Next Article in Journal
Comparative Analysis of Antioxidant System and Salt-Stress Tolerance in Two Hibiscus Cultivars Exposed to NaCl Toxicity
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of Biochar Applied in Either Rice or Wheat Seasons on the Production and Quality of Wheat and Nutrient Status in Paddy Profiles
Previous Article in Journal
Toxicity and Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Agave sisalana Extract Derived from Agroindustrial Residue
Previous Article in Special Issue
Effects of Biochar on the Fluorescence Spectra of Water-Soluble Organic Matter in Black Soil Profile after Application for Six Years
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Plants
Volume 12
Issue 7
10.3390/plants12071524
plants-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Review on Rice Husk Biochar as an Adsorbent for Soil and Water Remediation

by
Zheyong Li
1,2,†,
Zhiwei Zheng
1,2,3,†,
Hongcheng Li
1,2,
Dong Xu
1,2,
Xing Li
1,2,
Luojing Xiang
1,2,* and
Shuxin Tu
3,4
1
Hubei Provincial Academy of Eco-Environmental Sciences, Wuhan 430072, China
2
State Key Laboratory of Soil Health Diagnosis and Green Remediation for Environmental Protection, Wuhan 430072, China
3
College of Resources and Environment, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China
4
Hubei Research Centre for Environment Pollution and Remediation, Wuhan 430070, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Plants 2023, 12(7), 1524; https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12071524
Submission received: 10 February 2023 / Revised: 22 March 2023 / Accepted: 27 March 2023 / Published: 31 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Biochar Applications for Agricultural and Forest Ecosystems)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Rice husk biochar (RHB) is a low-cost and renewable resource that has been found to be highly effective for the remediation of water and soil environments. Its yield, structure, composition, and physicochemical properties can be modified by changing the parameters of the preparation process, such as the heating rate, pyrolysis temperature, and carrier gas flow rate. Additionally, its specific surface area and functional groups can be modified through physical, chemical, and biological means. Compared to biochar from other feedstocks, RHB performs poorly in solutions with coexisting metal, but can be modified for improved adsorption. In contaminated soils, RHB has been found to be effective in adsorbing heavy metals and organic matter, as well as reducing pollutant availability and enhancing crop growth by regulating soil properties and releasing beneficial elements. However, its effectiveness in complex environments remains uncertain, and further research is needed to fully understand its mechanisms and effectiveness in environmental remediation.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Heavy metals are regarded extremely dangerous environmental pollutants because of their high toxicity, carcinogenicity, and nondegradability [1]. Moreover, most heavy metals have different migration and distribution characteristics—for example, Cd has higher mobility than those of Pb and As—making heavy metal remediation a challenge [2]. At present, technologies such as adsorption, chemical precipitation, membrane removal, ion exchange, complexation, redox, and phytoremediation have been used for heavy metal remediation [3]. However, these techniques are not only expensive but also create secondary pollution [4]. Therefore, there exists an urgent demand for cost-effective, environment-friendly methods for effectively removing heavy metals. In this regard, biochar has attracted widespread attention owing to its high surface area and well-developed pore structure as well as its low cost. Biochar is a carbon-rich porous solid residue produced by the thermal transformation of biomass in partial or total absence of oxygen [5,6]. Biochar production process has three stages: predecomposition (i.e., evaporation of moisture and light volatiles); main pyrolysis (i.e., decomposition of cellulose and hemicellulose), and the formation of carbonaceous solids (i.e., degradation of lignin and other organic matter with strong chemical bonds) [7]. Compared with activated carbon, biochar is a better adsorbent material, with the advantages of low cost, widely available sources, and high affinity for removing heavy metals from contaminated aqueous media [8,9]. Compared with fly ash, biochar has the advantages of green technology, high removal efficiency, and high social acceptability [10]. Compared with clay minerals, biochar has the merits of low cost, high stability, and high affinity for heavy metals [11]. However, biochar has some disadvantages that deserve our attention. Biochar may produce environmentally harmful substances such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) during pyrolysis, and these substances may have a negative impact on the environment. Moreover, applying biochar to the soil may have negative effects on the soil environment; for example, it may cause loosening of the soil and acceleration of soil erosion [12]. Furthermore, previous studies showed that the remediation of heavy metals by biochar can be improved in various ways, such as by changing the pyrolysis conditions, biochar modification with modifiers, and impregnation of biochar with chelating agents [13,14]. A study reported the remediation of heavy metals by biochar in combination with other technologies, such as biochar phytoremediation and biochar electrodynamic remediation [15].
Global rice consumption was approximately 486 million metric tons between 2018 and 2019 [16]. The rice husks produced as a byproduct of this consumption are estimated to be 20%–34% of the amount consumed [17]. Rice husks have a hard surface, low bulk density, and the highest amorphous silica content among grasses [18]. They are primarily composed of cellulose (50%), lignin (30%), and organic compounds (20%) [19]. Despite the potential applications of rice husks as value-added products, most rice producers currently dispose of them through piling and open burning. These disposal methods not only consume land resources but also cause environmental and health problems [20]. Therefore, safe disposing of the rice husk biomass is highly desired. Meanwhile, the high carbon content of rice husk facilitates its conversion into energy-rich biochar upon thermochemical treatment. As one of the many types of biochar, RHB is of great interest because it comes from waste rice husk and is both low-cost and green [21]. RHB has excellent properties and a wide range of applications in several fields. As a precursor resource, RHB is abundant in silicon and alumina, which are suitable for the synthesis of zeolites, amorphous silica and silica-based catalysts. Moreover, its organic components are suitable for preparing activated carbon, carbon-based catalysts and porous carbon [22,23]. RHB is also suitable for soil conditioning. Many studies have focused on the effects of RHB on the chemical properties and biota of soils. Qu et al. [24] showed that RHB can effectively improve the physical and mechanical properties of soils. Further, the surface of RHB contains a large number of acidic (carboxylic, lactonic, and phenolic), neutral (benzoquinonyl and others), and basic functional groups (quinonoid carbonyl, pyrone, and benzopyranyl groups); these functional groups provide the basis for pollution remediation by RHB [25,26]. RHB exhibited good adsorption of heavy metals, organic matter, and other pollutants in water bodies. Notably, it can not only improve the physicochemical properties and reduce the biologically effective heavy metal content in soils but also reduce the heavy metal stress on plants [27]. Additionally, it can be used as a filler material. Recently, many studies showed that rice husk ash can be used as a filler to improve mortar performance drastically. This improvement is attributed to the fact that on addition of rice husk ash, with a smaller particle size than that of the mortar, the compressive strength of mortar is increased because of the filler action [28]. In addition, rice husk ash can promote the sulfate resistance of mortar. Venkatanarayanan and Rangaraju [29] evaluated the effect of rice husk ash on the sulfate resistance of mortars and showed that addition of 15% rice husk ash resulted in a 71% increase in the sulfate resistance of mortar.
Although RHB is widely regarded an environment-friendly adsorbent and soil conditioner, its potential risks cannot be ignored. Table 1 lists the properties and some elemental compositions of RHB. From Table 1, it is seen that RHB contains a variety of harmful components and has abundant silica. Meanwhile, RHB may also release toxic and harmful elements in the environment because of changes in its properties, thereby causing harm to humans and the environment. In recent years, there have been an increasing number of reports on the potential hazards of biochar. These reports mainly addressed the negative impacts of biochar application on soil physicochemical properties, microbiota, greenhouse gases, and organisms at different trophic levels [30,31]. Moreover, Ndirangu et al. [32] discussed the potential risks of biochar prepared from different feedstocks and the necessary mitigation and control measures available. These measures include the selection of suitable feedstocks and control of biochar pyrolysis conditions. Therefore, possible human health hazards and environmental problems caused by rice husk char cannot be ignored; its risk assessment and mitigation control need to be further researched.
Compared to other biochar, RHB is characterized by its widely available sources, high yield, and abundance of amorphous silica [41]. Although numerous review papers on biochar research are available, to the best of our knowledge, no review focusing exclusively on RHB preparation, modification, and purification and remediation of organic and inorganic pollutants in water and soil has been published as yet [42,43]. The present review summarizes the research on the preparation, characterization, and modification of RHB during the decade from 2012 to 2022. Moreover, the purification and remediation effects of RHB applications on water and soil environments, including the improvement of the chemical, biological, and physical properties of soil, plant growth, and stabilization of heavy metals and organic pollutants in soil, are reviewed.
This systematic review used the Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, ACS journal, and Scopus databases. Papers published between 2012 and 2022 were gathered using the search string rice husk preparation AND rice husk biochar modification AND rice husk biochar (adsorption OR sorption) AND (water OR soil) AND (heavy metals, organic matter); only documents published in English were considered.

