4.6 Article

Optimization of Blended Biochar Pellet by the Use of Nutrient Releasing Model

期刊

APPLIED SCIENCES-BASEL
卷 8, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/app8112274

关键词

biochar pellet; modified Hyperbola model; nutrient release; pelletization; pig manure compost

资金

  1. National Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Rural Development Administration beyond Research Program of Agricultural Science & Technology Development
  2. Rural Development Administration (RDA), Republic of Korea [PJ013814012018] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

For the recycling of biomass conversion materials, this experiment was conducted to investigate plant nutrient releasing characteristics, and to determine an optimum blended ratio of biochar for producing a biochar pellet based on a column leaching study. The treatments consisted of only pig manure compost (PMC) as a control, pig manure compost pellets (PMCP), and biochar pellets (BCP) blended with biochar and pig manure compost with the following ratios: 9:1, 8:2, 4:6, and 2:8. Results showed that the accumulated amount of ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N) was in order of PMC > PMCP > BCP (2:8) > BCP (4:6) > BCP (8:2) > BCP (9:1) ratios. The highest accumulated amounts of phosphate phosphorus (PO4-P) and potassium (K) were 1953 and 1917 mg L-1 in the PMC and PMCP, but the lowest in the BCP (9:1) were 223 and 1078 mg L-1, respectively. It was shown that the highest accumulated amount of silicon dioxide (SiO2) was 2329 mg L-1 in the BCP (8:2), but the lowest in the PMC was 985 mg L-1. The estimations for accumulated NH4-N, PO4-P, K, and SiO2 releasing amounts in all the treatments were significantly fitted with a modified Hyperbola model. The optimum mixing rate was estimated to be BCP (2:8). Therefore, biochar pellets might be useful in obtaining basic information on slow-release fertilizer for sustainable agriculture.

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

4.6
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