ReviewRSC advances2026
From technical feasibility to systemic viability: valorising semi-natural grassland biomass in a conservation-driven bioeconomy.
Review in RSC advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Semi-natural grasslands (SNGs) are biodiversity-rich cultural landscapes maintained through conservation-driven mowing and grazing, generating recurrent streams of heterogeneous lignocellulosic biomass. Although this biomass represents a potential resource within a circular bioeconomy, its late harvest timing, elevated ash and mineral contents, high botanical variability and dispersed spatial distribution fundamentally differentiate it from woody biomass and intensively managed energy crops. Here we provide a critical synthesis of ecological constraints, technological valorisation pathways and techno-economic evidence for SNG biomass utilisation across Europe. By integrating technology readiness level (TRL) analysis with techno-economic assessment (TEA), we show that technical maturity alone is an insufficient indicator of practical suitability. Generic TRL classifications frequently overestimate applicability because they do not account for feedstock-specific constraints inherent to conservation-derived biomass. Across the reviewed literature, economic feasibility consistently emerges only for integrated, low-complexity energy pathways-most notably co-digestion in existing anaerobic digestion systems and fractionation-based concepts such as IFBB-where infrastructural integration, mineral reduction and multi-output recovery mitigate feedstock heterogeneity. In contrast, stand-alone bioenergy facilities and advanced biorefinery routes remain economically marginal or insufficiently assessed. We argue that feedstock-sensitive systems analysis, regional aggregation and coherent policy alignment between biodiversity conservation and bioeconomy strategies are essential to transform SNG biomass from a management by-product into a structurally viable component of a multifunctional bioeconomy.
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.