TY - JOUR
T1 - Pretreatment techniques used in biogas production from grass
AU - Rodriguez, Cristina
AU - Alaswad, A.
AU - Benyounis, K.y.
AU - Olabi, A.g.
N1 - © 2016, Elsevier. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
PY - 2017/2/1
Y1 - 2017/2/1
N2 - Grass is being considered as a potential feedstock for biogas production, due to its low water consumption compared to other crops, and the fact that it can be cultivated in non-arable lands, avoiding the direct competition with food crops. However, biogas production is limited by the characteristics of the feedstock; in particular its complex lignocellulosic structure. Hence, different pretreatment methods are being investigated for grass structure disruption before undergoing the anaerobic digestion process. The aim of this paper is to review current knowledge on pretreatment techniques used for grassland biomass. Pretreatment techniques were categorized into mechanical, microwave, thermal, chemical and biological groups. The effect of the application of each studied methods on the biogas yield and on the energy balance is discussed. A further comparison between the covered techniques was revealed.
AB - Grass is being considered as a potential feedstock for biogas production, due to its low water consumption compared to other crops, and the fact that it can be cultivated in non-arable lands, avoiding the direct competition with food crops. However, biogas production is limited by the characteristics of the feedstock; in particular its complex lignocellulosic structure. Hence, different pretreatment methods are being investigated for grass structure disruption before undergoing the anaerobic digestion process. The aim of this paper is to review current knowledge on pretreatment techniques used for grassland biomass. Pretreatment techniques were categorized into mechanical, microwave, thermal, chemical and biological groups. The effect of the application of each studied methods on the biogas yield and on the energy balance is discussed. A further comparison between the covered techniques was revealed.
UR - https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1364032116002306
U2 - 10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.022
DO - 10.1016/j.rser.2016.02.022
M3 - Article
SN - 1364-0321
VL - 68
SP - 1193
EP - 1204
JO - Renewable and sustainable energy reviews
JF - Renewable and sustainable energy reviews
IS - Part 2
ER -