i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/he

Progress in the production of hydrogen energy

from food waste: A bibliometric analysis

Adithya Sridhar a, Muthamilselvi Ponnuchamy b,

Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar c,d,*, Ashish Kapoor b,**, Leilei Xiao e,f,***
a
School of Food Science and Nutrition, Faculty of Environment, The University of Leeds, Leeds, LS2 9JT, United
Kingdom
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and
Technology, Kattankulathur, Tamil Nadu, 603203, India
c
Department of Chemical Engineering, Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering, Chennai, India
d
Centre of Excellence in Water Research (CEWAR), Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering, Chennai,
India
e
Key Laboratory of Coastal Biology and Biological Resources Utilization, Yantai Institute of Coastal Zone Research,
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yantai, 264003, PR China
f
CAS Key Laboratory of Coastal Environmental Processes and Ecological Remediation, Yantai Institute of Coastal
Zone Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yantai, 264003, PR China

highlights graphical abstract

Bibliometric analysis shows future

trends in food waste to hydrogen
energy research.

Author keyword analysis aids in
outlining research hotspots for
future discussion.

Hydrogen production methods
and food waste treatments were
the prime themes.

China and USA contributed to
highest publications and citations
respectively.

Emphasis is needed on efficient
commercialization, delivery and
social acceptance.

article info abstract

Article history: The exponential increase in food waste generation has prompted the scientific community
Received 8 July 2021 to convert it into value-added resources. Hydrogen energy provides a sustainable option to
Received in revised form fossil fuels due to its purity, high energy content, with no emissions other than water

* Corresponding author. Department of Chemical Engineering, Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering, Chennai, India.
** Corresponding author.
*** Corresponding author. Key Laboratory of Coastal Biology and Biological Resources Utilization, Yantai Institute of Coastal Zone
Research, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Yantai, 264003, PR China.
E-mail addresses: senthilkumarp@ssn.edu.in (P. Senthil Kumar), ashishko@srmist.edu.in (A. Kapoor), ai-yanzi@163.com (L. Xiao).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2021.09.258
0360-3199/© 2021 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4 26327

13 September 2021 vapor. Combining the two aspects, a bibliometric analysis was performed for the conver-
Accepted 29 September 2021 sion of food waste to hydrogen energy to evaluate the research trends based on literature
Available online 26 October 2021 in the Scopus database over the last two decades. The cluster analysis supported with the
visualization tool aided in conducting a systematic study revealing growing themes and
Keywords: hot issues. The results showed a growing interest in the conversion of food waste to
Bibliometric analysis hydrogen energy research with the number of publications increasing by nearly 50 times in
Food waste the last two decades. Comprehensive journals like the International Journal of Hydrogen En-
Hydrogen energy ergy were most popular in publishing articles contributing to almost 30% in the research
Research trends area. The country-wise analysis revealed that China accounted for more than 25% of the
Sustainability articles published followed by South Korea and India while the USA dominated in terms of
the number of citations. Lastly, keyword cluster analysis revealed five major research
hotspots for future discussion. The study concludes that further perspectives on fuel de-
livery, environmental impacts, and social acceptance could aid in positive developments in
the biohydrogen energy industry.
© 2021 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

ecological impacts of hydrogen energy production from

Introduction
Food has become a vital part for survival and a necessity for
the ecosystem. The increasing production and demand for
food has led to excessive wastage in its raw or processed form.
The stacking and improper disposal of waste has become a
global concern taking place from post-harvest to consumer
level. According to a recent report by Food and Agricultural
Organization (FAO), approximately 13.8% of the total food is
lost between farm and retail with the highest waste contri-
bution by fruits, vegetables, cereals, and pulses globally
(15e40%) [1]. The reported reasons for high percentage loss
were due to unsuitable harvesting time, harsh climatic con-
ditions, pests, handling practices as well as lack of infra-
structure. Griffin et al. performed a case study reporting the
quantification of food waste at specific stages: production
(20%), processing (1%), distribution (19%), and consumers
(60%) [2]. The major causes were shrinkage of food while
cooking, supply chain barriers, climatic variations, soil run-
offs, and policy constraints. Similar analysis was conducted in
Finland where more than 50% of the waste was generated by
households [3]. Another case study conducted in Spain
concluded a 1% rise in tourist arrivals led to more than 1.25%
food waste generation [4]. The decision between ‘best before’
and ‘use by’ was a tough call to estimate the shelf life of the
product for the consumers [3,5]. Thus, an imperative need
exists to utilize these food waste efficiently to generate value-
added products.
The research on food waste to useful energy has grown
considerably since the last decade. As of today, more than 80%
of the world's energy is generated through fossil fuels [6].
These fossil fuels are utilized for a variety of applications from
automotive to households. Waste to energy incineration is
considered advantageous compared to traditional pit burning
as it provides benefits like volume reduction, no pre-
treatment, less reaction time, and promising fuel generation
capacities [7]. However, concerns arose about the release of
different pollutants, dioxins, and heavy metals in the atmo-
sphere harming the environment [8]. Fig. 1 illustrates the
different wastes using traditional methods. Climatic changes
due to anthropogenic reasons have led to an exponential in-
crease in greenhouse gas emissions and a temperature rise.
Such dramatic variations have led to significant economic
losses and impacts on human life. With the rising concerns
about global warming, pollution, and climate change, a
transformation to better fuels that provide clean energy is
required. The need of the hour lies in alternative energy
strategies to ensure future world stability. Adoption of newer
alternatives post evaluation of possible risks and climatic
changes is essential for sustainable growth.
The production of hydrogen has gained importance as it
can be generated from renewable energy in addition to fossil
fuels. Fig. 2(a) illustrates the global production of hydrogen
energy per annum (~50 million tons). It can be considered a
clean energy source due to the combustion of water vapor as
the main product [9,10]. The utilization of hydrogen as a fuel
attempts to solve a majority of the environmental challenges
caused compared to conventional fuels. Fig. 2(b) provides the
cost drop forecasted by the Hydrogen Council (between 2020
and 2030) if a 50:50 blend of hydrogen and low-carbon fuels are
adopted [9,10]. The hydrogen market forecasts a growth of
5e10% per year (50e82 metric tons) by 2050. The use of
different raw materials like food waste, plant parts, and algae
would enable high production volumes with the creation of
new hydrogen-related policies emerging by 2030 [13]. On the
other hand, food waste requires effective management sys-
tems due to its complex characteristics and pre-treatment
steps. As the current food waste disposal systems require
more evaluations, researchers have explored an alternative
for creating value from the waste to keep up with the growing
green hydrogen energy demand. For instance, a study used
supercritical water gasification to generate hydrogen-rich
syngas from a mixture of food waste (rice, chicken, cabbage,
and cooking oil) [14]. The batch experiments showed a high
hydrogen yield of 20.37 mol/kg with an improvement of
32.21% post addition of catalyst (KOH). Similar investigations
were compared using one-stage and two-stage fermentation
process for food waste (rice, vegetables, carbohydrates, and
26328 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4

Fig. 1 e Ecological impact of hydrogen energy production from different wastes using traditional methods.

Fig. 2 e (a) Global production of hydrogen energy per annum (~50 million metric tons), and (b) cost drop forecasted by the
Hydrogen Council (between 2020 and 2030) if 50:50 blends of hydrogen and low-carbon fuels are adopted.

meat) where the studies showed an 18% higher energy re-
covery in two-stage compared to one stage with a hydrogen
yield of 55 mL/g [15]. This energy could possibly be a useful
resource for generating heat and electricity in automobiles,
households, and commercial areas. Although the promising
potential of hydrogen as an energy source has been well
explored, its dependency on fossil fuels still exists on a com-
mercial scale. Thus, the need of the hour lies in its effective
utilization as an independent source to produce valuable
energy.
The literature search for reliable and sustainable energy
sources has grown substantially since the last decade. When it
comes to substrate selection, valorization of food waste has
gained popularity as it aims to solve three-fold problems: (1)
reutilization of waste to useful sources, (2) odor reduction
caused during landfill treatment, and (3) promotes
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
environmental remediation. Thus, importance should be
given to assess the growth trend of food waste to energy
conversion, with a particular focus on the utilization of
hydrogen energy as a fuel.
Bibliometric analysis has achieved considerable interest as
a tool for quantitative analysis to evaluate the growth and
development for a specific research field [16]. Several mathe-
matical and statistical tools have been investigated to analyze
the theme, patterns, and distribution of publications. In the
area of food waste to energy research, reviews and biblio-
metric analysis have been investigated in related areas like
solar energy [17], food waste utilization/distribution [18e20],
biomass waste utilization [21,22], waste to energy incineration
[6] as well as energy efficiency [23]. However, according to
authors searches, no bibliometric studies have been con-
ducted to understand the scope of hydrogen energy produc-
tion from food waste. Thus, the main focus of the paper lies in
understanding the progress of food waste to hydrogen energy
using bibliometrics. The data collected has been supported by
visualizations as they play a crucial role in understanding the
relationship and trends. A critical analysis of top journals,
countries, institutions as well as keyword analysis have been
carried out. Lastly, hotspots and possible limitations during
the study are discussed for future work. The findings from this
study could be considered as a possible platform for under-
standing the avenues of hydrogen energy as well as con-
ducting future academic research for food waste to hydrogen
energy conversion.
Methodology
The concept of bibliometrics or bibliometric analysis was first
introduced by Alan Pritchard in 1969 to estimate the growth of
a specific field. The study normally follows a three-step sys-
tematic path of identification, critical assessment, and moni-
toring of published work since decades [24,25]. Fig. 3
illustrates the general process flow adopted for a biblio-
metric study. The method is one of the most accepted tech-
niques for analyzing research trends, narrowing emerging
themes, and producing output. Such tools are developed to
improve scientific quality, research developments, and evo-
lution. Additionally, it can help interested researchers to
extract basic information and research progress in a specific
field. Different literature databases namely Google Scholar,
Web of Science, Scopus, Dimensions, and PubMed have been
evaluated for their merits and values. Table 1 provides the
usefulness of different databases based on critical parame-
ters. These databases differ in terms of coverage, focus, and
refines or indicators provided [26]. The indicators present in
databases aid in providing many publications, subjects cate-
gories covered, duration, influential authors, sources, funding,
collaborations, and citation counts at different aggregate
levels. The citation and publication count may vary with da-
tabases based on a variety of indicators. Indicators like single
or fractional counting, citations per publication, journal cita-
tion score (JCS), surface normalized impact factor (SNIP),
journal rank, field citation score (FCS), citation rate as well as
number of co-publications (CoP) are used for deciphering
result for the topic [27]. As the results produced during
26329
bibliometrics help in understanding the research traditions by
employing citations, refines, resolution parameters, and key-
words, certain linkages are framed grouping similar areas of
research [28,29]. These linkages or clusters help in systematic
scrutinization by gathering themes. An effective bibliometric
analysis would lead to clear mapping of clusters indicating a
strong network and link strength [28].
After data extraction using bibliometric search databases,
an equal role is played by mapping software tools for a visual
representation of the data collected. Mapping software tools
help in visually representing the collected data between ele-
ments, objects, regions, and themes [34]. Different computer-
based softwares have been introduced aiming for user-
friendly abilities to build powerful assessments. A wide
range of visualization tools like Bibexcel, Citespace, Vantage
point, and VOSviewer have been explored for data represen-
tation and decision making. These products and features
guide the user to generate thematic, heat, or general maps
with nodes to evaluate the position and performance of do-
mains and their sub-sections. Such visualization softwares
are less considered during research due to challenges in
mapping smaller items or issues in displaying multiple results
[35]. For small maps with less information and minimal
number of items (say 100 items), a simple graphical repre-
sentation using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS)
or Pajek is generally adopted to provide the result [36]. How-
ever, due to the growing amounts of data in databases, larger
bibliometric maps have been developed coupled with features
like zoom functionality, labeling algorithms, heat variations
as well as density differences [37,38]. Computer programs like
VOSviewer (Visualization of Similarities viewer), Bibexcel,
HistCite, R, and Python have been developed with this aim and
are generally utilized by researchers. Such special features
normally result in a graphical representation of extensive data
with an accurate analysis.
Data collection
The scientific data extraction for our study was conducted
using the Scopus database on 5th June 2021. Scopus is a widely
accepted tool for data extraction and scientific search after the
Web of Science. The study aims at mapping the trends in the
area of generation of hydrogen energy from food waste along
with their research achievements. The literature was
retrieved for the last two decades (2000e2021) using the
advanced search options “title, abstract, and keywords” to
evaluate the progress and contributions made in the topic.
The time period was chosen to (1) provide a holistic assess-
ment of the significant contributions made in the field of
integrating hydrogen energy and food waste, (2) investigate
and quantitatively forecast the research trends and hot areas
of food waste to hydrogen energy research and (3) track and
predict the future growth of the field. As food waste is nor-
mally generated from households, residential areas, agricul-
ture, or biomass, these were used as the specific categories to
measure the research focus. The data was filtered from the
engineering and sciences discipline choosing articles written
in English. Fig. 4 provides the workflow methodology with
total yearly publication and total mean yearly citations until
5th June 2021. The keywords selected were: (“Food waste” OR
26330 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Fig. 3 e General process flow adopted for the bibliometric study.
“foods” OR “food residues” OR “food waste residues” OR “re-
sidual food waste”) AND (“Hydrogen energy or H2 energy” OR
“hydrogen production” or “H2 production” OR “production of
H2” OR “conversion of H2 energy” OR “biohydrogen” OR “bio-
hydrogen” OR “bio-H2”). Our findings showed a total of 1100
articles for hydrogen energy research and 835 articles for food
waste research have been published under the engineering
and sciences field in English. However, only 742 documents
(491 research articles) were retrieved from 291 sources (mini-
reviews, reviews, conference reviews, journals, book chapters,
books, and editorials) which concentrated on food waste to
hydrogen energy conversion. Thus, a detailed analysis to
evaluate the contribution on the latest developments, hot-
spots, demerits, and future research prospects have been
carried out using these research articles.
Content analysis
The document types, publication output, journal lists, country
collaborations, and keywords were analyzed either using the
R package or Microsoft excel 2019. In this study, the R package
has been adopted for data extraction. These are based on the
principle of text mining where valuable data is identified and
filtered based on relations, patterns, trends in form of texts
[39,40]. The publication output and document type can help
decipher core hotspots in the field and possible sub-fields
which may emerge in the near future. The author's keyword
analysis shows the interaction between different research
directions in the form of words. A content analysis is only
effective if an effective mix of keywords and jargons are
adopted. Another important aspect taken into consideration
is the journal impact factor (IF) and the h-index. The IF can be
obtained from InCites Journal citation reports 2019 in Scopus
and is updated with time. The h-index can be defined as an
indicator to quantify the research outputs of a scholar. It is a
single number where h of the total publications (TP) have at
least h citations each and (TP-h) papers have  h citations each
[41,42].
Social network analysis
The social network analysis describes the ability of text data to
be displayed into visual maps or graphs to provide a clear
relationship between two to three parameters. In this study,
VOSviewer was used as a tool for analyzing the bibliographic
data. Unlike other complex computer programs like SPSS or
Pajek used for bibliometric map building, Visualization of
similarities viewer (VOSviewer) is an easy tool for displaying
large amounts of data in a simple format. It is a free graphical
representation tool founded by Leiden University,
Netherlands [33]. The software provides a more robust
coverage providing zoom functionality, tabling algorithms,
threshold manipulating based on user's preferences as well as
layouts (2D mapping). The visual representation comprises of
labeling, scattering, and mapping (density, thermal, and
overlay mapping) based on the input files provided [43e45].
Additionally, analyzing the clusters are conducted at an
aggregate level compared to CitNetExplorer, a commonly used
software, to evaluate individual publications [45]. The tool can
show various criterions like author collaborations, keywords,
co-occurrence, journals or country links in the form of net-
works, network link strength, density visualization as well as
heat maps [38]. The color-coding in the software denotes the
similarity in the research done between countries. In addition,
the clustering analysis post mapping aid in analyzing the
research trends towards a topic grouping similar items based
on keyword matches or citations. The clustering techniques
are based on a multidimensional scaling approach (MIDS)
which is evaluated by calculating similar indexes to build an
association strength [28]. Tools like VOSviewer, by default,
normalize the input data based on co-occurrence frequencies
to develop a link strength. The association strength (ASij) is
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4 26331

