0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views35 pages

Review Biochar II

This document reviews research on biochar produced from different biomass types and its applications. Biochar is produced through controlled pyrolysis of biomass and can be used as a soil improver, for pollutant removal, carbon sequestration, and as a fuel or catalyst. The document discusses various biomass sources used to make biochar and the impact of pyrolysis temperature on biochar properties and yield.

Uploaded by

andresfelipe
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
28 views35 pages

Review Biochar II

This document reviews research on biochar produced from different biomass types and its applications. Biochar is produced through controlled pyrolysis of biomass and can be used as a soil improver, for pollutant removal, carbon sequestration, and as a fuel or catalyst. The document discusses various biomass sources used to make biochar and the impact of pyrolysis temperature on biochar properties and yield.

Uploaded by

andresfelipe
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 35

Biochar produced from different biomass types and its applications – A

review

Lesly Tejedaa, Jesus Olivero-Verbelb*, Heleine Ramos-Avilezb

a
Engineering Program Research Group, College of Engineering, University of

Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia


b
Environmental and Computational Chemistry Group, College of Pharmaceutical

Sciences, University of Cartagena, Cartagena, Colombia

*Corresponding author.

Prof. Jesús Olivero-Verbel.

Environmental and Computational Chemistry Group

College of Pharmaceutical Sciences

University of Cartagena

Zaragocilla Campus

Cartagena, Colombia

Telephone: 57-5-6698179, 57-5-6698180

Fax: 57-5-6698323

E-mail: [email protected]

1
Abstract

Biochar obtained from controlled pyrolysis of different biomass types is a versatile

and efficient material in a variety of applications. This paper reviews research

about raw materials and pyrolysis process focusing on different types of biomass. It

includes the influence of pyrolysis temperature on biochar properties and its

performance when used as soil improver, pollutants remover, carbon sequester,

catalyst or fuel. According to the reviewed literature, biochar fraction increases

between 400 °C and 600 °C in fast pyrolysis. However in this range of

temperatures the biochar surface area decreases, limiting its use as adsorbent.

Most of the raw materials used to obtain biochar belong to the group of

lignocellulosic biomass. The main application of biochar is in soil improvement and

carbon sequester, contributing to reduction of the greenhouse effect. Biochar is an

interesting solution with environmental and agro-industrial applications because of

being produced from waste and low cost raw material.

Introduction

Biochar is a carbon-rich and porous material produced from a variety of biomass

through pyrolysis at relatively low temperatures (<700 °C) (Barrow, 2012). It

contains functional surface groups, such as carboxylic, phenolic, hydroxyl,

carbonyl, and quinines (Brewer et al., 2011; Beesley & Marmiroli, 2011; Yao et al.,

2010; Uchimiya et al., 2010). Organic carbon content of biochar can be as high as

2
90%, depending on the source material (Beesley et al., 2010). Figure 1 shows the

percentages of carbon in biochar produced from straws of canola, corn, soybean

and peanut (Yuan et al., 2011), miscanthus (Kwapinski et al., 2010), corn stover

(Brewer et al., 2011), switchgrass and wheat straw (Bruun et al., 2011), sludge

wastewater (Hossain et al., 2011), and rice straw (Peng et al., 2011; Xiao et al.,

2010) at different pyrolysis temperatures. Biochar obtained from lignocellulosic

biomass has higher carbon content. Usually the increase in temperature results in

an increase in carbon content.

Biochar has generated great interest worldwide (Li et al., 2011) due to its use in

multiple applications such as soil improver (Barrow, 2012, Karhu et al., 2011;

Zheng et al., 2010; Hossain et al., 2010; Beesley et al., 2010; Tenenbaum, 2009;

Smith et al., 2010; Noguera et al., 2010), fuel (He et al., 2012), catalyst (Dehkhoda

et al., 2010), adsorbent for pollutants removal (Keiluweit et al., 2010; Cao et al.,

2010; Qiu et al., 2009) and carbon sequestration (Barrow, 2012, Vaccari et al.,

2011; Bruun et al., 2011; Hammond et al., 2011; Matovic, 2011; Woolf et al., 2010;

Roberts et al., 2010; Steinbeiss et al., 2009). In addition to these applications,

production and use of biochar permits the recycling of organic waste from

agriculture (Peng et al., 2011; Chen et al., 2011; Lee et al., 2010; Inyang et al.,

2010), livestock (Uchimiya et al., 2010; Cao et al., 2010) and sludge wastewater

(Chun et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2011; Hossain et al., 2011; Tu et al., 2012).

3
1. Pyrolysis Process

Pyrolysis is a process of thermal degradation of biomass-derived feedstocks under

oxygen limited conditions (Warnock et al., 2010). The pyrolysis process generates

three products: a liquid called bio-oil, syngas and one solid or biochar (Spokas et

al., 2009; Yoder et al., 2011). Syngas and bio-oil can be captured to generate

products of value instead of being emitted into the atmosphere, like a substitute for

diesel after adequate treatment (Woolf et al., 2010).

Pyrolysis processes are classified into two major types, fast and slow, according to

the speed at which the biomass is altered. Fast pyrolysis, with a biomass residence

time of a few seconds, generates more bio-oil and less biochar than slow pyrolysis,

for which biomass residence times can range from hours to days (Woolf et al.,

2010). In pyrolysis of rice straw, increasing temperature and duration decreases

the biochar yield (Peng et al., 2011). Slow pyrolysis minimizes the risk of producing

dioxins and polyaromatic hydrocarbons (Barrow, 2012).

The process conditions for obtaining biochar influence its characteristics: slow

pyrolysis biochar properties tend to be similar, while fast pyrolysis biochar is more

heterogeneous (Smith et al., 2010). Depending on the type of pyrolysis and the

conditions under which it is carried out, such as low or high temperature, low or

high pressure, fast or slow speed, heating rate, particle size and biomass material,

the yields of each phase change noticeably (Spokas et al., 2009). Mahinpey et al.

