Next Article in Journal
Life Cycle Optimization of Circular Industrial Processes: Advances in By-Product Recovery for Renewable Energy Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Liquid Addition Techniques to Enhance Methane Biotrickling Filters at Dairy Barn Concentrations
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Hydrothermal Carbonization of Fish Waste: A Sustainable Pathway for Valorization and Resource Recovery

by
Carmen María Álvez-Medina
1,*,
Sergio Nogales-Delgado
1,*,
Beatriz Ledesma Cano
1,
Vicente Montes-Jiménez
2 and
Silvia Román Suero
1
1
Department of Applied Physics, University of Extremadura, Avda. De Elvas s/n, 06006 Badajoz, Spain
2
Department of Organic Chemistry, Chemical Institute for Energy and the Environment (IQUEMA), University of Córdoba, 14071 Córdoba, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Clean Technol. 2026, 8(1), 4; https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol8010004
Submission received: 16 October 2025 / Revised: 18 November 2025 / Accepted: 12 December 2025 / Published: 4 January 2026

Abstract

Fisheries and aquaculture residues pose escalating environmental challenges due to their high moisture content, nutrient loads, and pollutant potential when improperly managed. Conventional valorization routes, such as fishmeal, fish oil, and silage, offer partial mitigation but remain limited in scalability, conversion efficiency, and environmental performance. In this study, fish processing residues were subjected to hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) under controlled subcritical conditions (180–220 °C), along with a high-severity catalytic run (325 °C) using sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) as an additive. The latter condition exceeded the typical HTC range and entered the subcritical hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL) regime. The resulting solid, liquid, and gaseous fractions were comprehensively characterized to assess their energy potential, chemical composition, and reactivity. Hydrochars achieved higher heating values (HHVs) ranging from 14.2 to 25.7 MJ/kg. These results underscore their suitability as renewable solid fuels. The gas products were dominated by CO2 under standard HTC conditions. In contrast, the catalytic run in the subcritical HTL regime achieved a hydrogen enrichment of up to 30 vol.%, demonstrating the efficacy of NaHCO3 in promoting the water-gas shift reaction. Subsequent air gasification confirmed the high reactivity of the hydrochars, producing syngas enriched in H2 and CO at elevated temperatures. Overall, this study demonstrates a scalable multiproduct valorization route for fishery residues, supporting circular bioeconomy strategies and contributing to the achievement of UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 7, 12, and 13).

1. Introduction

Sustainable waste management has emerged as one of the most critical environmental, technological, and economic challenges of the 21st century, with direct implications for food security, climate change mitigation, and the efficient use of natural resources. Among various organic waste streams, residues generated by fisheries and aquaculture represent a rapidly growing and particularly impactful fraction. Inefficient management of these residues leads to nutrient losses, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and aquatic ecosystem contamination, exacerbating eutrophication and water quality deterioration [1,2]. This situation highlights the urgent need for sustainable technological strategies capable of converting aquatic residues into high-value products under the principles of the circular and blue bioeconomy.
Over recent decades, the expansion of global fisheries and aquaculture has been driven by increasing population growth, rising protein demand, and technological advances in harvesting and processing [3]. According to FAO [4], total aquatic production reached 223.2 million tonnes (Mt) in 2022, of which 185.4 Mt were destined for direct human consumption, consolidating aquaculture as the main source of marine protein. However, between 30% and 70% of the processed fish mass becomes solid or liquid residues such as heads, scales, skin, viscera, and bones, which can represent up to 80% of the dry weight of the raw material [5,6]. These residues are rich in proteins (49–58%), lipids (7–19%), ashes (21–30%), and polysaccharides such as chitin (up to 21%), as well as collagen and polyunsaturated fatty acids of high biological value [7,8]. Despite this significant biochemical potential, a large fraction remains underutilized, leading to environmental burdens and economic losses.
Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) studies have quantified the environmental footprint of seafood processing industries, revealing substantial impact values: 9.66 kg CO2equivalent per kilogram of processed product, 0.079 kg SO2eq associated with acidification, 0.02 kg PO43−-eq linked to eutrophication, and 0.17 kg 1,4-DCB-eq related to human toxicity [9]. These findings highlight the importance of developing sustainable valorization pathways that aim both to minimize carbon intensity and to enable the recovery of valuable nutrients from biomass residues.
Conventional valorization pathways, including fishmeal and fish oil production, silage, or anaerobic digestion, remain limited in scalability and efficiency. These processes rely heavily on fresh raw materials, show low nutrient recovery yields, and often generate high-strength effluents [2,10]. In contrast, hydrothermal thermochemical technologies have emerged as promising alternatives to these conventional biological routes, as they can convert wet and heterogeneous biomass into energy-rich products without prior drying, thereby offering the potential to reduce overall energy demand and environmental impacts [11].
Among these, three major routes have gained relevance: Hydrothermal Carbonization (HTC), Hydrothermal Liquefaction (HTL), and Hydrothermal Gasification (HTG). Each operates within a specific range of temperature and pressure, yielding distinct products and offering unique advantages for different biomass types [12].
Hydrothermal Carbonization (HTC) typically occurs between 180 and 250 °C under autogenous pressures (1–5 MPa) and residence times ranging from 0.5 to 24 h. Under these subcritical conditions, reactions of hydrolysis, dehydration, decarboxylation, and aromatization take place, producing a carbon-rich solid known as hydrochar, along with an aqueous phase containing dissolved organics and nutrients, and a minor gaseous phase mainly composed of CO2 [13]. Compared with dry thermochemical routes, such as pyrolysis, HTC offers lower energy consumption, higher process efficiency, and direct treatment of wet biomass. The resulting hydrochar exhibits tunable porosity, high thermal and chemical stability, and favorable adsorption capacity, making it applicable in energy, soil amendment, catalysis, and wastewater treatment [14,15].
Hydrothermal Liquefaction (HTL) operates at 250–374 °C and pressures of 5–20 MPa. HTL promotes the depolymerization of macromolecules, particularly lipids and proteins, into an energy-dense liquid phase termed biocrude. This biocrude exhibits properties comparable to petroleum-derived crude oil and can be further upgraded to produce liquid fuels and valuable chemical intermediates [16]. For lipid- and protein-rich feedstocks such as fish residues, HTL can achieve carbon conversion efficiencies above 60%, offering a feasible route for renewable fuel generation.
At supercritical conditions (>374 °C, >22 MPa), Hydrothermal Gasification (HTG) enables the complete conversion of wet biomass or hydrochar into a gaseous mixture primarily composed of H2, CO, and CH4. In these conditions, water acts simultaneously as solvent, reactant, and catalyst, enhancing reaction kinetics and mass transfer. HTG processes can achieve hydrogen yields up to 76.7 g H2 per kilogram of biochar, with energy efficiencies exceeding 35% [17,18]. HTG therefore represents a direct, though moderately efficient, pathway for renewable hydrogen and synthetic gas production from wet organic residues.
Integrating HTC, HTL, and HTG within a single hydrothermal biorefinery provides a comprehensive multiproduct valorization approach. In this framework, HTC converts carbohydrates and proteins into hydrochar, HTL liquefies lipids and amino compounds into biocrude and HTG converts both hydrochar and aqueous residues into hydrogen-rich syngas [19]. This sequential conversion scheme maximizes carbon recovery, enhances energy yield, and minimizes secondary waste generation, aligning with the principles of a low-carbon circular bioeconomy.
The performance of these processes can be further optimized by the incorporation of alkaline catalytic additives such as NaHCO3, Na2CO3, K2CO3, and CaO. These catalysts enhance dehydration, decarboxylation, and reforming reactions, as well as promoting CO2 capture and hydrogen generation. Among them, NaHCO3 serves as an effective, low-cost, and pH-buffering catalyst that facilitates organic carbon conversion and nutrient migration into the aqueous phase [20,21]. Na2CO3 enhances deoxygenation and reduces char formation [22], while K2CO3 improves ionic mobility and selectivity toward H2 during HTG [23]. CaO acts as an in situ CO2 sorbent and stabilizes hydrochar by reducing aromatic condensation and polycyclic compound formation [24,25]. The synergistic combination of these alkaline catalysts increases process efficiency and accelerates carbon conversion, making them ideal for large-scale hydrothermal valorization of fishery wastes.
The integral valorization of fish residues through these hydrothermal catalytic routes is fully consistent with the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, particularly the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 7, 12, and 13. SDG 7 promotes affordable and clean energy, SDG 12 encourages responsible production and consumption, and SDG 13 focuses on climate action [26,27]. By converting high-moisture fishery by-products into valuable materials and renewable fuels, hydrothermal biorefineries contribute directly to the transition toward carbon-neutral and resource-efficient production systems [26,27]. By converting high-moisture fishery by-products into valuable materials and renewable fuels, hydrothermal biorefineries contribute directly to the transition toward carbon-neutral and resource-efficient production systems.
In this context, the present study addresses an existing knowledge gap by evaluating the catalytic hydrothermal carbonization of fish residues using NaHCO3 as an additive, followed by gasification of the resulting hydrochars. This multiproduct approach offers valuable insight into carbon conversion, hydrogen generation, and nutrient recovery, paving the way for sustainable, circular, and low-carbon production systems applicable to the blue bioeconomy sector.
Figure 1 provides a schematic overview of the three principal hydrothermal conversion routes (HTC, HTL, and HTG), their operating temperature ranges, and corresponding product outputs. As temperature increases, the transformation progresses from solid hydrochar formation (180–250 °C), through biocrude-oil generation (250–374 °C), to syngas production rich in H2 and CH4 (>374 °C). This thermodynamic gradient illustrates the flexibility and scalability of hydrothermal technologies for the valorization of aquatic residues within a circular, low-carbon framework.

