Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Production of biodiesel under supercritical conditions: State of the art and T

bibliometric analysis
Pedro Andreo-Martíneza,b, , Víctor Manuel Ortiz-Martínezc, , Nuria García-Martínezb,
⁎ ⁎

Antonia Pérez de los Ríosa, Francisco José Hernández-Fernándeza, Joaquín Quesada-Medinaa,

⁎

a
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Murcia, Campus of Espinardo, 30100 Murcia, Spain
b
Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Faculty of Chemistry, University of Murcia, Campus of Espinardo, 30100 Murcia, Spain
c
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering, Technical University of Cartagena, Campus Muralla del Mar, E-30202 Cartagena, Spain

HIGHLIGHTS GRAPHICAL ABSTRACT

• Bibliometric study on biodiesel pro-

duction research under supercritical
condition.
• Science Citation Index Expanded da-
tabase, from 2001 to 2019, was used.
• Growing research field with 608 arti-
cles and significant annual output in-
crease.
• China country, Sila Science institution
and Fuel journal ranked first in the
field.
• Transition from first- to third-genera-
tion biodiesel and reaction optimiza-
tion trends.

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The demand for biodiesel as an alternative and potentially renewable fuel is constantly rising. Biodiesel pro-
Bibliometric analysis duction from lipids in supercritical conditions offers several advantages over other catalytic processes. These
Biodiesel advantages include high-efficiency production, environmental friendliness and the possibility of using a broad
Scientometric range of feedstock sources. As a consequence, there is a great interest in biodiesel production research using
Supercritical alcoholysis
supercritical fluids as a sustainable technology option. In this sense, bibliometric reviews can be very useful for
Web of Science©
the interpretation of scientific production and research trends in this field. Thus, this work presents a sciento-
Research trends
metric study on biodiesel production research under supercritical conditions from 2001 to 2019, based on the
Web of Science© database. 608 articles were analyzed and the parameters considered were: (i) publication type,
language and output characteristics, (ii) Lotka's Law, Price's index and h-index, (iii) authors, countries and
institutions collaboration analysis, (iv) publication performance by authors, journals, institutions and countries
and (v) author keywords, single title words and keywords Plus analysis. The productivity patterns of authors,
journals, institutions and authors keywords were found to fit Lotka's law. In terms of feedstock used in super-
critical conditions, the bibliometric analysis showed a clear transition from first- to third-generation biodiesel,
with special attention paid to the experimental study of supercritical reaction conditions. By contrast, further

