Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Bioresource Technology Reports

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/bioresource-technology-reports

Sustainable bioethanol production from first- and second-generation

sugar-based feedstocks: Advanced bibliometric analysis
Cláudia Elisa César Guimarães a, Francisco Simão Neto a, Viviane de Castro Bizerra b,
Jean Gleison Andrade do Nascimento b, Roberta Bussons Rodrigues Valério b,
Paulo Gonçalves de Sousa Junior c, Ana Kátia de Sousa Braz d, Rafael Leandro Fernandes Melo e,
Juliana de França Serpa a, Rita Karolinny Chaves de Lima a, Artemis Pessoa Guimarães a,
Maria Cristiane Martins de Souza a, Ada Amelia Sanders Lopes a,
Maria Alexsandra de Sousa Rios f, Ajay S. Desai g, Muhammad Bilal i, Wojciech Smułek h,
Teofil Jesionowski h, José Cleiton Sousa dos Santos a, b, *
a
Instituto de Engenharias e Desenvolvimento Sustentável, Universidade da Integração Internacional da Lusofonia Afro-Brasileira, Campus das Auroras, Redenção CEP
62790970, CE, Brazil
b
Programa de Pós-graduação em Energia e Ambiente, Universidade da Integração Internacional da Lusofonia Afro-Brasileira, Campus das Auroras, Redenção CEP
62790970, CE, Brazil
c
Departamento de Química Analítica e Físico-Química, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Campus do Pici, Fortaleza, Bloco 940, CEP 60455760, CE, Brazil
d
Departamento de Engenharia Hidráulica e Ambiental, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Campus do Pici, Fortaleza, Bloco 713, CEP 60400-900, CE, Brazil
e
Programa de Pós-graduação em Engenharia e Ciência de Materiais, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Campus do Pici, Bloco 729, Fortaleza CEP 60.440-554, CE, Brazil
f
Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica, Grupo de Inovações Tecnológicas e Especialidades Químicas—GRINTEQUI, Universidade Federal do Ceará, Bloco 715, Campus
do Pici, Fortaleza 60440554, CE, Brazil
g
Department of Fish Processing Technology, College of Fisheries, Shirgaon, Ratnagiri 415629, (Dr Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli), Maharashtra,
India
h
Institute of Chemical Technology and Engineering, Faculty of Chemical Technology, Poznan University of Technology, Berdychowo 4, PL-60965 Poznan, Poland
i
Department of Sanitary Engineering, Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, G. Narutowicza 11/12 Str., 80-233 Gdansk,
Poland

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

Keywords: Bioethanol is produced from carbohydrate-containing feedstocks through fermentation. Based on a bibliometric
Bioethanol review of studies published between 2012 and 2021, we analyzed those on sustainable bioethanol production.
Clean energy The Web of Science main collection yielded 1647 publications, which were analyzed using VOSViewer, Cite­
Feedstocks
Space, and ArcMap software. More than half of these publications originated from some Asian countries, cor­
Alternative process
Technology
responding to 63.6 %, with India being the most participatory country. The most studied area was energy fuels,
Sugar and Bioresource Technology (Elsevier) was the journal that published most on the topic, while Universiti Tenaga
Nasional in Malaysia had the most interactions. Four emerging trends were identified, in mention: enzymatic
hydrolysis, alternative process arrangements, use of the bacterium Zymomonas mobilis and structural features. In
conclusion, it was found that the studies generally identified more advantages than disadvantages, and the
research showed a positive trend, but there are still existing obstacles, which may be overcome through improved
processes.

1. Introduction (including oil, coal, and natural gas), primarily used to produce elec­
tricity (Ibrahim et al., 2023; Kabir et al., 2023; Kiehbadroudinezhad
The world’s economy depends on various fossil energy sources et al., 2023; Moreira et al., 2020; Nogueira et al., 2023; Sarkar et al.,

* Corresponding author at: Institute of Engineering and Sustainable Development, Universidade da Integração Internacional da Lusofonia Afro-Brasileira, Campus
das Auroras, Redenção 62790970, CE, Brazil.
E-mail address: [email protected] (J.C.S. dos Santos).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2023.101543
Received 14 April 2023; Received in revised form 3 July 2023; Accepted 5 July 2023
Available online 7 July 2023
2589-014X/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

2012). These fuels are useful because they contain immense chemical different conversion technologies (Althuri and Venkata Mohan, 2022;
energy, while being relatively easy to store and transport (AlHumaidan Bender et al., 2022; Singh et al., 2022). These feedstocks may be clas­
et al., 2023; Balat, 2008; Chhandama et al., 2023; Ferreira Mota et al., sified in four groups: 1) fermenting mono - and disaccharides (including
2022; Mujtaba et al., 2023; Sathre, 2014). However, despite their ben­ glucose and sucrose); 2) starchy (containing starch); 3) lignocellulosic,
efits for social development, fossil fuels still have serious environmental being basically composed of 40–60 % cellulose, 20–40 % hemicellulose,
consequences that are the subject of worldwide debate (Bachs-Herrera and 15–25 % lignin (Balat, 2011; Souza et al., 2012); and 4) algae
et al., 2023; Olabi et al., 2023; Olah et al., 2009; Ribeiro, 2014; Santana (containing starch and cellulose) (Melendez et al., 2022; Sawarkar et al.,
et al., 2020). During the conversion of chemical energy into thermal 2022). In terms of the routes for obtaining these sources, feedstocks
energy (Kato, 2007) through the process of fuel combustion, the containing sugars and starch are associated with the first (first-genera­
resulting heat can provide electrical energy (Bachs-Herrera et al., 2023; tion, 1G) route, which uses edible biomass (Bušić et al., 2018; Kazemi
Dziejarski et al., 2023; Saddique et al., 2023) however, fuel combustion Shariat Panahi et al., 2022b). Lignocellulosic biomass (second-genera­
produces several pollutant gases (including carbon dioxide [CO2], car­ tion, 2G) comes from abundant and renewable crops that are nonedible
bon monoxide [CO], and sulfur and nitrogen oxides) (Haas et al., 2023; feedstocks (Gandam et al., 2022). Algae have received worldwide
Kirchherr et al., 2023). Known as greenhouse gases (GHGs) (Santos attention as a third (third-generation, 3G) route to obtain bioethanol
et al., 2023) these gases have a significant impact on environmental (Offei et al., 2018). In this study, algae will be discussed only briefly,
degradation (Chen et al., 2023; Malik et al., 2014; Nemmour et al., since the focus is on the first and second generations (Aghaei et al., 2022;
2023), global climate change (Zidanšek et al., 2009), and increased Devos and Colla, 2022).
health problems – situations of significant concern to humanity. In Key to ethanol fermentation is the microorganisms capable of car­
addition, the growth of the transportation sector (Osman et al., 2021) rying it out (Suhartini et al., 2022). The most widely used are yeasts of
has significantly contributed to the increase in fossil energy consump­ the genus Saccharomyces, in particular the species Saccharomyces cer­
tion, and consequently to factors that damage the environment (Ellab­ evisiae, known as baker’s or brewer’s yeast (Fan et al., 2023). However,
ban et al., 2014; Kurien and Mittal, 2023; Prato-Garcia et al., 2023). To the main limitation on their use is their relatively low tolerable ethanol
provide a partial solution to these problems, effort is made to implement concentration (rarely exceeding several percent) and their compatibility
clean energies in the energy matrix, since these bring numerous benefits with only selected mono- and disaccharides (Tikka et al., 2013). In the
to the environment, such as low GHG emissions and reduction in the rate search for more efficient bioethanol producers, research is being con­
of global warming (Jia et al., 2023). Thus, the use of clean energy (De La ducted on bacteria from the genera Lactobacillus and Clostridium, among
Peña et al., 2018; Genovese et al., 2023; Penalva Santos et al., 2023) has others (Soleimani et al., 2017). High hopes are also pinned on the bac­
been gaining more and more attention as a means of mitigating envi­ terial species Zymomonas mobilis (Xia et al., 2019). Yeasts of the Candida
ronmental damage and raising global awareness for sustainable devel­ and Pachysolen genera, which are capable of fermenting xylose to
opment. There are several alternative sources of energy (Alawad et al., ethanol, are also being tested (Selim et al., 2018). An interesting alter­
2023; Dresselhaus and Thomas, 2001; Guven et al., 2023) that, although native to S. cerevisiae is the yeast Pichia stipitis (Sarkar et al., 2012). A
they do not totally replace the use of fossil fuels, contribute to reducing separate area of research is the use of genetically modified microor­
their consumption (Souza et al., 2020; Souza et al., 2012). One of these ganisms enriched with enzymatic (Lopes et al., 2023) pathways that
renewable sources is energy generated from biomass (Kircher et al., enable the fermentation of lignocellulosic biomass (Abreu-Cavalheiro
2023; Kumar et al., 2015; Lan et al., 2012; Tahir et al., 2023), which is and Monteiro, 2013; Den Haan et al., 2013; Kazemi Shariat Panahi et al.,
an attractive and viable alternative that can contribute to reducing fossil 2022a; Pereira et al., 2021; Yuan et al., 2021).
fuel use, and is perceived as a carbon-neutral energy source (Abbasi and First- and second-generation bioethanol have sparked several de­
Abbasi, 2010; Culaba et al., 2023). Biomass can be converted into solid, bates as to which model is more sustainable, economical, and high-
liquid, and gaseous biofuels to generate bioenergy and certain chemicals yielding. Many researchers have concluded that second-generation
(Asif and Muneer, 2007; Oduro and Taylor, 2023; Vassilev and Vassi­ bioethanol production can be considered a technological innovation
leva, 2016). that addresses environmental concerns, as it allows better utilization of
Biofuels are derived from renewable feedstocks and, compared with first-generation municipal solid waste, residues, and biomass (Chen
fossil fuels, offer a greater balance between the amount of carbon di­ et al., 2021; Maia et al., 2020).
oxide they produce when burned and the amount absorbed during We conducted an advanced bibliometric review of integration op­
growing of the feedstock (Braun et al., 2023; Dave et al., 2019; Oliveira, portunities for sustainable bioethanol production. A broad search of
2019; Wang et al., 2023). However, for them to become widely used scientific articles in the Web of Science (WoS) database was performed
around the world, it is not enough that they have environmentally using the keywords “bioethanol production”, “fermentation”, and
sustainable characteristics – they must also be competitive with fossil “environmental impact”. Based on the above, this study addressed an
fuels (Mousavi-Avval et al., 2023; Vidal, 2021b; Woon et al., 2023). updated review and a bibliometric analysis of scientific research on the
Replacing fossil fuels with renewable fuels is seen as a strategy to production of sustainable bioethanol from sugar-based raw materials.
address not only future global energy needs, but also the need to reduce The focus of this review is on analyzing the evolution of updated
greenhouse gases; (Davidson, 2023; Ullah et al., 2015). Bioethanol, research, as well as trends in the use of solid and agricultural resources.
biodiesel (Ayodele et al., 2020; Catumba et al., 2023; de Oliveira et al., This review contributes to the description of available technologies for
2021; Khaire et al., 2021; Knothe and Razon, 2017; Ramos et al., 2011; waste recovery, providing the possibility to qualify different raw ma­
Rocha et al., 2021; Sanchez et al., 2020), and biogas (Kougias and terials and analyze innovative opportunities to use by-products. There­
Angelidaki, 2018; Zhang et al., 2023) are the best-known biofuels fore, this study effectively proposes future research and is the basis for
worldwide, and their use has grown rapidly because they are biode­ sustainability. The study is divided into eight sections (including this
gradable products and have several positive impacts on the environment introduction). The second section describes the methodology used to
(Cavalcante et al., 2022; Germano de sousa et al., 2022). Of these, construct the paper. The third section presents the results and related
bioethanol (“green ethanol”, CH3CH2OH or EtOH) is the most contro­ discussions. The fourth section presents the main differences between
versial with regard to a number of factors, often influenced by govern­ the two generations of bioethanol (1G and 2G). Based on these differ­
ment policies, including energy balance, production, productivity/ ences, methods of integrating 1G and 2G bioethanol are presented in
competitiveness, and the economic model of society (Gouveia, 2013; fifth section. In the sixth section discusses the main research issues. The
Kusmiyati et al., 2023; Malik et al., 2022; Ndubuisi et al., 2023). seventh section presents conclusions, and in the eighth section contains
Bioethanol is classified as a liquid biofuel that can be produced from a list of references.
carbohydrate sources through the feedstock fermentation process, using This review aims to answer the following questions:

2
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

• How has scientific output evolved as regards research on the pro­ Excel, and Google Spreadsheets software were used to measure, inter­
duction of sustainable bioethanol? pret, and evaluate the volume of documents obtained. VOSViewer was
• What are the main feedstocks highlighted in the survey? used to visualize and construct bibliometric maps from the network data
• What are the main research hotspots (keywords) in the literature on using VOS mapping and clustering techniques (Catumba et al., 2023;
the production of sustainable bioethanol? Neto et al., 2023; Nogueira et al., 2023; Rodrigues et al., 2023; Sales
• What are the main co-citation clusters in this research area? et al., 2023; Santos et al., 2018). Citespace was used to obtain a set of
bibliographic records of relevant publications. Excel and Google
2. Methodology Spreadsheets were used to create tables and some figures. ArcMap was
used to perform geocoding, which is the process of transforming location
2.1. Data source data into spatial data.

Bibliometric analysis is a popular, detailed tool for counting large 3. Results and discussion
amounts of scientific data (Yoshida, 2010). Such an analysis aims to
uncover the evolving nuances of a particular research field, revealing 3.1. Bibliometric analysis
essential indicators such as countries, authors, journals, institutions, and
emerging areas within the field (Donthu et al., 2021). In this section, the first question will be answered:
For the present bibliometric analysis, the Web of Science Clarivate
Analytics database (https://www-webofscience.ez373.periodicos.capes. • Q1: How has scientific output evolved as regards research on the
gov.br/wos/woscc/basic-search) was searched, to obtain the largest production of sustainable bioethanol?
number of high-quality publications on the subject. Papers were
accessed using the proxy of the University of International Integration of
Afro-Brazilian Lusophony (UNILAB). The keywords chosen to obtain the 3.1.1. Quantitative analysis of publication trends
sample for this study were, in the first field, “Bioethanol production” The evolution of the number of publications is one of the most
(title) or “Fermentation” (title) and “Environmental impact” (theme) relevant aspects of bibliometric analysis. From 2012 to 2021, publica­
and 2012–2021 (years of publication). It was decided to exclude the year tions on bioethanol production increased significantly.
2022 in order not to interfere with the search (by causing an increase of Fig. 2 shows an evolutionary comparison of the total number of
articles), since this was the year in which the review was conducted. publications and the numbers of publications classified as articles, re­
Subsequently, the publications were refined to include only those views, and conference papers. Among the 1647 publications, 107 were
written in English, and the following document types were selected: review articles (6.50 %). For a better understanding of the data, Fig. 2
articles (n = 1381), review articles (n = 107), and conference abstracts has been constructed with separate columns for each group. Due to
(n = 193). Thus, 1647 documents were obtained in total. space limitations, annual numbers of publications per group are not
This bibliometric analysis includes the following steps: 1) biblio­ shown, but they are indicated by the heights of the columns. Review
metric analysis of publication development, presenting a quantitative articles are in the minority relative to the other two groups: only 4 re­
analysis of publication trends, distribution of journals, countries, in­ view articles were published in 2012, although this number increased
stitutions, authors, cited articles, and research areas (Ranjbari et al., fivefold (n = 20) in 2020, which was the most productive year for this
2022); 2) analysis of referenced feedstocks; and 3) analysis of keywords category. Conference papers represent 11.72 % (n = 193) of the total
and main clusters. Fig. 1 briefly illustrates the methodology used to number of contributions. In this case the most productive year was 2018,
prepare the study as per the PRISMA guidelines. with 29 publications. The number fell in both 2019 and 2020, and only
three such papers were published in 2021; this is an unusual trend, since
2.2. Data analysis generally lower numbers of papers are recorded for earlier years.
Approximately 83 % (n = 1381) of the publications were original arti­
VOSViewer, Citespace (v.6.1. R3), Arcmap (Wampler et al., 2013), cles. This high proportion indicates positive interest in the topic,

Fig. 1. Representation of the study methodology in the PRISMA structure.

