Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/rser

Techno-economics and life-cycle assessment of biological and

thermochemical treatment of bio-waste
Mukesh Kumar Awasthi a, b, *, Surendra Sarsaiya d, Steven Wainaina b, Karthik Rajendran e,
Sanjeev Kumar Awasthi a, Tao Liu a, Yumin Duan a, Archana Jain d, Raveendran Sindhu f,
Parameswaran Binod f, Ashok Pandey c, Zengqiang Zhang a, **, Mohammad J. Taherzadeh b
a
College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province, 712100, PR China
b
Swedish Centre for Resource Recovery, University of Borås, 50190, Borås, Sweden
c
Centre for Innovation and Translational Research, CSIR-Indian Institute of Toxicology Research, Lucknow, 226 001, India
d
Key Laboratory of Basic Pharmacology and Joint International Research Laboratory of Ethnomedicine of Ministry of Education, Zunyi Medical University, Zunyi,
Guizhou, China
e
Department of Environmental Science, SRM University-AP, Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh, India
f
Microbial Processes and Technology Division, CSIR-National Institute for Interdisciplinary Science and Technology (CSIR-NIIST), Trivandrum, 695019, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The energy sector contributed to three-fourth of overall global emissions in the past decade. Biological wastes
Bio-waste can be converted to useful energy and other byproducts via biological or thermo-chemical routes. However,
Life cycle assessment issues such as techno-economic feasibility and lack of understanding on the overall lifecycle of a product have
Circular economy
hindered commercialization. It is needed to recognize these inter-disciplinary factors. This review attempts to
Thermochemical-biological conversion
critically evaluate the role of technology, economics and lifecycle assessment of bio-waste in two processing
Value-added products
Sustainability types. This includes: 1. biological and, 2. thermo-chemical route. The key findings of this work are: 1. Policy
support is essential for commercialization of a waste treatment technology; 2. adequate emphasis is necessary on
the social dimensions in creating awareness; and 3. from a product development perspective, research should
focus on industrial needs. The choice of the treatment and their commercialization depends on the regional
demand of a product, policy support, and technology maturity. Utilization of bio-wastes to produce value-added
products will enhance circular economy, which in turn improves sustainability.

United States of America (USA) [2]. The indiscriminate clearance,

poor-quality handling, and unrestrained landfilling of bio-waste,
1. Introduction
particularly in lower- and middle-income nation’s leading to loss of
potential energy sources that could otherwise be used to meet the
The increasing global population has resulted in a rise in demand for
growing global supply demands [3]. Some of the most abundant
materials and energy. Over the years, petroleum-based resources have
bio-wastes are made up of hemicellulose, cellulose and lignin as key
been utilized to provide most of these materials and a significant fraction
constituents [4].
of the energy. As a result, there has been a growing concern of the high
Given the abundant applications of bio-waste and coal, assembly
rates of depletion of these resources in addition to their detrimental
costs persist as the biggest obstacle for thermo-chemical bio-waste en­
impacts on the ecosystem. On the other hand, abundant bio-wastes are
ergy alteration. To commercialize bio-waste energy conversion, it is
produced from the different streams such as from households, industries,
important to assess the costs of accumulating domestic bio-waste re­
agricultural activities and institutions [1]. Indeed, between 40 and 50%
sources. By using a native biomass resource data, it is conceivable to
of municipal solid waste (MSW) consists of bio-waste. The major envi­
quantify the operational biomass resources. For this reason the
ronmental risk from bio-waste is the formation of methane (CH4)
comprehensive distribution of bio-waste resources, a growth in plant
throughout their decay in landfill sites. It is projected, for instance, that
measure would consequence in a deficiency of raw resources and a rise
landfills have been become third major source of CH4 releases in the

* Corresponding author. College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F University, Yangling, Shaanxi Province, 712100, PR China.
** Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: [email protected] (M.K. Awasthi), [email protected] (Z. Zhang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.110837
Received 30 October 2019; Received in revised form 14 January 2021; Accepted 13 February 2021
Available online 23 March 2021
1364-0321/© 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Abbreviations mL/L/d Millilitre per litre per day

MSW Municipal solid waste
$ Dollar MT Million tons
◦
C Degree Centigrade MW Mega watt
ACNPs Activated carbon nanoparticles NH3 Ammonia
AD Anaerobic Digestion NH+4-N Ammonium
BtE Bio-waste to energy PO34 Phosphate
C:N Carbon-to-nitrogen NOx Nitrous oxide
CSTR Continuous Stirred-tank Reactor NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory
CE Circular economy OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
CH4 Methane OPEX Operational expenses
CO Carbon monoxide ORP Oxidation reduction potential
Co Cobalt PAHs Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
CO2 Carbon dioxide PCDD/F Dioxins and furans
COD Chemical oxygen demand PHA Polyhydroxyalkanoates
eq Equivalent POPs Persistent Organic Pollutants
EU European Union s Second
Fe Iron SD System dynamics
GHG Greenhouse gas SOx Sulfur oxide
IMBH Integrated mechanical biological handling t/a Tons per acre
K Kalvin USA United States of America
K/s Kalvin per second VFAs Volatile fatty acids
LCA Life cycle assessment VOC Volatile organic compounds
MCA Multi-criteria analysis WtW Waste to wealth
MFSP Minimum fuel selling price ww Wet weight
mg/l Milligram per litre

in the percentage of fuel [5]. Anaerobic digestion [6], ignition with economy.
energy regaining, integrated mechanical biological handling (IMBH)
with anaerobic digestion, and efficient gasification are opportunities for 2. Global scenario of bio-waste generation
both to accomplish bio-waste and bio-waste-to-bioenergy possibility.
The influence of MSW management alternatives depends on the quantity Bio-waste, containing cellulose, starch, hemicellulose, protein, and
of the limited factors [7]. The exploration for sustainable growth de­ lipids, can turn as low-cost raw resources for the biotechnological pro­
mands the decrease in the generation of bio-waste, as well as the gen­ duction of renewable energy [13]. In a comprehensive context,
eration of upcoming treatment strategies that reduce the ecological bio-waste is an organic waste resulting from living microorganisms or of
impacts. The LCA (life cycle assessment) is a systematic objective tool, biological source (for example sewage, agrarian or food leftovers,
which has been useful for the assessment of MSW [8]. On the other hand, sawdust, or forestry matter, and manure) that is primarily made up of
Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) is applied to recognize for determining organic substances [14]. Approximately 1.3 billion tons of MSW are
multifaceted strategy planning and difficulties for bio-waste manage­ collected wide-reaching; this is projected to rise to 2.2 billion tons in
ment. The application of system dynamics (SD) in bio-waste manage­ 2025 and 4.2 billion tons yearly in 2050 [13]. Bio-waste to energy (BtE)
ment arrangement can help to predict the upcoming trends and analyse technologies are a feasible method to both managing waste and pro­
the scheme characteristics. SD is widely useful in arenas related to ducing energy. The worldwide market worth of BtE technology is almost
bio-waste administration in the past few years [7]. $25.32 billion (US dollar) and is predicted to rise by $40 billion (US
Several documents have been published about the assessment be­ dollar) by 2023 [13]. In 1960, 88.1 million tons of MSW was generated
tween diverse bio-waste situations management. In particular a huge in United States alone. In 2014, this quantity reached 258.5 million tons
quantity of LCA’s has been performed on waste managing options, [15]. The United States is the chief producer of waste for every capita
including different waste managing technology organizations like globally, with individually inhabitant producing a usual of 808 kg/year
composting, landfilling, anaerobic digestion or/and incineration in 2019 [16].
exposed that in Denmark, biogas and updraft gasification technologies A geographic region-based analysis of municipal waste generation
are stimulating alternatives to waste incineration and it is suggested to was investigated by the European Nations. Fig. 1 shows the waste gen­
care the usage of biogas built on manure and carbon-based waste [9]. eration analysis carried out by different countries based on their waste
The studies revealed the numerous technologies that utilize waste as a generation. As per the latest information of Eurostat statistical data
resource in an upcoming circular economy [10], in agreement with the source, the 28 European countries were produced the highest municipal
European circular low-cost action proposal and related legislations [9]. waste (492 kg/capita) in 2018. Across the European Union, the quantity
Global economy has increased the consideration as a key idea for of total municipal waste varies considerably, extending from 272 kg/
emerging closed-loop mechanical and biological series [11]. Rethinking capita in Romania to near 814 kg/capita in Denmark. The overall
our commercial system and applying circular supply management municipal waste landfilled in the EU cut down by 69 million tonnes,
schemes will help to moderate the pressing problem of municipal waste from 121 million tonnes (over 286 kg/capita) in 1995 to 52 million
management [5,12]. In this scenario, this review aims to critically tonnes (117 kg/capita) in 2018 with a reduction of 57%. The volume of
evaluate and compare the thermal and biological process for bio-wastes waste conversion (material recycling as well as composting) increases
management. Comparative assessment of the technological advances, from 37 million tonnes (87 kg/capita) in 1995 to near 104 million
economics and life cycle assessment of these technologies was made tonnes (233 kg/capita) in 2018 at a typical annual increase of 4.2%. The
alongside future outlooks and upcoming challenges for a circular percentage of municipal waste recycled increased from 19% to 47%. The

2
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Fig. 1. Municipal waste generation rate in European and other countries, in kg/capita.

lowest municipal wastes were produced by Kosovo (178 kg/capita), with lesser emissions actions, it is likely to reduce significantly the
Romania (226 kg/capita) and Serbia (319 kg/capita) in the year of 2018 quantity of methane releases [23]. In India, the Swachh Bharat Mission
[16,17]. (Clean India) started in 2014 and the reviewed Solid Waste Management
The 35 countries included in the Organisation for Economic Co- Rules 2016 officially bind urban establishments to design, plan, imple­
operation and Development (OECD) nations produced over 44% of the ment and apply its management in the Indian framework [24]. The
entire MSW globally, this portion varies expressively, from over 56% of higher bio-waste portion, higher moisture percentage (30–60%) and
1
entire MSW in 2018, by means of an average of 27% and an annual lower calorific rate (800–1500 kcal x kg−ww , ww=wet weight) limit the
generation percentage of over 177 million ton. Only a limited portion of possible of conventional ignition for Indian bio-waste and support bio­
this quantity (37% in OECD nations, i.e. 66 million tonnes) is presently logical treatments, for example anaerobic digestion [25]. Of some 143,
sent to biological treatment facilities [1,18]. As per 2018 OECD-MSW 000 t MSW generated every day in India, 20–30% persist uncollected
statistics, the quantity of MSW generated exceeds an estimated 680 while the respite is regularly disposed in undeveloped dump sites or
million tonnes. An individual residing in the OECD countries produces poor landfills [24]. Consistent with the European biogas suggestion, 17,
on average about 525 kg of waste/year. On average, Europeans produce 376 biogas units and 459 biomethane plants are in action in Europe.
lesser amount of wastes (about 115 Kg) than individuals residing in the Source-divided local bio-waste is processed in 75 bio-waste assimilation
Americas (about 100 kg) which is more than a resident living in the plants in Germany with a whole capacity of 1.9 MT each year [26].
OECD Asia-Oceania region. It is predicted that worldwide, around 2
billion tonnes of municipal waste were produced in 2016 (around 270 2.1. Bio-waste as resource
kg/person) and this amount will continue to rise. The share of MSW
landfilled in the OECD countries has decreased to 42% in 2018, with Bio-waste is formed mostly from biomass and can therefore decom­
some countries no longer using landfills (Switzerland, Germany, Finland pose through aerobic and anaerobic environments. Managing bio-waste
Sweden, and Belgium) [16,17]. The total yearly rising of bio-waste in in a profitable manner is important to shield the environment while
the European Union (EU) is projected at 76.50–102 million tonnes (MT) enhancing the living standards. Consequently, assimilating it with
of garden and food waste comprised in mixed MSW and equal to 37 MT energy-generating technologies may support to resolve energy and
from the drink and food industry [14]. Poultry is the most eaten meat waste management difficulties while also creating an income. The
followed by pork in the entire world (14.99 and 16.02 kg/capita/year, different categories of bio-wastes are used for the production of
respectively) [19]. According to certified data of Statistical Office of the renewable energy, chemicals and biomaterials. These include woody
Republic of Serbia in 2016, it can be measured that yearly generation of biomass, agricultural waste, municipal waste, sewage sludge, algae and
chicken in Serbia was 9.31 × 107 kg, while consequence from slaugh­ aquatic plants (Ephraim et al., 2020). Furthermore, bio-wastes can be
terhouses is 6.88 × 107 kg, out of which 1.72 × 107 kg are treated in categorized according to their source and different approaches are
meat processing plants [19]. Most by-products resulting from meat essential for their pre-treatments and alteration into high-value products
(worldwide annual production 263 MT) and fish (worldwide annual as revealed in Fig. 2 [13].
production 128 MT) production business, e.g., skin, hair, bones, ma­
nures signify typically environmental material [20], though, their eco­ • Wood and forestry industry: waste produced during the collecting
nomic pressure has been assessed too [21]. In 2011, 9 MT of used of forestry wastes and that generated in forest timber-based in­
supplies ended up as bio-waste in Denmark. Of these, 9 MT, 61% was dustries (e.g., plywood, timber, and particle board);
managed, 29% combusted for collective heat and electricity making and • Food manufacturing waste: includes residues from facilities
6% ended up at landfills [9]. Considering another bio-waste, oranges are involved in vegetable manufacturing, beer making, and
a significant agronomic product cover 10.5% of the over-all world fruit confectionary;
production. Nearly 8–20 MT of bio-waste residue are produced annually • Paper industrial waste: where wood is altered to pulp using
by orange business internationally [14]. numerous chemical and mechanical approaches (alkaline: kraft or
In lower and intermediate-income countries settings, bio-waste sulfate; and acidic: sulfite);
spread around 50–70% of the entire waste generated; distinct the • Municipal solid waste: emanating mainly from households, in­
20–40% attained in higher income surroundings [15,22]. Consequently, stitutions and restaurants and usually managed by recycling,
if the discarding of bio-waste can be declined by deviation and treatment

3
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Fig. 2. An outline of potential source of biowaste, treatment options and its bio-products.

landfills, thermal and biological treatments and bio-waste combus­ • Bio-based specialty chemicals, usually used in incomplete quantities
tion methods for bioenergy recapture; for higher technological applications, which can be categorized as
• Animal processing waste: the meat processing business includes high worth (and low capacity) products;
mainly skin, hair, feathers, meat, bone and agro-food waste; • Biofuels (for example bio-methane and biogas), cellulose, bio-
plastics, and commodity chemicals, which can be categorized as
The biodegradable part of MSW (from now stated to as ‘bio-waste’) is average value (and medium capacity) products;
considerable (ca. 40–80% of whole weight), attracts insects, rodents and • Compost and solid digestate, produced over anaerobic and aerobic
is a substantial basis of methane (CH4) emissions [25]. In India, for digestion processes, correspondingly, which are measured as low
instance, waste is being accessed in enormous amounts which is now value (and higher capacity) products [18].
apparent as a valuable supply and believed to substitute fossil sources to
an excessive extent if appropriately exploited. Due to easy accessibility Application of bio-waste resources for making of activated carbon
and higher carbon-based content, bio-waste is being considered as the nanoparticles (ACNPs) will be a Waste-to-Wealth (WtW) method as they
potential resource for the future economic development [27]. The use of are low-cost, produces a lesser carbon dioxide amount and they show a
digested organic wastes to expand soil fertility and structure, in addition substantial part in industrial qualities [29]. Carbonaceous resources, for
to plant growth, has been extensively explored in the previous decades example bio-waste, should be slightly processed, with the uppermost
and is of increasing interest [28]. Bio-waste has been explored as fuels possible competence, then dumped. This means that the approaches of
for power production, heat production, and chemical production. co-gasification and gasification should be assumed to report the re­
Moreover, biomass can be altered to biofuels, for example bioethanol or quirements of energy and waste managing systems and to substitute, or
biodiesel [5]. This designates a huge possibility of resource recapture at least accompaniment, the co-combustion and combustion methods
from this bio-waste: presumptuous a complete capture proportion of [30]. Many nations (for example the US, Australia, Brazil, Germany,
70%, it can be assessed that a supplementary amount of about 58 France and Italy) have recognized commercial-level bioenergy genera­
MT/year could be directed to resource recapture, generating added tion units from diverse bio-wastes. The use of Bio-waste to energy (BtE)
worth products with numerous levels of interest. Important taxonomy technologies has been confirmed as a renewable method for generating
includes [1,18]: bioenergy and declining environmental impacts by reducing the