⁎
Corresponding authors.
E-mail addresses: pam11@um.es (P. Andreo-Martínez), victor.ortiz@upct.es (V.M. Ortiz-Martínez), quesamed@um.es (J. Quesada-Medina).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114753
Received 24 October 2019; Received in revised form 21 February 2020; Accepted 26 February 2020
Available online 06 March 2020
0306-2619/ © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
process optimization, the reduction of the severity of the supercritical conditions through devised strategies to
lower energy consumption and further economic analysis are still needed, among other factors, for the real
implementation of the technology.
1. Introduction
According to the American standard ASTM D6751, biodiesel is de-
fined as “a fuel comprised of monoalkyl esters of long-chain fatty acids
derived from vegetable oils or animal fats, designated B100”. Biodiesel is
obtained through esterification and/or transesterification processes and
it is used as a total or partial substitute for fossil diesel. Chemically
speaking, biodiesel is a mixture of fatty acid methyl esters (FAMEs)
with chain lengths of C14:0-C24:3 [1,2]. Nowadays, biodiesel is a
promising renewable source of energy as it is a clean-burning and re-
newable fuel, biodegradable, environmentally friendly [3] and poten-
tially neutral in relation to global warming since biodiesel can reduce
net CO2 emissions by 78% in comparison to fossil diesel [4].
There is a wide range of oleaginous feedstocks suitable for biodiesel
production, including raw and organic waste materials. Selection of
feedstock is the primary factor as it accounts for 75–80% of total pro-
duction costs. In this sense, the use of non-edible vegetable oils, cooking
oil waste or waste-based feedstocks are favorable options. By contrast,
the utilization of raw edible oils can lead to an increase in food market
prices and can pose higher environmental impacts [5]. Depending on
the type of feedstocks used in its production, biodiesel can generally be
categorized into first, second and third generations [6,7]. First-gen-
eration biodiesel is obtained from food crops such as soy, wheat, ra-
peseed or corn. Second-generation biodiesel involves the use of non-
edible vegetable oils, used cooking and frying oils, and animal fats. That
being the case, second-generation biodiesel avoids competition with
crops for food purposes, land clearing and water supply. Third-gen-
eration biodiesel, derived from microalgae or macroalgae and meta-
bolic engineering of photosynthetic organisms, respectively, has
emerged as one of the most sustainable alternatives. In comparison to
conventional crops, such types of feedstocks offer high growth rates and
high photosynthetic efficiency for biomass production.
The transesterification of triglycerides (TG) from oleaginous feed-
stocks involves the reaction of TG with short-chain alcohols, such as
methanol or ethanol, to obtain FAMEs and low amounts of other by-
products such as glycerol and intermediate products (mono- and di-
glycerides), which greatly influence final biodiesel quality [8]. To date,
several methods for the transesterification of oleaginous feedstocks into
biodiesel have been successfully proposed, including both homo-
geneous and heterogeneous catalysis (using acid or alkali catalysts),
ultrasound- and microwave-assisted processes, enzymatic technology
and supercritical conditions [9,10]. In general, catalytic techniques are
time-consuming, generate large amounts of wastewater and soaps, and
are highly sensitive to the presence of free fatty acids (FFAs) and/or
water (more than 0.5 and 0.06 wt%, respectively) together with the fact
that they require downstream separation, neutralization and purifica-
tion steps, which are highly costly [11]. Despite these limitations, the
alkali technology is widely used on an industrial scale [12]. Microwave-
and ultrasound-assisted methods include high energy consumption and
all the aforementioned limitations for catalytic transesterification, al-
though higher FAME yields can be achieved in shorter reaction times
and they present a more environmentally friendly approach. In com-
parison, the supercritical transesterification method can overcome the
drawbacks of conventional catalytic approaches. In this case, high
temperature and pressure conditions are used. Although catalysts are
generally avoided in supercritical biodiesel production, heterogeneous
catalysts can also be employed to increase conversion rates, which are
easier to handle than homogenous catalysts in terms of separation steps.
In addition, biodiesel production under supercritical conditions offers
unique advantages, including the possibility of obtaining higher FAME
2
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
yields in shorter reaction times. Furthermore, it can be applied to a
wide variety of feedstock (even those with a high content of FFAs and
water) without any pretreatment requirement, using a wide range of
solvents. In addition, the separation and purification stages are rela-
tively easy to carry out [13–15]. Despite these advantages, supercritical
biodiesel production poses several drawbacks including the need for
high oil-to-alcohol molar ratios and high temperature and pressure
conditions [12], which translates into high capital costs and energy
consumption due to the elevated pressures and temperatures. These
high temperatures can also lead to the degradation of polyunsaturated
fatty acids and/or glycerol. Nevertheless, these drawbacks represent
interesting research challenges for the scientific community.
The production of biodiesel under supercritical conditions is a re-
latively new method, as the first article within the field was published
by Saka and Kusdiana in 2001 [16,17], although their preliminary re-
sults had been reported two years earlier at the 4th Biomass Conference
of the Americas on Growth Opportunity in Green Energy and Value-
Added Products [18]. However, biodiesel is not a new concept. The
term was actually coined in 1937 by the Belgian scientist G. Chavanne
through his patent entitled “Procedure for the transformation of vege-
table oils for their uses as fuels” [19]. Previously, the transesterification
of vegetable oils was developed by Duffy [20], and Rudolf Diesel de-
veloped an engine that ran on 100% peanut oil at the 1900 Paris World
Exhibition, which had been successfully tested seven years before in
Germany. Subsequently, the Chavanne's patent was applied on an in-
dustrial level in Brazil by Expedito Parente and various standards on the
quality of biodiesel such as the DIN51606 (German), ASTM D6751
(American) and EN 14214 (European) were developed [4,21]. Despite
these facts, according to the bibliometric review on biodiesel research
published by Zhang, Gao [22], it was not until 1991 that the first
publication related to biodiesel was indexed by the Science Citation
Index Expanded (SCI-E). From 1991 to 2015, a total of 18,204 pub-
lications on biodiesel research have been indexed.
Bibliometric reviews are common nowadays and, although the first
bibliometric review was conducted by Cole and Eales [23], the term
bibliometric was coined by Pritchard [24] and it is defined as the
analysis of scientific publications using statistical methods in order to
provide a general outline and overall structure of the research area.
Early bibliometric reviews were carried out on very small scales and
mostly restricted to disciplines within the natural sciences. The official
appearance of SCI in 1963 [25], which systematically compiles com-
prehensive citation information regarding publications in science
journals, allowed the rapid development of bibliometric reviews,
proving that citation-based literature research is useful and effective
[26]. In this sense, the bibliometric review has become a widely used
tool for statistical and quantitative literature citation and for the in-
terpretation of scientific production and research trends in specific
fields. Clear proof of this fact is the large number of bibliometric re-
views published in many disciplines of science and engineering such as
constructed wetlands [27], ecological restoration [28], shale gas [29],
nuclear power [30], biomass [31] and biofuels [32]. In fact, several
bibliometric reviews of general biodiesel research trends [22] and mi-
croalga-derived biodiesel production [33] have been published re-
cently.
That being said, and to the best of the author's knowledge, no bib-
liometric reviews of biodiesel production research under supercritical
conditions have been published yet. The aim of this work is to to
evaluate the field of supercritical biodiesel production from 2001 to
2019, based on the Web of Science© (WoS) database, through a com-
prehensive bibliometric review. For this purpose, publication language
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
and output characteristics, Lotka's law, Price's index, h-index, colla-
boration analysis and publication performance by authors, journals,
countries and institutions were analyzed to dissect publication patterns.
Finally, author keywords, single title words, and WoS keywords were
analyzed to explore the research trends and to identify hot topics in the
field.
2. State of the art of biodiesel production under supercritical
conditions technology
Biodiesel production under supercritical conditions technology is a
potential and exciting alternative to classical biodiesel production
technologies, such as catalytic transesterification, as it allows for si-
multaneous TG transesterification and FFA esterification, it does not
require a catalyst, and has a high reaction rate and a higher FAMEs
yield with fewer operational steps. Furthermore, it is applicable to a
wide variety of feedstock, is more tolerant to the presence of FFA and
water, and is well-disposed to continuous operations [12].
The classic transesterification reaction of TGs to produce FAMEs and
glycerol, in the presence of methanol, occurs in three consecutive and
reversible stages. During this process, a total of 3 mol of methyl ester
are produced (1 mol in each stage) and the final product is a mixture of
mono-, di- and TGs, glycerol, thermal degradation products and FAMEs
[34]. The glycerol causes problems in classical catalytic transester-
ification as further steps are necessary in order to separate glycerol and
FAMEs. However, under supercritical conditions, glycerol thermally
decomposes and reacts with methanol through etherification reactions
at temperatures and pressures above 270 °C and 10 MPa, respectively,
and reaction times longer than 45 min and forms methyl glycerol
ethers, diglycerols and alcohols, which are miscible in biodiesel. These
low-molecular weight compounds presence can improve the cold flow
properties and the viscosity of the biodiesel produced [35,36]. In ad-
dition, the use of other organic solvents without glycerol production,
including methyl acetate, have also been proposed. This solvent pro-
duces triacetin instead of glycerol as a by-product, which is also soluble
with FAME [37,38].
Besides methanol and methyl acetate, other organic solvents such as
ethanol [39–41], methyl tertbutyl ether [42,43] and dimethyl carbo-
nate [44,45] have been successfully used to produce biodiesel under
supercritical conditions. Some of them have advantages over methanol.
For example, ethanol is renewable in nature, less toxic, shows fewer
safety risks than methanol, and works as both a reactant and an acid
catalyst under supercritical conditions [46]. However, the most widely
used organic solvent is methanol due, mainly, to the fact that it pro-
vides a higher reaction rate and biodiesel production yield under the
same reaction conditions [43], because it is less bulky with decreased
steric hindrance [42,43], and its cost remains significantly lower than
other organic solvents [47].
The critical temperatures and pressures of methanol, ethanol, me-
thyl tertbutyl ether, methyl acetate and dimethyl carbonate are
239.2 °C and 8.09 MPa [15], 241.6 °C and 6.27 MPa [39], 224 °C and
3.49 MPa [42], 233.7 °C and 4.7 MPa [37], and 275 °C and 4.63 MPa
[44], respectively. Crossing those critical conditions, extreme changes
in the mass density of solvent occur, leading to changes in its solubility
and mass-transfer characteristics. Under supercritical conditions, TGs
and solvents become a single phase due to an increase in the density of
solvent and a decrease in its dielectric constant. The increase in density
leads to a diminishing polarity in solvent because hydrogen bonding in
the molecules is weakened and they can then act as free monomers.
Thus, non-polar TG is better dissolved in solvent under supercritical
conditions to form a homogeneous phase [12]. In other words, under
supercritical conditions, a single homogeneous phase is generated in
the reactor, so interface mass transfer limitations are avoided and the
reaction can be carried out at a high reaction rate [48].
The main parameters influencing the supercritical transesterifica-
tion are temperature, reaction time, pressure, and solvent-to-oil molar
3
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
ratio. In addition, thermal decomposition reactions of FAMEs may
occur due to the high temperatures used (usually higher than 300 °C),
thus resulting in low yields of biodiesel [35,49].
The optimum temperature and reaction time to reach maximum
yields of biodiesel are in the range of 290–400 °C and 5–75 min, re-
spectively, depending on the type of reactor and the oil used [12,48].
The pressure reached under supercritical conditions to produce
biodiesel depends on the type of feedstock, the reaction temperature,
the type of reactor (batch-type or flow-type) and the agitation speed of
the medium [48]. Generally, pressure is not a specific control variable
because it is a consequence of the mixture conditions for a given tem-
perature. Further, it is generally observed that when pressure is high
enough to maintain the reaction in a homogenous state and the reaction
time is suitable to reach equilibrium conversion, the effect of pressure
does not provide significant improvement on FAMEs yield. In this sense,
although it is widely known that the reaction pressure positively affects
the yield of FAMEs, it has been reported that the influence of pressure
yield becomes smaller between 15.5 and 25 MPa, and negligible above
25 MPa [47,50].
In regards to the solvent-to-oil molar ratio, there is a clear consensus
that the optimal solvent-to-oil molar ratio ranges from 40:1 to 45:1,
regardless of the type of oil or fat used [1,12].
Thermal decomposition of FAMEs is a very frequent phenomenon in
biodiesel production under supercritical conditions. This phenomenon
is observed only at reaction temperatures equal to or higher than 300 °C
and leads to a decrease in biodiesel yield. Besides, it is known that only
polyunsaturated FAMEs undergo thermal decomposition at 300 °C,
while monounsaturated FAMEs are relatively stable at this temperature
[51]. In this sense, the fatty acid composition of the fat or oil used to
produce biodiesel under supercritical condition is important to take
into account as it has been also reported that tri-unsaturated fatty acid
TGs react at a lower reaction rate than those of di-unsaturated fatty
acids, which in turn also react at a lower reaction rate than those of
monounsaturated ones [1,52]. Further, the main thermal decomposi-
tion reactions that can occur during the supercritical methanol trans-
esterification are isomerization (275–400 °C), hydrogenation
(> 325 °C), pyrolysis (> 350 °C) and polymerization (Diels–Alder re-
action) (300–425 °C) of the FAMEs generated, which were all stable
below 275 °C [48,53].
On the other hand, in order balance the severity of supercritical
conditions, several strategies such as the use of heterogeneous catalyst
or co-solvents have been proposed. The addition of a co-solvent can
increase the mutual solubility between TGs and organic solvent, al-
lowing biodiesel to be produced under milder conditions. Some of the
co-solvents that have been tested include non-polar compressed gases
such as propane [54], carbon dioxide [54,55], ethane, n-butane, n-
hexane [46,56], chloroform [56], n-heptane [54], tetrahydrofuran
[57], diethyl ether [56] and/or ionic liquids [58]. The use of catalysts
also improves biodiesel production under supercritical conditions [9]
because it increases the transesterification reaction rate and softens
supercritical requirements. Some of the catalysts that have been tested
include SO4–ZrO2 [59], weak acids [60], micro-NaOH [61], liquid or-
ganic amine [62], zeolite [63], Cs-doped heteropolyacid [64], nano-
MgO [65] or NaOH [66]. As can be observed, the use of homogeneous
catalysts (trace amounts) was also studied due to the fact that only a
few heterogeneous catalysts, such as zinc aluminate and zirconia sup-
ported metal oxide catalysts, are stable under these conditions [12].
Finally, the supercritical technology to produce biodiesel has been
successfully tested for a wide range of feedstocks, ranging from first- to
third-biodiesel generation. The first biodiesel generation feedstocks
include soybean oil [67,68], sunflower oil [69–71], groundnut oil [52],
Camelina sativa oil [46,71], Brassica napus oil [72,73], cottonseed oil
[71], linseed oil [74], coconut oil [54,75], rice bran oil [69] or palm oil
[59,75]. The second biodiesel generation feedstocks include Ricinus
communis oil [76,77], Jatropha curcas oil [61,78], Pongamia pinnata oil
[51,52], Simmondsia chinensis oil [79], Nicotiana tabacum oil [35],
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
Calophyllum inophyllum oil [5,80], Cerbera odollam oil [81], Raphanus
sativus oil [82], Ceiba pentandra oil [83], neem and mahua oil [42],
animal fats [84,85], waste frying oil or used vegetable oil [63,86] or
leather tanning waste [87]. The third-generation biodiesel feedstocks
include microalgae oil [88–90]. Most of the aforementioned feedstocks
contain a high amount of free fatty acids (> 0.5 wt%) and/or water
(> 0.06 wt%), which reduces the FAME yield and leads to the forma-
tion of soaps which complicates the separation of glycerol and FAMEs
when using conventional catalytic processes for biodiesel production.
However, a high amount of free fatty acids and water have positive
effects when biodiesel is produced under supercritical conditions. The
FFAs are directly converted into FAMEs, leading to an increase in the
transesterification yield, and moderate water contents can favor the
transesterification process through hydrolysis and esterification reac-
tions. Furthermore, the presence of water in the process can allow a
lower solvent-to-oil molar ratio to be used, which also would reduce the
cost of purification processes (ie. removal of solvent) [47].
3. Bibliometric analysis
3.1. Research methodology and data statistics
The Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-E), Web of Science©
(https://webofknowledge.com/) was used to obtain the scientific
output information for the present bibliographic review. The temporary
search period was from inception to February 10th, 2020. The Boolean
strings chosen were: theme: (“biodiesel” OR “bio-diesel” OR “bio
diesel”) AND theme: (“Supercritical transesterification” OR
“Supercritical condition*” OR “Supercritical methanol” OR
“Supercritical ethanol” OR “Supercritical alcoholysis”) in all databases.
The publication characteristics were analyzed using Microsoft Excel
(v. 2019). BibExcel [91] was used to perform the frequency analysis
and network diagrams for cooperation analysis were generated using
Pajek 1.0.0.1 [92], and VOSviewer [93] software's.
Journal Citation Reports (JCR) Science Edition 2018 was used to
obtain the journal impact factor (IF). The 2018 Journal Citation Reports
(JCR) provides statistical citation data, indexing 11,877 journals across
236 scientific disciplines and 81 countries [94].
Country and institution productions were evaluated by the affilia-
tion address [first (FP) or corresponding author (RP)] of at least one
author of the published article. The names of authors (i.e. Ríos, APD by
de los Ríos, AP; Akgun, NA by Akgun, N; or Hossain, AABMS by
Hossain, ABMS, checked with e-mail and affiliation), institutions (i.e.
the Indian Institutes of Technology from different locations, i.e.
Varanasi or Guwahati, by Indian Institute of Technology, National
Tsing Hua University by National Tsinghua University, Widya Mandala
Surabaya Cathol Univ by Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic Univ, or
Sila Science by all the institutions of Trabzon in Turkey), author key-
words (i.e. trans-esterification and (Trans)esterification by transester-
ification, FFA by Free Fatty Acid or plural by singular), single title
words (i.e. plural by singular or lowercase by capital letters) and WoS
keywords (i.e. also plural by singular and lowercase by capital letters or
Bio-diesel by Biodiesel) were conscientiously standardized.
The bibliometric parameters used to analyze the publications re-
lated to biodiesel production research under supercritical conditions
over the past 19 years were: (i) type and language of the documents, (ii)
publication characteristics (total publications, number of authors,
average number of authors per article, number of references cited,
number of references per article, number of pages per article, and
average number of pages per article), (iii) authors performance, (iv)
journal publication patterns (number of publications, JCR impact factor
-IF, JCR journal subject category, and journal position by JCR cate-
gories), (v) WoS categories; publication patterns for countries and in-
stitutions; collaboration and co-citation analysis, (vi) founding analysis,
(vii) Lotka's law, Price's index, h-index of authors, journals, countries
and institutions (defined as the h of Np authors, journals, countries and
4
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
institutions having at least h citations each and the other Np-h authors,
journals, countries and institutions having ≤h citations each) using the
Web of Science© records, and (viii) biodiesel production research
under supercritical condition trends obtained by author keywords,
single title words, and WoS keyword analysis.
3.1.1. Limitations
The present comprehensive bibliometric review has associated
limitations as other bibliometric studies. These limitations are a result
of by the database used, the Boolean strings chosen, the manual stan-
dardization of author's names, institutions and keywords, the selection
of only “articles” as type of publication to perform the analysis, and the
bibliometric parameters used to analyze the publications selected,
among others. For example, the choice of the database to perform a
bibliometric analysis can pose a bias risk. The search for publications on
biodiesel production under supercritical conditions was carried out
only in the WoS database, which excludes non-SCI journals; therefore,
the articles published in journals not indexed in the WoS database and
their citations may have been excluded. The Boolean strings chosen for
a specific research topic can also pose a risk of bias. In this sense,
predefined keywords are more limiting than freely chosen keywords as
they vary from person to person. Inconsistencies may exist between the
keywords selected by the authors of the article, the content of the ar-
ticle and the Boolean strings chosen to perform a bibliometric review.
3.2. Results and discussion
3.2.1. Publication patterns
3.2.1.1. Type of document and language of publications. A total of 793
documents related to biodiesel production under supercritical
conditions met the selection criteria established for the present
bibliometric review; however, 780 records from the Main Collection
of the WoS were selected for further analysis since the database offers
broader download options for bibliometric parameters. The remaining
records were: 5 from Korean Journal Database, 4 from Derwent
Innovations Index, 3 from Russian Science Citation Index and 1 from
Medline. In addition, no duplicate publications were found.
The number of documents found in the present bibliometric review
was lower than that reported in other bibliometric reviews [27,33,95].
This can be explained by the fact that the production of biodiesel under
supercritical conditions is a relatively new research field; as commented
above, the first article in the field was published in 2001 by Saka and
Kusdiana [16]. In addition, the selected research focus within this field
is more limited in comparison to other bibliometric reviews. Just as a
note, it is not surprising that biodiesel production under supercritical
conditions appeared for the first time in Japan, since this country was
first place for new patent applications on supercritical fluids during the
seven years between 1998 and 2005 [96]. In addition, the Price's index
value (48.8%) can corroborate the newness of this research field since
this index approaches 50% in disciplines in which current literature is
more abundant. On the contrary, when the historical literature grows,
the Price's index decreases below this value [97]. The Price's index is an
indicator of obsolescence defined as the percentage of references that
are less than 5 years old and it is calculated considering the percentage
of citations that are less than 5 years old and older than 5 years old,
respectively. This index also suggests that science production develops
at a faster pace than other human activities, duplicating in size every
10–15 years. However, the time of duplication is not the same in all
scientific fields as some disciplines grow faster than others [98].
The 780 documents related to biodiesel production under super-
critical conditions included 9 document types. Research articles (608;
77.9%) were the dominant type followed by review articles (71; 9.1%),
proceeding papers (36; 4.6%), article and proceeding papers (33;
4.2%), article and book chapters (20; 2.6%), meeting abstracts (9;
1.1%), review and book chapters (1; 0.1%), corrections (1; 0.1%), and
letters (1; 0.1%). In addition, there were about 8.5 research articles per
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
review and 16.9 research articles per proceeding papers. Since the re-
search articles were the predominant publication type on biodiesel
production under supercritical conditions, 608 articles published until
2019 were used for further analysis in the present bibliometric study.
The 608 articles were published in 8 different languages, of which
600 (98.7%) were in English, 2 (0.3%) in Portuguese, 1 (0.2%) in
Russian, 1 (0.2%) in Serbo-Croatian, 1 (0.2%) in Turkish, 1 (0.2%) in
Spanish, 1 (0.2%) in Chinese, and 1 (0.2%) in Polish. The fact that
English is the universal scientific language can be due, in part, to eco-
nomic factors and historical and political reasons which favored English
over other languages such as Russian, French or German [99].
3.2.1.2. Output characteristics of the publications and author
performance. No additional search to dissect publication patterns was
needed since there are no publications on biodiesel production under
supercritical conditions dating before 1999 [18]. As can be observed in
Fig. 1A, the total annual number of publications related to biodiesel
production under supercritical conditions increased from 1 in 1999 to
70 and 41 in 2017 and 2020, respectively. The number of articles
increased from 3 in 2001 to 56 and 31 in 2017 and 2019, respectively.
There was an evident and significant rise in both the number of
publications and the number of articles from 2005–2006 to
2008–2009. Since then, a stabilization in the number of publications
with a slightly increasing trend over time can be observed. In addition,
two different intervals, from 2001 to 2006 and from 2007 to 2019, can
be identified in terms of accumulative trends. In this way, Fig. 1B shows
a linear model and a two-order polynomial model for these two
Fig. 1. A) The number of publications and articles on biodiesel production under supercritical conditions from 1999 to 2019. B) The correlations between the number
of accumulated articles per year and the year of publication, since 2001.
5
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
intervals, respectively, describing the correlations between the
number of accumulated articles per year for the two intervals
considered. The number of articles showed a high correlation with
the year of publication for the models mentioned (R2 = 0.9497 for the
2001–2006 interval and R2 = 0.9992 for the 2007–2019 interval). The
fitted linear and two-order polynomial models are Y = 4.7714·X – 4.2,
and Y = 0.2707·X2 + 40.17·X – 242.37, respectively (the number of
years since 2001 is X and the number of articles accumulated per year is
Y).
The linear model displayed in Fig. 1B shows a low increase in ar-
ticles published in the first interval (2001–2006). However, using the
two-order polynomial model corresponding to the second interval
(2007–2019), an increase in the number of accumulative articles re-
lated to biodiesel production under supercritical conditions can be
predicted for 2024, with an estimated number of 878 articles, which
accounts for almost than one and half times the articles published in
2019 (608). The authors of the present bibliometric study have suc-
cessfully checked the effectiveness of the extrapolation method to es-
timate the number of future publications by verifying the predictions
made in previous bibliometric studies. For instance, Zhi and Ji [27]
stated in their bibliometric review on constructed wetland research, for
the period from 1991 to 2011, that the number of articles published in
2015 and 2017 would double and triple, respectively, in comparison to
those published in 2011 (3787). The search carried out in WoS revealed
that the articles published in 2015 and 2017 were 7113 and 8770, re-
spectively. Further, using the prediction model reported in a biblio-
metric study on industrial wastewater research from 1991 to 2014 [95],
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