3
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 2. Evolution of the number of publications on bioethanol production in WoS from 2012 to 2021.

motivated by the need to replace fossil fuels with biofuels. In summary, dividing the total number of citations of articles accumulated in the last
although 2020 was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, it was still two years by the total number of articles published by the journal in that
found to be the year with the highest scientific output (Queiroz et al., period (Marziale and Mendes, 2002).
2021), except in the case of conference papers; nevertheless, it is esti­ Of the journals in Table 1, Bioresource Technology and Journal of
mated that the number of research papers may increase further. Cleaner Production have the highest impact factors, and Bioresources has
the lowest. It may be assumed that the higher the IF, the better known
3.1.2. Distribution of scientific journals the journal is.
We retrieved 1057 documents published in 70 different journals. The According to the website of Bioresource Technology, the journal aims
growth in the number of documents is due to the fact that, in recent to disseminate knowledge on bioenergy, biomass, biological treatment
years, the topics of bioethanol production and sustainability have of waste, biotransformation, and systems analysis of bioresources and
generated great attention in the search for sustainable and innovative related conversion or production technologies. The Journal of Cleaner
environmental practices to reduce dependence on fossil fuels. Production website states that the journal focuses on research and
Table 1 shows the 10 journals with the largest numbers of publica­ practice in cleaner production, the environment, and sustainability.
tions in the period analyzed. Of these, Bioresource Technology was the Of the journals listed in Table 1, three are Dutch, four are British, and
leading journal (155 publications and 5840 citations), followed by the remainder is North American.
Renewable Energy (57 publications and 2358 citations). Next, Fuel had 42
publications and 1354 citations, followed closely by Crops and Industrial 3.1.3. Distribution by country and institution
Products (41 publications and 1244 citations). Another important result Using VOSviewer software, we were able to verify the countries and
given in Table 1 is the impact factor (IF), a simple measure of the quality institutions that contributed to the evolution of scientific output in the
of journals that has been used as an academic tool to evaluate produc­ researched subject area (Albagli, 1996; Medeiros, 2016). In the case of
tivity and fundraising (Ruiz et al., 2009). This factor is obtained by the distribution of countries, criteria were defined in VOSviewer to
refine the analysis to countries with at least five documents and five
citations. This produced 20 participating countries. The most productive
Table 1
countries in terms of research on bioethanol production are ranked in
Top 10 journals in terms of publications relating to bioethanol production.
Table 2. This table gives the following data: country, number of publi­
Rank Journal C IF NP NC AC P (%)
cations, citations, ratio of citations to publications, total link strength,
1
Bioresource
NL 11.889 155 5840 37.68 15.09 %
and percentage participation.
Technology India was the country with the most articles (n = 214, 14.35 % of the
2 Renewable Energy UK 8.634 57 2348 41.19 5.55 %
3 Fuel UK 8.035 42 1354 32.24 4.09 %
Industrial Crops
4 NL 6.449 41 1244 30.34 3.99 %
and Products Table 2
Waste and The 10 most productive countries in bioethanol research.
5 Biomass NL 3.449 33 354 10.73 3.21 %
Rank Country NP NC AC Total link strength P (%)
Valorization
Biomass & 1 India 214 5707 26.67 40 14.35 %
6 UK 5.774 32 528 16.5 3.12 %
Bioenergy 2 China 194 3936 20.29 58 13.01 %
Biotechnology for 3 Brazil 113 2359 20.88 36 7.58 %
7 UK 7.67 30 1268 42.27 2.92 %
Biofuels 4 USA 109 3490 32.02 50 7.31 %
8 Bioresources USA 1.747 28 325 11.61 2.73 % 5 South Korea 108 2774 25.69 44 7.24 %
Journal of Cleaner 6 Indonesia 107 1368 12.79 38 7.18 %
9 USA 11.042 28 591 21.11 2.73 %
Production 7 Malaysia 84 2226 26.50 54 5.63 %
Bioenergy 8 Spain 79 2007 25.41 27 5.30 %
10 USA 3.852 26 361 13.88 2.53 %
Research 9 Japan 74 1470 19.86 23 4.96 %
10 Thailand 63 872 13.84 29 4.23 %
C = country; IF = impact factor; NP = number of publications; NC = number of
citations; AC = average citations; P = percentage of the total number of papers. NP = number of publications; NC = number of citations; AC = average citations
NL = Netherlands; UK = United Kingdom; USA = United States of America. (NC/NP); P = percentage of the total number of papers.

4
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

total). China ranked second (n = 194, 13.01 %), followed by Brazil (n = from 84 to 113 publications, and those in yellow have the highest
113, 7.58 %) and the United States (n = 109, 7.31 %). These four numbers of publications (194 to 214).
countries together accounted for 42.25 % of all publications. The The continent with the most significant scientific output in the period
countries ranked 5 to 10 accounted for a further 34.54 % of publications. analyzed was Asia. Half of the 20 countries considered are Asian, and
As well as having the highest number of publications, India also has they account for 949 (63.6 %) of the number of publications in the
more citations than any other country. India is reported to be the world’s studied subject area. This concentration of research may be related to
largest consumer of sugar and other sugarcane sweeteners, with per growth in demand for electricity (Queiroz et al., 2021). The American
capita consumption close to the world average, indicating the impor­ continent has 283 (19.0 %) publications, and Europe has 195 (13.1 %).
tance of sugarcane in the diet (Moreira, 2007). Thus, sugarcane is one of Africa has fewer publications, with only 36 (2.4 %) papers, while Oce­
the most widely produced feedstocks in that country, and can be ania has 28 (1.9 %).
considered the most widely used feedstock for bioethanol production. Fig. 5 shows 27 institutions with at least 5 publications and 300 ci­
India’s interest in bioethanol technology is due to its great potential as a tations. The total number of publications from these institutions was
transportation fuel (Ghosh and Ghose, 2003). With the development of 338, with 14,158 citations. Two of the institutions are Brazilian, and
technologies and diverse feedstocks, India may become the third largest these have the largest numbers of publications. They are the University
bioethanol market in the world, behind the two largest producers: the of São Paulo (n = 23) and the State University of Campinas (n = 18),
United States and Brazil. which together account for 12.13 % (n = 41) of the papers. The
Fig. 3 shows the cooperation network among the 20 countries remaining institutions account for 87.87 % (n = 297).
analyzed, which are divided into three clusters. The first and largest Universiti Tenaga Nasional, University of Malaysia, University of
cluster (yellow) includes nine countries: Australia, Bangladesh, India, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Uni­
Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand. The versity of Minho have the highest total link strength (number of
second largest cluster (green) contains six countries: Egypt, the United interactions).
Kingdom, Pakistan, China, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. The Fig. 6 shows the geocoding of affiliations, and indicates a significant
third cluster (purple) consists of five countries: Brazil, France, Mexico, clustering of organizations in Western Europe, South Asia (more spe­
Portugal, and Spain. cifically India), and the United States.
Thick lines connecting two countries indicate a higher concentration The search of authors was limited to 26 authors of documents related
of items, as in the case of the United States and China. Both are major to bioethanol production, identified as those who have contributed the
players in the global economy and are seeking independence from most to the field’s development. The selection was based on the
nonrenewable sources. This fact has made the United States the world’s following criteria: at least 5 documents and at least 200 citations.
largest producer, consumer, and exporter of biofuels (Vidal, 2021a), and Data analysis resulted in a total of 217 documents and 9430 citations,
China is one of its foremost bioethanol importers. The cooperation be­ originating from 26 authors identified in the study. Among them, seven
tween these two countries has stimulated growth in scientific output. were highlighted for having the highest number of publications,
Collaboration between Brazil and Portugal is also gaining in importance, demonstrating the culture of the theme and the positive impact of the
and has led to significant scientific and technological advances. Brazil research. Gwi-Taek Jeong (Pukyong National University, Busan, South
has more experience in bioenergy and biofuels, and Portugal expects Korea) was the most prolific author of studies on the subject, with 15
that country to contribute to its own development in this area. published articles. Then, with 14 publications each, Héctor A. Ruiz
Another visualization of the distribution of publications by country, (Universidad Autonoma de Coahuila, Coahuila, Mexico) and Yuwalee
also indicating continental affiliation, is shown in Fig. 4. Countries Unpaprom (Maejo University, Chiang Mai, Thailand) occupied second
shown in blue have between 16 and 79 publications, those in green have and third place in the ranking (Fig. 7). Author Hyeun-Jong Bae

Fig. 3. Network visualization map showing cooperation between countries with at least five published articles. (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

5
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 4. Distribution of publications by country. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Fig. 5. Network visualization map showing collaboration between institutions with at least 300 citations.

(Chonnam National University, Gwangju, South Korea) presented the selected the most cited articles identified in the case analysis. The ten
highest number of citations, that is, 740 citations, having contributed most cited articles within WoS are listed in Table 3 in descending order
with only 13 articles. of citations; they have a total of 4073 citations.
As a result of the analysis, 10 clusters were identified, three of which
had particularly high numbers of collaborations. 3.1.5. Research fields
The selected articles are grouped into nine knowledge areas (Fig. 8).
3.1.4. Quantitative analysis of cited articles The best-represented areas are Energy Fuels, Engineering, and
Citations are significant because they indicate the impact (as Biotechnology/Applied Microbiology, with more than 500 articles (The
described in Section 3.1.2), influence, or achievements of a researcher, figures sum to more than the total number of analyzed articles, as some
institution, or country, and are the main practical method of unifying publications are assigned to more than one area).
information on scientists’ standing (Romancini, 2010). Therefore, we Fig. 9 shows the numbers of studies as percentages. Energy Fuels,

6
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 6. Geocoding of the organizations responsible for publishing the analyzed articles.

production methods (Osman et al., 2021) has led to the development of

three generations of bioethanol production (Jambo et al., 2016).
The first generation corresponds to commercial technologies.
Ethanol plants use sugar and starch to produce first-generation bio­
ethanol (Lennartsson et al., 2014). Ethanol produced from sugar and
starch dominates integration studies, due to its important techno-
economic components and life cycle assessment (LCA) (Ferreira et al.,
2018). However, the main disadvantage of this form of production is the
food–fuel trade-off (Bhatia et al., 2017), since a diminishing food supply
may affect the world population (Jambo et al., 2016). Second-
generation processes are emerging technologies. Second-generation
bioethanol was developed to solve the problems of the first genera­
tion, and is based on the fermentation of lignocellulosic biomass. This
production method has attracted the interest of many researchers and
scientists as the best path to sustainability (Aditiya et al., 2016a). Third-
generation processes are still under development (Luz Jr et al., 2009).
Third-generation bioethanol is produced from algae, because these have
good potential and can be converted directly into energy. The use of
algae to produce bioethanol depends on factors such as technology and
the marine environment (Jambo et al., 2016). Therefore, the variety of
feedstocks broadens possibilities of bioethanol production, because they
are inexhaustible and economical. In selecting a feedstock, several
Fig. 7. Network visualization map showing collaboration between authors.
criteria – including sugar content, yield, processing cost, quantity, ease
of acquisition (availability), transportation, and energy balance – are
with 748 articles (23.10 % of the total), is the field of greatest interest, evaluated to ensure the effectiveness of bioethanol production. Avail­
due to the growing environmental concerns regarding the use of energy ability depends on geographical region. For example, compared with
fuels. The Engineering field has the second largest number of publica­ Brazil, the United States has difficulty finding sugar feedstocks, and thus
tions (688 articles, 21.56 % of the total). Biotechnology/Applied favors bioethanol production from starchy feedstocks.
Microbiology is in third place with 556 articles (17.17 %). Together, Some feedstocks of each generation are shown in Fig. 10. First-
these three areas represent more than half of the publications in the generation feedstocks are typically usable for food, as they are com­
selected subject field. mon agricultural residues (Alvim et al., 2014); for example, corn (Kumar
It is believed that the great demand for publications in these areas of and Singh, 2019), sugar cane (Andrade et al., 2010), barley (Jeong,
knowledge is due to the worldwide interest in alternative energy sour­ 2017), wheat (Patni et al., 2013), sugar beet (Martins, 2015), and sweet
ces. This has been reinforced by the increase in the price of oil and sorghum (Almodares and Hadi, 2009) (Ayodele et al., 2020). Nonfood
concern about its environmental impact (Mota et al., 2009). feedstocks, on the other hand, are classified as second- and third-
generation. They may be derived from agricultural residues of first-
3.2. Feedstocks for producing bioethanol generation feedstocks, forestry residues, and some algae.
Of the 1647 publications retrieved from the database, 281 contain
Based on keyword frequency, this section will address the following the terms “first generation”, “second generation” or “third generation”
question: in their title or subject. These keywords are present in 17.06 % of the
publications. The criteria used for the data collection were the same as
• Q2: What are the main feedstocks highlighted in the survey? for the initial search, but a new search field was added: a topic with the
terms “first generation” OR “second generation” OR “third generation”
and the logical operator AND. “Lignocellulosic agriculture wastes as
3.2.1. Classification of feedstocks biomass feedstocks for second-generation bioethanol production: con­
As mentioned in the introduction, the evolution of feedstocks and cepts and recent developments” (see Section 3.1.4) was the most cited

7
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Table 3 Table 3 (continued )

