The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 56 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 3 of the 26 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Utilizing orange peel waste biomass in textile wastewater treatment and its recyclability for dual biogas and biochar production: a techno-economic sustainable approach
Open accessAbstract
Orange peel is a fruit-based biomass produced in huge quantities worldwide, requiring an appropriate management strategy to meet the waste-to-wealth approach. In the current study, this agricultural waste was used (as an adsorbent) to treat dye-laden wastewater, followed by its regeneration and recyclability for dual biogas and biochar production. An adsorbent material was prepared by mixing orange peel powder (OPP) with biochar (1:1, w/w) and used to remove various pollutants from textile wastewater (TWW) within 30 min. This adsorption system achieved chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, and color removal efficiencies of 38.56±1.73%, 29.31±1.25%, 91.92±4.75%, and 74.81±3.96%, respectively. The spent adsorbent was cleaned and mixed with cow dung (as inoculum) to generate biogas via anaerobic co-digestion. This system maintained a bio-CH 4 of 411.5±21.7 mL/g volatile solids (VS), equivalent to 14.3±1.1% of COD initial . Because the digestate of the co-digestion process contained volatile suspended solids (VSS), with a VSS/COD initial percentage of 45.2±3.2%, it was efficiently pyrolyzed to obtain biochar. The adsorption/co-digestion/pyrolysis combined system revealed a financially feasible scenario, with a payback period of 7.5 years. The study outputs would fulfill various sustainable development goals (SDGs) related to waste minimization, environmental protection, and affordable energy supply. Graphical abstract:
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Orange peel powder mixed with biochar (1:1) was used to treat dye-laden textile wastewater, and the spent adsorbent was recycled through anaerobic co-digestion with cow dung for biogas and pyrolysis of the digestate for biochar. The integrated adsorption/co-digestion/pyrolysis scheme was reported as economically feasible with a 7.5-year payback period.
Key findings
- The OPP:biochar adsorbent removed 38.56±1.73% COD, 29.31±3.15% TDS, 91.92±4.75% turbidity, and 74.81±3.96% color from textile wastewater within 30 min; biochar alone gave higher COD removal (50.22±2.96%) and TDS removal (42.58±2.64%), while OPP alone gave 35.70±1.65% COD removal.
- HCl was the most efficient desorbing agent, with color recoveries of 78–79% at 1 N and 2 N; over four adsorption/desorption cycles, color removal declined from 78.0% to 57.4%, and the final effluent contained 56.7 mg Pt Co/L, below the 75 mg Pt Co/L limit cited.
- Anaerobic co-digestion of spent adsorbent and cow dung produced 411.5±21.7 mL CH₄/g VS, equivalent to 258.5±13.7 mL CH₄/g COD initial and 73.9±4.2% of the theoretical CH₄ value; cow dung mono-digestion produced 417.9±22.9 mL CH₄/g VS, and adsorbent mono-digestion produced 258.2±13.6 mL CH₄/g VS.
- Digestate pyrolysis yielded biochar; ADB had the highest BET surface area of 78.8 m²/g, total pore volume of 0.99 cm³/g, smallest pore diameter of 8.1 nm, and crystallinity index of 67.0%, while CDB contained more N (12.85%) than ADB (0.85%). Scenario 3 had capital cost 1460 USD, operating cost 370 USD/month, total profit 564 USD/month, and a 7.5-year payback period; scenario 2 had an 8.9-year payback, and scenario 1 was economically infeasible.
Methods
- Three-step experimental design: batch adsorption of textile wastewater using OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar (1:1, w/w) at 1.2 g/L for 30 min at 25°C and 100 rpm; regeneration with HCl, H₂SO₄, or NaOH at 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 M, followed by four adsorption/desorption cycles.
- Biogas production: spent adsorbent (5 g) mixed with cow dung (5 g) in 250-mL serum bottles with 200 mL final volume, purged with N₂, incubated at 35°C and 40 rpm for 28 days; controls used spent adsorbent (10 g) or cow dung (10 g) alone. Biogas was passed through 1 M NaOH and quantified by water displacement; bio-CH₄ was fitted with the modified Gompertz model, and COD mass balance was calculated.
- Digestate pyrolysis: digestate thermally treated at 600°C for 2 h under N₂ at 2 L/min and 100°C/min heating rate. Characterization used SEM, EDX, XRF, FTIR, and XRD; economic evaluation used capital and operating costs, net profit, and payback period.
Limitations
- The paper states future work is needed to enhance OPP:biochar adsorption via thermal, mechanical, and/or chemical treatments; test orange-peel adsorption as post-treatment after bioprocesses; determine the optimum biosorbent-to-cow dung ratio; investigate biochar for food production and biochar–soil interactions; and determine toxic and heavy metal constituents of the generated biochar.
- The paper notes that COD removal was insufficient to meet environmental discharge regulations without additional treatment, that real application of digestate biochar for removing wastewater pollutants still needs assessment, and that further investigations are required to determine optimum pyrolysis temperature and activation strategy for increasing biochar BET surface area.
- Evident from the text: the study is lab-scale and batch-based, uses a single textile wastewater source and cow dung inoculum, and the economic evaluation relies on capital/operating estimates from public sources, companies, and expert opinions with assumed prices; long-term continuous operation and scale-up were not demonstrated.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
3 of 26 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured
- Premisecitation
Cellulose and hemicellulose portions of agricultural waste adsorbents can be degraded by anaerobic digestion and converted to biogas.
“These portions could be degraded by anaerobic digestion and converted to biogas [11].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites [11] Hamad H, Idrus S (2022) Recent Developments in the Application of Bio-Waste-Derived Adsorbents for the Removal of Methylene Blue from Wastewater: A Review. Polymers 14(4):783. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym14040783 source
Section 7.4 states that agricultural wastes are rich in cellulose and hemicellulose. But the passages on post-adsorption management (Section 10) discuss other uses and pyrolysis, not degradation of those portions by anaerobic digestion or their conversion to biogas. The searched passages for “anaerobic digestion” and “biogas” did not establish that process. (LLM, conf=0.83)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
- Findingown data
HCl was the most efficient desorbing agent for quickly releasing physisorbed dye molecules compared with H2SO4 and NaOH.
“The reusability investigation demonstrated that HCl was the most efficient desorbing agent to quickly release the physisorbed dye molecules compared with the other chemicals used.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingcitation
After 4 cycles, the final effluent contained 56.7 mg Pt Co/L, below 75 mg Pt Co/L.
“After these 4 cycles, the final effluent contained 56.7 mg Pt C o /L, which could not alter the original properties of the receiving water bodies (below 75 mg Pt C o /L) [42].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [42] Silva L, Moreira F, Souza A, Souza S, Boaventura R, Vilar V (2018) Chemical and electrochemical advanced oxidation processes as a polishing step for textile wastewater treatment: A study regarding the discharge into the environment and the reuse in the textile industry. J Clean Prod 198:430–442. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.001 source
- Findingown data
Biochar achieved a TDS removal efficiency of 42.58±2.64%.
“The TDS removal efficiencies improved by using the biochar and OPP:biochar adsorbents, giving values of 42.58±2.64%and 29.31±3.15%,respectively (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Conversion of total COD initial into bio-CH4 and end-products showed a mass balance between 84% and 87%.
“The conversion of total COD initial into bio-CH 4 and endproducts showed a mass balance between 84% and 87% (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- The authors state this as an assumption: Some fractions of COD initial, such as substrate stored in biomass cells, CH4 dissolved in the medium, and non-degraded organic matter, could not be detected in the COD mass balance formula.
- Findingown data
The OPP:biochar adsorbent achieved a turbidity removal efficiency of 91.92±4.75% from textile wastewater.
“This adsorption system achieved chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, and color removal efficiencies of 38.56±1.73%,29.31±1.25%,91.92±4.75%,and 74.81±3.96%,respectively.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
OPP achieved a COD removal efficiency of 35.70±1.65%.
“Biochar showed the highest COD removal efficiency of 50.22±2.96%,followed by 38.56±1.73%for OPP:biochar, and 35.70±1.65%for OPP (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Biochar achieved the highest COD removal efficiency of 50.22±2.96%.
“Biochar showed the highest COD removal efficiency of 50.22±2.96%,followed by 38.56±1.73%for OPP:biochar, and 35.70±1.65%for OPP (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Increasing adsorption/regeneration cycles from 1 to 4 reduced color removal from 78.0% to 57.4%.
“Increasing the number of adsorption/regeneration cycles from 1 to 4 was associated with color removal reduction from 78.0 to 57.4%, respectively (Fig. 2c).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The OPP:biochar adsorbent included -OH, -COOH, and C=C groups on its surface.