it was forecast that 44,268 articles would be published in 2018 and the conditions. Therefore, according to Lotka's law, and considering that
search carried out in WOS produced 42,765 articles in the field. more than 35 countries, including the USA, several members of Eur-
Therefore, this analysis is a reasonably effective tool to predict the opean Union, China and Brazil, have recently implemented policies to
number of future publications in a research field. promote biofuel production and use [32], it can be expected that more
Table 1 shows the characteristics of the publications from 2001 to scientists will be involved in this research field.
2019. The annual number of authors increased considerably from 6 in Of the 608 articles found in the present bibliometric review, 428
2001 to 237 in 2018. The rise in the average number of authors and (70.4%) cited themselves (local citations). The article that received the
references cited (from 43 in 2001 to 2469 in 2018) also indicates an highest number of local citations (279) was Saka and Kusdiana [16],
increase in scientific production and collaboration within the target which is logical given that these authors are pioneers in biodiesel
fields of the present bibliometric review. Considering the most recent production under supercritical conditions, followed by Kusdiana and
data from 2019, a decrease in the number of publications can be ob- Saka [102], which was locally cited 231 times. Nine (1.5%), eighteen
served in comparison to previous years. The average number of pages (3.0%), sixty-two (10.2%) and one hundred and sixteen (19.0%) arti-
per article (8.1) ranged from 6.0 in 2001 to 11.0 in 2019. cles were cited more than 100, 50, 20 and 10 times, respectively. A co-
1533 different authors signed the 608 articles found in the present citation analysis was also performed. Co-citation analysis measures the
bibliometric review. Since it has been reported that there may be bias in number of documents that have cited any given pair of documents. This
this type of study due to the possibility that the same author appears analysis showed 442,912 unique pairs and Appendix Fig. A.2 shows co-
with different names in several articles [27,100], an exhaustive stan- citation networks for frequencies ≥35. The most common co-citation
dardization work was done for this analysis to minimize the bias risk. number was 1 (92.1%), followed by 2 (5.3%) and 3 (1.3%). The greater
Among the 1533 authors, 1136 (74.1%) appeared in one article, fol- co-citation number was Saka and Kusdiana [16] and Kusdiana and Saka
lowed by 217 (14.2%) in two, 76 (5.0%) in three, and 27 (1.8%) in four [102] (146), followed by Saka and Kusdiana [16] and Kusdiana and
articles. Saka [103] (110), and Kusdiana and Saka [103] and Kusdiana and Saka
Forty-five articles (7.4%) had a single author. Twelve (1; 0.2%) was [102] (99).
the highest number of authors in one article, followed by 11 (1; 0.2%),
10 (5; 0.8%) and 9 (9; 1.5%). The most common number of authors per 3.2.1.3. Journal publication patterns and WoS subject category. 139
article was three (130; 21.4%), followed by four (117; 19.2%), five (91; different journals published the 608 articles found in the present
15.0%) and two (87; 14.3%). Sixty-three (10.4%), thirty-nine (6.4%), bibliometric review. The 10 most productive journals together with
and twenty (3.3%) articles were authored by six, seven, and eight au- article number and percentage, h-index, IF (2018), journal category,
thors, respectively. and journal position by categories according to JCR are listed in
Table 2 shows the top 10 authors in the field according to the Table 3. 10 journals were responsible for 62.8% of the 608 articles.
number of publications, indicating their h-index together with the total The Fuel journal ranked first for number of published articles (69,
number of publications (TP), the number of times they appear as first 12.4%), followed by Bioresource Technology (49, 8.8%), and Journal of
authors in the publications (FP), and the number of times they appear Supercritical Fluids (48, 8.6%). Fuel had the highest h-index value (32),
as corresponding authors. Demirbas, A. contributed the highest number followed by Bioresource Technology (27) and Energy Conversion and
of articles (36; 5.9%) with an h-index of 20, followed by Saka, S. (21; Management (23). These results are in line with those published by
3.5%) with an h-index of 18, Lee, K.T. (16; 2.6%) and Deng, S.G. (14; Zhang, Gao [22]. As can be observed in Fig. 3A, the annual publication
2.3%) with an h-index of 12, respectively, Patil, P. (11; 1.8%), Oliveira, pattern for the top 6 most productive journals exhibited a sharp
J.V. (12; 2.0), and Quesada-Medina, J. (14; 2.3%) with an h-index of increase from 2001 to 2008, when the maximum was reached (27).
11, respectively, da Silva, C. (18; 3.0%) with an h-index of 10, and From 2009 to 2015 this growing trend showed slight fluctuations
Olivares-Carrillo, P. (11; 1.8%) and Tavlarides, L.L. (10; 1.6) with an h- around 21 publications.
index of 9, respectively. Seventy-nine (56.8%) journals published one article on biodiesel
The analysis of author collaboration showed a total of 4104 colla-
borations. Appendix Fig. A.1 shows collaboration networks for fre- Table 1
quencies ≥ 4. The most common collaboration number was 1 (3487; Characteristics by article year from 2001 to 2019.
85.0%), followed by 2 (423; 10.3%) and 3 (111; 2.7%). The greatest
PY TP AU AU/TP NR NR/TP PG PG/TP
number of author collaboration was 11 (0.02%): Patil, P.D. and Deng,
S.G. [both from New Mexico State University (USA)]; followed by 10 2001 3 6 2.0 43 14.3 18 6.0
(0.02%): Sawangkeaw, R. and Ngamprasertsith, S. [both from 2002 2 2 1.0 18 9.0 15 7.5
Chulalongkorn University (Thailand)]; and 9 (0.05%): Oliveira, J.V. 2003 3 14 4.7 83 27.7 23 7.7
2004 5 17 3.4 140 28.0 35 7.0
and da Silva, C., [from Regional Integrada Alto Uruguai & Missoes 2005 6 11 1.8 170 28.3 43 7.2
University (Brazil) and University Estadual of Maringa (Brazil), re- 2006 8 28 3.5 168 21.0 58 7.3
spectively], and Quesada-Medina, J. and Olivares-Carrillo, P. [both 2007 28 101 3.6 709 25.3 231 8.3
from University of Murcia (Spain)]. As can be observed, except for 2008 40 132 3.3 930 23.3 293 7.3
2009 46 166 3.6 1360 29.6 319 6.9
Demirbas, A., Sawangkeaw, R., Ngamprasertsith, S., and Saka, S., those
2010 41 166 4.0 1516 37.0 317 7.7
6 authors were also among the most productive and had the highest h- 2011 53 228 4.3 1713 32.3 426 8.0
index. 2012 46 174 3.8 1412 30.7 331 7.2
The Lotka's Law is a bibliometric law on the distribution of authors 2013 41 176 4.3 1316 32.1 317 7.7
according to their productivity and it is described as Xn·Y = C [101]. 2014 50 226 4.5 2163 43.3 460 9.2
2015 44 202 4.6 1911 43.4 443 10.1
The number of articles is represented by X, the number of authors 2016 55 237 4.3 2002 36.4 452 8.2
publishing X articles is Y, with n commonly ranging between 1.2 and 2017 56 234 4.2 2336 41.7 540 9.6
3.5, and C depending on the field of knowledge [27]. Fig. 2A shows 2018 50 237 4.7 2469 49.4 494 9.9
Lotka's Law (X2.51·Y = 1169.6) to elucidate the correlation of the 2019 31 140 4.5 1470 47.4 342 11.0
Average 3.7 31.6 8.1
number of authors with the number of articles published. The range
Total 608 2497 21,929 5157
from 1 to 6 articles (only 2.2% of the 1533 authors published more than
six articles) showed a high correlation (R2 = 0.9712). Fig. 2A also TP: total publications; AU: authors number; AU/TP: average of authors per
shows that an adequate number from 1 to 3 authors greatly contributed article; NR: cited reference count; NR/TP: average of reference per article; PG:
(93.2%) to biodiesel production research under supercritical page count; PG/TP: average of pages per article.

6
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

Table 2
10 most productive authors ordered by h-index from 2001 to 2019.
Author Affiliation h-index (R) TP (R) RP (R) FP (R)

Demirbas, A. Sila Science, Turkey 20 (1) 36 (1) 36 (1) 34 (1)

King Abdulaziz University, Saudi Arabia
Saka, S. Kyoto University, Japan 18 (2) 21 (2) 20 (2) 4 (9)
Lee, K.T. Chungnam National University, South Korea 12 (3) 16 (4) 11 (5) N/A
Deng, S.G. American Refining Group Inc, USA 12 (3) 14 (5) 13 (3) N/A
Quesada-Medina, J. University of Murcia, Spain 11 (5) 14 (5) 10 (7) 1 (97)
Oliveira, J.V. Federal University of Santa Catarina, Brazil 11 (5) 12 (7) 3 (35) N/A
Patil, P. New Mexico State University, USA 11 (5) 11 (8) N/A 7 (3)
da Silva, C. Maringa State University, Brazil 10 (8) 18 (3) 12 (4) 3 (20)
Olivares-Carrillo, P. University of Murcia, Spain 9 (9) 11 (8) 1 (91) 3 (20)
Tavlarides, L.L. Syracuse University, USA 9 (9) 10 (14) 9 (9) N/A

TP: total publications; FP: publication with first author; RP: publication with corresponding author; R: Rank.

production under supercritical conditions, and 19 (13.7%) and 13
(9.4%) journals published two and three articles, respectively. The
Lotka's Law of Fig. 2B shows a good correlation of journals with a
number of articles in the range from one to six articles (only 10.1% of
the 139 journals published more than six articles) with a good de-
termination coefficient (R2 = 0.954). Therefore, a broader variety of
subject areas for biodiesel production under supercritical conditions is
expected in future publications.
The 608 articles were published in 35 different subject categories of
the WoS. This fact implies that biodiesel production under supercritical
condition research is multidisciplinary in nature. Fig. 4 shows the top
five WoS categories from 2001 to 2019, with “Engineering, Chemical”
contributing the most with 346 articles, followed by Energy & Fuels
(340), “Chemistry, Physical” (78), Biotechnology & Applied
Microbiology (74), and Thermodynamics (71). Zhang, Gao [22] re-
ported a greater number of subject categories (81) in their bibliometric
review on biodiesel research for the period 1991–2015, since their field
of study was broader and, as discussed before, biodiesel production
under supercritical conditions is a relatively new research field. How-
ever, they also reported a strong increase of both Engineering and En-
ergy & Fuels subject categories from 2005 onward, in agreement with
the results found in the present bibliometric review, proving that those
are the most productive categories in the study of biodiesel and that it
will be hard for other categories to surpass them in the near future.
3.2.1.4. Country and institution publication performance. Fig. 5 shows the
608 articles representing 60 countries and, as can be observed, Africa
was the continent with the fewest countries involved in the publication

Fig. 2. A) Lotka's Law to elucidate the correlation of the number of authors with the articles published; B) Lotka's Law to elucidate the correlation between the
journals number and the articles published; C) Lotka's Law to elucidate the correlation of the institutions number with the articles published; D) Lotka's Law to
characterize the total author's keywords percentage and its frequency of utilization.