The 10 most cited articles among the 1647 selected articles published between Rank Title Authors Year of Total
2012 and 2021. publication citations
Rank Title Authors Year of Total Production from
publication citations Residual Biomass (
Bioethanol Sarkar, Nibedita; Robak and Balcerek,
production from Ghosh, Sumanta 2018)
1 agricultural wastes: Kumar; Bannerjee, 2012 943
An overview (Sarkar Satarupa; Aikat,
et al., 2012) Kaustav article.
Lignocellulosic
biomass for 3.2.2. Sources of sucrose and starch
bioethanol
production: Current
The feedstock fermentation process is based on the anaerobic con­
Limayem, Alya; version of sugars (mainly glucose and fructose) into ethanol and carbon
2 perspectives, 2012 770
Ricke, Steven C.
potential issues and dioxide. It has been carried out by industries for a long time, and is very
future prospects ( common in the production of first-generation ethanol. Certain yeasts can
Limayem and Ricke,
be used in the alcoholic fermentation process due to their low cost in the
2012)
Ho, Shih-Hsin; distillation process and high productivity; for example, Saccharomyces
Bioethanol
Huang, Shu-Wen; cerevisiae, a yeast that has been used for thousands of years for the
production, using
carbohydrate-rich
Chen, Chun-Yen; production of food and beverages (Mohd Azhar et al., 2017), is currently
3 Hasunuma, 2013 372 widely used for the production of biofuels.
microalgae biomass
Tomohisa; Kondo,
as feedstock (Ho
Akihiko; Chang, Jo-
In the search including the keyword “yeast”, 157 publications were
et al., 2013) located. The yeasts Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Pichia stipitis were the
Shu
Role and significance most commonly used for producing bioethanol in this group of studies.
of beta-glucosidases Singhania, Reeta Most commercial bioethanol production plants rely on sources of
in the hydrolysis of Rani; Patel, Anil
sucrose and starch (Ayodele et al., 2020), which explains the increasing
cellulose for Kumar; Sukumaran,
4
bioethanol Rajeev K.; Larroche,
2013 364 number of publications on bioethanol production from crops containing
production ( Christian; Pandey, these substances. When the terms “starch” OR “sugar” were added to the
Singhania et al., Ashok WoS database search query, 687 documents were returned, representing
2013) a considerable number of studies.
Lignocellulosic
agriculture wastes as
Fig. 3 shows the 1G bioethanol production scheme, which includes
biomass feedstocks specific steps depending on the feedstock. The first step is the selection
for second-generation Saini, Jitendra of the sugar or starch crop. For sugar feedstocks (sugar cane, sugar beet,
5 bioethanol Kumar; Saini, Reetu; 2015 356 or sugar sorghum), juice extraction is performed by two methods –
production: concepts Tewari, Lakshmi
pressure or diffusion. This process separates the juice from the fiber or
and recent
developments (Saini bagasse. The resulting juice is sent to the processing stage. After treat­
et al., 2015) ment, the juice is filtered and evaporated until it crystallizes, producing
Bioethanol sugar (Susmozas et al., 2020). The part that has not crystallized is called
production from molasses, which goes to the fermentation stage. The major challenge in
renewable sources: Zabed, H.; Sahu, J.
6 Current perspectives N.; Suely, A.; Boyce, 2017 333
this process is the selection of yeasts capable of surviving the reaction
and technological A. N.; Faruq, G. conditions (Amorim et al., 2011) and increasing fermentation produc­
progress (Zabed et al., tivity. On average, the fermentation process takes place at temperatures
2017) between 25 and 30 ◦ C, and the duration varies between 6 h and 72 h,
Second generation Aditiya, H. B.;
depending on the raw material used. After fermentation, two steps take
bioethanol Mahlia, T. M. I.;
7 production: A critical Chong, W. T.; Nur, 2016 306 place – the release of carbon dioxide, and distillation. Distillation con­
review (Aditiya et al., Hadi; Sebayang, A. sists of purifying the juice by eliminating existing impurities. After
2016b) H. distillation, bioethanol can be hydrated with approximately 95.5 %
Optimization of alcohol and 4.5 % water, or dehydrated or purified with approximately
Hydrothermal
Pretreatment of Nitsos, Christos K.;
0.4 % water and 99.6 % alcohol (Vohra et al., 2014).
Lignocellulosic Matis, Konstantinos In contrast, starchy feedstocks (corn, wheat, or barley) require more
8 2013 223
Biomass in the A.; Triantafyllidis, complex steps, such as milling, cooking, liquefaction, and enzymatic
Bioethanol Kostas S. hydrolysis. Because they are grains, the production of bioethanol from
Production Process (
starchy feedstocks begins with milling, which reduces the grains to fine
Nitsos et al., 2013)
Recent advances in particles to facilitate subsequent processes such as cooking and lique­
second generation faction. The liquefaction step is performed by separating the starch
bioethanol grains that are not soluble in an aqueous solution (Li et al., 2015).
production: An Liquefaction is considered a fundamental step in the process, because it
insight to
Rastogi, Meenal; is from this step that syrups are produced. The next step is enzymatic
9 pretreatment, 2017 211
Shrivastava, Smriti hydrolysis, which is essential for starchy crops and allows the syrup to
saccharification and
fermentation ferment and proceed to distillation to produce bioethanol. When corn is
processes (Rastogi used as a starchy feedstock, two milling processes are applied – dry and
and Shrivastava,
wet (Fig. 11).
2017)
Review of Second-
Lignocellulosic biomass may be classified into crop residues (sugar­
Robak, Katarzyna; cane bagasse and corn cobs), hardwoods (poplar and alpine poplar),
10 Generation 2018 195
Balcerek, Maria
Bioethanol conifers (pine and spruce), cellulosic wastes (paper pulp, recycled paper,
and newspapers), herbaceous biomass (alfalfa and reed hay), and

8
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 8. Published articles by research area.

Fig. 9. Percentage distribution of knowledge areas in research related to sustainable bioethanol production.

municipal solid waste (Rodrigues et al., 2017). Lignocellulosic feed­ color indicates the most common terms, such as lignocellulosic biomass
stocks have a complex structure, being composed of three basic com­ (n = 242), ethanol production (n = 189), bioethanol (n = 184), and
ponents: cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin, which make up 90 % of the enzymatic hydrolysis (n = 138). Fig. 13 shows the most prominent
biomass dry mass, while ash and extractives make up 10 % (Cabral et al., feedstocks in the survey: corn straw, rice straw, wheat straw, sugarcane
2016). Cellulose is a glucose polymer and the most principal chemical bagasse, bagasse, and straw. The terms “straw” and “bagasse” appeared
component in different lignocellulosic biomass (Shen et al., 2013). in abstract form (i.e., without highlighting the feedstocks to which they
Hemicellulose is also a glucose polymer with a low molecular weight, refer), but both refer to the crop under study. Wheat straw, the most
making it less complex and easier to hydrolyze. On the other hand, lignin frequently mentioned keyword, is an attractive alternative for bio­
is highly branched, has the most complex and stable structure, and has ethanol production because it contains 33 % to 40 % cellulose, 20 % to
strengthening properties (Osman et al., 2021). The chemical composi­ 25 % hemicellulose, and 15 % to 20 % lignin (Talebnia et al., 2010). The
tion of lignocellulosic crops depends on the biomass used. However, the European Union, China, India, the USA, and Canada are considered the
amount of cellulose is between 40 % and 60 %, while hemicellulose world’s main wheat producers, and hence have more resources for this
accounts for between 20 % and 40 % and lignin between 10 % and 25 %. type of production (Swain et al., 2018).
The search returned a total of 452 articles on lignocellulosic biomass. The process for obtaining second-generation bioethanol is based on
The data were obtained by adding the keywords “lignocellulosic five steps (Fig. 14): 1) pretreatment – a step necessary to break down the
biomass” OR “2G”. Fig. 12 illustrates the commonly found terms; purple chemical composition of the plant to facilitate the access of enzymes; 2)

9
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

publication numbers during the analyzed period. In 2012, the topic of

water-based bioethanol production was new, which explains the low
participation and interest of researchers. However, in recent years, the
number of studies related to the use of algae for this generation of
production has increased, leading to a significant increase in the count of
articles.
A total of 52 keywords were found in the 206 selected articles
referring to the cultures used in this type of production, such as Chla­
mydomonas reinhardtii, Chlorella vulgaris, Cyanobacteria, Gelidium aman­
sii, and Kappaphycus alvarezii. These biomasses are optimized for
bioethanol production because they contain cellulose, hemicellulose,
and starch, making the path to obtaining third-generation bioethanol
similar to that for second-generation bioethanol. In general, the pro­
cesses can be summarized as follows: 1) pretreatment (drying and size
reduction of algae), 2) enzymatic hydrolysis, and 3) fermentation, al­
ways considering the characteristics of the biomass in question (Jambo
et al., 2016). Such production is considered a promising solution to the
global energy crisis and the threat of climate change (Daroch et al.,
2013), because algae are feedstocks with significant advantages. Spe­
cifically, they consume carbon dioxide, thus contributing to the reduc­
tion of greenhouse gas emissions; they have highly concentrated sugars,
allowing them to be classified as a rich biomass; and they grow without
Fig. 10. Some feedstocks used for producing bioethanol. requiring land for cultivation (Miranda et al., 2012).

enzymatic hydrolysis – a step that converts the pretreated lignocellulosic 4. Main differences between 1G and 2G bioethanol production
material into fermentable sugars; 3) fermentation – a step that also oc­
curs in 1G bioethanol production, enabling the conversion of ferment­ Bioethanol production involves a number of steps, the most impor­
able sugars into 2G bioethanol; 4) distillation – a step to purify the tant of which is the conversion of simple sugars to bioethanol by
remaining residues; and 5) treatment of the liquid fraction (bioethanol) fermentation (Iram et al., 2022). One of the major differences between
(Hendriks and Zeeman, 2009). the generations is the sustainability of the feedstock. As first-generation
bioethanol is commercialized on a large scale, arable land is heavily
3.2.3. Sources of water exploited, making food scarcer and more expensive (Sitong et al., 2018).
Searching for “algae” OR “microalgae” OR “macroalgae” as feed­ In the search for crops that would minimize these problems, researchers
stocks for third-generation bioethanol production returned 206 articles have found that lignocellulosic biomass performs better than sugar or
distributed in the publication databases. This result shows that the starch sources. The type of crop, its cost, the cost of pretreatment, the
technology has progressed gradually. Fig. 15 shows the evolution of method of pretreatment, and the contribution to GHG reduction are all
factors that differentiate the generations. Table 4 summarizes the key

Fig. 11. Flowchart of the bioethanol production process from sources of sugar and starch.

10
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 12. Density map of keywords related to the sustainable production of bioethanol from second-generation feedstocks.

Fig. 13. Main types of lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol production.

differences between 1G and 2G bioethanol, and their respective

advantages.
In the case of second-generation bioethanol, the pretreatment of
lignocellulosic crops is used to release cellulose and hemicellulose, and
to remove lignin in a delignification process (Singh et al., 2014). As
these are complex crops, this step requires high efficiency, as it enables
enzyme accessibility and determines the profitability of the use of
fermentable sugars (Chen et al., 2017). Pretreatment methods are
categorized as biological (using microorganisms), chemical (acid, alka­
line, ionic), physical (mechanical agitation and irradiation), and
physical-chemical (steam explosion, hot liquid water, CO2 explosion)
Fig. 14. Flowchart of the process of bioethanol production from lignocellu­
(Aditiya et al., 2016b; Ayodele et al., 2020). These pretreatments are
losic sources.
more demanding and occur at temperatures above 100 ◦ C, while the
pretreatment used to obtain 1G bioethanol is performed at 85 ◦ C for

11
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 15. Evolution of research on water sources used for the production of third-generation bioethanol.

Table 4
Differences between first- and second-generation bioethanol.
Parameter 1G bioethanol 2G bioethanol Advantage of 1G over 2G or vice versa

Sugar and starch sources: wheat, sugar Lignocellulosic sources: inedible food, Sucrose or starchy feedstocks make it easier to generate
Feedstock
beet, sugarcane, corn, etc. wood, urban solid waste, etc. fermentable sugars, while lignocellulosics are more complex.
Acid (dilute or concentrated), vapor Liquefaction requires low to medium process conditions compared
Pretreatment Liquefaction
exploration, etc. to lignocellulosic pretreatment strategies.
Enzymatic Saccharification with amylases and Lignocellulolytic process with cellulases Saccharification has high conversion yield compared to cellulose
hydrolysis glucoamylases and hemicellulases and hemicellulose hydrolysis.
Cost of feedstock 40–70 % 30 % Lignocellulosic biomass is cheaper.
Cost of pretreatment Low High 1G bioethanol requires low capital investment.
Reduction in GHG
39–52 % 86 % 2G bioethanol is more sustainable than 1G bioethanol.
emissions
Food x Fuel Yes No 2G bioethanol uses inedible feedstocks.

approximately 2 h (Iram et al., 2022). cellulosic ethanol can further reduce emissions by 86 % (Aui et al.,
Another difference is found in the enzymatic hydrolysis process, 2021). Therefore, it can be stated that second-generation bioethanol is
often associated with the cost of producing bioethanol, which is also one more sustainable than first-generation bioethanol.
of the differences listed. Due to the complexity of lignocellulosic crops,
their enzymatic hydrolysis is more complicated than that of starch. 5. Integration for the production of 1G and 2G bioethanol
These crops are degraded by specific enzymes (cellulases and hemi­
cellulases) (Aditiya et al., 2016b), which are generally slower acting and In recent years, bioethanol has contributed to the partial replace­
are added in high concentrations, entailing high costs. In contrast, the ment of fossil fuels. In addition, due to the differences between the two
enzymes used in starch hydrolysis, amylase and glycogen, easily break generations, it has been concluded that 2G bioethanol offers more sus­
down with glucose molecules and can convert 100 % of the starch into tainable and viable solutions to issues such as energy security, envi­
glucose (McAloon et al., 2000). ronmental concerns, food crises, and economic and political crises
In terms of costs, the production of first-generation bioethanol is (Babazadeh, 2017), as well as helping to solve waste disposal problems
more economical than that of second-generation bioethanol, because the in cities (Qiao et al., 2022). Nevertheless, the following factors hinder
pretreatment or hydrolysis for the production of second-generation the large-scale industrial production of 2G bioethanol: 1) lack of effi­
bioethanol requires high investment (Karimi and Chisti, 2015). cient and economical pretreatment technology; 2) inability to efficiently
Regarding the cost of feedstocks, cellulosic biomass is more accessible convert the major components of lignocellulosic biomass; and 3) insuf­
because it is nonfood based, while starch and sucrose feedstocks are ficient production of sugar and bioethanol (Qiao et al., 2022). To
more expensive. Finally, there is a difference with regard to the reduc­ overcome these barriers, combining the two generations may be an
tion of greenhouse gases (GHG). Environmental benefits are the most interesting strategy to facilitate the transition from 1G to 2G biofuels
attractive aspect of bioethanol production, considering that bioethanol (Susmozas et al., 2020). The opportunities for integrating 1G and 2G
is a renewable fuel suitable for reducing environmental impacts, which bioethanol production can be exploited in three ways:
include greenhouse gas emissions (Zabed et al., 2014). Therefore, GHG
reduction is closely associated with the mode of production, processing, a. Via colocation
and conversion of raw materials into bioethanol (Dwivedi et al., 2015).
Agricultural operations and processing of sucrose sources (1G) for bio­ This is a straightforward approach that involves setting up a second-
ethanol production can contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. On the generation bioethanol plant adjacent to an existing first-generation
other hand, lignocellulosic crops contribute most to the reduction of bioethanol plant without their disrupting each other’s operations (de
GHG emissions, as they are agricultural or forest waste. Research on the Jong et al., 2015; Susmozas et al., 2020).
economic viability of cellulosic ethanol has revealed that corn-based Colocation allows sharing of the flow of the two processes, ensures
bioethanol (starch source) reduces GHG emissions by 39–52 %, while accessibility to resources, and minimizes the costs of certain procedures

