Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of the effects of conventional organic amendments and biochar on the chemical, physical and microbial properties of coal fly ash as a plant growth medium

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Environmental Earth Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The bulk of fly ash (an inorganic waste of coal-fired power generation) produced is deposited in disposal areas where it needs to be revegetated. The effects of addition of three conventional organic amendments (biosolids, poultry manure, green waste compost), or poultry manure-derived biochar, to coal fly ash (at two rates) on some key chemical, physical and microbial properties and on growth of Rhodes grass (Chloris gayana) was studied in a laboratory incubation/greenhouse study. Addition of all amendments, including biochar, increased concentrations of extractable Mg, K, Na and P and CEC(pH 7.0). Additions of poultry manure, and particularly biosolids, also greatly increased levels of extractable NH4 + and NO3 −-N. Addition of biosolids, green waste compost and biochar resulted in a decrease in macroporosity, a concomitant increase in mesoporosity and, at the high rate of addition, an increase in available water-holding capacity. Basal respiration was very low in fly ash and was increased by addition of all amendments; metabolic quotient was markedly greater in control than amended treatments. Biosolids, poultry manure and green waste compost additions all increased microbial biomass C. Growth of Rhodes grass was extremely low under unfertilized conditions in control, biochar and, to a lesser extent, green waste compost treatments but addition of poultry manure and the lower rate of biosolids resulted in large increases in yields. Although biochar additions increased extractable Ca, K, P, Cu, Zn and Mn, CEC, mesoporosity and water-holding capacity, they had a little or no stimulatory effect on the size of the soil microbial community, N fertility or plant growth. This was attributable to the lack of metabolisable C and an insignificant N-supplying capacity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adriano DC, Page AL, Elseewi AA, Chang AC, Straughan I (1980) Utilization and disposal of fly ash and other coal residues in terrestrial ecosystems: a review. J Environ Qual 9:333–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitken RL, Scott BJ (1999) Magnesium. In: Peverill KI, Sparrow LA, Reuter DJ (eds) Soil analysis, an interpretation manual. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 255–262

    Google Scholar 

  • Amonette JE, Joseph S (2009) Characteristics of biochar; microchemical properties. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (eds) Biochar for environmental management. Science and technology. Earthscan, London, pp 33–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson JPE (1982) Soil respiration. In: Page AL (ed) Methods of soil analysis, part 2. Chemical and microbiological properties. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 837–871

    Google Scholar 

  • Asokan P, Saxena M, Asolekar SR (2005) Coal combustion residues—environmental implications and recycling potentials. Resour Conserv Recy 43:239–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baba A, Kaya A (2004) Leaching characteristics of fly ash from thermal power plants of Soma and Tuncbilek, Turkey. Environ Monit Assess 91:171–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belyaeva ON, Haynes RJ (2010) A comparison of the properties of manufactured soils produced from composting municipal green waste alone or with poultry manure or grease trap/septage waste. Biol Fertil Soils 46:271–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake GR, Hartge KH (1986) Particle density. In: Klute A (ed) Methods of soil analysis, Part 1. Physical and mineralogical methods, 2nd edn. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, pp 377–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Bolan NS, Adriano DC, Curtin D (2003) Soil acidification and liming interactions with nutrient and heavy metal transformation and bioavailability. Adv Agron 78:216–272

    Google Scholar 

  • Brookes PC, Landman A, Pruden G, Jenkinson DS (1985) Chloroform fumigation and the release of nitrogen: a rapid direct extraction method to measure microbial biomass in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 17:837–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson CL, Adriano DC (1993) Environmental impacts of coal combustion residues. J Environ Qual 22:227–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan KY, Van Zwieten L, Meszaros I, Downie A, Joseph S (2008) Using poultry manure biochars as soil amendments. Aust J Soil Res 46:437–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng C-H, Lehmann J, Thies JE, Burton SD, Engelhard MH (2006) Oxidation of black carbon by biotic and abiotic processes. Org Geochem 37:1477–1488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colwell JD (1963) The estimation of the phosphorus fertilizer requirements of wheat in southern New South Wales by soil analysis. Aust J Exp Agric Anim Husb 3:190–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Djurdjevic L, Mitrovic M, Pavlovic GC, Kostic O (2006) Phenolic acids as bio-indicators of fly ash deposit revegetation. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol 50:488–495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser B, Lehmann J, Zech W (2002) Ameliorating physical and chemical properties of highly weathered soils in the tropics with charcoal—a review. Biol Fertil Soils 35:219–230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourley CJP (1999) Potassium. In: Peverill KI, Sparrow LA, Reuter DJ (eds) Soil analysis, an interpretation manual. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 229–245

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta UC (1993) Boron, molybdenum and selenium. In: Carter MR (ed) Soil sampling and methods of analysis. Lewis, Boca Raton, pp 91–99