7
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

Table 3
Top 10 productive journals, total number of articles (percentage), h-index, IF (2018), journal categories, and journal position by categories according to JCR from
2001 to 2019.
Journal name TP (%) h-index (R) IF (2018) Subject category Position

Fuel 69 (12.4) 32 (1) 5.128 Energy & Fuels 20/103

Engineering, Chemical 13/138
Bioresource Technology 49 (8.8) 27 (2) 6.669 Agricultural Engineering 1/13
Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology 13/162
Energy & Fuels 7/81
Journal of Supercritical Fluids 48 (8.6) 19 (4) 3.481 Chemical, Physical 56/148
Engineering, Chemical 29/138
Energy Conversion and Management 45 (8.1) 23 (3) 7.181 Thermodynamics 2/60
Energy & Fuels 12/103
Mechanics 3/134
Energy Sources Part A-Recovery Utilization and Environmental Effects 37 (6.6) 15 (7) 0.894 Energy & Fuels 93/103
Engineering, Chemical 108/138
Energy & Fuels 34 (6.1) 19 (4) 3.021 Energy & Fuels 52/103
Engineering, Chemical 36/137
Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 24 (4.3) 12 (8) 3.375 Engineering, Chemical 33/138
Fuel Processing Technology 21 (3.8) 16 (6) 4.507 Chemistry, applied 11/71
Energy & Fuels 27/103
Engineering, Chemical 19/138
Applied Energy 11 (2.0) 11 (9) 8.426 Energy & Fuels 8/103
Engineering, Chemical 5/138
Chemical Engineering journal 11 (2.0) 10 (10) 8.355 Engineering, Environmental 2/52
Engineering, Chemical 6/138

TP (%): total publications and percentage of total publications; IF: Impact factor.

of articles on biodiesel production under supercritical conditions over
the last 19 years. It is worth mentioning that, although one article
lacked affiliation [104], it was manually added and the names of the
institutions were exhaustively standardized in order to avoid bias, as
discussed before.
Table 4 shows the 20 most productive countries in biodiesel
production research under supercritical conditions. China ranked first
with 96 (15.8%) articles, followed by Japan (58; 9.5%), the USA (54;
8.8%), and Brazil (53; 8.7%). Among the top 20 most productive
countries, Japan had the highest h-index value (29), followed by China
(27), Turkey (25) and the USA (25). Zhang, Gao [22], in their biblio-
metric review on biodiesel research until 2015, reported that the USA

Fig. 3. A) Annual publication patter of the six most productive journals; B) Annual publication patter of the six most productive countries.

8
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
Fig. 4. Top five productive Web of Science categories from 2001 to 2019.
occupied the first place in the ranking for the period of 1991–2015,
closely followed by China, with a dominant role of China in biodiesel
research. Later, Ma, Gao [33], in their bibliometric review on micro-
alga-derived biodiesel until 2016, also reported that the USA ranked
first in terms of published articles, followed by China; however, China
surpassed the USA in 2015 and held this position in 2016 mainly due to
the China's effective guidance policies. Thus, the position of China as a
leading country in terms of articles published on biodiesel observed by
these authors is also confirmed in the present bibliometric review. In
addition, Fig. 3B shows that, only considering the TP of the top 6 most
productive countries for the last 19 years, China held a predominant
position since 2010 until 2018, being surpassed by Brazil in 2019. The
cases of Japan and Turkey are particularly interesting because these
countries offered the largest number of articles published until 2009,
but they were also outstripped by China from 2010 onwards. On the
other hand, the largest producers of biodiesel in 2016 were the Eur-
opean Union (26.0%) followed by the USA (17.9%), Brazil (12.3%),
Argentina and Indonesia (9.7%) and Thailand (4.5%) [105]. As can be
observed, the largest producers of biodiesel are listed among the 20
most productive countries included in Table 4. As a special case, China
is not among the largest producers of biodiesel despite being a leading
Fig. 5. Choropleth global map of total number of articles on biodiesel production under supercritical conditions from 2001 to 2019.
9
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
country in biodiesel research. This can be explained by the fact that the
Chinese government started to promulgate policies on the use of bio-
fuels as an important energy strategy in 2015 [106]. These policies
translate more rapidly into scientific production than into industrial
production mainly due to the temporary limitations on the im-
plementation of the developed technologies, among other factors. Fi-
nally, Table 4 also includes the research production in terms of pub-
lications per country normalized to inhabitant population (million)
(ratio R). Taking into account this ratio, China ranked 17th instead of
first place.
The majority of the articles (499; 82.1%) were single-country pub-
lications and 109 (17.9%) were international joint publications. The
correlation of the top 20 most productive countries in single-country
articles with the accumulative percentage of single-country articles is
shown in Appendix Fig. A.3, offering a good correlation (R2 = 0.9847)
in the range from 1 to 20 countries. In addition, these 20 countries
published almost all the articles (92.8%) related to biodiesel production
research under supercritical conditions.
The country collaboration analysis found a total of 86 collaborations
and Fig. 6 shows collaboration networks for frequencies ≥2. As can be
observed, there are seven regional groups varying in size of countries
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

Table 4
20 most productive article publishing countries from 2001 to 2019.
Country TP TP R (%) h-index (R) SP R (%) CP R (%) FP R (%) RP R (%) CP CP (%) Ratio (R)

China 96 1 (15.7) 27 (2) 1 (15.8) 2 (15.5) 1 (14.4) 1 (14.8) 17 17.7 0.06 (17)
Japan 58 2 (9.5) 29 (1) 4 (9.0) 4 (11.9) 2 (9.0) 2 (8.0) 13 22.4 0.45 (8)
USA 54 3 (8.8) 25 (3) 5 (7.2) 1 (16.5) 5 (5.9) 4 (7.7) 18 33.3 0.16 (15)
Brazil 53 4 (8.7) 20 (5) 3 (9.2) 9 (6.4) 3 (8.7) 3 (7.8) 7 13.2 0.25 (11)
Turkey 49 5 (8.0) 25 (3) 2 (9.4) 29 (1.8) 4 (7.7) 4 (7.7) 2 4.1 0.61 (7)
South Korea 38 6 (6.2) 13 (8) 7 (5.8) 8 (8.2) 7 (4.9) 6 (6.0) 9 23.7 0.73 (5)
India 35 7 (5.7) 11 (12) 6 (6.6) 29 (1.8) 6 (5.5) 7 (5.5) 2 5.7 0.02 (20)
Malaysia 35 7 (5.7) 18 (6) 8 (5.0) 7 (9.1) 8 (4.6) 8 (5.4) 10 28.6 1.1 (2)
Spain 32 9 (5.2) 16 (7) 10 (3.2) 3 (14.6) 10 (3.1) 9 (4.6) 16 50.0 0.68 (6)
Thailand 24 10 (3.9) 13 (8) 9 (4.2) 22 (2.7) 9 (3.6) 10 (3.7) 3 12.5 0.34 (9)
Taiwan 22 11 (3.6) 12 (10) 15 (1.8) 4 (11.9) 15 (2.1) 11 (3.1) 13 59.1 0.92 (4)
Serbia 20 12 (3.2) 12 (10) 11 (3.0) 15 (4.5) 12 (2.4) 11 (3.1) 5 25.0 2.81 (1)
Iran 18 13 (2.9) 9 (14) 14 (2.4) 13 (5.5) 11 (2.7) 13 (2.6) 6 33.3 0.22 (13)
Russia 16 14 (2.6) 6 (18) 11 (3.0) 40 (0.9) 12 (2.4) 14 (2.3) 1 6.3 0.11 (16)
Indonesia 14 15 (2.3) 8 (15) 23 (0.4) 6 (11.0) 16 (1.9) 18 (1.1) 12 85.7 0.05 (19)
Argentina 14 15 (2.3) 11 (12) 13 (2.6) 40 (0.9) 14 (2.3) 14 (2.3) 1 7.1 0.31 (10)
Portugal 11 17 (1.8) 8 (15) 18 (0.8) 9 (6.4) 17 (1.6) 19 (0.9) 7 63.6 1.06 (3)
UK 11 17 (1.8) 8 (15) 18 (0.8) 9 (6.4) 28 (0.6) 16 (1.4) 7 63.6 0.16 (14)
Mexico 8 19 (1.3) 5 (20) 16 (1.2) 29 (1.8) 18 (1.3) 17 (1.3) 2 25.0 0.06 (18)
Saudi Arabia 8 19 (1.3) 4 (23) 18 (0.8) 18 (3.6) 22 (0.8) 19 (0.9) 4 50.0 0.24 (12)

TP: total publications; SP: single country publication; CP: internationally collaborative publication; FP: publication with first author; RP: publication with corre-
sponding author; R (%): Rank and share in publication; CP%: the percentage of internationally collaborative publications in total publications for each country; R:
ratio of TP per inhabitant population (million).

and articles. The most collaborative country was China (5), followed by
both the USA (4) and Spain (4). The most common collaboration
number was 1 (61; 70.9%), followed by 2 (14; 16.3%) and 3 (4; 4.7%).
Indonesian-Taiwanese collaborations ranked first (9; 0.1%) and In-
donesia also showed the maximum collaborative rate (87.5%), followed
by both Portugal (63.6%) and United Kingdom (63.6%) (Table 4).
Therefore, as can be observed, the research on biodiesel production
under supercritical conditions was centralized in Asia, followed by
America.
An analysis of the number of publications reporting research funds
was also carried out taking into account the country of the first author
(FP), in order to determine the increasing interest in biodiesel pro-
duction under supercritical conditions. Among the 608 articles, 221
(36.3%) did not report research funds. The first article declaring re-
search funds [Sila Science (Turkey)] was published in 2008 [107]. This
date coincides with the second interval of Fig. 1.B, highlighting the
increasing interest in biodiesel production under supercritical condi-
tions from 2007. Mexico (8; 100%) and Malaysia (28; 100%) reported
research funds in all its published articles, followed by Spain (19;
94.7%), Portugal (10; 90%), South Korea (30; 86.7%), Serbia (15;

Fig. 6. Country collaboration network for frequencies ≥2. The circle size represents the number of articles, two different colors represent the presence of a significant
connection between two groups of countries.