12
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

associated with both generations, such as transportation, storage, and boundaries and trends (Jiang et al., 2022). Selecting the right keywords
feedstock supply (Susmozas et al., 2020). A practical case has been is extremely important for increasing numbers of citations (Dhamija and
analyzed in the United States. In a sugar cane (first-generation) plant Bag, 2020).
located on a farm, after the production of sugar and bioethanol, the Fig. 16 shows the time evolution of the identified keywords. The size
bagasse and straw remained in the field because it was not profitable to of a word’s node (circle) corresponds to the number of occurrences (the
transport the concentrated bagasse to another distant plant. This situa­ larger the node, the greater the number of occurrences). The color
tion led them to implement a 2G plant alongside the sugar cane plant. change of nodes from purple to green reflects progress over time: each
This was considered a reliable and economical alternative that increased year is characterized by a color shade to facilitate visualization of the
fuel production (Tanzil et al., 2022). evolution. The map nodes are connected by lines, demonstrating for the
first time the co-occurrence of particular keywords.
b. Retrofitting Table 5 lists the most cited keywords on bioethanol production,
showing their location (ranking), citation frequencies, and total link
Retrofitting is a strategy that allows for adaptations. In other words, strength.
there is a combination of processes and equipment between cellulosic Depending on the criteria added in VOSviewer, 50 keywords were
bioethanol and first-generation bioethanol. If a first-generation plant has identified in the analyzed research area. Filtering was based on a min­
sufficient conditions for second-generation bioethanol production, ad­ imum of 25 occurrences per publication. Due to the large amount of
aptations are made to use the same flow rate. According to an experi­ information, the 24 most cited keywords over time (2012 to 2021) were
mental analysis using software (Macrelli et al., 2012), this integration prioritized, corresponding to 5992 occurrences (79 % of the total key­
may take place: words found).
During the period covered by the search, the term “bioethanol” was
• In the distillation step, allowing the use of the same distillation the most prominent in the articles (794 occurrences), in addition to
system for the separately obtained 1G and 2G fermentation broths. being the keyword with the second highest number of co-occurrences
The feedstocks are separated but have the same distillation column (TLS) for different researchers. The keyword with the highest TLS was
(Macrelli et al., 2012). This becomes easier when a 1G bioethanol “ethanol production” (675 occurrences, second in the ranking). The
production plant is combined with a new 2G plant. keyword “fermentation” had 585 occurrences; this is because it denotes
• In the evaporation stage, consisting of mixing the sugar streams. The an essential step in the production of bioethanol (Lin and Tanaka, 2006).
mixing is performed with the liquid portion extracted after the The next keyword is “pretreatment” with 379 occurrences. As described
enzymatic hydrolysis of the lignocellulosic biomass with sugar juice above, this is an essential step for the development and industrialization
(sucrose source) (Sitong et al., 2018). This mixing should take place of efficient processes for second-generation ethanol (Chiaramonti et al.,
before and after evaporation to ensure an intermediate sucrose 2012). The eighth most cited article (Table 3) describes pretreatment as
concentration. The transition to the common fermentation phase and a critical step in the biological conversion of biomass to ethanol (Nitsos
subsequent distillation is also unique. et al., 2013). The keyword “ethanol” had 339 occurrences, followed by
“enzymatic hydrolysis”, with 331 occurrences. The seventh term is
Mixing the two streams enables the achievement of low costs (due to “biomass”, with 323 occurrences. The eighth term is “lignocellulosic
utility sharing), increased bioethanol production, and close to zero biomass” (240 occurrences). The remaining keywords in the ranking are
presence of inhibitors (lignocellulosic sugar inhibitors can be diluted in related to second-generation biofuels and their production steps. Simi­
the sugar broth stream), leading to better performance during fermen­ larly, to Fig. 16, it is also possible to visualize the co-citation network
tation (Sitong et al., 2018). map of the most frequent keywords (Fig. 17). A node represents a
keyword, and a line between two nodes represents the co-occurrence of
c. Repurposing those keywords (Xiao et al., 2019). The same criteria as in Table 5 were
used to create the map, with the fifty identified keywords displayed. The
Unlike the methods mentioned, repurposing is a strategy that may mapped keywords were found to form three different clusters, with
involve adjusting the production process of an existing bioethanol fa­ cluster 1 (yellow) being the largest (21 keywords), cluster 2 (purple) the
cility. A 1G bioethanol plant can be reused in this way to produce 2G second largest (17 keywords), and cluster 3 (pink) the smallest (12
bioethanol (Susmozas et al., 2020). In other words, the first generation keywords).
plant is suitable for a new purpose, which is second generation In the first cluster, the term “enzymatic hydrolysis” has the highest
production. number of occurrences and is linked to several terms, such as “ligno­
cellulose”, “hydrolysis”, and “sugarcane bagasse”, which are related to
6. Hot research topics the production of second-generation bioethanol. This link occurs
because enzymatic hydrolysis is the essential unit operation in the
In this topic, the following question will be answered: conversion of lignocellulose (Modenbach and Nokes, 2013). The least
cited term in this cluster is “SSF” (simultaneous saccharification
• Q3: What are the main research hotspots (keywords) in the literature fermentation), a good strategy to increase the overall conversion rate of
on the production of sustainable bioethanol? cellulose to ethanol (Souza de Alves, 2011). The other terms in the
cluster have from 38 to 331 occurrences. The diagram also shows that
the terms “ethanol production” and “fermentation” are the most cited in
6.1. Quantitative keyword analysis cluster 2, and are connected to the majority of the other keywords. The
least cited term in this group is “detoxification”, which is a specialized
Citespace is a software product that provides co-citation networks of process for the removal of a certain inhibitor of the hydrolyzed material
documents, keywords, and authors (Xiao et al., 2019). The Citespace (Chandel et al., 2011). The other terms have numbers of occurrences in a
Timezone map visually represents research areas in different time pe­ range from 41 to 675. Most of the keywords are linked to the mother
riods and their derived relationships, allowing reasonable predictions of term of the research area, “bioethanol” (in cluster 3), which has the
future developments (Jiang et al., 2022). For this analysis, a network of largest node in its cluster, indicating the importance of this keyword for
the most frequently cited keywords was created on the map. High- search indexing. It has the strongest connections with the terms “pre­
popping keywords are those with a rate of change in frequency over a treatment”, “biomass”, “ethanol”, and “optimization”, which also have
given period, reflecting search hotspots and indicating search several occurrences.

13
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 16. Keyword preview network (January 2012 to December 2021).

Table 5
Ranking of the 24 most prominent keywords cited in the analyzed articles.
Rank Keyword Frequency TLS Rank Keyword Frequency TLS

1 Bioethanol 794 3311 13 Simultaneous saccharification 175 1019

2 Ethanol production 675 3376 14 Cellulose 130 749
3 Fermentation 585 2967 15 Wheat-straw 123 744
4 Pretreatment 379 2103 16 Enzymatic hydrolysis 119 683
5 Ethanol 339 1431 17 Corn stover 118 744
6 Enzymatic hydrolysis 331 1912 18 Saccharomyces cerevisiae 117 498
7 Biomass 323 1601 19 Acid 116 643
8 Lignocellulosic biomass 240 1332 20 Biofuels 115 506
9 Saccharomyces cerevisiae 239 1229 21 Sugarcane bagasse 115 654
10 Hydrolysis 237 1278 22 Yeast 104 506
11 Optimization 218 1088 23 Rice straw 98 612
12 Saccharification 213 1204 24 Bioethanol production 89 291

TLS: Total link strength.

6.2. Research clusters #6 Banana Stem, #7 Novel Pretreatment Method, and #8 Glycerol. The
size of each cluster was determined by the total number of publications
This section addresses the fourth question: included in it, which was 93 on average. The clusters were numbered by
decreasing size from #0 to #8. These clusters are discussed in the
• Q4: What are the main co-citation clusters in this research area? following paragraphs. The connections between the clusters were also
examined, with each cluster exploring a different theme related to the
Clustering is another technique for enriching bibliometric analysis, integration of bioethanol production. Table 6 shows the six primary co-
where the main goal is to create thematic or social clusters (depending citation clusters of articles related to the topic under investigation.
on the type of analysis to be performed) (Donthu et al., 2021). Cluster Cluster #0 has “Saccharomyces cerevisiae” as the main keyword, with
analysis aims to detect the natural partitioning of objects by grouping 108 members. The term “Saccharomyces cerevisiae” was tagged by the
similar observations into homogeneous subsets (Boccard and Rudaz, LLR test, and “Bioethanol production” was tagged by LSI. The main
2013). article of cluster #0 is “Detoxification of hydrolysates of the red seaweed
Following the creation of the visualization network, CiteSpace was Gelidium amansii for improved bioethanol production”, which refers to
used to identify the main clusters of publications supporting the devel­ the production of bioethanol from Gelidium amansii as biomass by the
opment of this research area. The logarithmic likelihood ratio (LLR) separate hydrolysis and fermentation (SHF) process (Nguyen et al.,
(Dunning, 1993), latent semantic indexing (LSI) (Kontostathis and Pot­ 2019). This process is associated with the pretreatment phase of thermal
tenger, 2006), and mutual information (MI) tests were used in the acid hydrolysis, enzymatic saccharification, detoxification, and biomass
identification of research clusters. fermentation (Nguyen et al., 2019). To promote sustainable, environ­
The network consisted of nine clusters that represented the most mentally friendly alternatives, the researchers presented methods to
significant research topics. The clusters, obtained from the CiteSpace improve bioethanol production by analyzing seaweed paste content,
database, were categorized as follows: #0 Saccharomyces cerevisiae, #1 treatment time, and ideal conditions (e.g., temperature and weight by
Life Cycle Assessment, #2 Enzymatic Hydrolysis, #3 Different Process volume [p/v]) following the pretreatment steps for ethanol fermenta­
Configurations, #4 Zymomonas mobilis, #5 Structural Characteristics, tion using seaweed hydrolysate with Saccharomyces cerevisiae yeast and

14
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Fig. 17. Visualization map of the keyword co-citation network in the search for literature on integration for bioethanol production. (For interpretation of the
references to color in this figure, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)

Table 6
Top six co-citation clusters of publications on integration opportunities for bioethanol production.
CID Label NS Mean Top terms Representative articles References

#0 Saccharomyces cerevisiae 108 2015 Saccharomyces cerevisiae; Yeast; Bioethanol production HAU, NGUYEN TRUNG (2019.0) (Nguyen et al., 2019)
#1 Life Cycle assessment 100 2015 Biofuel; Conversion; Energy SINGH, R (2016.0) (Singh et al., 2016)
#2 Enzymatic hydrolysis 96 2014 Ethanol production; Fermentation; Enzymatic DUY, KHUONG LE (2014.0) (Khuong et al., 2014)
hydrolysis
#3 Different process 68 2015 Acid pretreatment; Acid hydrolysis; Fuel ethanol CARLOS, LOPEZ-LINARES J (López-Linares et al.,
configuration production (2014.0) 2014)
#4 Zymomonas mobilis 59 2014 Fuel ethanol; Enzyme; Zymomonas mobilis MOON, S (2012.0) (Moon et al., 2012)
#5 Structural characteristics 28 2016 Cellulosic ethanol; Bagasse; Fermentable sugar HAFID, H (2017.0) (Hafid et al., 2017)

Note: CID = cluster ID, NS = node size.

various detoxification treatments. denotes a tool used to evaluate the environmental impacts and resources
Cluster #1 is the second largest, with 100 members. It is labeled “life used during the life cycle study of a product (Finnveden et al., 2009).
cycle assessment” by the LLR test and “bioethanol production” by the LSI Currently, the main aim of many social projects is to analyze environ­
test. T. mental impacts and determine the most sustainable conditions, which
he main keyword of the cluster is “life cycle assessment,” which reflects the rising worldwide level of environmental awareness. The life