(2009) examined the influence of pressure in the pyrolysis of wheat straw. The

4
experiments were performed at 10, 20, 30 and 40 psi. Reactor pressure had

considerable influence on pyrolysis yield. For pyrolysis of wheat straw in a tubular

reactor, 20 psi was the optimum pressure with respect to yield.

Low temperature pyrolysis gives a material with more desirable soil improvement

properties than charcoal or ash (Barrow, 2012). The effect of temperature on

performance of pyrolysis of rice straw (Xiao et al., 2010; Peng et al., 2011), pine

wood shavings, tall fescue grass (Keiluweit et al., 2010), wheat straw (Bruun et al.,

2011), wastewater sludge (Hossain et al., 2011) and Lemna minor (Muradov et al.,

2012) is shown in the Figure 2. For all biomass types used, with increasing

temperature the biochar yield decreased. In a conventional pyrolysis system, large

particles are difficult to stir up and process in the fluid bed, as they tend to settle to

the bottom of the bed where heat transfer and speed of thermal processing are

reduced (Lei et al., 2009). Generally, biochar is not a fully carbonized product

because its production by pyrolysis is often operated under low temperatures.

Kim et al. (2012) studied the influence of pyrolysis temperature on physicochemical

properties of biochar obtained from the fast pyrolysis of pitch pine, and reported

that biochar obtained at 400 and 500 °C was composed of a highly ordered

aromatic carbon structure. On the other hand, wastewater sludge biochar produced

at low temperature was acidic whereas at high temperature it was alkaline in

nature (Hossain et al., 2011).

5
Biochar is traditionally produced by burning wood in pits or temporary structures,

but a modern equipment pyrolysis reduces the air pollution related with this

practice. A portion of the gaseous product is burned to heat the pyrolysis chamber,

and the rest can provide heat or fuel for an electric generator (Tenenbaum, 2009);

also, the versatility of biochar technologies offers the potential for equitable

technology transfer and use in developing countries (Pratt & Moran, 2010).

2. Biomass types used to produce biochar

Applications and functions of biochar depend on its physical and chemical

properties (e.g. elemental composition, loading and surface area). Because

biochar can be from various biomass types in different processing conditions, it is

very important to characterize their physical and chemical properties before use

(Yao et al., 2011; Uchimiya et al., 2010). Many biomass types have been used to

produce biochar. The following are some of them.

2.1 Agricultural waste

The sugar cane bagasse is the residue of sugar cane after the juice extraction.

Like most agricultural residues, bagasse is carbon-rich, abundant and a suitable

biomass for the production of biofuels or biochar. Biochar is produced from

anaerobically digested cane bagasse with the advantage of producing methane in

the process; also, biochar is produced from undigested sugar cane bagasse (Yang,

2011). The biochar produced from digested residues had a higher pH, surface

area, cation exchange capacity, anion exchange capacity, hydrophobicity and

6
more negative surface charge, compared with biochar of undigested sugar cane

bagasse. These characteristics suggest that biochar produced from anaerobically

digested cane bagasse may be efficiently used to improve soil quality, sequester

carbon or as a low-cost adsorbent to remove pollutants from wastewater (Inyang et

al., 2010; Dong et al., 2011; Yao et al., 2011).

Biochar produced from corn stovers was characterized by two techniques: fast

pyrolysis at 450 °C and gasification at 700 °C. The results showed that biochar

obtained by fast pyrolysis, has a cation exchange capacity two times higher than

biochar produced by gasification. This indicates that it is important to monitor the

conditions of pyrolysis and the selection of appropriate methods to produce biochar

with desirable properties in relation to soil amendment and carbon sequestration

(Lee et al., 2010). Moreover, Chen et al. (2011) investigated the ability of biochar

produced from hardwood at 450°C and corn straw at 600 °C to adsorb Cu(II) and

Zn(II) in aqueous solutions. At low concentrations of metals there is low

competition, however, with increasing concentrations of Cu(II) and Zn(II)

adsorption capacity of Zn(ll) by biochar decreased by approximately 75-85% in

presence of Cu(II) at concentrations above 1 mM. The results indicate that biochar

produced from agricultural residues may act as an effective adsorbent surface, but

care must be taken when using these adsorbents for the treatment of mixed waste

streams (Chen et al., 2011).

Peng et al. (2011) produced biochar from rice straw in a temperature range from

250 to 450 °C and from 2 to 8 h. Increasing the temperature and duration of

7
pyrolysis, decreased biochar yield and organic matter volatile, but increased the

carbon content, potassium and phosphorus.

The effectiveness of biochars produced from Eucalyptus spp. at 450 and 850 °C in

reducing the bioavailability of chlorpyrifos and carbofuran was investigated. This

study showed that the addition of biochar in soil significantly reduced

phytoavailability of both pesticides, which can be exploited to reduce the

absorption of pesticides by plants from contaminated soils (Yu et al., 2009).

Kwapinski et al. (2010) studied the biochar produced in pyrolysis of biomass of

willow, pine and miscanthus and found that biochar amendments significantly

influenced seed germination and plant growth. Recently, biochar was obtained by

residues of Boehmeria nivea as raw material in the gasification process using

vapor-air mixture in a cyclone furnace to produce a tar-free liquid fuel (He et al.,

2012).

In another study, Bernardo et al. (2012) developed co-pyrolysis of wastes of

polyethylene, polypropylene and polystyrene with pine biomass and used tires.

They analyzed physico-chemical properties of chars obtained and reported that the

upgrading treatment allowed carbonaceous materials of quality to be obtained and

reused as adsorbents or as precursors for activated carbon.

