| Literature DB >> 30360479 |
Caixia Wu1,2, Yungui Li3,4, Mengjun Chen5,6, Xiang Luo7,8, Yuwei Chen9,10, Nelson Belzile11,12, Sheng Huang13,14.
Abstract
Biochar has been extenEntities:
Keywords: adsorption; biochar; cadmium; degradation; soil
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30360479 PMCID: PMC6266441 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15112331
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
The basic physicochemical properties of the six tested pristine soils.
| Soil | Geographic Location | Moisture Content/% | pH | SSA/(m2·g−1) | TOC/(g·kg−1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Peat 1) | N 33°10′23.0″, | 88.26 | 5.72 | 3.10 | 92.7 |
| NDS 1) | N 33°10′47.555″, | 48.14 | 5.73 | 2.02 | 73.1 |
| LDSI | N 33°19′36.0″, | 33.47 | 6.03 | 2.52 | 45.2 |
| LDSII 1) | N 33°10′45.710″, | 10.53 | 6.40 | 2.71 | 15.7 |
| MDS 1) | N 33°10′43.667″, | 8.77 | 6.59 | 3.06 | 8.90 |
| SDS | N 33°19′41.5″, | 4.47 | 6.91 | 3.11 | 5.60 |
Notes: 1) The data from the reference [32].
Figure 1The FTIR spectra of the six selected soils and biochar.
Figure 2The SEM images of the six selected soils.
The main physicochemical properties of the biochar.
| Biochar | Yield/wt% | Ash/% | d50 1)/μm | SSA/(m2·g−1) | Elemental Composition and Atomic Ratio of Biochar Organic Components 2) | pH | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C/wt% | H/wt% | N/wt% | O/wt% | (O+N)/C | H/C | ||||||
| MS100 | 100.00 | 14.61 | 11.36 | 3.09 | 44.75 | 6.32 | 1.36 | 47.57 | 0.82 | 1.70 | 6.32 |
| MS350 | 47.58 | 34.90 | 9.31 | 3.82 | 63.97 | 4.66 | 2.56 | 28.81 | 0.37 | 0.87 | 6.49 |
| MS500 | 33.70 | 36.20 | 9.09 | 6.03 | 66.38 | 2.93 | 2.40 | 28.29 | 0.35 | 0.53 | 8.50 |
| MS700 | 30.40 | 41.67 | 8.04 | 133.4 | 72.49 | 2.16 | 1.83 | 23.51 | 0.26 | 0.36 | 9.08 |
Notes: 1) The d50 particle size is the equivalent diameter of the largest particle when the cumulative distribution in the distribution curve is 50%; 2) The elemental composition of the organic component was obtained by subtracting the ash content and finally calculated as a mass fraction, where the percentage of O was calculated by subtraction.
Figure 3The SEM images of biochar.
Figure 4The Cd adsorption isotherms on the six selected soils.
The parameters based on Langmuir and Freundlich model fittings for Cd adsorption isotherms with the six selected soils and the biochar.
| Sample | Langmuir | Freundlich | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Soil 1) | Peat | 6309 | 0.025 | 0.99 | 343 | 0.567 | 0.97 |
| NDS | 5361 | 0.022 | 0.99 | 261 | 0.583 | 0.98 | |
| LDSI | 1710 | 0.054 | 0.99 | 126 | 0.555 | 0.98 | |
| LDSII | 1028 | 0.035 | 0.99 | 58 | 0.584 | 0.98 | |
| MDS | 553 | 0.037 | 0.99 | 33 | 0.583 | 0.99 | |
| SDS | 170 | 0.047 | 0.99 | 15 | 0.500 | 0.99 | |
| Biochar 2) | MS 100 | 2622 | 0.024 | 0.92 | 132 | 0.586 | 0.86 |
| MS 350 | 22987 | 0.030 | 0.99 | 1483 | 0.549 | 0.99 | |
| MS 500 | 28391 | 0.061 | 0.97 | 3637 | 0.425 | 0.91 | |
| MS 700 | 49016 | 0.047 | 0.98 | 4813 | 0.470 | 0.96 | |
Notes: 1) NDS: nondegraded soil; LDSI: slightly degraded soil I; LDSII: slightly degraded soil II; MDS: moderately degraded soil; SDS: severely degraded soil; 2) Biochar derived from maize stalk with different pyrolysis temperature. The biomass samples were named as MS100, MS350, MS500, and MS700, respectively.
Figure 5The relationship between the maximum adsorption capacity of cadmium on the six selected soils and TOC in the soils.
Figure 6The Cd adsorption isotherms of the biochars.
Comparison adsorption capacity of maize stalk biochar for Cd with different adsorbents.
| Adsorbent | Adsorption Capacity ( | References |
|---|---|---|
| Vinegar residue biochar 700 °C | 2910 | [ |
| Wheat straw biochar 450 °C | 5000 | [ |
| Wheat straw biochar 600 °C | 1960 | [ |
| Swine manure biochar 300 °C | 42440 | [ |
| Peanut hull biochar 450 °C | 6740 | [ |
| Maize stalk biochar 700 °C | 49016 | This study |
Figure 7The effect of the weight ratio of MS700 on the Cd adsorption in a mixed system.
Figure 8The effect of the biochar pyrolysis temperature on the Cd adsorption.
Figure 9The Cd adsorption of the maize stalk biochar MS 700 in different type of soils.
Regression parameters of Langmuir and Freundlich model fittings for Cd adsorption isotherms and calculated values on the MDS amended with different weight ratio of MS700.
| Sample | Langmuir | Freundlich | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| MDS | 100 | -- | -- | -- | 553 | 0.037 | 0.99 | 33.3 | 0.583 | 0.99 |
| MDS+1%MS 700 | 67.7 | 60.6 | 22.1 | 1038 | 809 | 0.047 | 0.95 | 93.7 | 0.434 | 0.93 |
| MDS+2%MS 700 | 48.5 | 87.7 | 26.5 | 1522 | 1118 | 0.063 | 0.99 | 153 | 0.413 | 0.97 |
| MDS+4%MS 700 | 30.5 | 113 | 30.1 | 2492 | 1742 | 0.072 | 0.99 | 231 | 0.432 | 0.95 |
Notes: 1) The adsorption contribution rate RC calculated by Equation (6); 2) The adsorption decline level D calculated by Equation (5); 3) The Q’m,soil+MS calculated by Equation (4).
The regression parameters of Langmuir and Freundlich model fittings for Cd adsorption isotherms and calculated values on the soil amended with biochar prepared at different temperatures.
| Sample | Langmuir | Freundlich | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| MDS | 100 | -- | -- | -- | 553 | 0.037 | 0.99 | 33.3 | 0.583 | 0.99 |
| MDS+2%MS 100 | 90.2 | 8.73 | −1.2 | 594 | 601 | 0.027 | 0.99 | 41.1 | 0.509 | 0.95 |
| MDS+2%MS 350 | 62.4 | 52.9 | 13.3 | 1002 | 869 | 0.046 | 0.98 | 86.7 | 0.480 | 0.93 |
| MDS+2%MS 500 | 53.9 | 56.4 | 9.4 | 1110 | 1006 | 0.058 | 0.99 | 129 | 0.424 | 0.97 |
| MDS+2%MS 700 | 48.5 | 87.7 | 26.5 | 1522 | 1118 | 0.063 | 0.99 | 153 | 0.413 | 0.97 |
Notes: 1) The adsorption contribution rate RC calculated by Equation (6); 2) The adsorption decline level D calculated by Equation (5); 3) The Q’m,soil+MS calculated by Equation (4).
The regression parameters of Langmuir and Freundlich model fittings for adsorption isotherms and calculated values for Cd on soils amended with 2.0% MS700.
| Sample | Langmuir | Freundlich | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
| NDS+2%MS 700 | 72 | 13.4 | −17.1 | 6234 | 7300 | 0.018 | 0.99 | 265 | 0.639 | 0.98 |
| LDSI+2%MS 700 | 67.9 | 39.7 | 7.1 | 2656 | 2468 | 0.033 | 0.96 | 170 | 0.540 | 0.92 |
| LDSII+2%MS 700 | 63.5 | 61.8 | 20.2 | 1988 | 1586 | 0.051 | 0.97 | 171 | 0.461 | 0.92 |
| MDS+2%MS 700 | 48.5 | 87.7 | 26.5 | 1522 | 1118 | 0.063 | 0.99 | 153 | 0.413 | 0.97 |
| SDS+2%MS 700 | 22.9 | 134.8 | 36.6 | 1147 | 727 | 0.134 | 0.89 | 180 | 0.299 | 0.8 |
Notes: 1) The adsorption contribution rate RC calculated by Equation (6); 2) The adsorption decline level D calculated by Equation (5); 3) The Q’m,soil+MS calculated by Equation (4).
Figure 10The relationship between the adsorption decline level (D) of Cd and the TOC of soil.
Figure 11The adsorption inhibition and acceleration effect difference between soil–biochar system.