“All peak assignments within the 4000-500 cm -1 wavenumber range indicated that the OPP:biochar adsorbent included -OH, -COOH, and C=C groups on its surface (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The point zero charge (pHZPC) of OPP:biochar was around pH=8.
“The point zero charge (pH ZPC ) of OPP:biochar was detected at around pH= 8 (see Supplementary Fig. S1).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Adding cow dung to the digestion process improved cumulative bio-CH4 by 67.8%, reaching 280.06±16.72 mL.
“Adding cow dung to the digestion process improved this cumulative bio-CH 4 by 67.8%, reaching 280.06±16.72 mL.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Biochar achieved a decolorization efficiency of 82.96±4.47%.
“The biochar and OPP:biochar adsorbents showed high decolorization efficiencies of 82.96±4.47%and 74.81±3.96%,respectively (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The OPP:biochar adsorbent achieved a TDS removal efficiency of 29.31% from textile wastewater (abstract ±1.25%; results ±3.15%).
“This adsorption system achieved chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, and color removal efficiencies of 38.56±1.73%,29.31±1.25%,91.92±4.75%,and 74.81±3.96%,respectively.”
- Also stated in: § 3.1.1 Removals of COD, color, TDS, and turbidity by OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar · plain
“The TDS removal efficiencies improved by using the biochar and OPP:biochar adsorbents, giving values of 42.58±2.64%and 29.31±3.15%,respectively (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 3.1.1 Removals of COD, color, TDS, and turbidity by OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar · plain
- Findingown data
The three adsorbents reduced turbidity by 89-95%.
“In addition to TDS removal, the three adsorbents showed a high turbidity reduction in the 89-95% range (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The OPP:biochar adsorbent achieved a color removal efficiency of 74.81±3.96% from textile wastewater.
“This adsorption system achieved chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, and color removal efficiencies of 38.56±1.73%,29.31±1.25%,91.92±4.75%,and 74.81±3.96%,respectively.”
- Also stated in: § 3.1.1 Removals of COD, color, TDS, and turbidity by OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar · plain
“The biochar and OPP:biochar adsorbents showed high decolorization efficiencies of 82.96±4.47%and 74.81±3.96%,respectively (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 3.1.1 Removals of COD, color, TDS, and turbidity by OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar · plain
- Findingown data
OPP reduced TDS from 159 mg/L to 126.4±4.6 mg/L.
“The initial TDS value of TWW was 159 mg/L, which was reduced to 126.4±4.6 mg/L by adsorption onto OPP.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The OPP:biochar adsorbent achieved a COD removal efficiency of 38.56±1.73% from textile wastewater.
“This adsorption system achieved chemical oxygen demand (COD), total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, and color removal efficiencies of 38.56±1.73%,29.31±1.25%,91.92±4.75%,and 74.81±3.96%,respectively.”
- Also stated in: § 3.1.1 Removals of COD, color, TDS, and turbidity by OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar · plain
“Biochar showed the highest COD removal efficiency of 50.22±2.96%,followed by 38.56±1.73%for OPP:biochar, and 35.70±1.65%for OPP (Fig. 2a).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § 3.1.1 Removals of COD, color, TDS, and turbidity by OPP, biochar, and OPP:biochar · plain
- Findingown data
After TWW treatment, the voids of the micropore structure were occupied by molecules related to organic/inorganic pollutants.
“After TWW treatment, the voids of the micropore structure were occupied by molecules related to the organic/inorganic pollutants.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Elemental analysis demonstrated the presence of Ca2+, Mg2+, and K+ ions on the OPP:biochar surface.
“The elemental analysis results also demonstrated the presence of multiple Ca 2+ , Mg 2+ , and K + ions on the OPP:biochar surface (Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
Increasing the molarity of desorbing reagents released more dye molecules from the OPP:biochar adsorbent.
“Increasing the molarity of desorbing reagents was associated with releasing more dye molecules from the OPP:biochar adsorbent (Fig. 2b).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingnone given
The digestate was thermally pretreated to prepare biochar, having a 9.4 nm pore diameter and 67.5 m2/g surface area.
“The digestate was thermally pretreated to prepare biochar, having a 9.4 nm pore diameter and 67.5 m 2 /g surface area.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Biogas profit was estimated using the COD mass balance (CH4 as COD/COD initial = 14.3%; equivalent to 1655 L/month) and biogas price of 0.2 USD per L.
“Another profit was estimated by selling the biogas evolved from the digesters, using the COD mass balance (CH 4 as COD/COD initial = 14.3%; equivalent to 1655 L/month) and biogas price of 0.2 USD per L (see Supplementary Tables S4 and S5).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
The CDB's cellulose was more amorphous.
“On the contrary, the CDB's cellulose was more amorphous.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
CDB had more N elements (12.85%) compared with ADB (0.85%).
“This finding could be justified by the presence of more N elements of 12.85% in CDB, compared with only N of 0.85% in ADB (see EDX elemental composition in Fig. 5b).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The CH4/COD initial percentage was 14.0±0.9% for cow dung mono-digestion.
“The CH 4 /COD initial percentages were 14.3±1.1% for adsorbent/cow dung co-digestion and 14.0± 0.9% for cow dung mono-digestion (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingreasoning
The SEM micrograph of ADB showed a well-arranged morphology, compared with the presence of deformation bands, cracks, and cavities in the CDB micro-pores.
“The SEM micrograph of ADB showed a well-arranged morphology, compared with the presence of deformation bands, cracks, and cavities in the CDB micro-pores (Fig. 5b).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The CH4/COD initial percentage was 14.3±1.1% for adsorbent/cow dung co-digestion.
“The CH 4 /COD initial percentages were 14.3±1.1% for adsorbent/cow dung co-digestion and 14.0± 0.9% for cow dung mono-digestion (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The physical properties of ADB corresponded to the smallest pore diameter of 8.1 nm, compared with 9.4 nm for MDB and 10.7 nm for CDB.
“These physical properties corresponded to the smallest pore diameter of 8.1 nm, compared with 9.4 nm for MDB and 10.7 nm for CDB.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
The pore structure of digestate biochar was considerably greater than 3.94 m2/g for biochar of poultry litter.
“Moreover, the pore structure of digestate biochar was considerably greater than 3.94 m 2 /g for biochar of poultry litter [53].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [53] Song W, Guo M (2012) Quality variations of poultry litter biochar generated at different pyrolysis temperatures. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 94:138–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2011.11.018 source
- Findingown data
Anaerobic co-digestion of spent biosorbent with cow dung generated bio-CH4 yield of 411.5±21.7 mL/g VS.
“The spent biosorbent was added to cow manure in an anaerobic digester to generate bio-CH 4 of 411.5±21.7 mL/g VS, equivalent to 73.9±3.6% of the maximum theoretical value.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The combined adsorption/co-digestion/pyrolysis system had a payback period of 7.5 years.
“The adsorption/co-digestion/pyrolysis combined system revealed a financially feasible scenario, with a payback period of 7.5 years.”
- Also stated in: § Highlights · plain
“Wastewater treatment with biogas/biochar production maintained 7.5-year payback period.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Highlights · plain
- Findingreasoning
The adsorbent group had the highest COD soluble/COD initial of 31.3±2.1%.
“The highest COD soluble /COD initial of 31.3±2.1% for the adsorbent group could be attributed to the excessive accumulation of organic acids during anaerobic mono-digestion.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The cow dung mono-digestion group contained the highest VSS amount of 658±37 mg.
“Also, this group contained the highest VSS amount of 658±37 mg, which could be converted into biogas.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingreasoning
The highest bio-CH4 productivity of 417.9±22.9 mL/g VS was found for the mono-digestion run with only cow dung.
“The highest bio-CH 4 productivity of 417.9±22.9mL/g VS was found for the monodigestion run with only cow dung.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
The BET surface area of ADB (78.8 m2/g) was slightly larger than 63.5 m2/g for biochar obtained from pyrolysis of wheat straw.
“This BET surface area was slightly larger than 63.5 m 2 /g for biochar obtained from the pyrolysis of wheat straw, which was used to reduce chlorpyrifos from aqueous solutions [52].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [52] Wang P, Yin Y, Guo Y, Wang C (2015) Removal of chlorpyrifos from waste water by wheat straw-derived biochar synthesized through oxygen-limited method. RSC Adv 5(89):72572–72578. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5RA10487D source
- Findingown data
The three digesters showed COD reduction within the 68.2-71.8% range.
“The three digesters showed a reasonable COD reduction within the 68.2-71.8%range; however, the adsorbent mono-digestion group might have suffered from medium acidification.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
ADB showed a more ordered, intact, and crystalline structure than CDB.