2.2 Algaes

Algal biomass has been studied as feedstock to produce biochar. The pyrolysis of

macroalgae can produce a range of chemicals and chars with various properties

8
(Ross et al., 2011). The study of pyrolysis of Fucus vesiculosus, Chorda filum,

Laminaria digitata, Fucus serratus, Laminaria hyperborea, and Macrocystis pyrifera

reported that performance in the production of biochar is high and can be used in

the manufacturing of activated carbon or adsorbents (Ross et al., 2009; Ross et al.,

2008). Macroalgaes of the Ulvaceae Cladophoraceae family have been used,

showing that seaweed biochar properties make it suitable for improving soil

conditions and as a tool to sequester carbon for a long time (Bird et al., 2011). In

slow pyrolysis of Tetraselmis chui, biochar was produced with a high cation

exchange capacity, high concentration of N, and a low C:N relation, which makes it

suitable as a soil remedial (Grierson et al., 2011). Grierson et al. (2009) have been

found yields of biochar of 63% on slow pyrolysis of Dunaliella tertiolecta to 500 °C

and 53% in the Chaetocerous muelleri under the same conditions. Algal biomass

remaining after lipid extraction of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii was subjected to

pyrolysis at 350 °C and the product with the most biochar yield was characterized

by a high content of ash and carbon. Additionally, the nitrogen content makes it

suitable for use as a slow release source of nitrogen in the soil (Torri et al., 2011).

The composition of biochar from microalgaes has been studied. In pyrolysis of the

algaes Macrocystis pyrifera, Laminaria digitata and Fucus vesiculosus, biochar had

high concentrations of alginic acid (Anastasakis et al., 2011). Cations coupled to

the alginates present in biomass of algaes influence in pyrolysis products. Biochar

from sodium alginate presents swelling and mesoporosity while the biochar from

calcium alginate does not present this behavior. Different ranges of temperature

9
and pyrolysis conditions have been used. The macroalgaes Undaria pinnatifida,

Laminaria japonica and Porphyra tenera were pyrolysed between 300 and 600 °C

and the major production of biochar was at 300°C (Bae et al., 2011). The pyrolysis

of microalgae Chlorella sp. was improved by using microwaves and by the

recycling of the obtained biochar because of its high absorption capacity of

microwaves (Du et al., 2011). The biochar yield by microalgaes is higher in fast

pyrolysis than in slow pyrolysis (Ross et al., 2008).

2.3 Livestock wastes

Broiler litter was used by Uchimiya et al. (2010) to produce biochar. Pyrolysis was

carried out at 350 and 700 °C and biochar was activated with steam for the

immobilization of ions Cd(II), Cu(II), Ni(II), Pb(II) in water and soil. In both cases,

pH was increased by the addition of alkaline biochar, improving the immobilization

of heavy metals. The adsorption capacity of biochar is closely related to the type of

metal, showing the following inclination to increase removal of the solution:

Ni(II)<Cd(II)<Cu(II)<Pb(II). This tendency was observed in all biochars, suggesting

that ion exchange becomes less dominant in the immobilization of heavy metals by

increasing charred portions of fraction in soil.

Cao et al. (2010) studied the ability of dairy-manure derived biochar to adsorb Pb

and the organic pollutant atrazine. Two samples of biochar were prepared at 200

and 350 °C and were compared with activated carbon and dry manure. Dairy

manure can be converted to biochar and it is an effective sorbent of metals and

organic pollutants. This is an advantage since biochar from dairy manure can

10
remove both organic pollutants and heavy metals in one place, while biochar from

agricultural wastes is only effective in removing organic contaminants. Tsai et al.

(2012) reported that the manure-derived biochar was rich in soil nutrients such as

N, P, Ca, Mg, and K. They suggested that the mesoporous manure-derived biochar

could be used as an excellent medium to improve soil.

Song & Guo (2012) produced biochar from poultry litter and they suggested

pyrolysis temperature of 300 °C for agricultural-use and 500 °C for carbon

sequestration and other environmental applications.

2.4 Wastewater sludge

The sludge generated in wastewater treatment, once dried, has been used in

production of bio-oil and biochar. The pyrolysis of sludge from sewage treatment

plants and domestic water was carried out by Zhang et al. (2011) in a horizontal

reactor placed in a quartz tube furnace at 600, 800 and 1000 °C. The pyrolysis of

digested sludge from a treatment plant for domestic wastewater was carried out in

a range from 300 to 700 °C and increasing temperature decreased the nitrogen

content in the biochar (Hossain et al., 2010).

Chun et al. (2011) developed a pyrolysis gasifier, with carbonization and activation

steps to convert dried sludge into activated char and gas fuel energy. Dewatered

sewage sludge from the municipal wastewater treatment plant in Guangzhou,

China was used to obtain biochar. Sewage sludge-derived char was successfully

employed as the support of heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst (Tu et al., 2012).

11
Hossain et al. (2011) studied the influence of pyrolysis temperature on production

and nutrient properties of wastewater sludge biochar. They reported that

concentrations of trace metals present in wastewater sludge were found enriched

in the biochar.

3. Biochar applications

3.1 Soil amendment

Biochar can be used as a soil amendment because it contains mineral nutrients

and absorbs agricultural chemicals (Kim et al., 2012). The discovering of small

plots of fertile land in Amazonia, enriched with biochar and known as terra petra,

compared with others soils in region, suggested the idea that biochar can be added

to soil in order to increase its fertility (Kasozi et al., 2010; Bailey et al., 2011).

Organic material is important to maintain the main functions of soil, like fertility,

food production and protection against erosion. It is considered that soils

containing carbon less than 5% are in risk of pre-desertification (Mankasingh et al.,

2011). Because of its high carbon content, biochar is used to increase soil

productivity by optimizing its quality by increasing pH, improving its capacity to

retain moisture, enhancing its ability to attract beneficial fungi and microbes, and

improving cation exchange soil to retain nutrients (Zheng et al., 2010). Application

of biochar in soil increases cation exchange capacity up to 40% and its pH to a unit

(Hossain et al., 2010). Karhu et al. (2011) showed that the addition of biochar to

soil in southern Finland increased its water holding capacity by 11%. Biochar helps

retain phosphorus and potassium in the soil, improving the efficiency of fertilizer

12
use. However, fertilization with biochar initially can take nitrogen from external

sources because the carbon from biochar decomposition uses nitrogen in the soil

(Tenenbaum, 2009).