Table 1 e Usefulness of databases, namely Google Scholar, Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed and Dimensions in terms of
critical parameters [26,30e33].
Critical parameter Google Scholar Web of Science Scopus PubMed Dimensions
(WoS)
Year of arrival (~) 2000e2004 2000e2004 2004 1990e1997 2018
First article covered 1900s 1900s 1970 1966 1665
period (~)
Core areas covered Engineering and Engineering and Engineering and Clinical fields, Engineering and
sciences, business, sciences, sciences, health dental, nursing, sciences, policy, clinical
administration, technology, social science, life sciences, medicine, space, life trials, funding, food and
marketing, science, arts, and social sciences science, bioethics, culinary, geotagging,
pharmacology, humanities bio, and nano artificial intelligence
materials, veterinary medicine
science, social science,
arts, and humanities
Languages offered All languages English (45 other English (30 other English (56 other All languages
languages) languages) languages)
No. of keyword in the No limit 15 30 No limit Depends on the area and
search bar theme
Search inclusion All available All available All available Citation count and All available (along with
(abstracts, patents offered not specific themes for the
authors, patents, available respective author)
citation count)
Article show limit N/A 500 records with 2000 limited N/A
1,00,000 per query
Cost Free Paid Paid Free Free (needs
subscription)
Developer Google Clarivate Elsevier National Institute of Digital Science and
Health Research Solutions Inc

defined as the ratio between the observed number of co- index, the mapping is generated weighing items accordingly.
occurrences of i and j and the expected number of co- Due to these useful features as well as promising user inter-
occurrences at i and j, where i and j are occurrences that are face systems, VOSviewer was adopted to evaluate the corre-
statistically independent [46]. On the basis of the following lation and relationships.

Fig. 4 e Workflow methodology along with total yearly publication and total mean yearly citations until June 5th, 2021.
26332 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Results from bibliometric study
General trends
The annual number of publications from over the last two
decades is presented. Documents from early 2000's (2002) to
2021 were analyzed emphatically owing to less convincing
data between 1980's to 1990's which was less than 10 docu-
ments per year. The number of publications rose rapidly from
14 articles before 2002 to more than 687 articles until 2020
possibly due to a sudden increase in the financial support
from various funding agencies. Additionally, the annual sci-
entific production growth rate for the past 40 years
(1980e2021) was at a positive scale (13.66%). Another reason
could be the growing demands for alternative forms of energy
that are green, environment friendly, and sustainable. A
remarkable increase was also seen in the international col-
laborations as well as patents. Although a limited number of
articles have been published under the title of converting food
waste to hydrogen energy, several pieces of research have
been carried out in using hydrogen as a fuel with emphasis on
production technologies, compared to conventional fossil
fuels. When it comes to food waste treatment, anaerobic
digestion is used for methane generation and dark fermen-
tation is adopted for hydrogen production. Few studies have
also used the keywords “LCA” or life cycle assessment to
evaluate the environmental impacts, feasibility, and logistics
of such wastes [44]. In addition to the above trends, our study
noticed food waste being categorized into specific themes like
agricultural waste (105 articles), household/kitchen/residen-
tial area waste (19 articles), or biowaste (91 articles) for their
possible conversion to hydrogen energy. Table 2 provides the
top five highly cited papers that have dealt with the conver-
sion of food waste to hydrogen energy research published over
the last two decades.
Performance of journals
A total of 291 sources including journals, books, and confer-
ence reviews have been published concerning the topic of
food waste to hydrogen energy conversion over the last two
Table 2 e Top five highly cited papers dealing with food waste to hydrogen energy research over the last two decades.
Article title Author name
Biohydrogen production: prospects and Levin D.B, Pitt L, Love M
limitations to practical application.
Effect of pH on hydrogen production from Fang H.H.P, Liu. H
glucose by a mixed culture.
A review on dark fermentative biohydrogen Ghimire A, Frunzo. L, Pirozzi F,
production from organic biomass: process Trably E, Escudie R, Lens P.N.L,
parameters and use of by-products. Esposito G
Biohydrogen production by anaerobic Han S.K, Shin H.S
fermentation of food waste.
Feasibility of biohydrogen production Kim S.H, Han S.K, Shin H.S
by anaerobic co-digestion of food waste
and sewage sludge.
decades. Table 3 shows a list of the top five best journals to
publish for a topic on food waste to hydrogen energy. Cite-
Score, SNIP, and source journal ranking (SJR) are journal
metrics that help in measuring the citation impact and growth
of journals [40,41]. A total of 137 documents (27.9%) have been
published in the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy fol-
lowed by Bioresource Technology (85 documents) and Waste
Management (29 documents) which were considered popular.
Among the list of high impact factor journals, Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews was rated the highest, although the
journal ranks lower (9th position, data not shown in Table 3) in
terms of publishing articles on food waste and hydrogen en-
ergy. Other journals like Renewable Energy (4th position),
Biomass and Bioenergy (5th position) and Journal of Environmental
Management (6th position, data not shown in Table 3) offer
similar scope for revealing aspects on hydrogen energy gen-
eration from food waste.
Performance of countries/territories and institutions
The network mapping of countries and territories along with
their publications and citation analysis are displayed in Fig. 5.
VOSviewer was used to map the data where the size of rect-
angular frames positively correlates with the number of ci-
tations in that specific country. The greater the weight of the
label and rectangular frame, the higher the citations and
research articles published in the country [47]. The total link
strength denotes the country-to-country research impact
globally. For our study on food waste to hydrogen energy, the
cluster data concluded the maximum number of research
articles by authors in China (133 articles) accounting for more
than 25%, followed by India (86 articles), Italy (76 articles),
USA (69 articles) and South Korea (63 articles). The higher
single country publications (SCP) and multiple country pub-
lications (MCP) showed the researchers in China have been
working in close collaborations on food waste to hydrogen
energy with other countries like Italy, India, South Korea,
USA, and Japan.
The top 20 most productive institutions are listed in Table 4.
Zhejiang University in China, the Indian Institute of Chemical
Technology, India (CSIR-IICT), and Feng Chia University in
Journal published Citations Publication year
(as of 2021)
International Journal of 22 2004
Hydrogen Energy
Bioresource Technology 18 2002
Applied Energy 16 2015
International Journal of 16 2004
Hydrogen Energy
International Journal of 16 2004
Hydrogen Energy
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4 26333

Table 3 e Top five best Journals to publish for conversion of food waste to energy.
S. No Journal published TP (R %) h-index CiteScore 2019 SNIP SJR Publisher
1. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 137 (27.9) 50 8 1.377 1.141 Elsevier
2. Bioresource Technology 85 (17.3) 30 12.8 2.012 2.43 Elsevier
3. Waste Management 29 (5.9) 19 9.6 2.106 1.634 Elsevier
4. Renewable Energy 15 (3.05) 11 11.2 2.366 2.052 Elsevier
5. Biomass and Bioenergy 11 (2.24) 7 6.6 1.415 1.11 Elsevier

TP: Total journal publications; R: Rank; SNIP: Source normalized impact per paper; SJR: Journal Rank indicator.

Fig. 5 e Network mapping of countries along with their country publications and citation analysis.

Taiwan, China were considered the top three effective in-
stitutions researching on food waste to hydrogen energy. It is
worth mentioning that the Laboratory of Clean Energy in
Zhejiang University has a total link strength of 22 accounting
for more than 12% of the overall publications followed by the
Department of Bioengineering and Environment CSIR, India
contributing to 9.3% (total link strength: 13). Additionally, it can
be inferred that a significant portion of affiliations (combining
single and multiple author collaborations) was seen by Chinese
institutions namely Tsinghua University (6.7 weightage %),
Tongji University (5.4% weightage), Zhejiang University of
Technology (5.3% weightage) and Xi'an University of Agricul-
ture and Technology (5.3% weightage) ranking 5th, 8th, 9th and
10th position respectively.
While China has surpassed other countries during article
contribution, the articles from the USA have been the most
cited (4034). Meanwhile, India, Korea, and Italy also achieved a
faster citation and productivity growth in the last 10 years.
The possible reason for the boom in the number of publica-
tions and citations in the case of the USA and China could be
that the developed countries had initiated discussion years
before the developing countries, thereby establishing a rela-
tively effective management system for further advance-
ments. Additionally, due to the excessive food wastage in the
USA and higher consumption of fossil fuels in both countries,
positive trends on shifting towards food waste recycling and
developing green fuels arose. When it comes to developing
countries like India, modernization programs in collaboration

Table 4 e Most relevant institutional affiliations (as of 2021) for the topic of food waste to hydrogen energy.
S. No. Institute affiliation Articles published Rank (Weightage %) Country or region located
1. Zhejiang University 59 1 (12) China
2. CSIR-Indian Institute of Chemical Technology (CSIR-IICT) 46 2 (9.3) India
3. Feng Chia University 45 3 (9.1) Taiwan, China
4. University of Padova 35 4 (7.1) Italy
5. Tsinghua University 33 5 (6.7) China
26334 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
with the government have reduced overall littering and
increased waste collection rates. For instance, Kanpur city in
India have created a network of waste pickers, dump collec-
tors, and dealers in every area under governments’
“modernization scheme” where they earn approximately
Rs.1527-Rs.10,700 per month for waste collection and segre-
gation [48,49]. Similar recognition has been achieved in parts
of South America (Brazil) where food packaging products
(cardboards, packets, etc.) were recycled and sold. One of the
most successful companies, Coopamare, in Brazil, collects
packaging items from waste pickers and turns them into
valuable products like green energy sources and bio-based
products [50]. Thus, such initiatives can boost the productiv-
ity of food waste to produce useful energy, possibly hydrogen
energy, considering the resource scarcity, urbanization, and
industrialization.
Performance of authors
The performance of authors and collaborations were con-
ducted for those researchers who have contributed a mini-
mum of five articles to academia. Fig. 6 illustrates an overlay
visualization for the list of authors who have published a
minimum of five articles under the topic of food waste to
hydrogen energy. The isolated nodes were ignored as they did
not cover the main scope of the research. The possible reason
Fig. 6 e Overlay visualization for the list of authors who have published a minimum of five articles under the topic of food
waste to hydrogen energy.
for the closed network links was due to the growing de-
velopments in the topic where the authors attempted to delve
deeper into specific aspects of work.
The visualization using citation analysis with author unit
analysis concluded a total of 70 authors out of 2206 authors
(3.17%). Venkata Mohan. S working in the Indian Institute of
Chemical Technology-CSIR, Hyderabad has published the
most documents (18) with a total of 734 citations followed by
Lin C.Y from Feng Chia University, Taiwan, China (15 docu-
ments). When it comes to citations, South Korean researcher,
Shin. H.S is one of the highly cited researchers achieving a
total of 1472 under food waste to hydrogen energy conversion.
The visualization reveals that after 2018, specific authors like
“Albini. E”, “Pecorini. L”, “Ghimire. A”, “Zhao. M”, and others
have shown increased interest in the topic in comparison with
other authors. The co-authorship analysis based on countries
showed researchers from China accounting for 133 docu-
ments followed by India with 86 documents. The author's h-
index value is based on the number of publications and the
times cited [51]. Although South Korean, Turkish, and Chinese
researchers occupy the top 5 positions, significant contribu-
tions have been done by the USA (4716 citations with 69 doc-
uments). In terms of international collaborations, China and
the USA stand out. Further, it is noteworthy to mention the
contribution of India and Indian efforts in bio-energy research
taking into account the massive population.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Keyword analysis
The keyword co-occurrence analysis was conducted in the
present study by calculating the keyword usage and their
ranking. Fig. 7 illustrates three fields plot and their relations
between authors, keywords, and journals. The Sankey dia-
gram shows three elements: authors, topics, and journals
keeping n ¼ 10 where n denotes the number of items in the
dataset. The link between the elements is connected with grey
links denoting the network strength. The width of the arrows
is proportional to the flow rate of research topics [52,53]. “Food
waste”, “biohydrogen”, and “dark fermentation” have been
considered top trending words used by authors in various
journals. Table 5 shows the top ten keywords along with their
usage by authors, occurrences, and ranking. Data extraction
study showed 175 occurrences (18% of the articles) have uti-
lized “food waste” as the keyword followed by “biohydrogen”
(14%), “hydrogen” (11%), and “dark fermentation” (8%). It can
be deciphered that more importance has been given to specific
areas like efficient hydrogen fuel generation as well as food
waste utilization by using keywords “dark fermentation”,
“biohydrogen”, “anaerobic digestion”, “methane”, “biogas”,
“biofuels”, “biodiesel” and “biomass”. Nominal importance
has also been given in moderating the operational parameters
(~5%) by utilizing keywords like “pH”, “volatile fatty acids” and
“fermentation”.
In this study, the authors have also made an attempt to
demonstrate specific clusters to notice the research hot-
spots to be focused on in the near future. A minimum of 6
words per document was taken as a threshold for catego-
rizing the areas. Using the visualization tools, color coding
depicts the number of similar areas and their network links
under which work is in progress. Fig. 8 illustrates the
Fig. 7 e Three fields plot illustrating the relationship between authors, keywords, and journals.
26335
keywords and keyword clusters with their research hotspots
requiring further emphasis. A total of 5 clusters were
inferred dealing with different subareas on the topic of food
waste to hydrogen energy. For instance, red color (Cluster I)
constitutes 183 items highlighting keywords like “hydrogen
fuels” (15 occurrences, link strength:139), “agricultural
waste” (16 occurrences, link strength: 271), “food process-
ing” (36 occurrences, link strength: 624), “biomass power”
(11 occurrences, link strength: 246) denoting a dominating
trend towards sustainable technologies for hydrogen pro-
duction. Similarly, green color (Cluster II) demonstrates
effective food waste treatment methods with keywords like
“co-digestion” (12 occurrences, link strength: 333), “volatile
solids” (9 occurrences, link strength: 149) “pH control” (6
occurrences, link strength: 90), “response surface method-
ology” (17 occurrences, link strength: 235) and “fermenta-
tion” (239 occurrences, link strength: 5915). The purple color
(Cluster III), blue color (Cluster IV) and yellow color (Cluster
V) represent the keywords related to themes namely bio-
hydrogen production, utilization of hydrogen in fuel cells
and economics, feasibility and logistics respectively. It is
noteworthy to mention that an increasing attention is given
to utilizing food waste as a source for hydrogen production
employing different innovative technologies. However,
more work in terms of parameter optimization is required to
make these processes efficient. Additionally, the cluster
analysis shows the least importance to economics, feasi-
bility, and logistics (Cluster V). The possible reason for this
could be to finalize a standard technology globally giving
adequate attention to the exponential increase in food
wastage. Further, social acceptance concerning meeting an
equivalent demand while using hydrogen energy needs to
be addressed.
26336 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4

anaerobic co-digestion of food waste (in presence of CaO2

Table 5 e Top ten keywords occurrences (as of 2021) and
catalyst) for production of hydrogen and methane [72]. The
their usage (%) in articles.
results showed maximum methane concentration to be
Keyword Occurrences Keyword usage by Rank
54.13% followed by hydrogen 26.34% with a substrate to
authors (%)
inoculum ratio of 1:3. Although in some cases, a lower pro-
Food waste 175 18 1 duction of hydrogen was seen, an equally important challenge
Biohydrogen 135 14 2
of food waste valorization has been achieved which poses a
Hydrogen 109 11 3
Dark 80 8 4
great concern in the food industry. Large amounts of food
fermentation waste can be processed into valuable energy enabling re-
Hydrogen 56 6 5 utilization of resources. Additionally, when it comes to tech-
production nological improvements, hydrogen production can be further
Anaerobic 50 5 6 enhanced by using torrefaction in presence of a low-cost
digestion
biocatalyst in a fluidized bed gasifier for future work. How-
Methane 39 4 7
ever, a focus on transportation and capital cost (CAPEX and
Fermentation 37 4 7
Biomass 31 3 9 OPEX) is required for a global scale-up.
Biogas 30 3 10
Cluster II: effective food waste treatments

Food waste consists of a significant fraction of solid waste.

Research hotspots for future discussion
Based on cluster analysis done for the co-occurrence of key-
words (as presented in Fig. 8), specific research hotspots have
been shortlisted which need greater focus. These areas have
been summarized below.
Cluster I: technologies for hydrogen production
The variety of methods adopted for hydrogen generation have
gained increasing attention as they aim to find a possible
alternative to fossil fuel energy sources. Hydrogen production
pathway relies on three major elements; (1) material that
contains hydrogen (or hydrocarbons), (2) energy source and (3)
catalyst used [54,55]. However, these elements should be
given importance in addition to known factors like material
type (feedstock to extract hydrogen), techniques adopted,
cleanness, cost-effectiveness, possible environmental im-
pacts, and scale-up. Table 6 shows the technologies adopted
for the conversion of food waste to hydrogen energy.
Hydrogen has an energy content of 1.22 kJ/kg, 2.75 times
higher than other hydrocarbon fuels and 2.6 times greater
than methane [69]. The mixture of hydrogen and methane,
called hythane, can also be utilized as an effective fuel in the
automotive industry. The hydrogen-containing material is a
crucial factor in determining the amount of hydrogen to be
generated. Additionally, the presence of catalysts plays a role
in increasing the efficiency of the overall process. However,
this depends on the type of material being used during the
study [55]. For instance, a performance estimation study was
conducted using food waste generated from Indian kitchens
to produce hydrogen-rich gas using steam gasification [70].
Performance parameters like steam flow rate and tempera-
tures were varied to arrive at optimum conditions (0.5 mL/min
and 800  C) providing an efficiency of 63%. Similar studies
were done using supercritical water gasification process
analyzing the suitability of different food additives (NaOH,
NaHCO3, and NaCl) for treatment of food waste to hydrogen
energy (temperatures: 400e450  C) where NaOH demonstrated
the best catalytic performance with hydrogen generation of
12.73 mol/kg [71]. Investigations were also conducted using
These organic wastes are normally disposed into landfills
causing environmental problems (leachate formation,
groundwater pollution, infertile soil, greenhouse gas emis-
sions) if not properly managed and treated [73]. Fig. 9 illus-
trates the methodology for food waste treatment to produce
hydrogen energy. Anaerobic digestion (AD) has been consid-
ered the most common process for food waste treatment for
decades. As food wastes are biodegradable, containing high
amounts of valuable compounds majorly carbohydrates,
proteins, and lipids, it can be considered a promising sub-
strate for bio-energy production [74]. In a typical AD process,
the food waste is degraded in 4 steps; (1) hydrolysis, (2)
acidogenesis, (3) acetogenesis, (4) methanogenesis. The
digestion process can be categorized into single-stage and
two-stage process. In comparison to a single-stage process, a
two-stage process is normally preferred as it allows better
microorganism activity at each phase, giving higher impor-
tance to hydrolysis, acidification, and methanogenesis. Addi-
tionally, improved process stability and loading capacities are
achieved [75].
Various factors need to be understood for effective
hydrogen production using food waste as input. Fig. 10 illus-
trates the various factors to be considered for hydrogen pro-
duction using food waste as substrate. The low alkalinity and
slight variation in pH due to volatile acids causes degradation
of organics making the process less favorable. The continuous
production of hydrogen requires special bioreactor systems.
These can be classified into suspended and biofilm bioreactors
depending on the distribution of microorganisms present
[69,76]. The production studies at a laboratory level are nor-
mally performed in methane production systems, but with
slight improvements in parameter optimizations. For
instance, the production of hydrogen using a packed bed
reactor with polyurethane foam (packing material) was con-
ducted by varying the loading rates [77]. The results showed a
significant decrease in yields when the loading rates of cheese
whey permeate decreased from 18.8 g to 6.3 g mainly due to
the microbial decrease of Sporolactobacillus sp. and Prevotella
[77]. Similar production studies were performed by evaluating
the effectiveness of anaerobic sludge reactor and anaerobic
fluidized reactor using a mixture of glucose and cheese whey
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Fig. 8 e Keywords and keyword clusters with their research hotspots requiring further emphasis.
where the co-fermentation concluded yields of 1.7 mmol H2/g
feed in a fluidized bed reactor [78]. Additionally, the utilization
of cheese whey as a sole substrate contributed to 1.9 mmol H2/
g feed. These bioreactors were operated in continuous mode
under suitable conditions for maximizing hydrogen produc-
tion and reactor performance.
Continuous stirred tank reactors (CSTR) is considered the
most common reactor set up after lab-scale batch reactor due
to its easy operation and mechanism. The suspended form of
the material improves the mass transfer of the overall process
[79]. Lee et al., 2014 reported hydrogen fermentation set up in a
CSTR fed with food waste under thermophilic conditions [80].
The customized setup was operated at different loading rates
(70.2, 89.4, and 125.4 kg fed/m3/day) where the maximum yield
of 111.1 mL H2/g volatile solids was achieved at 125.4 kg fed/
m3/day. Additionally, the microbial activity using Clostridium
sp. strain Z6 could degrade >96% of the total carbohydrate
content. Similar studies were conducted using enzymatic
hydrolysis of Agave tequilana bagasse where the maximum
values of 2.53H2/L day was attached under organic loading of
60 g [81]. Apart from these, other types of reactors like single-
stage digestor, photo fermentation reactor, and semi-
continuous reactor were also evaluated for hydrogen yield.
Table 7 provides a list of studies for the conversion of food
waste to hydrogen energy using different reactor configura-
tions. It is critical to mention that all the above studies had to
undergo pre-treatment steps like thermal treatment, acid
treatment [82], alkaline treatment [83], and ultrasonication/
microwave treatment [84] before conversion in order to
effectively select the main hydrogen producers. However,
adoption of these pre-treatment methods adds to a significant
increase in operating cost, thereby making the processes less
attractive at a commercial level [85].
26337
Recent years have shown developments in two-stage
bioreactor systems where the food to biomass substrate is
fed into the hydrogen bioreactor at one stage and the effluent
generated is converted to methane in the second stage. The
bioreactor is controlled under specific conditions (variation in
temperature or pH) depending on the microbial load fed into
the system. The process is considered to be energy efficient
during higher organic loading rates with promising degrada-
tion characteristics when compared with single-stage biore-
actor systems [84]. For instance, a study estimated the effect of
different organic loading rates (17.7, 34.8, 70.8, and 106 g vol-
atile solids/L day) with retention times (48, 24, 12, and 8 h). The
hydrogen production was more effective at higher loading rate
with shorter retention time in the acidogenic reactor system
[94]. Nathia-Neves et al. designed two reactors and used them
sequentially and semi-continuously for biogas production
where the maximum production of hydrogen of 76.5% was
achieved in the first 20 days at pH 5.96 after which a decrease
was noticed [95]. On the other hand, methane content
increased from 39.7% to 51.4% during this period. Additionally,
the co-digestion process, utilizing a mixture of restaurant food
waste and vinasse (a waste from sugarcane industry) could
reduce the total solids to up to 64%. The increase in hydrogen
generation was reported due to the activation of acidogenic
bacteria at an optimum pH value aiding the process. Although
this technology attempts to solve the threat of energy crisis
and manages food waste effectively, substrate ratio, time for
microbial population growth in the reactor, inoculum char-
acteristics according to food waste fed as well as reusability
can be given more attention. Moreover, the time lag often
generated during acidogenesis and methanogenesis is a
crucial factor affecting hydrogen generation [96]. A study
investigated the effect of different pre-treatment methods
 26338
Table 6 e Technologies adopted for conversion of food waste to hydrogen energy.
Name of the Major technological Merits Challenges Quantity of substrate Yield obtained References
technology requirement reused

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Solar gasification Solar energy Promising hydrogen yield. Solar collector plates need Biomass (Scenedesmus Syngas yield for biomass: 82 [56]
Infinite availability of to be changed from time to algae and wheat straw) e90%
energy source time. Sewage sludge (water Syngas yield for sewage sludge:
Weather conditions and treatment plant) 63e74%
climate change to be Cotton, soybean husk, black 18% yield obtained during solar [57]
considered. mustard husk, and straw gasification compared to
conventional gasification (15%)
Biomass Biomass or plant waste Organic waste can be Oxygen source requirement Food waste, poultry waste, Highest gas efficiency was [58]
gasification (preferably dried and recycled Tar and char formation solid waste observed in food waste (71%)
pre-treated) High biomass conversion Biomass substrate can be followed by solid (53%) and
efficiency complex and hence process poultry waste (45%)
control requirements Dealcoholized grape marc 0.6 Nm3/kg biomass [59]
Almond shells 1.58 Nm3/kg biomass [60,61]
Steam reforming High temperatures and No expensive oxygen source Need for catalyst Food waste (1 kg) 151L of H2/kg of food waste at [62]
catalyst required regeneration 700  C, 25 h
Pine chips (particle size: 10.73% (by weight) using Ni [63]
1e2 mm) eZrO2
Rice husk 61.9 Nm3/kg rice husk using 0.1 [64]
LaNiO3 catalyst
Supercritical Effective process control Substrates with high water High pressure requirement Rice (40%), cabbage (30%), 1.88 mol/kg, [65]
water and loading rates activity can also be treated High energy consumption cooking oil (20%), chicken H2 selectivity (53.86%) at 360  C
gasification (10%) for 90 min with 5% KOH catalyst
Cabbage, chicken, rice, 8.03 mol/kg at 480  C, Ni/Al2O3 [66]
banana peel (9%) catalyst, Lanthanum
promoter
Pyrolysis Catalyst depending on Easy operation CO2 emissions Rice straw, microalgal oil 70% [67]
the loading rate of No complex pre-treatment Char formation Rice husk, coconut shell, Hydrogen yield generated with [68]
substrate required Efficient catalyst sugarcane bagasse, palm 10% NiAl2O3 catalyst:
Plant/agricultural waste in requirement for better kernel shell, cotton stalk, Hydrogen composition increase
addition to foo/kitchen/ performance wheat straw to 25.35 mmol/g after addition
canteen waste can be High reactor cost of palm kernel shell and
treated catalyst
Highest amount of lignin
content: 25.25 mmol/g
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
(acid, alkaline, and hydrogen peroxide) of food waste (mixture
of potato and bean waste) for continuous hydrogen produc-
tion where the findings concluded best yields ranging between
126.4 and 252.7 mL H2/g volatile using hydrogen peroxide
treatment [97]. Co-digestion of substrates with multiple
acidogenic units could be a possible solution to overcome the
issue as these would generate a continuous system with less
spent waste compared to single-stage reactors. Moreover,
utilization of food waste rich in proteins and lipids could be a
possible solution for faster reaction with the inoculum fed.
This would not only reduce the nutrient imbalance often
caused but also improve the design and feasibility of the two-
stage system.
Cluster III: biohydrogen production
Biohydrogen can be produced from different types of raw
sources like fossil fuels, industrial wastewaters, and un-
treated biomass. However, commercializing hydrogen needs
stricter conditions with limitations on usage of non-
renewable fossil fuels causing harmful emissions and green-
house gases [98]. The need of the hour lies in greener pro-
duction of hydrogen energy or biohydrogen. Generation of the
gas from renewable materials, food waste, and other organic
starch materials have been increasingly valued due to their
efficiency. Biological productions may be considered more
viable compared to thermochemical technologies due to
higher efficiency along with a lower capital cost [99]. Addi-
tionally, due to the utilization of enzymes and microorgan-
isms, the need for heat treatment is reduced. Fig. 11 illustrates
different methods for producing biohydrogen. The most
common methods for generating biological hydrogen from
food waste are dark fermentation or photo fermentation [100].
Dark fermentation involves conversion of food waste
Fig. 9 e Methodology illustrating the food waste treatment to produce hydrogen energy.
26339
substrates or organic compounds into hydrogen in the
absence of oxygen along with a group of bacteria. Enzymatic
hydrolysis favors the organic compounds with high molecular
weight degrading them to produce hydrogen and volatile fatty
acids as main products [100,101]. On the other hand, photo
fermentation involves biochemical reactions using a group of
photosynthetic bacteria [99,102]. The major difference be-
tween the two processes is that the latter is occurring in the
presence of light. Additionally, when it comes to economic
feasibility, dark fermentation may be considered more bene-
ficial as the process involves continuous production of
hydrogen, unlike photo fermentation which is dependent on
sunlight. When it comes to the production of biohydrogen
using plant material and algae (blue/green) as substrate, bio-
photolysis is generally noteworthy. The technology can be
done directly (through a natural process in the presence of
light) or indirectly (in the presence of cyanobacteria or
microalgae) to produce hydrogen [102e104]. Eqs (1)e(4) de-
scribes the mechanisms for common biohydrogen production
processes.
C6 H12 O6 þ 12H2 O / 12 H2 þ 6 CO2 ðIndirectÞ (1)
2H2 O þ light / 2H2 þ O2 ðDirectÞ (2)
C6 H12 O6 þ 2H2 O / 2CH3 COOH þ 2CO2 þ 4H2 ðFermentationÞ
(3)
C6 H12 O6 þ 6H2 O / 6CO2 þ 12H2 ðFermentationÞ (4)
The quantity of food waste in addition to bioprocessing of
protein, carbohydrate, and lipid-rich contents requires careful
operation under specific conditions. Table 8 describes the
major requirements and evaluations done for effective
26340 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Fig. 10 e Factors to be considered for hydrogen energy production from food waste.
biohydrogen production using biological treatment. In a
typical fermentation process, the sugars containing organic
acids in the food waste break down into smaller chains (fer-
menting) at varied processing conditions to generate bio-
hydrogen. The energy produced during the process is more
than 2.75 - fold (122 kJ/g) compared to traditional fossil fuel-
based approaches [105,106]. However, certain importance
must be given while varying the food waste to biomass ratio
and conditions. For instance, Asadi et al. used ethanol pre-
treated rice straw for producing biohydrogen through a bio-
logical enzyme (Enterobacter aerogenes) where the results
revealed temperatures of 180  C at 30 min was optimal for
obtaining maximum hydrogen yield of 19.73 mL/g straw [107].
It was noticed that no further trends in yield were observed by
varying the parameters. Similar research was conducted
using cassava processing wastewater for generating bio-
hydrogen from microbial consortia (bacterial families of por-
phyromonadaceae, clostridiaceae, ruminococcaceae, and
enterococcaceae) where clostridiaceae provided maximum effi-
ciency of 90% within 16e24 h [108]. A higher yield was ob-
tained due to parameter optimization (via Box Behnken
design) as well as kinetic analysis where values of viscosity (m),
rate constant (k), and adsorption capacity (q) were higher post
enzymatic hydrolysis. Thus, it can be concluded that factors
like organic load, bacterial concentration, pH, temperature,
and agitation are key for considering an economically viable
process.
To boost biological hydrogen generation, several studies
have utilized the presence of cheap catalyst salts to improve
the degradation of sugars. The recent years have also shown
the increasing usage of nanocatalysts, to improve the
degradation process facilitating faster bioconversion re-
actions [122e124]. These nanocatalysts, due to their small
particle size, possess higher surface area providing more
active sites thereby expediting the fermentation process.
Additionally, the use of hematite and oxide nanoparticles
along with the substrate has provided an increase of 1.2e1.5
fold in the fermentation process [105]. The utilization of
lignocellulosic biomass impregnated with nickel nano-
catalyst showed a rise in the gas yields and hydrogen yields
by 9.5e16.2 mmol/g and 2.8e5.8 mmol/g respectively [125].
Another kinetic research revealed the use of sodium car-
bonate nanocatalyst could lower the activation energy from
117.88 kJ/mol to 78.25 kJ/mol for sugarcane bagasse gasifi-
cation [126]. This lowering of activation energy allows faster
and greater product generation. Thus, utilization of such
catalysts could positively agree on improving the hydrogen
production process. When it comes to technological im-
provements, a combination of dark and photo fermentation
technology have also been explored for the production of
biohydrogen. For instance, biohydrogen enhancement was
conducted using a combination of dark and photo fermen-
tation by adding two waste materials (exhausted resin and
biochar) for food waste treatment [127]. The porous structure
of biochar, as well as the nutrient provision by resin for
bacterial activity, shortened the lag phase by 41.5% with
hydrogen yields of 94%. Thus, the potential of ‘waste to treat
waste’ for obtaining valuable products was successfully
experimented. Similar research was conducted using a
three-step process coupling dark fermentation, photo
fermentation, and anaerobic digestion where the highest
yield of 121.45 ± 44.5 L H2/kg volatile solids was produced at a
loading rate of 2.5 kg volatile solids/m3 day for 4 days [128].
Additionally, the research concluded merging the three
methods provided a 1.75 - fold increase in yields. Thus, such
hybrid methods could be adopted for better energy recovery.
Table 7 e Conversion of food waste to hydrogen energy using different reactor configurations.
Food source Type of reactor Conditions Hydrogen yield Reference
adopted
Pre-treatment Reactor pH

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
temperature ( C)
Food waste with and Single stage digestor Thermal treatment (25 L flask, 134  C, 37 7 87 nL/kg volatile solids fed [86]
without olive husks 3.2 bar
Food and microalgae waste Batch reactor 20 kHz, 150 W ultrasonication 150e250 5.5e5.8 60% substrate benefit for production of [87]
leftover Centrifugation (7000 rpm for 10 min) hydrogen
and then heat treatment (90  C,
20 min)
Food waste Anaerobic sequencing Alkaline shock (pH: 12.5 for 1 day) 35 5.3 0.9 mol H2/mol hexose added [88]
batch reactor (ASBR)
Food waste (rich husk, Batch reactor Reactor operated with 10% total solids 55 7.5 Highest yield: 40.04 mL/volatile solids [89]
straw, potato, noodles, by adding waste and seeded sludge, fed
meat, green vegetables, 12 h Lowest yield: 23.05 mL/volatile solids
tofu)
Cafeteria waste (grains, Co-digestion of 100  C, 10 min for 2e5 weeks 35 7 0.93e9.5 mL/feedstock [90]
vegetables, meat) municipal food waste (2
stage bioreactors)
Food waste (rice, cabbage, Hastelloy Batch Reactor Food waste concentration (10e30% 360 1.88 mol/kg using KOH catalyst [65]
e
cooking oil, chicken) weight),
Catalyst: NaOH, KOH, NieAl2O3, Ni
eZrO2, FeCl3,10.5e20 MPa
Indian kitchen waste Gasification reactor 0.125 mL/min - 0.75 mL/min, 700 800 1.2 m3/kg food waste fed [70]
e800  C
e
(bread, vegetables, pulses, (performance: 63% at 0.5 mL/min
beans, meat, rice, cooking steam flow rate)
oils)
Food waste (protein Supercritical 400e450  C, 20e60 min, Naþ (as 450 12.73 mol/kg food waste [71]
e
powder, cooking oil, gasification batch additive)
cellulose, soluble starch) reactor (250 mL)
Cheese whey powder Batch reactor Reactor conditions: 121  C, 15 min 55 5.2 4.5 mL/g cells fed [91]
Inoculum: 20 g/L substrate, 360 h
Brewery waste Photo fermentation 5e10% waste concentration, 48e96 h 25e35 8 2.5 - fold increase in hydrogen [92]
reactor growth production in diluted brewery waste
Citrus peel waste Batch reactors Substrate (5e15 g/L), 30e44, 5.5e8.5 30 8.5 13e29 mmol/L [93]

26341
26342 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Cluster IV: utilization of hydrogen in fuel cells
Fuel cell is an electrochemical device that converts chemical
energy to electrical energy. It consists of three major compo-
nents: a fuel electrode or anode, an oxidant electrode or
cathode, and an electrolyte between them [130]. These elec-
trodes consist of a catalyst (normally platinum). Fig. 12(a) il-
lustrates the typical mechanism of hydrogen fuel cells for
utilization in automobiles [129]. Water and temperature are
key parameters to achieve an efficient fuel cell design.
Hydrogen molecule is passed into the unit through a gas flow
stream where an electrochemical reaction occurs (Eq. (5)). The
hydrogen ions migrate to the acid electrolyte through an
external circuit at cathode (Eq. (6)). The electrons and
hydrogen ions react with oxygen supplied to form water
which is the main product (Eq. (7)). This water is continuously
removed during operation for the generation of electric power.
The mechanism can be presented by the following equation
[131].
H2 / 2Hþ þ 2 e
1
O2 þ 2Hþ þ 2e /H2 O
2
1
H2 þ O2 /H2 O þ W þ Qheat
2
Fuel cells have shown promising approaches in minimizing
environmental impacts as well as providing promising effi-
ciencies. Fig. 13 illustrates the merits and challenges of using a
hydrogen fuel cell system. Various developments in types of
fuel cells have been conducted by testing different cost-
effective materials in addition to parameter optimization.
Fig. 11 e Different methods for producing biohydrogen: (a) direct and indirect biophotolysis, (b) dark fermentation process,
(c) photo fermentation process, and (d) dark-photo fermentation utilizing food waste as an effective feedstock.
Fig. 12(b) provides the different materials used in fuel cells by
industry manufacturers [129]. For instance, a nitrogen doper
porous carbon material was fabricated from renewable
biomass (duckweed) for fuel cell generation [132]. The single-
chamber fuel cell provided a power density of 625.9 mW/m2
in addition to providing better stability than conventional
platinum electrocatalyst. This not only makes the material a
natural sourced cost-effective option but also saves the value
of platinum-based catalysts. Similar facile and eco-friendly
materials were investigated from nitrogen-doped activated
carbon derived from tofu gel (TGC-900) [133]. The TGC-900
provided a high surface area of 651.78 m2/g by doping nitro-
gen (5.52%). The material revealed to successfully drive four
single chamber fuel cells with a highest power density of
977 ± 32 mW/m2 and output voltage of 544 ± 6 mV. Based on
the relationship between electrodes and fuels, fuel cells are
normally classified into proton exchange membrane fuel cells
(PEMFC), methanol fuel cells, phosphoric acid fuel cell (PAFC),
solid oxide fuel cells (SOFC), carbonate fuel cells (MCFC); each
having their own merits and values [134]. Out of these tech-
(5) nologies, proton exchange membrane fuel cells (PEM) are most
preferred due to their low operating temperature (80e100  C),
(6) low emissions with high efficiency (60e65%) [130].
In recent years, the UK Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Hub pub-
lished a report on using hydrogen and fuel cells for producing
(7) safe, affordable, and low-carbon heating source in the country
[135]. Although the technology has received less interest for
decades due to varying consumer preferences, huge potential
has been noticed by developing countries. When it comes to
effective expansion of the fuel cell industry, US Department of
Energy has dominated the sector selling at $1200/kW in 2015
and $1000/kW targeted for 2020e21 (for a typical blended
PEMFC system) [136]. Japan and Korea have introduced a
Table 8 e Major requirements and evaluations conducted for effective biohydrogen production using biological treatments.
Name of the Major Limitations Substrate Inoculum Process conditions Biohydrogen yield References
technology requirements
pH Temperature ( C)
Biophotolysis Water and sunlight Constant Sludge Heterocystous 8 40 in an air-conditioned 4.85 mL H2/L h [109]
(in case of direct requirement of cyanobacterium Nostoc room with 140 red and
process) sunlight PCC 7120 white LED light
Water, sunlight, and Overall cost of the illumination
bacteria process should be (318 mmol m2 s1)
(cyanobacteria/ considered. Wastewater Lyngbya sp 7.4 30 ± 1 17.05 mmol H2/g bacteria/h [110]

i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
microalgae) in case of
indirect process
No additional
nutrient requirement
Dark fermentation Absence of oxygen, Effective control of Fruit and vegetable Lactobacillaceae, <6 35 ± 1 Highest yield for fruit and [111]
bacterial cluster enzyme, pH, and waste, sugar beet pulp, coriobacteriaceae, vegetable waste: 52 cm3/g
substrate ratios corn silage bifidobacteriaceae volatile solids
Lowest yield for corn silage: 24
e27 cm3/g volatile solids
Sugar beet pulp, sugar Anaerobic sludge 5.5 35 280 dm3 H2/kg volatile solids [112]
beet leaves, sugar beet obtained from fruit and
stillage, rye stillage, vegetable waste.
maize silage, fruit and Slaughterhouse waste turned to
vegetable waste, kitchen be unsuitable for hydrogen
waste, and production.
slaughterhouse waste
Hydrolyzed sugar beet Ruminococcaceae 5.5 80 52.11 dm3 H2/kg volatile solids at [113]
pulp a dose of 1 g Fe2O3/dm3
Lactate wastewater from Clostridium genera 8.5 45 0.85 mol H2/mol lactate [114]
food processing industry consumed
Photo fermentation Presence of light, Process can only take Chewing gum residue Rhodobacter sphaeroides 5.5 28 ± 2 0.80 L H2/L chewing gum residue [115]
bacterial cluster place in the presence Glucose Rhodobacter capsulatus e 30 5.5 ± 0.15 mol H2/mol glucose [116]
of light. JP91
Platanus orientalis leaves Photosynthetic bacteria 7 50 in a water bath (48 h) 82% [117]
(HAU-M1) Energy conversion efficiency:
15.17%
Hydrolyzed straw Rhodobacter sphaeroides 7.1 30 under illumination of 4.62 mol H2/mol reducing sugar [118]
biomass 4000 ± 200 lux
Dark-photo Aimed to increase the More studies on Corn stover Enterobacter aerogenes 6.5 30 under illumination Maximum cumulative hydrogen [119]
fermentation hydrogen yield by adopting different 3500 lux and then yield: 141.42 mL/g total solids
integrating the two types of bacterial without light (in case of Minimum cumulative hydrogen
processes. cultures need to be dark fermentation) yield: 36.08 mL/g total solids
Dark-photo co- conducted. Fruit and vegetable Acetobacter lovaniensis, e 30 Dark fermentation: 793.7 mL H2/g [120]
fermentation system waste, cheese whey clostridium butycricum, solids and Photo fermentation:
appears more feasible powder Enterobacter sp, 695.4 mL H2/g solids
in terms of cost, two- Bifidobacterium
stage system, and Starch/glucose-based Clostridium butyricum and 6.5 30 with light intensity 8.3 ± 0.1 mmol H2/g solids [121]
environment friendly. media Rhodopseudomonas 40 W/m2 during photo
palustris fermentation

26343
26344 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4

Fig. 12 e (a) Mechanism of hydrogen fuel cells for utilization in automobiles, and (b) current materials used (%) in fuel cells by
industry manufacturers.

programme for exploring the area of residential fuel cell mi-
crochips as larger fuel cells have entered the market in
countries like the USA and Europe [137]. It is noteworthy to
mention that with time, efficient cost reduction efforts have
been conducted to further expand the growing market of
hydrogen energy. However, considering the growing
emissions with the depleting fossil fuel sources, a more stra-
tegic and independent approach is required for scale-up.
In order to effectively utilize hydrogen fuel cells, certain
technical problems need to be given importance [138]: (1)
frequently changing from anode side to cathode side, (2)
possible counter flow mechanisms for higher generation, and

Fig. 13 e Merits and challenges of using a hydrogen fuel cell system.

 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4 26345

(3) ensuring stable hydrogen currents with least drops in cell
voltage. Apart from technical improvements, an imperative
need lies in the global market reach of the fuel. Fuel cell
vehicle manufacturers like Toyota have begun manufacturing
cars with hydrogen fuel cells selling at a base price of $ 57,500
compared to standard petrol and hybrid vehicles ($18,500)
[139]. The huge difference exists due to the lack of
manufacturing facilities and knowledge on the system for an
effective large-scale production [140]. The key enablers could
be reducing purchase and operation costs of hydrogen fuel
cells in addition to providing tax incentives. For instance,
countries like the USA, Norway, Canada, and the UK have
already begun to issue subsidies and tax benefits for pro-
moting green fuels [130]. Thus, such schemes would not only
attract the consumers but also aid in removing the depen-
dence on fossil fuels promoting a sustainable environment.
Cluster V: others: economics, feasibility, and logistics
Cost analysis is an important step for measuring the net profit
and feasibility throughout the process. In addition to the pre-
treatment and reactor conditions, unit costs concerning
buying enzymes that positively favor the substrate are critical.
The expenses incurred during various stages including raw
material processing, production, logistics, and transportation
can be used to calculate the net profit of the process. For
instance, a study was conducted for commercial scale-up of
hydrogen using lignocellulosic biomass of Triticum aestivum. L
crop as feedstock [141]. The bi-dimensional study (environ-
mental-economic sustainability) used biorefinery energy bal-
ance and its relation with economics to evaluate the
generation. The results showed acid pre-treatment step gave
the most sustainable indicator (0.007 $/MJ output) compared
to other treatments. Similar investigations were conducted to
narrow down a specific pre-treatment step (comparison be-
tween acid, thermal, thermo-acidic, pressure, and freeze-
thaw treatments) to lower the energy consumption and in-
crease biohydrogen production using kitchen waste where
freeze-thaw method was the most profitable (11.5 V/ton
kitchen waste) [142]. Bordeleau and Droste adopted non-
thermal pre-treatment steps like ultrasound and microwave
treatment and conducted an economic analysis with con-
ventional thermal treatments for treating organic mixture
(20e60%) [143]. The results showed highest net cost per
influent flow using chemical treatment (0.0217 $/m3)
compared to ultrasound (0.0166 $/m3), microwave (0.0119
$/m3) and conventional methods (0.0124 $/m3). Considering
the growing potential for hydrogen energy production
through biological methods and exploration of different mi-
croorganisms’, economic evaluations through fermentation
could be a possible solution for the future. Table 9 provides
cost analysis ($/year) for the production of hydrogen energy as
a fuel through fermentation. The breakup cost has also been
provided to perform a robust cost estimation study. These
values are subject to change with inflation, policy changes,
location, and developments.
It is noteworthy to mention that irrespective of the pre-
treatment steps conducted, factors like labor charges, loca-
tion cost, product prices, disposal cost, maintenance cost, and
taxes also need to be included for a robust cost analysis.
Additionally, pre-treatments consume more energy for an
effective hydrolysis thereby increasing the overall cost. In
order to boost the overall production and efficacy of hydrogen
generation, biological methods may be used, carefully con-
trolling the substrate ratio. As of today, a significant amount of
hydrogen production is conducted by blending coal, gas, and

Table 9 e Cost analysis ($/year) for production of hydrogen energy as a fuel through fermentation [9,144e149].
Type of cost Cost relations Tentative values ($/year) Secondary parameters
Total capital cost 16,36,560 Startup time
Storage Storage tank (25% H2 fermenter cost) 89,000
Construction H2 fermenter equipment 3,56,000 Supervisor charge
Food waste grinding/pretreatment 2,58,000
Purification 3,88,040 Depreciation
Additional Land use/location (50% construction cost) 5,45,520
Total operation management 5,48,568 Interest rate fluctuations
Materials Chemicals/catalysts 48,000
Maintenance 6% capital cost Fuel transportation cost
Annual costing 19% capital cost 310,946
Additional Labour (20% operating cost) 91,428 Social acceptance
Total profits 3,60,000
Amount of waste For every 1-ton input 100 Environmental condition
Waste recycling 10% treatment cost 3,60,000
Total production Captial cost þ Operation cost $ 3.2/kg of H2 Accidents and leaks
Annual cost ¼
Annual H2 production
Cost estimation for production of hydrogen energy through renewable energy resources
Renewable energy sources Process technology normally adopted Low limit ($/kg H2) Higher limit ($/kg H2)
Solar Photovoltaic electrolysis 6.7 10.7
Wind Electrolysis 2.4 3.3
Biomass Gasification/Pyrolysis 3 4.5
Hydropower Electrolysis 6.4 9.4
Tidal Electrolysis 7.6
e
26346 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Fig. 14 e (a) Value of renewable energy sources ($/kg) compared to fossil fuels and grid systems, and (b) available routes for
transporting hydrogen fuels (as of 2019).
oil leading to excessive carbon emissions in the industry. A
possible replacement for this could be to increase the utili-
zation of renewable energy sources like solar, wind, nuclear or
hydro power. Fig. 14(a) illustrates the carbon emissions and
the value of renewable energy sources compared to fossil fuels
and grid systems [135,144]. These energy sources could pro-
vide a possible pathway towards addressing sustainability,
cost-effectiveness, and environmental concerns as they are
infinitely available. However, constraints concerning location,
climatic changes, depreciation, and social acceptance of fuel
should be addressed accordingly. Conducting a life cycle
assessment is another promising solution towards under-
standing the possible environmental impacts of a particular
process. The assessment holds immense potential in
improving and rethinking each stage in a process considering
cost and energy demands [150]. The method follows the steps
as highlighted below [151,152]:

Goal and scope: Understanding the purpose of the study and
setting up system boundaries for a process.

Life cycle inventory: Encompasses specific criterions like
labor requirements, cost, energy consumption, location,
and total processing time for the process. These would
later be suitable for integrations and optimizations.

Life cycle impact assessment: Listing and addressing the
environmental problems and mitigating possible future
challenges. The assessment also involves meeting the
purpose and demands of the study.

Interpretation: Verifying results, treatment methods, and
datasets. A sensitivity analysis and cost-benefit analysis
is also conducted for better decision-making and
improvements.
Thus, such systems could play a key role in possible im-
provements at each stage from raw material to value addition
in products. As immense opportunities exist in converting
food waste to hydrogen fuel for consumers globally, a positive
change could be made in utilizing such systems for better
hydrogen production.
Considering the logistics and freight activities taking place
for decades to increase trade, transportation of energy sources
is imperative. Fig. 14(b) describes the available routes in the
transportation sector for hydrogen fuels [135,144]. As a ma-
jority of freight transport in urban areas is by road (more than
38% in Europe and 53% in Asia), the demand for hydrogen fuel
as a possible replacement to diesel-powered vehicles could be
effective to reduce the levels of SOX, NOX, CO2 and particulate
matter emissions [153]. Rentizelas et al. reported trans-
portation costs, in general, vary with distance and time [154].
The transport distance should consider the travel and return
time in addition to waiting time at the respective stations in
case of ships or planes. Additionally, the fuel cost incurred
during ship and plane transportation is high. Further, loading
and unloading from vehicle to vehicle could increase the time,
fuel cost, insurance, and maintenance [154]. The same would
apply to increasing the use of hydrogen as a fuel. When it
comes to road transportation, the cost of trucks and the cost of
fuel for transportation should be considered. The cost of truck
encompasses capital, license, insurance, cost of a driver, and
maintenance cost (tires, lubricants, breaks, or accidents) [155].
The factors affecting road transport include [156]: (1) minimal
distance from industries and commercial areas, (2) greater
mobility and flexibility compared to other modes like aviation
and marine. Buses, taxis, and carpooling services can also
bring up the potential of hydrogen energy thereby dropping
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Fig. 15 e Cycle illustrating the techno-economic feasibility of hydrogen energy from food waste.
the overall cost [157]. Additionally, the use of carbohydrates
and sugars provides a more appealing solution as a substrate
for improving hydrogen economy [158]. Although road trans-
port seems the most promising option, aspects towards
effective storage facilities in cryogenic conditions and supply
chain improvements could add on to greater value to the
system.
Limitations during our study
The production of hydrogen energy from food waste appears
to be a less concentrated research area but would be a growing
demand in the near future if the technical limitations are
solved accordingly. Fig. 15 shows a hypothetical cycle illus-
trating the techno-economic feasibility of hydrogen energy
from food waste. Constructive improvements need to be made
at each stage of the supply chain, from raw material handling
to market reach. The widespread consumption of hydrogen
globally requires promising delivery infrastructure. Con-
structing pipelines appears to be a more economically feasible
option compared to bulk delivery through vehicles [159].
However, the challenge lies in constructing completely new
networks or making some additional arrangements in the
current pathways [160,161]. On a global scale, pipelines of
more than 3000 km have been constructed out of which
around 15 networks (around 1600 km) have been set up in
Europe [137,162]. Although the role of hydrogen has attracted
considerable interest in the industry as well as academia, pipe
setups are a challenge to generalize based on factors like
installation, fluid flows, pipeline routing, topography, and
geographic locations. Moreover, the infrastructure for
hydrogen gas production is 20% more expensive than natural
gas [137]. Thus, a more viable option would be to utilize the
26347
transport available in that location. Also, possible funding
could be provided to lower-income regions for better im-
provements in infrastructure. Adequate importance on
improving policies and collaborations would greatly affect
factors like technological process, strategic choices, policy
priorities, and future innovations. For instance, the Energy
Policy Act by the Department of Energy, USA formulated in
1998 stated the importance of alternative fuels like ethanol,
methanol or their blends [163]. Additionally, the act promotes
the usage of renewable energy resources for carbon credit
trading. Similar green initiatives for future transports was
introduced by the Ministry of New and Renewable Energy
(MNRE), India which aimed at developing hydrogen based fuel
cell vehicles for two/three wheeler vehicles [164]. Further, the
scheme created a roadmap for the pathway for transition to
hydrogen energy in India. Thus, the present scenario requires
global leaders to focus on environmental impacts and climate
change for a sustainable future.
In the context of bibliometric research, the cluster analysis
utilized in the study could be beneficial in concentrating on
future areas integrating hydrogen energy and food waste.
Although the authors have done their best to reduce errors,
few articles may have been left out due to the scanning of only
one database to analyze the progress and themes. As limited
number of articles were available in other languages apart
from English, these were neglected. Additionally, the keyword
selection for article search was based on author's linguistic
abilities. Therefore, underrepresentation of specific data and
jargon could impact the accuracy. Areas like information and
communication technologies (ICT) which have begun to add
value in the field of food technology could one of the future
aspects towards bolstering hydrogen production. For an effi-
cient generation of hydrogen energy from food waste, an in-
depth analysis of the economics with follow-ups at each
26348 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
Table 10 e Reasons and external factors to consider while adopting hydrogen-based energy system over conventional fuels
[167,168].
Criteria Hydrogen fuels
Sustainability Solves majority of energy related global
environmental problems.
Climate change Minimal damage to air quality
Products Water is the major product
Innovation Technologically promising with least impact to
environment
Cost High investment (depends on the production
process)
Policy implementations and More policy have been implemented targeting 2030
international collaboration and 2050 with less being successfully implemented.
stage in addition to abiding by the policies is critical to achieve
success. As our focus of work was limited to studying the
technical progress of hydrogen energy from food waste,
journals focusing on management, economics, public health,
medicine, and trade were not considered. Further, few unre-
lated articles may be listed which do not perfectly match the
scope of the work. This may have led to some drawbacks in
the survey. The present study has been employed with an aim
to understand the literature progress and future hotspots for
effective utilization of food waste to hydrogen energy.
Research gaps
The article has provided a panorama to the current research
trends and issues towards the conversion of hydrogen energy
from food waste over the last two decades. Based on the
comprehensive analysis and categories revealed, the
following gaps were noticed which require immediate notice
for future research. The authors have presented the gaps in
the form of questions for simplicity and future explorations.

What is the approximate quantitative cost for pre-
treatment and processing of food waste before bio-
hydrogen generation? How does this cost impact the
overall production cost of the process after conducting a
life cycle assessment?

What are the sustainable alternatives to processing food
waste (similar to alternatives stated by Kibler et al.) such
that it causes the least harm to the environment? [165].

What are the avenues for utilizing spent food waste after
the production of hydrogen energy such that it aligns to
sustainable development goals 2030?

What are the rebound effects if there is an imbalance in the
supply chain (considering natural disasters, pandemics,
and trade inequalities)?

What is the progress on cheaper catalysts and nano-
catalysts for the generation of hydrogen energy?

What are the possible infrastructure-related policies that
need to be considered during the installation of recharge
points for vehicles? How do these policies affect the dy-
namics of blended fuels?
In addition to the above question, promoting the value of
hydrogen energy as well as satisfying consumer interests by
Conventional fuels
Solves energy related issues, but produces toxic
emissions harmful to ecosystem.
Excessive damage to air quality leading to pollution
Carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, sulphur dioxide
and other harmful gases
Technologically promising and adopted since many
years.
Low
Promoting use of hybrid fuels.
making them understand the valorization pathways of food
waste would set up a strong base for a hydrogen fuel future.
Future directions and perspectives
The continuous greenhouse gas emissions harming the
ecosystem as well as the limited quantity of petroleum-based
resources have led to a positive change in debates on effective
hydrogen energy production. As food waste is considered a
huge bundle of resource, energy conversion, possibly
hydrogen energy, brings immense value to the environment
and people. Trends in biohydrogen production through inte-
gration of dark and photo fermentation have attracted several
researchers globally. As per the authors’ research, the ma-
jority of the studies have focused on a mixture of food wastes
originating from residential or commercial areas. However,
using spent products from post processing of various foods
could also add equal value during the conversion process.
Careful optimization of process parameters from different
spent products like beverage wastewater, hops, dairy waste-
water, food waste liquid residues as well as plant parts could
act as promising feedstocks for biohydrogen production [166].
Additionally, the reactor effluents generated from the bio-
hydrogen tank can be further processed to produce biofuels.
As huge research has been carried out in terms of generating
hydrogen, the importance of locating material collection sites
(for food waste), spreading climate-related awareness, inter-
national collaborations, viable options for H2 energy trans-
port, recovery, and market scale-up is necessary. Table 10
describes the reasons and external factors to consider while
adopting a hydrogen-based energy system and its value over
conventional fuels. Lack of clear knowledge on the level of
acceptability of food wastes and the pre-processing tasks still
needs more development. Additionally, government collabo-
ration globally would help achieve the target of a possible
future scale-up focusing on environmental sustainability.
Conclusions
Bibliometric analysis acts as an efficient tool in making
quantitative progress based on relevant data for a topic
helping scientists and the industry arena. The cluster analysis
conducted in the present study are in good agreement
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
revealing major hotspots and possible sub-themes which
require attention. As for hydrogen energy, it can be said that
the energy has huge value, although underrated as it is com-
bined with conventional fuels. Additionally, utilizing food
waste as a substrate result in minimal environmental impact
as well as promotes valorization aiming to follow sustainable
development goals. This article brings together two growing
challenges, energy demand and food wastage, foreseeing a
brighter future for the developing sustainable biohydrogen
industry. Evaluating an effective “source-service-system”
principle in addition to government policies and stakeholders’
engagement would play a key role in making this positive
transition.
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
references
[1] FAO 2019. The state of food and agriculture 2019. 2019.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315764788.
[2] Griffin M, Sobal J, Lyson TA. An analysis of a community
food waste stream. Agric Hum Val 2009;26:67e81. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10460-008-9178-1.
[3] Sridhar A, Ponnuchamy M, Kumar PS, Kapoor A. Food
preservation techniques and nanotechnology for increased
shelf life of fruits, vegetables, beverages and spices: a
review. Environ Chem Lett 2020;2:1e21. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s10311-020-01126-2.
[4] Filimonau V, De Coteau DA. Food waste management in
hospitality operations: a critical review. Tourism Manag
2019;71:234e45. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tourman.2018.10.009.
[5] Sridhar A, Ponnuchamy M, Kumar PS, Kapoor A, Vo DVN,
Prabhakar S. Techniques and modeling of polyphenol
extraction from food: a review. Environ Chem Lett 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10311-021-01217-8.
[6] Mao G, Liu X, Du H, Zuo J, Wang L. Way forward for
alternative energy research: a bibliometric analysis during
1994-2013. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;48:276e86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2015.03.094.
[7] Pham TPT, Kaushik R, Parshetti GK, Mahmood R,
Balasubramanian R. Food waste-to-energy conversion
technologies: current status and future directions. Waste
Manag 2015;38:399e408. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.wasman.2014.12.004.
[8] Xuan D, Tang P, Poon CS. Limitations and quality upgrading
techniques for utilization of MSW incineration bottom ash
in engineering applications e a review. Construct Build
Mater 2018;190:1091e102. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.conbuildmat.2018.09.174.
26349
[9] Bakenne A, Nuttall W, Kazantzis N. Sankey-Diagram-based
insights into the hydrogen economy of today. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2016;41:7744e53. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2015.12.216.
[10] Hydrogen Council. Hydrogen Council. 2020.
[13] Lepage T, Kammoun M, Schmetz Q, Richel A. Biomass-to-
hydrogen: a review of main routes production, processes
evaluation and techno-economical assessment. Biomass
Bioenergy 2021;144:105920. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biombioe.2020.105920.
[14] Yan M, Su H, Hantoko D, Kanchanatip E, Shahul Hamid FB,
Zhang S, et al. Experimental study on the energy conversion
of food waste via supercritical water gasification:
improvement of hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2019;44:4664e73. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2018.12.193.
[15] Nathao C, Sirisukpoka U, Pisutpaisal N. Production of
hydrogen and methane by one and two stage fermentation
of food waste. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2013;38:15764e9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2013.05.047.
[16] Raan AFJ van. Measurement : interdisciplinary research
and perspectives for your citations only ? Hot topics in
bibliometric analysis. Interdiscip Res Perspect
2009;31(50e62):37e41. https://doi.org/10.1207/
s15366359mea0301.
[17] Du H, Li N, Brown MA, Peng Y, Shuai Y. A bibliographic
analysis of recent solar energy literatures: the expansion and
evolution of a research field. Renew Energy 2014;66:696e706.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.01.018.
[18] Wang Y, Lai N, Zuo J, Chen G, Du H. Characteristics and
trends of research on waste-to-energy incineration: a
bibliometric analysis, 1999e2015. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2016;66:95e104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.07.006.
[19] Chen H, Jiang W, Yang Y, Yang Y, Man X. State of the art on
food waste research: a bibliometrics study from 1997 to
2014. J Clean Prod 2017;140:840e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2015.11.085.
[20] Elsamadony M, Tawfik A, Danial William A, Suzuki M.
Optimization of hydrogen production from organic fraction
of municipal solid waste (OFMSW) dry anaerobic digestion
with analysis of microbial community. Int J Energy Res
2015;33:1e12. https://doi.org/10.1002/er.
[21] Mao G, Zou H, Chen G, Du H, Zuo J. Past, current and future
of biomass energy research: a bibliometric analysis. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2015;52:1823e33. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.141.
[22] Hosseini SE, Wahid MA, M MJ, Azli MA, Mohamad FM. A
review on biomass-based hydrogen production for
renewable energy supply. Arch Therm 2015;33:1e19.
https://doi.org/10.1002/er.
[23] Du H, Wei L, Brown MA, Wang Y, Shi Z. A bibliometric
analysis of recent energy efficiency literatures: an
expanding and shifting focus. Energy Effic 2013;6:177e90.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-012-9171-9.
[24] Small H. Co-citation in the scientific literature: a new
measure of the relationship between two documents. Am
Soc Inf Sci 1973;4:1e5.
[25] Roig-Tierno N, Gonzalez-Cruz TF, Llopis-Martinez J. An
overview of qualitative comparative analysis: a bibliometric
analysis. J Innov Knowl 2017;2:15e23. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jik.2016.12.002.
[26] Alryalat SAS, Malkawi LW, Momani SM. Comparing
bibliometric analysis using pubmed, scopus, and web of
science databases. JoVE 2019:1e12. https://doi.org/10.3791/
58494.
[27] Mallig N. A relational database for bibliometric analysis.
Innov Syst Policy Anal 2010;22:1e40.
26350 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
[28] Ardito L, Scuotto V, Del Giudice M, Petruzzelli AM. A
bibliometric analysis of research on Big Data analytics for
business and management. Manag Decis 2019;57:1993e2009.
https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2018-0754.
[29] Pauna VH, Picone F, Le Guyader G, Buonocore E,
Franzese PP. The scientific research on ecosystem services:
a bibliometric analysis. Ecol Quest 2018;29:53e62. https://
doi.org/10.12775/EQ.2018.022.
[30] Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison
of PubMed, scopus, web of science, and Google scholar:
strengths and weaknesses. J Life Sci 2008;22:338e42. https://
doi.org/10.1096/fj.07-9492lsf.
[31] Harzing AW, Alakangas S. Google scholar, scopus and the
web of science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary
comparison. Scientometrics 2016;106:787e804. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1798-9.
[32] Ordun ~ a-Malea E, Lo  pez-Co
 zar ED. Dimensions: Re-
discovering the ecosystem of scientific information. El Prof
Inf 2018;27:420e31.
[33] Moral-Mun ~ oz JA, Herrera-Viedma E, Santisteban-Espejo A,
Cobo MJ. Software tools for conducting bibliometric
analysis in science: an up-to-date review. El Prof Inf
2020;29:1e20. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.03.
[34] Chen C. Science mapping: a systematic review of the
literature. J Data Inf Sci 2017:1e40.
[35] Skupin A. The world of geography: visualizing a knowledge
domain with cartographic means. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A
2004;101:5274e8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307654100.