4
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

operation of fossil-dependent fuels [13]. shown in Fig. 4. Anaerobic digestion is the commercially established
biological conversion technology currently applied for biogas produc­
tion although other organic chemicals can be obtained. The thermo-
2.2. Significance of bio-waste treatments for sustainable energy and bio chemical adaptation technology, such as gasification, combustion, and
products pyrolysis, has numerous advantages like applicability to an extensive
range of feedstock, adaptation of both lignin and carbohydrate into high
A steady alteration from ‘direct fossil based’ to ‘circular bio-based’ value-added products, faster response rates, and the capability to yield
budget is gaining noteworthy consideration. As sustainability is an diverse fuels [11]. The fresh gas produced in bio-waste gasification is
imperative element, lessening the usage of fossil sources gives major still mainly utilized in ignition for power generation in condensation
importance [27]. There is a continuing economic predicament in turbines [30]. Moreover, there are numerous attractive features asso­
numerous EU nations while the major method of waste treatment and ciated to biomass incineration and pyrolysis, such as low temperature
management is still landfilling, establishes a significant problem for necessities, flexibility to a wide diversity of feedstock and the option of
reaching legally-binding goals set by the EU regulation. The detail also, resulting in numerous functioning products from characteristic waste
that the EU has set a 7% cap on biofuels generation from food harvests in streams. Consequently, the pyrolysis of bio-wastes establishes an
transportation fuels, obliges associate states to use substitute resources applied, effective, and sustainable means of creating large amounts of
with the intention to reach the targets decided. The already standing renewable bioenergy while concurrently reducing releases of green­
technologies, in numerous cases, need additional optimization while house gases and extra pollutants [11]. These treatment technologies are
they are incapable to manage bio-waste because of the fact that the raw discussed in the following sections.
materials will biodegrade, losing serious substances, if not managed on
time. Furthermore, many bio-waste handling processes used nowadays
are measured to be complex, difficult and need to be optimized [2]. 3.1. Biochemical conversion technologies
Waste management strategies in European nations (and other techno­
logically advanced nations) have since focused on dropping the quantity 3.1.1. Biogas platform
of bio-waste landfilled [7]. The European Commission has started a Biogas refers to a gas mixture that mainly consists of CH4 (40–60%)
public discussion about emerging a sustainability strategy for and CO2 (60-40%). Depending on the conditions of the anaerobic
bio-wastes, where the final-use competence of converting them into heat digestion process, biogas may also contain small amounts of compo­
and bioelectricity or, as a substitute, generating liquid, solid and gaseous nents, also regarded as impurities, such as NH3, H2, CO, N2, H2S, O2 and
energies as a way of waste management is a fundamental issue. In this volatile organic compounds (VOC). Wet bio-wastes are the preferable
way, bio-waste may be transformed into required, higher value-added substrates for anaerobic digestion that utilizes naturally-occurring mi­
products mostly by biochemical (using enzymes and/or microbes) and croorganisms to breakdown the organic components in four complex
thermo-chemical (by means of heat power with or lacking of chemical inter-dependent segments; hydrolysis, acidogenesis with acetogenesis
catalysts) means [11]. and then methanogenesis [31]. Among these stages, hydrolysis is the
rate-limiting stage in which hydrolytic enzymes solubilize complex
3. Bio-waste treatment technologies polymers to simpler monomers [32]. As discussed earlier, some of the
most abundant bio-wastes are recalcitrant and hence in order to speed
Bio-wastes can be utilized as feed stocks for generating energy as well up the hydrolysis process, pre-treatment strategies are performed on the
as synthesizing a variety of essential products by using different con­ substrate either physically, chemically, and biologically to enable easy
version pathway (Fig. 3). The two major routes for this utilization is the access of the microbes to the available nutrients [33,34]. Acidogens then
biological breakdown using microorganisms or thermal conversion as utilize the resulting hydrolysates and rapidly convert them into

Fig. 3. Systematic view of biowaste conversion pathway, products and its applications. (Adapted and modified [11]).

5
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Fig. 4. Flowchart and system boundary of the anaerobic digestion system.

hydrogen, carbon dioxide and soluble compounds such as alcohols and 37]. These are included the theoretical methane yield from different
short chain carboxylic acids, commonly documented as volatile fatty bio-waste (429 ml CH4/gVS from food waste, 0.16–0.35 m3/kgVS from
acids. In the succeeding step, acetogens convert hydrogen and carbon fruit and vegetable waste, 0.20–0.50 m3/kgVS from slaughterhouse
dioxide into acetic acid at preferably low hydrogen partial pressures waste, 474.41 ml/gVS from Food waste, 488.34 ml/gVS from Vegetable
[34]. In the final step, the methanogens use the metabolites of the pre­ waste, 701.15 ml/gVS from sewage sludge, 544,05 ml CH4/g VS from
vious steps for conversion into biogas either via the methylotrophic, CO2 chicken litter, 641,88 ml CH4/g VS from Swine solids, 551,41 ml CH4/g
reduction or aceticlastic pathway [35]. Several theoretical methane VS from beef feedlot, 414 ml CH4 g− 1VS from starch, 414 ml CH4 g− 1VS
yields from various organic wastes have been specified in Table 1 [36, from cellulose) [38–40].
Some of commercialized application areas for biogas have been the
production of heat and electricity [33]. In applications for which the
Table 1
biogas is to replace natural gas, such as a transport fuel and in the
Theoretical methane yield of selected materials.
chemical industry, an upgrading step is very critical [33,35]. This en­
Year Organic materials Theoretical Other value-added References sures that unwanted impurities enumerated earlier are eliminated as
Methane yield products
they may pose health hazards, diminish the gas energy density and
2020 Food waste 429 ml CH4/ Carbohydrates: [40] reduce the efficiency of the application devices. The available biogas
gVS 9.60%
upgrading methods include membrane separation, water scrubbing,
Proteins: 6.79%
Lipids: 5.30% pressure swing absorption, chemical adsorption and more recently
2018 Fruit and 0.16–0.35 m3/ Protein: [38] biological methane enrichment. The biological methane enrichment is a
vegetable waste kgVS 10.5–17.8% low-cost and climate-smart method that would effectively utilize the
Lipids: 0.8–5.2% available impurities for microbial growth and functioning [35].
2018 Slaughterhouse 0.20–0.50 m3/ Carbohydrate: [38]
Recently, there has been interest in using CH4 as a feedstock for
waste kgVS 0–27.7%
Protein: biosynthesis of other eco-friendly products. One such product is biode­
2.0–38.9% gradable biopolymers, polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHA), and using meth­
Lipids: 1–40.5% anotrophs such as Methylocystis hirsuta, Methylosinus trichosporium and
2018 Dairy waste 0.1–0.85 m3/ Carbohydrate: [38]
Methylocystis sp [38,39]. Indeed, a life cycle assessment has suggested
kgVS 3–43.8
Protein: 1.4–33.5 that not only can methane reduce the feedstock burden for a
Lipids: 0.1–11.6 waste-derived biopolymer but also reduce the production energy de­
2018 Food waste 474.41 ml/gVS NR [41] mand when part of the available methane is diverted for energy pro­
Vegetable waste 488.34 ml/gVS duction [40].
Sewage sludge 701.15 ml/gVS
Despite the benefits brought about by anaerobic digestion technol­
2016 Chicken litter 544,05 ml CO2, NH3 and H2S [39]
CH4/g VS ogy through biogas production from bio-wastes, some technical, eco­
2016 Swine solids 641,88 ml CO2, NH3 and H2S [39] nomic, and social challenges still exist that hinder its extensive
CH4/g VS application [37]. Research is therefore being conducted to solve some of
2016 Beef feedlot 551,41 ml CO2, NH3 and H2S [39]
these challenges. For instance, some investigations have revealed that
CH4/g VS
2011 Starch 414 ml CH4 NR [42]
co-digesting two or more types of waste in the same vessel provide
g− 1VS positive synergistic effects that not only increase the biogas yields but
2011 Cellulose 414 ml CH4 NR [42] also improve the quality of the effluent. The process improvement is
g− 1VS attributed to the better balance of nutrients, enhanced
2011 Gelatine 433 ml CH4 NR [42]
carbon-to-nitrogen (C/N) ratio, reduction of potentially toxic com­
g− 1VS
2011 Mung Bean 434 ml CH4 NR [42] pounds and increased organic content [41]. Moreover, co-digestion
g− 1VS enables higher organic loadings in the bioreactor and hence more

6
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

waste reduction in addition to enabling easier handling of already maintain optimum pH conditions, in addition to preventing possible
existing organic mixtures [41,42]. Another process improvement strat­ microbial inhibition caused by the carboxylic acids. Besides VFAs, other
egy has been the anaerobic dry digestion in which the total solids con­ important chemicals that can also be synthesized as intermediates dur­
tent is 20% (w/w). Some key benefits of this strategy compared to the ing anaerobic digestion include lactic acid and alcohols (e.g. ethanol)
conventional wet digestion are reduced demand for agitation, low water [51,54]. The lactic acid can be utilized for manufacture of biodegradable
requirements, saving in reactor volume and lower energy input for plastics while ethanol is a suitable renewable fuel substitute [58].
heating due to a reduced operating volume. Moreover, dry digestion Indeed, some operating parameters, such as pH and type of substrate,
enables the application of readily available dry organic residues [43]. can be optimized for enhanced production of lactate from waste acidi­
Table 2 provides the performance of some biogas production systems at fication [58,59]. Regarding the production of ethanol, very low con­
diverse scales. centrations are obtained in mixed culture fermentations. However, as
described by Ref. [60], improved yields of ethanol from a number of
3.1.2. Carboxylate platform bio-wastes can be achieved through strategies such as enzymatic
The anaerobic digestion technology can also be applied for produc­ saccharification (which can be performed by enzymes such as Tricho­
tion of intermediate metabolites, namely volatile fatty acids (VFAs), derma reesei) followed by fermentation using single microorganisms
consisting between 2- to 6-carbon short-chain aliphatic carboxylic acids. such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Clostridium thermocellum.
These VFAs are presently formed from petroleum sources [44].
Compared to the biogas platform, VFAs have a wider range of applica­ 3.2. Thermochemical conversion of biowaste
tions and therefore form a rapidly growing multibillion-dollar industry
[45,46]. In particular, the distinct carboxylic acids can be applied as 3.2.1. Combustion
building blocks in industrial processes such as manufacturing of latex Among the thermo-chemical conversion technologies, incineration
paints using acetic acid, food additives using propionic acid, perfumes of bio-wastes is the most widespread [61]. It comprises of a controlled
using butyric acids, high-energy fuels using valeric acid and lubricating combustion procedure in which the resulting heat is often applied for
grease using caproic acid. Moreover, the acid mixture can also be uti­ turning steam turbines to generate electricity and/or for heat ex­
lized in a number of bioprocesses that provide a sustainable route for changers either for industry or district heating. There is huge potential
fulfilling the criteria for circular economy. These bioprocesses include for generation of electricity using this technology. For instance, it has
synthesis of biodegradable plastics [47], biological removal of nitrogen been estimated power generation by municipal solid waste incineration
and phosphorous in wastewater treatment plants [48], production of plants in China in 2020 would reach up to 3.3 GW [62]. In addition to
mixed alcohols [49] and biodiesel [50]. the energy recovery that minimizes the dependence on fossil-based re­
The current short chain fatty acids are derived from petroleum re­ sources, a reduction of up to 85% in bio-waste volumes can be achieved
sources. Considering, the possibility of synthesizing VFAs into the using incinerators along with destroying potential pathogens [63,64].
essential high value materials, VFAs are key components in creating a Some organic residuals found in MSW streams, such as food wastes,
circular using bio-wastes. Several researches have consequently been contain high levels of moisture and inert components. These two qual­
conducted to identify the optimum process conditions for production of ities can reduce the calorific value of the residues in addition to unfav­
VFAs from bio-wastes. Considering food wastes, some researchers agree ourable tilting the energy balance of the incineration process due to the
that pH and temperature ranges of 6.0–7.0 and 35–40 ◦ C, respectively, pre-drying stage needed to evaporate the water. One of the possible
are ideal for biosynthesis of VFAs [50–52]. Other factors that may in­ routes to thermally treat such residuals is by co-combusting with other
fluence the process performance in terms of the product yield and drier materials that could potentially enhance the net energy recovery
product distribution include the substrate-to- microorganism ratio, the along with mitigating the ecological burden of the untreated organics.
organic loading rate, hydraulic retention time, substrate composition The pre-drying of the wet residues could be also be achieved by the use
and oxidation reduction potential (ORP) [44,53,54]. of heat losses from the incinerator.
Indeed, large scale bio-waste based VFA processes using the anaer­ Some of the drawbacks of incinerating bio-wastes are the resulting
obic digestion technology would benefit from already existing infra­ toxic SOx dioxin emissions dioxins and generation of ash laden with
structure. However, in order to make VFAs utilizable in the downstream heavy metals [64]. Moreover, some materials that could act as feed­
processes, a recovery and/or purification procedure is required. The stocks for incineration plants contain nitrogen can potentially be con­
recovery strategies that have been applied include adsorption [55], verted to NOx emissions, which would demand sophisticated
electro-dialysis [56] and liquid-liquid taking out [31]. Moreover, with gas-cleaning equipment [65]. Additionally, bio-wastes have been asso­
the aim of scaling up waste-based VFA process, an immersed membrane ciated with elevated heavy metal emissions as well as acidification of the
bioreactor that is easy to operate, compact and containing robust flue gases [62,66]. Moreover, high investment costs are incurred for
membrane cleaning capabilities has been developed [57]. The providing the necessary initial capital in addition to the high expendi­
mentioned bioreactor not only enabled continuous recovery of VFAs ture for operating the incineration plants [15].
from a fermentation medium containing high suspended solids from a
considerably long period but also circumvented the chemicals needed to

Table 2
Performance of aerobic digestion systems for production of biogas.
Biowaste type Feeding mode OLR a HRT (d)b Temp. (oC) CH4 yield Reference

Sewage sludge Batch – – 50 566 mL/g VS [151]

Food waste Batch – – 55 220 mL/g VS [152]
Food waste + cow manure Semi-continuous 10 g VS/L/d – 35 317 mL/g VS [153]
Food waste + garden waste Continuous 2.5 kg VS/m3/d 80 42 402 m3/ton VS [154]
Slaughterhouse waste Continuous 7.02 kg TS/m3/d 2 35 0.21 m3/kg VS [155]
Sewage sludge + fruit waste Semi-continuous 1.2 g VS/L/d 20 37 0.23 L/g VS [156]
Cellulose-rich paper waste Batch – – 37 210 mL/g VS [157]
#
Solids retention time.
a
Organic loading rate
b
Hydraulic retention time.

7
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

3.2.2. Pyrolysis processing is also conducted in the presence of catalysts under moderate
Pyrolysis of bio-wastes, especially lignocelluloses, has been proposed temperature (300–400 ◦ C) and pressurized hydrogen in which oxygen is
as an alternative to incineration to circumvent some of the drawbacks removed in the form of H2O and CO2 [67,68]. Emulsification occurs
connected to incineration. Unlike combustion, the pyrolysis process between two immiscible solutions in which the condensations of one
takes place when the organic material is placed under the higher tem­ point are captured within a sheet of other with adequate agitation in the
peratures under anaerobic environment, such as briefly described in existence of emulsifying substance. Popular emulsification procedures
Tables 3 and 5. As a result, the organic material is converted mainly to have been conducted to generate bio-oil/biodiesel emulsions that have
biochar, bio-oil and pyrolysis gas consisting of varying amounts of CO2, superior properties as transportation fuel relative to the individual
CO, CH4, H2, C2H6 and C2H4. Some of the commercialized pyrolysis compounds with the aid of emulsifiers such as Tween 60, Span 80 and
products include active carbon, industrial solvents, bio-chemicals or octanol [71,72]. On the other hand, the steam reforming is normally an
even biofuels [62,67,68]. The conventional pyrolysis process is an irreversible process that applies steam with the help of catalysts at
irreversible and slow degradation of the organic material (heating rate elevated temperatures to convert hydrocarbons to H2and CO via water
of 0.1–1 K/s, residence time of 450–550 s and at temperatures in the gas shift and methanation reactions [73].
range of 550–950 K) and is normally applied for production of biochar. The biochars characterisation is revealed high exterior zone (115 m2
The applied temperature highly influences the biochar formation that g− 1) and regions of calcium organic accumulation. The biochars varied
consists of residue organic solid as well as several inorganic substances. somewhat in their liming standards (33% and 29%), and carbon
On the other hand, to attain high productivity of liquid products, the contented (50% and 52%). Molar H/C proportions of 0.30 in the bio­
material undergoes fast pyrolysis (heating rate of 10–200 K/s, residence chars recommended aromatic steadiness. A utilization rates of 10 t ha− 1
time of 0.5–10 s and at temperatures between 850 and 1250 K) or flash in a ferrosol individually biochars suggestively amplified pH, redeem­
pyrolysis (heating rate above 1000 K/s, residence time of ˂0.5 s and at able Ca and whole C, while in a calcarosol individually biochars
temperatures between 1050 and 1300 K) [69,70]. The liquid may amplified C while biochar two also augmented redeemable potassium.
contain a variety of compounds such as phenols, ketones, acids, esters, Biochars condensed Al accessibility (ca. 2 cmol (+) kg− 1 to <0.10 cmol
alcohols and aldehydes [70]. (+) kg− 1) in the ferrosol [74]. Some researcher has observed the
The liquid product of pyrolysis, also known as bio-oil, may be applied chemical configuration of the volatile complexes formed through the
directly as a fuel or as an additive to fossil-based fuels. However, in its pyrolysis of sugarcane straw [75]. The pyrolysis could be directed in a
raw form, the quality of the bio-oil is not optimized for such applications straight up furnace via a quartz vessel at a temperature of 700 ◦ C. The
due its thermal instability, potential corrosiveness and high viscosity. account of bio-oil for GC × GC/TOFMS is essential for a greater
Consequently, several techniques to upgrade the bio-oil have been considerate of the conformation of the bio-oil, once the sample are
established, including catalytic cracking, hydro-processing, emulsifica­ composed by a complex blend of chemical compounds. Other investigate
tion and steam reforming. In summary, catalytic cracking involves the revealed that the most extreme oil yield of over 40% was gotten at the
use of catalysts for removal of oxygen (in the form of CO, CO2 or H2O) correct pyrolysis conditions. The ideal yield (>40%) of pyrolysis oil can
via de-carbonylation, decarboxylation or dehydration reactions. Hydro- be accomplished at the pyrolysis temperature of >500 ◦ C, temperature

Table 3
Characteristics and performance of selected thermo-chemical conversion processes.
Thermochemical Biowaste type Pyrolysis device/gasifier Operating conditions Performance Reference
process

Pyrolysis Microcrystalline cellulose, Eight-spot fixed bed reactor Temperature 450 ◦ C with and without Bio oil in the range of [67]
xylan, lignin and the potassium carbonate or zinc 26–45 wt%
polypropylene chloride as a catalyst
Softwood residue Thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) 600 ◦ C at a constant heating rate of 20 Bio-oil/biodiesel ratio of [72]
with TGA/DSC, SDT Q600, TA C/min under nitrogen, at a flow of 30 4:6 by volume
◦

Instruments mL/min.
Sugar cane straw Quartz pyrolysis reactor consisting of Temp.= 800 ◦ C Bio-oil yield= 23.9% [162]
a vertical furnace Heating rate= 60 ◦ C/min
Paper mill waste Pilot slow-pyrolysis unit Max. temp= 550 ◦ C Heating rate= Bio-char yield= 32% [163]
5–10 ◦ C/min
Rice husk Fixed-bed fast pyrolysis reactor Max. temp= 800 ◦ C Max. calorific value of [164]
Heating rate =100–500 ◦ C/min bio-oil = 1820 kcal/kg
Max. calorific value of
bio-char = 5089 kcal/kg
Municipal solid waste Thermogravimetry (TGA) instrument Max. temp= 600 ◦ C Heating rate= Higher heating value [165]
10 ◦ C/min between 22.8 and 47 MJ/
kg
Gasification Food waste Lab scale gasifier Temp.= 900 ◦ C Hydrogen yied ~ 1.6 g [166]
Gasifying agent: steam Syngas flow rate= 7.6 g/
min
Municipal solid waste Fixed-bed gasifier Max. Temp.= 900 ◦ C Carbon conversion [167]
efficiency (wt%) =
90.37%
Olive kernels Fixed-bed gasifier Max. Temp.= 950 ◦ C Lower heating value of [168]
Gasifying agent: air produced gas = 8.60 MJ/
Nm3
Olive tree cuttings Fixed-bed gasifier Max. Temp.= 950 ◦ C Lower heating value of [169]
Gasifying agent: air produced das = 9.41 MJ/
Nm3
Palm trunk waste Batch gasification reactor Temp.= 800 oCGasifying agent: steam Apparent thermal [170]
efficiency = 110%
Wood and straw waste Laboratory scale atmospheric Reaction temperature from 1000 ◦ C to Yield 56.7 g/kg fuel [80]
pressure entrained flow reactor 1350 ◦ C

8
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

rate of >200 ◦ C/min, holding time of >2 min, condensation temperature instance, the fixed bed gasifiers display high thermal efficiency while the
of <¡10 ◦ C and molecule estimate of <0.50 mm [76]. A thermogravi­ fluidized bed gasifiers exhibit excellent mixing capabilities [82]. The
metric examination counting assurance of active parameters are per­ entrained flow gasifiers are associated with high carbon conversion
formed at a consistent heating rate of 10 ◦ C/min in a dormant while plasma gasifiers produce high quality syngas due to the destruc­
environment. The plastics polystyrene, polypropylene, low-density tion of tars [20,88]. Certain bio-wastes such as food residues that make
polyethylene and high-density polyethylene were all demonstrated as up a significant portion of MSW (on volume basis), contain high mois­
single responses depicting the corruption of hydrocarbon polymers. The ture levels (on weight basis). Due to the accompanying low heating
cellulosic division of MSW was demonstrated as a set of three autono­ value, these types of wastes are inappropriate for traditional gasification
mous parallel reactions portraying the degradation of hemicellulose, processes. Some of the approaches have been developed to improve the
cellulose and lignin, with normal enactment energies of 111, 244 and 43 gasification conditions of such abundant wet organic materials include
kJ/mol, separately [77]. co-gasification with other drier organic materials in appropriate por­
Gasification is more useful than pyrolysis based on examined tions such as wood [89] as well as application of hydrothermal gasifi­
criteria, but longer time is required to wrap up the gasification process. cation [90]. Characteristics of syngas from the gasification of food waste
Inorganic constituents of food char were found to have a catalytic have been examined at two particular higher temperatures of 800 and
impact. Char reactivity expanded with expanded degree of trans­ 900 ◦ C. Longer time of gasification is ascribed to moderate responses
formation. Within the change extend from 0.1 to 0.9 the increment in between the remaining char and gasifying operator. Thus, the char
reactivity was went with by an increment in pre-exponential figure gasification energy was explored. Char reactivity expanded with
(Fig. 7), which recommended an increment in gasifying specialist expanded degree of transformation [75]. Gasification took place with
adsorption rate to char surface. In other case, within the transformation air, in a temperature run of 750–950 ◦ C, for different air proportionality
run from 0.93 to 0.98 the increment in reactivity was gone by dimin­ proportions (0.14–0.42) and beneath climatic pressure. In each run, the
ishing activation vitality [78]. Syngas generation from pyrolysis of MSW most components of the gas stage where CO, CO2, H2 and CH4. It was
shifted within the run of 47–67 mol%. The comes about demonstrated found that gas from olive tree cuttings at 950 ◦ C and with an air pro­
that the nearness of calcined dolomite impacted enormously the item portionality ratio of 0.42 had the next LHV (9.41 MJ/Nm3) in compar­
yields and gas composition in pyrolysis handle, and uncovered critical ison to olive bits (8.60 MJ/Nm3) [76]. A batch gasifier has been utilized
catalytic execution on expanding gas abdicate and diminishing oil yield to look at the syngas characteristics from gasification of palm trunk
and char abdicate compared to non-catalytic handle. In the interim, waste utilizing steam as the gasifying specialist. Reactor temperature
syngas from MSW pyrolysis is exceedingly desirable as feedstock for was settled at 800 ◦ C. Oil palm trunk waste yielded more syngas, vitality
Fischer–Tropsch blend for the generation of transportation energy, and hydrogen than that from other sorts of biomass such as mangrove
moreover can be straightforwardly utilized as an MHV fuel with lower wood, paper and food waste [77]. The conditions and performance of
warming esteem of 13.87 MJ/N m3 [79]. Saraeian et al. [80] results some bio-waste gasification systems are summarized in Table 3.
appeared that gasification with air at higher temperatures (950 ◦ C)
favoured gas yields. Syngas generation expanded with reactor temper­ 3.3. Hybrid/integrated thermochemical-biological process
ature, whereas CO2, CH4, light hydrocarbons and tar taken after the
inverse drift. It was found that gas from olive tree cuttings at 950 ◦ C and Hybrid/integrated biorefineries process refer to biorefineries that
with an air comparability proportion of 0.42 had a better LHV (9:41 utilize a combination of forms to change over biomass into warm and/or
MJ=Nm3) in comparison to olive kernels (8:60 MJ=Nm3). Gasification power, fills and/or chemicals [91]. Hybrid/integrated
of oil palm trunk has been inspected in a bunch reactor utilizing steam as thermo-chemical-biological handling includes a few biorefineries gen­
the gasifying operator at a reactor temperature of 800 ◦ C. Nearly 50% of eration pathways [92]. There are two unmistakable approaches ordi­
the syngas is delivered amid the first 5 min. The results showed that narily utilized for hybrid handling: (a) gasification taken after by
there is over 60% increase in hydrogen production with steam gasifi­ maturation and (b) quick pyrolysis taken after by hydrolysis and/or
cation as compared to that with pyrolysis [81]. aging [93]. In common, hybrid handling includes a wide combination of
natural, warm, and/or catalytic forms. Wen and Jarboe [94] focussed on
3.2.3. Gasification the arrangement of thermo-chemical deconstruction of biomass taken
An emerging thermo-chemical treatment of bio-waste involves after by biochemical updating to last products. Two noticeable illus­
gasification process that applies high temperatures (approximately trations of hybrid thermochemical-biochemical preparing are quick
1073–1273 K for lignocelluloses) and a limited oxidizing agent resulting pyrolysis of biomass into pyrolytic substrates taken after by microbial
in a combustible gas containing primarily of CO and H2 (syngas). After a aging and gasification of biomass into blend gas (syngas) taken after by
series of complex reactions, the gaseous product may also comprise of syngas fermentation. On the other hand, thermo-chemical handling of
moisture, CO2, CH4, H2S, NH3 and N2 [15,20,57,82]. Moreover, the biomass by quick pyrolysis gives a non-enzymatic course for depoly­
process conditions can be designed to influence the quality of the gas for merization of biomass into sugars that can be utilized for the natural
a defined application such as energy generation using internal com­ generation of powers and chemicals [95]. By employing a
bustion engines as well as synthesis of a varied range of bio-products thermo-chemical degradation step (like pyrolysis or gasification), taken
[83–85]. The gasification progression can be largely considered as after by a biochemical change step, the utilization of the biomass feed­
either indirect or direct. The former takes place when the feedstock is stock, and the generation of the required items, is significantly
moderately oxidized to maintain the required temperature levels. The increased. These characteristics make the two-platform biorefinery
latter, however, requires an additional energy source and an indirect maybe the foremost coordinates plan. The modelled handle comprises of
gasification agent (usually steam) [82]. The use of steam has also been a gasification unit, an aging unit, and a downstream handling unit. The
useful in overcoming the challenges of tar and char formation in addi­ gasification unit was based on an Auger gasifier. It has recognized dry­
tion to selective production of H2 [15]. Compared to the other thermal ing, pyrolysis, and combustion zones. This permits for a tight control of
conversion process, gasification is associated with minimal hazardous how much feedstock carbon is changed over into char. The fermentation
emissions as well as greater flexibility to the feedstock that can be used module was modelled in Aspen Plus with the use of a stoichiometric
[86]. reactor. The reactor operates at ambient pressure and 37 ◦ C with Ace­
Several gasifier designs have been explored with diverse kinds of togenic bacteria, like Clostridium ljungdahlii, Clostridium carboxidivorans,
operating conditions include fixed bed, fluidized bed, entrained flow and Alkalibaculum bacchi [96].
and plasma gasifiers [15,87]. The selection of the mentioned gasifier A novel hyphenated Pyrolysis-Anaerobic Digestion model (Py-AD)
designs is based on the performance of the individual designs. For was tried by Torri et al. [97] in arrange to assess the potential of hybrid

9
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

thermo-chemical natural prepare to create methane from woody Pt/Al2O3 catalyst, obtaining a H2 yield of up to 35%.
biomass. A wood screw halfway pyrolyzer was specifically coupled to It was worth noting that syngas fermentation has been widely
two natural reactors optimized for the absorption of leftover condens­ explored compared to the fermentation of bio-oil probably due to the
able compounds and gas created by pyrolysis of softwood. The comes availability of a wide range of wild autotrophic single microbes and
about from Py-AD and those from tests with bench-scale pyrolysis and natural mixed microbial consortia that can be readily utilized for
aging reactors examination given data on the generally execution of the bioconversion of the gas. The possible metabolic pathways during gas
Py-AD and mass and vitality adjust based on chemical oxygen demand. fermentation include hydroxyl-propionic acid cycle, reductive acetyl-
Pre-processing with air classification, taken after by a hybrid CoA pathway and reductive Calvin-Benson-Bassham cycles which
biochemical/thermo-chemical change conspire, was utilized to move were well described [88]. The application of biocatalysts for conversion
forward the quality of short revolution woody coppice (SRWC) for of bio-oil and syngas into high value chemicals has several benefits
biofuels generation. Pyrolysis of biochemical change lignin wealthy compared to their metal counterparts notwithstanding the low response
build up gives fluid yields comparable to entire tree (without any frac­ rates and potential toxicity [78,103,104]. Some of these benefits include
tionation) pyrolysis, with a better-quality oil that has ~ 60% diminished the potential savings in the energy and capital cost due to operation at
add up to corrosive number. Utilizing this combined relatively low temperature and pressure conditions. The use of bio­
biochemical/thermo-chemical transformation methodology can move catalysts also reduces the requirement for extensive cleaning of the
forward yields of fermentable sugars and pyrolysis fluid over 80%, gaseous substrate in the case of syngas since microbes have higher
rather than the 60% abdicate of sugars or bio-oil when employing a tolerance to foreign compounds (e.g. H2S) relative to the metal catalysts
single change technique [98]. Michailos et al. [99] developed another that can easily get poisoned. In addition, unlike the chemical conversion
Aspen Plus model of a syngas fermentation process, but modelled the process, biocatalysts do not need a strict ratio of the gas components for
gasifier as a circulating fluidized bed reactor and used a Continuous optimum performance. Lastly, the high enzymatic specificity of partic­
Stirred-tank Reactor (CSTR) reactor for the fermentation process. The ular species can lead to biosynthesis of specific end products which
considered acetogenic bacterium was C. ljungdahlii, which converts, would reduce the purification requirements in the downstream stages
respectively, 70 and 50% of the CO and H2 present in the syngas to [105].
ethanol. Hybrid processing remains an attractive approach for advanced The fermentation of bio-oil entails the utilization of inherent sugar
biofuels and bio-based products because of the robustness of compounds such as levoglucosan for synthesizing bio-based fuels and
thermo-chemical deconstruction of biomass and opportunities to chemicals. Although the yield of levoglucosan after biomass pyrolysis
improve fermentation of the resulting substrates through advances in can be low, it can be improved by measures such as cation removal and
biotechnology. Research directed toward these challenges in concert intermittent collection of the bio-oil. Some of important products that
with growing demand for low-carbon fuels and bio-based products will have been synthesized from levoglucosan include itaconic acid using
improve the commercial prospects of hybrid processing in the coming Aspergillus terreus K26, citric acid using Aspergillus niger CBX 209 and
years [94]. ethanol using Saccharomyces cerevisiae [86,94]. Other microorganisms
belonging to the genus Clostridium have been explored for fermentation
4. Perspectives and challenges of combined thermal and of the syngas constituents such as Clostridium ragsdalei (ethanol), Clos­
biological treatment tridium ljungdahlii (acetate, and ethanol) and Clostridium carboxidivorans
(butyrate, butanol, and hexanol) [89,106–108]. Syngas
The separate treatments of bio-waste (either biological or thermo- bio-methanation is perhaps the most robust utilization of microbes for
chemical) as well as the transformation of the syngas and the bio-oil syngas conversion due to the application of mixed microbial consortium
resulting from these treatments for actual application have been well that perform numerous complex biochemical reactions for production of
studied, developed and some have been commercialized [83,84]. The biogas, similar to those performed during anaerobic digestion described
Fischer-Tropsch synthesis method is an example of an established pro­ earlier, and can therefore lead to other bio-products such as acetate and
cessing technique that utilizes metals catalysts (e.g. Fe and Co) to propionate [109]. Mixed microbial consortia adapt easily to the oper­
convert syngas into products such as butane, ethene, diesel, methane ating conditions and possess higher tolerance to harsh conditions such as
and methanol at elevated temperatures (475–625 K) and pressures gas impurities compared to pure cultures [110]. From a bioprocess
(15–40 bar) [76]. However, hybrid systems that combine the operation viewpoint, bioconversion of syngas into methane-rich biogas can be an
elements of both thermo-chemical and biological treatments are rela­ appropriate technique to treat unsorted municipal solid wastes and
tively new and are drawing considerable attention attributable to the other hard-to-degrade carbon-based constituents. The use of a two-stage
potential economic and ecological advantages. This section highlights process (initial acetate production that was then converted into methane
the recently documented capabilities, breakthroughs and challenges of in separate reactors) and cell encapsulation in a reverse membrane
hybrid systems that employ microbes as catalysts for such conversions. bioreactor are some advances aimed at removing potential inhibitors to
methanogens and improving the rate of syngas bio-methanation,
4.1. Integrated bio-waste biorefineries respectively [91,111].
Despite the promising potential of the hybrid thermochemical-
Various bio-wastes can be treated using integrated biorefinery sys­ biological processes, one key bottleneck remains the mass transfer of
tems that utilize both thermo-chemicals as well as biological processes. the gaseous substrate to the cells through the liquid medium that causes
One of the options is applying pyrolysis or gasification as the initial step the cell concentration to rise above the level of the available gaseous
followed by a fermentation of the resultant liquid or gas to obtain substrate [57,85,88,112,113]. Some of the suggested solutions to the
products such as ethanol, methane, hydrogen, butanol and acetic acid mass transfer challenge include increasing the rate of agitation in a
[85,100]. Alternatively, as demonstrated in a recent study, a hybrid regular continuously stirred reactor although this increases the energy
system can be created by combining the methane formed from anaerobic demand and might also damage the cells [112,114]. As an alternative
digestion of food waste with the end product of wood chips gasification [113], proposed the use of a monolithic biofilm reactor that improved
to form a blended gaseous product with enhanced energy density [101]. the CO and H2 consumption rate by 56.6% and 26.7% respectively
Another hybrid process suitable for food and agricultural processing relative to a bubble column reactor during ethanol fermentation. A study
residues that utilized the advantages of biological and thermal treat­ by Worden et al. [112], on the other hand, suggested the application of a
ments of wastes while minimizing their individual drawbacks was pro­ reverse membrane bioreactor in which the cell density in the bioreactor
posed by Ref. [102]. It involved the synthesis of organic acids and was increased by encapsulation strategy with the aid of hydrophilic
ethanol from the bio-waste followed by aqueous phase reforming using a membrane sachets, resulting in a maximum methane production rate of

