EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 369 (2026) EPJ Web Conf., 369 (2026) 01008 References
Open Access
Issue
EPJ Web Conf.
Volume 369, 2026
4th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Applied Mathematics (JIAMA’26)
Article Number 01008
Number of page(s) 16
Section Applied Physics & Engineering Systems Modeling
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/epjconf/202636901008
Published online 13 May 2026
  1. Muscat A, de Olde EM, Ripoll-Bosch R, Van Zanten HHE, Metze TAP, Termeer CJAM, et al. Principles, drivers and opportunities of a circular bioeconomy. Nat Food. 2021; 2:561–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-021-00340-7 [Google Scholar]
  2. House JD, Neufeld J, Leson G. Evaluating the quality of protein from hemp seed (Cannabis sativa L.) products through the use of the protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score method. J Agric Food Chem. 2010; 58: 11801–7. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf102636b [Google Scholar]
  3. Vonapartis E, Aubin M-P, Seguin P, Mustafa AF, Charron J-B. Seed composition of ten industrial hemp cultivars approved for production in Canada. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis [Internet]. 2015; 39: 8–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2014.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. Wang Y, Wu JJ. Thermochemical conversion of biomass: Potential future prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews [Internet]. 2023; 187: 113754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2023.113754 [Google Scholar]
  5. Kreuger E, Prade T, Escobar F, Svensson S-E, Englund J-E, Björnsson L. Anaerobic digestion of industrial hemp–Effect of harvest time on methane energy yield per hectare. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2011; 35: 893–900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  6. Prasara-A J, Gheewala SH. Sustainable utilization of rice husk ash from power plants: A review. Journal of Cleaner Production. 2017; 167: 1020–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.042 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cherubini F, Bird ND, Cowie A, Jungmeier G, Schlamadinger B, Woess-Gallasch S. Energyand greenhouse gas-based LCA of biofuel and bioenergy systems: Key issues, ranges and recommendations. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. 2009; 53: 434–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2009.03.013 [Google Scholar]
  8. Prade T, Svensson S-E, Mattsson JE. Energy balances for biogas and solid biofuel production from industrial hemp. Biomass and Bioenergy. 2012; 40:36–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2012.01.045 [Google Scholar]
  9. Loi 13-21 ANRAC. 2021. https://www.anrac.gov.ma/fr/loi1321/. Accessed 15 Oct 2025 [Google Scholar]
  10. El Hafdaoui H, Khallaayoun A, Al-Majeed S. Renewable energies in Morocco: A comprehensive review and analysis of current status, policy framework, and prospective potential. Energy Conversion and Management: X. 2025; 26: 100967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecmx.2025.100967 [Google Scholar]
  11. Hamelin L, Naroznova I, Wenzel H. Environmental consequences of different carbon alternatives for increased manure-based biogas. Applied Energy [Internet]. 2014; 114: 774–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2013.09.033 [Google Scholar]
  12. Astrup TF, Tonini D, Turconi R, Boldrin A. Life cycle assessment of thermal Waste-to-Energy technologies: Review and recommendations. Waste Management [Internet]. 2015; 37: 104–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2014.06.011 [Google Scholar]
  13. Wernet G, Bauer C, Steubing B, Reinhard J, Moreno-Ruiz E, Weidema B. The ecoinvent database version 3 (part I): overview and methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment [Internet]. 2016; 21: 1218–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8 [Google Scholar]
  14. Huijbregts MAJ, Steinmann ZJN, Elshout PMF, Stam G, Verones F, Vieira M, et al. ReCiPe2016: a harmonised life cycle impact assessment method at midpoint and endpoint level. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment. 2017; 22: 138–47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-016-1246-y [Google Scholar]
  15. ISO. ISO 14040:2006 Environmental management Life cycle assessment Principles and framework. European Com mittee for Standardization. Geneva, Switzerland [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2025 Oct 15]. https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html. Accessed 15 Oct 2025 [Google Scholar]
  16. ISO. ISO 14044:2006 life cycle assessment Requirements and guidelines, EN environmental management. European Com mittee for Standardization. Geneva, Switzerland [Internet]. Geneva, Switzerland; 2006. https://www.iso.org/standard/38498.html. Accessed 15 Oct 2025 [Google Scholar]
  17. Fusi A, Guidetti R, Azapagic A. Evaluation of environmental impacts in the catering sector: the case of pasta. Journal of Cleaner Production [Internet]. 2016; 132:146–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.074 [Google Scholar]
  18. Bernas J, Bernasová T, Nedbal V, Neugschwandtner RW. Agricultural LCA for Food Oil of Winter Rapeseed, Sunflower, and Hemp, Based on Czech Standard Cultivation Practices. Agronomy. 2021;11. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11112301 [Google Scholar]
  19. Demirbaş A. Biomass resource facilities and biomass conversion processing for fuels and chemicals. Energy Conversion and Management. 2001; 42:1357–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0196-8904(00)00137-0 [Google Scholar]