“Although the pyrolysis process tended to decompose the lignocellulosic components of digestates and release volatiles, ADB showed a more ordered, intact, and crystalline structure than CDB.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
Co-digestion of exhausted adsorbent and cow dung produced bio-CH4 of 258.5±13.7 mL CH4/g COD initial, equivalent to about 73.9% of the theoretical value.
“Hence, the current study revealed that the co-digestion of the exhausted adsorbent (after TWW treatment) and cow dung would produce bio-CH 4 of 258.5±13.7 mL CH 4 /g COD initial , equivalent to about 73.9% of the theoretical value (350 mL CH 4 /g COD).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The lowest capital cost of scenario-1 was 320 USD.
“The lowest capital cost of scenario-1 (320 USD) was ascribed to the simple installation of eight adsorption tanks (6 L each) with pressure sensors to monitor the fluidization behavior.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The operating cost of scenario-3 was 370 USD/month.
“The operating cost of scenario-3 was also maximized to 370 USD/month, assigning to the electricity consumption for raising the digester temperature and thermal treatment of the digestate (i.e., 3100 kWh per month × 0.05 USD/kWh).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingown data
The intensities of the characteristic XRD peaks for ADB were higher than that for MDB and CDB.
“However, the intensities of these characteristic peaks for ADB were higher than that for MDB and CDB.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingreasoning
The adsorbent mono-digestion group had the lowest biogas productivity of 258.2±13.6 mL/g VS.
“This condition suppresses the methanogenic activity, properly justifying the lowest biogas productivity of 258.2±13.6 mL/g VS (Table 2).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Findingcitation
The three biochar samples exhibited two major XRD peaks at ~26° and ~29°, corresponding to graphite (002) plane and the crystalline structure of calcium carbonate (CaCO3), respectively.
“The three biochar samples exhibited two major XRD peaks at ~ 26° and ~ 29°, corresponding to graphite (002) plane and the crystalline structure of calcium carbonate (CaCO 3 ), respectively [56].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [56] Oraon A, Prajapati AK, Ram M, Saxena VK, Dutta S, Gupta AK (2022) Synthesis, characterization, and application of microporous biochar prepared from Pterospermum acerifolium plant fruit shell waste for methylene blue dye adsorption: the role of surface modification by SDS surfactant. Biomass Conv Bioref. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-022-02320-8 source
- Findingown data
The digestate of the co-digestion process contained VSS with a VSS/COD initial percentage of 45.2±3.2%.
“Because the digestate of the co-digestion process contained volatile suspended solids (VSS), with a VSS/COD initial percentage of 45.2±3.2%, it was efficiently pyrolyzed to obtain biochar.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingown data
The bio-CH4 yield from the spent biosorbent and cow dung mixture was equivalent to 73.9±3.6% of the maximum theoretical value.
“The spent biosorbent was added to cow manure in an anaerobic digester to generate bio-CH 4 of 411.5±21.7 mL/g VS, equivalent to 73.9±3.6% of the maximum theoretical value.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Findingreasoning
The cow dung mono-digestion group had the highest COD initial of 1275±65 mg.
“This finding could be ascribed to sufficient organic electron donors availability, given by the highest COD initial of 1275±65 mg.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Orange peel contains polysaccharides and associated polymers, making it a viable source for green biorefinery-industrial implementation.
“However, orange peel contains polysaccharides and associated polymers, making it a viable source for green biorefinery-industrial implementation [1].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [1] de la Torre I, Martin-Dominguez V, Acedos MG, Esteban J, Santos VE, Ladero M (2019) Utilisation/upgrading of orange peel waste from a biological biorefinery perspective. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 103(15):5975–5991. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00253-019-09929-2 source
- Premisecitation
Adsorbents synthesized from agricultural wastes, mainly plant residues, include high fractions of cellulose and hemicellulose.
“Adsorbents synthesized from agricultural wastes, mainly plant residues, include high fractions of cellulose and hemicellulose [13].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [13] Othmani A, Kesraoui A, Akrout H, Elaissaoui I, Seffen M (2020) Coupling anodic oxidation, biosorption and alternating current as alternative for wastewater purification. Chemosphere 249:126480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126480 source
- Premisecitation
Thermal treatment of anaerobic digestate at 300-900°C under an oxygen-limited environment generates biochar.
“For instance, a thermal treatment (300-900°C) of anaerobic digestate under an oxygen-limited environment generates a C-rich material known as biochar [23].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [23] Fan S, Wang Y, Li Y, Wang Z, Xie Z, Tang J (2018) Removal of tetracycline from aqueous solution by biochar derived from rice straw. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(29):29529–29540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2976-0 source
- Interpretationreasoning
Uptake of cationic-based pollutants would be favorable under the investigated condition.
“Accordingly, the uptake of cationicbased pollutants would be favorable under the investigated condition.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The synthesized OPP:biochar could efficiently remove color for 4 successive adsorption/desorption cycles.
“Hence, the regeneration and reusability study revealed that the synthesized OPP:biochar could efficiently remove color for 4 successive cycles of adsorption/desorption.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Incineration of orange peel waste is associated with releasing substantial amounts of greenhouse gas emissions.
“For instance, the incineration of this waste has been associated with releasing substantial amounts of greenhouse gas emissions [2].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [2] Ahmed M, Mashkoor F, Nasar A (2020) Development, characterization, and utilization of magnetized orange peel waste as a novel adsorbent for the confiscation of crystal violet dye from aqueous solution. Groundw Sustain Dev 10:100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100322 source
- Interpretationown data
The OPP:biochar adsorbent maintained a pore-filling removal mechanism due to its heterogeneous and relatively porous matrix.
“The OPP:biochar adsorbent could maintain the porefilling removal mechanism, assigning to its heterogeneous and relatively porous matrix (SEM observation; Fig. 3).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationcitation
The C=C shift from 1625 to 1622 cm-1 signifies π-π interaction with pollutants.
“These adsorption peaks, in addition to the C=C shift from 1625 to 1622 cm -1 , signify the π-π interaction with pollutants [23].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [23] Fan S, Wang Y, Li Y, Wang Z, Xie Z, Tang J (2018) Removal of tetracycline from aqueous solution by biochar derived from rice straw. Environ Sci Pollut Res 25(29):29529–29540. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-018-2976-0 source
- Interpretationreasoning
TDS reduction from 159.0 to 112.4 ppm could be justified by ion exchange and electrostatic removal of cations/anions.
“Removing these ions (cation/anion) could justify the TDS reduction from 159.0 to 112.4 ppm.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationcitation
The shift in -OH groups could be ascribed to formation of hydrogen bonds between the adsorbent surface and dye molecules.
“For example, the shift in -OH groups could be ascribed to the formation of hydrogen bonds between the adsorbent surface and the dye molecules [38].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [38] Rahimi A, Alihosseini F (2022) Application of dye saturated clay adsorbent from dyeing wastewater as textile printing pigment. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 97(11):3152–3162. https://doi.org/10.1002/jctb.7183 source
- Premisecitation
Orange peel can eliminate crystal violet dye from synthetically contaminated solutions.
“The orange peel ability to eliminate crystal violet dye from synthetically contaminated solutions, owing to its promising adsorption characteristics, has been demonstrated [2].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [2] Ahmed M, Mashkoor F, Nasar A (2020) Development, characterization, and utilization of magnetized orange peel waste as a novel adsorbent for the confiscation of crystal violet dye from aqueous solution. Groundw Sustain Dev 10:100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100322 source
- Interpretationreasoning
At the adsorption pH of 9.4, the OPP:biochar net surface charge was almost negative.
“Because the adsorption process was operated at a pH of 9.4 (greater than pH ZPC ), the OPP:biochar net surface charge was almost negative.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Biochar maintained the highest treatment performance compared with OPP and OPP:biochar.
“Based on the aforementioned observations and due to the biochar porous structure and heterogeneous physicochemical characteristics, biochar maintained the highest treatment performance compared with OPP and OPP:biochar.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Digestate after anaerobic digestion contains high concentrations of nutrients, minerals, and partially degraded organics.
“The resultant digestate after the anaerobic digestion phase includes high concentrations of nutrients, minerals, and partially degraded organics, which should be recycled to obtain valuable products [18].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [18] Msemwa G, Ibrahim M, Fujii M, Nasr M (2022) Phytomanagement of textile wastewater for dual biogas and biochar production: A techno-economic and sustainable approach. J Environ Manage 322:116097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116097 source
- Study design and conductown data
The modified Gompertz model fit the experimental bio-CH4 data with R2 around 0.97.
“Bio-CH 4 estimation by the modified Gompertz model showed a strong relationship with the experimental data, representing goodness-of-fit (R 2 ) around 0.97.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationcitation
The ADB's cellulose mainly consisted of a crystalline (ordered) region, which could be ascribed to the removal of the amorphous domain under thermal treatment.
“Accordingly, the ADB's cellulose mainly consisted of a crystalline (ordered) region, which could be ascribed to the removal of the amorphous domain under thermal treatment [26].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [26] Aili Hamzah A, Hamzah M, Mazlan N, Che M, Siajam S, Show P (2022) Optimization of subcritical water pre-treatment for biogas enhancement on co-digestion of pineapple waste and cow dung using the response surface methodology. Waste Manag 150:98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2022.06.042 source
- Interpretationreasoning
Biochar obtained from plant feedstocks could have an efficient adsorption capacity towards wastewater treatment.
“Accordingly, the biochar obtained from the plant feedstocks could have an efficient adsorption capacity towards wastewater treatment (e.g., limiting the migration of pollutants in soil).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The detection of more voids and cracks in the CDB's SEM image could be justified by the easier solubility of amorphous cellulose compared with crystalline cellulose.
“This finding could justify the detection of more voids and cracks in the CDB's SEM image, probably because the solubility of amorphous cellulose is comparatively easier than that of crystalline cellulose.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim- Rests on an assumption: Amorphous cellulose is more soluble than crystalline cellulose.
- Interpretationown data
The proposed adsorption/digestion/pyrolysis combined scheme was economically feasible with a payback period of 7.5 yr to recover the project's initial investment.
“The proposed adsorption/digestion/pyrolysis combined scheme was economically feasible with a payback period of 7.5 yr to recover the project's initial investment.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
Plant wastes generate biochar with porosity and surface area greater than animal manure-based biochar.
“Parthasarathy et al. [54] also demonstrated that plant wastes would generate biochar with porosity and a surface area greater than the animal manurebased biochar.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [54] Parthasarathy P, Al-Ansari T, Mackey H, Sheeba Narayanan K, McKay G (2022) A review on prominent animal and municipal wastes as potential feedstocks for solar pyrolysis for biochar production. Fuel 316:123378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123378 source
- Premisecitation
Some enzymes, such as cellulase in the cow manure inoculum, could be responsible for degrading the crystalline cellulose portion.
“It was also reported that some enzymes, such as cellulase in the cow manure inoculum, could be responsible for degrading the crystalline cellulose portion [20].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [20] Xing BS, Han Y, Wang X, Ma J, Cao S, Li Q, . . . Yuan H (2020). Cow manure as additive to a DMBR for stable and high-rate digestion of food waste: Performance and microbial community. Water Res 168:115099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2019.115099 source
- Interpretationreasoning
The study provided a viable option to avoid the disposal of the digested substrate (digestate) from the biogas digester.
“The study also provided a viable option to avoid the disposal of the digested substrate (digestate) from this biogas digester.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
Selling the biogas and biochar would recover the funds invested in purchasing the project facilities.
“Selling the biogas and biochar would recover the funds invested in purchasing the project facilities.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Premisecitation
The profitability estimates included pollution reduction, equivalent to revenue of approximately 0.16 USD for removing 1.0 kg COD from the aquatic environment.
“The profitability estimates included pollution reduction, equivalent to revenue of approximately 0.16 USD for removing 1.0 kg COD from the aquatic environment.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [3] Gémar G, Gómez T, Molinos-Senante M, Caballero R, Sala-Garrido R (2018) Assessing changes in eco-productivity of wastewater treatment plants: The role of costs, pollutant removal efficiency, and greenhouse gas emissions. Environ Impact Assess Rev 69:24–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2017.11.007 source
- Interpretationreasoning
ADB could compress greater distinct inorganic elements and their formed crystals.
“As such, ADB could compress greater distinct inorganic elements and their formed crystals.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
The digestate of anaerobic co-digestion was efficiently pyrolyzed to prepare biochar.
“Digestate of anaerobic co-digestion was efficiently pyrolyzed to prepare biochar.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“Because the digestate of the co-digestion process contained volatile suspended solids (VSS), with a VSS/COD initial percentage of 45.2±3.2%, it was efficiently pyrolyzed to obtain biochar.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
- Interpretationreasoning
The pyrolysis temperature imposed a greater thermal effect on the CDB amorphous pore texture, which could be the reason of the increased pore size and decreased BET surface area.
“Apparently, the pyrolysis temperature imposed a greater thermal effect on the CDB amorphous pore texture, which could be the reason of the increased pore size and decreased BET surface area (see Supplementary Fig. S2; Table S1).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
OPP could be mixed with biochar for preparing an adsorbent able to reduce TWW pollution.
“The current study demonstrated that OPP could be mixed with biochar for preparing an adsorbent able to reduce TWW pollution; then, the spent material could be regenerated and utilized for dual biogas and biochar productions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The spent material could be regenerated and utilized for dual biogas and biochar productions.
“The current study demonstrated that OPP could be mixed with biochar for preparing an adsorbent able to reduce TWW pollution; then, the spent material could be regenerated and utilized for dual biogas and biochar productions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
A shorter project payback period would be expected due to recycling the exhausted adsorbent for dual biogas and biochar production.
“Moreover, a shorter project payback period would be expected due to recycling the exhausted adsorbent for dual biogas and biochar production.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationown data
The thermal treatment of CDB mainly transformed the crystalline cellulose to the amorphous.
“The digestate-based biochar indicated that ADB had a larger surface area with a greater number of adsorption sites and could resist chemical and biological degradations; whereas, the thermal treatment of CDB mainly transformed the crystalline cellulose to the amorphous.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationnone given
Pyrolysis of feedstock was responsible for enriching the samples with quartz and calcite as mineral phases.
“Apparently, pyrolysis of feedstock was responsible for enriching the samples with quartz and calcite as mineral phases.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim - Interpretationown data
The co-digestion process enhanced COD initial conversion into CH4 compared with the mono-digestion systems.
“This finding suggests that the co-digestion process enhanced the COD initial conversion into CH 4 compared with the mono-digestion systems.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim - Interpretationreasoning
Biochar selling would recover the funds invested in purchasing extra facilities for the project.
“By assessing the cash flow of the three scenarios, biochar selling would recover the funds invested in purchasing extra facilities for the project.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
- It may state two separate claims as one. 21
- Probably not a substantial claim. 6
It may state two separate claims as one.
PremisecitationOpen dumping of fruit peels requires a large land area and its leachate could contaminate groundwater.
“Moreover, the open dumping of fruit peels requires a large land area, and its leachate could contaminate groundwater [4].”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked- cites [4] Dutta S, He M, Xiong X, Tsang D (2021) Sustainable management and recycling of food waste anaerobic digestate: A review. Bioresour Technol 341:125915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125915 source
The Introduction and Sections 2–3 discuss food-waste anaerobic digestate and its treatment or land application, not open dumping of fruit peels. Searches for fruit peels, dumping, leachate, land area, and groundwater found no passage addressing the claimed land requirement or groundwater contamination. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
It may state two separate claims as one.
PremisecitationDigestate-derived biochar is characterized by a porous structure, P, K, and other micronutrient enrichment, and a large specific surface area.
“For example, the digestate-derived biochar is characterized by a porous structure (mesopores and macropores), P, K, and other micronutrient enrichment, and a large specific surface area [24,25].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 2 sources checked- cites [24] Mohammadi A, Sandberg M, Venkatesh G, Eskandari S, Joseph S, Granström K (2019) Environmental performance of end-of-life handling alternatives for paper-and-pulp-mill sludge: Using digestate as a source of energy or for biochar production. Energy 182:594–605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.065 source
- cites [25] Shen Z, Zhang J, Hou D, Tsang D, Ok Y, Alessi D (2019) Synthesis of MgO-coated corncob biochar and its application in lead stabilization in a soil washing residue. Environ Int 122:357–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.11.045 source
Section 3.2 (page unavailable) reports macropores in corncob-derived biochar, and Section 3.1 reports that MgO coating increased its BET surface area. The paper does not establish these properties for digestate-derived biochar or report the claimed mesopores and P, K, and micronutrient enrichment. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
It may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataCow dung mono-digestion produced the highest total bio-CH4 of 323.29±18.31 mL with the shortest λ=8.20±0.49 d.
“The cow dung monodigestion group maintained the highest total bio-CH 4 production of 323.29±18.31mL with the shortest λ= 8.20±0.49d (Fig. 4b).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataAdsorbent mono-digestion produced 166.87±9.61 mL biogas with an extended λ of 9.30±0.54 d.