[36] Zupic I, Cater T. Bibliometric methods in management and
organization. Organ Res Methods 2015;18:429e72. https://
doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629.
[37] Boyack KW, Klavans R, Bo € rner K. Mapping the backbone of
science. Scientometrics 2005;64:351e74. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11192-005-0255-6.
[38] van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a
computer program for bibliometric mapping.
Scientometrics 2010;84:523e38. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-009-0146-3.
[39] Choudhary AK, Oluikpe PI, Harding JA, Carrillo PM. The
needs and benefits of text mining applications on post-
project reviews. Comput Ind 2009;60:728e40. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.compind.2009.05.006.
[40] Ghazinoory S, Ameri F, Farnoodi S. An application of the
text mining approach to select technology centers of
excellence. Technol Forecast Soc Change 2013;80:918e31.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2012.09.001.
[41] Bornmann L, Daniel H-D. What do we know about the h-
index? Wiley Inter Sci 2013;64:1e5. https://doi.org/10.1002/
asi.
[42] Elsevier BVA. Scopus-h-index-guide (2014). 2014.
[43] Ordun ~ a-Malea E, Costas R. Link-based approach to study
scientific software usage: the case of VOSviewer, vol. 126.
Springer International Publishing; 2021. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s11192-021-04082-y.
[44] Min Z, Ming G, Siyuan Y, Zheng T, Zhen G, Ma X, et al.
Global trends and future prospects of food waste research: a
bibliometric analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res 2019;26:1e11.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-05071-8.
[45] van Eck NJ, Waltman L. Citation-based clustering of
publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer.
Scientometrics 2017;111:1053e70. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11192-017-2300-7.
[46] Skute I, Zalewska-Kurek K, Hatak I, de Weerd-Nederhof P.
Mapping the field: a bibliometric analysis of the literature
on universityeindustry collaborations. J Technol Tran
2019;44:916e47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-017-9637-1.
[47] Xie L, Chen Z, Wang H, Zheng C, Jiang J. Bibliometric and
visualized analysis of scientific publications on atlantoaxial
spine surgery based on web of science and VOSviewer.
World Neurosurg 2020;137:435e442.e4. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wneu.2020.01.171.
[48] Zia H, Devadas V, Shukla S. Assessing informal waste
recycling in Kanpur City, India. Manag Environ Qual Int J
2008;19:597e612. https://doi.org/10.1108/
14777830810894265.
[49] Wilson DC, Velis C, Cheeseman C. Role of informal sector
recycling in waste management in developing countries.
Habitat Int 2006;30:797e808. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.habitatint.2005.09.005.
[50] Ezeah C, Fazakerley JA, Roberts CL. Emerging trends in
informal sector recycling in developing and transition
countries. Waste Manag 2013;33:2509e19. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wasman.2013.06.020.
[51] Ouyang Y, Cai Y, Guo H. Visualization and analysis of
mapping knowledge domains for food waste studies. Int J
Environ Res Publ Health 2021;18:1e17. https://doi.org/
10.3390/ijerph18105143.
[52] Syed AM, Bawazir HS. Recent trends in business financial
riskeA bibliometric analysis. Cogent Econ Finance
2021;9:1e19. https://doi.org/10.1080/
23322039.2021.1913877.
[53] Rusydiana AS, Taqi M, Firmansyah I, Assalafiyah A,
Kustiningsih N. A bibliometric analysis of islamic
accounting research indexed by Dimensions.ai. Libr Philos
Pract 2020:4803.
[54] Acar C, Dincer I. Review and evaluation of hydrogen
production options for better environment. J Clean Prod
2019;218:835e49. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jclepro.2019.02.046.
[55] Dawood F, Anda M, Shafiullah GM. Hydrogen production for
energy: an overview. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2020;45:3847e69. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2019.12.059.
[56] Arribas L, Arconada N, Gonza  lez-Ferna ndez C, Lo€ hrl C,
Gonza  lez-Aguilar J, Kaltschmitt M, et al. Solar-driven
pyrolysis and gasification of low-grade carbonaceous
materials. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017;42:13598e606. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.02.026.
[57] Müller F, Patel H, Blumenthal D, Poz ivil P, Das P, Wieckert C,
et al. Co-production of syngas and potassium-based
fertilizer by solar-driven thermochemical conversion of
crop residues. Fuel Process Technol 2018;171:89e99. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2017.08.006.
[58] Ramzan N, Ashraf A, Naveed S, Malik A. Simulation of
hybrid biomass gasification using Aspen plus: a
comparative performance analysis for food, municipal solid
and poultry waste. Biomass Bioenergy 2011;35:3962e9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.06.005.
[59] Herna  ndez JJ, Aranda G, Barba J, Mendoza JM. Effect of
steam content in the air-steam flow on biomass entrained
flow gasification. Fuel Process Technol 2012;99:43e55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2012.01.030.
[60] Rapagna  S, Gallucci K, Foscolo PU. Olivine, dolomite and
ceramic filters in one vessel to produce clean gas from
biomass. Waste Manag 2018;71:792e800. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wasman.2017.07.038.
[61] Cao L, Yu IKM, Xiong X, Tsang DCW, Zhang S, Clark JH, et al.
Biorenewable hydrogen production through biomass
gasification: a review and future prospects. Environ Res
2020;186:109e547. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.envres.2020.109547.
[62] Park MJ, Kim JH, Lee YH, Kim HM, Jeong DW. System
optimization for effective hydrogen production via
anaerobic digestion and biogas steam reforming. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2020;45:30188e200. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.08.027.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
[63] Santamaria L, Lopez G, Arregi A, Amutio M, Artetxe M,
Bilbao J, et al. Stability of different Ni supported catalysts in
the in-line steam reforming of biomass fast pyrolysis
volatiles. Appl Catal B Environ 2019;242:109e20. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apcatb.2018.09.081.
[64] Liu C, Chen D, Cao Y, zhang T, Mao Y, Wang W, et al.
Catalytic steam reforming of in-situ tar from rice husk over
MCM-41 supported LaNiO3 to produce hydrogen rich
syngas. Renew Energy 2020;161:408e18. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2020.07.089.
[65] Su H, Hantoko D, Yan M, Cai Y, Kanchanatip E, Liu J, et al.
Evaluation of catalytic subcritical water gasification of food
waste for hydrogen production: effect of process conditions
and different types of catalyst loading. Int J Hydrogen
Energy 2019;44:21451e63. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2019.06.203.
[66] Su H, Kanchanatip E, Wang D, Zhang H, Antoni, Mubeen I,
et al. Catalytic gasification of food waste in supercritical
water over La promoted Ni/Al2O3 catalysts for enhancing
H2 production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45:553e64.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.10.219.
[67] Zhang Z, Zhou F, Cheng H, Chen H, Li J, Qiao K, et al.
Optimizing the aromatic yield via catalytic fast Co-pyrolysis
of rice straw and waste oil over HZSM-5 catalysts. Energy
Fuel 2019;33:4389e94. https://doi.org/10.1021/
acs.energyfuels.9b00779.
[68] Akubo K, Nahil MA, Williams PT. Pyrolysis-catalytic steam
reforming of agricultural biomass wastes and biomass
components for production of hydrogen/syngas. J Energy
Inst 2019;92:1987e96. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.joei.2018.10.013.
[69] Karadag D, Ko € rog
 lu OE, Ozkaya B, Cakmakci M, Heaven S,
Banks C. A review on fermentative hydrogen production
from dairy industry wastewater. J Chem Technol
Biotechnol 2014;89:1627e36. https://doi.org/10.1002/
jctb.4490.
[70] Singh D, Yadav S, Bharadwaj N, Verma R. Low temperature
steam gasification to produce hydrogen rich gas from
kitchen food waste: influence of steam flow rate and
temperature. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45:20843e50.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.05.168.
[71] Su W, Cai C, Liu P, Lin W, Liang B, Zhang H, et al.
Supercritical water gasification of food waste: effect of
parameters on hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2020;45:14744e55. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2020.03.190.
[72] Deheri C, Acharya SK. An experimental approach to
produce hydrogen and methane from food waste using
catalyst. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45:17250e9. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.04.245.
[73] Parthasarathy P, Sheeba K. Combined slow pyrolysis and
steam gasification of biomass for hydrogen generationda
review. Int J Energy Res 2014;33:1e18. https://doi.org/
10.1002/er.
[74] Dung TNB, Sen B, Chen CC, Kumar G, Lin CY. Food waste to
bioenergy via anaerobic processes. Energy Procedia
2014;61:307e12. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.egypro.2014.11.1113.
[75] Algapani DE, Qiao W, Ricci M, Bianchi D, Wandera S M,
Adani F, et al. Bio-hydrogen and bio-methane production
from food waste in a two-stage anaerobic digestion process
with digestate recirculation. Renew Energy
2019;130:1108e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2018.08.079.
[76] Pu Y, Tang J, Wang XC, Hu Y, Huang J, Zeng Y, et al.
Hydrogen production from acidogenic food waste
fermentation using untreated inoculum: effect of substrate
26351
concentrations. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2019;44:27272e84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2019.08.230.
[77] Ferna  ndez C, Carracedo B, Martı́nez EJ, Go  mez X, Mora
 n A.
Application of a packed bed reactor for the production of
hydrogen from cheese whey permeate: effect of organic
loading rate. J Environ Sci Health, Part A Toxic Hazard Subst
Environ Eng 2014;49:210e7. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10934529.2013.838885.
[78] Ferreira Rosa PR, Santos SC, Silva EL. Different ratios of
carbon sources in the fermentation of cheese whey and
glucose as substrates for hydrogen and ethanol production
in continuous reactors. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2014;39:1288e96. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2013.11.011.
[79] Guo WQ, Ren NQ, Wang XJ, Xiang WS, Meng ZH, Ding J, et al.
Biohydrogen production from ethanol-type fermentation of
molasses in an expanded granular sludge bed (EGSB)
reactor. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:4981e8. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.05.033.
[80] Lee DY, Xu KQ, Kobayashi T, Li YY, Inamori Y. Effect of
organic loading rate on continuous hydrogen production
from food waste in submerged anaerobic membrane
bioreactor. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2014;39:16863e71. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.08.022.
[81] Contreras-Da  vila CA, Me ndez-Acosta HO, Arellano-Garcı́a L,
Alatriste-Mondrago  n F, Razo-Flores E. Continuous hydrogen
production from enzymatic hydrolysate of Agave tequilana
bagasse: effect of the organic loading rate and reactor
configuration. Chem Eng J 2017;313:671e9. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.cej.2016.12.084.
[82] Kim DH, Jang S, Yun YM, Lee MK, Moon C, Kang WS, et al.
Effect of acid-pretreatment on hydrogen fermentation of
food waste: microbial community analysis by next
generation sequencing. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2014;39:16302e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2014.08.004.
[83] Kim DH, Kim SH, Jung KW, Kim MS, Shin HS. Effect of initial
pH independent of operational pH on hydrogen fermentation
of food waste. Bioresour Technol 2011;102:8646e52. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.03.030.
[84] Yuan T, Bian S, Ko JH, Wu H, Xu Q. Enhancement of
hydrogen production using untreated inoculum in two-
stage food waste digestion. Bioresour Technol
2019;282:189e96. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biortech.2019.03.020.
[85] Ghimire A, Frunzo L, Pirozzi F, Trably E, Escudie R, Lens PNL,
et al. A review on dark fermentative biohydrogen
production from organic biomass: process parameters and
use of by-products. Appl Energy 2015;144:73e95. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.01.045.
[86] Pagliaccia P, Gallipoli A, Gianico A, Montecchio D,
Braguglia CM. Single stage anaerobic bioconversion of food
waste in mono and co-digestion with olive husks: impact of
thermal pretreatment on hydrogen and methane
production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;41:905e15. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.10.061.
[87] Yun Y, Sung S, Choi J, Kim D. Two-stage co-fermentation of
lipid-extracter microalgae waste with food waste leachate :
a viable way to reduce the inhibitory effect of leftover
organic solvent and recover additional energy. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2016:1e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2016.07.096.
[88] Kim DH, Kim SH, Kim KY, Shin HS. Experience of a pilot-
scale hydrogen-producing anaerobic sequencing batch
reactor (ASBR) treating food waste. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2010;35:1590e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2009.12.041.
26352 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
[89] Sattar A, Arslan C, Ji C, Sattar S, Umair M, Sattar S, et al.
Quantification of temperature effect on batch production of
bio-hydrogen from rice crop wastes in an anaerobic bio
reactor. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;41:11050e61. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.04.087.
[90] Zhu H, Parker W, Conidi D, Basnar R, Seto P. Eliminating
methanogenic activity in hydrogen reactor to improve
biogas production in a two-stage anaerobic digestion
process co-digesting municipal food waste and sewage
sludge. Bioresour Technol 2011;102:7086e92. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.04.047.
[91] Kargi F, Eren NS, Ozmihci S. Hydrogen gas production from
cheese whey powder (CWP) solution by thermophilic dark
fermentation. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2012;37:2260e6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.11.018.
[92] Hakobyan L, Gabrielyan L, Blbulyan S, Trchounian A. The
prospects of brewery waste application in biohydrogen
production by photofermentation of Rhodobacter
sphaeroides. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46:289e96. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.09.184.
[93] Camargo FP, Sakamoto IK, Bize A, Duarte ICS, Silva EL,
Varesche MBA. Screening design of nutritional and
physicochemical parameters on bio-hydrogen and volatile
fatty acids production from Citrus Peel Waste in batch
reactors. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2021;46:7794e809. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.06.084.
[94] Paudel S, Kang Y, Yoo YS, Seo GT. Effect of volumetric
organic loading rate (OLR) on H2 and CH4 production by
two-stage anaerobic co-digestion of food waste and brown
water. Waste Manag 2017;61:484e93. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.wasman.2016.12.013.
[95] Na  thia-Neves G, Neves T de A, Berni M, Dragone G,
Mussatto SI, Forster-Carneiro T. Start-up phase of a two-
stage anaerobic co-digestion process: hydrogen and
methane production from food waste and vinasse from
ethanol industry. Biofuel Res J 2018;5:813e20. https://
doi.org/10.18331/BRJ2018.5.2.5.
[96] Srisowmeya G, Chakravarthy M, Nandhini Devi G. Critical
considerations in two-stage anaerobic digestion of food
waste e a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2020;119:109e587. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2019.109587.
[97] Salem AH, Mietzel T, Brunstermann R, Widmann R. Two-
stage anaerobic fermentation process for bio-hydrogen and
bio-methane production from pre-treated organic wastes.
Bioresour Technol 2018;265:399e406. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biortech.2018.06.017.
[98] Mohod RT, Bhansali SS, Moghe SM, Kathoke TB. Preheating
of biodiesel for the improvement of the performance
characteristics of di engine : a review. Int J Eng Res Gen Sci
2014;2:747e53.
[99] Vijayaraghavan K, Ahmad D, Ibrahim MK Bin. Biohydrogen
generation from jackfruit peel using anaerobic contact
filter. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2006;31:569e79. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2005.06.006.
[100] Kapdan IK, Kargi F. Bio-hydrogen production from waste
materials. Enzym Microb Technol 2006;38:569e82. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.enzmictec.2005.09.015.
[101] Argun H, Kargi F, Kapdan IK. Effects of the substrate and
cell concentration on bio-hydrogen production from
ground wheat by combined dark and photo-fermentation.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2009;34:6181e8. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2009.05.130.
[102] Azwar MY, Hussain MA, Abdul-Wahab AK. Development of
