Abstract
This study evaluates the fuel properties and energy performance of hydrochar produced through co-hydrothermal carbonization (Co-HTC) of swine manure (SM) and coffee waste (CW). Reaction temperature (160 °C, 200 °C, 240 °C) and SM:CW mixing ratio (1:1, 3:1, 5:1) were varied to examine their effects on carbonization behavior, energy densification, and combustion characteristics. The hydrochar yield (HY), except at 160 °C (3:1), ranged from 53.4% at 240 °C (1:1) to 67.6% at 160 °C (5:1), with higher SM content and lower temperatures favoring yield due to ash and volatile retention. The highest energy densification ratio (EDR) of 1.38 was achieved at 240 °C and 5:1, whereas the energy yield (EY) increased from 69.3% at 160 °C (5:1) to 79.9% at 240 °C (5:1), reflecting the synergistic effects of the feedstock composition and temperature. The combustion reactivity, as indicated by the S index, did not show a consistent correlation with temperature, in contrast to the clear trends in EDR and EY. These findings highlight the complementary roles of SM as a nutrient-rich feedstock and CW as carbon-dense lignocellulosic biomass, enabling Co-HTC to produce customized solid fuels for diverse energy applications. Thus, Co-HTC offers a flexible and scalable approach for converting high-moisture organic waste into energy-dense solid fuels under moderate conditions, supporting circular bioeconomy strategies.
1 Introduction
Efficient biomass management plays a crucial role in sustainable development by addressing waste treatment and energy recovery issues. The improper disposal of organic waste contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, water contamination, and soil degradation, leading to significant environmental and public health concerns (). Conventional waste treatment methods, such as landfilling and incineration, have low efficiency and are not environmentally sustainable, increasing the interest in biomass conversion technologies for energy recovery (). Converting organic waste into a renewable energy resource is an effective waste management solution that enhances resource efficiency while mitigating environmental burdens associated with conventional disposal ().
Hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) has emerged as an eco-friendly thermochemical process for converting biomass into high-energy-density solid fuels (; ). Recent studies have compared batch and continuous HTC processes to optimize hydrochar production from various biomass sources, particularly swine manure (SM) (). reviewed the HTC processes and highlighted their key mechanisms, operating parameters, and applications in the energy and environmental sectors. further summarized recent advances, technological challenges, and future directions in HTC research. HTC is particularly advantageous as it eliminates the need for energy-intensive drying processes, making it cost-effective and environmentally friendly (). Conducted at moderate temperatures (180 °C–250 °C) under autogenous pressure, HTC facilitates dehydration and decarboxylation reactions, leading to increased carbon content and reduced oxygen levels in the biomass (; ). The resulting hydrochar exhibits a high energy density, reduced oxygen content, and improved combustion characteristics, making it suitable for long-term storage and handling (). Recent studies suggest that co-hydrothermal carbonization (Co-HTC) is a promising alternative to overcome the limitations of single-feedstock HTC (). Recent studies have highlighted that synergistic effects between diverse biomass types can significantly enhance hydrochar properties, particularly through interactions between ash-forming minerals and lignin-derived aromatics (; ). These findings suggest that co-processing feedstocks with complementary compositions may optimize hydrochar characteristics through mechanisms not achievable with single feedstocks. Co-HTC enhances fuel properties while mitigating the drawbacks of individual feedstock by co-processing multiple biomass sources (; ).
SM and coffee waste (CW) are two types of organic wastes that require immediate and effective management due to their environmental impacts (). SM contains high nitrogen and sulfur levels, posing risks of water contamination and eutrophication, while its high ash content can lower fuel quality (; ). In contrast, CW is characterized by a high fixed carbon content and low ash levels, making it a promising feedstock for high-quality hydrochar production (; ). Furthermore, recent study by demonstrated that applying tailored HTC conditions to spent coffee grounds can significantly enhance the fuel properties and improve the energy recovery potential. However, under HTC conditions, lignin in CW is relatively recalcitrant compared to cellulose and hemicellulose, but it can undergo partial depolymerization releasing phenolic intermediates into the process water, followed by dominant condensation and repolymerization into stable aromatic structures in hydrochar (). While CW’s high lignin content makes it suitable for producing energy-dense hydrochar, its low nitrogen content limits nutrient recovery potential. Conversely, SM’s elevated ash and nitrogen content provide agronomic value but compromise fuel quality when used alone due to increased noncombustible residue and lower energy density. These contrasting compositional profiles suggest that co-processing may leverage the strengths of each feedstock while mitigating their individual limitations.
Globally, SM and CW generation is estimated at approximately 1.7 billion tonnes and 6.5 million tonnes per year, respectively (; Zhang et al., 2021), representing substantial waste streams in rural and urban settings with region-specific management challenges. Co-HTC offers a promising approach to co-process these feedstocks by exploiting their complementary properties: CW’s lignin-rich structure provides carbonaceous material for energy densification and aromatic structure formation, while SM’s mineral and nitrogen content enhances the potential agronomic value of co-produced hydrochar (; ). Single-feedstock HTC studies have demonstrated that increasing reaction temperature progressively enhances the carbon content and higher heating value (HHV) of SM-derived hydrochar through dehydration and decarboxylation reactions; however, the inherently high ash content of SM imposes a persistent constraint on fuel quality improvement, as inorganic minerals accumulate with rising temperature, lowering combustion reactivity (; ; ). To address this limitation, Co-HTC with lignocellulosic biomass has been proposed as a complementary strategy: co-processing SM with cellulose revealed that interactions between organic intermediates and mineral components modify hydrochar structure (), cross-interactions between manure-derived feedstocks similarly alter hydrochar and liquid characteristics (), and combinations with corn stalk improve combustion behavior through ash dilution and carbon densification (; ). Previous Co-HTC studies have demonstrated that biomass blending can improve fuel characteristics (; ), reduce ash-related combustion issues (), and generate synergistic effects through mineral-organic interactions during carbonization (; ). However, most prior work has focused on either examining single mixing ratios across different temperatures or evaluating limited temperature ranges for multiple feedstock combinations. Few studies have systematically investigated the interactive effects of both mixing ratio and reaction temperature on feedstocks with fundamentally contrasting properties, lignin-rich lignocellulosic biomass versus ash- and nitrogen-rich animal manure. Furthermore, the mechanistic understanding of how feedstock composition influences carbonization pathways and fuel performance metrics under varying thermal conditions remains limited.
While previous Co-HTC studies involving SM have predominantly paired it with agronomic lignocellulosic residues such as corn stalk, cellulose, or sawdust (; ; ), none have systematically investigated its combination with spent coffee waste, a globally generated urban biomass with a fundamentally different compositional profile. The high lignin, low ash, and high fixed carbon characteristics of CW introduce distinct carbonization dynamics and potential synergistic interactions with SM that cannot be inferred from prior manure–crop residue studies. This study addresses these gaps by systematically evaluating how mixing ratio and reaction temperature interactively influence the co-processing of SM and CW, two feedstocks with fundamentally contrasting compositional profiles. Unlike previous studies that optimized for single performance metrics such as yield () or heating value (), this work establishes quantitative relationships between feedstock composition, process conditions, and multiple fuel quality indicators. By examining how organic structure (lignin-derived carbonization) versus inorganic content (ash accumulation) governs carbonization efficiency under varying thermal conditions, this research provides mechanistic insights into Co-HTC behavior. The systematic multi-condition design enables identification of optimal process parameters tailored to specific application requirements, whether prioritizing combustion reactivity, energy concentration, or energy retention, thereby supporting the development of flexible, regionally adaptable waste-to-energy systems.
Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the fuel properties and thermal behavior of hydrochar produced through Co-HTC of SM and CW. To achieve this, (1) the effects of reaction temperature on hydrochar yield (HY) and fuel characteristics were analyzed, and (2) the influence of mixing ratio (1:1, 3:1, 5:1) and reaction temperature (160 °C, 200 °C, 240 °C) on fuel performance was systematically investigated. Ultimately, the synergistic effects of Co-HTC were assessed to identify the optimal process conditions for producing high-quality solid fuels. The findings of this study provide insights into the potential for developing high-efficiency biofuels from organic waste, contributing to sustainable waste management and advancements in energy-conversion technologies.
2 Materials and methods
2.1 Materials
In this study, SM and CW were used as feedstocks for the Co-HTC process. SM was collected from a livestock farm in Gyeonggi Province, South Korea, and CW was obtained from a commercial coffee shop in Seoul, South Korea. Prior to HTC experiments, both feedstocks were dried at 105 °C for 24 h until constant weight was achieved, based on preliminary tests to ensure complete moisture removal. The dried samples were then ground to a particle size of ≤2 mm to ensure homogeneity.
The proximate and ultimate compositions of SM and CW are summarized in Table 1. SM exhibited a high ash content (29.8%) and a relatively low fixed carbon content (8.8%), which may limit its direct application as a solid fuel due to its reduced combustion efficiency and increased pollutant emissions (). Additionally, the ratio of volatile matter to combustible carbon (0.87) was significantly high, indicating a lower combustion efficiency and higher emissions when used as a standalone solid fuel.
TABLE 1
| Property | Unit | Swine manure (SM) | Coffee waste (CW) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proximate analysis | |||
| Moisture | wt% | 96.4 | 61.9 |
| Volatile matter | wt% | 61.4 | 78.2 |
| Fixed carbon | wt% | 8.8 | 20.6 |
| Ash | wt% | 29.8 | 1.3 |
| Ultimate analysis | |||
| Carbon (C) | wt% | 40.0 | 51.0 |
| Hydrogen (H) | wt% | 6.0 | 6.6 |
| Oxygen (O) | wt% | 18.7 | 38.5 |
| Nitrogen (N) | wt% | 3.9 | 1.9 |
| Sulphur (S) | wt% | 1.7 | 0.7 |
| High heating value (HHV) | MJ/kg | 18.8 | 22.3 |
| Lignin (%) | wt% | 3.9 | 28.2 |
| Cellulose (%) | wt% | 2.7 | 16.7 |
| Hemicellulose (%) | wt% | 5.8 | 27.2 |
| Carbohydrate (%) | wt% | 21.1 | 77.3 |
| Protein (%) | wt% | 27.5 | 14.1 |
| Fat (%) | wt% | 19.9 | 7.2 |
Proximate and ultimate analysis of SM and CW.
On the other hand, CW had a significantly lower ash content (1.3%) and higher fixed carbon content (20.6%) compared to SM. Although CW exhibited a higher volatile matter content (78.4%) than SM (61.4%), its volatile-to-combustible carbon ratio (0.79) was also high, posing challenges for its direct use as a solid fuel.
The ultimate analysis revealed that CW contained higher carbon (51.0%) and oxygen (38.5%) contents, whereas SM exhibited lower carbon (40.0%) and oxygen (18.7%) contents. Generally, fuels with lower H/C and O/C ratios tend to experience reduced energy loss, smoke, and water vapor formation during combustion, making them more suitable for solid fuel applications (). However, CW exhibited higher hydrogen and oxygen contents, resulting in H/C and O/C ratios that did not reach those of lignite or fossil fuels. Additionally, SM had relatively higher nitrogen (3.9%) and sulfur (1.7%) contents than CW, suggesting its potential application as an agricultural soil amendment.
2.2 Experimental apparatus
In this study, HTC experiments were conducted using a custom-designed high-temperature, high-pressure reaction system to ensure stable operation under extreme conditions. The experimental setup consisted of a reactor, a heating system, a pressure monitoring and control system, and a cooling system, each optimized for efficient control and stable operation of the HTC process (Supplementary Figure S1).
The HTC reactor was made of stainless steel (SUS 316) with a total internal volume of 1,000 mL. To enhance corrosion resistance, an anti-corrosion coating was applied to the internal surface. The reactor was designed to withstand a maximum operating temperature of 400 °C and a maximum pressure of 150 bar, allowing for stable operation even under high-pressure conditions generated during the HTC process.
The internal temperature of the reactor was monitored in real-time using a K-type thermocouple, and a PID (Proportional-Integral-Derivative) control system was employed to maintain temperature fluctuations within ±5 °C. The electric heating system provided a maximum heating rate of 10 °C/min and was automatically regulated to maintain the set temperature for a predefined reaction duration.
During the reaction, internal pressure was continuously monitored using a high-pressure gauge. To prevent overpressure, the system was equipped with a safety valve that was automatically activated when the maximum allowable pressure was exceeded.
An external cooling water circulation system was used for rapid cooling after the reaction. The cooling process was facilitated by a cooling coil attached to the reactor, which allowed for an efficient temperature reduction immediately after the reaction, thereby preventing excessive prolongation of the reaction.
2.3 Experimental conditions
HTC experiments were conducted at 160 °C, 200 °C, 240 °C, 280 °C, and 320 °C for individual feedstocks (SM and CW) to explore the decomposition behavior of components like cellulose and lignin, as suggested in previous studies. For Co-HTC, SM and CW were mixed in 1:1, 3:1, and 5:1 mass ratio and treated at 160 °C, 200 °C, and 240 °C, which represent a practical operating range for evaluating fuel performance. These ratios were selected to reflect not only the compositional differences between SM and CW, but also their realistic generation volumes, as SM is produced in much larger quantities globally than CW. This allowed us to evaluate the synergistic potential and the application feasibility of Co-HTC under SM-dominant conditions. The Co-HTC approach was adopted to determine whether combining the two feedstocks could offset their individual limitations and improve the overall fuel quality of the resulting hydrochars.
In all experiments, the total feedstock loading was maintained at 80 g, and based on previous experimental results, distilled water was added to maintain a fixed moisture content of 80%. The reaction time was set to 1 h after the target temperature was reached. To ensure an oxygen-free environment, N2 purging was performed at a flow rate of 400 mL/min for 10 min before heating.
To ensure reproducibility and minimize experimental uncertainty, all HTC and Co-HTC experiments were independently performed in triplicate under each condition. The resulting data are presented as mean values with standard deviations to reflect measurement variability and enhance the statistical reliability of the findings.
2.4 Experimental methods
The biochemical composition of raw feedstocks was characterized through a suite of complementary analyses. Proximate analysis (moisture, volatile matter, fixed carbon, and ash) was performed according to ASTM D7582, and ultimate analysis (C, H, N, S) was conducted following ASTM D5373 and ISO 17247 using a Flash 2000 Elemental Analyzer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA). HHV was determined by ASTM D5865 using a Parr Model 1341 Plain Jacket Calorimeter (Parr Instrument Company, USA). Protein content was quantified via the Kjeldahl method (Standard Methods 4500-Norg B) using a Foss KjeltecTM 8400 analyzer (Foss, Denmark), and lipid content was measured according to ASTM D7060 by ether extraction at 80 °C for 8 h using A2000 and XT 15 analyzers (Ankom Technology, USA). Carbohydrate content was estimated by difference as: Carbohydrate (%) = 100 − Moisture (%) − Protein (%) − Fat (%) − Ash (%). Fiber fractions (lignin, cellulose, and hemicellulose) were determined following Standard Methods 973.18 and ASTM D1103 using an Ankom A2000 analyzer, with lignin assessed by 72% H2SO4 pretreatment and cellulose and hemicellulose quantified via Acid Detergent Fiber (ADF) and Neutral Detergent Fiber (NDF) methods, respectively. All procedures were conducted in accordance with the Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 24th edition (2023) ().
Thermal decomposition behavior of the hydrochar samples was evaluated by thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and derivative thermogravimetric (DTG) analysis using a TG 209 F3 analyzer (Netzsch, Germany) following ASTM E1131 (). Approximately 5 ± 0.2 mg of each pulverized sample (≤2 mm) was heated from 30 °C to 900 °C at a rate of 20 °C/min under an airflow of 20 mL/min. Prior to analysis, all hydrochars were thoroughly homogenized to ensure sample representativeness.
Hydrochar yield (HY), energy densification ratio (EDR), and energy yield (EY) were calculated using Equations 1–3, respectively, based on mass and HHV measurements obtained after drying and weighing the recovered hydrochar (; Zhang et al., 2016). The combustion characteristic index (S), a key parameter for evaluating ignition ease, burning velocity, and burnout temperature, was determined using Equation 4, which incorporates the maximum and mean mass loss rates alongside the ignition and burnout temperatures from TGA results ().where Mh is the mass of dried hydrochar (g), Mb is the initial mass of biomass (g), HHVh is the higher heating value of hydrochar (MJ/kg), HHVb is the higher heating value of raw biomass (MJ/kg), (dw/dt)max is the maximum mass loss rate (wt%/min), (dw/dt)mean is the average mass loss rate (wt%/min), Ti is the ignition temperature (°C), and Tf is the burnout temperature (°C).
3 Results and discussion
3.1 Hydrochar yield of SM and CW
HTC is an efficient thermochemical process for converting biomass into high-energy-density solid fuel. The yield and characteristics of hydrochar significantly depend on the reaction temperature. In this study, HY was analyzed at different HTC temperatures for SM and CW.
The reaction temperature had a significant effect on HY (Figure 1). HY values were calculated based on the total mass of fixed carbon, volatile matter, and ash, ensuring consistency with standard biomass yield determination. For SM, HY decreased from 61.8% at 160 °C to 27.6% at 320 °C. Similarly, for CW, the yield decreased from 69.9% at 160 °C to 44.4% at 320 °C. This decline is attributed to the decomposition of volatile organic compounds and thermal degradation of biomass components, which reduces the residual solid mass at higher temperatures. These results align with previous studies, which reported that HY typically decreases with increasing HTC temperature due to mass loss from devolatilization (; Zhang et al., 2024).
FIGURE 1
The mass recovery of SM and CW decreased with rising HTC temperature. At 160 °C, the mass recovery rates were 61.8% for SM and 69.9% for CW. As the HTC temperature increased, the loss of volatile matter increased, and the residual solid fraction declined. CW exhibited a more pronounced decrease in mass recovery due to its higher volatile matter content.
The decomposition of hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin during HTC varies across different temperature ranges. Hemicellulose begins to decompose at approximately 180 °C–200 °C and is largely degraded by 260 °C, releasing acetic acid, furfural, and hydroxymethylfurfural, which contribute to reduced oxygen content and enhanced fuel quality in hydrochar (). Cellulose starts to decompose around 240 °C, with major decomposition occurring between 280 °C and 320 °C. This process generates hydroxymethylfurfural, levoglucosan, and other volatile compounds, which contribute to an increase in fixed carbon content and energy density (). Lignin decomposition begins at approximately 280 °C and continues gradually up to temperatures above 500 °C, leading to the formation of aromatic compounds. The thermal stability of lignin contributes to the increase in fixed carbon content and the reduction of oxygen content in hydrochar, thereby improving its long-term fuel stability (; ). Furthermore, demonstrated that delignification significantly influences the thermal degradation reactivity of hemicellulose and cellulose in wood cell walls, providing useful insights into the thermal behavior of lignocellulosic biomass during thermochemical processing.
The higher mass recovery of the CW compared to SM at increasing HTC temperatures can be attributed to two key factors. First, CW contains a higher proportion of lignin and fixed carbon than SM. As HTC temperature increases, lignin transforms into stable aromatic compounds, thereby increasing the fixed carbon content of hydrochar (). In contrast, SM has a relatively high ash content, leading to an increase in residual ash proportion as temperature rises, which limits fuel conversion efficiency (). Second, the lignin-cellulose network structure of CW enhances hydrochar formation. However, at temperatures above 280 °C, CW’s mass recovery decreases as cellulose decomposition intensifies. Since lignin decomposes over a broad temperature range (280 °C–500 °C), a portion of carbon is retained, but overall mass continues to decline ().
TGA results indicate that SM and CW exhibit slight mass loss below 100 °C due to the removal of free and bound moisture (Figure 2). This initial mass loss caused by the evaporation of residual water from the biomass is commonly observed in HTC preheating stages (; ). Between 160 °C and 280 °C, CW exhibited a more rapid mass loss compared to SM, primarily due to the decomposition of hemicellulose (180 °C–260 °C) and cellulose (240 °C–320 °C) (; ). CW, which has a higher cellulose and lipid content, released more volatile matter within this temperature range. In contrast, SM exhibited a slower decomposition rate, with a portion of organic components persisting even at 240 °C.
FIGURE 2
Above 280 °C, CW continued to exhibit gradual mass loss, although the rate of decomposition slowed. This trend is attributed to the thermal stability of lignin, which decomposes gradually between 280 °C and 500 °C, leading to the formation of stable aromatic structures (). Meanwhile, SM demonstrated an increase in ash content above 280 °C due to the presence of mineral components that remain stable at high temperatures. This suggests that SM’s conversion to hydrochar is limited by its higher inorganic content, which increases the proportion of noncombustible material rather than fixed carbon.
CW was evaluated as having superior fuel properties compared to SM due to its higher fixed carbon content and lower ash content. At 320 °C, CW exhibited optimal fuel characteristics, making it a favorable feedstock for high-quality solid fuel production. Conversely, SM, due to its high ash content, showed limited improvement in fuel quality with increasing HTC temperature, however, its potential application as a carbon storage material remains significant.
