Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36118570›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2022

Nanomaterials for biogas augmentation towards renewable and sustainable energy production: A critical review.

Sohaib Z Khan, Asad A Zaidi, Muhammad Nihal Naseer, Hamad AlMohamadi

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Sohaib Z KhanDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Islamic University of Madina, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Asad A ZaidiDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering Science and Technology, Hamdard University, Karachi, Pakistan.
Muhammad Nihal NaseerDepartment of Engineering Sciences, PN Engineering College, National University of Sciences and Technology, Karachi, Pakistan.
Hamad AlMohamadiDepartment of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Islamic University of Madinah, Madinah, Saudi Arabia.
Islamic University of Madinah · SAHamdard University · PKNational University of Sciences and Technology · PK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanotechnology is considered one of the most significant advancements in science and technology over the last few decades. However, the contemporary use of nanomaterials in bioenergy production is very deficient. This study evaluates the application of nanomaterials for biogas production from different kinds of waste. A state-of-the-art comprehensive review is carried out to elaborate on the deployment of different categories of nano-additives (metal oxides, zero-valent metals, various compounds, carbon-based nanomaterials, nano-composites, and nano-ash) in several kinds of biodegradable waste, including cattle manure, wastewater sludge, municipal solid waste, lake sediments, and sanitary landfills. This study discusses the pros and cons of nano-additives on biogas production from the anaerobic digestion process. Several all-inclusive tables are presented to appraise the literature on different nanomaterials used for biogas production from biomass. Future perspectives to increase biogas production via nano-additives are presented, and the conclusion is drawn on the productivity of biogas based on various nanomaterials. A qualitative review of relevant literature published in the last 50 years is conducted using the bibliometric technique for the first time in literature. About 14,000 research articles are included in this analysis, indexed on the Web of Science. The analysis revealed that the last decade (2010-20) was the golden era for biogas literature, as 84.4% of total publications were published in this timeline. Moreover, it was observed that nanomaterials had revolutionized the field of anaerobic digestion, methane production, and waste activated sludge; and are currently the central pivot of the research community. The toxicity of nanomaterials adversely affects anaerobic bacteria; therefore, using bioactive nanomaterials is emerging as the best alternative. Conducting optimization studies by varying substrate and nanomaterials' size, concentration and shape is still a field. Furthermore, collecting and disposing nanomaterials at the end of the anaerobic process is a critical environmental challenge to technology implementation that needs to be addressed before the nanomaterials assisted anaerobic process could pave its path to the large-scale industrial sector.

Indexed as

anaerobic fermentationbiogasbiohydrogenbiomassnanomaterialnanoparticles (NPS)nanotechnologywaste

Identifiers

PMID36118570
PMCPMC9478561
OpenAlexW4294190668

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.