“The results in Fig. 4(a) demonstrated that adsorbent mono-digestion maintained biogas production of 166.87±9.61mL with an extended λ of 9.30±0.54d.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataThe COD consumption rate k1 was 0.149±0.0071/d for cow dung, 0.113±0.0051/d for sorbent, and 0.130±0.0051/d for sorbent/cow dung co-digestion.
“This pattern could be justified by increasing the COD consumption rate (k 1 ) to 0.149±0.0071/d, compared with 0.113±0.0051/d for sorbent and 0.130±0.0051/d for sorbent/cow dung co-digestion.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingnone givenThe plant-based adsorbent was synthesized from agricultural waste (orange peel) and used to reduce COD, TDS, turbidity, and color concentrations from aqueous solutions.
“The plant-based adsorbent was synthesized from agricultural waste (orange peel) and used to reduce COD, TDS, turbidity, and color concentrations from aqueous solutions.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataThe chemical utilization cost in scenario-3 was equivalent to 607 kg reagent per month, with a unit price of 0.14 USD/kg, giving a monthly cost of 85 USD.
“This pathway was equivalent to the utilization of 607 kg reagent per month in scenario-3, with a unit price of 0.14 USD/kg, giving a monthly cost of 85 USD.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataBiochar production of 28.8 kg/month was multiplied by the unit price of 0.9 USD/kg, adding a profit of 26 USD/month to the scenario-3 cash flow.
“Biochar production of 28.8 kg/month was multiplied by the unit price of 0.9 USD/ kg, adding a profit of 26 USD/month to the scenario-3 cash flow.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataThe ADB sample showed the highest BET surface area of 78.8 m2/g and Vtot of 0.99 cm3/g among the digestate biochars.
“The ADB sample showed the highest BET surface area of 78.8 m 2 /g and V tot of 0.99 cm 3 /g (see Supplementary Fig. S2; Table S1).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataThe capital cost of the adsorption/digestion/pyrolysis scheme was 1460 USD, which was greater than scenario-1 and scenario-2 by 4.6- and 1.2-times, respectively.
“Hence, the capital cost of the adsorption/digestion/pyrolysis scheme maintained the maximum value of 1460 USD (Table 3), which was greater than scenario-1 (adsorption) and scenario-2 (adsorption/digestion) by 4.6-and 1.2-times, respectively.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataThe highest crystallinity index (CrI) of 67.0% was noticed for ADB, followed by MDB (58.2%) and CDB (50.6%).
“The highest CrI of 67.0% was noticed for ADB, followed by MDB (58.2%) and CDB (50.6%).”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
FindingcitationADB showed the highest SiK and CaK elemental composition, validating that this biochar material comprised the sharpest XRD crystalline peaks at 2θ ~ 26° and ~ 29°.
“ADB showed the highest SiK and CaK elemental composition (see Fig. 5b), validating that this biochar material comprised the sharpest XRD crystalline peaks at 2θ ~ 26° and ~ 29°.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataThe project payback period reached 7.5 yr in scenario-3 and 8.9 yr in scenario-2; scenario-1 was economically infeasible.
“This time reached 7.5 yr in scenario-3 and 8.9 yr in scenario-2; whereas scenario-1 was economically infeasible.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
FindingreasoningThe maximum profit was obtained by scenario-3 (564 USD/month), followed by scenario-2 (452 USD/month) and scenario-1 (48 USD/month).
“Accordingly, the maximum profit was obtained by scenario-3 (564 USD/month), followed by scenario-2 (452 USD/month) and scenario-1 (48 USD/month).”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Findingown dataIn scenario-1, the adsorption process eliminated a COD mass of about 298 kg/month, corresponding to a monthly income of 48 USD.
“In scenario-1, the adsorption process eliminated a COD mass of about 298 kg/month, corresponding to a monthly income of 48 USD.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
PremisecitationOrange peel occupies almost 50% of the fruit's fresh weight and is rich in essential oils, free sugars, and polyphenols.
“Orange peel occupies almost 50% of the fruit's fresh weight, and it is rich in essential oils, free sugars, and polyphenols [2].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [2] Ahmed M, Mashkoor F, Nasar A (2020) Development, characterization, and utilization of magnetized orange peel waste as a novel adsorbent for the confiscation of crystal violet dye from aqueous solution. Groundw Sustain Dev 10:100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100322 source
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
PremisecitationAnaerobic co-digestion of animal manure with different feedstocks elevates bio-CH4 yields.
“Applying anaerobic co-digestion of animal manure with different feedstocks (e.g., lignocellulosic residues) to elevate the bio-CH 4 yields has been verified [21,22].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked- cites [21] Awosusi A, Sethunya V, Matambo T (2021) Synergistic effect of anaerobic co-digestion of South African food waste with cow manure: Role of low density-polyethylene in process modulation. Mater Today: Proceedings 38:793–803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.584 source
- cites [22] Khayum N, Anbarasu S, Murugan S (2018) Biogas potential from spent tea waste: A laboratory scale investigation of co-digestion with cow manure. Energy 165:760–768. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.163 source
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
PremisecitationIncreasing Ca (in calcite) and Si (in quartz) for biochars could be accompanied by increasing the crystalline mineral phases.
“It was previously demonstrated that increasing Ca (in calcite) and Si (in quartz) for biochars could be accompanied by increasing the crystalline mineral phases [57].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [57] Rodriguez JA, Lustosa Filho JF, Melo LCA, de Assis IR, de Oliveira TS (2020) Influence of pyrolysis temperature and feedstock on the properties of biochars produced from agricultural and industrial wastes. J Anal Appl Pyrolysis 149:104839. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaap.2020.104839 source
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
Interpretationown dataThe current study successfully represented a sustainable and viable strategy for managing the spent biosorbent after treating dye-laden wastewater.
“The current study successfully represented a sustainable and viable strategy for managing the spent biosorbent after treating dye-laden wastewater.”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown dataThe exhausted biosorbent was recycled as a substrate in a biological treatment system to generate bioenergy, reducing biogenic waste disposal.
“The exhausted biosorbent was recycled as a substrate in a biological treatment system to generate bioenergy, reducing biogenic waste disposal.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
PremisecitationBiogenic CO2 emitted by biogas anaerobic digestion would contribute to carbon footprint reduction and energy supply decarbonization.
“Biogenic CO 2 emitted by biogas anaerobic digestion would contribute to carbon footprint reduction and energy supply decarbonization [18].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [18] Msemwa G, Ibrahim M, Fujii M, Nasr M (2022) Phytomanagement of textile wastewater for dual biogas and biochar production: A techno-economic and sustainable approach. J Environ Manage 322:116097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116097 source
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
PremisecitationPlant-based residues primarily comprise cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin, forming biochar with a well-organized pore structure.
“Plant-based residues primarily comprise cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin, forming biochar with a well-organized pore structure [55].”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked- cites [55] Qambrani N, Rahman M, Won S, Shim S, Ra C (2017) Biochar properties and eco-friendly applications for climate change mitigation, waste management, and wastewater treatment: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 79:255–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.057 source
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown dataManure-based biochar could be used as a nutrient-rich fertilizer, encouraging the fulfillment of SDG2 'Zero Hunger' by improving agricultural practices.
“However, the manure-based biochar could be used as a nutrient-rich fertilizer, encouraging the fulfillment of SDG2”
Quote in the paperNot a substantial claimIt may state two separate claims as one.
Interpretationown dataADB had a larger surface area with a greater number of adsorption sites and could resist chemical and biological degradations.
“The digestate-based biochar indicated that ADB had a larger surface area with a greater number of adsorption sites and could resist chemical and biological degradations; whereas, the thermal treatment of CDB mainly transformed the crystalline cellulose to the amorphous.”
Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
The authors state this as an assumption.
Some fractions of COD initial, such as substrate stored in biomass cells, CH4 dissolved in the medium, and non-degraded organic matter, could not be detected in the COD mass balance formula.
“It is assumed that some fractions of COD initial , such as substrate stored in biomass cells, CH 4 dissolved in the medium, and non-degraded organic matter [49], could not be detected in this COD mass balance formula (see Eq. 3).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Amorphous cellulose is more soluble than crystalline cellulose.
“probably because the solubility of amorphous cellulose is comparatively easier than that of crystalline cellulose.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Methane conversion percentage conflicts with the reported yield
MajorFor adsorbent/cow dung co-digestion, the reported yield of 258.5 mL CH4/g initial COD is 73.9% of the stated theoretical 350 mL/g-not 14.3% of initial COD. The table separately reports 73.9% as actual/theoretical methane production.
