4.7 Article

The effect of biochar on severity of soil water repellency of crude oil-contaminated soil

Journal

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
Volume 27, Issue 6, Pages 6022-6032

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-07246-9

Keywords

Crude oil-contaminated soil; Water repellency; Hydrophobicity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Crude oil contamination adversely affects soil water repellency. In this study the effect of biochar on this soil characteristic has been investigated in the laboratory. Soil sample was collected from a field located near Pars Oil Company, at the top depth of 015 cm below surface. After air-drying and passing through a 2-mmsieve, the soil was artificially contaminated with four levels of crude oil (1:0, 1:25, 1:16.6, and 1:12.5 ratios). Biochars used in this research were generated from beechwood and maize residues at three different pyrolysis temperatures (350 degrees C, 550 degrees C, and 750 degrees C). Chemical functionality of all biochar samples was determined using Fourier-transform infrared spectrometry. Sufficient amounts of beechwood and maize biochars, passed through a 0.053-mmand 2-mmsieves, were mixed into crude oil-contaminated soil at the rate of 0, 0.5, 1, and 2% of total dry soil weight. The mixed samples were then laboratory incubated for 90 days at 24 degrees C and 10% soil moisture. Water repellency was measured using water drop penetration time (WDPT). The experimental results showed that functional groups on the biochars' surfaces produced at the studied temperatures were distinct. Beechwood and fine size of biochar showed more ability in reducing the hydrophobicity. The produced biochars, at higher temperature, had more potential to alleviate water repellency due to the strong interactions between functional groups of biochars and crude oil. The highest amount of biochar used (2%) significantly alleviated water repellency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available