10
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

186.0 mL/L/d compared to 106.3 mL/L/d by non-encased cells. canola oil was cheaper under super-critical conditions than alkali/acid
catalysed pre-treatment. The break-even price of alkali/acid catalysed
pre-treatment was 0.762 $/l; the difference in break-even price under
4.2. Techno-economic feasibility analysis of integrated bio-waste these two conditions were 0.13 $/l. This difference resulted in addi­
treatment and management tional 5-years to recover the investment [110]. This shows that it is
critical to look at the possibility to reduce every cent possible for a
Techno-economic analysis highlights the feasibility of waste treat­ process to be economically feasible. European markets report the bio­
ment systems in industrial scale. Bio-waste treatment faces the diesel price at 0.8 $/l. When vegetable oil was used as a feedstock, the
commercialization hurdles globally due to its economic feasibility. The production cost of biodiesel could be decreased to 0.767 $/l. A major
support of government policies and incentives plays a vital role in the share of the production costs is accrued due to raw materials (~85%)
realization of waste treatment industry. In addition, the demand and [111]. This indicates that the selection of cost-effective feed-stock is
market for a product determine the type of technology to be used. necessary to bring down the price of biodiesel production. The shares of
investment between transesterification and purification sections were
4.2.1. Anaerobic digestion 41% and 59% respectively. To bring down the production costs of bio­
Anaerobic digestion is the utmost favourable technology to treat diesel, the cost in purification steps needs to be reduced [114]. In
biological wastes. Biological wastes with high-moisture will be first addition, the choice of solvent during purification increases the pro­
processed through AD followed by incineration. Many developed duction cost of biodiesel. When hexane was used instead of methanol,
countries adopt this methodology for energy recovery and efficiency the purification costs were increased by 50% in biodiesel production
purposes. Food waste AD plants require 300 €/(t/a) as capital invest­ [115].
ment, whereas the operational expenses (OPEX) lies in the range of 80
€/(t/a). If carbon capture is included alongside AD, then the capital 4.2.3. Incineration
investment increases to 500 €/(t/a) and the OPEX could be doubled Incineration is preferred in western countries because heat can be
[106]. Of currently available bio-waste treatment technologies, AD is used as a valuable product. In Japan, incineration accounts for greater
one of the few technologies that is economically feasible. This is due to than two-thirds for bio-waste treatment. This is due to the lesser land
the gate-fees attracted from organic wastes to avoid landfilling. AD of availability. The demand and market for heat has proven incineration
lingo-cellulosic wastes would not be economically viable due to the cost technologies feasible in the EU region. In developing countries, several
of raw material. In addition, pre-treatment of lignocelluloses increases hurdles occur in commercializing incineration systems [17]. This in­
the cost of biomethane production [107]. Biomethane is a versatile cludes moisture content, purity of bio-waste, emissions, odour issue, etc.
energy vector which could be used for heat, electricity and trans­ In the USA, the capital cost of incineration ranges between $ 600 and
portation fuel (Fig. 5). However, from a techno-economic point of view 750/ton of waste processed. However, the cost gets reduced to one-third
there are several uncertainties that affect the profitability of the plant. ($200/ton) when such a facility is commissioned in China. This differ­
This includes reduced operations, collection and transportation costs ence in cost is due to variation in interest rate, cheap labour, local
and capacity of the plant [106,108]. manufacturing, and taxing policy of the government. The operating
costs i.e., the costs incurred to run the plant in China is about $30/ton
4.2.2. Transesterification [80].
Bio-waste cooking oil as an organic waste is widely used for biodiesel
production. Within transesterification, the choice of catalyst and the 4.2.4. Pyrolysis and gasification
type of process used determine the economic feasibility of biodiesel. Pyrolysis and gasification technologies are in their initial phases of
Chandolias et al. [109] reported that producing biodiesel from waste

Fig. 5. The system boundary of the life cycle model for biowaste treatment and management (Adapted and modified, [8]).

11
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

commercialization. Hence, the cost of these technologies is expensive. challenges. These include low yields, the got to control the fractional
Pyrolysis technology costs $ 1080/dry ton of feedstock. The electricity weight of H2 within the reactor to avoid item hindrance, and adminis­
produced via fast pyrolysis ranges between 8.4 and 11.2 c/kWh. For tration issues for the by-products made amid maturation. A few have
slow pyrolysis, the production cost ranges between 10.7 and 14.4 c/kWh proposed utilize of cell-free frameworks to progress bioprocess yields,
[112]. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) USA estimated counting that from bio-hydrogen generation [92].
the production of liquid transportation fuel from organic biomass via Separation/purification/upgrading of pyrolysis oil into biofuels and/
fast pyrolysis. When pyrolysis oil was blended with gasoline, the mini­ or individual chemicals is challenging and postures a wide range of
mum fuel selling price (MFSP) required for financial sustainability was $ inquire about that will require the improvement of entire unused sort of
3.34/gallon. For diesel blending, the MFSP was $3.71/gallon. Important chemistry, particularly committed to the physicochemical characteris­
research gaps identified includes feedstock quality, interaction of tics of biomass pyrolysis oils. Separated this, Nonstop handling on an
elemental ash and volatile organic components and effect of mixed mechanical scale in, for example, twist drill (screw) reactors can be
biomass on pyrolysis. From, a commercial outlook, reducing capital challenging since of the need to handle biomass slurries beneath lifted
costs on upgrading is critical. Further work is required in understanding weights and temperatures [91]. Furthermore, higher lignin substance of
effective catalysts for efficient pyrolysis [113]. leaves and bark could be a compositional perspective that should be
Gasification converts solid feed-stock’s to syngas via partial oxida­ considered, high lignin lends itself to thermo-chemical transformation
tion. The syngas could be used to produce liquid fuels, including ethanol forms; alternately, the higher ash substance in bark and leaves may
and methanol. Gasification is a low-cost technology; however, it has cause problems with high temperature transformation [98]. One is the
technical hurdles, including the production of tar. Tar causes blockages poisonous quality of the blend, which was tentatively watched within
of filters and fuel lines, which affects plant operations. For a 1 MW plant, the centre time span of the AD test. This toxicity may be ascribed to trace
the capital investments of a gasifier is 370 $/kW. A similar capacity of compounds that are highly toxic to methanogenic archaea or to matter
coal gasifier costs twice than a biomass gasifier. This shows biomass that’s non-detectable by GC-MS (e.g. formic corrosive, oligomers or
gasifier is an economically feasible technology; when technical chal­ trace metals from the combinations utilized for Py-AD). This issue may
lenges are addressed, this technology shall be commercially available be circumvented by implies of handle heightened receiving a multi-stage
[116]. AD framework are utilized or on the off chance that item diverse from
biogas might be created from VFA (e.g. concentrated VFA, poly­
4.3. Drawbacks and challenges of combined thermal and biological hydroxyalkanoates or bioelectricity with microbial fuel cell) [97].
process Changes in feed-stock estimate and composition are two major
challenges that any waste-based, or indeed any, biorefinery must tackle.
Pretreatment procedures are the primary step for the degradation of However, the specific biomass feed-stocks (most commonly lignocellu­
biomasses and a major challenge is to build the hybrid and non-hybrid losic biomass) have demonstrated to present issues and challenges
forms to be more financial, for which there must be no pre-processing within the setting of the something else clear organic transformation
like retting with weaken acids or antacids to expel dampness and sand stage. The thick crystalline structure of lignocellulosic biomass makes it
particles from the biomass to decrease the erosion prepare within the troublesome for chemicals to enter and get to the glycosidic bonds they
reactors. A few of the issues experienced are reactor disintegration, are implied to hydrolyse. The yield of fermentable sugars within the
halting up, char particulates on the reactor and tar advancement. At hydrolysate streams can be so inadequately that the overall prepare is
high-temperature, there occurs disintegration degradation on the not productive [96]. The pre-treatments utilizing weaken acids have a
reactor fabric and dangerous side-effects, whereas intense fouling is number of preferences when compared to concentrated acidic hydro­
depicted through the expansion of undesirable surface things on the lytic methods to resolve the major issues within the vein of recuperation
reactor parts, preventing its capacity [117]. Separated this, the changes of acids, harmfulness and a specific upkeep for the destructive materials.
in feed-stock estimate and composition are two major challenges that Another challenge at huge scale operations is bolstering of heteroge­
any waste-based, or indeed any, and biorefinery must handle. In any neous biomass at high-pressure into the reactors and after that filtration
case, the specific biomass feed-stocks (most commonly lignocellulosic of slurries with high total solids for hydrolytic pathways within the
biomass) have demonstrated to present issues and challenges within the nearness of proteins [101]. Fermentative utilization of this bio-oil faces
setting of the something else clear organic transformation stage. The two impressive challenges. To begin with is the fact that most
thick crystalline structure of lignocellulosic biomass makes it trouble­ bio-oil-associated sugars are show within the anhydrous frame. Meta­
some for proteins to enter and get to the glycosidic bonds they are bolic designing has empowered utilization of the most anhydrosugar,
implied to hydrolyse. The yield of fermentable sugars within the hy­ levoglucosan, and in workhorse biocatalysts. The second challenge is the
drolysate streams can be so deficiently that the generally handle is not truth that bio-oil is wealthy in microbial inhibitors. Collection of bio-oil
productive [96]. in unmistakable divisions, detoxification of bio-oil earlier to maturation,
The three innovation scenarios inspected here grant knowledge into and expanded strength of the biocatalyst have all demonstrated viable
the relative benefits and contrasting challenges encompassing genera­ strategies for tending to this inhibition [95].
tion of different biofuels from levoglucosan. The obstacles related with
maturation of bio-oil levoglucosan are related to both the feedstock and 4.4. Environmental assessment of bio-waste treatment
the different bioconversion advances. In expansion to the one of kind
natural challenges related with utilizing bio-oil levoglucosan as a feed­ 4.4.1. Anaerobic digestion
stock, there are moreover contemplations that are more broadly related The main outputs of anaerobic digestion (AD) are the energy-rich
with each bioconversion innovation. Whereas the ethanol generation biogas and the digestate residue. Normally, the residue can be land­
situation displayed the slightest cost per unit vitality delivered, it filled, incinerated, composted or directly spread on land as fertilizer.
required the foremost capital. Typically intelligent of ethanol aging However, the dewatered digestate and press water from anaerobic
requiring hardware, such as centrifuges for the partition of solids from digestion of bio-waste may contain abundant pollutants in the form of
the aging broth, that is not required for methane and hydrogen gener­ chemical oxygen demand (COD), and heavy metal [118]. Accordingly,
ation. Selection of certain practices, such as the utilize of film innovation the environmental concerns related to anaerobic digestion is how to
for water-ethanol division, may offer assistance lower capital and disposal digestate residue in an environmental feasible method, which is
working costs by moving forward efficiency (hence diminishing the one of the significant ecological matters. However, several researches
specified bioreactor measure) and lessening vitality request. Hydrogen reported that various environmental benefits associated with AD to fulfil
generation through dark aging moreover faces eminent specialized the country’s high demand of power and electricity.

12
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Bio-waste represents the easily biodegradable compounds, which is fuel. Besides, the bio-methane (upgrade biogas, about 98% of methane)
comprised of food waste, industrial waste such as animal manure and has the same property with natural gas in chemical production [33].
residues from food processing plants, and agro-based residues like Biogas production from bio-waste is prevailing in many countries. About
cornstalk and wood bio-wastes. Compared with other waste treatment 10–15% of solid waste was treated by AD [120,121]. Germany is the
technologies, the energy and resource recovery potential are incompa­ pioneer country in global biogas production; about 7000 biogas plants
rable to the advantage of AD technology (Fig. 6). Biogas is an important were operated in 2011 while the number of biogas plants increased by
product of anaerobic digestion, which is widely exploited for heat and 14.28% in 2014, with approximately 25% installed capacity [33,122].
electricity production. It is estimated that 0.7 m3 of biogas can generate Moreover, the technologies of energy supplementation from biogas are
1 kWh of electricity which can power a light bulb of 60 W for 1 h [119]. indorsed in the last three decades in the rural portions of India [25].
In consideration of the great amount of bio-waste generation worldwide, Apart from the biomethane production, hydrogen production is also
heat and electricity recovery from bio-waste is really promising. With common in the process of anaerobic digestion. Hydrogen is widely
the increasing global energy demand and continuous consumption of accepted as a clean fuel because the final combusting product is water
finite fossil fuel, biogas is regarded as a renewable substitution of fossil vapour, which is thought to be an optimal alternative to alleviate the

Fig. 6. Environmental assessment of biowaste treatment through anaerobic digestion, combustion, pyrolysis and gasification.

13
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Fig. 7. Illustration of “Waste to Energy” technologies approach based on applied conversion methods.

global warming caused by greenhouse gas emission from combustion of formation can be abridged. Additionally, rumen microbes from cow
fossil fuel. Recent studies indicated that manifold phase of AD have an dung can be recovered in AD system for enhancing hydrolysis and
advanced hydrogen yield [123]. Hence, lots of researches were carried methane recovery from bio-waste [127].
out on the enhancement of hydrogen production via anaerobic digestion Generally, the dewatered digestate contain high percentage of
of bio-waste [113,124]. The energy transition from fossil fuels to phosphate and ammonium. A study was performed to access the envi­
renewable energy not only liberates our reliance on fossil fuels, but also ronmental consequences of the use on land of digestate and processed by
reduces the environmental impacts associated with waste and energy wastewater treatment technology [117]. It was reported that the excess
sector. nutrient in field will exceed the crops uptake threshold so that lead to
However, uncontrolled disposal may result in the unexpected release significant environmental impacts via nutrients leaching and runoff,
of methane into the environment due to the poor infrastructure and bad such as eutrophication of water body. This phenomenon has been re­
management in some countries and regions. Since the impact of ported in some agriculture regions, like Belgium, Ireland and the
methane on the global warming is 25 times that of carbon dioxide, the Netherlands. In addition, the impact of direct use on land for global
uncontrolled release of methane should receive special attention [125]. warming is 2.25 times than that adopted wastewater treatment tech­
In addition, it was reported that ruminant livestock can yield 250–500 L nology. The impact on human health for land application was about six
of CH4 per day [126]. As a result of this methane production, it is esti­ times higher than wastewater treatment [128,129]. also identified the
mated by Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations that environmental influences of diffusion digestate directly as compared to
livestock’ input to global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of anthropoid four different treatment technologies by life cycle valuation as presented
origin may be about 14.5% over the next centuries. According to pre­ in Fig. 7 [130]. It indicates that it is necessary to shift from digestion
vious reports, this methane is mostly resulted as of enteric fermentation, conversion treatment to nutrient recovery technology. In addition,
primarily formed by ruminants. As methane plays an important role in digestates contain heavy metal and detrimental substance, such as
the context of global warming, the reduction in GHG emissions will be cadmium and arsenic. When digestates containing heavy metals spread
achieved if this part of biogas can be captured or avoided. Hence, factors to agricultural land, accumulated heavy metals in the agriculture soil
disturbing methane formation from livestock was investigated. Through poses risk on human health [131]. The digestate can also cause solemn
controlling the factors, like the level of feed consumption, kind of car­ contamination to outward water and groundwater. In addition, global
bohydrate, feed dealing out, and variations in the micro flora, methane phosphate reserve is foreseen to be exhausted in next centuries [132].