10
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

86.7%), Taiwan (13; 84.6%), Indonesia (12; 83.3%); Australia (6;
83.3%), USA (36; 77.8%), Brazil (53; 77.4%) and China (88; 77.3%).
On the contrary, Saudi Arabia (5), Algeria (1), Austria (2), Bangladesh
(2), Belgium (1), Finland (1), Greece (2), Israel (2), Nigeria (1), Poland
(1), South Africa (1) and Switzerland (1) did not publish research funds
in any of its articles.
Table 5 shows the 20 most productive institutions performing re-
search on biodiesel production under supercritical conditions. The 608
articles represented 490 institutions from 60 countries. Among the 608
articles, 347 (57.1%) were independent institution publications, and
261 (42.9%) were inter-institutional collaborative publications. Among
the 490 institutions, 337 (55.4%) had only one article related to bio-
diesel production research under supercritical conditions, 65 (10.7%)
two articles, and 26 (4.3%) three articles.
Among the top 20 most productive institutions, three institutions
were located in China proving the leading and dominant role of this
country in the field. This finding corroborates the results reported by
Zhang, Gao [22]. Brazil, the USA, Japan and Serbia had two institutions
in the top 20 most productive institutions, and the countries India,
Indonesia, Malaysia, Russia, South Korea, Spain, Thailand, Taiwan, and
Turkey ranked with one institution in the top 20 most productive in-
stitutions. The Sila Science Institution (27; 4.4%), Kyoto University (22;
3.6%), Chulalongkorn University (18; 2.9%), Sains Malaysia University
(16; 2.6%), University of Murcia (14; 2.3%), and New Mexico State
University (13; 2.1%), were the top six research institutions. The Sila
Science together with Kyoto University had the highest h-index value
(18), followed by both Sains Malaysia University and New Mexico State
University (12).
The institution collaboration analysis found a total of 458 colla-
borations and Appendix Fig. A.4 shows collaboration networks for
frequencies ≥3. As can be observed, there are twelve groups varying in
size of institutions and articles. The most collaborative institutions are
the National Taiwan University of Science and Technology (3) followed
by Regional Integrada Alto Uruguai & Missoes University together with
Maringa State University (2). The most common institutions colla-
boration number was 1 (392; 85.6%), followed by 2 (48; 10.5%) and 3
(11; 2.4%). The two institutions that published the largest number of
articles in collaboration were National Taiwan University Science and
Technology (Taiwan) and Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic University
(Indonesia) (7; 0.2%).
Three institutions [Regional Integrada Alto Uruguai & Missoes
University (Brazil), National Taiwan University of Science and
Technology (Taiwan), and Widya Mandala Surabaya Catholic
University (Indonesia)] published all their articles in collaboration with
other institutions while Sila Science published only two inter-institu-
tional articles and all the articles of both Indian Institute of Science and
Hiroshima University were single institution articles. Finally, the in-
stitution collaboration was higher than the country collaboration, as
reported elsewhere [27,32].
Lotka's law of Fig. 2C shows a good correlation of institutions with a
number of articles published in the range from one to eight articles
(only 2.8% of the 490 institutions published more than eight articles)
with a good determination coefficient (R2 = 0.9208). This analysis
showed that 398 (81.2%) institutions published less than three articles
related to biodiesel production under supercritical conditions over the
last 19 years. In this sense, it can be forecast that the number of in-
stitutions implicated in the production of biodiesel under supercritical
conditions will increase as the number of articles also rises; however,
significant changes in the positions of the top 20 most productive in-
stitutions cannot be expected in the coming years.
3.3. Research trends
The single title words and author keywords provide detailed in-
formation about the subject of the articles while the WoS keywords
provide more detailed and varied information on the articles. Garfield
[108] reported that the frequencies of author keywords and single title
words can be statistically analyzed to identify the leading fields of re-
search and to suggest future science directions. In addition, the bib-
liometric study of single title words, WoS keywords and author key-
words can minimize the incomplete meaning of single words in the title,
the indirect relationship between WoS keywords and research em-
phases, and the small sample size for author keywords, respectively
[109]. In this sense, the 608 articles found in the present bibliometric
review were analyzed in terms of author's keywords, single title words
and WoS keywords.
3.3.1. Author keyword analysis
Fig. 2D shows Lotka's law to elucidate the correlation of the per-
centage of total author keywords with the frequency that an author
keyword was used. The range from 1 to 6 times showed a good de-
termination coefficient (R2 = 0.9744). A total of 964 unique author

Table 5
20 most productive article publishing institutions from 2001 to 2019.
Institution TP TP R (%) h-index (R) SP R (%) CP R (%) FP R (%) RP R (%) CP CP (%)

Sila Science, Turkey 27 1 (4.4) 18 (1) 1 (7.2) 53 (0.7) 1 (4.2) 1 (4.1) 2 7.4
Kyoto University, Japan 22 2 (3.6) 18 (1) 2 (5.7) 53 (0.7) 2 (3.6) 2 (3.2) 2 9.1
Chulalongkorn University, Thailand 18 3 (2.9) 11 (5) 3 (3.7) 15 (1.9) 3 (2.7) 3 (2.6) 5 27.8
Sains Malaysia University, Malaysia 16 4 (2.6) 12 (3) 4 (3.1) 15 (1.9) 4 (2.1) 5 (1.9) 5 31.3
University of Murcia, Spain 14 5 (2.3) 11 (5) 12 (1.4) 3 (3.4) 13 (0.9) 6 (1.6) 9 64.3
New Mexico State University, USA 13 6 (2.1) 12 (3) 8 (2.0) 8 (2.2) 7 (1.3) 4 (2.1) 6 46.2
Estadual Maringa University, Brazil 12 7 (1.9) 5 (21) 52 (0.2) 2 (4.2) 19 (0.8) 9 (1.4) 11 91.7
National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taiwan 12 7 (1.9) 7 (9) N/A 1 (4.5) 13 (0.9) 9 (1.4) 12 100.0
University of Belgrade, Serbia 11 9 (1.8) 9 (7) 12 (1.4) 8 (2.2) 9 (1.1) 9 (1.4) 6 54.5
Syracuse University, USA 10 10 (1.6) 9 (7) 6 (2.3) 53 (0.7) 5 (1.6) 6 (1.6) 2 20.0
Indian Institute of Science, India 10 10 (1.6) 4 (35) 5 (2.8) N/A 5 (1.6) 6 (1.6) 0 0.0
Widya Mandala Catholic University, Indonesia 9 12 (1.4) 7 (9) N/A 3 (3.4) N/A 32 (0.6) 9 100.0
Russian Academy of Science, Russia 9 12 (1.4) 5 (21) 9 (1.7) 34 (1.1) 13 (0.9) 20 (0.9) 3 33.3
Xi’an Jiaotong University, China 8 14 (1.3) 4 (35) 52 (0.2) 5 (2.6) 94 (0.1) 15 (1.1) 7 87.5
Dalian University of Technology, China 8 14 (1.3) 7 (9) 12 (1.4) 34 (1.1) 19 (0.8) 12 (1.3) 3 37.5
University of Novi Sad, Serbia 8 14 (1.3) 5 (21) 52 (0.2) 5 (2.6) 94 (0.1) 12 (1.3) 7 87.5
Zhejiang University, China 8 14 (1.3) 7 (9) 9 (1.7) 53 (0.7) 13 (0.9) 20 (0.9) 2 25.0
Hiroshima University, Japan 8 14 (1.3) 7 (9) 6 (2.3) N/A 7 (1.3) 12 (1.3) 0 0.0
Regional Integrada Alto Uruguai & Missoes University, Brazil 7 19 (1.1) 6 (14) N/A 5 (2.6) 37 (0.4) 59 (0.3) 7 100.0
Kongju National University, South Korea 7 19 (1.1) 4 (35) 52 (0.2) 8 (2.2) 94 (0.1) 20 (0.9) 6 85.7

TP: total publications; SP: single institute publication; CP: inter-institutionally collaborative publication; FP: publication with first author; RP: publication with
corresponding author; R (%): Rank and share in publication; CP%: the percentage of inter-institutionally collaborative publications in total publications for each
institute.

11
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

keywords were found and 155 (16.1%) were used three or more times.
Zhi and Ji [27] explained that this fact can be attributed to the non-
standardization in the use of synonymous terms, spelling variations and
abbreviations.
Table 6 shows the top 20 author keywords from 2001 to 2019, using
5-year intervals to ensure a rational period of time and to try to reduce
annual fluctuations. Excluding the topic search keywords (i.e. biodiesel
or supercritical methanol and related words such as biofuel, production
or fuel), “transesterification” (152; 15.7%), “esterification” (32; 3.3%),
“vegetable oil” (30; 3.1%), “kinetics” (22; 2.2%), “methyl esters” (20;
2.0%), and both “free fatty acids” and “heterogeneous catalyst” (18;
1.8%) were the five most frequently used author's keywords. “Trans-
esterification” maintained a constant position (2–3) in the four 5-year
intervals and “esterification” climbed from position 9 (2.6%) in the first
interval (2001–2005) to position 5 (2.9%) in the second interval
(2006–2010), descended to position 8 (1.9%) in the third interval
(2011–2015) but climbed again to position 4 (3.0%) in the fourth in-
terval (2016–2019). However, “vegetable oil” descended from position
5 (6.7%) and 4 (4.2%) in the first and the second intervals, respectively,
to position 11 (1.7%) and 15 (1.4%) in the third and the fourth inter-
vals, respectively. By contrast, “microalga” did not appear in the first
interval but climbed from position 66 (0.3%) in the second interval to
position 11 (1.7%) and 12 (1.6%) in the third and the fourth intervals,
respectively. This fact can demonstrate the transition from first-gen-
eration biodiesel to third-generation biodiesel [6,7]. In this sense, mi-
croalgae utilization has been identified as a promising technology for
biodiesel production, wastewater treatment, the development of high
value-added products and CO2 capture; although the oil content in
microalgae is similar to that found in other feedstocks, the global an-
nual output is larger and the growth rates are faster [110–112]. The
cultivation of microalgae presents some drawbacks that would need to
be overcome in order to increase its sustainability. In this sense, it is
essential to improve the Net Energy Ratio of the production process of
microalgae, which would lead to the reduction of greenhouse gases
emissions. The cultivation of microalgae in photobioreactors requires
high energy consumption, which makes it unsustainable. Nevertheless,
the use of open ponds or raceways combined with wastewater treat-
ment could help to perform the process in a more sustainable way
[113,114].
The author keyword “kinetics” climbed from positions 10 (1.6%)
and 19 (1.3%) in the second and the third intervals, respectively, to
position 6 (2.3%) in the fourth interval. The author keyword
“heterogeneous catalyst” maintained the position 19 in the third and
fourth intervals, showing the general interest in the study of the
transesterification reaction rates (biodiesel production under super-
critical conditions is faster than classical biodiesel production) and the
attempt to soften the supercritical reaction conditions to reduce energy
requirements thus improving environmental advantages.
3.3.2. Single title words analysis
1153 unique words were found in the analysis of single title words,
in which terms such as prepositions and articles were discarded. Table 7
shows the 20 most used single words in titles from 2001 to 2019 using
5-year intervals. Excluding the topic search keywords, as previously
mentioned, “oil” (264; 22.8%), “transesterification” (168; 14.5%),
“process” (84; 7.2%), “acid” (76; 6.5%), and “condition” (66; 5.7%)
were the five most frequently used single title words. “Oil” remained
around a constant position in the four intervals studied due to the fact
that is the feedstock used to produce biodiesel under supercritical
conditions. The decrease of “soybean” from position 10 (4.9%) in the
first interval to position 31 (1.4%) in the fourth interval also revealed
the obsolescence of first-generation biodiesel. “Transesterification” re-
mained in a virtually constant position (6) in the four intervals studied
and “catalyst” climbed from position 22 (1.6%) in the first interval to
position 10 (4.0%) in the fourth interval studied, both being consistent
with the analysis of author keywords, since catalysts in supercritical
conditions can be used to smooth reaction conditions. “Process” was not
present in the first interval but climbing to position 8 (4.1%) in the
fourth interval, and “condition” climbed from position 22 (1.6%) in the
first interval to position 8 (4.1%) in the fourth interval. This fact can
suggest that optimization reaction conditions have become primary
research focuses.
3.3.3. WoS keywords analysis
929 unique words were found in the WoS keyword analysis and the
20 most utilized WoS keywords, from 2001 to 2019 using 5-year in-
tervals, are shown in Table 8. Excluding the topic search keywords,
“transesterification” (252; 27.1%), “rapeseed” (241; 25.9%), “vegetable
oil” (220; 23.6%), “soybean oil” (203; 21.8%), and “Fuel” (200; 21.5%)
were the five most frequently used WoS keywords. As WoS keywords
are generated by an ISI algorithm, from words or expressions in the
article's reference titles [108], it is logical that “rapeseed” appears in
the second position of most-used WoS keywords since the most cited
article was “Biodiesel fuel from rapeseed oil as prepared in supercritical

Table 6
20 most used author's keywords from 2001 to 2019.
Author keywords TP 2001–2019 R (%) 2001–2005 R (%) 2006–2010 R (%) 2011–2015 R (%) 2016–2019 R (%)

Biodiesel 353 1 (36.6) 1 (21.0) 1 (33.4) 1 (31.6) 1 (23.2)

Transesterification 152 2 (15.7) 3 (18.4) 2 (14.9) 2 (13.9) 2 (8.4)
Supercritical Methanol 102 3 (10.5) 1 (21.0) 3 (8.4) 3 (8.4) 3 (7.0)
Esterification 32 4 (3.3) 9 (2.6) 5 (2.9) 8 (1.9) 4 (3.0)
Supercritical 30 5 (3.1) 9 (2.6) 10 (1.6) 4 (3.0) 6 (2.3)
Vegetable Oil 30 5 (3.1) 5 (7.8) 4 (4.2) 11 (1.7) 15 (1.4)
Methanol 24 7 (2.4) 9 (2.6) 7 (2.5) 5 (2.4) 21 (0.9)
Kinetic 22 8 (2.2) 9 (2.6) 10 (1.6) 19 (1.3) 6 (2.3)
Ethanol 22 8 (2.2) N/A 32 (0.6) 8 (1.9) 5 (2.5)
Supercritical Ethanol 21 10 (2.1) 9 (2.6) 16 (1.2) 19 (1.3) 6 (2.3)
Supercritical Fluid 21 10 (2.1) 9 (2.6) 66 (0.3) 6 (2.2) 9 (2.1)
Methyl Esters 20 12 (2.0) 3 (18.4) 10 (1.6) 32 (0.8) 21 (0.9)
Free Fatty Acids 18 13 (1.8) 9 (2.6) 21 (0.9) 19 (1.3) 10 (1.8)
Heterogeneous Catalyst 18 13 (1.8) 9 (2.6) 9 (1.9) 19 (1.3) 19 (1.1)
Response Surface Methodolog 17 15 (1.7) N/A 32 (0.6) 8 (1.9) 15 (1.4)
Supercritical Transesterification 17 15 (1.7) N/A 16 (1.2) 24 (1.1) 10 (1.8)
Microalga 16 17 (1.6) N/A 66 (0.3) 11 (1.7) 12 (1.6)
Fatty Acid Methyl Esters 16 17 (1.6) N/A 10 (1.6) 14 (1.5) 21 (0.9)
Biofuel 15 19 (1.5) N/A 32 (0.6) 14 (1.5) 15 (1.4)
Optimization 15 19 (1.5) N/A 66 (0.3) 6 (2.2) 21 (0.9)

TP: total publications; R (%): rank and share of the author keyword; N/A: not available due to the reason that the author keyword did not appear in the study period.

12
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al. Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753

Table 7
20 most used title words from 2001 to 2019.
Single title words TP 2001–2019 R (%) 2001–2005 R (%) 2006–2010 R (%) 2011–2015 R (%) 2016–2019 R (%)

Biodiesel 376 1 (32.6) 3 (18.0) 1 (25.4) 1 (24.1) 1 (16.8)

Supercritical 298 2 (25.8) 2 (19.6) 3 (16.0) 2 (20.1) 2 (14.9)
Production 278 3 (24.1) 6 (6.5) 4 (14.9) 3 (19.4) 3 (14.4)
Oil 264 4 (22.8) 1 (21.3) 2 (16.2) 4 (15.5) 4 (13.4)
Methanol 194 5 (16.8) 4 (14.7) 5 (11.1) 5 (12.8) 5 (9.1)
Transesterification 168 6 (14.5) 6 (6.5) 6 (9.2) 6 (12.2) 6 (7.8)
Process 84 7 (7.2) N/A 8 (4.3) 7 (6.3) 8 (4.1)
Acid 76 8 (6.5) 11 (3.2) 11 (3.2) 10 (4.5) 7 (5.1)
Condition 66 9 (5.7) 22 (1.6) 23 (1.7) 9 (5.1) 8 (4.1)
Catalyst 65 10 (5.6) 22 (1.6) 14 (2.8) 11 (4.3) 10 (4.0)
Ethanol 65 10 (5.6) N/A 15 (2.6) 8 (5.5) 13 (3.2)
Fatty 57 12 (4.9) 11 (3.2) 17 (2.4) 12 (3.8) 11 (3.3)
Continuous 54 13 (4.6) N/A 13 (3.0) 15 (3.6) 17 (2.8)
Fuel 51 14 (4.4) 5 (9.8) 7 (5.4) 34 (1.8) 31 (1.4)
Synthesis 51 14 (4.4) 22 (1.6) 9 (4.1) 17 (3.3) 26 (1.7)
Under 50 16 (4.3) 22 (1.6) 34 (1.3) 12 (3.8) 13 (3.2)
Soybean 49 17 (4.2) 10 (4.9) 10 (3.9) 21 (3.1) 31 (1.4)
Kinetic 46 18 (3.9) 11 (3.2) 23 (1.7) 12 (3.8) 23 (2.0)
Vegetable 44 19 (3.8) 6 (6.5) 11 (3.2) 28 (2.5) 27 (1.6)
Non-Catalytic 44 19 (3.8) N/A 18 (1.9) 26 (2.6) 15 (3.0)

TP: total publications; R (%): rank and share of the word in the title; N/A: not available due to the reason that the word did not appear in the title for the study period.

methanol” [16] followed by “Kinetics of transesterification in rapeseed
oil to biodiesel fuel as treated in supercritical methanol” [102], both
containing “rapeseed” in the title. This fact shows a certain degree of
temporal delay between the analysis of the WoS keywords and the
analysis of the author's keywords or the analysis of single title words.
For this reason, it can be also explained that “soybean oil” and “vege-
table oil” remained in a constant position in the four intervals studied
and that it would not descend in the fourth interval as it happened for
the author keywords and in the analysis of single title words. In addi-
tion, this fact can also provide an additional explanation for the results
published by Ho [115] in “Comments on “Past, current and future of
biomass energy research: A bibliometric analysis” by Mao et al. (2015)”
regarding the appearance of unrelated publications on the field pro-
vided by WoS keywords.
“Waste cooking oil” (67; 7.2%), a second-generation biodiesel
feedstock, maintained a constant position (around 11) in the four in-
tervals studied, highlighting the transition from first-generation bio-
diesel to second-generation biodiesel, results that are in line with those
reported by Zhang, Gao [22]. “Kinetics” was also consistent with the
analysis of author keywords and the “optimization” of reaction condi-
tions, discussed in the single title word analysis, because “optimization”
did not appear in the first interval but climbed to position 9 (5.6%) in
the third interval. The optimization of supercritical conditions can in-
clude the use of heterogeneous catalysts or co-solvents in order to
smooth out the supercritical reaction conditions. The use of energy
recovery devices could also reduce the energy requirements and the
study of the process through response surface methodology as well as
the study of the kinetics of the supercritical reactions could also con-
tribute to the development of this technology. In addition, LCA can be
used as a holistic decision-support technique to qualify and quantify the
economic, environmental and societal implications of various bio-re-
finery processes, feedstock and integration options [22]. Nevertheless,
although supercritical technology is not yet ready to be used on an
industrial scale, as discussed before, pilot-scale research units have
begun to be studied.
In summary, the analyses of author keywords, single title words and
WoS keywords showed a clear transition from first-generation biodiesel
to second- and third-generation biodiesel with special attention on the

Table 8
20 most used WoS keywords from 2001 to 2019.
WoS keyword TP 2001–2019 R (%) 2001–2005 R (%) 2006–2010 R (%) 2011–2015 R (%) 2016–2019 R (%)

Transesterification 252 1 (27.1) 2 (16.6) 3 (32.9) 1 (20.2) 1 (11.9)

Rapessed 241 2 (25.9) 1 (22.2) 1 (36.1) 2 (20.0) 7 (8.1)
Supercritical Methanol 241 2 (25.9) 4 (11.1) 2 (34.1) 4 (17.8) 1 (11.9)
Vegetable-Oil 220 4 (23.6) 3 (12.9) 4 (31.7) 6 (15.3) 4 (11.2)
Soybean Oil 203 5 (21.8) 7 (9.2) 5 (22.6) 5 (16.8) 3 (11.3)
Fuel 200 6 (21.5) 7 (9.2) 6 (19.4) 3 (19.1) 5 (10.3)
Biodiesel Production 135 7 (14.5) 18 (1.8) 10 (7.9) 7 (12.7) 6 (9.9)
Kinetics 133 8 (14.3) 4 (11.1) 7 (17.0) 8 (10.7) 8 (6.1)
Methanol 84 9 (9.0) 10 (5.5) 13 (6.7) 9 (9.0) 12 (3.9)
Optimization 74 10 (7.9) N/A 24 (3.5) 10 (7.3) 9 (5.6)
Biodiesel 73 11 (7.8) 4 (11.1) 9 (9.5) 13 (5.3) 15 (3.2)
Waste Cooking Oil 67 12 (7.2) 11 (3.7) 15 (6.3) 11 (5.6) 11 (4.1)
Esters 58 13 (6.2) 9 (7.4) 12 (7.1) 15 (4.9) 25 (2.3)
Water 58 13 (6.2) 11 (3.7) 18 (5.9) 14 (5.1) 17 (3.0)
Esterification 54 15 (5.8) 18 (1.8) 26 (3.1) 15 (4.9) 12 (3.9)
Free Fatty-Acid 52 16 (5.5) 18 (1.8) 22 (3.9) 19 (4.0) 12 (3.9)
Sunflower 50 17 (5.3) 18 (1.8) 20 (5.1) 17 (4.7) 21 (2.5)
Fatty-Acid 49 18 (5.2) N/A 10 (7.9) 22 (3.2) 21 (2.5)
Palm 48 19 (5.1) N/A 28 (2.3) 11 (5.6) 19 (2.8)
Oil 46 20 (4.9) N/A 26 (3.1) 23 (3.0) 10 (4.3)

TP: total publications; R (%): rank and share of the WoS keywords; N/A: not available due to the reason that the WoS keywords did not appear in the study period.

