The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 68 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review on the state-of-the-art of physical/chemical and biological technologies for biogas upgrading
Open accessAbstract
The lack of tax incentives for biomethane use requires the optimization of both biogas production and upgrading in order to allow the full exploitation of this renewable energy source. The large number of biomethane contaminants present in biogas (CO2, H2S, H2O, N2, O2, methyl siloxanes, halocarbons) has resulted in complex sequences of upgrading processes based on conventional physical/chemical technologies capable of providing CH4 purities of 88–98 % and H2S, halocarbons and methyl siloxane removals >99 %. Unfortunately, the high consumption of energy and chemicals limits nowadays the environmental and economic sustainability of conventional biogas upgrading technologies. In this context, biotechnologies can offer a low cost and environmentally friendly alternative to physical/chemical biogas upgrading. Thus, biotechnologies such as H2-based chemoautrophic CO2 bioconversion to CH4, microalgae-based CO2 fixation, enzymatic CO2 dissolution, fermentative CO2 reduction and digestion with in situ CO2 desorption have consistently shown CO2 removals of 80–100 % and CH4 purities of 88–100 %, while allowing the conversion of CO2 into valuable bio-products and even a simultaneous H2S removal. Likewise, H2S removals >99 % are typically reported in aerobic and anoxic biotrickling filters, algal-bacterial photobioreactors and digesters under microaerophilic conditions. Even, methyl siloxanes and halocarbons are potentially subject to aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation. However, despite these promising results, most biotechnologies still require further optimization and scale-up in order to compete with their physical/chemical counterparts. This review critically presents and discusses the state of the art of biogas upgrading technologies with special emphasis on biotechnologies for CO2, H2S, siloxane and halocarbon removal.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Brock Biology of Microorganisms
Madigan, M. T., Bender, K. S., Buckley, D. H., Sattley, W. M., & Stahl, D. A. (1996) · Cited by 5,759
Commercial Applications of Microalgae
Spolaore, P., Joannis-Cassan, C., Duran, E., & Isambert, A. (2006) · Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering · doi:10.1263/jbb.101.87 · Cited by 4,285
Algal–bacterial processes for the treatment of hazardous contaminants: A review
Muñoz, R., & Guieysse, B. (2006) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2006.06.011 · Cited by 1,497
Self-citationTechniques for transformation of biogas to biomethane
Ryckebosch, E., Drouillon, M., & Vervaeren, H. (2011) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.02.033 · Cited by 1,348
CO2 bio-mitigation using microalgae
Wang, B., Li, Y., Wu, N., & Lan, C. Q. (2008) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-008-1518-y · Cited by 1,212
(2020) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/c2017-0-01555-0 · Cited by 969
Production cost of a real microalgae production plant and strategies to reduce it
Acién, F. G., Fernández, J. M., Magán, J. J., & Molina, E. (2012) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2012.02.005 · Cited by 735
A review of biogas purification processes
Abatzoglou, N., & Boivin, S. (2009) · Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining · doi:10.1002/bbb.117 · Cited by 713
Membrane-based technologies for biogas separations
Basu, S., Khan, A. L., Cano-Odena, A., Liu, C., & Vankelecom, I. F. J. (2010) · Chem. Soc. Rev. · doi:10.1039/b817050a · Cited by 578
Tang, K., Baskaran, V., & Nemati, M. (2009) · Biochemical Engineering Journal · doi:10.1016/j.bej.2008.12.011 · Cited by 451
Cited by
Biogas as a renewable energy fuel – A review of biogas upgrading, utilisation and storage
Ullah Khan, I., Hafiz Dzarfan Othman, M., Hashim, H., Matsuura, T., Ismail, A. F., Rezaei-DashtArzhandi, M., & Wan Azelee, I. (2017) · Energy Conversion and Management · doi:10.1016/j.enconman.2017.08.035 · Cited by 775
A Review of Biogas Utilisation, Purification and Upgrading Technologies
Awe, O. W., Zhao, Y., Nzihou, A., Minh, D. P., & Lyczko, N. (2017) · Waste and Biomass Valorization · doi:10.1007/s12649-016-9826-4 · Cited by 722
Shah, M. S., Tsapatsis, M., & Siepmann, J. I. (2017) · Chemical Reviews · doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.7b00095 · Cited by 600
Evaluation of biogas upgrading technologies and future perspectives: A review
Kapoor, R., Ghosh, P., Kumar, M., & Vijay, V. K. (2019) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04767-1 · Cited by 423
Recent advances and viability in biofuel production
Malode, S. J., Prabhu, K. K., Mascarenhas, R. J., Shetti, N. P., & Aminabhavi, T. M. (2021) · Energy Conversion and Management: X · doi:10.1016/j.ecmx.2020.100070 · Cited by 396
Metadata
- Authors
- Muñoz, R., Meier, L., Diaz, I., & Jeison, D.
- Venue
- Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology
- Published
- 2015-09-26
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 727-759
- ISSN
- 1569-1705 (ISSN-L)
- 1572-9826
- OpenAlex
- W1871315969
- Cited by
- 674
- References
- 68
- FWCI
- 48.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review on the state-of-the-art of physical/chemical and biological technologies for biogas upgrading. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11157-015-9379-1
- The paper
- Muñoz, R., Meier, L., Diaz, I., & Jeison, D. (2015). A review on the state-of-the-art of physical/chemical and biological technologies for biogas upgrading. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-015-9379-1
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.