15
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

cycle of a product obeys the following stages: activity, including the developed flocculant CHFY0321 produced excellent fermentation re­
extraction and processing of materials; manufacturing, transportation sults in continuous ethanol production.
and distribution; and use, reuse, maintenance, recycling and disposal Cluster #5 is represented by the keyword “structural properties”. The
(Chau et al., 2015). Renu Singh, in the cluster’s lead article (“Environ­ main cited article of this cluster is “Over production of fermentable
mental sustainability of bioethanol production from rice straw in India: sugar for bioethanol from carbohydrate-rich Malaysian food waste via
a review”), describes the consequences of the unsustainable use of rice sequential acid-enzymatic hydrolysis pretreatment”. The article dis­
straw in India. He reports that the large consumption of rice leads cusses bioethanol production in Malaysia, where there is a large amount
farmers to increase the amount of rice cultivation, for this reason, high of food waste with a high content of carbohydrate polymers (e.g., starch,
amounts of straw are produced at harvest time. As a method of disposal, cellulose, and sugars), which has attracted the attention of researchers
the straw is burned in the open air, causing high emissions of greenhouse for sustainable bioethanol production. The author discusses the pre­
gases (GHG). In addition, farmers lose a viable byproduct for sustainable treatment of food waste. The emergence of the term “pretreatment”
bioethanol production, given that rice straw is an excellent raw material recurs in other clusters, reflecting its importance for bioethanol pro­
used for clean energy generation (Singh et al., 2016). duction – one of its important functions is to ensure greater production
of fermentable sugars –glucose, sucrose (Cooper, 2006), fructose
6.2.1. Emerging trends (Feinman and Fine, 2013), and maltose (Engelking, 2015) – prior to the
Cluster #2 has 96 members, and its main keyword is “enzymatic fermentation process. This article presents a proposed kinetic model for
hydrolysis”. The keyword “enzymatic hydrolysis” was one of the most optimal hydrolysis to obtain highly fermentable sugars. Based on the
influential in building the network, and the most cited terms in this results, the researchers considered the model reliable for describing the
cluster were “ethanol production”, “fermentation” and “enzymatic hy­ kinetic behavior of food waste hydrolysis at low temperatures.
drolysis” (Table 5). Its main article describes the fermentability of sug­
arcane bagasse to produce ethanol in a combination of alkaline 7. Conclusions
pretreatment and consolidated fermentation bioprocessing (CBP) by the
fungus Phlebia sp. MG-60. MG-60 was considered a potential candidate The search on WoS for articles on sustainable bioethanol production
to optimize alkaline pretreatment for bioethanol production from sug­ from first- and second-generation sugarcane feedstocks yielded 1647
arcane bagasse in a single bioreactor without enzymatic hydrolysis or publications from between 2012 and 2021. Of these publications, 83.85
chemicals (Khuong et al., 2014). The researchers reported that MG-60 % are original articles, demonstrating the level of interest in studies
decreased the lignin and xylan content of the bagasse, resulting in an relating to sustainability. Advanced tools (VOSviewer, Citespace, Arc­
increase in ethanol production from pretreated sugarcane bagasse as a map, Excel, and Google Sheets) were essential for the construction of
function of alkaline concentration. They also described the thermo­ this advanced bibliometric analysis. Based on our findings, we conclude
chemical pretreatment of the biomass (Langan et al., 2014), which in­ the following:
creases the substrate’s accessibility for enzymatic hydrolysis (Yang The highest number of publications was recorded in 2020 (230 ar­
et al., 2011), and defined alkaline pretreatment (Kim et al., 2016) as a ticles). The number grew over a period from 2014 to 2020, and
treatment used to dissolve a large part of the lignin and several uronic decreased in 2021. The study identified the journals with the most
acid substitutions responsible for hindering cellulose accessibility for publications on sustainable bioethanol production. The most cited was
enzymatic saccharification (Leu and Zhu, 2013). Bioresource Technology, with 5840 citations and 155 publications, fol­
Cluster #3 has the keyword “different process configurations”. Its lowed by Renewable Energy (2448 citations and 57 publications) and Fuel
main article is “Bioethanol production from rapeseed straw at high (1354 citations and 42 publications). Bioresource Technology has a higher
solids loading with different process configuration”, which discusses impact factor due to the many citations of its articles. Analysis by
different process configurations: separate hydrolysis and fermentation country showed that India, China and Brazil published the most articles,
(SHF), simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (SSF), and pre- together accounting for 34.94 % of the total set of publications (521
hydrolysis, saccharification and simultaneous fermentation (PSSF) articles and 12,002 citations). The predominant institutions were from
(Giang et al., 2019)). The different configurations, with high solid Asia, namely, Universiti Tenaga Nasional, University of Malaya, Uni­
loadings, were compared in the production of ethanol from rapeseed versity of Chinese Academy of Sciences, and Chinese Academy of Sci­
straw pretreated with sulfuric acid (López-Linares et al., 2014). The ences. The University of Minho, Portugal, is the only leading institution
researchers obtained the highest ethanol concentration in the SHF outside Asia. As regards authors, Gwi-Taek Jeong, Héctor A. Ruiz,
configuration with the highest substrate loading (20 % w/v). The Yuwalee Unpaprom, and Hyeun-Jong Bae collaborated in the develop­
amounts and yields of ethanol in the SSF and PSSF configurations did not ment of the research field. However, the most cited author (740 cita­
differ much, but the solid loading caused a difference in the preferred tions) in this analysis was Hyeun-Jong Bae from South Korea.
configuration (SSF with 7.5 % w/v and PSSF with 15 % w/v). The higher The analysis of the 10 most cited articles shows that the article
the solid loading, the more favorable the separation process appears to “Bioethanol production from agricultural wastes: An overview”, auth­
be (López-Linares et al., 2014). ored by four researchers, had the highest number of citations (943).
Cluster #4 is characterized by the keyword “Zymomonas mobilis”. These articles are distributed among the knowledge areas of “Energy
The cluster has a strong connection with “fuel ethanol” and “enzyme”. Fuels”, “Engineering”, and “Microbiology Applied to Biotechnology”,
Fuel ethanol plants reduce fuel production costs and provide an supporting the research with 61.83 % participation.
alternative use for the sugars produced during biomass conversion With regard to trends, the use of yeast during fermentation enables
(Lawford and Rousseau, 2003). There is only one bacterium that offers high fermentation efficiency and bioethanol production. The yeasts
several advantages over existing ethanol-producing microorganisms – Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Pichia stipitis have been used to produce
Zymomonas mobilis (Panesar et al., 2006). The main article in the cluster first-generation bioethanol.
(“Simultaneous saccharification and continuous fermentation of sludge- Currently, waste recycling is an alternative method used to amelio­
containing mash for bioethanol production by Saccharomyces cerevisiae rate food and energy crises. Lignocellulosic biomass, derived from rice
CHFY0321”) concerns a continuous process applied to improve the straw, wheat straw, corn stover, or sugarcane bagasse, is considered the
volumetric productivity of bioethanol from cassava pulp sludge, using most promising feedstock for sustainable bioethanol production because
the autoflocculating yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae to simplify the pro­ it is abundant, renewable, low-cost, and less polluting. It also contrib­
cess of ethanol production from starchy feedstocks and to produce bio­ utes to the reduction of solid urban waste. The only major problem with
ethanol economically by eliminating additional saccharification and this form of production is the cost of raw materials for pretreatment.
filtration processes (Moon et al., 2012). The authors reported that the Therefore, the integration of 1G and 2G bioethanol production has been

16
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

considered a strategy that allows efficient and economical technologies Aditiya, H.B., Chong, W.T., Mahlia, T.M.I., Sebayang, A.H., Berawi, M.A., Nur, H., 2016a.
Second generation bioethanol potential from selected Malaysia’s biodiversity
to improve bioconversion capacity and produce sufficient bioethanol.
biomasses: a review. Waste Manag. 47, 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Finally, the “hot topics”, reflected in the co-occurrence of keywords, wasman.2015.07.031.
can help to observe the themes towards which this field of research is Aghaei, S., Karimi Alavijeh, M., Shafiei, M., Karimi, K., 2022. A comprehensive review on
oriented. The most cited keywords were “bioethanol”, “ethanol pro­ bioethanol production from corn stover: worldwide potential, environmental
importance, and perspectives. Biomass Bioenergy 161, 106447. https://doi.org/
duction”, “fermentation” and “ethanol pretreatment”. In addition, co- 10.1016/j.biombioe.2022.106447.
citation clusters were identified, centered on six papers related to sus­ Alawad, S.M., Mansour, R. Ben, Al-Sulaiman, F.A., Rehman, S., 2023. Renewable energy
tainable bioethanol production. systems for water desalination applications: a comprehensive review. Energy
Convers. Manag. 286, 117035 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117035.
From a practical point of view, the analysis made it possible to follow Albagli, S., 1996. Divulgação científica: informação científica para a cidadania? Ciênc.
the evolution of sustainable bioethanol production. It was found that, in Inform. 25 (3), 396–404.
general, the studies presented more advantages than disadvantages. AlHumaidan, F.S., Absi Halabi, M., Rana, M.S., Vinoba, M., 2023. Blue hydrogen: current
status and future technologies. Energy Convers. Manag. 283, 116840 https://doi.
Thus, the research was seen to represent a positive trend, involving the org/10.1016/j.enconman.2023.116840.
participation of different researchers and high-impact journals, which Almodares, A., Hadi, M.R., 2009. Production of bioethanol from sweet sorghum: a
are highly relevant for engagement in and expansion of the research review. Afr. J. Agric. Res. 4 (9), 772–780.
Althuri, A., Venkata Mohan, S., 2022. Emerging innovations for sustainable production
area. of bioethanol and other mercantile products from circular economy perspective.
As suggestions for future studies that could improve new biblio­ Bioresour. Technol. 363, 128013 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128013.
metric analyses, we highly recommend: 1) more experimental work on Alvim, J.C., Alvim, F.A.L.S., Sales, V.H.G., Oliveira, E.M. de, Sales, P.V.G., Costa, A.C.R.,
2014. Biorefineries: concepts, classification, raw materials and products.
forms of integration of first- and second-generation biofuel production;
J. Bioenergy Food Sci. 1 (3), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.18067/JBFS.V1I3.22.
2) more open, public materials to assist in the development of the Amorim, H.V., Lopes, M.L., De Castro Oliveira, J.V., Buckeridge, M.S., Goldman, G.H.,
research area; 3) experimental studies with third-generation biofuels, 2011. Scientific challenges of bioethanol production in Brazil. Appl. Microbiol.
considering that algae are considered an excellent biomass for the pro­ Biotechnol. 91 (5), 1267–1275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-011-3437-6.
Andrade, E.T. de, Carvalho, S.R.G. de, Souza, L.F. de, 2010. Programa Do Proálcool E O
duction of bioethanol (rich in sugar) that is beneficial to the environ­ Etanol No Brasil. Engevista 11 (2), 127–136. https://doi.org/10.22409/engevista.
ment; and 4) regulations on the production and use of biofuels. v11i2.236.
Asif, M., Muneer, T., 2007. Energy supply, its demand and security issues for developed
and emerging economies. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 11 (7), 1388–1413. https://doi.
CRediT authorship contribution statement org/10.1016/j.rser.2005.12.004.
Aui, A., Wang, Y., Mba-Wright, M., 2021. Evaluating the economic feasibility of
Conceptualization, AASL, MASR, ASD, MB, WS, TJ, JCSS; cellulosic ethanol: a meta-analysis of techno-economic analysis studies. In. Renew.
Sust. Energ. Rev. 145 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111098.
Methodology, AASL, MASR, ASD, MB, WS, TJ, JCSS; Ayodele, B.V., Alsaffar, M.A., Mustapa, S.I., 2020. An overview of integration
Investigation, CECG, FSN, VCB, JGAN, RBRV, PGSJ, ANSB, RLFM, opportunities for sustainable bioethanol production from first- and second-
JFS, RKCL, APG, MCMS, AASL, MASR, ASD, MB, WS, TJ, JCSS; generation sugar-based feedstocks. J. Clean. Prod. 245, 118857 https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118857.
Formal analysis, CECG, FSN, VCB, JGAN, RBRV, PGSJ, AASL, MASR, Babazadeh, R., 2017. Optimal design and planning of biodiesel supply chain considering
ASD, MB, WS, TJ, JCSS; non-edible feedstock. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 75, 1089–1100.
Supervision, project administration, AASL, MASR, ASD, MB, WS, TJ, Bachs-Herrera, A., York, D., Stephens-Jones, T., Mabbett, I., Yeo, J., Martin-Martinez, F.
J., 2023. Biomass carbon mining to develop nature-inspired materials for a circular
JCSS;
economy. IScience 26 (4), 106549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.106549.
Writing and editing, CECG, FSN, VCB, JGAN, RBRV, PGSJ, ANSB, Balat, M., 2008. Potential importance of hydrogen as a future solution to environmental
RLFM, JFS, RKCL, APG, MCMS, AASL, MASR, ASD, MB, WS, TJ, JCSS; and transportation problems. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 33 (15), 4013–4029. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.05.047.
Funding acquisition, AASL, MASR, ASD, MB, WS, TJ, JCSS;
Balat, M., 2011. Production of bioethanol from lignocellulosic materials via the
All authors read and approved the final manuscript. biochemical pathway: a review. Energy Convers. Manag. 52 (2), 858–875. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2010.08.013.
Bender, L.E., Lopes, S.T., Gomes, K.S., Devos, R.J.B., Colla, L.M., 2022. Challenges in
Declaration of competing interest bioethanol production from food residues. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 19, 101171
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2022.101171.
The authors declare no competing financial interests. Bhatia, S.K., Kim, S.-H., Yoon, J.-J., Yang, Y.-H., 2017. Current status and strategies for
second generation biofuel production using microbial systems. Energy Convers.
Manag. 148, 1142–1156.
Data availability Boccard, J., Rudaz, S., 2013. Mass spectrometry metabolomic data handling for
biomarker discovery. In: Issaq, H.J., T. D. B. T.-P, Veenstra, M.A. To B.D. (Eds.),
Data will be made available on request. Proteomic and Metabolomic Approaches to Biomarker Discovery. Elsevier,
pp. 425–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-394446-7.00027-3.
Braun, M., Santana, C.S., Garcia, A.C., Andronescu, C., 2023. From waste to value –
Acknowledgments glycerol electrooxidation for energy conversion and chemical production. Curr.
Opin. Green Sustain. Chem. 100829 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogsc.2023.100829.
Bušić, A., Mardetko, N., Kundas, S., Morzak, G., Belskaya, H., Šantek, M.I., Komes, D.,
This study has been partially funded by the following Brazilian Novak, S., Šantek, B., 2018. Bioethanol production from renewable raw materials
agencies for scientific and technological development: Fundação Cear­ and its separation and purification: a review. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 56 (3),
ense de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (FUNCAP) 289–311. https://doi.org/10.17113/ftb.56.03.18.5546.
Cabral, M.M.S., Abud, A.K. de S., Silva, C.E. de F., Almeida, R.M.R.G., 2016. A produção
(PS1-0186-00216.01.00/21, PS1-00186-00255.01.00/21), Conselho de bioetanol a partir de fibra de casca de coco. Cienc. Rural 46 (10), 1872–1877.
Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20151331.
(311062/2019-9, 308280/2017-2, 313647/2020-8), and Coordenação Catumba, B.D., Sales, M.B., Borges, P.T., Ribeiro Filho, M.N., Lopes, A.A.S., Sousa
Rios, M.A. de, Desai, A.S., Bilal, M., Santos, J.C.S. dos, 2023. Sustainability and
de Aperfeiçoamento de Ensino Superior (CAPES) (finance code 001). challenges in hydrogen production: an advanced bibliometric analysis. Int. J.
Hydrog. Energy 48 (22), 7975–7992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
References ijhydene.2022.11.215.
Cavalcante, F.T.T., da Fonseca, A.M., Holanda Alexandre, J.Y.N., dos Santos, J.C.S.,
2022. A stepwise docking and molecular dynamics approach for enzymatic
Abbasi, T., Abbasi, S.A., 2010. Biomass energy and the environmental impacts associated
biolubricant production using Lipase Eversa® Transform as a biocatalyst. Ind. Crop.
with its production and utilization. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 14 (3), 919–937.
Prod. 187, 115450 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115450.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.11.006.
Chandel, K.A., da Silva, S.S., V., O., 2011. Detoxification of lignocellulosic hydrolysates
Abreu-Cavalheiro, A., Monteiro, G., 2013. Solving ethanol production problems with
for improved bioethanol production. In: Biofuel Production-recent Developments
genetically modified yeast strains. Braz. J. Microbiol. 44 (3), 665–671. https://doi.
and Prospects. https://doi.org/10.5772/16454.
org/10.1590/S1517-83822013000300001.
Chau, C.K., Leung, T.M., Ng, W.Y., 2015. A review on life cycle assessment, life cycle
Aditiya, H., Mahlia, T.M.I., Chong, W., Nur, H., Sebayang, A., 2016b. Second generation
energy assessment and life cycle carbon emissions assessment on buildings. Appl.
bioethanol production: a critical review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 66, 631–653.
Energy 143 (1), 395–413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.023.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.015.