The leaching of nutrients from agricultural soils reduces their fertility, accelerates

their acidification, increases fertilizer costs for farmers, reduces crop yields, and

negatively affects the quality of surface water and groundwater. Laboratory results

indicated that the addition of biochar to agricultural soil substantially reduced

leaching of nutrients (Laird et al., 2010). Fellet et al. (2011) studied the effects of

biochar application in mining waste and showed that the changes promoted by the

biochar seem to favor its use to help create a cover in a process of

phytostabilization. Nutrient retention, pH and water holding capacity were improved

with the content of biochar in the substrates and the bioavailability of Cd, Pb, Tl

and Zn decreased in mining waste.

However, some inconveniences have been reported in the use of biochar as a soil

amendment. Nag et al. (2011) researched the effect of the use of biochar in

bioavailability and persistence in soil of atrazine and trifluraline. The biochar was

obtained from wheat straw at 450°C and annual ryegrass was used in the

bioassay. Biochar-amended soil reduced the biodegradation of two herbicides and

increased four times the required dose for weed control.

13
3.2 CO2 capture

There is a great disequilibrium between carbon release into the atmosphere and

the adsorption of it; this promotes a continuous increase of carbon dioxide in the

atmosphere at 4.1 Gt of C per year (Steinbeiss et al., 2009). Since 2000,

anthropogenic carbon dioxide has increased by more than 3% yearly, and climate

change has enhanced in a vertiginous, dangerous and irreversible way. In order to

stabilize average global surface temperature, the accumulation of greenhouse

gases coming from anthropogenic sources must keep themselves under a specific

limit, which indicates that in the future the net emissions of these gases must

approximate zero (Woolf et al., 2010). A list of seven options to mitigate climatic

change has been reported: capture and storing of carbon, energetic efficiency,

change to fuel containing low levels of carbon, nuclear energy, renewable energy,

increase of biological sinks and reduction of other greenhouse gases not only

carbon dioxide. Of these options, only the increasing of biological sinks and the

capture and storing of carbon from pyrolysis of biomass can reduce carbon dioxide

from the atmosphere (Matovic, 2011). The production of biochar has been

suggested as a viable way to capture and store atmospheric carbon dioxide (Woolf

et al., 2010; Vaccari et al., 2011; Roberts et al., 2010). The captured carbon

converts into a more stable substance (Steinbeiss et al., 2009). The characteristic

time of the storing of biochar carbon has been estimated from hundred to milliards

of years (Brun et al., 2011).

14
If 10% of net primary productivity of biomass in the world was converted to biochar

with a yield of 50%, and assuming 30% of required energy to carry out the process,

4.8 Gt of C could be sequestrated per year. That is approximately 20% more than

the current annual increase of atmospheric carbon (Matovic, 2011). In addition, a

significant reduction of levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere could be

achieved, being a viable alternative to significantly decrease the content of carbon

in the atmosphere in combination with a reduction in emissions and applying the

rest of the options (Peng et al., 2011).

3.3 Sorbent

Biochar has an excellent capacity of adsorption because of its high surface area,

which is adequate to use as a low cost chemical sorbent, storing potentially

dangerous organic compounds (Cao et al., 2010; Keilluweit et al., 2010), including

some of the more common environmental pollutants. Biochar was recently

identified as a “supersorbent” of neutral organic compounds. It removes dyes from

aqueous solutions and because of its great surface area and its microporous

structure; it is an effective adsorbent of cationic and anionic dyes (Qiu et al., 2009).

shows surface area of biochar produced from miscanthus (Kwapinski et al., 2010),

rice straw (Xiao et al., 2010), broiler litter (Uchimiya et al., 2010; Uchimiya et al.,

2011), corn stover and switchgrass (Brewer et al., 2011), pine wood shavings and

tall fescue grass (Keiluweit et al., 2010), poultry litter (Song & Guo, 2012), pitch

pine (Kim et al., 2012) and Lemna minor (Muradov et al., 2012). It is notable that

surface area increases with high pyrolysis temperature.

15
Biochar produced from different biomass types has the capacity to adsorb

pesticides and others organic pollutants (Chen & Chen, 2009). Biochar obtained

from vegetal wastes can eliminate residues of pesticides like atrazine and simazine

in aquatic environments, reducing their pollution (Zheng et al., 2010). Chen & Yuan

(2011) evaluated the effect of pine biochar in soils polluted with polynuclear

aromatic hydrocarbons (PHAs). The adsorption of PHAs was significantly higher in

soil emended with biochar. The mechanisms and the affinity of adsorption depend

on the structure of the biochar and the concentration of adsorbate. Biochar

produced at high pyrolysis temperature has shown high efficiency in adsorption to

soil.

The adsorption of catechol and humic acids in biochar from oak, pine and grass

has been studied. The equilibrium of catechol sorption was reached after 14 days

and was described by a kinetic diffusion model; while, humic acids required just a

day and followed a pseudo kinetic second order. The capacity of sorption of

catechol was higher at high temperatures (Kasozi et al., 2010). Biochar can be

used to adsorb organic compounds, and its capacity of sorption has been superior

than capacity of natural organic material of soil in a factor from 10 to 100

(Cornelissen et al., 2005). To enhance the adsorption capacity of tetracycline from

aqueous solution, biochar derived from a fast pyrolysis system using rice-husk was

modified with acid and alkali and the surface area showed significant effects on

adsorption as well as O-containing functional groups (Liu et al., 2012). The

incorporation of rice straw biochar increased the adsorption of Pb(II) by

16
contaminated soils and the enhancement of adsorption of Pb(II) increased with the

addition of biochar (Jiang et al., 2012).