biohydrogen production by photobiological, fermentation
and electrochemical processes: a review. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2014;31:158e73. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2013.11.022.
[103] Pradhan N, Dipasquale L, D'Ippolito G, Panico A, Lens PNL,
Esposito G, et al. Hydrogen production by the thermophilic
bacterium Thermotoga neapolitana. Int J Mol Sci
2015;16:12578e600. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms160612578.
[104] Ghirardi ML, Zhang L, Lee JW, Flynn T, Seibert M,
Greenbaum E. Microalgae a source of renewable H2. Technol
Biotech 2000;18:506e11.
[105] Dinesh GK, Chauhan R, Chakma S. Influence and strategies
for enhanced biohydrogen production from food waste.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2018;92:807e22. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2018.05.009.
[106] Zhang Y, Shen J. Enhancement effect of gold nanoparticles
on biohydrogen production from artificial wastewater. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:17e23. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2006.06.004.
[107] Asadi N, Zilouei H. Optimization of organosolv pretreatment
of rice straw for enhanced biohydrogen production using
Enterobacter aerogenes. Bioresour Technol 2017;227. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.12.073.
[108] Martinez-Burgos WJ, Sydney EB, de Paula DR, Medeiros ABP,
de Carvalho JC, Soccol VT, et al. Biohydrogen production in
cassava processing wastewater using microbial consortia:
process optimization and kinetic analysis of the microbial
community. Bioresour Technol 2020;309:123e331. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.123331.
[109] Nyberg M, Heidorn T, Lindblad P. Hydrogen production by
the engineered cyanobacterial strain Nostoc PCC 7120
dhupW examined in a flat panel photobioreactor system. J
Biotechnol 2015;215:35e43. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jbiotec.2015.08.028.
[110] Shi XY, Yu HQ. Simultaneous metabolism of benzoate and
photobiological hydrogen production by Lyngbya sp. Renew
Energy 2016;95:474e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2016.04.051.
[111] Cieciura-Włoch W, Borowski S, Otlewska A. Biohydrogen
production from fruit and vegetable waste, sugar beet pulp
and corn silage via dark fermentation. Renew Energy
2020;153:1226e37. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.renene.2020.02.085.
[112] Cieciura-Włoch W, Borowski S. Biohydrogen production
from wastes of plant and animal origin via dark
fermentation. J Environ Eng Landsc Manag 2019;27:101e13.
https://doi.org/10.3846/jeelm.2019.9806.
[113] Cieciura-Włoch W, Borowski S, Doman  ski J. Dark
fermentative hydrogen production from hydrolyzed sugar
beet pulp improved by iron addition. Bioresour Technol
2020;314:123e713. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biortech.2020.123713.
[114] Ziara RMM, Miller DN, Subbiah J, Dvorak BI. Lactate
wastewater dark fermentation: the effect of temperature
and initial pH on biohydrogen production and microbial
community. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2019;44:661e73. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.045.
[115] Seifert K, Zagrodnik R, Stodolny M, Łaniecki M. Biohydrogen
production from chewing gum manufacturing residue in a
two-step process of dark fermentation and
photofermentation. Renew Energy 2018;122:526e32. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.01.105.
[116] Ghosh D, Sobro IF, Hallenbeck PC. Optimization of the
hydrogen yield from single-stage photofermentation of
glucose by Rhodobacter capsulatus JP91 using response
surface methodology. Bioresour Technol 2012;123:199e206.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.07.061.
[117] Zhang Z, Li Y, Zhang H, He C, Zhang Q. Potential use and the
energy conversion efficiency analysis of fermentation
effluents from photo and dark fermentative bio-hydrogen
production. Bioresour Technol 2017;245:884e9. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2017.09.037.
 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
[118] Wang X, Fang Y, Wang Y, Hu J, Zhang A, Ma X, et al. Single-
stage photo-fermentative hydrogen production from
hydrolyzed straw biomass using Rhodobacter sphaeroides.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2018;43:13810e20. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.01.057.
[119] Zhang T, Jiang D, Zhang H, Jing Y, Tahir N, Zhang Y, et al.
Comparative study on bio-hydrogen production from corn
stover: photo-fermentation, dark-fermentation and dark-
photo co-fermentation. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2020;45:3807e14. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2019.04.170.
[120] Nin ~ o-Navarro C, Chairez I, Christen P, Canul-Chan M,
Garcı́a-Pen~ a EI. Enhanced hydrogen production by a
sequential dark and photo fermentation process: effects of
initial feedstock composition, dilution and microbial
population. Renew Energy 2020;147:924e36. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.renene.2019.09.024.
[121] Hitit ZY, Zampol Lazaro C, Hallenbeck PC. Increased
hydrogen yield and COD removal from starch/glucose based
medium by sequential dark and photo-fermentation using
Clostridium butyricum and Rhodopseudomonas palustris.
Int J Hydrogen Energy 2017;42:18832e43. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.05.161.
[122] Jeong GT, Kim SK, Park DH. Application of solid-acid
catalyst and marine macro-algae Gracilaria verrucosa to
production of fermentable sugars. Bioresour Technol
2015;181:1e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2015.01.038.
[123] Zhao X, Li S, Wu R, Liu D. Organosolv fractionating pre-
treatment of lignocellulosic biomass for efficient enzymatic
saccharification: chemistry, kinetics, and substrate
structures. Biofuels, Bioprod Biorefining 2017;6:246e56.
https://doi.org/10.1002/bbb.
[124] Sarma S, Anand A, Dubey VK, Moholkar VS. Metabolic flux
network analysis of hydrogen production from crude
glycerol by Clostridium pasteurianum. Bioresour Technol
2017;242:169e77. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biortech.2017.03.168.
[125] Nanda S, Reddy SN, Dalai AK, Kozinski JA. Subcritical and
supercritical water gasification of lignocellulosic biomass
impregnated with nickel nanocatalyst for hydrogen
production. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;41:4907e21. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.10.060.
[126] Cao W, Guo L, Yan X, Zhang D, Yao X. Assessment of
sugarcane bagasse gasification in supercritical water for
hydrogen production. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2018;43:13711e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2017.12.013.
[127] Rezaeitavabe F, Saadat S, Talebbeydokhti N, Sartaj M,
Tabatabaei M. Enhancing bio-hydrogen production from
food waste in single-stage hybrid dark-photo fermentation
by addition of two waste materials (exhausted resin and
biochar). Biomass Bioenergy 2020;143:1e11. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105846.
[128] Ghimire A, Valentino S, Frunzo L, Trably E, Escudie  R,
Pirozzi F, et al. Biohydrogen production from food waste by
coupling semi-continuous dark-photofermentation and
residue post-treatment to anaerobic digestion: a synergy for
energy recovery. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40:16045e55.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2015.09.117.
[129] Deloitte China. Fueling the future of mobility - hydrogen
and fuel cell solutions for transportation. Financ Advis
2020;1:1e104.
[130] Sinigaglia T, Lewiski F, Santos Martins ME, Mairesse
Siluk JC. Production, storage, fuel stations of hydrogen and
its utilization in automotive applications-a review. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2017;42:24597e611. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.08.063.
26353
[131] Sharaf OZ, Orhan MF. An overview of fuel cell technology:
fundamentals and applications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2014;32:810e53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2014.01.012.
[132] Gong X, Peng L, Wang X, Wu L, Liu Y. Duckweed derived
nitrogen self-doped porous carbon materials as cost-
effective electrocatalysts for oxygen reduction reaction in
microbial fuel cells. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45:15336e45.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.03.177.
[133] Liu J, Wei L, Wang H, Lan G, Yang H, Shen J. Biomass-
derived N-doped porous activated carbon as a high-
performance and cost-effective pH-universal oxygen
reduction catalyst in fuel cell. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2020;45:29308e21. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2020.07.216.
[134] Lucia U. Overview on fuel cells. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2014;30:164e9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.09.025.
[135] Staffell I, Scamman D, Velazquez Abad A, Balcombe P,
Dodds PE, Ekins P, et al. The role of hydrogen and fuel cells
in the global energy system. Energy Environ Sci
2019;12:463e91. https://doi.org/10.1039/c8ee01157e.
[136] Staffell I, Green R. The cost of domestic fuel cell micro-CHP
systems. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2013;38:1088e102. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2012.10.090.
[137] Dodds PE, Staffell I, Hawkes AD, Li F, Grünewald P,
McDowall W, et al. Hydrogen and fuel cell technologies for
heating: a review. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2015;40:2065e83.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2014.11.059.
[138] Nishikawa H, Sasou H, Kurihara R, Nakamura S, Kano A,
Tanaka K, et al. High fuel utilization operation of pure
hydrogen fuel cells. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:6262e9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.07.019.
[139] Hardman S, Chandan A, Shiu E, Steinberger-Wilckens R.
Consumer attitudes to fuel cell vehicles post trial in the
United Kingdom. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2016;41:6171e9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.02.067.
[140] Yuan X, Liu X, Zuo J. The development of new energy
vehicles for a sustainable future: a review. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2015;42:298e305. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2014.10.016.
[141] Sanchez A, Ayala OR, Hernandez-Sanchez P, Valdez-
Vazquez I, de Leo  n-Rodrı́guez A. An environment-economic
analysis of hydrogen production using advanced
biorefineries and its comparison with conventional
technologies. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2020;45:27994e8006.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2020.07.135.
[142] Ma J, Duong TH, Smits M, Verstraete W, Carballa M.
Enhanced biomethanation of kitchen waste by different
pre-treatments. Bioresour Technol 2011;102:592e9. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.07.122.
[143] Bordeleau EL, Droste RL. Comprehensive review and
compilation of pretreatments for mesophilic and
thermophilic anaerobic digestion. Water Sci Technol
2011;63:291e6. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2011.052.
€
[144] El-Emam RS, Ozcan H. Comprehensive review on the
techno-economics of sustainable large-scale clean
hydrogen production. J Clean Prod 2019;220:593e609.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.309.
[145] Sharma S, Basu S, Shetti NP, Aminabhavi TM. Waste-to-
energy nexus for circular economy and environmental
protection: recent trends in hydrogen energy. Sci Total
Environ 2020;713:136e633. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scitotenv.2020.136633.
[146] AlNouss A, McKay G, Al-Ansari T. Enhancing waste to
hydrogen production through biomass feedstock blending:
a techno-economic-environmental evaluation. Appl Energy
2020;266:114e885. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.apenergy.2020.114885.
26354 i n t e r n a t i o n a l j o u r n a l o f h y d r o g e n e n e r g y 4 7 ( 2 0 2 2 ) 2 6 3 2 6 e2 6 3 5 4
[147] Yun YM, Lee MK, Im SW, Marone A, Trably E, Shin SR, et al.
Biohydrogen production from food waste: current status,
limitations, and future perspectives. Bioresour Technol
2018;248:79e87. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.biortech.2017.06.107.
[148] Winter CJ. The hydrogen energy economy: an address to the
World Economic Forum 2004. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2004;29:1095e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2003.11.006.
[149] Ogden JM. Hydrogen as an energy carrier: outlook for 2010,
2030, and 2050. Transp Stud 2007:1e26.
[150] Yeo J, Chopra SS, Zhang L, An AK. Life cycle assessment
(LCA) of food waste treatment in Hong Kong: on-site
fermentation methodology. J Environ Manag
2019;240:343e51. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jenvman.2019.03.119.
[151] Xu C, Shi W, Hong J, Zhang F, Chen W. Life cycle assessment
of food waste-based biogas generation. Renew Sustain
Energy Rev 2015;49:169e77. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.rser.2015.04.164.
[152] Sridhar A, Kapoor A, Kumar PS. Conversion of food waste to
energy : a focus on sustainability and life cycle assessment.
Fuel 2021:1e124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121069.
[153] Jones J, Genovese A, Tob-Ogu A. Hydrogen vehicles in urban
logistics: a total cost of ownership analysis and some policy
implications. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2020;119:1e27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109595.
[154] Rentizelas AA, Tolis AJ, Tatsiopoulos IP. Logistics issues of
biomass: the storage problem and the multi-biomass
supply chain. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2009;13:887e94.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2008.01.003.
[155] Ravula PP, Grisso RD, Cundiff JS. Comparison between two
policy strategies for scheduling trucks in a biomass logistic
system. Bioresour Technol 2008;99:5710e21. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biortech.2007.10.044.
[156] Nunes LJR, Causer TP, Ciolkosz D. Biomass for energy: a
review on supply chain management models. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev 2020;120:109e658. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2019.109658.
[157] Cardella U, Decker L, Klein H. Roadmap to economically
viable hydrogen liquefaction. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2017;42:13329e38. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2017.01.068.
[158] Zhang Y-HP, Xu J-H, Zhong J-J. A new high-energy density
hydrogen carrierd carbohydratedmight be better than
methanol. Int J Energy Res 2012;33:1e11. https://doi.org/
10.1002/er.
[159] Yang C, Ogden J. Determining the lowest-cost hydrogen
delivery mode. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:268e86.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.05.009.
[160] Haeseldonckx D, D’haeseleer W. The use of the natural-gas
pipeline infrastructure for hydrogen transport in a changing
market structure. Int J Hydrogen Energy 2007;32:1381e6.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2006.10.018.
[161] Smit R, Weeda M, de Groot A. Hydrogen infrastructure
development in The Netherlands. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2007;32:1387e95. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.ijhydene.2006.10.044.
[162] van der Zwaan BCC, Schoots K, Rivera-Tinoco R,
Verbong GPJ. The cost of pipelining climate change
mitigation: an overview of the economics of CH4, CO2 and
H2 transportation. Appl Energy 2011;88:3821e31. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.05.019.
[163] Wilkerson JT, Cullenward D, Davidian D, Weyant JP. End use
technology choice in the national energy modeling system
(NEMS): an analysis of the residential and commercial
building sectors. Energy Econ 2013;40:773e84. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2013.09.023.
[164] Salvi BL, Subramanian KA. Sustainable development of road
transportation sector using hydrogen energy system.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2015;51:1132e55. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2015.07.030.
[165] Kibler KM, Reinhart D, Hawkins C, Motlagh AM, Wright J.
Food waste and the food-energy-water nexus: a review of
food waste management alternatives. Waste Manag
2018;74:52e62. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.wasman.2018.01.014.
[166] Chandrasekhar K, Kumar S, Lee BD, Kim SH. Waste based
hydrogen production for circular bioeconomy: current
status and future directions. Bioresour Technol
2020;302:122e920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2020.
122920.
[167] Dincer I. Technical, environmental and exergetic aspects of
hydrogen energy systems. Int J Hydrogen Energy
2002;27:265e85. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-3199(01)
00119-7.
[168] Midilli A, Ay M, Dincer I, Rosen MA. On hydrogen and
hydrogen energy strategies I : current status and needs.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2005;9:255e71. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.rser.2004.05.003.