17
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Chen, H., Liu, J., Chang, X., Chen, D., Xue, Y., Liu, P., Lin, H., Han, S., 2017. A review on Ferreira Mota, G., Germano de Sousa, I., Barros, Luiz, de Oliveira, A., Luthierre Gama
the pretreatment of lignocellulose for high-value chemicals. Fuel Process. Technol. Cavalcante, A., da Silva Moreira, K., Thálysson Tavares Cavalcante, F., Erick da Silva
160, 196–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2016.12.007. Souza, J., Rafael de Aguiar Falcão, Í., Guimarães Rocha, T., Bussons Rodrigues
Chen, J., Zhang, B., Luo, L., Zhang, F., Yi, Y., Shan, Y., Liu, B., Zhou, Y., Wang, X., Lü, X., Valério, R., Cristina Freitas de Carvalho, S., Simão Neto, F., de França Serpa, J.,
2021. A review on recycling techniques for bioethanol production from Karolinny Chaves de Lima, R., Cristiane Martins de Souza, M., dos Santos, J.C.S.,
lignocellulosic biomass. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 149, 111370 https://doi.org/ 2022. Biodiesel production from microalgae using lipase-based catalysts: current
10.1016/j.rser.2021.111370. challenges and prospects. Algal Res. 62, 102616 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Chen, Fang, W., Liang, J., Nabi, M., Cai, Y., Wang, Q., Zhang, P., Zhang, G., 2023. algal.2021.102616.
Biochar application in anaerobic digestion: performances, mechanisms, Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M.Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S.,
environmental assessment and circular economy. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 188, Koehler, A., Pennington, D., Suh, S., 2009. Recent developments in Life Cycle
106720 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106720. Assessment. J. Environ. Manag. 91 (1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Chhandama, M.V.L., Rai, P.K., Lalawmpuii., 2023. Coupling bioremediation and jenvman.2009.06.018.
biorefinery prospects of microalgae for circular economy. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. Gandam, P.K., Chinta, M.L., Pabbathi, N.P.P., Baadhe, R.R., Sharma, M., Thakur, V.K.,
22, 101479 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2023.101479. Sharma, G.D., Ranjitha, J., Gupta, V.K., 2022. Second-generation bioethanol
Chiaramonti, D., Prussi, M., Ferrero, S., Oriani, L., Ottonello, P., Torre, P., Cherchi, F., production from corncob – a comprehensive review on pretreatment and
2012. Review of pretreatment processes for lignocellulosic ethanol production, and bioconversion strategies, including techno-economic and lifecycle perspective. Ind.
development of an innovative method. Biomass Bioenergy 46, 25–35. https://doi. Crop. Prod. 186, 115245 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115245.
org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.04.020. Genovese, M., Schlüter, A., Scionti, E., Piraino, F., Corigliano, O., Fragiacomo, P., 2023.
Cooper, J.M., 2006. 7 - Sucrose. In: Spillane, W.J.B.T.-O.S.T. in F. (Ed.), Woodhead Power-to-hydrogen and hydrogen-to-X energy systems for the industry of the future
Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition. Woodhead Publishing, in Europe. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 48 (44), 16545–16568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
pp. 135–152. https://doi.org/10.1533/9781845691646.2.135. ijhydene.2023.01.194.
Culaba, A.B., Mayol, A.P., San Juan, J.L.G., Ubando, A.T., Bandala, A.A., Germano de Sousa, I., Valério Chaves, A., de Oliveira, A.L.B., da Silva Moreira, K.,
Concepcion II, R.S., Alipio, M., Chen, W.-H., Show, P.L., Chang, J.-S., 2023. Design of Gonçalves de Sousa Junior, P., Simão Neto, F., Cristina Freitas de Carvalho, S.,
biorefineries towards carbon neutrality: a critical review. Bioresour. Technol. 369, Bussons Rodrigues Valério, R., Vieira Lima, G., Sanders Lopes, A.A., Martins de
128256 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.128256. Souza, M.C., da Fonseca, A.M., Fechine, P.B.A., de Mattos, M.C., dos Santos, J.C.S.,
Daroch, M., Geng, S., Wang, G., 2013. Recent advances in liquid biofuel production from 2022. A novel hybrid biocatalyst from immobilized Eversa® Transform 2.0 lipase
algal feedstocks. Appl. Energy 102, 1371–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. and its application in biolubricant synthesis. Biocatal. Biotransform. 1–22. https://
apenergy.2012.07.031. doi.org/10.1080/10242422.2022.2144263.
Dave, N., Selvaraj, R., Varadavenkatesan, T., Vinayagam, R., 2019. A critical review on Ghosh, P., Ghose, T.K., 2003. Bioethanol in India: recent past and emerging future.
production of bioethanol from macroalgal biomass. Algal Res. 42, 101606 https:// Biotechnol. India II, 1–27.
doi.org/10.1016/j.algal.2019.101606. Giang, T.T., Lunprom, S., Liao, Q., Reungsang, A., Salakkam, A., 2019. Enhancing
Davidson, B., 2023. Labour on the leading edge: a critical review of labour rights and hydrogen production from Chlorella sp. biomass by pre-hydrolysis with
standards in renewable energy. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 97, 102928 https://doi.org/ simultaneous saccharification and fermentation (PSSF). Energies 12 (5). https://doi.
10.1016/j.erss.2022.102928. org/10.3390/en12050908.
de Jong, S., Hoefnagels, R., Faaij, A., Slade, R., Mawhood, R., Junginger, M., 2015. The Gouveia, F., 2013. Bioetanol combustível brasileiro: economicamente sustentável?, 152.
feasibility of short-term production strategies for renewable jet fuels - a Guven, H., Ersahin, M.E., Ozgun, H., Ozturk, I., Koyuncu, I., 2023. Energy and material
comprehensive techno-economic comparison. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin. 9 (6), refineries of future: wastewater treatment plants. J. Environ. Manag. 329, 117130
778–800. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.1613. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.117130.
De La Peña, Y., Bordeth, G., Campo, H., Murillo, U., 2018. Clean Energies: An Haas, C., Jahns, H., Kempa, K., Moslener, U., 2023. Deep uncertainty and the transition
Opportunity to save the Planet 1 Energías Limpias una Oportunidad para salvar el to a low-carbon economy. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 100, 103060 https://doi.org/
Planeta, 3(1), pp. 21–25. https://doi.org/10.17981/ijmsor.03.01.04. 10.1016/j.erss.2023.103060.
de Oliveira, A., Cavalcante, F.T.T., Moreira, K.S., Monteiro, R.R.C., Rocha, T.G., Souza, J. Hafid, H.S., Nor ’Aini, A.R., Mokhtar, M.N., Talib, A.T., Baharuddin, A.S., Umi
E.S., da Fonseca, A.M., Lopes, A.A.S., Guimarães, A.P., de Lima, R.K.C., de Souza, M. Kalsom, M.S., 2017. Over production of fermentable sugar for bioethanol production
C.M., dos Santos, J.C.S., 2021. Lipases immobilized onto nanomaterials as from carbohydrate-rich Malaysian food waste via sequential acid-enzymatic
biocatalysts in biodiesel production: scientific context, challenges, and hydrolysis pretreatment. Waste Manag. 67, 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
opportunities. Rev. Virtual Quim. 13 (4), 875–891. https://doi.org/10.21577/1984- wasman.2017.05.017.
6835.20210019. Hendriks, A., Zeeman, G., 2009. Pretreatments to enhance the digestibility of
Den Haan, R., Kroukamp, H., Mert, M., Bloom, M., Görgens, J.F., Van Zyl, W.H., 2013. lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 100 (1), 10–18.
Engineering Saccharomyces cerevisiae for next generation ethanol production. Ho, S.-H., Huang, S.-W., Chen, C.-Y., Hasunuma, T., Kondo, A., Chang, J.-S., 2013.
J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 88 (6), 983–991. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.4068. Bioethanol production using carbohydrate-rich microalgae biomass as feedstock.
Devos, R.J.B., Colla, L.M., 2022. Simultaneous saccharification and fermentation to Bioresour. Technol. 135, 191–198.
obtain bioethanol: a bibliometric and systematic study. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 17, Ibrahim, H.A., Ayomoh, M.K., Bansal, R.C., Gitau, M.N., Yadavalli, V.S.S., Naidoo, R.,
100924 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100924. 2023. Sustainability of power generation for developing economies: a systematic
Dhamija, P., Bag, S., 2020. Role of artificial intelligence in operations environment: a review of power sources mix. Energy Strategy Rev. 47, 101085 https://doi.org/
review and bibliometric analysis. TQM J. 32 (4), 869–896. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 10.1016/j.esr.2023.101085.
TQM-10-2019-0243. Iram, A., Cekmecelioglu, D., Demirci, A., 2022. Integrating 1G with 2G bioethanol
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., Lim, W.M., 2021. How to conduct a production by using Distillers’ Dried Grains with Solubles (DDGS) as the feedstock
bibliometric analysis: an overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 133, 285–296. for lignocellulolytic enzyme production. Fermentation 8 (12), 1–18. https://doi.org/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070. 10.3390/fermentation8120705.
Dresselhaus, M.S., Thomas, I.L., 2001. Alternative energy technologies. Nature 414 Jambo, S.A., Abdulla, R., Mohd Azhar, S.H., Marbawi, H., Gansau, J.A., Ravindra, P.,
(6861), 332–337. https://doi.org/10.1038/35104599. 2016. A review on third generation bioethanol feedstock. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev.
Dunning, T., 1993. Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence. 65, 756–769. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.064.
Comput. Linguist. 19 (1), 61–74. Jeong, J., 2017. A study on the high-efficient bioethanol production using barley, 28(6),
Dwivedi, P., Wang, W., Hudiburg, T., Jaiswal, D., Parton, W., Long, S., Delucia, E., pp. 697–703.
Khanna, M., 2015. Cost of abating greenhouse gas emissions with cellulosic ethanol. Jia, Z., Cheng, L., Feng, H., Cao, R., Jia, P., Pu, B., Pan, Q., Shi, J., 2023. Full composition
Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 (4), 2512–2522. https://doi.org/10.1021/es5052588. numerical simulation of CO2 utilization process in shale reservoir using projection-
Dziejarski, B., Krzyżyńska, R., Andersson, K., 2023. Current status of carbon capture, based embedded discrete fracture model (pEDFM) considering nano-confinement
utilization, and storage technologies in the global economy: a survey of technical effect. Gas Sci. Eng. 111, 204932 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgsce.2023.204932.
assessment. Fuel 342, 127776. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2023.127776. Jiang, W., Aishan, T., Halik, Ü., Wei, Z., Wumaier, M., 2022. A bibliometric and
Ellabban, O., Abu-Rub, H., Blaabjerg, F., 2014. Renewable energy resources: current visualized analysis of research progress and trends on decay and cavity trees in forest
status, future prospects and their enabling technology. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 39, ecosystem over 20 years: an application of the CiteSpace software. Forests 13 (9).
748–764. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.113. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13091437.
Engelking, L., 2015. Chapter 18 - carbohydrate structure. In: Engelking, Third E. (Ed.), Kabir, M.M., Akter, M.M., Huang, Z., Tijing, L., Shon, H.K., 2023. Hydrogen production
L. R. B. T.-T. of V. P. C. Academic Press, pp. 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/ from water industries for a circular economy. Desalination 554, 116448. https://doi.
B978-0-12-391909-0.50018-9. org/10.1016/j.desal.2023.116448.
Fan, Y., Xia, W., Ma, C., Huang, Y., Li, S., Wang, X., Qian, C., Chen, K., Liu, D., 2023. Karimi, K., Chisti, Y., 2015. Future of bioethanol…. Biofuel Res. J. 2 (1), 147.
Recent advances of computational studies on bioethanol to light olefin reactions Kato, Y., 2007. Chemical energy conversion technologies for efficient energy use. In:
using zeolite and metal oxide catalysts. Chem. Eng. Sci. 270, 118532 https://doi. Thermal Energy Storage for Sustainable Energy Consumption. Springer,
org/10.1016/j.ces.2023.118532. pp. 377–391.
Feinman, R.D., Fine, E.J., 2013. Fructose in perspective. Nutr. Metab. 10 (1), 45. https:// Kazemi Shariat Panahi, H., Dehhaghi, M., Dehhaghi, S., Guillemin, G.J., Lam, S.S.,
doi.org/10.1186/1743-7075-10-45. Aghbashlo, M., Tabatabaei, M., 2022a. Engineered bacteria for valorizing
Ferreira, J.A., Brancoli, P., Agnihotri, S., Bolton, K., Taherzadeh, M.J., 2018. A review of lignocellulosic biomass into bioethanol. Bioresour. Technol. 344, 126212 https://
integration strategies of lignocelluloses and other wastes in 1st generation doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.126212.
bioethanol processes. Process Biochem. 75, 173–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Kazemi Shariat Panahi, H., Dehhaghi, M., Guillemin, G.J., Gupta, V.K., Lam, S.S.,
procbio.2018.09.006. Aghbashlo, M., Tabatabaei, M., 2022b. Bioethanol production from food wastes rich

18
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

in carbohydrates. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 43, 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?