2. Preparation of Rice Husk Biochar

The thermochemical conversion of biomass fuels has three main modes: combustion, gasification, and pyrolysis. The main products of combustion and slow pyrolysis are biochar, and the main products of gasification and fast pyrolysis are biomass oil and biomass gas [44]. Figure 1 summarizes the main modes and products of biomass thermal conversion. From Figure 1 we can see common combustion methods include grate combustion, fluidized bed combustion, and suspension (jet) combustion [18]. Grate combustion produces RHB with a large surface area that is suitable as an adsorbent. Fluidized bed combustion produces RHB that can be used as a filler for polymer composites and ceramic compounds. Suspension (jet) combustion produces RHB with completely amorphous silica, which is suitable for civil engineering and zeolite production [45].
Pyrolysis is popular for its low levels of asset utilization and high recovery rate. It is a complex process wherein the feedstock undergoes thermochemical changes under limited oxygen conditions, producing biochar, biomass oil, and biomass gas. Pyrolysis decomposes the biomass into a mixture of organic and inorganic compounds. Biochar is a carbon-rich, fine-grained, permeable, and aromatically stable solid product [47]. Depending on the operating conditions, pyrolysis can be classified as slow, fast, or flash. Slow pyrolysis is performed at low temperatures, slow heating rates, and long residence times, which facilitates char production. Flash pyrolysis typically has a residence time of less than 0.5 s and a very high heating rate. Fast pyrolysis is performed at moderate temperatures, a high heating rate, and long vapor residence time. Fast pyrolysis and flash pyrolysis favor the formation of bio-oil. Increasing the pyrolysis temperature from 400 °C to 800 °C was shown to decrease the RHB yield from 44.5% to 37.6% [48] and increase the bio-oil yield from 11.26% to 35.92% [49].

3. Properties of Rice Husk Biochar

Since rice husk undergoes different chemical reactions under different conditions, the process parameters (mainly pyrolysis temperature, heating rate, and carrier gas flow rate) have a great influence on the yield, structure, composition and properties of RHB.
It has been shown that the pyrolysis temperature is closely related to the changes in the structure and physicochemical properties of RHB. The data about these relationships are shown in Table 2. From the table, it can be seen that: (1) the pH of RHB is positively correlated with the pyrolysis temperature. This is related to the increase in ash content and alkaline functional groups during pyrolysis [50]. (2) In a certain temperature range, the specific surface area and porosity of RHB increase with increasing pyrolysis temperature. This is most likely related to the decomposition of organic matter and the formation of micropores [51]. Paethanom and Yoshikawa [52] observed that pores were created during the pyrolysis of rice husk and these pores led to a sharp increase in the specific surface area of biochar, but this porosity decreased at temperatures above 600 °C. (3) The aromaticity of RHB increased with the increase in pyrolysis temperature [53]. In addition, it has also been shown that high pyrolysis temperatures favor the generation of basic functional groups. This is because as the pyrolysis temperature increases, cellulose and hemicellulose start to degrade and some new functional groups (e.g., carboxyl, lactone, lactone alcohol, quinine, chromene, etc.) are generated. When the pyrolysis temperature is higher (>500 °C), lignin and other hard-to-decompose organic matter begin to decompose, oxygenated acidic functional groups (e.g., carboxyl) are removed in large amounts, and the number of basic functional groups increases [54]. Wei et al. [50] showed that when the pyrolysis temperature increased from 300 °C to 750 °C, the number of basic functional groups increased from 580.16 μmol/g to 1044.29 μmol/g and the number of acidic functional groups decreased from 5431.48 μmol/g to 3841.78 μmol/g. Therefore, RHB produced at lower temperatures (e.g., 300 °C–400 °C) had more organic features and contained more C-O and -OH crown energy groups. RHB produced at higher temperatures (e.g., 600 °C–700 °C) showed highly aromatic carbon layers, larger specific surface area and porosity, which were more favorable for the adsorption of pollutants by RHB.
RHB is often produced at low heating rates [65]. A low heating rate reduces the occurrence of not only side reactions but also thermal cracking reactions in the biomass, thereby increasing the RHB yield. Phuong et al. [66] found that increasing the heating rate from 10 °C/min to 50 °C/min decreased the RHB yield from 44% to 38%. Lower heating rates are also beneficial for obtaining more RHB. A low heating rate promotes the formation of an aromatic structure, which is conducive to obtaining more aromatic functional groups and stabilizes the carbon structure of RHB [67]. Abbas et al. [56] found that increasing the heating rate from 1 °C/min to 10 °C/min decreased the RHB carbon content from 71.05% to 67.46%, increased the oxygen/carbon ratio from 0.018% to 0.067%, and increased the hydrogen/carbon ratio from 0.351% to 0.587%.
The pyrolysis of biomass generates vapors that become involved in secondary reactions if they are not removed in time. This affects the composition of the pyrolysis products and thus the RHB yield. The biochar yield was found to stay the same when the nitrogen flow rate exceeded a certain level [68]. This indicates that lowering the carrier gas flow rate can remove most of the vapors from the reaction zone, thus reducing the occurrence of secondary reactions.

