4.7 Article

Waste paper ash as a hydraulic road binder: Hydration, mechanical and leaching considerations

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
卷 314, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.115042

关键词

Waste paper ash; WPA hydration; Soil stabilisation; Leaching; Heavy metals

资金

  1. European Union [730305]
  2. SAICA

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluates the mineralogical composition and leaching activity of waste paper fly ash (WPFA) and bottom ash (WPBA) to propose their reuse as a hydraulic road binder. The results show that WPFA and WPBA exhibit cementitious properties and can improve the mechanical performance of soils, while significantly reducing the amount of barium.
Waste paper fly ash (WPFA) and bottom ash (WPBA), derived from fluidised bed combustion of a paper recycling plant, exhibit cementitious properties owing to its mineralogical composition, and hence, could be proposed as a hydraulic binder. However, it may also contain some traces of heavy metals. Considering it is necessary to understand the effect of reusing any kind of waste on the environment, this study proposes of reusing WPFA/WPBA as a hydraulic road binder by evaluating its mineralogical composition and leaching activity. Chemical, physical, and mineralogical properties of raw WPFA/WPBA and the microstructural evolution of binders were carried out. Results showed that both ashes undergo hydration reactions while showing some cementitious properties by forming C-S-H gel, Friedel' s salt, and calcite. According to the European standard EN 13282-1, both WPFA and WPBA can be categorised as N1 considering they reach 5.3 and 3.6 MPa, respectively, at 56 days. Furthermore, the mechanical performance of various soils was improved by using WPFA and WPBA as a binder. From the environmental point of view, the amount of barium in WPFA and WPBA, which is the main problem, was significantly decreased by using these ashes as a binder.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据