13
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
optimization of supercritical reaction conditions. These results are in
line with those recently reported in previous bibliometric reviews on
biodiesel [22,32], proving the effectiveness of this type of analysis.
Finally, in order to compare the research trend of biodiesel pro-
duction under supercritical conditions with those of other production
methods, the bibliometric analysis for the period 1991–2015 [22] was
taken into account. This study reported that “heterogenous catalyst”
was listed in the top 30 most frequently used author keywords from
1991 to 2015, reaching position 21 in 2015, while “lipase” reached
position 10 in the same period of time. On the contrary, the word
“supercritical” was not listed in the top 30 most frequently used author
keywords. This can be explained by the fact that alkali technology is
widely used on an industrial scale and that biodiesel production via
enzymatic processes is a growing research field. In addition, these data
corroborate the newness of supercritical biodiesel production tech-
nology, as discussed in Section 3.1.1.
4. Future perspectives and research gaps
The production of biodiesel under supercritical conditions has been
shown to offer numerous benefits and has created high expectations
among the scientific community; thus, intensive research is being done
worldwide in this field according to the results presented above. With
supercritical conditions, high conversion rates can be achieved in short
reaction times. This process requires a lower number of unit operation
steps in comparison to conventional catalytic processes and has proven
to be suitable to exploit inexpensive low-grade feedstocks like waste oil
sources. Nevertheless, there are remaining limitations and research
gaps that need to be addressed in order to make the technology com-
mercially feasible.
Economic analysis and optimization are identified as crucial future
research lines. Since there is a lack of economic analysis on biodiesel
production in supercritical conditions, it is expected that future efforts
will focus on this critical aspect as lab-scale experimental tests cannot
be directly linked to their viability on an industrial scale. On the other
hand, mathematical optimization through modeling tools is required to
assess the main parameters of the supercritical process, especially in
terms of temperature, feedstock composition, reaction time and solvent-
to-oil ratio. Systematic approaches through optimization, together with
economical analysis, will greatly contribute to the practical im-
plementation of supercritical processes for biodiesel generation by
identifying the trade-offs of the technology. In addition, there is still a
necessity to fully understand the reaction mechanisms involved, and
the kinetics of supercritical reactions have not yet been resolved.
Moreover, the development of proper reactor models is necessary to be
used for process design and decision-making. Also, the environmental
impacts of supercritical technology have to be studied in greater depth
with respect to conventional catalytic transesterification processes.
The high temperatures required in supercritical biodiesel produc-
tion are associated with high energy consumption, which increases
operational costs. In addition, temperature is a key parameter to control
the final conversion yield. While high temperatures can generally in-
crease conversion rates over time, several strategies can be im-
plemented in order to balance reaction conditions, such as the use of co-
solvents. On the other hand, high temperatures can lead to the de-
gradation of the product obtained in the process, which needs to be
further examined in future research works.
The employment of excess amounts of alcohols (e.g. methanol) is
typical in experimental set-ups at lab-scale, in order to ensure the
performance of the reaction in single-phase. However, the optimization
of this parameter can lead to a reduction of the amount of alcohol and
operational costs.
A clear transition from first-generation biodiesel to third-generation
can be inferred from the results obtained in this study. The use of mi-
croalgae as a feedstock for biodiesel production has become increas-
ingly popular due to their fast-growing rates and their high level of
14
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
lipids. Supercritical conditions allow the extraction of microalgae oil
with subsequent transesterification in a single-step process. These re-
cognized advantages will translate into a shift of research focus on
microalgae utilization.
5. Conclusions
The present work offers the first bibliometric review on the pro-
duction of biodiesel under supercritical conditions from 2001 to 2019,
mapping the state of the art in the field over this period and identifying
current research trends and gaps. In this analysis, a total of 608 articles
on biodiesel production under supercritical conditions were found,
based on the Web of Science© database. The productivity patterns for
authors, journals, institution productivity and author keywords fit
Lotka's law. The Price's index value (48.8%) reflected the newness of
the field. Fuel (12.4%; h-index: 32), China (15.7%; h-index: 27) and Sila
Science (4.4%; h-index: 18) ranked first as journal, country and in-
stitution, respectively, in terms of total publications in the topic. The
analyses of author keywords, single title words and WoS keywords
showed a clear transition from first-generation biodiesel to third-gen-
eration biodiesel, in terms of feedstock employed for supercritical
biodiesel production, and the increasing interest and necessity of the
optimization of supercritical reaction conditions in order to reduce the
severity of operation and associated costs. While great attention has
been paid to the study of feedstock and solvent types and of operational
parameters such as temperature, pressure, reaction time and solvent-to-
oil molar ratio, other critical aspects such as economic analysis,
mathematical optimization and the reduction of the severity of condi-
tions through devised strategies (heterogeneous catalysis and use of co-
solvents in supercritical conditions) needs to be further explored and
addressed in the future so that the technology becomes commercially
available. On the other hand, a remarkable decrease in the number of
total publications was observed in 2019. This may be explained by the
intensive experimental research performed in the lasts years, while
process optimization and concrete remaining challenges such as high-
energy consumption in the process, which narrows the scope of re-
search, can be expected to be the focus of future studies.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgements
This research was funded by the Fundación Séneca, grant number
20957/PI/18 and The Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
(MINECO) grant number RTI2018-099011-B-I00. The authors would
like to thank Ms. Seonaid McNabb for the revision of English.
Appendix A. Supplementary material
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.114753.
References
[1] Andreo-Martínez P, García-Martínez N, Durán-del-Amor MDM, Quesada-Medina J.
Advances on kinetics and thermodynamics of non-catalytic supercritical methanol
transesterification of some vegetable oils to biodiesel. Energy Convers Manage
2018;173:187–96.
[2] Jambulingam R, Shalma M, Shankar V. Biodiesel production using lipase im-
mobilised functionalized magnetic nanocatalyst from oleaginous fungal lipid. J
Clean Prod 2019;215:245–58.
[3] Farobie O, Matsumura Y. Continuous production of biodiesel under supercritical
methyl acetate conditions: experimental investigation and kinetic model. Bioresour
Technol 2017;241:720–5.
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
[4] Cheng J. Biomass to renewable energy processes. 2nd ed. New York: CRC Press;
2017.
[5] Lamba N, Gupta K, Modak JM, Madras G. Biodiesel synthesis from Calophyllum
inophyllum oil with different supercritical fluids. Bioresour Technol
2017;241:767–74.
[6] Sivaramakrishnan R, Incharoensakdi A. Microalgae as feedstock for biodiesel
production under ultrasound treatment – a review. Bioresour Technol
2018;250:877–87.
[7] Ma Y, Gao Z, Wang Q, Liu Y. Biodiesels from microbial oils: opportunity and
challenges. Bioresour Technol 2018;263:631–41.
[8] Navarro López E, Robles Medina A, González Moreno PA, Esteban Cerdán L, Martín
Valverde L, Molina Grima E. Biodiesel production from Nannochloropsis gaditana
lipids through transesterification catalyzed by Rhizopus oryzae lipase. Bioresour
Technol 2016;203:236–44.
[9] Tran D-T, Chang J-S, Lee D-J. Recent insights into continuous-flow biodiesel pro-
duction via catalytic and non-catalytic transesterification processes. Appl Energy
2017;185:376–409.
[10] Christopher LP, Hemanathan K, Zambare VP. Enzymatic biodiesel: challenges and
opportunities. Appl Energy 2014;119:497–520.
[11] Ambat I, Srivastava V, Sillanpää M. Recent advancement in biodiesel production
methodologies using various feedstock: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev
2018;90:356–69.
[12] Farobie O, Matsumura Y. State of the art of biodiesel production under super-
critical conditions. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2017;63:173–203.
[13] Lee J-S, Saka S. Biodiesel production by heterogeneous catalysts and supercritical
technologies. Bioresour Technol 2010;101:7191–200.
[14] Jazzar S, Quesada-Medina J, Olivares-Carrillo P, Marzouki MN, Acién-Fernández
FG, Fernández-Sevilla JM, et al. A whole biodiesel conversion process combining
isolation, cultivation and in situ supercritical methanol transesterification of native
microalgae. Bioresour Technol 2015;190:281–8.
[15] Jazzar S, Olivares-Carrillo P, Pérez de los Ríos A, Marzouki MN, Acién-Fernández
FG, Fernández-Sevilla JM, et al. Direct supercritical methanolysis of wet and dry
unwashed marine microalgae (Nannochloropsis gaditana) to biodiesel. Appl Energy
2015;148:210–9.
[16] Saka S, Kusdiana D. Biodiesel fuel from rapeseed oil as prepared in supercritical
methanol. Fuel 2001;80:225–31.
[17] Tran D-T, Chen C-L, Chang J-S. Continuous biodiesel conversion via enzymatic
transesterification catalyzed by immobilized Burkholderia lipase in a packed-bed
bioreactor. Appl Energy 2016;168:340–50.
[18] Saka S, Dadan K. Transesterification of rapeseed oils in supercritical methanol to
biodiesel fuels. 4th Biomass conference of the Americas on growth opportunity in
green energy and value-added products. 1999. p. 797–801.
[19] Chavanne G. Procedure for the transformation of vegetable oils for their uses as
fuels. Translation from Knothe, (2005c) Belgian Patent 1937;422:31.
[20] Duffy P. XXV.—On the constitution of stearine. Quart J Chem Soc London
1853;5:303–16.
[21] Eryilmaz T, Yesilyurt MK, Cesur C, Gokdogan O. Biodiesel production potential
from oil seeds in Turkey. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2016;58:842–51.
[22] Zhang M, Gao Z, Zheng T, Ma Y, Wang Q, Gao M, et al. A bibliometric analysis of
biodiesel research during 1991–2015. J Mater Cycles Waste Manage
2018;20:10–8.
[23] Cole FJ, Eales NB. The history of comparative anatomy: Part I. —A statistical
analysis of the literature. Sci Prog (1916–1919) 1917;11:578–96.
[24] Pritchard A. Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics. J Document 1969;25:348–9.
[25] Gingras Y. Bibliometrics and research evaluation: uses and abuses. MIT Press;
2016.
[26] Lei L, Liu D. The research trends and contributions of System's publications over
the past four decades (1973–2017): a bibliometric analysis. System 2019;80:1–13.
[27] Zhi W, Ji G. Constructed wetlands, 1991–2011: a review of research development,
current trends, and future directions. Sci Total Environ 2012;441:19–27.
[28] Romanelli JP, Fujimoto JT, Ferreira MD, Milanez DH. Assessing ecological re-
storation as a research topic using bibliometric indicators. Ecol Eng
2018;120:311–20.
[29] Wang Q, Li R. Research status of shale gas: a review. Renew Sust Energ Rev
2017;74:715–20.
[30] Wang Q, Li R, He G. Research status of nuclear power: a review. Renew Sust Energ
Rev 2018;90:90–6.
[31] Chen H, Ho Y-S. Highly cited articles in biomass research: a bibliometric analysis.
Renew Sust Energ Rev 2015;49:12–20.
[32] Yaoyang X, Boeing WJ. Mapping biofuel field: a bibliometric evaluation of re-
search output. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2013;28:82–91.
[33] Ma X, Gao M, Gao Z, Wang J, Zhang M, Ma Y, et al. Past, current, and future
research on microalga-derived biodiesel: a critical review and bibliometric ana-
lysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int 2018;25:10596–610.
[34] Salar-García MJ, Ortiz-Martínez VM, Olivares-Carrillo P, Quesada-Medina J, de los
Ríos AP, Hernández-Fernández FJ. Analysis of optimal conditions for biodiesel
production from Jatropha oil in supercritical methanol: quantification of thermal
decomposition degree and analysis of FAMEs. J Supercrit Fluids 2016;112:1–6.
[35] García-Martínez N, Andreo-Martínez P, Quesada-Medina J, de los Ríos AP, Chica
A, Beneito-Ruiz R, et al. Optimization of non-catalytic transesterification of to-
bacco (Nicotiana tabacum) seed oil using supercritical methanol to biodiesel pro-
duction. Energy Convers Manage 2017;131:99–108.
[36] Marulanda VF. Biodiesel production by supercritical methanol transesterification:
process simulation and potential environmental impact assessment. J Clean Prod
2012;33:109–16.
[37] Patil PD, Reddy H, Muppaneni T, Deng S. Biodiesel fuel production from algal
15
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
lipids using supercritical methyl acetate (glycerin-free) technology. Fuel
2017;195:201–7.
[38] Niza NM, Tan KT, Lee KT, Ahmad Z. Biodiesel production by non-catalytic su-
percritical methyl acetate: thermal stability study. Appl Energy
2013;101:198–202.
[39] Farobie O, Sasanami K, Matsumura Y. A novel spiral reactor for biodiesel pro-
duction in supercritical ethanol. Appl Energy 2015;147:20–9.
[40] Mazanov SV, Gabitova AR, Usmanov RA, Gumerov FM, Labidi S, Amar MB, et al.
Continuous production of biodiesel from rapeseed oil by ultrasonic assist trans-