cofs.2021.11.001. direct=true&db=agr&AN=IND44797490&site=ehost-live).
Khaire, K.C., Moholkar, V.S., Goyal, A., 2021. Bioconversion of sugarcane tops to Maia, J.L. da, Cardoso, J.S., Mastrantonio, D.J. da S., Bierhals, C.K., Moreira, J.B.,
bioethanol and other value added products: an overview. Mater. Sci. Energy Costa, J.A.V., Morais, M.G. de, 2020. Microalgae starch: a promising raw material for
Technol. 4, 54–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mset.2020.12.004. the bioethanol production. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 165, 2739–2749. https://doi.org/
Khuong, L.D., Kondo, R., De Leon, R., Kim Anh, T., Shimizu, K., Kamei, I., 2014. 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.10.159.
Bioethanol production from alkaline-pretreated sugarcane bagasse by consolidated Malik, A., Grohmann, E.A., Al, E., 2014. Environmental Deterioration and Human
bioprocessing using Phlebia sp. MG-60. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegradation 88, 62–68. Health. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7890-0.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.12.008. Malik, K., Sharma, P., Yang, Y., Zhang, P., Zhang, L., Xing, X., Yue, J., Song, Z., Nan, L.,
Kiehbadroudinezhad, M., Merabet, A., Ghenai, C., Abo-Khalil, A.G., Salameh, T., 2023. Yujun, S., El-Dalatony, M.M., Salama, E.-S., Li, X., 2022. Lignocellulosic biomass for
The role of biofuels for sustainable MicrogridsF: a path towards carbon neutrality bioethanol: insight into the advanced pretreatment and fermentation approaches.
and the green economy. Heliyon 9 (2), e13407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Ind. Crop. Prod. 188, 115569 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115569.
heliyon.2023.e13407. Martins, R.V., 2015. Etanol De Beterraba. Itr@ciência 10 (31), 1–16.
Kim, J.S., Lee, Y.Y., Kim, T.H., 2016. A review on alkaline pretreatment technology for Marziale, M.H.P., Mendes, I.A.C., 2002. O fator de impacto das publicações científicas.
bioconversion of lignocellulosic biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 199, 42–48. https:// Rev. Lat. Am. Enfermagem 10 (4), 466–467. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.08.085. 11692002000400001.
Kircher, M., Aranda, E., Athanasios, P., Radojcic-Rednovnikov, I., Romantschuk, M., McAloon, A., Taylor, F., Yee, W., Regional, E., Ibsen, K., Wooley, R., Biotechnology, N.,
Ryberg, M., Schock, G., Shilev, S., Stanescu, M.D., Stankeviciute, J., Surmacz- 2000. Determining the Cost of Producing Ethanol from Corn Starch and
Górska, J., Tsipa, A., Vasquez, M., Villano, M., Vorgias, C.E., 2023. Treatment and Lignocellulosic Feedstocks. Golden (CO), National renewable energy laboratory;
valorization of bio-waste in the EU. EFB Bioecon. J. 3, 100051 https://doi.org/ 2000 October. Report no.: NREL/TP-580-28893. Contract no. DE-AC36-99-
10.1016/j.bioeco.2023.100051. GO10337. October, p. 44. https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/meta
Kirchherr, J., Yang, N.-H.N., Schulze-Spüntrup, F., Heerink, M.J., Hartley, K., 2023. dc716079/.
Conceptualizing the Circular Economy (revisited): an analysis of 221 definitions. Medeiros, F., 2016. A bibliometria e a avaliação da produção científica. A Historiografia
Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 194, 107001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Medieval Portuguesa Na Viragem Do Milénio, pp. 19–37. https://doi.org/10.4000/
resconrec.2023.107001. books.cidehus.1231.
Knothe, G., Razon, L.F., 2017. Biodiesel fuels. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 58, 36–59. Melendez, J.R., Mátyás, B., Hena, S., Lowy, D.A., El Salous, A., 2022. Perspectives in the
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2016.08.001. production of bioethanol: a review of sustainable methods, technologies, and
Kontostathis, A., Pottenger, W.M., 2006. A framework for understanding Latent Semantic bioprocesses. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 160, 112260 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Indexing (LSI) performance. Inf. Process. Manag. 42 (1 SPEC. ISS), 56–73. https:// rser.2022.112260.
doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2004.11.007. Miranda, J.R., Passarinho, P.C., Gouveia, L., 2012. Pre-treatment optimization of
Kougias, P.G., Angelidaki, I., 2018. Biogas and its opportunities—a review. Front. Scenedesmus obliquus microalga for bioethanol production. Bioresour. Technol.
Environ. Sci. Eng. 12 (3) https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-018-1037-8. 104, 342–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.10.059.
Kumar, A., Kumar, N., Baredar, P., Shukla, A., 2015. A review on biomass energy Modenbach, A.A., Nokes, S.E., 2013. Enzymatic hydrolysis of biomass at high-solids
resources, potential, conversion and policy in India. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 45, loadings - a review. Biomass Bioenergy 56, 526–544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
530–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.007. biombioe.2013.05.031.
Kumar, D., Singh, V., 2019. Bioethanol production from corn. In: Corn. Elsevier, Mohd Azhar, S.H., Abdulla, R., Jambo, S.A., Marbawi, H., Gansau, J.A., Mohd Faik, A.A.,
pp. 615–631. Rodrigues, K.F., 2017. Yeasts in sustainable bioethanol production: a review.
Kurien, C., Mittal, M., 2023. Utilization of green ammonia as a hydrogen energy carrier Biochem. Biophys. Rep. 10, 52–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrep.2017.03.003.
for decarbonization in spark ignition engines. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. https://doi. Moon, S.-K., Kim, S.W., Choi, G.-W., 2012. Simultaneous saccharification and continuous
org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.04.073. fermentation of sludge-containing mash for bioethanol production by
Kusmiyati, K., Hadiyanto, H., Fudholi, A., 2023. Treatment updates of microalgae Saccharomyces cerevisiae CHFY0321. J. Biotechnol. 157 (4), 584–589. https://doi.
biomass for bioethanol production: a comparative study. J. Clean. Prod. 383, 135236 org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2011.06.009.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135236. Moreira, E., 2007. EVOLUÇÃO E PERSPECTIVAS DO COMÉRCIO INTERNACIONAL DE
Lan, R., Irvine, J.T.S., Tao, S., 2012. Ammonia and related chemicals as potential indirect AÇÚCAR E ÁLCOOL Eduardo Fernandes Pestana Moreira São Paulo.
hydrogen storage materials. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 37 (2), 1482–1494. https://doi. Moreira, Moura, L.S., Monteiro, R.R., de Oliveira, A.L., Valle, C.P., Freire, T.M.,
org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.10.004. Fechine, P.B., de Souza, M.C., Fernandez-Lorente, G., Guisan, J.M., dos Santos, J.C.,
Langan, P., Petridis, L., O’Neill, H.M., Pingali, S.V., Foston, M., Nishiyama, Y., Schulz, R., 2020. Optimization of the production of enzymatic biodiesel from residual babassu
Lindner, B., Hanson, B.L., Harton, S., Heller, W.T., Urban, V., Evans, B.R., oil (Orbignya sp.) via RSM. Catalysts 10 (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/
Gnanakaran, S., Ragauskas, A.J., Smith, J.C., Davisond, B.H., 2014. Common catal10040414.
processes drive the thermochemical pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass. Green Mota, J.C., Almeida, M.M. De, Alencar, V.C. De, Curi, W.F., 2009. Impactos e benefícios
Chem. 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1039/x0xx00000x. ambientais, econômicos e sociais dos biocombustíveis. Eng. Ambient. 6 (3),
Lawford, H.G., Rousseau, J.D., 2003. Cellulosic fuel ethanol: alternative fermentation 220–242.
process designs with wild-type and recombinant Zymomonas mobilis. Appl. Mousavi-Avval, S.H., Sahoo, K., Nepal, P., Runge, T., Bergman, R., 2023. Environmental
Biochem. Biotechnol. 106 (1–3), 457–469. https://doi.org/10.1385/ABAB:106:1-3: impacts and techno-economic assessments of biobased products: a review. Renew.
457. Sust. Energ. Rev. 180, 113302 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113302.
Lennartsson, P.R., Erlandsson, P., Taherzadeh, M.J., 2014. Integration of the first and Mujtaba, M., Fernandes Fraceto, L., Fazeli, M., Mukherjee, S., Savassa, S.M., Araujo de
second generation bioethanol processes and the importance of by-products. Medeiros, G., do Espírito Santo Pereira, A., Mancini, S.D., Lipponen, J., Vilaplana, F.,
Bioresour. Technol. 165, 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.01.127. 2023. Lignocellulosic biomass from agricultural waste to the circular economy: a
Leu, S.Y., Zhu, J.Y., 2013. Substrate-related factors affecting enzymatic saccharification review with focus on biofuels, biocomposites and bioplastics. J. Clean. Prod. 402,
of lignocelluloses: our recent understanding. Bioenergy Res. 6 (2), 405–415. https:// 136815 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136815.
doi.org/10.1007/s12155-012-9276-1. Ndubuisi, I.A., Amadi, C.O., Nwagu, T.N., Murata, Y., Ogbonna, J.C., 2023. Non-
Li, Z., Liu, W., Gu, Z., Li, C., Hong, Y., Cheng, L., 2015. The effect of starch concentration conventional yeast strains: Unexploited resources for effective commercialization of
on the gelatinization and liquefaction of corn starch. Food Hydrocoll. 48, 189–196. second generation bioethanol. Biotechnol. Adv. 63, 108100 https://doi.org/
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2015.02.030. 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2023.108100.
Limayem, A., Ricke, S.C., 2012. Lignocellulosic biomass for bioethanol production: Nemmour, A., Inayat, A., Janajreh, I., Ghenai, C., 2023. Green hydrogen-based E-fuels
current perspectives, potential issues and future prospects. Prog. Energy Combust. (E-methane, E-methanol, E-ammonia) to support clean energy transition: a literature
Sci. 38 (4), 449–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2012.03.002. review. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.03.240.
Lin, Y., Tanaka, S., 2006. Ethanol fermentation from biomass resources: current state and Neto, F.S., de Melo, Fernandes, Neta, M.M., Sales, M.B., Silva de Oliveira, F.A., de Castro
prospects. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 69 (6), 627–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Bizerra, V., Sanders Lopes, A.A., de Sousa Rios, M.A., Santos, J.C.S. dos, 2023.
s00253-005-0229-x. Research progress and trends on utilization of lignocellulosic residues as supports for
Lopes, J., Sales, M.B., Bizerra, V.D.C., Mara, M., Nobre, R., Ana, K., Sousa, D., Sousa, S., enzyme immobilization via advanced bibliometric analysis. Polymers 15 (9).
Cavalcante, L.G., Melo, R.L.F., Gonçalves, P., Junior, D.S., Neto, F.S., Sousa, C., https://doi.org/10.3390/polym15092057.
2023. Lipase from Yarrowia lipolytica: prospects as an industrial biocatalyst for Nguyen, T.H., Sunwoo, I.Y., Jeong, G.-T., Kim, S.-K., 2019. Detoxification of hydrolysates
biotechnological applications. of the red seaweed Gelidium amansii for improved bioethanol production. Appl.
López-Linares, J.C., Romero, I., Cara, C., Ruiz, E., Moya, M., Castro, E., 2014. Bioethanol Biochem. Biotechnol. 188 (4), 977–990. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12010-019-
production from rapeseed straw at high solids loading with different process 02970-x.
configurations. Fuel 122, 112–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.01.024. Nitsos, C.K., Matis, K.A., Triantafyllidis, K.S., 2013. Optimization of hydrothermal
Luz Jr., L.F. de L., Kaminski, M., Kozak, R.H., Ndiaye, P.M., 2009. Bioetanol, Biodiesel E pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass in the bioethanol production process.
Biocombustíveis: Perspectivas Para O Futuro. Regional, Urbano E Ambiental, 03, ChemSusChem 6 (1), 110–122.
pp. 53–57 http://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/bitstream/11058/5488/1/BRU_n3_ Nogueira, R.C., Neto, F.S., Junior, P.G. de S., Valério, R.B.R., Serpa, J. de F., Lima, A.M.
bioetanol.pdf. da S., de Souza, M.C.M., de Lima, R.K.C., Lopes, A.A.S., Guimarães, A.P., Melo, R.L.
Macrelli, S., Zacchi, G., Mogensen, J., 2012. Techno-economic evaluation of 2nd F., Rios, M.A. de S., dos Santos, J.C.S., 2023. Research trends and perspectives on
generation bioethanol production from sugar cane bagasse and leaves integrated hydrothermal gasification in producing biofuels. Energy Nexus 10, 100199. https://
with the sugar-based ethanol process [electronic resource]. Biotechnol. Biofuels 5 doi.org/10.1016/j.nexus.2023.100199.
(1), 152 (doi:10.1186/1754-6834-5-22%0Ahttps://ezproxy.lib.uconn.edu/login?

