electrification. Glob J Sci Eng.
2020;1(1):9–14. doi: 10.37516/global.j.sci.eng.2020.002
101. Kabeyi MJB, Olanrewaju OA. Biogas production and ap-
plications in the sustainable energy transition. J Energy.
2022;2022(1):8750221. doi: 10.1155/2022/8750221
102. Ukoba K, Olatunji KO, Adeoye E, Jen TC, Madyira DM.
Optimizing renewable energy systems through artificial in-
telligence: Review and future prospects. Energy Environ.
2024;35(7):3833–3879. doi: 10.1177/0958305X241256293
103. Bale AS, William P, Kondekar VH, Sanamdikar S, Joshi P,
Nigam P, et al. Harnessing AI and IoT for optimized renew-
able energy integration and resource conservation. Libr Prog
Int. 2024;44(3):1412–1426. [cited 2024 Nov 25]. Available
from: www.bpasjournals.com
104. Li J, Herdem MS, Nathwani J, Wen JZ. Methods and appli-
cations for artificial intelligence, big data, internet of things,
and blockchain in smart energy management. Energy AI.
2023;11:100208. doi: 10.1016/j.egyai.2022.100208
105. Erhueh OV, Elete T, Akano OA, Nwakile C, Hanson E.
Application of internet of things (IoT) in energy infras-
tructure: Lessons for the future of operations and mainte-
nance. Compr Res Rev Sci Technol. 2024;2(2):28–54. doi:
10.57219/crrst.2024.2.2.0036
106. Kara S, Hauschild M, Sutherland J, McAloone T. Closed-loop
systems to circular economy: A pathway to environmen-
tal sustainability? CIRP Annals. 2022;71(2):505–528. doi:
10.1016/j.cirp.2022.05.008
107. Gürsan C, de Gooyert V. The systemic impact of a transi-
tion fuel: Does natural gas help or hinder the energy tran-
sition? Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 2021;138:110552. doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2020.110552
108. Oyedepo SO, Babalola OP, Nwanya SC, Kilanko O, Leramo
RO, Aworinde AK, et al. Towards a sustainable electric-
ity supply in Nigeria: The role of decentralized renewable
energy system. Eur J Sustain Dev Res. 2018;2(4):40. doi:
10.20897/ejosdr/3908
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 19 of 20

https://www.academia.edu/journals/academia-green-energy/about https://doi.org/10.20935/AcadEnergy7556
109. Colombo E, Romeo F, Mattarolo L, Barbieri J, Morazzo
M. An impact evaluation framework based on sustainable
livelihoods for energy development projects: An applica-
tion to Ethiopia. Energy Res Soc Sci. 2018;39:78–92. doi:
10.1016/j.erss.2017.10.048
110. Gontard N, Sonesson U, Birkved M, Majone M, Bolzonella
D, Celli A, et al. A research challenge vision regarding man-
agement of agricultural waste in a circular bio-based econ-
omy. Crit Rev Environ Sci Technol. 2018;48(6):614–54. doi:
10.1080/10643389.2018.1471957
111. Kothari R, Vashishtha A, Singh HM, Pathak VV, Tyagi VV,
Yadav BC, et al. Assessment of Indian bioenergy policy for
sustainable environment and its impact for rural India:
Strategic implementation and challenges. Environ Technol
Innov. 2020;20:101078. doi: 10.1016/j.eti.2020.101078
112. Junginger HM, Mai-Moulin T, Daioglou V, Fritsche U, Guis-
son R, Hennig C, et al. The future of biomass and bioenergy
deployment and trade: A synthesis of 15 years IEA Bioenergy
Task 40 on sustainable bioenergy trade. Biofuels Bioprod
Biorefining. 2019;13(2):247–66. doi: 10.1002/bbb.1993
113. Abbas R, Pitt J, Michael K. Socio-technical design for public
interest technology. IEEE Trans Technol Soc. 2021;2(2):55–
61. doi: 10.1109/TTS.2021.3086260
ACADEMIA GREEN ENERGY 2025, 2 20 of 20