ReviewiScience2020
A Perspective on Biofuels Use and CCS for GHG Mitigation in the Marine Sector.
Review in iScience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global research landscape and transfer-oriented synthesis of diet-based enteric methane mitigation in ruminants (2005-2025): A bibliometric and implementation-focused review.Veterinary world · 2026Article
- A Review on Modified Montmorillonite-Based Catalysts for Biofuel and Recycled Carbon Fuel Production.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Waste animal fat with hydrothermal liquefaction as a potential route to marine biofuels.PeerJ · 2023Article
- Navigating within the Safe Operating Space with Carbon Capture On-Board.ACS sustainable chemistry & engineering · 2022Article
- Techno-economic Analysis of Sustainable Biofuels for Marine Transportation.Environmental science & technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of the marine sector were around 2.6% of world GHG emissions in 2015 and are expected to increase 50%-250% to 2050 under a "business as usual" scenario, making the decarbonization of this fossil fuel-intensive sector an urgent priority. Biofuels, which come in various forms, are one of the most promising options to replace existing marine fuels for accomplishing this in the short to medium term. Some unique challenges, however, impede biofuels penetration in the shipping sector, including the low cost of the existing fuels, the extensive present-day refueling infrastructure, and the exclusion of the sector from the Paris climate agreement. To address this, it is necessary to first identify those biofuels best suited for deployment as marine fuel. In this work, the long list of possible biofuel candidates has been narrowed down to four high-potential options-bio-methanol, bio-dimethyl ether, bio-liquefied natural gas, and bio-oil. These options are further evaluated based on six criteria-cost, potential availability, present technology status, GHG mitigation potential, infrastructure compatibility, and carbon capture and storage (CCS) compatibility-via both an extensive literature review and stakeholder discussions. These four candidates turn out to be relatively evenly matched overall, but each possesses certain strengths and shortcomings that could favor that fuel under specific circumstances, such as if compatibility with existing shipping infrastructure or with CCS deployment become pivotal requirements. Furthermore, we pay particular attention to the possibility of integrating deployment of these biofuels with CCS to further reduce marine sector emissions. It is shown that this aspect is presently not on the radar of the industry stakeholders but is likely to grow in importance as CCS acceptability increases in the broader green energy sector.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.