    Google Scholar 

  • Handreck KA (1997) Phosphorus requirements of Australian native plants. Aust J Soil Res 35:241–289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handreck KA, Black ND (2002) Growing media for ornamental plants and turf. NSW University Press, Randwick

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes RJ (1986) Uptake and assimilation of mineral nitrogen by plants. In: Haynes RJ (ed) Mineral nitrogen in the plant soil system. Academic Press, Orlando, pp 303–378

    Google Scholar 

  • Haynes RJ (2009) Reclamation and revegetation of fly ash disposal sites—challenges and research needs. J Environ Manag 90:43–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidrich C (2003) Ash utilization—an Australian perspective. In: Proceedings of the 2003 international ash utilization symposium, Centre for Applied Energy Research, University of Kentucky, pp 1–13

  • Hue NV (1995) Sewage sludge. In: Rechcigl JE (ed) Soil amendments and environmental quality. Lewis, Boca Raton, pp 199–247

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly G (2006) Recycled organics in mine site rehabilitation. Department of Environment and Conservation NSW, Parramatta

    Google Scholar 

  • Khaleel R, Reddy AR, Overcash MR (1981) Changes in soil physical properties due to organic waste applications: a review. J Environ Qual 10:133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann J (2007) Bioenergy in the black. Front Ecol Environ 5:381–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machulla G, Zikeli S, Kastler M, Jahn R (2004) Microbial biomass and respiration in soils derived from lignite ashes: a profile study. J Plant Nutr Soil Sci 167:449–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moody PW, Bolland MDA (1999) Phosphorus. In: Peverill KI, Sparrow LA, Reuter DJ (eds) Soil analysis, an interpretation manual. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 187–220

    Google Scholar 

  • Naidu BP, Harwood M (1997) Opportunities for landscape stabilization and revegetating disturbed lands in stressful environments with exotic and native forages. Trop Grassl 31:364–369

    Google Scholar 

  • Page AL, Elseewi AA, Straughan IR (1979) Physical and chemical properties of fly ash from coal-fired power plants with reference to environmental impacts. Resid Rev 71:83–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierzynski GM (1994) Plant nutrient aspects of sewage sludge. In: Clapp CE, Larson WE, Dowdy RH (eds) Sewage sludge: land utilization and the environment. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, pp 21–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayment GE, Higginson FR (1992) Australian laboratory handbook of soil and water chemical methods. Inkata Press, Melbourne

    Google Scholar 

  • Rippon JE, Wood MJ (1975) Microbiological aspects of pulverized fuel ash. In: Chadwick MJ, Goodman GT (eds) The ecology of resource degradation and renewal. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 331–349

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw RJ (1999) Soil salinity—electrical conductivity and chloride. In: Peverill KI, Sparrow LA, Reuter DJ (eds) Soil analysis, an interpretation manual. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, pp 129–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Thies JE, Rillig MC (2009) Characteristics of biochar; biological properties. In: Lehmann J, Joseph S (eds) Biochar for environmental management. Science and technology. Earthscan, London, pp 85–105

    Google Scholar 

  • Townsend WN, Gillham EWF (1975) Pulverized fuel ash as a medium for plant growth. In: Chadwick MJ, Goodman GT (eds) The ecology of resource degradation and renewal. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 285–304

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsiridis V, Samaras P, Kungolos A, Sakellaropoulos GP (2006) Application of leaching tests for toxicity of coal fly ash. Environ Toxicol 21:409–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USEPA (1992) The toxicity characteristic leaching procedure. US Code of Federal Regulations, 40th edn, Part 261, Appendix II. USEPA, Washington, DC

  • Ussiri DAN, Lal R (2005) Carbon sequestration in reclaimed minesoils. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:151–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vance ED, Brookes PC, Jenkinson DS (1987) An extraction method for measuring microbial biomass C. Soil Biol Biochem 19:703–707

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wardle DA, Ghani A (1995) A critique of the microbial metabolic quotient (qCO2) as a bioindicator of disturbance and ecosystem development. Soil Biol Biochem 27:1601–1610

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Paul Vievers of Tarong Energy for supplying the fly ash, Sean Kemble of Phoenix Power Recyclers for supplying the green waste compost, Adriana Downie of BEST Energies Australia for supplying the biochar, Katherine Raymont for assistance with C and N analysis and David Appleton of the School of Land, Crop and Food Sciences Analytical Services Group for analysis of metals and mineral N.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Land, Crop and Food Sciences/CRC CARE, The University of Queensland, St Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia

    O. N. Belyaeva & R. J. Haynes

Authors
  1. O. N. Belyaeva
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. J. Haynes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. J. Haynes.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Belyaeva, O.N., Haynes, R.J. Comparison of the effects of conventional organic amendments and biochar on the chemical, physical and microbial properties of coal fly ash as a plant growth medium. Environ Earth Sci 66, 1987–1997 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-1424-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-011-1424-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation