The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A review of biomass gasification modelling
Open accessAbstract
Abstract Currently around 10% of all energy generated worldwide comes from biomass. Most of this 10% is biofuel energy from the fermentation of corn and sugarcane. Fermentation of corn competes with the global food supply, and fermentation of sugarcane drives deforestation. Therefore, the renewable and sustainable growth of these two bio-based energy sources may not be desirable even if it is economically feasible. Biomass gasification by contrast is significantly more flexible in terms of the bio-feedstock or waste that can be processed to either produce biofuels or to co-generate electricity and heat on demand. Fluidized bed and entrained flow gasifiers already achieve promising economy-of-scale for fuel production whilst downdraft gasifiers are well-suited for small-scale heat and power co-generation. This superior flexibility of gasification both in terms of the feedstock type and also the energy generation or fuel production options, is what drives expanding research and implementation opportunities for biomass gasification. Research progress is accelerated by modelling work. This review is the first review in the biomass gasification modelling field to collect and analyze statistics on the growing number of gasification modelling studies and approaches used. The frequency of the various modelling choices made, and the trends this data reveals, is reported. For new researchers this review provides a succinct guide to the modelling choices that needs to made early on in a modelling study or project. A detailed methodology characterization is introduced that includes consequential modelling choices not explicitly addressed by prior reviews. To seasoned researchers this study provides the first statistical (as opposed to ad hoc or anecdotal) picture of what their fellow researchers are doing.
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
BP Statistical Review of World Energy
Gurney, J., & Company, B. P. (1985) · Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · doi:10.2307/3324639 · Cited by 6,268
96/01121 BP statistical review of world energy 1995
(1996) · Fuel and Energy Abstracts · doi:10.1016/0140-6701(96)91019-x · Cited by 2,663
A review of the primary measures for tar elimination in biomass gasification processes
Devi, L., Ptasinski, K. J., & Janssen, F. J. J. G. (2003) · Biomass and Bioenergy · doi:10.1016/s0961-9534(02)00102-2 · Cited by 1,435
Process and technological aspects of municipal solid waste gasification. A review
Arena, U. (2012) · Waste Management · doi:10.1016/j.wasman.2011.09.025 · Cited by 1,349
An overview of advances in biomass gasification
Sikarwar, V. S., Zhao, M., Clough, P., Yao, J., Zhong, X., Memon, M. Z., Shah, N., Anthony, E. J., & Fennell, P. S. (2016) · Energy & Environmental Science · doi:10.1039/c6ee00935b · Cited by 1,258
Biomass Gasifier ''Tars'': Their Nature, Formation, and Conversion
Milne, T. A., Evans, R. J., & Abatzaglou, N. (1998) · doi:10.2172/3726 · Cited by 1,031
The technical and economic feasibility of biomass gasification for power generation
Bridgwater, A. V. (1995) · Fuel · doi:10.1016/0016-2361(95)00001-l · Cited by 1,025
Combustion and Gasification in Fluidized Beds
Basu, P. (2006) · CRC Press eBooks · doi:10.1201/9781420005158 · Cited by 966
Review and analysis of biomass gasification models
Puig-Arnavat, M., Bruno, J. C., & Coronas, A. (2010) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2010.07.030 · Cited by 830
Zainal, Z. A., Ali, R., Lean, C. H., & Seetharamu, K. N. (2001) · Energy Conversion and Management · doi:10.1016/s0196-8904(00)00078-9 · Cited by 800
Cited by
Hoang, A. T., Pham, V. V., & Nguyen, X. P. (2021) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127161 · Cited by 663
Comparative assessment of renewable energy-based hydrogen production methods
Ishaq, H., & Dincer, I. (2021) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2020.110192 · Cited by 369
Zhang, G., Liu, J., Pan, X., Abed, A. M., Le, B. N., Ali, H. E., & Ge, Y. (2023) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.10.224 · Cited by 43
Metadata
- Authors
- Safarian, S., Unnþórsson, R., & Richter, C.
- Venue
- Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-08
- Volume
- 110
- Pages
- 378-391
- ISSN
- 1364-0321 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2945999410
- Cited by
- 404
- References
- 82
- FWCI
- 13.68
- 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 of biomass gasification modelling. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.003
- The paper
- Safarian, S., Unnþórsson, R., & Richter, C. (2019). A review of biomass gasification modelling. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.05.003
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.