2. Materials and Methods

The experimental design was developed to ensure reproducibility and facilitate comparison with the existing literature. It covered the complete workflow, from raw material handling to the characterization of all products derived from hydrothermal carbonization (HTC). The methodological approach was structured to minimize external variability, enabling the establishment of clear and reproducible correlations between operating conditions and the physicochemical properties of the resulting fractions.

2.1. Raw Material

Fish residues were provided by Extrepronatour S.L. (Badajoz, Spain). The material was delivered in sealed 10 L containers, subdivided into 500 g units, vacuum-packed, and immediately frozen at −20 °C. This protocol ensured the preservation of intrinsic properties and prevented enzymatic degradation or microbial activity prior to processing, which is critical for biomass rich in proteins and lipids. The morphological appearance of the raw material is shown in Figure 2.
In the final run, sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3, purity of ≥99%, Sigma-Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany) was added as a catalytic agent. This compound was selected due to its low cost, wide availability, and favorable safety profile compared with other alkaline additives, while still being effective in promoting dehydration and decarboxylation reactions under hydrothermal conditions. Upon decomposition, NaHCO3 releases CO2 and forms Na2CO3 and NaOH, thereby modifying the reaction medium and facilitating the redistribution of carbon and nutrients between solid, liquid and gaseous phases.

2.2. Experimental Conditions

Experiments were carried out in a stainless-steel batch reactor (Parr 4848, Parr Instrument Company, Moline, IL, USA), specifically designed for high-pressure and high-temperature hydrothermal operations. The reactor was equipped with automated sensors for continuous monitoring of temperature and pressure, ensuring precise control of the reaction parameters throughout the experiments (Figure 3). The mass of biomass inputs and all resulting product fractions was determined using an analytical balance (Cobos analytical balance, Cobos Precision S.L., Barcelona, Spain; ±0.1 mg precision), guaranteeing high accuracy in yield calculations.
Six experimental runs were performed, each with a constant reaction time of 3 h. This residence time was selected because approximately 3 h is sufficient for the main hydrothermal carbonization reactions (dehydration, decarboxylation, and condensation) to reach completion without excessive degradation of organic matter. Previous studies have shown that extending the reaction time beyond 3–4 h provides minimal improvements in hydrochar yield or carbon content but increases energy demand and operating costs [28,29]. Therefore, a reaction time of 3 h was chosen as an optimal compromise, ensuring complete carbonization kinetics and reproducibility under controlled laboratory conditions.
Runs one to five were designed to isolate the effect of temperature while maintaining a constant biomass-to-water ratio of 1:1 (w/w). This ratio was selected to provide sufficient liquid for uniform heat transfer and an adequate hydrothermal medium, while avoiding unnecessary dilution that would reduce energy efficiency. Ratios between 1:1 and 1:3 have been reported as optimal for high-moisture or protein-rich biomasses such as fish residues, since they prevent excessive hydrolysis and organic matter loss while maintaining sufficient water for reaction stability [30,31].
Run six represented a high-severity condition with reduced biomass load, relative excess water, NaHCO3 addition, and elevated temperature, simulating conditions closer to those expected in catalytic or intensified HTC scenarios.
All experiments were performed in duplicate, and the results from each replicate showed excellent agreement (differences below 3%). The high consistency observed between runs confirms the robustness and stability of the experimental procedure. Consequently, the data presented are considered fully representative of the hydrothermal carbonization behavior under the investigated conditions.
The operational parameters applied in the six experimental runs are summarized in Table 1.
Runs one to five provided a systematic evaluation of temperature effects under standard conditions, while run six enabled assessing the combined influence of increased thermal severity and medium alkalinity.

2.3. Product Separation

At the end of each run, products were separated into solid, liquid, and gaseous fractions to facilitate independent characterization. Hydrochar was recovered by filtration, dried at 105 °C until constant weight, and stored in airtight containers to prevent moisture uptake. The liquid fraction was diluted 1:20 with distilled water immediately after recovery; this step was essential to stabilize the aqueous phase and avoid secondary polymerization reactions that could alter its composition. The gaseous fraction was collected directly from the reactor headspace and analyzed immediately after depressurization to prevent compositional drift due to leakage or adsorption phenomena.

2.4. Product Characterization

The efficiency of hydrochar production was expressed as solid yield (SY), calculated according to Equation (1):
S Y ( % ) = m f m i × 100
where mf represents the mass of dried hydrochar (g) and mi the initial mass of raw biomass (g). This metric was selected as a primary indicator of HTC conversion performance.
The energy content of the produced hydrochars was determined through the higher heating value (HHV) using a bomb calorimeter (Parr 1351, Parr Instrument Company, Moline, IL, USA).
The liquid fraction was analyzed for pH using a digital pH meter (Crison, Barcelona, Spain) and for electrical conductivity using a digital conductimeter (Crison, Barcelona, Spain). These parameters provided an overview of the ionic content and acid–base balance, which are essential for assessing downstream applications such as nutrient recovery and biofertilizer production.
The gaseous fraction was analyzed by gas chromatography (Agilent 990, Agilent Technologies, Santa Clara, CA, USA), allowing for precise quantification of the major gas components, including H2, CO2, CH4, CO, and N2. This analytical approach ensured an accurate evaluation of gas composition under different operating conditions.
The analytical methods employed are summarized in Table 2.
The integration of these analyses provided a comprehensive overview of the process, from biomass conversion efficiency to the energetic and chemical characterization of the liquid and gaseous fractions (Figure 4). This methodological approach ensures comparability with previous literature and establishes a basis for future optimizations aimed at the integral valorization of fishery residues.

3. Results

This section presents the results of hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) of fish residues, organized by product fraction, hydrochar, aqueous phase, and gas, as well as by the reactivity of selected hydrochars under air gasification. The catalytic test with sodium bicarbonate is also highlighted, as it produced distinctive conditions for hydrogen enrichment.

3.1. Hydrochar Yield and Energy Potential

Hydrochars represent the solid fraction of HTC and their energy content is crucial to evaluating their potential as renewable fuels. As shown in Table 3, HHVs ranged from approximately 14 to 26 MJ/kg, with marked differences depending on feed fraction and operating severity.
In several experiments, distinct solid portions of the hydrochar, such as the carbon-rich and bone-rich fractions, were analyzed, allowing direct comparison of their respective energy contents. For instance, samples produced at 180 °C and 190 °C showed markedly different HHV, with higher energy content in those sub-fractions that already displayed a charcoal-like morphology (particularly fraction c). However, fraction separation was not performed in this study, as it would represent an additional cost in an industrial-scale process. Consequently, samples prepared at 200, 210 and 220 °C correspond to the total solid fraction recovered after HTC without separation.
Except for the carbon-rich fraction (HC-c), HHV was relatively low compared with those typically reported for lignocellulosic biomass, which can be attributed to the high mineral content of the feedstock. Nevertheless, a slight increase in HHV with temperature was observed, consistent with progressive dehydration and carbon enrichment at higher HTC severities.
Comparable results were reported by Kannan et al. [32], who performed HTC of fish residues under similar temperature conditions (190–210 °C) combined with microwave treatment, obtaining HHV between 17 and 25 MJ kg−1. These authors also examined the evolution of O/C and H/C ratios using the Van Krevelen diagram, observing that (unlike lignocellulosic biomasses) the H/C ratio remained nearly constant as severity increased, which they attributed to the predominance of decarboxylation over dehydration.
Figure 5 reproduces the Van Krevelen diagram, illustrating the tendency of fish residues to maintain a constant H/C ratio with increasing temperature. This interpretation aligns with the observations from the present study, which also suggest the predominance of decarboxylation mechanisms during HTC of fish residues.
Taken together, these results demonstrate that hydrochars preserve significant energy content and compositional diversity, making them promising solid fuels or carbon-rich precursors for further upgrading.

3.2. Aqueous Fraction

The hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) process applied to fish residues promoted extensive decomposition of the biomass, resulting in the generation of a predominant liquid fraction and a smaller amount of solid hydrochar. Table 4 summarizes the experimental results for the mass of the aqueous fraction obtained in each run. In all cases, the recovered liquid mass was high, generally exceeding 900 g, indicating a substantial degree of conversion of the feedstock under subcritical conditions.
With the exception of one run at 200 °C, which was affected by a minor pressure loss in the reactor, the liquid yields remained high and consistent, with an average recovery of approximately 90% of the initial biomass mass. This stability reflects the effectiveness of the hydrothermal environment in promoting physical and chemical transformations that favor the formation of a dominant liquid phase, even under moderate reaction conditions [33,34].
To contextualize these experimental findings within the broader framework of water management in hydrothermal systems, Figure 6 is presented below. This schematic, developed by the GAIRBER research group [35], conceptually illustrates different HTC configurations based on the source and utilization of water within the system.
In Figure 6a, two independent configurations are shown: (i) HTC performed with externally added water and (ii) HTC applied to wet biomass without additional water input, relying on intrinsic moisture. Figure 6b represents the co-hydrothermal carbonization (Co-HTC) process, where dry and wet biomasses are treated simultaneously in a single reactor. This configuration enables more efficient use of the available water and potentially reduces overall water consumption.
Although the present study exclusively employed a mixture of biomass and externally added water, the high liquid yields obtained demonstrate a strong interaction between the organic matrix and the hydrothermal medium under subcritical conditions. These findings highlight the efficiency of HTC for processing wet fish residues and support its potential as a low-water-demand conversion route within sustainable waste valorization strategies.

3.3. Gas Fraction

The gas composition generated during the hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) process, as shown in Table 5, provides important insights into the dominant decomposition pathways of the biomass.
In the non-catalytic experiments, CO2 was the predominant gaseous product, accompanied by a gradual decrease in N2 and small amounts of CO and CH4. The concentration of H2 remained almost undetectable within the investigated temperature range, confirming that decarboxylation was the main gas-forming mechanism under these conditions. This behavior agrees with previous HTC studies, where CO2 evolution has been linked to the removal of carboxylic and phenolic groups from the biomass matrix [36].
In contrast, the catalytic experiment at 325 °C showed a moderate increase in H2 concentration, reaching about 30 vol.%. This result indicates that NaHCO3 promoted partial activation of the water gas shift (WGS) reaction, enhancing hydrogen formation in situ. Although the increase in H2 content was moderate, it clearly demonstrates a catalytic effect compared with the non-catalytic baseline. Similar H2 concentrations, typically between 25 and 35 vol.%, have been reported in the literature, but generally at higher temperatures (350 to 425 °C) when alkaline or hydrotalcite-type catalysts are used [36,37,38].
Comparable results have been reported by other authors, but usually under more severe conditions. Zeng and Shimizu reported up to 35 vol.% H2 at temperatures above 400 °C [36], while Lee et al. obtained similar yields using Cu-Mg-Al hydrotalcite-derived catalysts between 350 and 400 °C [37]. Likewise, Khandelwal et al. achieved around 30 vol.% H2 during catalytic hydrothermal gasification with alkaline carbonates, but only above 375 °C [38]. Achieving a similar H2 yield at 325 °C in the present study, therefore, highlights the relatively high catalytic efficiency of NaHCO3 under milder hydrothermal conditions.
Overall, the results show that NaHCO3 acts as a moderate but effective catalytic promoter, enhancing hydrogen formation at lower temperatures without significantly changing the overall gas composition. This consistent improvement supports the role of alkaline media in facilitating the WGS reaction and provides additional experimental evidence of the influence of NaHCO3 on gas distribution under hydrothermal conditions.

3.4. Hydrochar Gasification

The gasification of hydrochars was conducted under oxidizing conditions using air at 800 °C and 900 °C, with the objective of comparing the composition of the resulting gases with that obtained during hydrothermal treatments (HTC and HTL). This comparison underscores the intrinsic differences between the reducing aqueous environment typical of hydrothermal processes and the high-temperature oxidative atmosphere characteristic of gasification [39,40,41].
Table 6 summarizes the total moles of the main gaseous species formed under these conditions. Hydrochars produced at 200 °C were gasified at both 800 °C and 900 °C, each analyzed in duplicate due to the higher hydrochar yield obtained at this HTC temperature. In contrast, the hydrochar prepared at 220 °C was gasified only once at 800 °C, as its lower solid yield limited the available sample amount. The reported values correspond to independent experimental runs conducted under identical conditions, ensuring the consistency and reproducibility of the results.
Increasing the temperature markedly modified the gas composition, promoting the formation of H2 and CO while progressively reducing CO2 concentrations. Light hydrocarbons (CH4, C2H4, C2H6, and traces of C2H2) were also detected, originating from thermal cracking and secondary reforming reactions within the residual carbonaceous matrix. This behavior reflects the high thermal reactivity of the material and the predominance of conversion pathways that favor the generation of reducing gases [42,43].
At 900 °C, the product gas exhibited H2/CO ratios between 2 and 3, values suitable for Fischer–Tropsch (FT) and biomass-to-liquids (BTL) synthesis. These ratios are consistent with those reported in previous studies on high-temperature biomass gasification aimed at the production of industrial-grade syngas [44,45,46,47].
The inorganic composition of the hydrochar likely influenced the conversion reactions. Previous research has shown that alkali and alkaline-earth metals such as Ca, Na, and K can act as catalytic promoters during gasification, reducing the activation energy and enhancing CO2 reforming and reduction reactions [41,43,48]. However, this potential catalytic effect was not verified within the scope of the present study be further investigated in future work.
Compared to hydrothermal treatments, gasification exhibited similar trends in both gas composition and carbon conversion. During HTC, CO2 formation dominated due to decarboxylation, whereas HTL favored higher H2 yields through aqueous-phase reforming. Under gasification conditions, the reaction equilibrium shifted toward reducing gas mixtures dominated by H2 and CO, reflecting the combined influence of temperature, reaction atmosphere, and the potential catalytic contribution of inorganic species to syngas quality [40,49].
Overall, these findings confirm that hydrochars derived from fish residues via hydrothermal carbonization exhibit high reactivity and efficient conversion, making them promising precursors for syngas production. The results provide a sound experimental basis for the mechanistic and redox equilibrium analyses discussed in Section 4.

4. Discussion

The hydrothermal carbonization of fish residues under subcritical conditions produced solids with moderate energy potential and clear structural heterogeneity. This heterogeneity reflects the complex composition of the feedstock, where organic and mineral fractions coexist and influence the degree of carbon concentration. Comparable observations have been reported for marine and mineral-containing biomasses, where inorganic domains hinder uniform solid formation and affect carbonization efficiency [50]. The slight increase in apparent carbonization with temperature suggests progressive dehydration and rearrangement of organic matter, consistent with the thermal behavior expected in hydrothermal carbonization processes [51].
A high recovery of the liquid phase was observed during the HTC process, remaining stable across the tested temperature range. This behavior indicates significant solubilization of organic matter, suggesting an efficient interaction between the feedstock and the hydrothermal medium. Although the composition of this phase was not analyzed, the high liquid recovery aligns with findings from protein-rich biomasses, where hydrolysis and partial depolymerization generate soluble low-molecular-weight intermediates. Such aqueous fractions have been described as potentially valuable for nutrient recovery or further conversion in circular biorefinery schemes [52,53].
The transition toward higher severity conditions resulted in a reduction of the solid fraction and a clear change in the gas phase. The addition of NaHCO3 coincided with an increase in hydrogen proportion, indicating a modification of the reaction environment under alkaline conditions. Although the specific pathways were not determined, this outcome aligns with trends observed in other alkaline-assisted hydrothermal systems, where carbonate additives alter solubility equilibria and the distribution of gaseous products [54]. The lower heating value of the solid under catalytic conditions suggests that the additive promoted higher conversion rather than an increase in solid energy density.
Gasification of the hydrochars confirmed their good reactivity and the generation of reducing gas mixtures. The variation in hydrogen and carbon monoxide with temperature indicates a favorable shift toward more reactive gaseous species. This observation is consistent with general gasification behavior reported for hydrothermally derived solids from nitrogen- and ash-rich biomasses [55]. While the catalytic influence of mineral matter was not examined in this work, its potential role cannot be ruled out and could be explored in future studies.
Overall, the combination of hydrothermal carbonization, high-severity treatment, and gasification provided a coherent picture of carbon redistribution across the solid and gaseous fractions. The results demonstrate that moderate hydrothermal processes can effectively convert fish residues into reactive solids and gas streams of energetic interest, supporting the potential of hydrothermal conversion as a sustainable valorization route within a circular bioeconomy framework [56].

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates the technical feasibility of hydrothermal conversion as an integrated route for the valorization of fish-processing residues, enabling the production of energy-relevant products from a wet and heterogeneous biomass.
Under subcritical HTC conditions, fish residues were efficiently converted into reactive hydrochars with moderate heating values, suitable for further thermochemical upgrading. The addition of NaHCO3 modified the reaction environment, promoting higher hydrogen proportions in the gaseous phase without the use of metallic catalysts, confirming its potential as an accessible and low-impact alkaline additive.
A high recovery of the liquid phase was also observed, indicating strong interaction between the organic matrix and the hydrothermal medium. Although its composition was not analyzed in this work, its abundance suggests promising opportunities for future valorization through nutrient recovery or secondary conversion pathways within circular biorefinery frameworks.
The gasification of the produced hydrochars confirmed their high reactivity and the formation of H2- and CO-rich syngas mixtures, suitable for energy recovery and synthesis applications. Furthermore, the process’s capability to efficiently treat high-moisture biomass supports its integration with low-moisture feedstocks in co-hydrothermal systems, enhancing overall carbon efficiency and process sustainability.
Collectively, these results position hydrothermal technologies as versatile, efficient, and sustainable platforms for marine residue valorization, contributing to the development of circular bioeconomy strategies and the transition toward low-carbon production systems.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.R.S.; methodology, S.R.S. and B.L.C.; software, C.M.Á.-M.; validation, C.M.Á.-M., B.L.C., S.N.-D. and S.R.S.; formal analysis, C.M.Á.-M.; investigation, C.M.Á.-M.; resources, S.R.S. and V.M.-J.; data curation, C.M.Á.-M.; writing—original draft preparation, C.M.Á.-M.; writing—review and editing, C.M.Á.-M. and B.L.C.; visualization, C.M.Á.-M.; supervision, S.R.S., B.L.C., S.N.-D. and V.M.-J.; project administration, S.R.S.; funding acquisition, S.R.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The authors are thankful to Agencia Española de Investigación for the financial help through the project PID2020-116144RB-I00/AEI/10.13039/501100011033.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All data supporting the results of this study are included in the table within the manuscript. No additional datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Alejandro Martínez Martín for his help with the graphic illustrations.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
BTLBiomass-to-Liquids
CH4Methane
COCarbon Monoxide
CO2Carbon Dioxide
co-HTCCo-hydrothermal Carbonization
DCBDichlorobenzene (1,4-DCB-eq)
FAOFood and Agriculture Organization
FTFischer–Tropsch
GHGGreenhouse Gas(es)
H2Hydrogen
HCHydrochar
HHVHigher Heating Value
HTCHydrothermal Carbonization
HTGHydrothermal Gasification
HTLHydrothermal Liquefaction
LCALife Cycle Assessment
MJ/kgMegajoules per Kilogram
Na2CO3Sodium Carbonate
NaHCO3Sodium Bicarbonate
NaOHSodium Hydroxide
N2Nitrogen
O/COxygen-to-Carbon Ratio
PO43−Phosphate Ion
SDGsSustainable Development Goals
SYSolid Yield
TTemperature

References

  1. Coppola, D.; Lauritano, C.; Esposito, F.P.; Riccio, G.; Rizzo, C.; De Pascale, D. Fish Waste: From Problem to Valuable Resource. Mar. Drugs 2021, 19, 116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Padma, S.; Rao, R.V.; Krishnan, K. Transforming Fish Waste into High-Value Resources: A Sustainable Approach to Circular Bioeconomy. Uttar Pradesh J. Zool 2024, 45, 34685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Geetha, K. Frontiers in Marine Biotechnology and Fish Genomics: Innovations for Sustainable Aquaculture and Blue Economy Advancement. Natl. J. Smart Fish. Aquac. Innov. 2024, 2, 58–63. [Google Scholar]
  4. FAO. The State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2024; FAO: Rome, Italy; IFAD: Rome, Italy; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA; WFP: Rome, Italy; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2024; ISBN 978-92-5-138882-2. [Google Scholar]
  5. Saravanan, M.; Kumar, P.S.; Vo, D.-V.N. Valorization of Fish Waste for Bioactive Compounds and Nutraceuticals. Environ. Res. 2023, 229, 117422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. UNICEF. UNICEF Annual Report 2024; UNICEF: New York, NY, USA, 2024; ISBN 9789280656626. [Google Scholar]
  7. Alfio, L.; Padilla-Rascón, D.; Martínez, J. From Fish Waste to Value: An Overview of the Sustainable Recovery of Omega-3 for Food Supplements. Molecules 2021, 26, 1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Naseem, S.; Imam, A.; Rayadurga, A.S.; Ray, A.; Suman, S.K. Trends in Fisheries Waste Utilization: A Valuable Resource of Nutrients and Valorized Products for the Food Industry. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2024, 64, 9240–9260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Astuti, R.D. Hadiyanto Life Cycle Assessment of Seafood Processing Waste Management. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Paris, France, 7–9 February 2018; Volume 131, p. 012046. [Google Scholar]
  10. Venugopal, V. Valorization of Seafood Processing Discards: Bioconversion and Bio-Refinery Approaches. Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 2021, 5, 611835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Hussin, F.; Hazani, N.N.; Khalil, M.; Aroua, M.K. Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Biomass Conversion Using Hydrothermal Technology: A Review. Fuel Process. Technol. 2023, 246, 107747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Nizamuddin, S.; Baloch, H.A.; Griffin, G.J.; Bhutto, A.W. Hydrothermal Technologies for Biomass Conversion: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017, 74, 1289–1304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Merzari, F.; Lucian, M.; Volpe, M.; Andreottola, G.; Fiori, L. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Biomass: Design of a Bench-Scale Reactor for Evaluating the Heat of Reaction. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2018, 65, 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Sabry, T.M.; El-Korashy, I. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Calotropis Procera Leaves as a Biomass: Preparation and Characterization. J. Mol. Struct. 2023, 1302, 137397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cavali, M.; Junior, N.L.; de Sena, J.D.; Woiciechowski, A.L.; Soccol, C.R.; Filho, P.B.; Bayard, R.; Benbelkacem, H.; Junior, A.B.d.C. A Review on Hydrothermal Carbonization of Potential Biomass Wastes, Characterization and Environmental Applications of Hydrochar, and Biorefinery Perspectives. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 857, 159627. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Qin, J.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Y.; Wei, Q. Catalytic Hydrothermal Liquefaction of Fish Proteins and Lipids for the Production of Bio-Oil Over Four Different Catalysts. 2024. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Yan, J.; Zhang, H.; Yang, Z.; Li, Y. Boosting Bio-Lipids Hydrodeoxygenation via Highly Dispersed and Coking-Resistance Bimetallic Ni-La/SiO2 Catalyst. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2025, 13, 114968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Mariyam, S.; Alherbawi, M.; McKay, G.; Al-Ansari, T. A Systematic Review on Hydrogen Production via Hydrochar-Based Gasification. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2025, 166, 150933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rojas, M.; Manrique, R.; Hornung, U.; Funke, A.; Mullen, C.A.; Chejne, F.; Maya, J.C. Advances and Challenges on Hydrothermal Processes for Biomass Conversion: Feedstock Flexibility, Products, and Modeling Approaches. Biomass Bioenergy 2025, 194, 107621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Andérez-Fernández, M.; Álvarez-Murillo, A.; Román, S.; Ledesma, B. Sodium Bicarbonate as a Catalytic Additive in Hydrothermal Carbonization. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 316, 116084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Duan, Y.; Zhang, X.; Li, J. Carbon Conversion Enhancement Using NaHCO3 in HTC of Organic Waste. Energy Convers. Manag. 2023, 292, 117254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ischia, G.; Berge, N.D.; Bae, S.; Marzban, N.; Román, S.; Farru, G.; Wilk, M.; Kulli, B.; Fiori, L. Advances in Research and Technology of Hydrothermal Carbonization: Achievements and Future Directions. Agronomy 2024, 14, 955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Seçer, M.; Yüksel, M.; Demirbaş, A. Hydrothermal Co-Gasification of Sorghum Biomass and Lignite: Optimization for Hydrogen Yield. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2020, 45, 19698–19708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Liu, W.; Zhang, J.; Zheng, X. Distribution and Toxicity of PAHs during CaO-Assisted Hydrothermal Carbonization of Sewage Sludge. Waste Manag. 2020, 108, 81–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Lan, X.; Li, R.; Zhang, J. Effect of CaO on the Hydrothermal Carbonization of Food Waste. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 297, 127512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Nations, U. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; United Nations General Assembly: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