19
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Oduro, R.A., Taylor, P.G., 2023. Future pathways for energy networks: a review of Sales, M.B., Lima, G., Ana, K., Sousa, D., Gonçalves, P., Junior, D.S., Leandro, R.,
international experiences in high income countries. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 171, Melo, F., Bussons, R., Val, R., Serpa, J.D.F., Michele, A., Silva, D., Karolinny, R.,
113002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2022.113002. Lima, C. De, Pessoa, A., Cristiane, M., Souza, M. De, Am, A., Santos, D., 2023. Trends
Offei, F., Mensah, M., Thygesen, A., Kemausuor, F., 2018. Seaweed bioethanol and opportunities in enzyme biosensors coupled to Metal-Organic Frameworks
production: a process selection review on hydrolysis and fermentation. Fermentation (MOFs): an advanced bibliometric analysis, pp. 181–211.
4 (4), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation4040099. Sanchez, N., Ruiz, R., Hacker, V., Cobo, M., 2020. Impact of bioethanol impurities on
Olabi, A.G., Shehata, N., Sayed, E.T., Rodriguez, C., Anyanwu, R.C., Russell, C., steam reforming for hydrogen production: a review. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 45 (21),
Abdelkareem, M.A., 2023. Role of microalgae in achieving sustainable development 11923–11942. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.02.159.
goals and circular economy. Sci. Total Environ. 854, 158689 https://doi.org/ Santana, J.C.S., Ribeiro, M.E. de O., Souza, P.R. de A., Souza, J.P.S. de, Peres, S.M., 2020.
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.158689. O Uso E Produção Da Energia Limpa Como Método De Preservação Ambiental
Olah, G.A., Goeppert, A., Prakash, G.K.S., 2009. Chemical recycling of carbon dioxide to Sustentável. Revista Portos: Por Um Mundo Mais Sustentável 99–111. https://doi.
methanol and dimethyl ether: from greenhouse gas to renewable, environmentally org/10.47879/ed.ep.2020144p99.
carbon neutral fuels and synthetic hydrocarbons. J. Org. Chem. 74 (2), 487–498. Santos, J.C.S. dos, Dhenadhayalan, N., Li, Y., Pinilla, J.L., 2023. Chemical reactions and
https://doi.org/10.1021/jo801260f. catalysis for a sustainable future. Front. Chem. 11 (June), 1–4. https://doi.org/
Oliveira, B., 2019. Produção De Etanol De Segunda Geração a Partir De Resíduos 10.3389/fchem.2023.1228591.
Industriais Da Jabuticaba Utilizando Líquidos Iônicos Para a Quebra Da Celulose. Santos, L., Carvalho, F. De, Pereira, I., Santos, D., Pereira, D., 2018. Análise bibliométrica
Osman, A.I., Qasim, U., Jamil, F., Al-Muhtaseb, A.H., Jrai, A.A., Al-Riyami, M., Al- da gestão e aplicação dos resíduos oriundos do processamento do caju (Anacardium
Maawali, S., Al-Haj, L., Al-Hinai, A., Al-Abri, M., Inayat, A., Waris, A., Farrell, C., occidentale) Bibliometric analysis of the management and application of residues
Maksoud, M.I.A.A., Rooney, D.W., 2021. Bioethanol and biodiesel: bibliometric from cashew processing (Anacardium occidentale), 2018, pp. 537–546.
mapping, policies and future needs. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 152 (July 2020) Sarkar, N., Ghosh, S.K., Bannerjee, S., Aikat, K., 2012. Bioethanol production from
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111677. agricultural wastes: an overview. Renew. Energy 37 (1), 19–27. https://doi.org/
Panesar, P.S., Marwaha, S.S., Kennedy, J.F., 2006. Zymomonas mobilis: an alternative 10.1016/j.renene.2011.06.045.
ethanol producer. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 81 (4), 623–635. Sathre, R., 2014. Comparing the heat of combustion of fossil fuels to the heat
Patni, N., Pillai, S.G., Dwivedi, A.H., 2013. Wheat as a promising substitute of corn for accumulated by their lifecycle greenhouse gases. Fuel 115, 674–677. https://doi.
bioethanol production. Procedia Eng. 51 (NUiCONE 2012), 355–362. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.07.069.
org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.01.049. Sawarkar, A.N., Kirti, N., Tagade, A., Tekade, S.P., 2022. Bioethanol from various types
Penalva Santos, D., Correa, C., Amaral Alves, Y., Gomes Souza, C., Mancebo Boloy, A., R., of banana waste: a review. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 18, 101092 https://doi.org/
2023. Brazil and the world market in the development of technologies for the 10.1016/j.biteb.2022.101092.
production of second-generation ethanol. Alex. Eng. J. 67, 153–170. https://doi.org/ Selim, K.A., El-Ghwas, D.E., Easa, S.M., Abdelwahab Hassan, M.I., 2018. Bioethanol a
10.1016/j.aej.2022.09.004. microbial biofuel metabolite; new insights of yeasts metabolic engineering.
Pereira, L.M.S., Milan, T.M., Tapia-Blácido, D.R., 2021. Using Response Surface Fermentation 4 (1), 16.
Methodology (RSM) to optimize 2G bioethanol production: a review. Biomass Shen, D., Xiao, R., Gu, S., Zhang, H., 2013. The overview of thermal decomposition of
Bioenergy 151, 106166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106166. cellulose in lignocellulosic biomass. In: Cellulose - Biomass Conversion, pp. 193–226.
Prato-Garcia, D., Robayo-Avendaño, A., Vasquez-Medrano, R., 2023. Hydrogen from Singh, A., Singhania, R.R., Soam, S., Chen, C.-W., Haldar, D., Varjani, S., Chang, J.-S.,
natural gas and biogas: building bridges for a sustainable transition to a green Dong, C.-D., Patel, A.K., 2022. Production of bioethanol from food waste: status and
economy. Gas Sci. Eng. 111, 204918 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgsce.2023.204918. perspectives. Bioresour. Technol. 360, 127651 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Qiao, J., Cui, H., Wang, M., Fu, X., Wang, X., Li, X., Huang, H., 2022. Integrated biortech.2022.127651.
biorefinery approaches for the industrialization of cellulosic ethanol fuel. Bioresour. Singh, R., Shukla, A., Tiwari, S., Srivastava, M., 2014. A review on delignification of
Technol. 360, 127516 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2022.127516. lignocellulosic biomass for enhancement of ethanol production potential. Renew.
Queiroz, L.P.O., Albuquerque, F.B. de, Sousa, J.C.R. de, 2021. Análise bibliométrica Sust. Energ. Rev. 32 (April), 713–728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.051.
sobre a utilização de resíduos do coco (cocos nucifera l.) em aplicações para Singh, R., Srivastava, M., Shukla, A., 2016. Environmental sustainability of bioethanol
biocombustíveis. Rev. Ibero Am. Ciênc. Ambient. 12 (9), 551–561. https://doi.org/ production from rice straw in India: a review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 54, 202–216.
10.6008/cbpc2179-6858.2021.009.0043. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.10.005.
Ramos, L.P., Da Silva, F.R., Mangrich, A.S., Cordeiro, C.S., 2011. Biodiesel production Singhania, R.R., Patel, A.K., Sukumaran, R.K., Larroche, C., Pandey, A., 2013. Role and
technologies. Rev. Virtual Quim. 3 (5), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.5935/1984- significance of beta-glucosidases in the hydrolysis of cellulose for bioethanol
6835.20110043. production. Bioresour. Technol. 127, 500–507.
Ranjbari, M., Shams Esfandabadi, Z., Quatraro, F., Vatanparast, H., Lam, S.S., Sitong, C., Xu, Z., Li, X., Yu, J., Cai, M., Jin, M., 2018. Integrated bioethanol production
Aghbashlo, M., Tabatabaei, M., 2022. Biomass and organic waste potentials towards from mixtures of corn and corn stover. Bioresour. Technol. 258, 18–25. https://doi.
implementing circular bioeconomy platforms: a systematic bibliometric analysis. org/10.1016/j.biortech.2018.02.125.
Fuel 318 (January). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123585. Soleimani, S.S., Adiguzel, A., Nadaroglu, H., 2017. Production of bioethanol by
Rastogi, M., Shrivastava, S., 2017. Recent advances in second generation bioethanol facultative anaerobic bacteria. J. Inst. Brew. 123 (3), 402–406. https://doi.org/
production: an insight to pretreatment, saccharification and fermentation processes. 10.1002/jib.437.
Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 80, 330–340. Souza de Alves, C.J., 2011. Produção de Etanol por Sacarificação e Fermentação
Ribeiro, D., 2014. Combustíveis fósseis. Rev. Ciênc. Element. 2 (2), 10–11. https://doi. Simultâneas do Bagaço de Cana-de-Açúcar Utilizando Leveduras Termotolerantes,
org/10.24927/rce2014.172. pp. 1–63.
Robak, K., Balcerek, M., 2018. Review of second generation bioethanol production from Souza, J., Monteiro, R.R.C., Rocha, T.G., Moreira, K.S., Cavalcante, F.T.T., de Sousa
residual biomass. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 56 (2), 174. Braz, A.K., de Souza, M.C.M., dos Santos, J.C.S., 2020. Sonohydrolysis using an
Rocha, T.G., de L. Gomes, P.H., de Souza, M.C.M., Monteiro, R.R.C., dos Santos, J.C.S., enzymatic cocktail in the preparation of free fatty acid. 3 Biotech 10 (6), 254.
2021. Lipase cocktail for optimized biodiesel production of free fatty acids from https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-020-02227-z.
residual chicken oil. Catal. Lett. 151 (4), 1155–1166. https://doi.org/10.1007/ Souza, O., Schulz, M.A., Fischer, G.A.A., Wagner, T.M., Sellin, N., 2012. Energia
s10562-020-03367-w. alternativa de biomassa: bioetanol a partir da casca e da polpa de banana. Rev. Bras.
Rodrigues, A.F.S., da Silva, A.F., da Silva, F.L.B., dos Santos, K.M., de Oliveira, M.P., Eng. Agríc. Ambient. 16 (8), 915–921. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1415-
Nobre, M.M.R., Catumba, B.D., Sales, M.B., Silva, A.R.M., Braz, A.K.S., 43662012000800015.
Cavalcante, A.L.G., Alexandre, J.Y.N.H., Junior, P.G.S., Valério, R.B.R., de Castro Suhartini, S., Rohma, N.A., Mardawati, E., Kasbawati, Hidayat, N., Melville, L., 2022.
Bizerra, V., dos Santos, J.C.S., 2023. A scientometric analysis of research progress Biorefining of oil palm empty fruit bunches for bioethanol and xylitol production in
and trends in the design of laccase biocatalysts for the decolorization of synthetic Indonesia: a review. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 154, 111817 https://doi.org/10.1016/
dyes. Process Biochem. 126, 272–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. j.rser.2021.111817.
procbio.2023.01.014. Susmozas, A., Martín-Sampedro, R., Ibarra, D., Eugenio, M.E., Iglesias, R.,
Rodrigues, C., Woiciechowski, A.L., Letti, L.A.J., Karp, S.G., Goelzer, F.D., Sobral, K.C.A., Manzanares, P., Moreno, A.D., 2020. Process strategies for the transition of 1G to
Coral, J.D., Campioni, T.S., Maceno, M.A.C., Soccol, C.R., 2017. Materiais advanced bioethanol production. Processes 8 (10), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.3390/
lignocelulósicos como matéria-prima para a obtenção de biomoléculas de valor pr8101310.
comercial. Biotecnol. Aplic. Agro&Ind 4, 283–314. https://doi.org/10.5151/ Swain, M.R., Singh, A., Sharma, A.K., Tuli, D.K., 2018. Bioethanol production from rice-
9788521211150-08. and wheat straw: an overview. In: Bioethanol Production From Food Crops:
Romancini, R., 2010. O que é uma citação? A análise de citações na ciência. Intexto Sustainable Sources, Interventions, and Challenges, September 2018, pp. 213–231.
0 (23), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-813766-6.00011-4.
Ruiz, M.A., Greco, O.T., Braile, D.M., 2009. Fator de impacto: Importância e influência Tahir, F., Saeed, M.A., Ali, U., 2023. Biomass energy perspective in Pakistan based on
no meio editorial, acadêmico e científico. Rev. Bras. Hematol. Hemoter. 31 (5), chemical looping gasification for hydrogen production and power generation. Int. J.
88–93. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-84842009005000080. Hydrog. Energy 48 (48), 18211–18232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
Saddique, Z., Imran, M., Javaid, A., Kanwal, F., Latif, S., Santos, J.C.S. dos, Kim, T.H., ijhydene.2023.01.247.
Boczkaj, G., 2023. Bismuth-based nanomaterials-assisted photocatalytic water Talebnia, F., Karakashev, D., Angelidaki, I., 2010. Production of bioethanol from wheat
splitting for sustainable hydrogen production. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. https://doi. straw: an overview on pretreatment, hydrolysis and fermentation. Bioresour.
org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2023.05.047. Technol. 101 (13), 4744–4753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.11.080.
Saini, J.K., Saini, R., Tewari, L., 2015. Lignocellulosic agriculture wastes as biomass Tanzil, A.H., Brandt, K., Zhang, X., Wolcott, M., Silva Lora, E.E., Stockle, C., Garcia-
feedstocks for second-generation bioethanol production: concepts and recent Perez, M., 2022. Evaluation of bio-refinery alternatives to produce sustainable
developments. 3 Biotech 5 (4), 337–353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-014- aviation fuels in a sugarcane mill. Fuel 321, 123992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
0246-5. fuel.2022.123992.

20
C.E.C. Guimarães et al. Bioresource Technology Reports 23 (2023) 101543

Tikka, C., Osuru, H.P., Atluri, N., Raghavulu, P., Yellapu, N.K., Mannur, I.S., Prasad, U. Xia, J., Yang, Y., Liu, C.G., Yang, S., Bai, F.W., 2019. Engineering Zymomonas mobilis for
V., Aluru, S., K, N.V., Bhaskar, M., Al, E., 2013. Isolation and characterization of robust cellulosic ethanol production. Trends Biotechnol. 37 (9), 960–972. https://
ethanol tolerant yeast strains. Bioinformation 9 (8), 421–425. https://doi.org/ doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.02.002.
10.6026/97320630009421. Xiao, X., Skitmore, M., Li, H., Xia, B., 2019. Mapping knowledge in the economic areas of
Ullah, K., Ahmad, M., Sofia, Sharma, V.K., Lu, P., Harvey, A., Zafar, M., Sultana, S., 2015. green building using scientometric analysis. Energies 14 (15). https://doi.org/
Assessing the potential of algal biomass opportunities for bioenergy industry: a 10.3390/en12153011.
review. Fuel 143, 414–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.10.064. Yang, B., Dai, Z., Ding, S.Y., Wyman, C.E., 2011. Enzymatic hydrolysis of cellulosic
Vassilev, S.V., Vassileva, C.G., 2016. Composition, properties and challenges of algae biomass. Biofuels 2 (4), 421–449. https://doi.org/10.4155/bfs.11.116.
biomass for biofuel application: an overview. Fuel 181, 1–33. https://doi.org/ Yoshida, N.D., 2010. ANÁLISE BIBLIOMÉTRICA: UM ESTUDO APLICADO À PREVISÃO
10.1016/j.fuel.2016.04.106. TECNOLÓGICA. Future Stud. Res. J. Trends Strateg. 2 (1), 52–84. https://doi.org/
Vidal, M. de F., 2021a. Produção e mercado de etanol. Caderno Setorial Etene 159 (6), 10.24023/futurejournal/2175-5825/2010.v2i1.45.
2–11. Yuan, H., Tan, L., Kida, K., Morimura, S., Sun, Z.-Y., Tang, Y.-Q., 2021. Potential for
Vidal, M. de F., 2021b. PRODUÇÃO E USO DE BIOCOMBUSTÍVEIS NO BRASIL, pp. 1–15. reduced water consumption in biorefining of lignocellulosic biomass to bioethanol
Vohra, M., Manwar, J., Manmode, R., Padgilwar, S., Patil, S., 2014. Bioethanol and biogas. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 131 (5), 461–468. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
production: Feedstock and current technologies. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2 (1), jbiosc.2020.12.015.
573–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2013.10.013. Zabed, Herman, Sahu, J.N., Suely, A., Boyce, A.N., Faruq, G., 2017. Bioethanol
Wampler, P.J., Rediske, R.R., Molla, A.R., 2013. Using ArcMap, Google Earth, and Global production from renewable sources: current perspectives and technological progress.
Positioning Systems to select and locate random households in rural Haiti. Int. J. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 71, 475–501.
Health Geogr. 12 (1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-072X-12-3. Zabed, Hossain, Faruq, G., Sahu, J.N., Azirun, M.S., Hashim, R., Nasrulhaq Boyce, A.,
Wang, Z., Li, S., Jin, Z., Li, Z., Liu, Q., Zhang, K., 2023. Oil and gas pathway to net-zero: 2014. Bioethanol production from fermentable sugar juice. Sci. World J. 2014
review and outlook. Energy Strategy Rev. 45, 101048 https://doi.org/10.1016/j. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/957102.
esr.2022.101048. Zhang, T., Uratani, J., Huang, Y., Xu, L., Griffiths, S., Ding, Y., 2023. Hydrogen
Woon, K.S., Phuang, Z.X., Taler, J., Varbanov, P.S., Chong, C.T., Klemeš, J.J., Lee, C.T., liquefaction and storage: recent progress and perspectives. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev.
2023. Recent advances in urban green energy development towards carbon 176, 113204 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113204.
emissions neutrality. Energy 267, 126502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Zidanšek, A., Blinc, R., Jeglič, A., Kabashi, S., Bekteshi, S., Šlaus, I., 2009. Climate
energy.2022.126502. changes, biofuels and the sustainable future. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 34 (16),
6980–6983.

21