Reported 14.3 · recomputed 73.857143
“The CH 4 /COD initial percentages were 14.3±1.1% for adsorbent/cow dung co-digestion and 14.0± 0.9% for cow dung mono-digestion (Table 2).”
Methane theoretical-yield uncertainty differs in conclusion and table
MinorThe conclusion reports 73.9±3.6% of the theoretical methane yield, while Table 2 reports 73.9±4.2% for the same co-digestion run.
“equivalent to 73.9±3.6% of the maximum theoretical value.”
“CH 4 (actual/theoretical) (%) 48.1±2.7 73.9±4.2 72.4±4.1”
TDS removal uncertainty differs between abstract and results
MinorThe same 29.31% TDS removal for the mixed adsorbent has an uncertainty of ±1.25% in the abstract but ±3.15% in the results.
“29.31±1.25%,91.92±4.75%”
“giving values of 42.58±2.64%and 29.31±3.15%,respectively (Fig. 2a).”
Citations
Cites
Qambrani, N. A., Rahman, M. M., Won, S., Shim, S., & Ra, C. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.057 · Cited by 774
Quality variations of poultry litter biochar generated at different pyrolysis temperatures
Song, W., & Guo, M. (2012) · Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis · doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2011.11.018 · Cited by 693
Baskar, A. V., Bolan, N. S., Hoang, S. A., Sooriyakumar, P., Kumar, M., Singh, L., Jasemizad, T., Padhye, L. P., Singh, G., Vinu, A., et al. (2022) · The Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153555 · Cited by 646
Review on recent advances of carbon based adsorbent for methylene blue removal from waste water
Santoso, . B., Ediati, R., Kusumawati, Y., Bahruji, H., Sulistiono, D. O., & Prasetyoko, D. (2020) · Materials Today Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.mtchem.2019.100233 · Cited by 502
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
Dai, J., Meng, X., Zhang, Y., & Huang, Y. J. (2020) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123455 · Cited by 392
Lasheen, M. R., Ammar, N. S., & Ibrahim, H. S. (2011) · Solid State Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.solidstatesciences.2011.11.029 · Cited by 329
Hasan, M. M., Hasan, M. N., Awual, M. R., Islam, M. M., Shenashen, M. A., & Iqbal, J. (2020) · Journal of Molecular Liquids · doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2020.114356 · Cited by 326
Hamad, H. N., & Idrus, S. (2022) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym14040783 · Cited by 326
Sustainable management and recycling of food waste anaerobic digestate: A review
Dutta, S., He, M., Xiong, X., & Tsang, D. C. W. (2021) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2021.125915 · Cited by 291
Karmee, S. K. (2017) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2017.10.042 · Cited by 290
Sri Shalini, S., Palanivelu, K., Ramachandran, A., & Raghavan, V. (2021) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-020-00604-5 · Cited by 257
Naushad, M., Alqadami, A. A., Al‐Kahtani, A. A., Ahamad, T., Awual, M. R., & Татарчук, Т. (2019) · Journal of Molecular Liquids · doi:10.1016/j.molliq.2019.112075 · Cited by 231
Shen, Z., Zhang, J., Hou, D., Tsang, D. C. W., Ok, Y. S., & Alessi, D. S. (2019) · Environment International · doi:10.1016/j.envint.2018.11.045 · Cited by 226
Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of raw sugarcane vinasse
Júnior, A. D. N. F., Koyama, M. H., de Araújo, M. M., & Zaiat, M. (2015) · Renewable Energy · doi:10.1016/j.renene.2015.11.064 · Cited by 215
Shokry, H., Elkady, M. F., & Hamad, H. A. F. (2019) · Journal of Materials Research and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.jmrt.2019.07.061 · Cited by 140
Sun, J., Zhang, L., & Loh, K. (2021) · Bioresources and Bioprocessing · doi:10.1186/s40643-021-00420-3 · Cited by 134
Beyan, S. M., Prabhu, S. V., Tedla, T. S., & Getahun, A. A. (2021) · Bioresource Technology Reports · doi:10.1016/j.biteb.2021.100664 · Cited by 123
Rodriguez, J. A., Lustosa Filho, J. F., Melo, L. C. A., de Assis, I. R., & de Oliveira, T. S. (2020) · Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis · doi:10.1016/j.jaap.2020.104839 · Cited by 114
Bi, S., Qiao, W., Xiong, L., Ricci, M., Adani, F., & Dong, R. (2019) · Renewable Energy · doi:10.1016/j.renene.2019.02.083 · Cited by 103
Ahmed, M., Mashkoor, F., & Nasar, A. (2020) · Groundwater for Sustainable Development · doi:10.1016/j.gsd.2019.100322 · Cited by 103
Removal of tetracycline from aqueous solution by biochar derived from rice straw
Fan, S., Wang, Y., Li, Y., Wang, Z., Xie, Z., & Tang, J. (2018) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-018-2976-0 · Cited by 100
Khayum, N., Anbarasu, S., & Murugan, S. (2018) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2018.09.163 · Cited by 100
Utilisation/upgrading of orange peel waste from a biological biorefinery perspective
de la Torre, I., Martin-Dominguez, V., Acedos, M. G., Esteban, J., Santos, V. E., & Ladero, M. (2019) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-019-09929-2 · Cited by 95
Wang, P., Yin, Y., Guo, Y., & Wang, C. (2015) · RSC Advances · doi:10.1039/c5ra10487d · Cited by 78
Silva, L. G. M., Moreira, F. C., Souza, A. A. U., Souza, S. M. A. G. U., Boaventura, R. A. R., & Vilar, V. J. P. (2018) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.07.001 · Cited by 78
Xing, B.-S., Han, Y., Wang, X. C., Ma, J., Cao, S., Li, Q., Wen, J., & Yuan, H. (2020) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2019.115099 · Cited by 76
Mohammad-pajooh, E., Turcios, A. E., Cuff, G., Weichgrebe, D., Rosenwinkel, K., Vedenyapina, M. D., & Шарифуллина, Л. Р. (2018) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.09.020 · Cited by 74
Mohammadi, A., Sandberg, M., Venkatesh, G., Eskandari, S., Dalgaard, T., Joseph, S., & Granström, K. (2019) · Energy · doi:10.1016/j.energy.2019.06.065 · Cited by 74
Buller, L. S., Sganzerla, W. G., Lima, M. N., Muenchow, K. E., Timko, M. T., & Forster‐Carneiro, T. (2022) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131802 · Cited by 73
Tong, K., Lin, A., Ji, G., Wang, D., & Wang, X. (2016) · Journal of Hazardous Materials · doi:10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.01.014 · Cited by 70
Parthasarathy, P., Al-Ansari, T., Mackey, H. R., Sheeba Narayanan, K., & McKay, G. (2022) · Fuel · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2022.123378 · Cited by 69
Gémar, G., Gómez, T., Molinos-Senante, M., Caballero, R., & Sala-Garrido, R. (2018) · Environmental Impact Assessment Review · doi:10.1016/j.eiar.2017.11.007 · Cited by 64
In vivo and in vitro efficient textile wastewater remediation by Aspergillus niger biosorbent
Li, S., Huang, J., Mao, J., Zhang, L., He, C., Chen, G., Parkin, I. P., & Lai, Y. (2018) · Nanoscale Advances · doi:10.1039/c8na00132d · Cited by 62
Application of guar gum for the removal of dissolved lead from wastewater
Mukherjee, S., Mukhopadhyay, S., Zafri, M. Z. B., Zhan, X., Hashim, M. A., & Gupta, B. S. (2017) · Industrial Crops and Products · doi:10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.10.022 · Cited by 60
Process Improvement of Biogas Production from Anaerobic Co-digestion of Cow Dung and Corn Husk
Avicenna, Mel, M., Ihsan, S. I., & Setyobudi, R. H. (2015) · Procedia Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.proche.2015.03.014 · Cited by 52
Atukunda, A., Ibrahim, M. G. E., Fujii, M., Ookawara, S. A., & Nasr, M. (2022) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-022-02944-w · Cited by 46
Self-citationEtuwe, C. N., Momoh, Y., & Iyagba, E. T. (2016) · Waste and Biomass Valorization · doi:10.1007/s12649-016-9482-8 · Cited by 44
Othmani, A., Kesraoui, A., HaneneAkrout, Elaissaoui, I., & Seffen, M. (2020) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.126480 · Cited by 44
Biogas production from straw—the challenge feedstock pretreatment