Song et al. (2012) investigated the effects of wheat straw biochar on the sorption,

dissipation and bioavailability of hexachlorobenzene (HCB). HCB sorption by

biochar was 42 times higher than that by soil. Biochar amendment of soil resulted

in a rapid reduction in the bioavailability of HCB, even for the 0.1% biochar

application rate, suggesting that wheat straw biochar could be used in immobilizing

POPs in contaminated sites. In addition, biochar can eliminate metallic pollutant

from water by capturing ions of heavy metals, for example, biochar was six times

more effective in adsorption of Pb than commercial activated carbon (Cao et al.,

2010). Biochar from sugar beet wastes has been used to remove Cr(VI) from

aqueous solutions in function of pH, contact time and mass of biochar. The maxim

capacity of adsorption for Cr(VI) was 123 mg/g in acid media and the equilibrium

was reached at 16 hours (Dong et al., 2011). In another case, biochar from sugar

beet previously anaerobically digested was used to evaluate the capacity of the

elimination of phosphates. The biochar reached a removal yield of 73%, which

indicates that biochar is efficient in eliminating phosphates from aqueous solutions

(Yao et al., 2011).

3.4 Catalyst

Dehkoda et al. (2010) used biochar as catalyst in biodiesel production by

sulfonation with concentrated sulfuric acid and fuming sulfuric acid. The catalyst

17
prepared with concentrated sulfuric acid was very active in esterification of fat

acids and conversion was increased with reaction time. Sulfonated biochar has

shown a great potential to be used as a catalyst in biodiesel production, especially

to reduce the fat acid contained in vegetal oils. Heterogeneous catalysts were

prepared using biochar as support in the transesterification of canola oil; however,

biochar catalysts showed a low capacity of being reused under high temperature

and pressure conditions (Yu et al., 2010). Sewage sludge-derived char has been

successfully employed as the support of heterogeneous Fenton-like catalyst (Tu et

al., 2012). Lemna minor bio-char exhibited appreciable catalytic activity in biogas

reforming. The treatment of bio-char with CO 2 at 800 °C increased its surface area

(Muradov et al., 2012).

3.5 Energy use

Biochar can also be used as a fuel because of its heat value. Different biomass

types like willow, pine and miscanthus (Kwapinski et al., 2010), soft wood

(Schwaiger et al., 2011), rice straw (Xiao et al., 2010), algae of family Tetraselmis

chui (Grierson et al., 2011), Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (Torri et al., 2011) and

mixtures of plastic wastes and used tires (Bernardo et al., 2012) have been studied

in order to determine the heat value of produced biochar, as shown in Figure 4. It is

notable that the heat value of biochar is similar to that of coal. Phan et al. (2008)

characterized the products of slow pyrolysis of municipal waste and reported that

18
biochar stores between 38 and 55% of the energy contained in raw material, while

bi-oil only has between 20 and 30%.

Table 1 summarizes the published research about biochar, used biomass, pyrolysis

conditions and applications.

Conclusions

Research carried out about the production and application of biochar has found

that fast pyrolysis between 400 and 600°C increases biochar fraction in products;

however, at low temperatures, surface area decreases, limiting its use as an

adsorbent of metals and organic pollutants. The most used raw materials to obtain

biochar are from the lignocellulosic biomass group. The main application of biochar

has been in soil amendment and carbon sequestering, contributing in the reduction

of greenhouse gases. Furthermore, production and employing of biochar allow for

the use of residual biomass, which would ordinarily be buried in landfills becoming

an environmental liability.

References

1. Anastasakis, K., Ross, R., Jones, M. 2011. Pyrolysis behavior of the main

carbohydrates of brown macro-algae. Fuel. (90): 598–607.

2. Bae, Y., Ryu, C., Jeon, J., Park, J., Suh, D., Suh, J., Chang, D., Park, Y.

2011. The characteristics of bio-oil produced from the pyrolysis of three

marine macroalgae. Bioresour. Technol. (102):3512–3520.

19
3. Bailey, V., Fansler, S., Smith, J., Bolton, H. 2011. Reconciling apparent

variability in effects of biochar amendment on soil enzyme activities by

assay optimization. Soil Biol. Biochem. (43): 296-301.

4. Barrow, C. 2012. Biochar: Potential for countering land degradation and for

improving agriculture. Appl Geogr. (34): 21-28.

5. Beesley, L., Moreno, E., Gomez, J. 2010. Effects of biochar and greenwaste

compost amendments on mobility, bioavailability and toxicity of inorganic

and organic contaminants in a multi-element polluted soil. Environ. Pollut.

(158): 2282-2287.

6. Beesley, L., Marmiroli, M. 2011.The immobilisation and retention of soluble

arsenic, admiumand zinc by biochar. Environ. Pollut. (159): 474-480.

7. Bernardo, M., Lapa, N., Gonçalves, M., Mendes, B., Pinto, F., Fonseca, I.,

Lopes, H. 2011. Physico-chemical properties of chars obtained in the co-

pyrolysis of waste mixtures. J Hazard Mater. 219–220: 196-202.

8. Bird, M., Wurster,C., Silva, P., Bass, A., Nys, R. 2011. Algal biochar –

production and properties. Bioresour. Technol (102): 1886–189.

9. Brewer, C., Unger, R., Schmidt-Rohr, K., Brown, R. 2011. Criteria to Select

Biochars for Field Studies based on Biochar Chemical Properties. Bioenerg.

Res. DOI 10.1007/s12155-011-9133-7.

10. Bruun, E., Hauggaard-Nielsen, H., Ibrahim, N., Egsgaard, H., Ambus, P.,

Jensen, P., Dam-Johansen, K. 2011. Influence of fast pyrolysis temperature

on biochar labile fraction and short-term carbon loss in a loamy soil.

Biomass Bioenerg. 3 (5):1182-1189.

20
11. Cao, X., Harris, W. 2010. Properties of dairy-manure-derived biochar

pertinent to its potential use in remediation. Bioresour. Technol. 101 (14):

5222-5228.

