4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Gas permeability of biochar-amended clay: potential alternative landfill final cover material

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND POLLUTION RESEARCH
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 7126-7131

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s11356-015-4871-2

关键词

Landfill final cover; Biochar; Biochar-amended clay; Compacted soil cover; Gas permeability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Compacted biochar-amended clay (BAC) has been proposed as an alternative landfill final cover material in this study. Biochar has long been proposed to promote crop growth, mitigate odor emission, and promote methane oxidation in field soils. However, previous studies showed that soil-gas permeability was increased upon biochar application, which will promote landfill gas emission. The objective of the present study is to investigate the possibility of using compacted BAC as an alternative material in landfill final cover by evaluating its gas permeability. BAC samples were prepared by mixing 425-mu m-sieved peanut shell biochar with kaolin clay in different ratios (0, 5, 10, and 15 %, w/w) and compacting at different degrees of compactions (DOC) (80, 85, and 90 %) with an optimum water content of 35 %. The gas permeability of the BACs was measured by flexible wall gas permeameter and the microstructure of the BACs was analyzed by SEM with energy-dispersive x-ray spectroscopy (EDX). The results show that the effects of biochar content on BAC gas permeability is highly dependent on the DOC. At high DOC (90 %), the gas permeability of BAC decreases with increasing biochar content due to the combined effect of the clay aggregation and the inhibition of biochar in the gas flow. However, at low DOC (80 %), biochar incorporation has no effects on gas permeability because it no longer acts as a filling material to the retard gas flow. The results from the present study imply that compacted BAC can be used as an alternative final cover material with decreased gas permeability when compared with clay.

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