4. Modification of Rice Husk Biochar

Virgin RHB generally has a limited adsorption capacity for pollutants. To improve the applicability of RHB to pollutant remediation, it should be modified. The RHB surface is rich in functional groups, which is favorable for modifier loading [5]. Common modification methods for enhancing the adsorption capacity and remediation effectiveness of RHB include physical, chemical, and microbial approaches [69]. Physical modifications are easy to apply because of their simplicity and low cost [70]. Chemical modification can be used to obtain RHB with different modification effects depending on the application, but such modifications may cause secondary contamination and incur high costs. Microbial modification is less expensive and produces no secondary contamination, and the modified RHBs tend to have better pollutant adsorption ability, but such modification often requires a longer time to achieve good modification results [71].

4.1. Physical Modification

Physical modification of RHB is applied during the charring and activation processes. The charring process occurs under anaerobic or anoxic conditions; the rice husks undergo pyrolysis at a certain temperature, which opens some of the pores [72]. The activation process mainly occurs in the presence of an activator (e.g., water vapor, carbon dioxide). The activator further opens the pores and increases the specific surface area of RHB [73,74]. Therefore, physical modification mainly involves increasing the specific surface area and porosity of RHB to improve the adsorption capacity of target pollutants. Physical modification is generally performed by steam activation, carbon dioxide activation ultraviolet radiation, and ball milling [75]. Steam activation is the most widely used owing to its simplicity and nonpolluting nature [76]. Mayakaduwa et al. [63] prepared RHB at 700 °C and then applied steam activation for 45 min, which increased the ability of RHB to remove carbofuran (i.e., a toxic insecticide) from an aqueous solution by 2.4 times to 396 mg/g.

4.2. Chemical Modification

Several approaches are available for chemical modification, of which several are listed below.
(1)
Acid/alkali modification
Acid modification refers to the treatment of rice husks or RHB with acid reagents (e.g., nitric acid, hydrochloric acid, and phosphoric acid) [21,77] to change the physicochemical properties. These changes can be divided into four main categories: removing metal impurities from the RHB surface, introducing acidic functional groups to the RHB surface, applying a corrosive acid to the RHB surface to make it inhomogeneous and increase the porosity as well as specific surface area, and protonating the RHB surface to increase the ion exchange rate between H+ and heavy metals [74,78]. Zhao et al. [79] found that pretreating biochar with phosphoric acid significantly increased the specific surface area (from 51.0 to 930 m2/g), total pore volume (from 0.046 to 0.558 cm3/g), and number of micropores (from 59.0% to 78.4–81.9%).
Alkali modification uses alkaline reagents instead, which generally activate the internal structure of RHB and increase the specific surface area to improve the adsorption and fixation capacities [80]. Some alkali modifiers remove ash impurities and nonpyrolyzed organic matter on the RHB surface, which increases porosity. Other alkali modifiers (e.g., potassium hydroxide) form intercalating compounds with inner and outer layers in RHB, thereby increasing the specific surface area [81,82]. Tsai et al. [83] modified RHB with sodium hydroxide, which increased the specific surface area from 21.764 to 434.62 m2/g and improved the adsorption capacity for malachite green by 4.3 times.
(2)
Metal (metal oxide) modification
Metal (metal oxide) modification changes the specific surface area, metal element content, cation exchange capacity, and surface charge of RHB. For example, Xiang et al. [84] used magnesium oxide to modify RHB, which increased the specific surface area by 4.88 times to 20.64 m2/g. RHB can also be modified by using iron oxide, magnesium, aluminum, titanium dioxide, manganese dioxide, etc. [85]. These modifications are usually performed via impregnation and in situ synthesis. The former involves impregnating RHB with a metal or metal oxide, which promotes the attachment of metal ions. The latter involves the direct addition of metal or metal oxide reagents to the feedstock. Then, pyrolysis, chemical precipitation, and activation are performed to complete the modification [86]. In situ synthesis has two major advantages over impregnation. First, it has more controllability, and improve the stability of the modifier. Second, it improves the adsorption capacity for the target pollutant more than the impregnation method when other conditions such as the raw material and processing conditions are maintained [87]. Teng et al. [27] found that iron modification significantly increased the effectiveness of RHB at solidifying lead and antimony in contaminated soil by eight and five times to 25% and 40%, respectively.
(3)
Functional group modification
Functional group modification uses organic compounds with target functional groups that are capable of chemically bonding with the RHB surface, which then loads the target functional group onto the RHB [88]. Functional group modification can significantly increase the number of functional groups in RHB, which provides more adsorption sites for target pollutants [89]. Functional group modification can be divided into several categories depending on the contents of the functional groups: oxygen-containing, nitrogen-containing, sulfur-containing, hydrophobic, and others [90]. Nitrogen-containing functional groups have a strong affinity for complexing with target pollutants such as heavy metals, particularly heavy metal cations such as Cd2+, Zn2+, and Cu2+ [91]. Nitrogen-containing functional groups are usually introduced to the RHB surface through nitrification and are subsequently reduced to the corresponding amino derivatives by reduction [92]. Gai et al. [93] found that using nitrogen-containing functional groups to modify RHB significantly increased the Cu2+ adsorption capacity by 2.2 times to 29.11 mg/g.

4.3. Microbial Modification

Microbial modification uses microorganisms, which act synergistically with RHB to considerably improve the adsorption capacity and remediation effectiveness of target pollutants [94]. RHB is used to host bacteria, which start to multiply inside the RHB at the ideal temperature and when sufficient nutrients are available to form a film on the RHB surface. The microorganisms use extracellular enzymes to convert some hard-to-degrade organic matter into easy-to-degrade organic matter. They then convert the biodegradable organic matter into biomass, carbon dioxide, and other substances. Finally, RHB removes the above substances through adsorption. Microbial modification improves the physicochemical properties of RHB such as the structure, redox potential, and pH. Cheng et al. [95] used the mycobacterium (Xylella vulgaris) to modify RHB, which improved the adsorption capacity for toluene by 31.6%.

5. Rice Husk Biochar as an Adsorbent

Water pollution poses a serious threat to the environment and human health because of its rapid spread, mobility, and impact. The effective removal of water pollution has been an issue of public concern for many years. RHB is widely used for the adsorption of heavy metals and organic substances in water because of its good stability, recyclability, and adsorption capacity [96].

