To main content

Feedstock reporting gaps limit interpretation of circularity claims across conversion technologies | Communications Sustainability

Abstract

Circularity claims in biomass and waste conversion research often depend on feedstock assumptions, but studies do not report baseline management, hazard-related information, and material status consistently. Here we show a Scopus-based evidence map of feedstock reporting across eight conversion technologies. We extract 152,548 feedstock items and retain 133,832 valid items using a deterministic-first workflow with record-level provenance, versioned dictionaries, and audited validation. The map reveals technology-specific reporting patterns and recurring gaps in the information needed to interpret whether feedstocks are primary biomass, wastes, by-products, or commodity inputs, and whether secondary streams carry hazard-relevant qualifiers. We provide a harmonised feedstock dictionary, a reusable labelling infrastructure, and minimum evidence conditions for transparent interpretation of feedstock claims. These findings characterise reporting patterns in a Scopus-indexed and query-constrained evidence base, not real-world deployment, feedstock availability, or sustainability performance. Together, these outputs support more transparent, reliable, and reusable feedstock evidence, enabling better-grounded interpretation of circularity claims across conversion technologies. Biomass and waste conversion studies often lack feedstock details needed to interpret circularity claims. This Scopus-based evidence map of 133,832 labelled feedstock items provides a reusable dictionary, labelling workflow and minimum evidence conditions for transparent comparisons
Read the publication

Category

Academic article

Language

English

Author(s)

Affiliation

  • SINTEF Energy Research / Energy Use
  • University of South-Eastern Norway

Date

27.07.2026

Year

2026

Published in

Communications Sustainability

View this publication at Norwegian Research Information Repository