esterification in supercritical ethanol. J Supercrit Fluids 2016;118:107–18.
[41] Reddy HK, Muppaneni T, Patil PD, Ponnusamy S, Cooke P, Schaub T, et al. Direct
conversion of wet algae to crude biodiesel under supercritical ethanol conditions.
Fuel 2014;115:720–6.
[42] Lamba N, Modak JM, Madras G. Fatty acid methyl esters synthesis from non-edible
vegetable oils using supercritical methanol and methyl tert-butyl ether. Energy
Convers Manage 2017;138:77–83.
[43] Farobie O, Matsumura Y. A comparative study of biodiesel production using me-
thanol, ethanol, and tert-butyl methyl ether (MTBE) under supercritical condi-
tions. Bioresour Technol 2015;191:306–11.
[44] Tan KT, Lee KT, Mohamed AR. Optimization of supercritical dimethyl carbonate
(SCDMC) technology for the production of biodiesel and value-added glycerol
carbonate. Fuel 2010;89:3833–9.
[45] Ilham Z, Saka S. Two-step supercritical dimethyl carbonate method for biodiesel
production from Jatropha curcas oil. Bioresour Technol 2010;101:2735–40.
[46] Muppaneni T, Reddy HK, Patil PD, Dailey P, Aday C, Deng S. Ethanolysis of ca-
melina oil under supercritical condition with hexane as a co-solvent. Appl Energy
2012;94:84–8.
[47] Ortiz-Martínez VM, Andreo-Martínez P, García-Martínez N, Pérez de los Ríos A,
Hernández-Fernández FJ, Quesada-Medina J. Approach to biodiesel production
from microalgae under supercritical conditions by the PRISMA method. Fuel
Process Technol 2019;191:211–22.
[48] Palacios-Nereo FJ, Olivares-Carrillo P, Pérez de los Ríos A, Quesada-Medina J.
High-yield non-catalytic supercritical transesterification of soybean oil to biodiesel
induced by gradual heating in a batch reactor. J Supercrit Fluids
2016;111:135–42.
[49] Olivares-Carrillo P, Quesada-Medina J. Thermal decomposition of fatty acid chains
during the supercritical methanol transesterification of soybean oil to biodiesel. J
Supercrit Fluids 2012;72:52–8.
[50] Liu J, Lin R, Nan Y, Tavlarides LL. Production of biodiesel from microalgae oil
(Chlorella protothecoides) by non-catalytic transesterification: evaluation of re-
action kinetic models and phase behavior. J Supercrit Fluids 2015;99:38–50.
[51] Ortiz-Martínez VM, Salar-García MJ, Palacios-Nereo FJ, Olivares-Carrillo P,
Quesada-Medina J, de los Ríos AP, et al. In-depth study of the transesterification
reaction of Pongamia pinnata oil for biodiesel production using catalyst-free su-
percritical methanol process. J Supercrit Fluids 2016;113:23–30.
[52] Rathore V, Madras G. Synthesis of biodiesel from edible and non-edible oils in
supercritical alcohols and enzymatic synthesis in supercritical carbon dioxide. Fuel
2007;86:2650–9.
[53] Sawangkeaw R, Bunyakiat K, Ngamprasertsith S. A review of laboratory-scale re-
search on lipid conversion to biodiesel with supercritical methanol (2001–2009). J
Supercrit Fluids 2010;55:1–13.
[54] Jiang J-J, Tan C-S. Biodiesel production from coconut oil in supercritical methanol
in the presence of cosolvent. J Taiwan Inst Chem Eng 2012;43:102–7.
[55] Imahara H, Xin J, Saka S. Effect of CO2/N2 addition to supercritical methanol on
reactivities and fuel qualities in biodiesel production. Fuel 2009;88:1329–32.
[56] Abedini Najafabadi H, Vossoughi M, Pazuki G. The role of co-solvents in improving
the direct transesterification of wet microalgal biomass under supercritical con-
dition. Bioresour Technol 2015;193:90–6.
[57] Sawangkeaw R, Bunyakiat K, Ngamprasertsith S. Effect of co-solvents on produc-
tion of biodiesel via transesterification in supercritical methanol. Green Chem
2007;9:679.
[58] Ortiz-Martínez V, Salar-García M, Hernández-Fernández F, Olivares-Carrillo P, de
Los Ríos A, Quesada-Medina J. Ionic liquids in supercritical methanol greatly
enhance transesterification reaction for high-yield biodiesel production. AlChE J
2016;62:3842–6.
[59] Petchmala A, Laosiripojana N, Jongsomjit B, Goto M, Panpranot J,
Mekasuwandumrong O, et al. Transesterification of palm oil and esterification of
palm fatty acid in near- and super-critical methanol with SO4–ZrO2 catalysts. Fuel
2010;89:2387–92.
[60] Wang C-W, Zhou J-F, Chen W, Wang W-G, Wu Y-X, Zhang J-F, et al. Effect of weak
acids as a catalyst on the transesterification of soybean oil in supercritical me-
thanol. Energy Fuels 2008;22:3479–83.
[61] Tang Z, Wang L, Yang J. Transesterification of the crude Jatropha curcas L. oil
catalyzed by micro-NaOH in supercritical and subcritical methanol. Eur J Lipid Sci
Technol 2007;109:585–90.
[62] Tang Z, Wang L, Yang J. Transesterification of rapeseed oil catalyzed by liquid
organic amine in supercritical methanol in a continuous tubular-flow reactor. Eur J
Lipid Sci Technol 2008;110:747–53.
[63] Medina-Valtierra J, Ramirez-Ortiz J. Biodiesel production from waste frying oil in
sub- and supercritical methanol on a zeolite Y solid acid catalyst. Front Chem Sci
Eng 2013;7:401–7.
[64] Shin H-Y, An S-H, Sheikh R, Park YH, Bae S-Y. Transesterification of used vege-
table oils with a Cs-doped heteropolyacid catalyst in supercritical methanol. Fuel
2012;96:572–8.
[65] Wang L, Yang J. Transesterification of soybean oil with nano-MgO or not in su-
percritical and subcritical methanol. Fuel 2007;86:328–33.
P. Andreo-Martínez, et al.
[66] Wang L, He H, Xie Z, Yang J, Zhu S. Transesterification of the crude oil of rapeseed
with NaOH in supercritical and subcritical methanol. Fuel Process Technol
2007;88:477–81.
[67] Olivares-Carrillo P, Quesada-Medina J, Pérez de los Ríos A, Hernández-Fernández
FJ. Estimation of critical properties of reaction mixtures obtained in different re-
action conditions during the synthesis of biodiesel with supercritical methanol
from soybean oil. Chem Eng J 2014;241:418–32.
[68] Quesada-Medina J, Olivares-Carrillo P. Evidence of thermal decomposition of fatty
acid methyl esters during the synthesis of biodiesel with supercritical methanol. J
Supercrit Fluids 2011;56:56–63.
[69] Vieitez I, Irigaray B, Casullo P, Pardo MJ, Grompone MA, Jachmanián I. Effect of
free fatty acids on the efficiency of the supercritical ethanolysis of vegetable oils
from different origins. Energy Fuels 2012;26:1946–51.
[70] Campanelli P, Banchero M, Manna L. Synthesis of biodiesel from edible, non-edible
and waste cooking oils via supercritical methyl acetate transesterification. Fuel
2010;89:3675–82.
[71] Anikeev VI, Yakovleva EY. Biodiesel synthesis from vegetable oils with super-
critical methanol. J Supercrit Fluids 2013;77:100–2.
[72] Lee S, Posarac D, Ellis N. An experimental investigation of biodiesel synthesis from
waste canola oil using supercritical methanol. Fuel 2012;91:229–37.
[73] Shin H-Y, Lim S-M, Kang SC, Bae S-Y. Statistical optimization for biodiesel pro-
duction from rapeseed oil via transesterificaion in supercritical methanol. Fuel
Process Technol 2012;98:1–5.
[74] Varma MN, Madras G. Synthesis of biodiesel from castor oil and linseed oil in
supercritical fluids. Ind Eng Chem Res 2007;46:1–6.
[75] Bunyakiat K, Makmee S, Sawangkeaw R, Ngamprasertsith S. Continuous produc-
tion of biodiesel via transesterification from vegetable oils in supercritical me-
thanol. Energy Fuels 2006;20:812–7.
[76] Román-Figueroa C, Olivares-Carrillo P, Paneque M, Palacios-Nereo FJ, Quesada-
Medina J. High-yield production of biodiesel by non-catalytic supercritical me-
thanol transesterification of crude castor oil (Ricinus communis). Energy
2016;107:165–71.
[77] Rodríguez-Guerrero JK, Rubens MF, Rosa PTV. Production of biodiesel from castor
oil using sub and supercritical ethanol: Effect of sodium hydroxide on the ethyl
ester production. J Supercrit Fluids 2013;83:124–32.
[78] Lim S, Lee KT. Process intensification for biodiesel production from Jatropha
curcas L. seeds: supercritical reactive extraction process parameters study. Appl
Energy 2013;103:712–20.
[79] Andreo-Martínez P, García-Martínez N, Quesada-Medina J, Román-Figueroa C,
Paneque M. Synthesis of value added fatty alcohols and FAMEs by non-catalytic
supercritical methanol transesterification of jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis) wax.
Energy Convers Manage 2017;154:430–9.
[80] Samniang A, Tipachan C, Kajorncheappun-ngam S. Comparison of biodiesel pro-
duction from crude Jatropha oil and Krating oil by supercritical methanol trans-
esterification. Renew Energ 2014;68:351–5.
[81] Ang GT, Ooi SN, Tan KT, Lee KT, Mohamed AR. Optimization and kinetic studies
of sea mango (Cerbera odollam) oil for biodiesel production via supercritical re-
action. Energy Convers Manage 2015;99:242–51.
[82] Valle P, Velez A, Hegel P, Mabe G, Brignole EA. Biodiesel production using su-
percritical alcohols with a non-edible vegetable oil in a batch reactor. J Supercrit
Fluids 2010;54:61–70.
[83] Ong LK, Effendi C, Kurniawan A, Lin CX, Zhao XS, Ismadji S. Optimization of
catalyst-free production of biodiesel from Ceiba pentandra (kapok) oil with high
free fatty acid contents. Energy 2013;57:615–23.
[84] Bolonio D, Marco Neu P, Schober S, García-Martínez M-J, Mittelbach M, Canoira L.
Fatty acid ethyl esters from animal fat using supercritical ethanol process. Energy
Fuels 2018;32:490–6.
[85] Marulanda VF, Anitescu G, Tavlarides LL. Investigations on supercritical transes-
terification of chicken fat for biodiesel production from low-cost lipid feedstocks. J
Supercrit Fluids 2010;54:53–60.
[86] Ngamprasertsith S, Laetoheem C-e, Sawangkeaw R. Continuous production of
biodiesel in supercritical ethanol: a comparative study between refined and used
palm olein oils as feedstocks. J Braz Chem Soc 2014;25:1746–53.
[87] Ong LK, Kurniawan A, Suwandi AC, Lin CX, Zhao XS, Ismadji S. Transesterification
of leather tanning waste to biodiesel at supercritical condition: Kinetics and
thermodynamics studies. J Supercrit Fluids 2013;75:11–20.
[88] Zhou D, Qiao B, Li G, Xue S, Yin J. Continuous production of biodiesel from
16
Applied Energy 264 (2020) 114753
microalgae by extraction coupling with transesterification under supercritical
conditions. Bioresour Technol 2017;238:609–15.
[89] Srivastava G, Paul AK, Goud VV. Optimization of non-catalytic transesterification
of microalgae oil to biodiesel under supercritical methanol condition. Energy
Convers Manage 2018;156:269–78.
[90] Patil PD, Gude VG, Mannarswamy A, Cooke P, Nirmalakhandan N, Lammers P,
et al. Comparison of direct transesterification of algal biomass under supercritical
methanol and microwave irradiation conditions. Fuel 2012;97:822–31.
[91] Persson O, Danell R, Schneider JW. How to use Bibexcel for various types of
bibliometric analysis. Celebrating Scholarly Communication Studies: A Festschrift
for Olle Persson at his 60th Birthday 2009;5:9–24.
[92] Batagelj V, Mrvar A. Pajek-program for large network analysis. Connections
1998;21:47–57.
[93] Van Eck NJ, Waltman L. VOSviewer manual. Leiden: Univeristeit Leiden; 2013. p.
1–53.
[94] Clarivate_Analytics. Journal Impact Factor, Journal Citation Reports; 2018.
[95] Zheng T, Wang J, Wang Q, Nie C, Smale N, Shi Z, et al. A bibliometric analysis of
industrial wastewater research: current trends and future prospects.
Scientometrics 2015;105:863–82.
[96] Schütz E. Supercritical fluids and applications–a patent review. Chem Eng Technol:
Ind Chem-Plant Equip-Process Eng-Biotechnol 2007;30:685–8.
[97] Price DJDS. Networks of scientific papers. Science 1965:510–5.
[98] Dabi Y, Darrigues L, Katsahian S, Azoulay D, De Antonio M, Lazzati A. Publication
trends in bariatric surgery: a bibliometric study. Obes Surg 2016;26:2691–9.
[99] Kirchik O, Gingras Y, Larivière V. Changes in publication languages and citation
practices and their effect on the scientific impact of Russian science (1993–2010).
J Am Soc Inform Sci Technol 2012;63:1411–9.
[100] Chiu W-T, Ho Y-S. Bibliometric analysis of tsunami research. Scientometrics
2007;73:3–17.
[101] Lotka AJ. The frequency distribution of scientific productivity. J Wash Acad Sci
1926;16:317–23.
[102] Kusdiana D, Saka S. Kinetics of transesterification in rapeseed oil to biodiesel fuel
as treated in supercritical methanol. Fuel 2001;80:693–8.
[103] Kusdiana D, Saka S. Effects of water on biodiesel fuel production by supercritical
methanol treatment. Bioresour Technol 2004;91:289–95.
[104] Demirbaş A. Diesel fuel from vegetable oil via transesterification and soap pyr-
olysis. Energy Sources 2002;24:835–41.
[105] Rouhany M, Montgomery H. Global biodiesel production: the state of the art and
impact on climate change. In: Tabatabaei M, Aghbashlo M, editors. Biodiesel: from
production to combustion. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2019. p.
1–14.
[106] Sun J, Xiong X, Wang M, Du H, Li J, Zhou D, et al. Microalgae biodiesel production
in China: a preliminary economic analysis. Renew Sust Energ Rev
2019;104:296–306.
[107] Balat M. Modeling vegetable oil viscosity. Energy Sources Part A
2008;30:1856–69.
[108] Garfield E. Key-words-plus takes you beyond title words. 2. Expanded journal
coverage for current-contents-on-diskette includes social and behavioral-sciences.
Current Contents 1990;33:5–9.
[109] Fu H-Z, Ho Y-S. Highly cited Antarctic articles using Science Citation Index
Expanded: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 2016;109:337–57.
[110] Wahidin S, Idris A, Yusof NM, Kamis NHH, Shaleh SRM. Optimization of the ionic
liquid-microwave assisted one-step biodiesel production process from wet micro-
algal biomass. Energy Convers Manage 2018;171:1397–404.
[111] Gnansounou E, Kenthorai Raman J. Life cycle assessment of algae biodiesel and its
co-products. Appl Energy 2016;161:300–8.
[112] Wu W, Wang P-H, Lee D-J, Chang J-S. Global optimization of microalgae-to-bio-
diesel chains with integrated cogasification combined cycle systems based on
greenhouse gas emissions reductions. Appl Energy 2017;197:63–82.
[113] Shuba Eyasu S, Kifle D. Microalgae to biofuels: ‘Promising’ alternative and re-
newable energy, review. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2018;81:743–55.
[114] Arcigni F, Friso R, Collu M, Venturini M. Harmonized and systematic assessment of
microalgae energy potential for biodiesel production. Renew Sust Energ Rev
2019;101:614–24.
[115] Ho Y-S. Comments on “Past, current and future of biomass energy research: a
bibliometric analysis” by Mao et al. (2015). Renew Sust Energ Rev
2018;82:4235–7.