  27. Laktuka, M.; Torres, P.; Sánchez, A. Circular Economy Integration into Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2023, 15, 756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. González-Arias, J.; Sánchez, M.E.; Martínez, E.J.; Covalski, C.; Alonso-Simón, A.; González, R.; Cara-Jiménez, J. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Olive Tree Pruning as a Sustainable Way for Improving Biomass Energy Potential: Effect of Reaction Parameters on Fuel Properties. Processes 2020, 8, 1201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Lucian, M.; Fiori, L. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Waste Biomass: Process Design, Modeling, Energy Efficiency and Cost Analysis. Energies 2017, 10, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. De Francesco, C.; Gasperini, T.; Duca, D.; Toscano, G.; Ilari, A. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Residual Biomass from Agricultural and Agro-Industrial Sector. Processes 2024, 12, 1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Yıldız Uzun, Z. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Sugar Beet Pulp: Optimization and Characterization. Biomass Convers. Biorefin 2024, 14, 21507–21521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kannan, S.; Burelle, I.; Orsat, V.; Vijaya Raghavan, G.S. Characterization of Bio-Crude Liquor and Bio-Oil Produced by Hydrothermal Carbonization of Seafood Waste. Waste Biomass Valorization 2020, 11, 3553–3565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Miyata, Y.; Fukushima, T.; Kihira, M.; Takisawa, K. Effect of Hydrothermal Reaction Conditions on Hydrochar from Microalgae. Biomass Convers. Biorefin 2024, 14, 349–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Sarker, T.R.; Sarker, B.; Saha, B.; Khatun, M.L.; Dalai, A.K. Hydrothermal Liquefaction: Transforming Waste into Renewable Fuels and High-Value Bio-Chemicals. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2025, 222, 115974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. García-Morato, R.; Román, S.; Ledesma, B.; Coronella, C. Co-Hydrothermal Carbonization of Grass and Olive Stone as a Means to Lower Water Input to HTC. Resources 2023, 12, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zeng, B.; Shimizu, N. Hydrogen Generation from Wood Chip and Biochar by Combined Continuous Pyrolysis and Hydrothermal Gasification. Energies 2021, 14, 3793. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Lee, C.H.; Kim, S.; Yoon, H.J.; Yoon, C.W.; Lee, K.B. Water Gas Shift and Sorption-Enhanced Water Gas Shift Reactions Using Hydrothermally Synthesized Novel Cu–Mg–Al Hydrotalcite-Based Catalysts for Hydrogen Production. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 145, 111064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Khandelwal, K.; Boahene, P.; Nanda, S.; Dalai, A.K. A Review of the Design and Performance of Catalysts for Hydrothermal Gasification of Biomass to Produce Hydrogen-Rich Gas Fuel. Molecules 2023, 28, 5137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Salaudeen, S.A.; Acharya, B.; Dutta, A. Steam Gasification of Hydrochar Derived from Hydrothermal Carbonization of Fruit Wastes. Renew. Energy 2021, 171, 582–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Soroush, S.; Ronsse, F.; Verberckmoes, A.; Verpoort, F.; Park, J.; Wu, D.; Heynderickx, P.M. Production of Solid Hydrochar from Waste Seaweed by Hydrothermal Carbonization: Effect of Process Variables. Biomass Convers. Biorefin 2024, 14, 183–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zeng, M.; Ge, Z.; Ma, Y.; Zha, Z.; Wu, Y.; Hou, Z.; Zhang, H. Hydrothermal Carbonization Coupled with Gasification for Collaborative Disposal of Kitchen Waste and Yard Waste. Energy Convers. Manag. 2023, 283, 116864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Mateo, R.S.G.; Mosqueda, A.O.; Kuttin, K.W.; Yu, H.; Pico, A.P.V.D.; Abesamis, M.F.A.; Ding, L.; Yu, G. Computational Fluid Dynamics Study of Sequential Hydrothermal Carbonization and CO2-Gasification of Municipal Solid Waste-Coconut Husk-Derived Hydrochar for Tunable Syngas Production. Fuel 2025, 388, 134421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ma, J.; Chen, M.; Yang, T.; Liu, Z.; Jiao, W.; Li, D.; Gai, C. Gasification Performance of the Hydrochar Derived from Co-Hydrothermal Carbonization of Sewage Sludge and Sawdust. Energy 2019, 173, 732–739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kim, Y.-D.; Yang, C.-W.; Kim, B.-J.; Moon, J.-H.; Jeong, J.-Y.; Jeong, S.-H.; Lee, S.-H.; Kim, J.-H.; Seo, M.-W.; Lee, S.-B.; et al. Fischer–Tropsch Diesel Production and Evaluation as Alternative Automotive Fuel in Pilot-Scale Integrated Biomass-to-Liquid Process. Appl. Energy 2016, 180, 301–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Chiodini, A.; Bua, L.; Carnelli, L.; Zwart, R.; Vreugdenhil, B.; Vocciante, M. Enhancements in Biomass-to-Liquid Processes: Gasification Aiming at High Hydrogen/Carbon Monoxide Ratios for Direct Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis Applications. Biomass Bioenergy 2017, 106, 104–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Havilah, P.R.; Sharma, A.K.; Govindasamy, G.; Matsakas, L.; Patel, A. Biomass Gasification in Downdraft Gasifiers: A Technical Review on Production, Up-Gradation and Application of Synthesis Gas. Energies 2022, 15, 3938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Slatter, N.L.; Vichanpol, B.; Natakaranakul, J.; Wattanavichien, K.; Suchamalawong, P.; Hashimoto, K.; Tsubaki, N.; Vitidsant, T.; Charusiri, W. Syngas Production for Fischer–Tropsch Synthesis from Rubber Wood Pellets and Eucalyptus Wood Chips in a Pilot Horizontal Gasifier with CaO as a Tar Removal Catalyst. ACS Omega 2022, 7, 44951–44961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Kopsch, M.; Lebendig, F.; Yazhenskikh, E.; Amado-Fierro, Á.; Centeno, T.; Müller, M. Effect of HTC and Water-Leaching of Low-Grade Biomasses on the Release Behavior of Inorganic Constituents in a Calcium Looping Gasification Process at 650 °C. Energy Fuels 2024, 38, 16504–16519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Vallejo, F.; Díaz-Robles, L.; Carné-Seco, V.; Pino-Cortés, E.; Espinoza-Pérez, A.; Espinoza-Pérez, L. Hybrid Porous Media Gasification of Urban Solid Waste Pre-Treated by Hydrothermal Carbonization. PLoS ONE 2023, 18, e0291838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Cavali, M.; Hennig, T.B.; Libardi Junior, N.; Kim, B.; Garnier, V.; Benbelkacem, H.; Bayard, R.; Woiciechowski, A.L.; Matias, W.G.; de Castilhos Junior, A.B. Co-Hydrothermal Carbonization of Sawdust and Sewage Sludge: Assessing the Potential of the Hydrochar as an Adsorbent and the Ecotoxicity of the Process Water. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 1052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Maniscalco, M.P.; Volpe, M.; Messineo, A. Hydrothermal Carbonization as a Valuable Tool for Energy and Environmental Applications: A Review. Energies 2020, 13, 4098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Belete, Y.Z.; Leu, S.; Boussiba, S.; Zorin, B.; Posten, C.; Thomsen, L.; Wang, S.; Gross, A.; Bernstein, R. Characterization and Utilization of Hydrothermal Carbonization Aqueous Phase as Nutrient Source for Microalgal Growth. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 290, 121758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Liu, G.; Zhang, T. Advances in Hydrothermal Carbonization for Biomass Wastewater Valorization: Optimizing Nitrogen and Phosphorus Nutrient Management to Enhance Agricultural and Ecological Outcomes. Water 2025, 17, 800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Muthukumar, K.; Loganathan, T.; Senthil Kumar, S.; Prabhakar, P.; Vishnu, S.; Senthil, S. Hydrogen-Rich Syngas Production from Food Waste via Supercritical Water Gasification: Influence of Gasification Temperature and Polyaniline and Potassium Carbonate (PANI-K2CO3) Catalyst. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2025, 141, 145–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Azargohar, R.; Nanda, S.; Cheng, H.; Dalai, A.K. Potential Application of Canola Hull Fuel Pellets for the Production of Synthesis Gas and Hydrogen. Energies 2022, 15, 8613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Abawalo, M.; Pikoń, K.; Landrat, M. Comparative Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen Production via Biogas Reforming and Agricultural Residue Gasification. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 5029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Conceptual schematic of hydrothermal conversion pathways for fish waste valorization.
Figure 1. Conceptual schematic of hydrothermal conversion pathways for fish waste valorization.
Cleantechnol 08 00004 g001
Figure 2. Morphological appearance of the raw fish residues used as feedstock in the HTC experiments.
Figure 2. Morphological appearance of the raw fish residues used as feedstock in the HTC experiments.
Cleantechnol 08 00004 g002
Figure 3. Illustration of the Parr 4848 reactor.
Figure 3. Illustration of the Parr 4848 reactor.
Cleantechnol 08 00004 g003
Figure 4. Schematic representation of the methodological approach for the integral valorization of fishery residue.
Figure 4. Schematic representation of the methodological approach for the integral valorization of fishery residue.
Cleantechnol 08 00004 g004
Figure 5. Van Krevelen diagram (H/C vs. O/C) of hydrochars produced under different HTC conditions [32].
Figure 5. Van Krevelen diagram (H/C vs. O/C) of hydrochars produced under different HTC conditions [32].
Cleantechnol 08 00004 g005
Figure 6. Comparative schematic of the hydrothermal carbonization processes: (a) Single HTC, including configurations with added water and self-moist feedstock. (b) Co-hydrothermal carbonization (Co-HTC) integrating both biomasses in a single system [35].
Figure 6. Comparative schematic of the hydrothermal carbonization processes: (a) Single HTC, including configurations with added water and self-moist feedstock. (b) Co-hydrothermal carbonization (Co-HTC) integrating both biomasses in a single system [35].
Cleantechnol 08 00004 g006
Table 1. Experimental conditions of HTC runs.
Table 1. Experimental conditions of HTC runs.
RunFish (g)H2O (g)T (°C)t (h)
15005001803
25005001903
35005002003
45005002103
55005002203
61005003253
Table 2. Parameters determined and analytical techniques used.
Table 2. Parameters determined and analytical techniques used.
ParameterDescriptionTechnique/Equipment
Solid yield (%)Ratio between initial and final hydrochar massGravimetry, Cobos balance
Liquid production (g)Mass of liquid phase obtained in each runGravimetry, Cobos balance
Higher heating valueEnergy released during hydrochar combustionParr 1351 bomb calorimeter
Elemental compositionC, H, N, S content; O calculated by differenceLECO TruSpec elemental analyzer
Liquid phase pHAcidity or alkalinity of post-HTC liquidCrison digital pH-meter
Electrical conductivityEstimation of dissolved ions in the liquid phaseDigital conductimeter
Gas composition (%)Molar fractions of H2, CO2, CH4, CO, N2, etc.Agilent 990 gas chromatograph
Table 3. Higher heating values (HHVs) of hydrochars obtained under HTC conditions.
Table 3. Higher heating values (HHVs) of hydrochars obtained under HTC conditions.
T (°C)SampleHHV (1) (kcal/kg)HHV (1) (MJ/kg)HHV (2) (kcal/kg)HHV (2) (MJ/kg)
180HC180a417317.47380715.94
HC180b426217.84--
HC180c613825.70--
190HC190a351114.70350114.66
HC190b432618.11--
HC190c598225.05--
200HC200339414.21386916.20
210HC210354314.83396016.58
220HC220341414.29411717.24
325HC200Na--372015.57
Note: HHV (1) corresponds to the carbon-rich subfraction (fraction c) of the hydrochar, whereas HHV (2) refers to the total solid recovered after HTC, including the portion with higher mineral content. Dashes (-) indicate experiments in which only one fraction was analyzed.
Table 4. Mass of liquid fraction obtained in HTC experiments.
Table 4. Mass of liquid fraction obtained in HTC experiments.
T (°C)Series 1 (g)Series 2 (g)
180958.40985.34
190898.10955.53
200612.62925.62
210943.39949.71
220950.77909.00
Table 5. Gas composition of HTC runs (vol.%).
Table 5. Gas composition of HTC runs (vol.%).
T (°C)H2N2COCH4CO2C2H4C2H6
1800.0032.170.140.0067.650.020.02
1900.0024.060.370.0375.480.000.05
2100.0016.370.380.0383.220.000.00
2200.0515.410.000.0684.450.010.02
32530.6611.820.130.4556.030.800.11
Table 6. Gas production during hydrochar air gasification (moles accumulated).
Table 6. Gas production during hydrochar air gasification (moles accumulated).
SampleH2COCH4CO2C2H4C2H6C2H2
HC_200_8000.210.030.120.850.030.010.00
HC_200_800_20.300.040.320.410.110.030.00
HC_220_8000.140.020.110.340.030.010.00
HC_200_9000.380.070.370.340.140.040.00
HC_200_900_20.250.100.050.390.000.000.00
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Álvez-Medina, C.M.; Nogales-Delgado, S.; Cano, B.L.; Montes-Jiménez, V.; Román Suero, S. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Fish Waste: A Sustainable Pathway for Valorization and Resource Recovery. Clean Technol. 2026, 8, 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol8010004

AMA Style

Álvez-Medina CM, Nogales-Delgado S, Cano BL, Montes-Jiménez V, Román Suero S. Hydrothermal Carbonization of Fish Waste: A Sustainable Pathway for Valorization and Resource Recovery. Clean Technologies. 2026; 8(1):4. https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol8010004

Chicago/Turabian Style

Álvez-Medina, Carmen María, Sergio Nogales-Delgado, Beatriz Ledesma Cano, Vicente Montes-Jiménez, and Silvia Román Suero. 2026. "Hydrothermal Carbonization of Fish Waste: A Sustainable Pathway for Valorization and Resource Recovery" Clean Technologies 8, no. 1: 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol8010004

APA Style

Álvez-Medina, C. M., Nogales-Delgado, S., Cano, B. L., Montes-Jiménez, V., & Román Suero, S. (2026). Hydrothermal Carbonization of Fish Waste: A Sustainable Pathway for Valorization and Resource Recovery. Clean Technologies, 8(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/cleantechnol8010004

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop