4.5 Article

Granulated biofuel ash as a sustainable source of plant nutrients

Journal

WASTE MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH
Volume 39, Issue 6, Pages 806-817

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/0734242X20948952

Keywords

Waste; biomass; granulated ash; barley; nutrients; heavy metals

Funding

  1. USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [2020-67022-31144]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study demonstrated that using granulated biomass ash can significantly increase yields of spring barley and straw, as well as enhance calcium concentration in soil. There were no significant changes in mobile phosphorus and heavy metal concentrations in soil.
Recovery of nutrients from biomass combustion ash is of great importance for sustainable bioenergy waste use. In this work, granulated fertilizer materials were engineered from biofuel bottom ash, lime kiln dust and water, analysed for their chemical complexity and tested in pot experiments (2017-2018) for their propensity to release nutrients. The results obtained in this work showed that spring barley yield was observed to be the highest for granulated biomass ash with 30% of ash in the granule. The yield increased 3.99 t ha(-1)per 100 kg ha(-1)potassium oxide (K2O) in 2017 and 1.23 t ha(-1)per 100 kg ha(-1)K(2)O in 2018. Straw yield varied between 1.39-5.08 t ha(-1)/100 kg ha(-1)in 2017 and 0.36-1.23 t ha(-1)/100 kg ha(-1)in 2018. Calcium concentration significantly increased in soil. No significant changes in soil mobile phosphorus (P) were obtained as well as for the heavy metal concentrations in soil. This suggests that biofuel ash can be a significant source of certain major nutrients for crops that can also beneficially affect soil pH. The results of this work can provide policy-makers with the information needed to diversify existing and enable new biomass bottom ash utilization routes which currently vary significantly between the countries.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available