IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i7p2265-d155582.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Suitability of Different Agricultural and Urban Organic Wastes as Feedstocks for the Production of Biochar—Part 1: Physicochemical Characterisation

Author

Listed:
  • Inés López-Cano

    (Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Waste Management, Centro de Edafología y Biología Aplicada del Segura, CSIC, P.O. Box 4195, 30080 Murcia, Spain)

  • María L. Cayuela

    (Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Waste Management, Centro de Edafología y Biología Aplicada del Segura, CSIC, P.O. Box 4195, 30080 Murcia, Spain)

  • Claudio Mondini

    (CREA Research Centre for Viticulture and Enology Branch of Gorizia, 34170 Gorizia, Italy)

  • Chibi A. Takaya

    (School of Chemical and Process Engineering, The University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK)

  • Andrew B. Ross

    (School of Chemical and Process Engineering, The University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK)

  • Miguel A. Sánchez-Monedero

    (Department of Soil and Water Conservation and Organic Waste Management, Centro de Edafología y Biología Aplicada del Segura, CSIC, P.O. Box 4195, 30080 Murcia, Spain)

Abstract

Biochar is traditionally made from clean lignocellulosic or waste materials that create no competition for land use. In this paper, the suitability of alternative feedstocks of agricultural and urban origins are explored. A range of biochars was produced from holm oak and a selection of organic wastes, such as greenhouse wastes, greenwastes, a cellulosic urban waste, municipal press cake and pig manure. They were characterized and assessed for their potential agricultural use. The physicochemical properties of biochars were mainly driven by the characteristics of feedstocks and the pyrolysis temperature. The use of pre-treated lignocellulosic residues led to biochars with a high concentration of ash, macro and micronutrients, whereas raw lignocellulosic residues produced biochars with characteristics similar to traditional wood biochars. All biochars were found to be suitable for agricultural use according to the international standards for the use of biochars as soil amendments, with the exception of a biochar from urban origin, which presented high levels of Cr and Pb. The use of these biochars as soil amendments requires a thorough agronomical evaluation to assess their impact on soil biogeochemical cycles and plant growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Inés López-Cano & María L. Cayuela & Claudio Mondini & Chibi A. Takaya & Andrew B. Ross & Miguel A. Sánchez-Monedero, 2018. "Suitability of Different Agricultural and Urban Organic Wastes as Feedstocks for the Production of Biochar—Part 1: Physicochemical Characterisation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2265-:d:155582
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2265/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/7/2265/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Walter R. Stahel, 2016. "The circular economy," Nature, Nature, vol. 531(7595), pages 435-438, March.
    2. Lydia Fryda & Rianne Visser, 2015. "Biochar for Soil Improvement: Evaluation of Biochar from Gasification and Slow Pyrolysis," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 5(4), pages 1-40, November.
    3. Huang, Y. & Dong, H. & Shang, B. & Xin, H. & Zhu, Z., 2011. "Characterization of animal manure and cornstalk ashes as affected by incineration temperature," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 88(3), pages 947-952, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Daya Shankar Pandey & Giannis Katsaros & Christian Lindfors & James J. Leahy & Savvas A. Tassou, 2019. "Fast Pyrolysis of Poultry Litter in a Bubbling Fluidised Bed Reactor: Energy and Nutrient Recovery," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Shakib Alghashm & Shiying Qian & Yinfeng Hua & Jian Wu & Haitao Zhang & Weihua Chen & Guoqing Shen, 2018. "Properties of Biochar from Anaerobically Digested Food Waste and Its Potential Use in Phosphorus Recovery and Soil Amendment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-11, December.
    3. María Videgain & Joan J. Manyà & Mariano Vidal & Eva Cristina Correa & Belén Diezma & Francisco Javier García-Ramos, 2021. "Influence of Feedstock and Final Pyrolysis Temperature on Breaking Strength and Dust Production of Wood-Derived Biochars," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-15, October.
    4. Inés López-Cano & María Luz Cayuela & María Sánchez-García & Miguel A. Sánchez-Monedero, 2018. "Suitability of Different Agricultural and Urban Organic Wastes as Feedstocks for the Production of Biochar—Part 2: Agronomical Evaluation as Soil Amendment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, June.
    5. Ajwal Dsouza & Gordon W. Price & Mike Dixon & Thomas Graham, 2021. "A Conceptual Framework for Incorporation of Composting in Closed-Loop Urban Controlled Environment Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-27, February.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Leticia Regueiro & Richard Newton & Mohamed Soula & Diego Méndez & Björn Kok & David C. Little & Roberto Pastres & Johan Johansen & Martiña Ferreira, 2022. "Opportunities and limitations for the introduction of circular economy principles in EU aquaculture based on the regulatory framework," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(6), pages 2033-2044, December.
    2. Durán-Romero, Gemma & López, Ana M. & Beliaeva, Tatiana & Ferasso, Marcos & Garonne, Christophe & Jones, Paul, 2020. "Bridging the gap between circular economy and climate change mitigation policies through eco-innovations and Quintuple Helix Model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    3. Millar, Neal & McLaughlin, Eoin & Börger, Tobias, 2019. "The Circular Economy: Swings and Roundabouts?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 11-19.
    4. Michael Saidani & Alissa Kendall & Bernard Yannou & Yann Leroy & François Cluzel, 2019. "Closing the loop on platinum from catalytic converters: Contributions from material flow analysis and circularity indicators," Post-Print hal-02094798, HAL.
    5. Kirchherr, Julian & Piscicelli, Laura & Bour, Ruben & Kostense-Smit, Erica & Muller, Jennifer & Huibrechtse-Truijens, Anne & Hekkert, Marko, 2018. "Barriers to the Circular Economy: Evidence From the European Union (EU)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 264-272.
    6. Germán López Pérez & Isabel María García Sánchez & José Luis Zafra Gómez, 2024. "A systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis of eco‐innovation on financial performance: Identifying barriers and drivers," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(2), pages 1321-1340, February.
    7. Graziela Darla Araujo Galvão & Steve Evans & Paulo Sergio Scoleze Ferrer & Marly Monteiro de Carvalho, 2022. "Circular business model: Breaking down barriers towards sustainable development," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 1504-1524, May.
    8. Philip Krummeck & Yagmur Damla Dokur & Daniel Braun & Steffen Kiemel & Robert Miehe, 2022. "Designing Component Interfaces for the Circular Economy—A Case Study for Product-As-A-Service Business Models in the Automotive Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-17, October.
    9. Marcos Ferasso & Tatiana Beliaeva & Sascha Kraus & Thomas Clauss & Domingo Ribeiro‐Soriano, 2020. "Circular economy business models: The state of research and avenues ahead," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3006-3024, December.
    10. Kyungeun Sung & Tim Cooper & Sarah Kettley, 2022. "Adapting Darnton’s Nine Principles Framework for Behaviour Change: The UK Upcycling Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-12, February.
    11. Gavin Melles, 2021. "Figuring the Transition from Circular Economy to Circular Society in Australia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-20, September.
    12. Cáceres, Rafaela & Pol, Enric & Narváez, Lola & Puerta, Anna & Marfà, Oriol, 2017. "Web app for real-time monitoring of the performance of constructed wetlands treating horticultural leachates," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 183(C), pages 177-185.
    13. Wifo, 2019. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 7/2019," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(7), July.
    14. Wishal Naveed & Majsa Ammouriova & Noman Naveed & Angel A. Juan, 2022. "Circular Economy and Information Technologies: Identifying and Ranking the Factors of Successful Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-18, November.
    15. Chiripuci Bogdan-Cristian & Popescu Maria-Floriana, 2020. "Waste management in Europe – from theory to practice," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 23(77), pages 77-84, September.
    16. Concepción Garcés-Ayerbe & Pilar Rivera-Torres & Inés Suárez-Perales & Dante I. Leyva-de la Hiz, 2019. "Is It Possible to Change from a Linear to a Circular Economy? An Overview of Opportunities and Barriers for European Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise Companies," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-15, March.
    17. Chembessi Chedrak & Gohoungodji Paulin & Juste Rajaonson, 2023. "“A fine wine, better with age”: Circular economy historical roots and influential publications: A bibliometric analysis using Reference Publication Year Spectroscopy (RPYS)," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 27(6), pages 1593-1612, December.
    18. Davide Antonioli & Claudia Ghisetti & Stefano Pareglio & Marco Quatrosi, 2022. "Innovation, Circular economy practices and organisational settings: empirical evidence from Italy," Working Papers 2022.07, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    19. Gianmarco Bressanelli & Nicola Saccani & Marco Perona & Irene Baccanelli, 2020. "Towards Circular Economy in the Household Appliance Industry: An Overview of Cases," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-23, November.
    20. Changhao Liu & Raymond Côté, 2017. "A Framework for Integrating Ecosystem Services into China’s Circular Economy: The Case of Eco-Industrial Parks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-20, August.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:7:p:2265-:d:155582. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.