  20. Saidur R, Abdelaziz EA, Demirbas A, Hossain MS, Mekhilef S. A review on biomass as a fuel for boilers. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2011; 15: 2262–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.02.015 [Google Scholar]
  21. ENERGY RECOVERY FROM SANITARY LANDFILLS A REVIEW. Microbial Energy Conversion. Pergamon; 1977 [cited 2026 Mar 3]. p. 119–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-021791-8.50019-6 [Google Scholar]
  22. Van Soest PJ, Robertson JB, Lewis BA. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J Dairy Sci. 1991; 74:3583–97. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(91)78551-2 [Google Scholar]
  23. Holliger C, Alves M, Andrade D, Angelidaki I, Astals S, Baier U, et al. Towards a standardization of biomethane potential tests. Water Sci Technol. 2016; 74:2515–22. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2016.336 [Google Scholar]
  24. Amaducci S, Zatta A, Pelatti F, Venturi G. Influence of agronomic factors on yield and quality of hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) fibre and implication for an innovative production system. Field Crops Research. 2008 [cited 2026 Mar 3]; 107:161–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2008.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Che Q, Yang M, Wang X, Yang Q, Rose Williams L, Yang H, et al. Influence of physicochemical properties of metal modified ZSM-5 catalyst on benzene, toluene, and xylene production from biomass catalytic pyrolysis. Bioresource Technology [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2026 Mar 3]; 278:248–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2019.01.081 [Google Scholar]
  26. Mikulčić H, Ridjan Skov I, Dominković DF, Wan Alwi SR, Manan ZA, Tan R, et al. Flexible Carbon Capture and Utilization technologies in future energy systems and the utilization pathways of captured CO2. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 2019; 114:109338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.109338 [Google Scholar]
  27. McKendry P. Energy production from biomass (part 3): gasification technologies. Bioresource Technology [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2026 Mar 3]; 83:55–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8524(01)00120-1 [Google Scholar]
  28. Obernberger I, Brunner T, Bärnthaler G. Chemical properties of solid biofuels—significance and impact. Biomass and Bioenergy [Internet]. 2006 [cited 2026 Mar 3]; 30:973–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2006.06.011 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories — IPCC [Internet]. [cited 2026 Mar 4]. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/2019-refinement-to-the-2006-ipcc-guidelines-for-national-greenhouse-gas-inventories/. [Google Scholar]
  30. ONEE. RAPPORT D’ACTIVITÉS Énergie électrique 2023 l’ONEE Branche Electricité [Internet]. RAPPORT D’ACTIVITÉS Énergie électrique 2023. [cited 2026 Mar 4]. https://www.one.org.ma/fr/pages/interne.asp?esp=2&id1=10&id2=73&t2=1. Accessed 4 Mar 2026 [Google Scholar]
  31. Wang L, Li C, Dong J, Quan Q, Liu J. Magnitudes and environmental drivers of greenhouse gas emissions from natural wetlands in China based on unbiased data. Environmental Science and Pollution Research [Internet]. 2021; 28: 44973–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-13843-4 [Google Scholar]
  32. Matassa S, Esposito G, Pirozzi F, Papirio S. Exploring the Biomethane Potential of Different Industrial Hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) Biomass Residues. Energies [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2026 Mar 5]; 13:3361. https://doi.org/10.3390/en13133361 [Google Scholar]
  33. Buendia E, Tanabe K, Kranjc A, Jamsranjav B, Fukuda M, Ngarize S, et al. 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 2019. [Google Scholar]
  34. Canadell JG, Scheel Monteiro P, Costa MH, Cotrim da Cunha L, Cox PM, Eliseev AV, et al. Global carbon and other biogeochemical cycles and feedbacks. In: Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pirani A, Connors SL, Péan C, Berger S, et al., editors. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2021. p. 673–816. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.001 [Google Scholar]
  35. EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2023 [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2026 Mar 4]. https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/emep-eea-guidebook-2023. Accessed 4 Mar 2026 [Google Scholar]
  36. Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pirani A, Connors SL, Péan C, Berger S, et al., editors. Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press; 2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896 [Google Scholar]
  37. Saltelli A, Annoni P, Azzini I, Campolongo F, Ratto M, Tarantola S. Variance based sensitivity analysis of model output. Design and estimator for the total sensitivity index. Computer Physics Communications [Internet]. 2010 [cited 2026 Apr 5]; 181:259–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc.2009.09.018 [Google Scholar]
  38. Tonini D, Hamelin L, Alvarado-Morales M, Astrup TF. GHG emission factors for bioelectricity, biomethane, and bioethanol quantified for 24 biomass substrates with consequential life-cycle assessment. Bioresour Technol. 2016;208: 123–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2016.02.052 [Google Scholar]
  39. CO2 emissions from biomass combustion for bioenergy: atmospheric decay and contribution to global warming CHERUBINI 2011 GCB Bioenergy Wiley Online Library [Internet]. [cited 2026 Mar 4]. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1757-1707.2011.01102.x?msockid=0f967b174d7167360e566bb54c37667b. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.