3.2 Elemental composition and fuel characteristics
The elemental composition and fuel characteristics of hydrochar provide critical insights into the thermochemical transformation of biomass during HTC. In this study, C, H, O, N, and S contents, H/C and O/C atomic ratios, and HHV of hydrochar produced from SM and CW at various reaction temperatures were analyzed.
As shown in Figure 3, the carbon content of hydrochar exhibited a consistent increasing trend with rising HTC temperature. The carbon content of SM increased from 45.0% at 160 °C to 54.2% at 320 °C, while that of CW increased from 56.2% at 160 °C to 76.5% at 320 °C, indicating that CW had a higher carbon retention than SM. The greater increase in CW’s carbon content can be attributed to its high lignin content, which facilitates the formation of aromatic structures during HTC, leading to an increase in carbon density (). In contrast, the carbonization of SM was relatively limited due to its high ash content, which increased with rising temperature and restricted fuel quality enhancement ().
FIGURE 3
The hydrogen and oxygen contents showed a decreasing trend with increasing HTC temperature. This reduction is mainly attributed to dehydration and decarboxylation reactions during HTC, which facilitate biomass carbonization by removing oxygen and hydrogen from the solid phase (). The oxygen content of SM decreased significantly from 21.0% at 160 °C to 4.4% at 320 °C, while CW’s oxygen content dropped from 32.8% to 3.5% over the same temperature range. The enhanced oxygen removal with increasing HTC temperature led to an increase in fixed carbon content, resulting in improved fuel quality ().
As oxygen and hydrogen were progressively eliminated during HTC, the fixed carbon content increased, leading to an enhancement in HHV. The HHV of SM increased from 21.2 MJ/kg at 160 °C to 25.1 MJ/kg at 320 °C, while CW exhibited a more substantial increase from 23.7 MJ/kg to 32.9 MJ/kg. The greater improvement in HHV for CW is primarily attributed to its high lignin content, which promotes efficient carbonization at elevated temperatures. Lignin-rich biomass generally retains a higher proportion of fixed carbon during HTC, resulting in the production of high-energy-density fuel, aligning with previous findings (Wang et al., 2025).
The Van Krevelen diagram in Figure 4 illustrates the reduction in the H/C and O/C atomic ratios of SM and CW with increasing reaction temperature. As temperature increased, the H/C ratio of SM declined from 1.65 to 1.39, while CW’s H/C ratio decreased from 1.62 to 1.15. Similarly, the O/C ratio exhibited a significant decrease, with SM declining from 0.35 to 0.06 and CW from 0.44 to 0.03. This trend indicates that HTC effectively facilitates dehydration and deoxygenation reactions, leading to a reduction in atomic ratios (). Notably, CW exhibited a sharper decrease in O/C ratio with increasing HTC temperature, which is characterized by low oxygen content and high carbon stability (). In contrast, SM exhibited a relatively gradual reduction in O/C ratio, which can be attributed to its high ash content, limiting the extent of fuel quality improvement during HTC (). However, while CW-derived hydrochar approached that of anthracite in terms of oxygen depletion, its H/C ratio remained close to that of lignite. This suggests that, although the HTC process promoted aromatic structure formation and improved carbonization, hydrogen removal was less extensive. As a result, hydrochar may not fully exhibit the combustion behavior or thermal maturity of high-rank coals such as anthracite.
FIGURE 4
In summary, CW underwent more effective carbonization than SM during HTC, resulting in a higher energy density fuel. The increase in HTC temperature led to an enhancement in the carbon content of hydrochar and a reduction in oxygen content, which significantly improved fuel quality. However, the presence of high ash content in SM restricted fuel quality improvement despite increasing HTC temperatures. The contrasting behaviors of SM and CW highlight how lignin-rich feedstocks benefit more from HTC in terms of oxygen elimination and fuel densification. Nonetheless, the residual hydrogen content in hydrochar indicates that further thermal upgrading or co-processing strategies may be needed to fully replicate the combustion properties of fossil fuels. Optimizing HTC conditions can further maximize biomass conversion into high-energy fuel.
3.3 Effects of Co-HTC temperature and mixing ratio on hydrochar fuel properties
The mixing ratio and reaction temperature in Co-HTC play a critical role in determining hydrochar fuel characteristics. Co-HTC is recognized as a promising technique for overcoming the limitations of individual biomass feedstocks and enhancing fuel quality through biomass interactions. This study evaluated the fuel characteristics of hydrochar produced at different mixing ratios (1:1, 3:1, 5:1) and reaction temperatures (160 °C, 200 °C, 240 °C).
The yield of hydrochar in HTC is influenced by the decomposition rate of biomass, the extent of volatile matter loss, and the efficiency of the carbonization reaction. In Co-HTC, biomass interactions further affect pyrolysis behavior and hydrochar formation process (). As shown in Figure 5, HY decreased consistently with increasing HTC temperature for all mixing ratios. At a 1:1 mixing ratio, HY declined from 67.4% at 160 °C to 53.4% at 240 °C. For the 3:1 ratio, HY decreased from 73.6% to 55.0%, while the 5:1 ratio showed a smaller decline from 67.6% to 57.9%. This downward trend reflects the typical behavior of biomass under HTC conditions, where rising temperatures accelerate the breakdown of volatile organic matter, resulting in greater mass loss. The sharp HY decrease in mixtures with higher CW proportions (1:1 and 3:1) can be attributed to CW’s higher volatile matter and lipid content, which decomposes and escapes as gas or liquid at elevated temperatures. In contrast, the relatively higher HY retention at the 5:1 ratio indicates that SM’s higher ash and protein content contributes more to solid residue, even though it may not enhance fuel quality (). Beyond these compositional effects, the alkaline mineral components in SM ash, particularly potassium and calcium, promote the hydrolysis and decomposition of cellulose and hemicellulose derived from CW, accelerating volatile release and contributing to the steeper HY decline observed in CW-rich mixtures (; ). Simultaneously, Maillard-type reactions between nitrogen-containing compounds released from SM proteins and reducing sugars generated by CW carbohydrate hydrolysis produce nitrogen-heterocyclic aromatic compounds that incorporate into the hydrochar matrix, partially offsetting mass loss through repolymerization (; ). These opposing tendencies create a compositional trade-off in Co-HTC: higher CW proportions favor carbon quality through lignin-driven aromatization but reduce HY, while higher SM proportions retain solid mass through ash accumulation but dilute fuel quality.
FIGURE 5
Furthermore, hydrochar’s carbon content increased while oxygen content decreased with rising HTC temperature and CW proportion. This trend highlights the occurrence of dehydration, decarboxylation, and deoxygenation reactions in HTC, which contribute to fuel quality improvement (). At a 1:1 mixing ratio, the carbon content increased from 56.4% at 160 °C to 64.2% at 240 °C. In contrast, the 5:1 mixing ratio showed a smaller increase, from 47.5% at 160 °C to 58.4% at 240 °C, indicating that higher SM proportions restricted carbonization efficiency. These contrasting trends reflect the fundamentally different carbonization pathways of each feedstock: CW undergoes lignin-driven aromatization, in which phenolic intermediates released during partial lignin depolymerization condense and repolymerize into stable polycyclic aromatic structures that progressively increase carbon density (; ). In SM-rich mixtures, this aromatization pathway is partially suppressed by the diluting effect of inorganic ash. Nonetheless, SM-derived mineral ions (particularly K+ and Ca2+) may facilitate cross-linking reactions between CW-derived aromatic intermediates and SM organic matter, generating a more heterogeneous but thermally stable hydrochar matrix compared to single-feedstock products ().
Biomass subjected to HTC undergoes an increase in carbon density while simultaneously experiencing a reduction in oxygen and hydrogen contents, leading to a decrease in the O/C and H/C atomic ratios (). While Figure 4 tracks the evolution of these atomic ratios with increasing temperature, Figure 6 contextualizes the changes in relation to the HHV across different mixing ratios, providing complementary insight into the Co-HTC process. At a 1:1 mixing ratio, the O/C ratio decreased from 0.27 at 160 °C to 0.18 at 240 °C, while the H/C ratio declined from 1.65 to 1.34 (Figure 6). The more pronounced O/C reduction at higher CW proportions (1:1) reflects lignin-driven aromatization, in which oxygen is expelled through dehydration of hydroxyl groups and decarboxylation of organic acids. In Co-HTC, SM’s alkaline mineral environment raises the local pH of the reaction medium, which favors decarboxylation over dehydration, selectively reducing the O/C ratio while moderating H/C reduction (; ). This pH-mediated mechanism explains why SM-dominant mixtures (5:1) show a comparatively smaller O/C decrease despite reaching the same maximum temperature.
FIGURE 6
This atomic ratio variation plays a critical role in determining fuel properties, as a lower O/C and H/C ratio is directly linked to an increase in energy density (). At a 1:1 mixing ratio, the HHV increased from 24.4 MJ/kg at 160 °C to 27.9 MJ/kg at 240 °C. The higher CW proportion contributed to a substantial increase in HHV, primarily due to the enhanced formation of aromatic carbon structures. These results indicate that HTC promotes the removal of oxygen while increasing carbon density, thereby enhancing the energy density of the fuel ().
TGA and DTG analyses (Figure 7) demonstrated that increasing HTC temperature significantly affected volatile matter release and thermal decomposition behavior. At a 1:1 mixing ratio, volatile matter loss occurred gradually at 160 °C, whereas at 240 °C, it became more pronounced, indicating substantial mass reduction. CW-rich hydrochars exhibited greater volatile release, attributed to the high lignin content in CW, which undergoes gradual thermal degradation over a broad temperature range ().
FIGURE 7
DTG curves revealed two distinct peaks for CW-rich hydrochars, corresponding to volatile release and fixed carbon formation. The high lignin content in CW contributed to a broader, slower degradation process, which enhanced combustion stability by sustaining char formation over an extended temperature range. Conversely, SM-rich hydrochars decomposed more rapidly, leading to higher volatile losses and reduced carbon retention. The concentrated mineral ash in SM-dominant hydrochars acts as a physical barrier restricting oxygen diffusion to the carbonaceous matrix, broadening the DTG peak and shifting burnout temperature to higher values, a mineral-mediated inhibition mechanism consistent with the S index decline observed at higher SM proportions (Section 3.4) (; ).
In contrast, at a 5:1 mixing ratio, where the SM content was predominant, the thermal decomposition process was more gradual. The increased ash content in SM likely hindered thermal degradation, limiting overall mass loss despite the rise in HTC temperature ().
Collectively, the SM-CW interactions during Co-HTC are governed by three principal mechanisms: (1) mineral-catalyzed hydrolysis of CW carbohydrates by SM ash components, accelerating volatile release and modulating HY; (2) Maillard-type cross-reactions between SM-derived nitrogenous compounds and CW-derived reducing sugars, contributing nitrogen-containing aromatic structures to the hydrochar matrix; and (3) pH-mediated shift from dehydration to decarboxylation pathways driven by SM’s alkaline mineral environment, selectively reducing O/C ratios beyond simple additive blending. A higher CW proportion led to a marked increase in carbon density and HHV, highlighting the effectiveness of lignin-rich biomass in fuel property enhancement. In contrast, higher SM proportions resulted in increased ash content, which restricted fuel quality improvement but suggested potential applications for agricultural utilization rather than combustion-based energy production. With increasing HTC temperature, the continuous decline in the O/C and H/C ratios indicated that the hydrochar structure progressively transitioned to a composition resembling that of coal.
3.4 Fuel performance evaluation
The fuel performance of hydrochar produced through HTC is a critical factor in determining combustion characteristics and energy efficiency. In HTC-treated hydrochar, as temperature increases, volatile matter decreases while fixed carbon content increases, directly impacting combustion reactivity and energy density. This study evaluated fuel performance based on S, EDR, and EY.
The S index is a crucial indicator of ignition ease, combustion rate, and burnout temperature. As shown in Table 2, the 1:1 mixing ratio exhibited the highest S value at 160 °C (39.0 × 10−9%2/min2·°C3), while the lowest S value was observed at 240 °C (9.1 × 10−9%2/min2·°C3). This decline suggests that as HTC progresses, volatile matter is removed while fixed carbon increases, leading to a reduction in combustion reactivity. In contrast, the 3:1 and 5:1 mixing ratios showed the highest S values at 200 °C, which subsequently decreased at 240 °C. In particular, the 5:1 mixing ratio demonstrated a higher ignition temperature (Ti) and lower combustion rate, indicating decreased reactivity. This behavior reflects the dual role of SM-derived ash: at moderate temperatures (200 °C), sufficient volatile matter is retained to sustain ignition while the mineral matrix provides structural support to the carbonaceous framework. At 240 °C, however, extensive volatile removal combined with the physical barrier effect of concentrated inorganic ash restricting oxygen diffusion to the combustible carbon matrix, collectively suppresses combustion reactivity in SM-dominant mixtures (; ). Consequently, the optimal HTC temperature for combustion performance shifts with mixing ratio: 160 °C for the 1:1 ratio and 200 °C for SM-dominant conditions.
TABLE 2
| Temperature (°C) | SM:CW | Ti (°C) | Tf (°C) | (dw/dt)max (%/min) | (dw/dt)mean (%/min) | S×10–9 (%2/min2·°C3) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 160 | 1:1 | 165 | 550 | −2.7628 | −0.2115 | 39.0 |
| 3:1 | 175 | 575 | −1.8244 | −0.2029 | 21.0 | |
| 5:1 | 175 | 610 | −1.2486 | −0.1854 | 12.4 | |
| 200 | 1:1 | 175 | 580 | −1.5487 | −0.2052 | 17.9 |
| 3:1 | 180 | 560 | −5.1611 | −0.2142 | 60.9 | |
| 5:1 | 180 | 575 | −4.6929 | −0.2082 | 52.4 | |
| 240 | 1:1 | 185 | 545 | −0.6955 | −0.2439 | 9.1 |
| 3:1 | 185 | 515 | −2.3273 | −0.2509 | 33.1 | |
| 5:1 | 185 | 570 | −0.9396 | −0.2060 | 9.9 |
Combustion characteristic index of hydrochar produced under various HTC conditions.
HTC reduces volatile matter, leading to mass loss; however, it enhances carbon density, which improves HHV and overall fuel quality. Figure 8 illustrates the EDR variations under different HTC conditions. At 160 °C, the EDR was 1.19 for the 1:1 ratio, increasing to 1.36 at 240 °C. The 3:1 ratio increased from 1.01 to 1.36, and the 5:1 ratio from 1.02 to 1.38. These increases demonstrate effective carbon densification with rising temperature, consistent with oxygen elimination via dehydration and decarboxylation reactions (). The comparably high EDR of the 5:1 ratio (1.38) despite elevated ash content is explained by mineral-catalyzed deoxygenation: alkali and alkaline earth metals (K, Ca) from SM ash promote decarboxylation of organic acids derived from CW carbohydrate hydrolysis, expelling oxygen as CO2 and enriching the solid phase in carbon. This pathway enables effective energy densification even when absolute carbon content remains lower than in CW-rich mixtures, because HHV improvement is driven by oxygen removal rather than carbon addition alone (; ). Interestingly, the 5:1 ratio reached the highest EDR at 240 °C, though its combustion reactivity remained low, indicating that high energy density does not always coincide with better ignition performance.
FIGURE 8
EY (%) quantifies the proportion of energy retained in hydrochar compared to raw biomass. For the 1:1 ratio, EY decreased from 79.8% at 160 °C to 72.4% at 240 °C, indicating that although energy densification improved, the reduction in hydrochar yield at higher temperature lowered the total retained energy. For the 3:1 ratio, EY increased slightly from 74.7% to 74.9%, showing relatively stable retention despite temperature change. In contrast, the 5:1 ratio exhibited a notable increase in EY from 69.3% at 160 °C to 79.9% at 240 °C, despite its high ash content. This elevated EY at the 5:1 ratio under 240 °C is attributable to the synergistic effect of increased hydrochar yield and moderate HHV improvement. Because HY is calculated based on the total hydrochar mass, including ash, SM-rich mixtures such as the 5:1 ratio retain a larger solid fraction, which further increases EY even though ash does not contribute to fuel quality. Therefore, EY reflects the proportion of energy retained in hydrochar relative to the raw biomass and does not indicate fuel purity, as it inherently accounts for all mass components, including ash. This interpretation aligns with the EY definition in Equation 3, where HY includes inert ash mass, while EDR is derived from HHV, which primarily reflects organic carbon content. Overall, the increase in EY with temperature indicates that HTC enhances energy retention via improved carbonization and fixed carbon formation, especially under higher temperature and SM-rich conditions (Yao et al., 2024).
The inverse relationship between S index and EDR/EY across all conditions reflects the mechanistic trade-off inherent to Co-HTC: the carbonization reactions that enrich fixed carbon and increase HHV simultaneously deplete reactive volatile matter required for ignition. In SM–CW Co-HTC, this trade-off is further modulated by mixing ratio, higher CW proportions favor aromatization-driven energy densification (high EDR, lower S), while higher SM proportions prioritize mass retention through ash accumulation (high EY, lowest S). This distinction has direct practical implications: solid fuels for fixed-bed or fluidized-bed combustion systems may prioritize EDR, whereas fuels intended for co-firing with coal may benefit from higher S index values achievable at lower HTC temperatures or higher CW proportions. These findings confirm that Co-HTC with appropriate CW proportions and temperature optimization enhances carbonization efficiency and fuel energy potential. Therefore, optimizing both HTC temperature and feedstock mixing ratio is essential to achieve a balance between combustion performance and energy retention. Compared to continuous HTC systems reported in recent studies (), which primarily focus on throughput and operational scalability, the batch-mode design employed in this study enables a more controlled evaluation of carbonization behavior and feedstock synergy. This enhances the understanding of the mechanistic interactions governing hydrochar fuel quality and complements large-scale system analyses.
4 Conclusion
This study systematically evaluated the Co-HTC of swine manure and coffee waste across a range of reaction temperatures and mixing ratios, revealing that the thermochemical behavior of compositionally contrasting feedstocks cannot be predicted by simple additive blending. The complementary properties of the two feedstocks—lignin-driven carbon densification from CW and mineral-mediated reaction modulation from SM—interact through distinct mechanistic pathways that collectively govern hydrochar fuel quality, energy retention, and combustion reactivity in ways unique to the co-processed system. This finding establishes a key principle for Co-HTC feedstock design: pairing a carbon-dense, low-ash lignocellulosic biomass with a mineral-rich, nitrogen-containing organic waste can unlock synergistic fuel properties that neither feedstock achieves independently, while simultaneously enabling dual valorization of both combustion-oriented and agronomically valuable hydrochar fractions. From an industrial perspective, the demonstrated flexibility of Co-HTC—wherein fuel characteristics can be tuned toward energy densification or energy retention by adjusting mixing ratio and temperature alone, without feedstock pre-drying or chemical pretreatment—positions it as a practically accessible waste-to-energy pathway for decentralized applications. The integration of urban and agricultural organic waste streams through Co-HTC directly supports circular bioeconomy objectives by converting two co-located but individually suboptimal waste streams into application-specific solid fuels. The mechanistic principles identified here are expected to extend beyond the SM–CW system, providing a generalizable basis for rational feedstock pairing in Co-HTC of other manure–biomass combinations and informing policy frameworks for regional waste-to-energy infrastructure. Future studies should quantify ash valorization pathways and conduct techno-economic analyses to evaluate Co-HTC scalability across diverse regional waste profiles.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
KM: Writing – review and editing, Writing – original draft, Data curation, Formal Analysis. DO: Writing – original draft, Formal Analysis. EL: Visualization, Writing – original draft, Data curation. JL: Writing – original draft, Investigation. DK: Writing – original draft, Investigation. KP: Conceptualization, Writing – review and editing, Supervision.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This study was supported by the Konkuk University Researcher Fund in 2024 and a National Research Foundation grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (RS-2023–00219272, RS-2024-00338631).
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. Generative AI (ChatGPT, OpenAI) was used to assist with translation, grammar editing, and language polishing during the preparation of this manuscript. The authors reviewed and verified the generated text and take full responsibility for the final content.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fenvs.2026.1826146/full#supplementary-material
SUPPLEMENTARY FIGURE S1Schematic diagram of the hydrothermal carbonization system.
References
1
Apaydın VarolE.MutluÜ. (2023). TGA-FTIR analysis of biomass samples based on the thermal decomposition behavior of hemicellulose, cellulose, and lignin. Energies16 (9), 3674. 10.3390/en16093674
2
APHA (2023). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 24th edn. Washington, DC: American Public Health Association.
3
CaiJ.LiB.ChenC.WangJ.ZhaoM.ZhangK. (2016). Hydrothermal carbonization of tobacco stalk for fuel application. Bioresour. Technol.220, 305–311. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.08.098
4
ChoC. H.LeeS. O.KangD. K.HongS. H.KangC. K.LeeJ. W. (2020). Preparation and characterization of lignin/chlorinated polyvinyl chloride blended fibers for low-cost carbon fibers. J. Korean Soc. Dye. Finish.32 (2), 111–119. 10.5764/TCF.2020.32.2.111
5
DangH.XuR.ZhangJ.WangM.YeL.JiaG. (2023). Removal of oxygen-containing functional groups during hydrothermal carbonization of biomass: experimental and DFT study. Energy276, 127436. 10.1016/j.energy.2023.127436
6
DangC. H.FarruG.GlaserC.FischerM. G.LibraJ. A. (2024). Enhancing the fuel properties of spent coffee grounds through hydrothermal carbonization: output prediction and post-treatment approaches. Sustainability16 (1), 338. 10.3390/su16010338
7
DevnathB.KhanalS.ShahA.RezaT. (2024). Influence of hydrothermal carbonization (HTC) temperature on hydrochar and process liquid for poultry, swine, and dairy manure. Environ11 (7), 150. 10.3390/environments11070150
8
FerrentinoR.SacchiG.ScrinziD.AndreottolaG.FioriL. (2023). Valorization of swine manure for a circular approach through hydrothermal carbonization. Biomass Bioenergy168, 106689. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2022.106689
9
GascóG.Paz-FerreiroJ.ÁlvarezM. L.SaaA.MéndezA. (2018). Biochars and hydrochars prepared by pyrolysis and hydrothermal carbonisation of pig manure. Waste Manag.79, 395–403. 10.1016/j.wasman.2018.08.015
10
HuY.GallantR.SalaudeenS.FarooqueA. A.HeS. (2022). Hydrothermal carbonization of spent coffee grounds for producing solid fuel. Sustainability14 (14), 8818. 10.3390/su14148818
11
IghaloJ. O.AkaemeF. C.GeorginJ.de OliveiraJ. S.FrancoD. S. (2025). Biomass hydrochar: a critical review of process chemistry, synthesis methodology, and applications. Sustainability17 (4), 1660. 10.3390/su17041660
12
IpialesR. P.MohedanoA. F.Diaz-PortuondoE.DiazE.De la RubiaM. A. (2023). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of swine manure and lignocellulosic waste: a new strategy for the integral valorization of biomass wastes. Waste Manag.169, 267–275. 10.1016/j.wasman.2023.07.018
13
IpialesR. P.SarrionA.DiazE.de la RubiaM.Diaz-PortuondoE.CoronellaC. J.et al (2024). Swine manure management by hydrothermal carbonization: comparative study of batch and continuous operation. Environ. Res.245, 118062. 10.1016/j.envres.2023.118062
14
IschiaG.BergeN. D.BaeS.MarzbanN.RománS.FarruG.et al (2024). Advances in research and technology of hydrothermal carbonization: achievements and future directions. Agronomy14 (5), 955. 10.3390/agronomy14050955
15
IslamM. T.RezaM. T. (2023). Evaluation of fuel and combustion properties of hydrochar derived from co-hydrothermal carbonization of biomass and plastic. Biomass Bioenergy172, 106750. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2023.106750
16
JangE. S.SongE. H.YoonJ. H.KimY. M. (2020). Study on the pyrolysis kinetics of solid fuel from livestock manure. J. Ind. Chem.31 (4), 443–451. 10.14478/ace.2020.1047
17
KhanM. A.HameedB. H.SiddiquiM. R.AlothmanZ. A.AlsohaimiI. H. (2022). Hydrothermal conversion of food waste to carbonaceous solid fuel—a review of recent developments. Foods11 (24), 4036. 10.3390/foods11244036
18
KimD.ParkS.ParkK. Y. (2017). Upgrading the fuel properties of sludge and low-rank coal mixed fuel through hydrothermal carbonization. Energy141, 598–602. 10.1016/j.energy.2017.09.113
19
KumarN.WeldonR.LynamJ. G. (2021). Hydrothermal carbonization of coffee silverskins. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol.36, 102145. 10.1016/j.bcab.2021.102145
20
LangQ.ZhaoQ.LiW. (2018). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of lignocellulosic biomass and swine manure: Hydrochar properties and heavy metal transformation behavior. Bioresour. Technol.249, 464–470. 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.06.084
21
LangQ.ZhangB.LiuZ.ChenZ.XiaY.LiD.et al (2019). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of corn stalk and swine manure: combustion behavior of hydrochar by thermogravimetric analysis. Bioresour. Technol.271, 75–83. 10.1016/j.biortech.2018.09.100
22
LangQ.LiuZ.LiY.XuJ.LiJ.LiuB.et al (2022). Combustion characteristics, kinetic and thermodynamic analyses of hydrochars derived from hydrothermal carbonization of cattle manure. J. Environ. Chem. Eng.10 (1), 106938. 10.1016/j.jece.2021.106938
23
LeeJ.ChoS.KimD.RyuJ.LeeK.ChungH.et al (2021). Conversion of slaughterhouse wastes to solid fuel using hydrothermal carbonization. Energies14 (6), 1768. 10.3390/en14061768
24
LeeE. J.JungS. A.JungY. J.HyungS. J.LeeJ. W. (2022). Chemical and structural properties of dry and wet torrefied biomass. Trends Agric. Life Sci.60, 17–25. 10.29335/tals.2022.60.17
25
LiQ.LinH.ZhangS.YuanX.GholizadehM.WangY.et al (2021a). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of swine manure and cellulose: influence of mutual interaction of intermediates on properties of the products. Sci. Total Environ.791, 148134. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148134
26
LiQ.ZhangS.GholizadehM.HuX.YuanX.SarkarB.et al (2021b). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of swine and chicken manure: influence of cross-interaction on hydrochar and liquid characteristics. Sci. Total Environ.791, 147381. 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147381
27
LiF. Y.JiangZ.JiW.ChenY.MaJ.GuiX.et al (2022). Effects of hydrothermal carbonization temperature on carbon retention, stability, and properties of animal manure-derived hydrochar. Int. J. Agric. Biol. Eng.15 (1), 124–131. 10.25165/j.ijabe.20221501.6758
28
LuX.GuX. (2022). A review on lignin pyrolysis: pyrolytic behavior, mechanism, and relevant upgrading for improving process efficiency. Biotechnol. Biofuels Bioprod.15 (1), 106. 10.1186/s13068-022-02203-0
29
ManiscalcoM. P.VolpeM.MessineoA. (2020). Hydrothermal carbonization as a valuable tool for energy and environmental applications: a review. Energies13 (16), 4098. 10.3390/en13164098
30
MassayaJ.PickensG.Mills-LampteyB.ChuckC. J. (2021). Enhanced hydrothermal carbonization of spent coffee grounds for the efficient production of solid fuel with lower nitrogen content. Energy fuels.35 (11), 9462–9473. 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.1c00870
31
Mendoza MartinezC. L.SermyaginaE.SaariJ.Silva de JesusM.CardosoM.Matheus de AlmeidaG.et al (2021). Hydrothermal carbonization of lignocellulosic agro-forest based biomass residues. Biomass Bioenergy147, 6004. 10.1016/j.biombioe.2021.106004
32
MouraP. R. S.de AquinoT. F.BianchiF. M.ViolaV. O.BonettiB.de Souza MartinsL.et al (2025). Co-combustion of coal and biomass waste in pilot-scale for energy use. Environ. Prog. Sustain Energy44 (3), e14608. 10.1002/ep.14608
33
OrdieresR.CultroneG. (2022). Technical quality of solid bricks made using clayey earth with added coffee grounds and fly ash. Constr. Build. Mater. 341, 127757. 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127757
34
PahnilaM.KoskelaA.SulasalmiP.FabritiusT. (2023). A review of pyrolysis technologies and the effect of process parameters on biocarbon properties. Energies16 (19), 6936. 10.3390/en16196936
35
PaulineA. L.JosephK. (2020). Hydrothermal carbonization of organic wastes to carbonaceous solid fuel–A review of mechanisms and process parameters. Fuel279, 118472. 10.1016/j.fuel.2020.11847
36
PetrovićJ.ErcegovićM.SimićM.KoprivicaM.DimitrijevićJ.JovanovićA.et al (2024). Hydrothermal carbonization of waste biomass: a review of hydrochar preparation and environmental application. Processes12 (1), 207. 10.3390/pr12010207
37
PoomsawatS.PoomsawatW. (2021). Analysis of hydrochar fuel characterization and combustion behavior derived from aquatic biomass via hydrothermal carbonization process. Case Stud. Therm. Eng.27, 101255. 10.1016/j.csite.2021.101255
38
RezaM. T.BeckerG.SachsenheimerK.MummeJ. (2014). Hydrothermal carbonization (HTC): near infrared spectroscopy and partial least squares regression for hydrochar process optimization. Appl. Energy135, 379–385. 10.1016/j.biortech.2014.03.008
39
ShahnawaziA. A.MerckelR.CarvalhoL.SchwedeS. (2025). Hydrothermal carbonisation of waste-activated sludge: possible route to improve sludge management in municipal wastewater treatment facilities. Bioresour. Technol.432, 132655. 10.1016/j.biortech.2025.132655
40
SharmaR.JasrotiaK.SinghN.GhoshP.srivastavaS.SharmaN. R.et al (2020). A comprehensive review on hydrothermal carbonization of biomass and its applications. Chem. Afr.3, 1–19. 10.1007/s42250-019-00098-3
41
SmithA. M.RossA. B. (2019). The influence of residence time during hydrothermal carbonisation of miscanthus on bio-coal combustion chemistry. Energies12 (3), 523. 10.3390/en12030523
42
SunW.BaiL.ChiM.XuX.ChenZ.YuK. (2023). Study on the evolution pattern of the aromatics of lignin during hydrothermal carbonization. Energies16 (3), 1089. 10.3390/en16031089
43
TangJ.ZouJ.LiQ.WuQ.ZhengX.FangJ.et al (2025). Alkaline catalytic liquefaction of pig manure fermentation residue in ethanol solvent for the production of high-quality biocrude oil. Waste Manage.197, 86–93. 10.1016/j.wasman.2025.02.035
44
WangC.FanY.HornungU.ZhuW.DahmenN. (2020). Char and tar formation during hydrothermal treatment of sewage sludge in subcritical and supercritical water: effect of organic matter composition and experiments with model compounds. J. Clean. Prod.242, 118586. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118586
45
WangJ.MinamiE.AsmadiM.KawamotoH. (2021). Effect of delignification on thermal degradation reactivities of hemicellulose and cellulose in wood cell walls. J. Wood Sci.67, 1–11. 10.1186/s10086-021-01952-0
46
WangH.MengH.OlowoyoJ. O.ZengY.ZhengY. (2025). Advancements in lignin valorization for energy storage applications: sustainable technologies for lignin extraction and hydrothermal ca rbonization. Nanomaterials15 (4), 309. 10.3390/nano15040309
47
XiongJ. B.PanZ. q.XiaoX. f.HuangH. j.LaiF. y.WangJ. x.et al (2019). Study on the hydrothermal carbonization of swine manure: the effect of process parameters on the yield/properties of hydrochar and process water. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis144, 104692. 10.1016/j.jaap.2019.104692
48
XiongW.LuoY.ShangguanW.DengY.LiR.SongD.et al (2024). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of lignocellulosic biomass and swine manure: optimal parameters for enhanced nutrient reclamation, carbon sequestration, and heavy metals passivation. Waste Manage190, 174–185. 10.1016/j.wasman.2024.09.019
49
YangX.WangB.GuoY.YangF.ChengF. (2024). Co-hydrothermal carbonization of sewage sludge and coal slime for clean solid fuel production: a comprehensive assessment of hydrochar fuel characteristics and combustion behavior. Biomass Convers. Biorefin14 (13), 14491–14503. 10.1007/s13399-022-03601-y
50
YaoY.XiaP.ZhaoL.YangC.HuangR.WangK. (2024). Effects of temperature and duration on the combustion characteristics of hydrochar prepared from traditional Chinese medicine residues using hydrothermal carbonization process. Int. J. Energy Res.2024 (1), 3595643. 10.1155/er/3595643
51
ZhangS.ChenT.LiW.DongQ.XiongY. (2016). Physicochemical properties and combustion behavior of duckweed during wet torrefaction. Bioresour. Technol.218, 1157–1162. 10.1016/j.biortech.2016.07.086
52
ZhangY.JiangY.WangS.WangZ.LiuY.HuZ.et al (2021). Environmental sustainability assessment of pig manure mono- and co-digestion and dynamic land application of the digestate. Renew. Sustain Energy Rev.137, 110476. 10.1016/j.rser.2020.110476
53
ZhangD.SunZ.FuH.LiuZ.WangF.ZengJ.et al (2024). Upgrading of cow manure by hydrothermal carbonization: evaluation of fuel properties, combustion behaviors and kinetics. Renew. Energy225, 120269. 10.1016/j.renene.2024.120269
54
ZhaoP.LinC.LiY.WuS.CuiX.DingY.et al (2021). Value-added products from pyrolysis of hydrochar derived from polyvinyl chloride and alkali coal. J. Clean. Prod.329, 129769. 10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129769
Summary
Keywords
combustion characteristic index, energy densification ratio, energy yield, hydrochar, thermochemical properties, waste valorization
Citation
Min KJ, Oh DY, Lee E, Lee JH, Kim DY and Park KY (2026) Fuel quality improvement and energy performance through co-hydrothermal carbonization of swine manure and coffee waste. Front. Environ. Sci. 14:1826146. doi: 10.3389/fenvs.2026.1826146
Received
09 March 2026
Revised
24 April 2026
Accepted
20 May 2026
Published
05 June 2026
Volume
14 - 2026
Edited by
Raj Boopathy, Nicholls State University, United States
Reviewed by
Zhihua Xiao, Hunan Agricultural University, China
Hua-jun Huang, Jiangxi Agricultural University, China
Updates
Copyright
© 2026 Min, Oh, Lee, Lee, Kim and Park.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ki Young Park, kypark@konkuk.ac.kr
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.