Andersen, L. F., Parsin, S., Lüdtke, O., & Kaltschmitt, M. (2020) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-020-00740-y · Cited by 44
Msemwa, G. G., Ibrahim, M. G., Fujii, M., & Nasr, M. (2022) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116097 · Cited by 44
Self-citationAmosa, M. K., Jami, M. S., Alkhatib, M. F. R., Tajari, T., Jimat, D. N., & Owolabi, R. U. (2016) · Cogent Engineering · doi:10.1080/23311916.2016.1162384 · Cited by 43
Fawzy, M., Nasr, M., Abdel-Rahman, A. M., Hosny, G., & Odhafa, B. R. (2019) · International Journal of Phytoremediation · doi:10.1080/15226514.2019.1612848 · Cited by 42
Self-citationGreywater Treatment Using Single and Combined Adsorbents for Landscape Irrigation
Amiri, M. J., Bahrami, M., Badkouby, M., & Kalavrouziotis, I. K. (2019) · Environmental Processes · doi:10.1007/s40710-019-00362-1 · Cited by 40
Lahbab, A., Djaâfri, M., Kalloum, S., Benatiallah, A., Atelge, M. R., & Atabani, A. E. (2021) · Fuel · doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121627 · Cited by 40
Oraon, A., Prajapati, A. K., Ram, M., Saxena, V. K., Dutta, S., & Gupta, A. K. (2024) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-022-02320-8 · Cited by 37
Guruchandran, S., Chakravarthy, M., Bakshi, A., & Ganesan, N. D. (2021) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106184 · Cited by 33
Aili Hamzah, A. F., Hamzah, M. H., Mazlan, N. I., Che Man, H., Jamali, N. S., Siajam, S. I., & Show, P. L. (2022) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2022.06.042 · Cited by 32
Gómez-Quiroga, X., Aboudi, K., Álvarez-Gallego, C. J., & Romero, L. I. (2019) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app9091791 · Cited by 29
Peng, H., Zou, C., Wang, C., Tang, W., & Zhou, J. (2020) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-020-09437-1 · Cited by 28
Segundo-Aguilar, A., González‐Gutiérrez, L. V., Climent, V., Feliu, J. M., Buitrón, G., & Cercado, B. (2021) · Sustainable Energy & Fuels · doi:10.1039/d0se01797c · Cited by 28
Awosusi, A., Sethunya, V., & Matambo, T. (2021) · Materials Today: Proceedings · doi:10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.584 · Cited by 24
Fereja, W. M., Dinbore, W. T., & Girmaye, B. (2020) · Cogent Food & Agriculture · doi:10.1080/23311932.2020.1816420 · Cited by 24
Musa, M. S. M., Sulaiman, W. R. W., Majid, Z. A., Majid, Z. A., Idris, A. K., & Rajaei, K. (2019) · Journal of King Saud University - Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.jksues.2019.06.001 · Cited by 22
Saleem, M., Hanif, M. U., Bahadar, A., Iqbal, H., Capareda, S. C., & Waqas, A. (2020) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr8121558 · Cited by 17
Application of dye saturated clay adsorbent from dyeing wastewater as textile printing pigment
Rahimi, A. A., & Alihosseini, F. (2022) · Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology · doi:10.1002/jctb.7183 · Cited by 13
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- APHA (2005) Standard Methods for Examinations of Water and Wastewater, 21st edn. APHA, AWWA and WEF, Washington, DC
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Trivedi, Y., Sharma, M., Mishra, R. K., Sharma, A., Joshi, J., Gupta, A. B., Achintya, B., Shah, K., & Vuppaladadiyamd, A. K. (2025) · Desalination · doi:10.1016/j.desal.2024.118509 · Cited by 152
Al‐Qahtani, S. D., Alhasani, M. A., Alkhathami, N. D., Al‐Ola, K. A. A., Alkhamis, K. M., El‐Desouky, M. G., & El-Bindary, A. A. (2023) · Environmental Technology · doi:10.1080/09593330.2023.2283409 · Cited by 71
Shaghaleh, H., Azhar, M., Zia‐ur‐Rehman, M., Hamoud, Y. A., Hamad, A. A. A., Usman, M., Rizwan, M., Yong, J. W. H., Alharby, H. F., Al-Ghamdi, A. J., et al. (2024) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2024.123365 · Cited by 39
Senga, R., Nasr, M., Fujii, M., & Abdelhaleem, A. (2024) · Chemosphere · doi:10.1016/j.chemosphere.2024.143847 · Cited by 32
Self-citationApplications of citrus peels valorisation in circular bioeconomy
Kumar, H., Guleria, S., Kimta, N., Nepovimová, E., Dhanjal, D. S., Sethi, N., Suthar, T., Shaikh, A. M., Kovács, B., & Harsányi, E. (2025) · Journal of Agriculture and Food Research · doi:10.1016/j.jafr.2025.101780 · Cited by 32
Shi, Z., Xing, K., Rameezdeen, R., & Chow, C. W. K. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-32560-2 · Cited by 25
Abdullah, N. H., Borhan, A., & Saadon, S. Z. A. H. (2023) · Bioresource Technology Reports · doi:10.1016/j.biteb.2023.101705 · Cited by 24
Alhajeri, N. S., & Tawfik, A. (2024) · Journal of Water Process Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.104767 · Cited by 20
Tumanyisibwe, A., Nasr, M., Fujii, M., & Ibrahim, M. G. E. (2024) · Water · doi:10.3390/w16142025 · Cited by 20
Self-citationAlhajeri, N. S., Tawfik, A., Al‐Fadhli, F. M., & Nasr, M. (2024) · Journal of Water Process Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jwpe.2024.105270 · Cited by 19
Self-citationTugume, M., Ibrahim, M. G. E., Fujii, M., & Nasr, M. (2024) · Waste and Biomass Valorization · doi:10.1007/s12649-024-02458-8 · Cited by 17
Self-citationYoucef, S., Chebbi, M., Youcef, L., Bouaziz, M. G., Soudani, A., Sahli, A., & Deroues, C. (2025) · Environmental Monitoring and Assessment · doi:10.1007/s10661-025-13987-7 · Cited by 15
Augustine, D., Abdelhaleem, A., Ookawara, S. A., & Nasr, M. (2024) · Waste and Biomass Valorization · doi:10.1007/s12649-024-02594-1 · Cited by 12
Self-citationSuarez-Velázquez, G. G., Lugo-Lugo, V., Meléndez-González, P. C., & Pech-Rodríguez, W. J. (2025) · Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery · doi:10.1007/s13399-025-06889-8 · Cited by 12
Mwalusambo, G., Tarus, B. K., Elisadiki, J., Son, M., Kim, H. H., Jande, Y. A. C., & Alfredy, T. (2025) · Desalination · doi:10.1016/j.desal.2025.119312 · Cited by 12
García-Prats, M., González, D., & Sánchez, A. (2026) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules31030503 · Cited by 12
Lizcano-Delgado, Y. Y., Martínez-Vázquez, O. T., Cristiani‐Urbina, E., & Morales-Barrera, L. (2024) · Processes · doi:10.3390/pr12061263 · Cited by 11
Chadha, M., & Berry, S. (2025) · Discover Chemistry. · doi:10.1007/s44371-025-00344-3 · Cited by 10
Dadebo, D., Obura, D., & Atukunda, A. (2024) · Bioresource Technology Reports · doi:10.1016/j.biteb.2024.101855 · Cited by 10
Azabo, M., Abdelhaleem, A., Fujii, M., & Nasr, M. (2024) · International Journal of Phytoremediation · doi:10.1080/15226514.2024.2374887 · Cited by 10
Self-citationHafez, R. M., Tawfik, A., Hassan, G. K., Zahran, M. K., Younes, A. A., Ziembińska-Buczyńska, A., Gamoń, F., & Nasr, M. (2024) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2024.107401 · Cited by 9
Self-citationAnbarasu, K., Vickram, A. S., Yaashikaa, P. R., Thanigaivel, S., Saravanan, A., Thamarai, P., & Deivayanai, V. C. (2025) · Sustainable Energy Technologies and Assessments · doi:10.1016/j.seta.2025.104759 · Cited by 8
Rubangakene, N. O., Safo, K., & Shokry, H. (2025) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-025-36369-5 · Cited by 7
Sustainable strength prediction of textile waste concrete using hybrid machine learning models
Kumar, N., Patil, S., Tahera, George, C., Chandra, S. S., & Ramaraju, H. K. (2025) · Asian Journal of Civil Engineering · doi:10.1007/s42107-025-01573-8 · Cited by 7
Sustainable utilization of citrus peel waste: Biochar production, modification, and applications
Rai, S., Tan, T. N., Tanboonchuy, V., Tulaphol, S., Damrongsiri, S., Chanpiwat, P., Minh, D. P., Oriez, V., Grisdanurak, N., Assawadithalerd, M., et al. (2025) · Cleaner Waste Systems · doi:10.1016/j.clwas.2025.100450 · Cited by 7
Szaja, A., Czarnota, J., Masłoń, A. A., & Lebiocka, M. (2025) · Applied Sciences · doi:10.3390/app15031537 · Cited by 7
Dadebo, D., Atukunda, A., Ibrahim, M. G. E., & Nasr, M. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-34917-z · Cited by 6
Self-citationSiddique, K., Saleem, A. R., Arslan, M., & Afzal, M. (2025) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su17136226 · Cited by 5
Sharma, S., Thakur, V., Rana, V. S., Sharma, U., Thakur, S., Sharma, S., Bhat, S. A., Kumar, R., & Kumar, A. (2024) · Environmental Science and Pollution Research · doi:10.1007/s11356-024-32156-w · Cited by 5
Nandikes, G., Anh, N. T. V., & Oh, S. (2025) · Sustainable Chemistry and Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.scp.2025.102130 · Cited by 5
Advances in phytochemistry, pharmacology, and sustainable utilization of orange peels
Mohamed, M. F. S., Yu, Y., Wang, L.-H., Lin, M.-K., & Chao, J. (2026) · International Journal of Food Properties · doi:10.1080/10942912.2026.2637277 · Cited by 4
Kuan, W., Ahmad, M. S., Hsieh, C., Bhuyar, P., Wang, T., Ou, S., & Chen, C. (2023) · International Journal of Energy Research · doi:10.1155/2023/5529837 · Cited by 4
Grzeszczak, J., Wróblewska, A., Michalkiewicz, B., Dzięcioł, M., & Janda, K. (2025) · Molecules · doi:10.3390/molecules30071627 · Cited by 4
Comparative Analysis of Plant-Based Natural Coagulants for Wastewater Treatment
Rawat, D. R., Parmar, K. M., & Thorat, S. S. (2025) · Current World Environment · doi:10.12944/cwe.20.1.30 · Cited by 4
Agricultural Waste Management for Food Security and Sustainability
Kumar, K., Khatri, A., & Thakur, I. S. (2025) · IntechOpen eBooks · doi:10.5772/intechopen.1010261 · Cited by 4
Feasibility assessment of remanufacturing waste sheet steel into angle mesh steel
Abdullah, Z. T. (2023) · IET Collaborative Intelligent Manufacturing · doi:10.1049/cim2.12089 · Cited by 4
Farhana, K., & Islam, M. R. (2026) · Materials Circular Economy · doi:10.1007/s42824-025-00213-5 · Cited by 3
Kumar, L., Shah, K. V., Ezhilselvi, V., Thulasiraman, A. V., & Hakeem, I. G. (2026) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en19061407 · Cited by 3
Agroindustrial Plant Wastes: Novel Source of Antimicrobial Peptides
Hernández-Jiménez, M. O., Loa, J. D. A., & Rojas‐Avelizapa, N. G. (2025) · Circular Economy and Sustainability · doi:10.1007/s43615-025-00515-5 · Cited by 3
Jabbar, K. K., Mezan, S. O., & Bouaziz, M. A. (2026) · Euro-Mediterranean Journal for Environmental Integration · doi:10.1007/s41207-025-01047-y · Cited by 2
Rout, C., Aggarwal, D., & Karn, S. K. (2023) · Bioremediation Journal · doi:10.1080/10889868.2023.2282638 · Cited by 2
Mirza, C. R. (2024) · SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH · doi:10.36719/2789-6919/35/61-77 · Cited by 1
Benakcha, M., Masmoudi, T., Chebbi, M., Youcef, S., Youcef, L., & Guergazi, S. (2026) · Reaction Kinetics Mechanisms and Catalysis · doi:10.1007/s11144-026-03070-8 · Cited by 1
Plastic waste management techniques and WtE consideration in developing countries
Nasr, M. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-13847-8.00017-8 · Cited by 1
Self-citationMirza, C. R. (2024) · NATURE AND SCIENCE · doi:10.36719/2707-1146/47/59-73 · Cited by 1
Balogun, A. A., Udoh, E. A., & Ayomide, A. A. (2025) · European Journal of Sustainable Development Research · doi:10.29333/ejosdr/16351 · Cited by 1
Yaulilahua-Huacho, R., Sumarriva-Bustinza, L. A., Castañeda-Campos, C., Mariño-Arroyo, J. B., Huamancaja-Arias, J., Merino-Carhuapoma, A., Torres, M. C. T., Estrada-Ayre, C. P., Deza, J. W. R., Rojas-Felipe, E., et al. (2025) · Journal of Experimental Biology and Agricultural Sciences · doi:10.18006/2025.13(4).498.515 · Cited by 1
From Farm to Functional: How Jujube Seeds Can Revolutionize the Food Industry
Chowdhury, S., Nayak, A., & Dutta, D. (2024) · Lecture notes in civil engineering · doi:10.1007/978-981-97-6024-4_23
Bidira, F., Bekele, E. A., Geresu, B. A., & Asaithambi, P. (2026) · Scientific African · doi:10.1016/j.sciaf.2026.e03307
Alqahtani, Z., Kola, O. E., Alsharif, A., Shawabkeh, A., Alnajeebi, A. M., Tayeb, R. A., Solami, A. A., AlMohamadi, H., & Al-Otaibi, J. S. (2026) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-026-46890-3
Abdulhameed, A. S., Omari, R. H. A., Al‐Yaari, M., Abdullah, S., & Abualhaija, M. M. (2026) · Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy · doi:10.1002/ep.70469
Life Cycle and Environmental Assessment
Rani, Y. G., John, J. A., & Ethiraj, S. (2026) · Royal Society of Chemistry eBooks · doi:10.1039/9781837676781-00350
Biomass-based biochar for wastewater treatment and management
Chen, Z., Nasr, M., Ighalo, J. O., Osman, A. I., Wang, L., Aziz, F., Kurniawan, T. A., & Yap, P. (2026) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-29865-3.00010-8
Self-citationManan, A., Ahmad, T., Hussain, S. N., & Asghar, H. M. A. (2026) · Water Air & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-026-09583-1
Rani, K. S., Babu, K. S., & Veeranjaneyulu, B. (2026) · International Journal of Drug Delivery Technology · doi:10.25258/ijddt.16.43s.56
From waste to table: Sustainable pestil production using pomegranate and orange peels
Baydur, R., Tatlısu, N. B., & BOZAGCI, E. C. (2025) · DergiPark (Istanbul University)
Xu, X., Ge, Y., Xie, Y., Wang, C., Shi, Y., Zhou, J., & Liu, J. (2026) · Food Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2026.150327
Valorization of citrus by-products: A pathway to sustainable lignocellulose-based carbon materials
Kaur, S., Singh, L., Khaire, K. C., Singh, V., Mahajan, P., & Kumar, B. (2026) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2026.117300
Sustainable materials and renewable energy from orange peel waste: A critical analysis
Melikoğlu, M. (2026) · Next Materials · doi:10.1016/j.nxmate.2026.102958
Mwalaji, O. A., Madirisha, M. M., Shilla, D. J., & Philip, J. Y. N. (2026) · International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology · doi:10.1007/s13762-026-07288-w
Modified biochars for sustainable wastewater treatment: A critical review
Uddin, M. R., & Juneja, A. (2026) · Chemical Engineering Journal Green and Sustainable · doi:10.1016/j.cejgas.2026.100142
Akar, T., Kocoglu, H., & Akar, S. T. (2026) · International Journal of Biological Macromolecules · doi:10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2026.154882
Metadata
- Authors
- Kalengyo, R. B., Ibrahim, M. G., Fujii, M., & Nasr, M.
- Affiliations
- Egypt-Japan University of Science and Technology (EG)
- Tokyo Institute of Technology (JP)
- Corresponding author
- Nasr, Mahmoud
- Venue
- Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery
- Published
- 2023-04-04
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 16
- Pages
- 19875-19888
- ISSN
- 2190-6815 (ISSN-L)
- 2190-6823
- OpenAlex
- W4362593051
- Cited by
- 64
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 19 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 5
- FWCI
- 5.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) (submittedVersion)
- Tokyo Tech Research Repository (Tokyo Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
- Greater South Information System
- Funders
- JICA Research Institute
- Egypt Japan University
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
- Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas Production
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Coagulation and Flocculation Studies
- Keywords
- orange peel waste, textile wastewater treatment, dye adsorption, adsorbent regeneration, co-digestion, biogas production, biochar production, pyrolysis, cow dung inoculum, COD removal, color removal, techno-economic analysis, waste-to-energy, agricultural waste valorization
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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
