Cited by 537Algal biology and biofuel productionGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchBioenergy crop production and management

Fourth generation biofuel: A review on risks and mitigation strategies.

Abdullah, Bawadi, Syed Muhammad, Syed Anuar Faua’ad, Shokravi, Zahra, Ismail, Shahrul, Kassim, Khairul Anuar, Mahmood, Azmi Nik, Aziz, Md Maniruzzaman A.·2019·Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.rser.2019.02.018

Cites

154 of 154 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Biofuels of first and second generation were commercially produced around 4% and 96% in 2019, respectively.

    “For the most part, biofuels of the first and in the vast majority of the second generation are commercially produced, around 4% and 96% in 2019, respectively [44].”

    From The potential of biofuels from first to fourth generation (2023) · cites this paper as [44]

  • Additional biocontainment methods based on genetic changes such as auxotrophies or kill switches significantly decrease the risk of GMO escape.

    “Additional biocontainment methods can be directly based on genetic changes inside the production cells such as auxotrophies or kill switches, significantly decreasing the risk of genetically modified organism (GMO) escape [44,81].”

    From The potential of biofuels from first to fourth generation (2023) · cites this paper as [44]

  • The EU quality standard specifies a 5% blend of bioethanol and petrol.

    “The EU quality standard specifies a 5% blend of bioethanol and petrol.”
  • The United States generates the most ethanol (10% ethanol, 90% petrol), followed by Brazil (27% ethanol).

    “The United States (US) generates the most ethanol (10% ethanol, 90% petrol), followed by Brazil (27% ethanol) [1, 85].”
  • The 5% bioethanol-petrol blend does not require engine adjustments and may be used at higher levels.

    “This blend does not require any engine adjustments and may be used at higher levels.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

6 of the 160 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Abdullah, B., Syed Muhammad, S. A. F., Shokravi, Z., Ismail, S., Kassim, K. A., Mahmood, A. N., & Aziz, M. M. A.
Affiliations
  • Universiti Teknologi Petronas (MY)
  • Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch (IR)
  • Universiti Malaysia Terengganu (MY)
  • University of Technology Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Aziz, Md Maniruzzaman A.
Venue
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-06
Volume
107
Pages
37-50
ISSN
1364-0321 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2917625265
Cited by
531
References
160
Citations by year
2026: 39 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 102 · 2023: 75 · 2022: 95 · 2021: 80 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 16
FWCI
12.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Higher Education of Malaysia (15H32, 19H98)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment › Algal biology and biofuel production
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Agronomy and Crop Science › Bioenergy crop production and management
Keywords
fourth-generation biofuels, genetically modified algae, microalgae cultivation, environmental risk, health risks, risk mitigation, biofuel legislation, open pond cultivation, horizontal gene transfer, biofuel by-products, waste disposal, GMO regulation

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