12. Chen, B., Chen, Z., 2009. Sorption of naphthalene and 1-naphthol by

biochars of orange peels with different pyrolytic temperatures.

Chemosphere 76 (1): 127–133.

13. Chen, X., Chen, G., Chen, L., Chen, Y., Lehmann, J., McBride, M., Hay, A.

2011a. Adsorption of copper and zinc by biochars produced from pyrolysis

of hardwood and corn straw in aqueous solution. Bioresour. Technol. 102

(19): 8877-8884.

14. Chen, B., Yuan, M. 2011. Enhanced sorption of polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbons by soil amended with biochar. J Soils Sediments. (11): 62–71.

15. Chun, Y., Kim, S.C., Yoshikawa, K. 2011. Pyrolysis gasification of dried

sewage sludge in a combined screw and rotary kiln gasifier. Appl Energ. 88

(4): 1105-1112.

16. Cornelissen, G., Gustafsson, O., Bucheli, T.D., Jonker, M.T.O., Koelmans,

A.A., Van Noort, P.C.M., 2005. Extensive sorption of organic compounds to

black carbon, coal, and kerogen in sediments and soils: mechanisms and

consequences for distribution, bioaccumulation, and biodegradation.

Environ. Sci. Technol. 39 (18): 6881–6895.

17. Dehkhoda, A., West, A., Ellis, N. 2010. Biochar based solid acid catalyst for

biodiesel production. Appl. Catal., A. (382): 197–204.

21
18. Dong, X., Ma,L., Gao, B., Li,Y.,2011. Characteristics and mechanisms of

hexavalent chromium removal by biochar from sugar beet tailing. J. Hazard.

Mater. 190 (1–3): 909-915.

19. Du, Z., Li, Y., Wang, X., Wan, Y., Chen, Q., Wang, C., Lin, X., Liu, Y., Chen,

P., Ruan, R. 2011. Microwave-assisted pyrolysis of microalgae for biofuel

production. Bioresour. Technol. (102): 4890–4896.

20. Fellet, G., Marchiol, L., Delle, G., Peressotti. A. 2011. Application of biochar

on mine tailings: Effects and perspectives for land reclamation.

Chemosphere. (83): 1262–1267.

21. Grierson, S., Strezov, V., Shah, P. 2011. Properties of oil and char derived

from slow pyrolysis of Tetraselmis chui. Bioresour. Technol. (102) 8232–

8240.

22. Grierson, S., Strezov, V., Ellem, Ross, M., Herbertson, J. 2009. Thermal

characterization of microalgae under slow pyrolysis conditions. J. Anal.

Appl. Pyrolysis. (85): 118–123.

23. Hammond, J., Shackley, S., Sohi, S., Brownsort, P. 2011. Prospective life

cycle carbon abatement for pyrolysis biochar systems in the UK. Energ

Policy. (39): 2646–2655.

24. He, P., Luo, S., Cheng, G., Xiao, B., Cai, L., Wang, J. 2012. Gasification of

biomass char with air-steam in a cyclone furnace. Renew Energ. (37): 398-

402.

22
25. Hossain, M., Strezov, V., Chan, Y., Nelson, P. 2010. Agronomic properties

of wastewater sludge biochar and bioavailability of metals in production of

cherry tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Chemosphere. (78):1167–1171.

26. Hossain, M., Strezov, V., Chan, Y., Ziolkowski, A., Nelson, P. 2011.

Influence of pyrolysis temperature on production and nutrient properties of

wastewater sludge biochar. J Environ Manage. 92 (1): 223-228.

27. Inyang, M., Gao, B., Pullammanappallil, P., Ding, W., Zimmerman, A. 2010.

Biochar from anaerobically digested sugarcane bagasse. Bioresour.

Technol (101): 8868–8872.

28. Jiang, T., Jiang, J., Xu, R., Li, Z. 2012. Adsorption of Pb(II) on variable

charge soils amended with rice-straw derived biochar, Chemosphere. (89):

249-256.

29. Karhu, K., Mattila, T., Bergström, I., Regina, K. 2011. Biochar addition to

agricultu-ral soil increased CH4 uptake and water holding capacity – Results

from a short-term pilot field study. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. (140): 309–313.

30. Kasozi, G., Zimmerman , A., Nkedi-Kizza, P., Gao, B. 2010. Catechol and

Humic Acid Sorption onto a Range of Laboratory-Produced Black Carbons

(Biochars). Environ Sci Technol. (44): 6189–6195.

31. Keiluweit, M., Nico, P., Johnson, M., Kleber, M. 2010. Dynamic Molecular

Structure of Plant Biomass-Derived Black Carbon (Biochar). Environ Sci

Technol. (44): 1247–1253.

23
32. Kim, K., Kim, J., Cho, T., Choi, J. 2012. Influence of pyrolysis temperature

on physicochemical properties of biochar obtained from the fast pyrolysis of

pitch pine (Pinus rigida). Bioresour Technol. (118): 158-162.

33. Kwapinski, W., Byrne, C., Kryachko, E., Wolfram, P., Adley, C., Leahy, J.,

Novotny, E., Hayes, M. 2010. Biochar from Biomass and Waste. Waste

Biomass Valor. (1): 177-189.

34. Laird, D., Fleming, P., Wang, B., Horton, R., Karlen, D. 2010. Biochar

impact on nutrient leaching from a Midwestern agricultural soil. Geoderma.

(158):436–442.

35. Lee, J., Kidder, M., Evans, B., Paik, P., Buchanan, A., Garten, C., Brown, R.

2010. Characterization of Biochars Produced from Cornstovers for Soil

Amendment. Iron Sci Technol. (44): 7970–7974.

36. Lei, H., Ren, S., Julson, J. 2009. The effects of reaction temperature and

time and particle size of corn stover on microwave pyrolysis. Energ Fuels.

(23): 3254–3261.

37. Li, D., Hockaday, W., Masiello, C., Alvarez, P., 2011. Earthworm avoidance

of biochar can be mitigated by wetting. Soil Biol Biochem. (43): 1732-1737.

38. Liu, P., Liu, W.J., Jiang, H., Chen, J.J., Li, W.W., Yu, H.Q. 2012.

Modification of bio-char derived from fast pyrolysis of biomass and its

application in removal of tetracycline from aqueous solution. Bioresour.

Technol. Volume 121: 235-240.

24
39. Mahinpey, N., Murugan, P., Mani, T., Raina, R. 2009. Analysis of Bio-Oil,

Biogas, and Biochar from Pressurized Pyrolysis of Wheat Straw Using a

Tubular Reactor. Energ Fuels (23): 2736–2742.

40. Mankasingh, U., Choi, P., Ragnarsdottir, V. 2011. Biochar application in a

tropical, agricultural region: A plot scale study in Tamil Nadu, India. Appl.

Geochem. 26: S218-S221.

41. Matovic, D. 2011. Biochar as a viable carbon sequestration option: Global

and Canadian perspective. Energy (36): 2011- 2016.

42. Muradov, N., Fidalgo, B., Gujar, A., Garceau, N., Raissi., A. 2012.

Production and characterization of Lemna minor bio-char and its catalytic

application for biogas reforming. Biomass Bioenerg. 42: 123-131.

43. Nag, S., Kookana, R., Smith, L., Krull, E.,Macdonald, L., Gill, G. 2011. Poor

efficacy of herbicides in biochar-amended soils as affected by their

chemistry and mode of action. Chemosphere. 84 (11): 1572-1577.

44. Noguera, D., Rondón, M., Laossi, K., Hoyos, V., Lavelle, P., Cruz, M., Barot,

S. 2010. Contrasted effect of biochar and earthworms on rice growth and

resource allocation in different soils. Soil Biol Biochem. (42): 1017-1027.

45. Phan, A., Ryu, C., Sharifi, V., Swithenbank, J. 2008. Characterization of

slow pyrolysis products from segregated wastes for energy production. J.

Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis (81): 65–71

46. Peng, X., Ye, L., Wangb, C., Zhou, H., Sun, B. 2011. Temperature- and

duration-dependent rice straw-derived biochar: Characteristics and its

25
effects on soil properties of an Ultisol in southern China. Soil Till Res (112):

159–166.

47. Pratt, K., Moran, D. 2010. Evaluating the cost-effectiveness of global

biochar mitigation potential. Biomass Bioenerg. (34): 1149-1158.

48. Qiu, Y., Zheng, Z., Zhou, Z., Sheng, G. 2009. Effectiveness and

mechanisms of dye adsorption on a straw-based biochar. Bioresour.

Technol. (100): 5348–5351.

49. Ross, A., Anastasakis, K., Kubacki, M., Jones, J. 2009. Investigation of the

pyrolysis behaviour of brown algae before and after pre-treatment using PY-

GC/MS and TGA.J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis (85): 3–10.

50. Ross, A., Hall, C., Anastasakis, K., Westwood, A., Jones, J., Crewe, R.

2011. Influence of cation on the pyrolysis and oxidation of alginates. J. Anal.

Appl. Pyrolysis (91): 344–351.

51. Ross, A., Jones, J., Kubacki, M., Bridgeman, M. 2008. Classification of

macroalgae as fuel and its thermochemical behavior. Bioresour Technol.

(99): 6494–6504.

52. Roberts, K., Gloy., B., Joseph, S., Scott , N., Lehmann., L. 2010. Life Cycle

Assessment of Biochar Systems: Estimating the Energetic, Economic, and

Climate Change Potential. Environ Sci Technol. (44): 827–833.

53. Schwaiger, N., Feiner, R., Zahel, K., Pieber, A., Witek, V., Pucher, P., Ahn,

E., Wilhelm, P., Chernev, B., Schröttner, H., Siebenhofer, M. 2011. Liquid

and Solid Products from Liquid-Phase Pyrolysis of Softwood. Bioenerg Res

DOI 10.1007/s12155-011-9132-8.

26
54. Smith, J., Collins, H., Bailey, V. 2010. The effect of young biochar on soil

respiration. Soil Biol Biochem. (42): 2345-2347.

55. Song, Y., Wang, F., Bian, Y., Orori, F., Jia, M., Xie, Z., Jiang, X. 2012.

Bioavailability assessment of hexachlorobenzene in soil as affected by

wheat straw biochar. J Hazard Mater (217–218): 391-397.

56. Song, W., Guo, M. 2012. Quality variations of poultry litter biochar

generated at different pyrolysis temperatures. J Anal Appl Pyrol. 94:138-

145.

57. Spokas, K., Koskinen, W., Baker, B., Reicosky, D. 2009. Impacts of

woodchip biochar additions on greenhouse gas production and sorption

/degradation of two herbicides in a Minnesota soil. Chemosphere (77): 574–

581.

58. Steinbeiss, S., Gleixner, G., Antonietti, M. 2009. Effect of biochar

amendment on soil carbon balance and soil microbial activity. Soil Biol.

Biochem. (41): 1301–1310.

59. Tenenbaum D. 2009. Biochar: carbon mitigation from the ground up. Environ

Health Perspect. 117(2): A70-3.

60. Torri, C., Samorì, C., Adamiano, A., Fabbri, D., Faraloni, C., Torzillo, G.

Preliminary investigation on the production of fuels and bio-char from

Chlamydomonas reinhardtii biomass residue after bio-hydrogen production.

Bioresour. Technol. (102): 8707–8713.

27
61. Tsai, W. T., Liu, S. C., Chen, H. R., Chang, Y. M., Tsai, Y. L. 2012. Textural

and chemical properties of swine-manure-derived biochar pertinent to its

potential use as a soil amendment. Chemosphere. 89 (2): 198-203.

62. Tu, Y., Tian S., Kong L., Xiong, Y. 2012. Co-catalytic effect of sewage

sludge-derived char as the support of Fenton-like catalyst. Chem Eng J.

185–186: 44-51.

63. Uchimiya, M., Lima, I., Klasson, K., Chang, S., Wartelle, L., Rodgers, J.

2010. Immobilization of heavy metal ions (CuII, CdII, NiII, and PbII) J. Agric.

Food Chem. (58): 5538–5544.

64. Vaccari, F., Barontia, S., Lugatoa, E., Genesio, L., Castaldi, S., Fornasier,

F., Migliettaa, F. 2011. Biochar as a strategy to sequester carbon and

increase yield in durum wheat. Europ. J. Agronomy. (34): 231–238.

65. Warnock, D., Mummey, D., McBride, B., Major, M. Lehmann, J., Rillig, M.

2010. Influences of non-herbaceous biochar on arbuscular mycorrhizal

fungal abundances in roots and soils: Results from growth-chamber and

field experiments. Appl Soil Ecol. (46): 450–456.

66. Woolf, D., Amonette, J., Street-Perrott, F., Lehmann, J., Joseph, S. 2010.

Sustainable biochar to mitigate global climate change. Ncomms 1053.

67. Xiao, R., Chen, X., Wang, F., Yu, G., Pyrolysis pretreatment of biomass for

entrained-flow gasification. 2010. Appl Energ (87): 149–155.

68. Yao, Y., Gao, B., Inyang, M., Zimmerman, A., Cao, X., Pullammanappallil,

P., Yang, L. 2011. Biochar derived from anaerobically digested sugar beet

28
tailings: Characterization and phosphate removal potential. Bioresour.

Technol (102): 6273–6278.

69. Yao, F., Arbestain, M., Virgel, S., Blanco, F., Arostegui, J., Maciá-Agulló, J.,

Macías, F. 2010. Simulated geochemical weathering of a mineral ash-rich

biochar in a modified Soxhlet reactor. Chemosphere (80):724–732.

70. Yoder, J., Galinato. S., Granatstein, D., Garcia, M. 2011. Economic tradeoff

between biochar and bio-oil production via pyrolysis. Biomass Bioenerg.

(35): 1851-1862.

71. Yu, J., Dehkhoda, A., Ellis, N. 2010. Development of Biochar-based Catalyst

for Transesterification of Canola Oil. Energ Fuel (25): 337–344.

72. Yu, X., Ying, G., Kookana, R. 2009. Reduced plant uptake of pesticides with

biochar additions to soil. Chemosphere. (76): 665–671.

73. Yuan, J., Xu, R., Zhang, H. 2011. The forms of alkalis in the biochar

produced from crop residues at different temperatures. Bioresour Technol.

(102): 3488–3497.

74. Zhang, B., Xiong, S., Xiao, B., Yu, D., Jia, X. 2011. Mechanism of wet

sewage sludge pyrolysis in a tubular. Int J Hydrogen Energ. (36): 355-363.

75. Zheng, W. Guo, M. Chow, T. Bennett, D, Rajagopalan, N. 2010. Sorption

properties of greenwastebiochar for two triazine pesticides. J. Hazard.

Mater. (181): 121–126.

29
Table 1. Biomass and method of production of biochar

Source of Method of
Application
Biomass production

Mixture of wood
Yu et al.,
waste, white wood, Fast pyrolysis Catalyst
2010
bark, and shavings

Fast pyrolysis Lee et al.,


Cornstovers Soil amendment
at 450 °C 2010

Pressurized
Mahinpey et
Wheat straw pyrolysis at Energy use
al., 2009
500°C

Pyrolysis at 200 Adsorbs lead and Cao et al.,


Dairy-Manure
and 350° C atrazine 2010

Pyrolysis from 250


Peng et al.,
Rice straw to 450 °C for Soil amendment
2011
between 2 and 8 h

Pyrolysis from 300 Fertilizer, atmospheric Hossain et al.,


Wastewater sludge
to 700 °C carbon sequestration 2010

Fast pyrolysis
Application on acidic Bird et al.,
Algae from 307 to
soils 2011
512°C

Dong et al.,
Sugar beet tailing Pyrolysis at 300°C
Hexavalent chromium
2011 Yao et

30
removal al., 2011

Reducing

Eucalyptus spp. Pyrolysis at 450 phytoavailability of Yu et al.,

wood chips and 850 °C chlorpyrifos and 2009

carbofuran in soil

Fast pyrolysis Schwaiger et


Spruce wood Energy use
from 350 to 390°C al., 2011

Soil amendment,
Fast pyrolysis Bruun et al.,
Wheat straw atmospheric carbon
from 475 to 525°C 2011
sequestration.

Pinus ponderosa,
Pyrolysis from 100 Keiluweit et
Festuca Environmental sorbent
to 700 °C. al., 2010
arundinacea

Agricultural-use, carbon
Pyrolysis from 300 Song & Guo,
Poultry litter sequestration and
to 600 °C. 2012
environmental sorbent

Pyrolysis at 400 Kim et al.,


Pinus rigida Not specific
and 500 °C. 2012

31
80

60

Canola straw
Corn straw
Soybean straw
%Carbon

40
Peanut straw
Miscanthus
Switchgrass
Wheat straw
20 Sludge waste
Rice straw

0
200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650
Temperature (°C)

Figure 1. Carbon percentage in biochar obtained from different sources

32
100

80 Sludge waste

Pine wood shavings

60 Tall fescue grass

Wheat straw
% Yield

40 Rice straw

Wastewater sludge

20 Lemna minor

0
200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Temperature (°C)

Figure 2. Yield in biochar production.

33
400

Miscanthus

Broiler litter
300
Rice straw

Corn stover
Surface area (m²/g)

200 Switchgrass

Pine wood shavings

Tall fescue grass

100 Poultry litter

Pitch pine

Lemna minor

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
Pyrolysis Temperature (°C)

Figure 3. Surface area of biochar.

34
Figure 4. Heat value of biochar.

35

You might also like