14
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Therefore, digestate should be rather regarded as a promising source for land acquisition reduced. However, the pyrolysis gas is also a mixture of
high quality organic fertilizer production, especially animal manure methane, carbon dioxide, hydrogen etc, which can be utilized as fuel to
digestate with considerable high concentrations of ammonium and generate heat. As a result of products impurities, an intensive cleaning is
phosphate (NH4–N 4000 mg/l and PO3− 4 300 mg/l) [133]. Alternative required. Additionally, high energy input and expensive operational and
options turn out to be important for efficient recovery nutrients, there­ maintenance cost are required in this process. It could be a promising
fore evading over fertilization and thus mitigating ecological influences. biorefinery technology for conversion of plastic waste to liquid fuel and
In conclusion, the environmental advantage of AD process is mainly char.
related to reduction of green-gas emission, energy and resource recovery Among the three typical methods (i.e., combusting, pyrolysis, and
from waste. Reuse of bioenergy and bio-products from anaerobic gasification), gasification is the cleanest one. Gasification is thermo-
digestion of bio-waste has been proved to be of crucial role in envi­ chemical conversion process of carbonaceous materials into syngas
ronmental sustainability. However, attention should be paid to the un­ (H2, CO, CO2, and CH4) with the inclusion of oxygen, air and steam at
controlled release of greenhouse gas and waste disposal. high temperature (800–1000 ◦ C) [15]. Apart from the application in
heat and electricity generation, syngas was crucial intermediate sub­
4.4.2. Combustion, pyrolysis, and gasification stance in the chemical industry. The amount of syngas from gasification
Thermal treatments can significantly reduce the waste in both mass is affected by the gasification technology and operation conditions.
and volume, and kill pathogens and toxic chemicals [134]. However, disposal of particulate matter and tar are required in syngas
Thermo-chemical technologies including combusting, pyrolysis, and production. It was reported that there were two strategies to produce
gasification are processes that use the high temperature to convert biomethane from biowaste: biogas road by anaerobic digestion and
feed-stock into electricity, energy, heat and value-added products further upgrading and syngas road by the process of gasification via
(Fig. 6). From environmental aspects, thermal treatments demonstrated cleaning, acclimatizing, methanation and ultimate upgrading of
better environmental amity. Combustion is a series of chemical reactions attained syngas [140]. The result indicated that high carbon utilization
by which carbon is oxidized to carbon dioxide in the presence of air rate and less environmental impact was achieved by syngas road.
while hydrogen is oxidized to water at temperatures above 800 ◦ C. However, large-scale methane production from AD is more feasible
However, the heat should be used immediately. Combusting was sug­ when considering the cost and operational difficulty. The ‘‘syngas road”
gested as a suitable technology to generate electricity from waste in is less extensive, and is still by a parade level. Fuel production, energy
development countries [135]. The combustion process can reduce waste and resource recovery can be fulfilled by combustion, pyrolysis and
volume by up to 80%. However, the net efficiency of bio-waste com­ gasification of bio-waste. However, there are still many challenges
bustion is usually low. The energy obtained from this process is affected needing to be solved, such as purification of gas product and
by the presence of moisture content. Thus, pre-treatment processes are pre-treatment of feed-stock to avoid the adverse effect on environment.
needed, such as drying. Due to the lower operating costs, incineration
has become the most commonly applied technology to generate energy 4.5. Life cycle assessment (LCA) for sustainable bio-waste and thermal
and electricity. Nonetheless, public acceptance rate of combustion is treatments
relatively low. The output of greenhouse gas emissions during waste
incineration are considered as an important part of global GHG emis­ Several bio-waste treatment and management initiatives have been
sions. Open burning without control and management will emit harmful ineffective [141]. To well assess the both benefits as well as drawbacks
product directly so that result in severe air pollution. It was an illegal of various bio-waste treatment strategies and technologies with respect
waste treatment but it is still widely practiced in some rural area. This to objectives and a step to step methodological structure can signifi­
action will pose substantial harm to human health and environment. cantly support taking knowledgeable decisions as shown in Table 4. Nasr
Additionally, the exhaust gases from waste incinerator may contain et al. [142] study revealed that existing guidelines and measures
many potentially harmful substances due to incomplete combusting, developed for businesses have been criticized for missing precisely this
including particle matter, chloride, heavy metals, dioxins and furans definition. Consequently, reinforcing the interface between circular
(PCDD/F) [136], oxide of sulfur and oxide of nitrogen, etc. The economy and bioeconomy wrangles about may give a vital step towards
composition of the exhaust gas is closely related to the composition of characterizing the supportability of the circular economy, subsequently
the feed-stock. It will cause server air pollution in the surrounding area. setting clear needs for economical trade practices. In this context, a
Moreover, the production of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) from decision model suggested by Jones et al. [135] displays that such deci­
waste incineration was the most significant public concern due to its sion support systems related to waste management depend on
strong toxicity and carcinogenicity. The POPs can be even carried long Cost-Benefit Analysis or multi-criteria decision-making approaches,
distance from their emission and accumulate through the food chain, while very few researchers use Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) methods. The
and have a detrimental effect on human health, such as dioxin, furan, most important LCA/CE tools are mainly focused on the qualitative
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAHs), and etc. Margallo et al. content analysis used to analyse communication in a theory-guided,
pointed that waste incineration is the worst category of biomass due to systematic manner. Other LCA tools are focused on the waste flow
the production of toxic substance and ash [137]. In addition, about 20% analysis, identify its waste prevention and CE valorisation potential,
of the bio-waste will be generated as ash in a typical incinerator. The environmental data and coupled with EXIOBASE for the import flows by
disposal of exhaust gases along with bottom ash are the prime ecological using EXIOBASE v. 2. These tools are used full for identifying the waste
concerns in such techniques. So as to avoid the generation of these flows with the most promising CE valorisation potential for cities [143].
pollutants, efficient gas cleaning systems are required. On this aspect [8] conducted a study based on LCA to assess biowaste
Pyrolysis is the decomposition of bio-waste by heat under anaerobic management; but they restricted their investigation to calculating en­
environment at medium to higher temperatures (350–700 ◦ C), which ergy in addition to water consumption emissions to the surrounding
was categorized into two types according the heating rate: slow pyrol­ atmosphere, and water as well as space necessities. Notably, maximum
ysis with char as main product and fast pyrolysis with bio-oil as the main numbers of assessment approaches are used entirely by experts focusing
product [138]. Char has attracted increasing attention as it can be in evaluation use of current available data to synthesizes and make
applied as bio-char, solid fuel and carrier of catalyst. Bio-waste oil is a decisions. Hence, in this article, we consider only LCA approach to
combination of water and organic matter, which was extensively used as evaluate some biological and thermal biowaste treatments. Tomić and
combustion fuel. However, high content of water (15–35 wt%) in bio-oil Schneider, 2018 has described the modelled through site-specific LCI
reduced its calorific value [139]. The volume can be reduced by 50–90% inventory, mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) technology data in­
by pyrolysis. Up to 80% energy can be recovered from bio-waste while ventory, used USLCI database, considered technologies as the LCA/CE

15
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Table 4
Major evaluation approaches of environmental assessment, life cycle assessment and circular economy for bio-waste biorefineries.
Region Feedstock EA approaches LCA/CE tools and methods Approach advantages Reference
type

Serbia Chicken • Design questionnaires; • Ecoinvent v3 and SimaPro 8.2.3 data • Useful for the minimization of the [19]
meat • Throughout on-site visits; software; environmental impacts on poultry
• Individual discussions with • Data Processing by Microsoft Office 2010; production;
respondents • Mapping the process, setting scope and • Given insights on a global warming
boundaries, collecting data, calculating and potential, ozone layer depletion and
analysing the results cumulative energy mandate
Germany and Biowaste • Used the exploration • Qualitative content analysis used to analyse • Identify the inaccessibility of tributary raw [171]
European engines DuckDuckGo and communication in a theory-guided, system­ data as a most important obstacle to circular
Union (EU) Google; atic manner; economy;
• Information produced • Circular economy ethics recognized in the • Discovered the relation among the circula
directly through business technical literature; economy and the bioeconomy required for
associations or distinct • Used business prototypical archetypes; the development of sustainable circular
enterprises, • Used contributory observation information economy indicators;
• Documents from policy to contextualize, understand and verify the • Stakeholders mostly sight the circular
and/or business information economy as separated into the technosphere
stakeholders and the biosphere;
• Explored the relation between a circular
economy and a bioeconomy could aid the
expansion of a stronger political possibility
and priorities for sustainable corporate
practices
Belgium Municipal • Detailed inventories of • Waste flow analysis; • Identifying the waste flows with the most [172,
solid waste economy-wide flows of • Identify its waste prevention and CE promising CE valorisation potential for 173]
waste; valorisation potential; cities;
• Analyse the urban waste • Environmental data and coupled with • LCA compares the environmental
metabolism in EXIOBASE for the import flows; performances of different valorisation
• terms of waste flows, waste • Using EXIOBASE v. 2 options;
production intensity and • CE mostly as provider of reusable
waste treatment bioproducts, recyclable resources and
performance nutrients instead of circularity islands.
Croatia Biowaste • Scenario-based analysis • Modelled through site-specific LCI • Development of a low carbon, sustainable [174,
encompass waste inventory; competitive and resource efficient economy; 175]
management and recovery • Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) • City-scale analysis results described the
system technology data inventory; municipal WM and MSW energy recovery;
• Used USLCI database; • Results revealed that energy-from-waste fa­
• Considered technologies are: incineration- cilities are satisfied around 50% of local
based waste-to-energy CHP DH plant, AD energy needs
plant, landfill with landfill gas collection, an
internal combustion engine-based CHP plant
for biogas transformation, and biogas up­
grade plant
Romania Biowaste • Assessed biowaste based on • Quantitative assessment based on scenarios • Supported a reliable expansion of [176,
several scenarios (worse- analysis; bioeconomy as indorsed by the EU; 177]
case, pessimistic, realistic, • Data broken down at county level; • Homebased composting selections should be
optimistic) • Greenhouse gasses (GHG) calculated at accepted by rural municipalities and
national and regional levels counties for the biowaste managing process
Saudi Arabia Biowaste • Scenario-based analysis of • Analysed the overall energy consumption; • Socio-economic assessment, ecological [178,
biowaste; • Detailed technical, economic and dependent LCA, life-cycle estimate, eco­ 179]
• Assessed biowaste based on environmental analysis of waste nomic input-output LCA and life cycle sus­
generation in million tons biorefineries through LCA; tainability assessment combined into
per year • Analysed economic benefits and technical obedience with LCA of waste biorefineries;
data of individually biorefinery technology • Advantages comprise recapture of energy
for a specific area circular economy; and valuable products, new prospects and
• Cradle-to-grave LCA analysis businesses growth and landfill cost reserves;
• Provided environmental benefits in the form
of reduced GHG emissions from the current
disposal practices
United Food waste • Inventory data used for the • Used inventory data of AD plants, literature • Presented a valuable return from a largely [180,
Kingdom food waste assessment; and the Eco-invent database V3.3; unutilised waste stream and help towards 181]
(UK) • Estimate the environmental • Uncertainty investigation of food waste to implementation of a circular economy;
impacts of treating food sightsee the consequence of the data • AD electricity produces 203 kg CO2-eq./
waste by AD varieties on the environmental influences; MWh;
• Sensitivity investigation used to test the • AD has lesser effects than both landfilling
impact of the assumptions and incineration

tools. Bio-waste is the main fraction of municipal waste, thus a proper significance of LCA studies for dependable impact assessments. Addi­
management is a key challenge in order to sustain a bio-economy in the tionally, this study recommends the integration of stakeholder consul­
near future [134]. highlighted main critical points associated to biogas tations to study for better application of life cycle approach in policy
formation comprise of the usage of the digestate along with the end strategy. Ardolino and Arena [144], has assessed bio-waste based on
usage of biogas. Also, some factors such as, site-specific conditions and several scenarios (worse-case, pessimistic, realistic, and optimistic).
practical implementation of biogas units can cause major differences Quantitative assessment based on scenarios analysis, data broken down
among life cycle impacts. Hence, their study emphasizes on the at county level, and greenhouse gases (GHG) calculated at national and

16
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Table 5
Hybrid/integrated thermochemical-biological process.
Year Feedstocks Products Hybrid/integrated process Advantages References

2020 Biomass Biofuels, biochemical Thermochemical degradation step (like pyrolysis or Desired products are significantly [182,183]
compounds, and fertilizers gasification), followed by a biochemical conversion step increased
2020 Biomass Biofuels Pyrolysis-Anaerobic Digestion prototype (Py-AD) High yield [184,185]
2020 Short rotation woody Biofuels hybrid biochemical/thermochemical conversion scheme Yields of fermentable sugars and [186]
coppice pyrolysis liquid above 80%
2019 Lignin biomass Advanced hydrocarbon Hybrid processing: thermochemical process, pyrolysis, or High yield [96]
biofuels gasification, then fermentation
2019 Bio-derived Biofuels Thermochemical, biological, biochemical and hybrid High yield [187]
Lignocellulosic conversion methods
molecules
2016 Levoglucosan Biofuels Hybrid thermochemical/biological processing High yield [188,189]
2015 Lignocellulosic Biofuels hybrid thermochemical-biochemical conversion scheme High yield of biofuels [190,191]
2011 Biomass Sugar and bio-oil Hybrid processing: thermochemical process, pyrolysis, High yield [192,193]
then fermentation
2007 Lignocellulosic plant Bio-oil Hybrid Thermochemical/Biological High yield [97]
material

regional levels can be calculated by using the LCA/CE tools. solar power plant. Pérez-Camacho et al. [150] has been applied LCA to
Ardolino and Arena [144], described the LCA study that demon­ evaluate the life cycle environmental influences of outmoded anaerobic
strated the total biomethane production sustainability over anaerobic digestion (AD) feedstock’s through food wastes (avoided GHG eq gen­
digestion of the composed organic fraction of municipal solid waste. In eration of 163.33 CO2-eq). The examination of the greenhouse gas
this context, the non-renewable energy as well as global warming po­ alleviation profits of resource management in circular economy policies
tentials of the Biowaste-to-Biomethane scenario could improve about (substantial GHG generation reduced and achieved by circular economy
36% and79%, respectively, in relations to Biowaste-to-Energy state. policy options – 2151.04 kg CO2 eq per MWh). Bueno et al. [151] per­
Starr et al. [145] used LCA to the comparative study and recognize formed comparative LCA study for evaluating the overall environmental
potential improvements among two technologies of carbon mineraliza­ impacts of two alternative approaches, presenting that assessments of
tion for biogas upgrading. While Xu et al. [146] analysed the environ­ alternative systems of straight material recapture or direct energy
mental impacts and the energetic aspects of a biomethane unit well retrieval must be side stepped in respect of previously proposed pointers
equipped by using three diverse upgrading technologies: mono­ in the LCA framework. An LCA analysis of the studies revealed above
ethanolamine liquid scrubbing and stressed water scrubbing, and ionic advocates that maximum numbers of use the Eco-invent databases to
scrubbing (liquid). Likewise, Mohammadi et al. [117] related the three evaluate the environmental performances of the bio-waste treatment.
diverse biological treatment procedures of organic portion of MSW: (a) The evaluation of findings acquired through LCAs approach; it is diffi­
composting; AD with an ultimate digestate composting; (b) AD with cult owing to differently system boundaries in addition to assumptions
final digestate composting; (c) upgrading of biogas by pressure swing made during the calculations. Though, the studied LCA works pointed to
adsorption, by means of with data derived from Eco-invent databank. related critical phases as well as impact categories.
Gunamantha and Sarto [147], used the basic LCA methodology to For example, Tufvesson et al. [152] suggested that, the impacts on
compare various energetic valorisation options. The inventory’s substitute uses of the resources must be taken into consideration, if in­
outcome was categorized into different impact categories, such as, dustrial residues that were previously used as animal protein as a
global warming, eutrophication acidification and photochemical feedstock for production, the properties of alternate protein feed
oxidant formation. Nizami et al. [148] has given more insights on the agronomy should be reserved into reason. Additionally, buy using LCA
socio-economic assessment, ecological dependent LCA, life-cycle esti­ tool only offers limited outputs of the overall effects, if some of the
mate, economic input-output LCA and life cycle sustainability assess­ impact categories such as, energy balance and CO2 emissions, are
ment combined into obedience with LCA of waste biorefineries. The considered. In this way, in the real world, the life cycle impacts are too
advantages are comprised the recapture of energy and valuable products depending on specific site. Thus, the LCAs approach for biogas tech­
along with new prospects and businesses growth and landfill cost re­ nologies could be considered even site-specific and regional limitations
serves. They have also provided environmental benefits in the form of [153]. There could be substantial difference among diverse setups as
reduced GHG emissions from the current disposal practices. well as their management in the production systems. In addition, it is
This study also covered the sensitivity analysis to modify in results required to analyse both individual LCA, as well as numerous combined
for an input of different types of organic biowaste, on the other hand had LCA work for simplified assessments, for example reports about the
no major consequence on the whole consequence. The outcome of the probable climate mitigation possible of biogas. Myllyviita et al. [154]
work come off with following conclusions: In vision of photochemical suggested a substitute method may possibly be to use life cycle
oxidant creation eutrophication and, global warming, scenario 5 was thoughtful as well as social impact assessments. In this method, addi­
found to be the most feasible system with highest savings of 0.14–0.16 tional qualitative measures may possibly to be considered while in
kg ethylene eq/fu, − 0.17 kg PO4 eq/fu, and − 168 kg CO2 eq/fu decision-making. Also, some of insights of biogas actors have been
respectively. While, in view of acidification, scenario 3 (gasification, recognized that, there is need for better integrate holistic life cycle
landfilling and anaerobic digestion) offers the maximum value of saving approach into the policy making methods of both individual firms as
(− 2.8 kg SO2 eq/fu). Miguel and Corona [149], studied the hybrid mode well as local municipalities. While, the conventional waste treatment
operation, the study revealed, the impact related with the consumption and management method for the production of biogas may likely to
of natural gas in solar-only operation was low, and maximum environ­ outcome in sub-optimal selections, though the additional holistic visu­
mental damage (fossil depletion and climate change, for instance, alization has the possible to modify the thoughtful in waste management
greenhouse gas emissions reduced from 26.6 kg CO2 eq/MWh (natural as utilizing energy and converting nutrient to fertiliser as well as energy
gas) to 25.1 (bio-waste biogas) and 24.2 kg CO2 eq/MWh (mixed production, and to end with consequential in optimization about func­
manure biogas) is related with the removal of materials as well as tions. Therefore, there could be need to adopt and develop general
manufacturing of elements used in the construction of the concentrating practices associated to environmental licenses as well as environmental

17
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

impact assessments in bio-waste treatment and management, also in resolutions should be well-defined under the system of state-of-the-art of
every place, community impact should be monitored in regular interval. circular economy business models. There is a high importance in the
Considering the need to improve the reliability and applicability of LCA, re-utilization of bio-waste generated from households in the urban cit­
also need for the evaluation of sustainability, additionally it could be ies. Environmental, social, and economic issues are some of the integral
more effective and valuable to include different stakeholders in the LCA issues related with the fossil established linear-economy which essential
method extra effective [132]. need greater devotion. In this aspect, the globe is progressively trans­
forming from natural fossil-based economy in to an eco-friendly and
sustainable circular economy.
4.6. Business models for a circular economy and successful The bio-waste which is produced in huge amount in developing
implementation of treatment concepts in developing countries countries can be measured as possible feedstock for arranging the bio-
waste economy model [18]. In addition, it could be also established
The circular economy is a model of production and consumption, drivers for the circular economy business model and assemblies the
which involves sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing and waste derived circular economy in a sustainable set-up to deal the
recycling existing materials and products as far as possible. In this way, innovative needs, scope as well as opportunities visualized in the busi­
the life cycle of products is extended. The circular economy includes all ness model. Frank et al. [156] showed a qualitative approach to explore
kind of bio-waste material streams with different utilization routes. The CE for business model in diverse industries, by highlighting as the
circular economy strengthens the eco-efficiency of processes and the use amount of module parts in a product and the accessibility of ecological
of bio-waste materials to reduce the use of fresh resources. In this article, replacements in the market signify a challenge for businesses towards
we analyse and hypothesize the implications of the approval of circular circular economy [157]. Circulating the bio-economy in a business
economy business models on an appropriate option to evaluate the po­ model for the recapture and reprocessing of bio-products plus bioenergy
tential environmental, economic as well as practical assessment of is deliberated. The European Union has presented the CE as a very
diverse bio-waste recycling and management systems (Table 4). There­ high-level approach to transfer our societies outside the limits to growth.
fore, some straightforward criteria and measures for the best available According to European policy makers, we could reach a CE system
technologies opportunity has been presented in Fig. 8, in the best through business model of current sustainable technologies. In addition,
business model approach from “waste to resources” in CE (circular to fill related gap, this article scrutinizes the business community’s
economy) system [12,155]. The importance of bio-waste as a most based on the CE. It mainly focuses on the bio-waste sector as one of the
valuable source of energy as well as secondary material has been dis­ emerging most resource-intensive in developing countries and examines
cussed, along with a potential environmental and public health risk developing countries level discussions along with business follows in
associated to the application of technologies (Fig. 8). A systematic emerging nations. The literature analysis on Scopus and science direct
comprehensive literature examination has been shown with the aim to has revealed that less than hundred articles has been published on cir­
identify and scrutinize the following important areas: the new demands cular economy business model in the last nine year. According to articles
tackled by operational management decision making about changes in discussed in this review article, our analysis and insight suggests that the
competence, handling procedures, inter- and intra-legislative relations business stakeholders presently associate the CE mainly to proven
and technologies; and to establish the total environmental sustainability practices as well as to technological and scientific business models. It
of sustainable bio-waste management and by biological processes and means there is need for research &innovation in term of business
thermal treatments of the segregated organic fraction of MSW. These

Fig. 8. Measures based on environmental economic and social criteria for associated technologies for secondary resource recovery from biowaste (Modified
from Ref. [150]).

18
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

models. Involving the discussions about the CE and this discussion offers Acknowledgments
potential directions as well as their consequences [158].
Rizos et al. [159] considered enablers along with barriers for me­ This work was supported by research fund from the Shaanxi Intro­
dium business in accepting circular economy business model. Analysis duced Talent Research Funding (Grant No. A279021901), China. The
were indicated the saving material expenses, creating viable advantages Introduction of talent research start-up Fund (Grant No. Z101022001),
and forming innovative markets for the key enablers to go towards College of Natural Resources and Environment, Northwest A&F Uni­
circular economy [160]. Certainly, the CE is very a well-known idea versity, Yangling, Shaanxi Province 712100, China. The Mobility for
promoted by developed as well as developing nations, including Regional Excellence-2020 (Grant No. RUN 2017–00771), European
different nationwide governments and by numerous businesses sector Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the
worldwide. There are some challenges, for instance, system boundaries, Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No 754412 at University of
which should be resolved for CE, in order to contribute in to worldwide Borås, Borås, Sweden. Distinguished High-Level Talents Research Grant
net sustainability. These challenges include thermodynamic boundaries, from Guizhou Science and Technology Corporation Platform Talents
temporal and spatial system boundaries, economic restrictions, pro­ Fund (Grant No. [2017]5733–001 & CK-1130-002) and Zunyi Medical
duction and frozen process chains, administrative restrictions and social University, Zunyi, China for their advanced research facilities. We are
and cultural restrictions. It is of main importance to understand the also thankful to all our laboratory colleagues and research staff members
boundary conditions to be able to innovate better solutions to the waste for their constructive advice and help.
management processes that use a lot of energy. Also, it helps to under­
stand how feasible and economical the new innovations are and how References
much it saves natural resources. It could also able to study whether some
of the energy and materials used in the process can be reclaimed used as [1] International Solid Waste Association Design and Artwork. hellofluid.co.uk;
2019. https://www.iswa.org/fileadmin/galleries/Publications/ISWA_Report
the raw materials of another process. Hence, in circular economy, in­ s/10003_ISWA_REPORT_2019_V6_web-compressed.pdf.
dividual processes cannot be considered to be closed systems but as open [2] Sotiropoulos A, Vourka I, Erotokritou A, Novakovic J, Panaretou V, Vakalis S,
systems that exchange energy and matter with the other systems. In Thanos T, Moustakas K, Malamis D. Combination of decentralized waste drying
and SSF techniques for household biowaste minimization and ethanol
addition, CE is also very important to draw attention of both the production. Waste Manag 2016;52:353–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
decision-makers and business community to achieve sustainability, wasman.2016.03.047.
however its essentials research and scientific innovation to safe the [3] Gold M, Tomberlin JK, Diener S, Zurbrügg C, Mathys A. Decomposition of
biowaste macronutrients, microbes, and chemicals in black soldier fly larval
environmental effects of CE effort toward the sustainability [132,161]. treatment: a review. Waste Manag 2018;82:302–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
wasman.2018.10.022.
5. Conclusion and future prospects [4] Sarsaiya S, Awasthi SK, Awasthi MK, Awasthi AK, Mishra S, Chen J. The dynamic
of cellulase activity of fungi inhabiting organic municipal solid waste. Bioresour
Technol 2018;251:411–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.12.011.
Generally, bio-waste recycling is an environmentally beneficial [5] Gwak YR, Kim YB, GwakI S, Lee SH. Economic evaluation of synthetic ethanol
approach of making secondary energy, value added products and production by using domestic biowastes and coal mixture. Fuel 2018;213:
managing significant amount of organic wastes. In order to advance the 115–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2017.10.101.
[6] Awasthi SK, Joshi R, Dhar H, Verma S, Awasthi MK, Varjani S, Sarsaiya S,
whole sustainability of bio-waste management systems, LCA base Zhang Z, Kumar S. Improving methane yield and quality via co-digestion of cow
approach should also be advanced. We evaluated the bio-waste used as dung mixed with food waste. Bioresour Technol 2018;251:259–63. https://doi.
resource properties and utilized various treatment technologies globally org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.12.063.
[7] Pubule J, Blumberga A, Romagnoli F, Blumberga D. Finding an optimal solution
for sustainable energy and bio products developments through using for biowaste management in the Baltic States. J Clean Prod 2015;88:214–23.
biochemical and thermo-chemical technologies especially incineration, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.04.053.
pyrolysis, gasification. The article provides the comprehensive infor­ [8] Güereca LP, Gassó S, Baldasano JM, Jiménez-Guerrero P. Life cycle assessment of
two biowaste management systems for Barcelona, Spain. Resour Conserv Recycl
mation to understand the actual concept of the bio-waste potential as 2006;49(1):32–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2006.03.009.
resource in circular economy system. In addition, we have revealed all [9] Thomsen M, Seghetta M, Mikkelsen MH, Gyldenkærne S, Becker T, Caro D,
the potential of circular economy in terms of three scopes such as, Frederiksen P. Comparative life cycle assessment of biowaste to resource
management systems – a Danish case study. J Clean Prod 2017;142(4):4050–8.
economic, sustainable development, environmental as well as social. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.034.
Furthermore, there are some of the major challenges associated in [10] Seghetta M, Romeo D, D’Este M, Alvarado-Morales M, Angelidaki I, Bastianoni S,
LCA system boundaries which are still growing challenges in the bio- Thomsen M. Seaweed as innovative feedstock for energy and feed evaluating the
impacts through a Life Cycle Assessment. Submit. J Clean Prod 2017;150:1–15.
waste management. In our, best of the knowledge, there are lack of
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.02.022.
basic data that shows the life cycle assessment models in developing [11] Ferreira CIA, Calisto V, Eduardo M, Correa C, Otero M, Helena N, Valdemar IE.
nations are almost certainly the one of the key reasons for the smaller Comparative valorisation of agricultural and industrial biowastes by combustion
number of research work has been carried out for most developing areas. and pyrolysis. Bioresour Technol 2016;218:918–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
biortech.2016.07.047.
In that context, LCA researchers requested to address serious challenges, [12] Vea EB, Romeo D, Thomsen M. Biowaste valorisation in a future circular
for example the environmental impact assessment of the unorganized bioeconomy. Procedia CIRP 2018;69:591–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
waste sector or informal waste sector. In spite of these challenges, procir.2017.11.062.
[13] Bhatia SK, Joo H-S, Yang Y-H. Biowaste-to-bioenergy using biological methods – a
evaluation between regional technologies are developed in this effort to mini-review. Energy Convers Manag 2018;177:640–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/
allow critical evaluation of life cycle assessment and its circular econ­ j.enconman.2018.09.090.
omy points together with environmental impacts that subsequently to [14] Jablonský M, Škulcová A, Malvis A, Šima J. Extraction of value-added
components from food industry based and agro-forest biowastes by deep eutectic
help begin a bio-waste circular sustainable strategies for the production solvents. J Biotechnol 2018;282:46–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
of bioenergy and bio products. jbiotec.2018.06.349.
[15] Watson J, Zhang Y, Si B, Chen W-T, de Souza R. Gasification of biowaste: a critical
review and outlooks. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;83:1–17. https://doi.org/
Declaration of competing interest 10.1016/j.rser.2017.10.003.
[16] OECD. Environment at a Glance: circular economy, waste and materials.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial Environmentat a Glance: Indicators. 2020. http://www.oecd.org/environment-at
-a-glance.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
[17] Eurostat. Municipal waste statistics. 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statisti
the work reported in this paper. cs-explained/index.php/Municipal_waste_statistics. [Accessed 24 August 2020].
[18] Taherzadeh MJ, Rajendran K. Factors affecting development of waste
management–experiences from different cultures. In: Ekström Karin M, editor.

19
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

Waste management and sustainable consumption: reflections on consumer waste. [43] Khosravi-Darani K, Mokhtari Z-B, Amai T, Tanaka K. Microbial production of poly
Taylor & Francis; 2015. p. 67–87. (hydroxybutyrate) from C1 carbon sources. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2013;97
[19] Ardolino F, Parrillo F, Arena U. Biowaste-to-biomethane or biowaste-to-energy? (4):1407–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-012-4649-0.
An LCA study on anaerobic digestion of organic waste. J Clean Prod 2018;174: [44] López JC, Arnáiz E, Merchán L, Lebrero R, Muñoz R. Biogas-based
462–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.320. polyhydroxyalkanoates production by Methylocystis hirsuta: a step further in
[20] Skunca D, Tomasevic I, Nastasijevic I, Tomovic V, Djekic I. Life cycle assessment anaerobic digestion biorefineries. Chem Eng J 2018;333:529–36. https://doi.org/
of the chicken meat chain. J Clean Prod 2018;184:440–50. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cej.2017.09.185.
10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.274. [45] Rostkowski KH, Criddle CS, Lepech MD. Cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment for a
[21] Fabry F, Rehmet C, Rohani V, Fulcheri L. Waste gasification by thermal plasma: a cradle-to-cradle cycle: biogas-to-bioplastic (and back). Environ Sci Technol 2012;
review. Waste Biomass Valori 2013 2013;4(3):421–39. http://www.fao.org/fa 46(18):9822–9. https://doi.org/10.1021/es204541w.
ostat/en/. [46] Ganesh R, Torrijos M, Sousbie P, Steyer JP, Lugardon A, Delgenes JP. Anaerobic
[22] Aspevik T, Oterhals Å, Rønning SB, Altintzoglou T, Wubshet SG, Gildberg A, co-digestion of solid waste: effect of increasing organic loading rates and
Afseth NK, Whitaker RD, Lindberg D. Valorisation of proteins from co-and by- characterization of the solubilised organic matter. Bioresour Technol 2013;130:
products from the fish and meat industry. Top Curr Chem 2017;375(3):53. 559–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.12.119.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s41061-017-0143-6. [47] Agyeman FO, Tao W. Anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and dairy manure:
[23] Hidalgo D, Martín-Marroquín MM, Corona F. A multi-waste management concept effects of food waste particle size and organic loading rate. J Environ Manag
as a basis towards a circular economy model. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019; 2014;133:268–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2013.12.016.
111:481–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.048. [48] Liew LN, Shi J, Li Y. Methane production from solid-state anaerobic digestion of
[24] Mertenat A, Diener S, Zurbrugg C. Black Soldier Fly biowaste treatment – lignocellulosic biomass. Biomass Bioenergy 2012;46:125–32. https://doi.org/
assessment of global warming potential. Waste Manag 2019;84(1):173–81. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.09.014.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.11.040. [49] Strazzera G, Battista F, Garcia NH, Frison N, Bolzonella D. Volatile fatty acids
[25] Central Public Health & Environmental Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO). htt production from food wastes for biorefinery platforms: a review. J Environ Manag
p://cpheeo.gov.in/cms/manual-on-municipal-solid-waste-management-2016.ph 2018;226:278–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.08.039.
p; 2016. [50] Jankowska E, Chwialkowska J, Stodolny M, Oleskowicz-Popiel P. Volatile fatty
[26] Breitenmoser L, Gross T, Huesch R, Rau J, Dhar H, Kumar S, Hugi C, Wintgens T. acids production during mixed culture fermentation – the impact of substrate
Anaerobic digestion of biowastes in India: opportunities, challenges and research complexity and pH. Chem Eng J 2017;326:901–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
needs. J Environ Manag 2019;236:396–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cej.2017.06.021.
jenvman.2018.12.014. [51] Plácido J, Zhang Y. Evaluation of esterification and membrane based solvent
[27] Uhlenhut F, Schluter K, Gallert C. Wet biowaste digestion: ADM1 model extraction as methods for the recovery of short chain volatile fatty acids from
improvement by implementation of known genera and activity of propionate slaughterhouse blood anaerobic mixed fermentation. Waste Biomass Valori 2018;
oxidizing bacteria. Water Res 2018;129:384–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 9(10):1767–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-017-9952-7.
watres.2017.11.012. [52] Chen Y, Wu Y, Wang D, Li H, Wang Q, Liu Y, Peng L, Yang Q, Li X, Zeng G,
[28] Mohan SV, Chiranjeevi P, Dahiya S, Naresh KA. Waste derived bioeconomy in Chen Y. Understanding the mechanisms of how poly aluminium chloride inhibits
India: a perspective. N Biotech Part A 2018;40:60–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. short-chain fatty acids production from anaerobic fermentation of waste activated
nbt.2017.06.006. sludge. Chem Eng J 2018;334:1351–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[29] Serranti S, Trella A, Bonifazi G, Izquierdo CG. Production of an innovative cej.2017.11.064.
biowaste-derived fertilizer: rapid monitoring of physical-chemical parameters by [53] Lee WS, Chua ASM, Yeoh HK, Ngoh GC. A review of the production and
hyper-spectral imaging. Waste Manag 2018;75:141–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. applications of waste-derived volatile fatty acids. Chem Eng J 2014;235:83–99.
wasman.2018.02.013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2013.09.002.
[30] Lakshmi SD, Avti PK, Gurumurthy H. Activated carbon nanoparticles from [54] Taco Vasquez S, Dunkleman J, Chaudhuri SK, Bond A, Holtzapple MT. Biomass
biowaste as new generation antimicrobial agents: a review. Nano-Struct Nano- conversion to hydrocarbon fuels using the MixAlco™ process at a pilot-plant
Objects 2018;16:306–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoso.2018.08.001. scale. Biomass Bioenergy 2014;62:138–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[31] Howaniec N, Smoliński A. Biowaste utilization in the process of co-gasification biombioe.2014.01.005.
with bituminous coal and lignite. Energy 2017;118:18–23. https://doi.org/ [55] Hong C, Haiyun W. Optimization of volatile fatty acid production with co-
10.1016/j.energy.2016.12.021. substrate of food wastes and dewatered excess sludge using response surface
[32] Alkaya E, Kaptan S, Ozkan L, Uludag-Demirer S, Demirer GN. Recovery of acids methodology. Bioresour Technol 2010;101(14):5487–93. https://doi.org/
from anaerobic acidification broth by liquid-liquid extraction. Chemosphere 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.02.013.
2009;77(8):1137–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2009.08.027. [56] Jiang J, Zhang Y, Li K, Wang Q, Gong C, Li M. Volatile fatty acids production from
[33] Xue Y, Liu H, Chen S, Dichtl N, Dai X, Li N. Effects of thermal hydrolysis on food waste: effects of pH, temperature, and organic loading rate. Bioresour
organic matter solubilization and anaerobic digestion of high solid sludge. Chem Technol 2013;143:525–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2013.06.025.
Eng J 2015;264:174–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2014.11.005. [57] Wu Q, Guo W, Yan S, Lu H, Peng S, Ren N. Enhancement of volatile fatty acid
[34] Achinas S, Achinas V, Euverink GJW. A technological overview of biogas production using semi-continuous anaerobic food waste fermentation without pH
production from biowaste. Engineer 2017;3(3):299–307. https://doi.org/ control. RSC Adv 2015;5(126):103876–83. https://doi.org/10.1039/c5ra21162j.
10.1016/J.ENG.2017.03.002. [58] Bermúdez-Penabad N, Kennes C, Veiga MC. Anaerobic digestion of tuna waste for
[35] Patinvoh RJ, Osadolor OA, Chandolias K, Sarvari Horvath I, Taherzadeh MJ. the production of volatile fatty acids. Waste Manag 2017;68:96–102. https://doi.
Innovative pretreatment strategies for biogas production. Bioresour Technol org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.06.010.
2017;224:13–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.11.083. [59] Lim SJ, Kim BJ, Jeong CM, Choi JD, Ahn YH, Chang HN. Anaerobic organic acid
[36] Aryal N, Kvist T, Ammam F, Pant D, Ottosen LDM. An overview of microbial production of food waste in once-a-day feeding and drawing-off bioreactor.
biogas enrichment. Bioresour Technol 2018;264:359–69. https://doi.org/ Bioresour Technol 2008;99(16):7866–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
10.1016/j.biortech.2018.06.013. biortech.2007.06.028.
[37] Raposo F, Fernández-Cegrí V, De la Rubia MA, Borja R, Béline F, Cavinato C, [60] Rebecchi S, Pinelli D, Bertin L, Zama F, Fava F, Frascari D. Volatile fatty acids
Demirer G, Fernández B, Fernández-Polanco M, Frigon JC, Ganesh R, Kaparaju P, recovery from the effluent of an acidogenic digestion process fed with grape
Koubova J, Méndez R, Menin G, Peene A, Scherer P, Torrijos M, Uellendahl H, pomace by adsorption on ion exchange resins. Energy Environ Sci 2016;306:
Wierinck I, de Wilde V. Biochemical methane potential (bmp) of solid organic 629–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2016.07.101.
substrates: evaluation of anaerobic biodegradability using data from an [61] Shi L, Hu Y, Xie S, Wu G, Hu Z, Zhan X. Recovery of nutrients and volatile fatty
international inter laboratory study. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2011;86(8): acids from pig manure hydrolysate using two-stage bipolar membrane electro
1088–98. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.2622. dialysis. Chem Eng J 2018;334:134–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[38] Xu F, Li Y, Ge X, Yang L, Li Y. Anaerobic digestion of food waste – challenges and cej.2017.10.010.
opportunities. Bioresour Technol 2018;247:1047–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [62] Wainaina S, Horváth IS, Taherzadeh MJ. Biochemicals from food waste and
biortech.2017.09.020. recalcitrant biomass via syngas fermentation: a review. Bioresour Technol 2018;
[39] Achinas S, Gerrit J, Willem E. Theoretical analysis of biogas potential prediction 248:113–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.06.075.
from agricultural waste. Res-Effic Technol. 2016;2(3):143–7. https://doi.org/ [63] Darwin, Cord-Ruwisch R, Charles W. Ethanol and lactic acid production from
10.1016/j.reffit.2016.08.001. sugar and starch wastes by anaerobic acidification. Eng Life Sci 2018;18(9):
[40] Casallas-Ojeda MR, Marmolejo-Rebellón LF, Torres-Lozada P, Cameselle C. 635–42. https://doi.org/10.1002/elsc.201700178.
Evaluation of simultaneous incidence of head space and temperature on [64] Feng K, Li H, Zheng C. Shifting product spectrum by pH adjustment during long-
biochemical methane potential in food waste. Cogent Eng 2020;7:1. https://doi. term continuous anaerobic fermentation of food waste. Bioresour Technol 2018;
org/10.1080/23311916.2020.1729514. 270:180–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.09.035.
[41] Safar KM, Bux MR, Aslam UM, Muhammad BK, Ahmed MS. Analysis of the [65] Nair RB, Lennartsson PR, Taherzadeh MJ. Bioethanol production from
feasibility of fruit and vegetable wastes for methane yield using different agricultural and municipal wastes. In: Wong JWC, Tyagi RD, Pandey A, editors.
substrate to inoculum ratios at Hyderabad, Sindh, Pakistan. J Mater Cycles Waste Current developments in biotechnology and bioengineering. Elsevier; 2017.
Manag 2018;21:365–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10163-018-0799-1. p. 157–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63664-5.00008-3.
[42] Raposo F, Fernández-Cegrí V, De la Rubia MA, Borja R, Béline F, Cavinato C, [66] Milica M, Milijana P, Ana M. Denitrification techniques for biomass combustion.
Ganesh R. Biochemical methane potential (BMP) of solid organic substrates: Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;82:3350–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
evaluation of anaerobic biodegradability using data from an international inter- rser.2017.10.054.
laboratory study. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 2011;86(8):1088–98.

20
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

[67] Liu G, Liao Y, Guo S, Ma X, Zeng C, Wu J. Thermal behaviour and kinetics of [93] Brown RC. Hybrid thermochemical/biological processing. Appl Biochem
municipal solid waste during pyrolysis and combustion process. Appl Therm Eng Biotechnol 2007;137–140(1–12):947–56.
2016;98:400–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2015.12.067. [94] Wen Z, Jarboe LR. Chapter-9, Hybrid Processing. Thermochemical Processing of
[68] Ashworth DC, Elliott P, Toledano MB. Waste incineration and adverse birth and Biomass: Conversion into Fuels, Chemicals and Power. second ed. 2019.
neonatal outcomes: a systematic review. Environ Int 2014;69:120–32. https:// p. 307–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119417637.ch9.
doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2014.04.003. [95] Jarboe LR, Wen Z, Choi D, Brown RC. Hybrid thermochemical processing:
[69] Pham TPT, Kaushik R, Parshetti GK, Mahmood R, Balasubramanian R. Food fermentation of pyrolysis-derived bio-oil. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2011;91(6):
waste-to-energy conversion technologies: current status and future directions. 1519–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3495-9.
Waste Manag 2015;38:399–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [96] De Buck V, Polanska M, Van Impe J. Modelling biowaste biorefineries: a Review.
wasman.2014.12.004. Front Sustain Food Syst 2020;4:11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2020.00011.
[70] Giuntoli J, de Jong W, Verkooijen AHM, Piotrowska P, Zevenhoven M, Hupa M. [97] Torri C, Giampiero P, Gualandi C, Maurizio P, Rombolà AG, Fabbri D. Evaluation
Combustion characteristics of biomass residues and biowastes: fate of fuel of the potential performance of hyphenated pyrolysis-anaerobic digestion (Py-
nitrogen. Energy Fuels 2010;24(10):5309–19. https://doi.org/10.1021/ AD) process for carbon negative fuels from woody biomass. Renew Energy 2020;
ef100571n. 148:1190–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2019.10.025.
[71] Vakalis S, Sotiropoulos A, Moustakas K, Malamis D, Vekkos K, Baratieri M. [98] Williams CL, Emerson RM, Hernandez S, Klinger JL, Fillerup EP, Thomas BJ.
Thermochemical valorization and characterization of household biowaste. Preprocessing and hybrid biochemical/thermochemical conversion of short
J Environ Manag 2017;203:648–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. rotation woody coppice for biofuels. Front Energy Res 2018;6:74. https://doi.
jenvman.2016.04.017. org/10.3389/fenrg.2018.00074.
[72] Rutkowski P. Chemical composition of bio-oil produced by co-pyrolysis of [99] Michailos S, Parker D, Webb C. Design, sustainability analysis and multi-objective
biopolymer/polypropylene mixtures with K2CO3 and ZnCl2 addition. J Anal Appl optimisation of ethanol production via syngas fermentation. Waste biomass
Pyrolysis 2012;95:38–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2012.01.003. Valori 2019;10:865–76. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-017-0151-3.
[73] Zhang Q, Chang J, Wang T, Xu Y. Review of biomass pyrolysis oil properties and [100] Ephraim A, Arlabosse P, Nzihou A, Pham Minh D, Sharrock P. Biomass categories.
upgrading research. Energy Convers Manag 2007;48(1):87–92. https://doi.org/ Handbook on characterization of biomass, biowaste and related by-products.
10.1016/j.enconman.2006.05.010. 2020. p. 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-35020-8_1.
[74] Van Zwieten L, Kimber S, Morris S, Chan KY, Downie A, Rust J, Joseph S, [101] Kumar G, Dharmaraja J, Arvindnarayan S, Shoban S, Bakonyi P, Saratale GD,
Cowie A. Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of paper-mill waste on agronomic Nemestóthy N, Bélafi–Bakó K, Yoon J, Kim S. A comprehensive review on
performance and soil fertility. Plant Soil 2010;327:235–46. https://doi.org/ thermochemical, biological, biochemical and hybrid conversion methods of bio-
10.1007/s11104-009-0050-x. derived lignocellulosic molecules into renewable fuels. Fuel 2019;251:352–67.
[75] Zhou Z, Zhang J, Liu J, Buyukada M, Everdilek F, Liang G. Pyrolytic behaviors, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2019.04.049.
kinetics, decomposition mechanisms, product distributions and joint optimization [102] Qin K, Lin W, Jensen PA, Jensen AD. High-temperature entrained flow
of Lentinus edodes stipe. Energy Convers Manag 2020;213:112858. https://doi. gasification of biomass. Fuel 2012;93:589–600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
org/10.1016/j.enconman.2020.112858. fuel.2011.10.063.
[76] Wang X, Ma D, Jin Q, Deng S, Satncin H, Tan H, Mikulčića H. Synergistic effects [103] Yang Z, Koh SK, Ng WC, Lim RCJ, Tan HTW, Tong YW, Dai Y, Chong C, Wang C-
of biomass and polyurethane co-pyrolysis on the yield, reactivity, and heating H. Potential application of gasification to recycle food waste and rehabilitate
value of biochar at high temperatures. Fuel Process Technol 2019;194:106127. acidic soil from secondary forests on degraded land in south East Asia. J Environ
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2019.106127. Manag 2016;172:40–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.02.020.
[77] Tabakaev R, Astafev A, Shanenkova Y, Dubinin Y, Yazykov N, Yakovlev V. [104] Muangrat R. A review: utilization of food wastes for hydrogen production under
Thermal effects investigation during biomass slow pyrolysis in a fixed bed hydrothermal gasification. Environ Technol Rev 2013;2(1):85–100. https://doi.
reactor. Biomass Bioenergy 2019;126:26–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. org/10.1080/21622515.2013.840682.
biombioe.2019.05.010. [105] Bridgwater AV, Meier D, Radlein D. An overview of fast pyrolysis of biomass. Org
[78] Mishra RK, Mohanty K. Pyrolysis kinetics and thermal behaviour of waste Geochem 1999;30(12):1479–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0146-6380(99)
sawdust biomass using thermogravimetric analysis. Bioresour Technol 2018;251: 00120-5.
63–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.12.029. [106] Chang HN, Kim N-J, Kang J, Jeong CM. Biomass-derived volatile fatty acid
[79] Dacers OD, Tong S, Li X, Zhu X, Edreis EMA, Liu H, Luo G, Worasuwannarak N, platform for fuels and chemicals. Bioproc Biosyst Eng 2010;15(1):1–10. https://
Kerdsuwan S, Fungtammasan B, Yao H. Pyrolysis kinetics of biomasses pretreated doi.org/10.1007/s12257-009-3070-8.
by gas-pressurized torrefaction. Energy Convers Manag 2019;182:117–25. [107] Asimakopoulos K, Gavala HN, Skiadas IV. Reactor systems for syngas
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.12.055. fermentation processes: a review. Chem Eng J 2018;348:732–44. https://doi.org/
[80] Saraeian A, Nolte MW, Shanks BH. Deoxygenation of biomass pyrolysis vapors: 10.1016/j.cej.2018.05.003.
improving clarity on the fate of carbon. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;104: [108] Chan JKS, Duff SJB. Methods for mitigation of bio-oil extract toxicity. Bioresour
262–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.01.037. Technol 2010;101(10):3755–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.12.054.
[81] Yaman S. Pyrolysis of biomass to produce fuels and chemical feed-stock’s. Energy [109] Chandolias K, Wainaina S, Niklasson C, Taherzadeh MJ. Effects of heavy metals
Convers Manag 2004;45(5):651–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(03) and pH on the conversion of biomass to hydrogen via syngas fermentation. Bio
00177-8. 2018;13(2):4455–69. https://doi.org/10.15376/biores.13.2.4455-4469.
[82] Farooq A, Shafaghat H, Jae J, Jung S-C, Park Y-K. Enhanced stability of bio-oil [110] Chandolias K, Richards T, Taherzadeh MJ. Combined gasification-fermentation
and diesel fuel emulsion using span 80 and tween 60 emulsifiers. J Environ process in waste biorefinery. In: Bhaskar T, Pandey A, Mohan SV, Lee D-J,
Manag 2019;231:694–700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.10.098. Khanal SK, editors. Waste biorefinery. Elsevier; 2018. p. 157–200.
[83] Jiang X, Ellis N. Upgrading bio-oil through emulsification with biodiesel: mixture [111] Phillips JR, Huhnke RL, Atiyeh HK. Syngas fermentation: a microbial conversion
production. Energy Fuels 2010;24(2):1358–64. https://doi.org/10.1021/ process of gaseous substrates to various products. Fermentatio 2017;3(2):28.
ef9010669. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation3020028.
[84] Trane R, Dahl S, Skjøth-Rasmussen MS, Jensen AD. Catalytic steam reforming of [112] Worden RM, Grethlein AJ, Jain MK, Datta R. Production of butanol and ethanol
bio-oil. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2012;37(8):6447–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. from synthesis gas via fermentation. Fuel 1991;70(5):615–9. https://doi.org/
ijhydene.2012.01.023. 10.1016/0016-2361(91)90175-A.
[85] Belgiorno V, De Feo G, Della Rocca C, Napoli RMA. Energy from gasification of [113] Youngsukkasem S, Chandolias K, Taherzadeh MJ. Rapid bio-methanation of
solid wastes. Waste Manag 2003;23(1):1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0956- syngas in a reverse membrane bioreactor: membrane encased microorganisms.
053x(02)00149-6. Bioresour Technol 2015;178:334–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[86] Arena U. Process and technological aspects of municipal solid waste gasification. biortech.2014.07.071.
A review. Waste Manage 2012;32(4):625–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [114] Zhang J, Kan X, Shen Y, Loh K-C, Wang C-H, Dai Y, Tong YW. A hybrid biological
wasman.2011.09.025. and thermal waste-to-energy system with heat energy recovery and utilization for
[87] Demirbas MF. Biorefineries for biofuel upgrading: a critical review. Appl Energy solid organic waste treatment. Energy 2018;152:214–22. https://doi.org/
2009;86:S151–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.04.043. 10.1016/j.energy.2018.03.143.
[88] Sikarwar VS, Zhao M, Clough P, Yao J, Zhong X, Memon MZ, Shah N, Anthony EJ, [115] Swami SM, Chaudhari V, Kim D-S, Sim SJ, Abraham MA. Production of hydrogen
Fennell PS. An overview of advances in biomass gasification. Energy Environ Sci from glucose as a biomass simulant: Integrated biological and thermochemical
2016;9(10):2939–77. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6EE00935B. approach. Ind Eng Chem 2008;47(10):3645–51. https://doi.org/10.1021/
[89] Wainaina S, Parchami M, Mahboubi A, Horváth IS, Taherzadeh MJ. Food waste- ie070895p.
derived volatile fatty acids platform using an immersed membrane bioreactor. [116] Jarboe LR, Wen Z, Choi D, Brown RC. Hybrid thermochemical processing:
Bioresour Technol 2019;274:329–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. fermentation of pyrolysis-derived bio-oil. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 2018;91(6):
biortech.2018.11.104. 1519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3495-9.
[90] Gómez-Barea A, Leckner B. Modeling of biomass gasification in fluidized bed. [117] Mohammadi M, Najafpour GD, Younesi H, Lahijani P, Uzir MH, Mohamed AR.
Prog Energy Combust Sci 2010;36(4):444–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Bioconversion of synthesis gas to second generation biofuels: a review. Renew
pecs.2009.12.002. Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15(9):4255–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[91] De Wild PJ. Biomass pyrolysis for hybrid biorefineries. Industrial Biorefineries & rser.2011.07.124.
White Biotechnology 2015:341–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63453- [118] Dürre P. Fermentative production of butanol-the academic perspective. Curr Opin
5.00010-0. Biotechnol 2011;22(3):331–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2011.04.010.
[92] Claypool JT, Christopher WS. Hybrid thermochemical/biological processing: the [119] Richter H, Molitor B, Wei H, Chen W, Aristilde L, Angenent LT. Ethanol
economic hurdles and opportunities for biofuel production from bio-oil. Renew production in syngas-fermenting Clostridium ljungdahlii is controlled by
Energy 2016;96:450–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2016.04.095.

21
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

thermodynamics rather than by enzyme expression. Energy Environ Sci 2016;9 [145] Starr K, Talens PL, Lombardi L, Gabarrell X, Villalba G. Optimization of
(7):2392–9. https://doi.org/10.1039/c6ee01108j. environmental benefits of carbon mineralization technologies for biogas
[120] Saxena J, Tanner RS. Effect of trace metals on ethanol production from synthesis upgrading. J Clean Prod 2014;76:32–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
gas by the Ethanologenic acetogen, Clostridium ragsdalei. J Ind Microbiol 2011;38 jclepro.2014.04.039.
(4):513–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10295-010-0794-6. [146] Xu C, Shi W, Hong J, Zhang F, Chen W. Life cycle assessment of food waste based
[121] Sancho NS, Cimpoia R, Bruant G, Guiot SR. Biomethanation of syngas using biogas generation. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;49:169–77. https://doi.org/
anaerobic sludge: shift in the catabolic routes with the co partial pressure 10.1016/j.rser.2015.04.164.
increase. Front Microbiol 2016;7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.01188. [147] Gunamantha M, Sarto. Life cycle assessment of municipal solid waste treatment to
[122] Grimalt-Alemany A, Skiadas IV, Gavala HN. Syngas biomethanation: state-of-the- energy options: case study of KARTAMANTUL region, Yogyakarta. Renew Energy
art review and perspectives. Biofuel Bioprod Bior 2018;12(1):139–58. https:// 2012;41:277–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2011.11.008.
doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1826. [148] Nizami AS, Rehan M, Waqas M, Naqvi M, Ouda OKM, Shahzad K, Miandad R,
[123] Luo G, Jing Y, Lin Y, Zhang S, An D. A novel concept for syngas biomethanation Khan MZ, Syamsiro M, Ismail IMI, Pant D. Waste biorefineries: enabling circular
by two-stage process: focusing on the selective conversion of syngas to acetate. Sci economies in developing countries. Bioresour Technol 2017;241:1101–17.
Total Environ 2018;645:1194–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.05.097.
scitotenv.2018.07.263. [149] Miguel GS, Corona B. Hybridizing concentrated solar power (CSP) with biogas
[124] Klasson KT, Ackerson MD, Clausen EC, Gaddy JL. Bioreactor design for synthesis and biomethane as an alternative to natural gas: analysis of environmental
gas fermentations. Fuel 1991;70(5):605–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-2361 performance using LCA. Renew Energy 2014;66:580–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/
(91)90174-9. j.renene.2013.12.023.
[125] Shen Y, Brown R, Wen Z. Enhancing mass transfer and ethanol production in [150] Pérez-Camacho MN, Curry R, Cromie T. Life cycle environmental impacts of
syngas fermentation of clostridium Carboxi divorans p7 through a monolithic substituting food wastes for traditional anaerobic digestion feed stock’s. Waste
biofilm reactor. Appl Energy 2014;136:68–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Manag 2018;73:140–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.12.023.
apenergy.2014.08.117. [151] Bueno G, Latasa I, Lozano PJ. Comparative LCA of two approaches with different
[126] Bredwell MD, Worden RM. Mass-transfer properties of micro bubbles. 1. emphasis on energy or material recovery for a municipal solid waste management
Experimental studies. Biotechnol Prog 1998;14(1):31–8. https://doi.org/ system in Gipuzkoa. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;51:449–59. https://doi.org/
10.1021/bp970133x. 10.1016/j.rser.2015.06.021.
[127] Westman SY, Chandolias K, Taherzadeh MJ. Syngas biomethanation in a semi- [152] Tufvesson LM, Lantz M, Börjesson P. Environmental performance of biogas
continuous reverse membrane bioreactor (rmbr). Fermentatio 2016;2(2):8. produced from industrial residues including competition with animal feed – life-
https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation2020008. cycle calculations according to different methodologies and standards. J Clean
[128] Rajendran K, Murthy G. Techno-economic and life cycle assessments of anaerobic Prod 2013;53:214–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.04.005.
digestion – a review. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol 2019;20:101–207. https://doi. [153] Borjesson P, Berglund M. Environmental systems analysis of biogas systems – part
org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101207. 1: fuel-cycle emissions. Biomass Bioenergy 2006;30:469–85. https://doi.org/
[129] Sarsaiya S, Jain A, Awasthi SK, Duan Y, Awasthi MK, Shi J. Microbial dynamics 10.1016/j.biombioe.2005.11.014.
for lignocellulosic waste bioconversion and its importance with modern circular [154] Myllyviita T, Holma A, Antikainen R, L€ahtinen K, Leskinen P. Assessing
economy, challenges and future perspectives. Bioresour Technol 2019;291: environmental impacts of biomass production chains e application of life cycle
121905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.121905. assessment (LCA) and multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA). J Clean Prod 2012;
[130] Kabir MM, Rajendran K, Taherzadeh MJ, Sárvári Horváth I. Experimental and 29–30:238–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.01.019.
economical evaluation of bioconversion of forest residues to biogas using [155] Puksec T, Foley A, Markovska N, Duic N. Life cycle to Pinch Analysis and 100%
organosolv pretreatment. Bioresour Technol 2015;178:201–8. https://doi.org/ renewable energy systems in a circular economy at sustainable development of
10.1016/j.biortech.2014.07.064. energy, Water and Environment Systems 2017. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;
[131] Yaakob Z, Mohammad M, Alherbadwi M, Alam Z, Sopian K. Overview of the 108:572–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.03.046.
production of biodiesel from Waste cooking oil. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013; [156] Frank U, Schlüter K, Gallert C. Wet biowaste digestion: ADM1 model
18:184–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.10.016. improvement by implementation of known genera and activity of propionate
[132] Apostolakou AA, Kookos IK, Marazioti C, Angelopoulos KC. Techno-economic oxidizing bacteria. Water Res 2018;129:384–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
analysis of a biodiesel production process from vegetable oils. Fuel Process watres.2017.11.012.
Technol 2009;90(7–8):1023–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2009.04.017. [157] Johnson KA, Johnson DE. Methane emissions from cattle. J Anim Sci 1995;73(8):
[133] Zhang Y, Dube MA, McLean DD, Kates M. Biodiesel production from waste 2483–92. https://doi.org/10.2527/1995.7382483x.
cooking oil: 2. Economic assessment and sensitivity analysis. Bioresour Technol [158] Yan BH, Selvam A, Wong JW. Application of rumen microbes to enhance food
2003;90:229–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(03)00150-0. waste hydrolysis in acidogenic leach-bed reactors. Bioresour Technol 2014;168:
[134] Kung CC, McCarl BA, Cao X. Economics of pyrolysis-based energy production and 64–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.03.085.
biochar utilization: a case study in Taiwan. Energy Pol 2013;60:317–23. https:// [159] Rizos V, Behrens A, van der Gaast W, Hofman E, Ioannou A, Kafyeke T, Flamos A,
doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.029. Rinaldi R, Papadelis S, Hirschnitz-Garbers M, Topi C. Implementation of circular
[135] Jones RJ, Massanet-Nicolau J, Mulder MJ, Premier G, Dinsdale R, Guwy A. economy business models by small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs): barriers
Increased biohydrogen yields, volatile fatty acid production and substrate and enablers. Sustain Times 2016;8(11):1212. https://doi.org/10.3390/
utilisation rates via the electrodialysis of a continually fed sucrose fermenter. su8111212.
Bioresour Technol 2017;229:46–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [160] Vazquez-Rowe I, Golkowska K, Lebuf V, Vaneeckhaute C, Michels E, Meers E,
biortech.2017.01.015. Benetto E, Koster D. Environmental assessment of digestate treatment
[136] Jin L, Zhao H, Wang M, Wei B, Hu H. Effect of temperature and simulated coal gas technologies using LCA methodology. Waste Manag 2015;43:442–59. https://doi.
composition on tar production during pyrolysis of a subbituminous coal. Fuel org/10.1016/j.wasman.2015.05.007.
2019;241:1129–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.12.093. [161] Patterson T, Esteves S, Dinsdale R, Guwy A. Life cycle assessment of biogas
[137] Gonzalez-Fernandez C, Sialve B, Molinuevo-Salces B. Anaerobic digestion of infrastructure options on a regional scale. Bioresour Technol 2011;102(15):
microalgal biomass: challenges, opportunities and research needs. Bioresour 7313–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.04.063.
Technol 2015;198:896–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.09.095. [162] Cordell D, Drangert JO, White S. The story of phosphorus: global food security
[138] Song Z, Zhang C, Yang G, Feng Y, Ren G, Han X. Comparison of biogas and food for thought. Global Environ Change 2009;19(2):292–305. https://doi.
development from households and medium and large-scale biogas plants in rural org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.10.009.
China. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2014;33:204–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [163] Shi L, Xie S, Hu Z, Wu G, Morrison L, Croot P, Hu H, Zhan X. Nutrient recovery
rser.2014.01.084. from pig manure digestate using electrodialysis reversal: membrane fouling and
[139] Di Maria F, Sisani F. A sustainability assessment for use on land or wastewater feasibility of long-term operation. J Membr Sci 2019;573:560–9. https://doi.org/
treatment of the digestate from bio-waste. Waste Manag 2019;87:741–50. 10.1016/j.memsci.2018.12.037.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2019.03.015. [164] Awasthi MK, Sarsaiya S, Wainaina S, Rajendran K, Kumar S, Quan W, Duan Y,
[140] Khoo HH, Lim TZ, Tan RB. Food waste conversion options in Singapore: Awasthi SK, Chen H, Pandey A, Zhang Z, Jian A, Taherzadeh M. A critical review
environmental impacts based on an LCA perspective. Sci Total Environ 2010;408 of organic manure biorefinery models toward sustainable circular bioeconomy:
(6):1367–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2009.10.072. technological challenges, advancements, innovations, and future perspectives.
[141] Guo M, Song W, Buhain J. Bioenergy and biofuels: history, status, and Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2019;111:115–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
perspective. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;42:712–25. https://doi.org/ rser.2019.05.017.
10.1016/j.rser.2014. [165] Brunner PH, Rechberger H. Waste to energy–key element for sustainable waste
[142] Nasr N, Elbeshbishy E, Hafez H, Nakhla G, Hesham El Naggar M. Comparative management. Waste Manag 2015;37:3–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
assessment of single-stage and two-stage anaerobic digestion for the treatment of wasman.2014.02.003.
thin stillage. Bioresour Technol 2012;111:122–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [166] Margallo M, Taddei MBM, Hernández-Pellón A, Aldaco R, Irabien Á.
biortech.2012.02.019. Environmental sustainability assessment of the management of municipal solid
[143] Zhu H, Parker W, Basnar R, Proracki A, Falletta P, Béland M, Seto P. Buffer waste incineration residues: a review of the current situation. Clean Technol Envir
requirements for enhanced hydrogen production in acidogenic digestion of food 2015;17(5):1333–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10098-015-0961-6.
wastes. Bioresour Technol 2009;100(21):5097–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [167] Lohri CR, Diener S, Zabaleta I, Mertenat A, Zurbrügg C. Treatment technologies
biortech.2009.02.066. for urban solid biowaste to create value products: a review with focus on low- and
[144] Ardolino F, Arena U. Biowaste-to-Biomethane: an LCA study on biogas and syngas middle-income settings. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 2017;16(1):81–130. https://
roads. Waste Manag 2019;87:441–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. doi.org/10.1007/s11157-017-9422-5.
wasman.2019.02.030.

22
M.K. Awasthi et al. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 144 (2021) 110837

[168] Karmperis AC, Aravossis K, Tatsiopoulos IP, Sotirchos A. Decision support models [180] Rodriguez C, Alaswad A, El-Hassan Z, Olabi AG. Mechanical pre-treatment of
for solid waste management: review and game-theoretic approaches. Waste waste paper for biogas production. Waste Manag 2017;68:157–64. https://doi.
Manag 2013;33:1290–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2013.01.017. org/10.1016/j.wasman.2017.06.040.
[169] Huttunen S, Manninen K, Leskinen P. Combining biogas LCA reviews with [181] Moraes MSA, Georges F, Almeida SR, Damasceno FC, Maciel GPdS, Zini CA,
stakeholder interviews to analyse life cycle impacts at a practical level. J Clean Jacques RA, Caramão EB. Analysis of products from pyrolysis of Brazilian sugar
Prod 2014;80:5–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.05.081. cane straw. Fuel Process Technol 2012;101:35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[170] Rosa P, Sassanelli C, Terzi S. Circular business models versus circular benefits: an fuproc.2012.03.004.
assessment in the waste from electrical and electronic equipment’s sector. J Clean [182] Van Zwieten L, Kimber S, Morris S, Chan KY, Downie A, Rust J, Joseph S,
Prod 2019;23(1):940–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.310. Cowie A. Effects of biochar from slow pyrolysis of papermill waste on agronomic
[171] Leipold S, Petit-Boix A. The circular economy and the bio-based sector - performance and soil fertility. Plant Soil 2010;327(1):235–46. https://doi.org/
perspectives of European and German stakeholders. J Clean Prod 2018;201: 10.1007/s11104-009-0050-x.
1125–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.019. [183] Tsai WT, Lee MK, Chang YM. Fast pyrolysis of rice husk: product yields and
[172] Soares N, Bastos J, Pereira LD, Soares A, Amaral AR, Asadi E, Rodrigues E, compositions. Bioresour Technol 2007;98(1):22–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Lamas FB, Monteiro H, Lopes MAR, Gaspar AR. A review on current advances in biortech.2005.12.005.
the energy and environmental performance of buildings towards a more [184] Sørum L, Grønli MG, Hustad JE. Pyrolysis characteristics and kinetics of
sustainable built environment. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2017;77:845–60. municipal solid wastes. Fuel 2001;80(9):1217–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.04.027. S0016-2361(00)00218-0.
[173] Kacprzak M, Neczaj E, Fijałkowski K, Grobelak A, Grosser A, Worwag M, Rorat A, [185] Ahmed II, Gupta AK. Pyrolysis and gasification of food waste: syngas
Brattebo H, Almås Å, Singh BR. Sewage sludge disposal strategies for sustainable characteristics and char gasification kinetics. Appl Energy 2010;87(1):101–8.
development. Environ Res 2017;156:39–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.08.032.
envres.2017.03.010. [186] He M, Xiao B, Liu S, Hu Z, Guo X, Luo S, Yang F. Syngas production from pyrolysis
[174] Caporgno MP, Trobajo R, Caiola N, Ibáñez C, Fabregat A, Bengoa C. Biogas of municipal solid waste (msw) with dolomite as downstream catalysts. J Anal
production from sewage sludge and microalgae co-digestion under mesophilic Appl Pyrol 2010;87(2):181–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2009.11.005.
and thermophilic conditions. Renew Energy 2015;75:374–80. https://doi.org/ [187] Skoulou V, Zabaniotou A, Stavropoulos G, Sakelaropoulos G. Syngas production
10.1016/j.renene.2014.10.019. from olive tree cuttings and olive kernels in a downdraft fixed-bed gasifier. Int J
[175] Forster-Carneiro T, Pérez M, Romero LI. Influence of total solid and inoculum Hydrogen Energy 2008;33(4):1185–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
contents on performance of anaerobic reactors treating food waste. Bioresour ijhydene.2007.12.051.
Technol 2008;99(15):6994–7002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. [188] Nipattummakul N, Ahmed II, Kerdsuwan S, Gupta AK. Steam gasification of oil
biortech.2008.01.018. palm trunk waste for clean syngas production. Appl Energy 2012;92:778–82.
[176] Zhang C, Xiao G, Peng L, Su H, Tan T. The anaerobic co-digestion of food waste https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.08.026.
and cattle manure. Bioresour Technol 2013;129:170–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/ [189] Leipold S, Petit-Boix A. The circular economy and the bio-based sector -
j.biortech.2012.10.138. perspectives of European and German stakeholders. J Clean Prod 2018;201:1125.
[177] Banks CJ, Chesshire M, Heaven S, Arnold R. Anaerobic digestion of source- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.019. 113.
segregated domestic food waste: performance assessment by mass and energy [190] Zeller V, Towa E, Degrez M, Achten WMJ. Urban waste flows and their potential
balance. Bioresour Technol 2011;102(2):612–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. for a circular economy model at city-region level. Waste Manag 2019;83:83–94.
biortech.2010.08.005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.10.034.
[178] Wang Z, Banks CJ. Evaluation of a two stage anaerobic digester for the treatment [191] Tomić T, Schneider DR. The role of energy from waste in circular economy and
of mixed abattoir wastes. Process Biochem 2003;38(9):1267–73. https://doi.org/ closing the loop concept – energy analysis approach. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
10.1016/S0032-9592(02)00324-2. 2018;98:268–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2018.09.029.
[179] Fonoll X, Astals S, Dosta J, Mata-Alvarez J. Anaerobic co-digestion of sewage [192] Mihai F-C, Ingrao C. Assessment of biowaste losses through unsound waste
sludge and fruit wastes: evaluation of the transitory states when the co-substrate management practices in rural areas and the role of home composting. J Clean
is changed. Chem Eng J 2015;262:1268–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Prod 2018;172:1631–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.10.163.
cej.2014.10.045. [193] Sloarch PC, Jeswani HK, Cuellar-Franca R, Azapagic A. Environmental
sustainability of anaerobic digestion of household food waste. J Environ Manag
2019;236:798–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.02.001.

23