5.1. Adsorption of Heavy Metals in Water

RHB has five main mechanisms for heavy metal adsorption (Figure 2) [77,97,98]: physical adsorption between RHB and heavy metal ions; ion exchange between ions adsorbed on the RHB surface (e.g., K+, Na+, Mg2+) and heavy metals; complexation of heavy metals with functional groups (e.g., carboxyl, hydroxyl) on the RHB surface; electrostatic interaction between heavy metals and the RHB surface; and coprecipitation between heavy metals and metal salts on the RHB surface (e.g., lead–phosphate–silicate precipitation).
RHB may be able to adsorb more heavy metals in water than biochar produced from other agricultural wastes. Agricultural wastes such as wood, straw, and shells are often used as a raw material for biochar. One ton of agricultural waste is estimated to yield about 0.3 tons of biochar [99,100]. Table 3 compares the differences in the physicochemical properties of biochar prepared from several common types of agricultural waste. Compared with biochar made from corncobs, straw, and sawn wood, RHB has a greater specific surface area and ash content as well as more abundant aromatic functional groups. Sanka et al. [101] showed that RHB has a superior adsorption capacity for chromium, iron, and lead in industrial wastewater to that of corncob biochar. RHB removed 65% of chromium and 90% of lead from industrial wastewater; however, corncob biochar only removed 20% and 35% of chromium and lead, respectively. Amen et al. [102] found that biochar prepared from agricultural waste had high adsorption capacities for Pb2+ and Cd2+. RHB, wheat straw biochar, and corncob biochar adsorbed 96.41%, 95.38%, and 96.92%, respectively, of Pb2+ and 94.73%, 93.68%, and 95.78%, respectively, of Cd2+. Higashikawa et al. [103] showed that RHB had a higher removal capacity for Cd2+ and Ni2+ in solution than sawdust biochar. Thus, RHB may be more suitable than biochar produced from other types of agricultural waste for adsorbing heavy metals in water.
However, RHB has a poor adsorption capacity for specific metal ions in a polymetallic solution [13,117]. A study investigated the adsorption effectiveness of 21 types of biochar in polymetallic solutions. Yak dung biochar demonstrated the best Cu2+ adsorption, followed by cotton stem biochar, whereas RHB performed the worst. Yak dung biochar also demonstrated the best Pb2+ removal, and the worst was poplar wood biochar. However, RHB demonstrated the second-worst removal of Pb2+, which was only better than poplar wood biochar [118]. In addition, it was also found that the adsorption capacity of biochar was most inhibited in ternary metal fraction systems and most enhanced in unitary metal fraction systems [119]. Xu et al. [120] found that the adsorption of Zn2+ and Cd2+ by RHB was completely inhibited in a multi-metal solution system. Compared with the monometallic solution system, the adsorption capacities for Pb2+, Cu2+, Zn2+, and Cd2+ of dairy manure biochar were reduced by 2.00%, 21.1%, 40.9%, and 39.3%, respectively, in a polymetallic solution system. In contrast, the adsorption capacities of RHB were reduced by 38.4%, 42.7%, 92.3%, and 100%, respectively. Similarly, Zhang et al. [121] found that alfalfa biochar had higher adsorption capacities than RHB for both Cd2+ and Pb2+ coexisting in solution.

5.2. Adsorption of Organic Matter in Water

RHB mainly removes organic pollutants from water via adsorption and the electrostatic effect. The adsorption mechanism of organic pollutants by RHB is related to the pyrolysis temperature. RHB prepared at low pyrolysis temperatures (100 °C–300 °C) mainly adsorbs organic pollutants by partitioning. RHB prepared at higher pyrolysis temperatures (400 °C–700 °C) mainly adsorbs organic pollutants through chemisorption (e.g., π–π bonding, hydrogen bonding, and ligand bonding). This is because RHB produced at low temperatures has a high ash content. This causes inorganic minerals to occupy most of the adsorption sites on the RHB surface, rendering partitioning the main adsorption mechanism [122]. In contrast, RHB produced at a high temperature has a greater specific surface area, porosity, and aromaticity [123], rendering chemisorption the main adsorption mechanism.
The magnitude of the electrostatic effect is related to the pH value and zero point charge (pHpzc). In general, the RHB surface is positively charged when the solution pH is less than pHpzc. This inhibits the adsorption of cations in solution by RHB because of electrostatic repulsion. When solution pH > pHpzc, the RHB surface is deprotonated, rendering it negatively charged. This enhances the adsorption capacity of cations in solution because of electrostatic attraction [124,125]. Lingamdinne et al. [126] experimentally found that RHB adsorbed trinitrotoluene (TNT) and cyclotrimethylenetrinitramine (RDX) mainly via electrostatic interaction. However, RHB had a higher adsorption capacity for TNT than for RDX, which they attributed to TNT being an aromatic compound. This allows RHB to additionally adsorb TNT via chemisorption through π–π bonds and nitrogen–oxygen bonds. In contrast, RHB can only adsorb RDX via chemisorption through nitrogen–oxygen bonds.

6. Rice Husk Biochar as a Soil Conditioner

RHB is widely used for soil remediation and soil improvement. RHB not only improves the soil environment, promotes plant development, and increases yield but also passivates heavy metals and reduces their accumulation in plants. RHB can also increase the number and activity of soil microorganisms and restore a healthy ecological environment. However, adding RHB can also have negative effects that degrade the soil environment.

6.1. Effect on Soil pH

Applying RHB increases the pH of the soil. This effect is particularly obvious in acidic soils [127]. This is because RHB is inherently alkaline. In addition, RHB contains mineral elements such as calcium, potassium, magnesium, sodium, and silicon that form carbonates or oxides during pyrolysis. This reduces the exchange acidity by reacting with H+ and Al3+ in acidic soils, which further increases the soil pH [128]. Oladele [129] added RHB to soil and found that, after 3 years, the soil pH increased from 4.90 to 6.84 at a depth of 0–10 cm and from 5.12 to 6.62 at a depth of 10–20 cm for an average increase of 28%.

6.2. Effect on Soil Cation Exchange

Adding RHB generally increases soil cation exchange [130]. RHB increases ion exchange sites in soil because of its rich oxygen-containing functional groups, which increases the cation exchange capacity of soil. This subsequently increases the adsorption of cations by the soil. Oladele [129] reported that applying RHB increased the soil exchange of cations. Soil cation exchange is affected by the amount of RHB applied and the soil type [41]. This is because the different textures of the soil determine the function of the biochar once it was incorporated into the soil. Generally speaking, sandy soils have more grit, larger porosity and higher water holding capacity [131]. Ghorbani et al. [132] reported that applying 1% and 3% RHB to sandy soils increased the cation exchange by 20% and 30%, respectively. Moreover, applying 1% and 3% RHB to clay soils increased the cation exchange by 9% and 19%, respectively.

6.3. Effect on Soil Microorganisms

RHB has diverse effects on soil microorganisms that can be beneficial or detrimental. For example, the large specific surface area and porous structure of RHB provide shelter for soil microorganisms [133], and RHB provides nutrients for the growth of soil microorganisms. RHB also alters the microbial habitat by affecting the physicochemical properties of the soil, including the aeration conditions, water content, and pH. RHB induces changes in enzyme activity, which affects soil elemental cycles associated with microorganisms. RHB interrupts intraspecies and interspecies communication between microbial cells through the adsorption and hydrolysis of signaling molecules [134]. Finally, RHB enhances the adsorption and degradation of soil contaminants and reduces the biological effectiveness and toxicity of soil [135].

6.4. Effect on Heavy Metals in Soil

Research advances in heavy metal adsorption by biochar have steadily increased the mechanisms by which biochar removes heavy metals in soils. Sohi et al. [136] proposed three mechanisms (electrostatic interaction, ion exchange, and adsorption), Ahmad et al. [97] proposed five mechanisms (complexation, electrostatic interaction, ion exchange, physical adsorption, and precipitation), and Li et al. [137] proposed six mechanisms (complexation, electrostatic interaction, ion exchange, physical adsorption, precipitation, and reduction). Applying biochar to soil increases the electrostatic interactions between metal cations and activated functional groups of the soil by increasing the soil pH. Thus, in addition to direct interactions, biochar can indirectly reduce the uptake of heavy metals by plants by changing the soil properties [41].
Adding RHB can reduce the uptake of heavy metals by plants in composite soils. Derakhshan and Jung used RHB to remediate soil contaminated by multiple heavy metals. Compared with the control group, adding RHB reduced the concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc in plant roots by 0.570, 0.6, 0.6, and 9.04 mg/kg, respectively. Bian et al. [138] found that adding RHB to contaminated soil reduced the cadmium and lead in cabbage leaves by 13% and 44%, respectively. Derakhshan and Jung [139] found that adding RHB to soil reduced the absorption of cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc in mustard plants by 79%, 13%, 87%, and 37%, respectively. However, Karam et al. [140] concluded that adding RHB increased the uptake of heavy metals by plants. This is because RHB has a high affinity for heavy metals, which prevents the migration and transformation of pollutants in the soil as well as the occurrence of severe soil contamination [141].
Adding RHB has been found to significantly increase the concentration of arsenic in soil. Zheng et al. [142] found that applying RHB to soil increased the arsenic content by 26%. Ibrahim et al. [143] found that adding RHB to soil significantly increased the arsenic content in the root, shoot, and leaf tissues of alfalfa grass. Zheng et al. [144] found that adding RHB increased the uptake of arsenic by wheat sprouts by 199%. These findings can be attributed to two main factors. First, arsenic is mainly present in soil in the form of anions such as AsO33− and AsO43−. Applying RHB to soil increases the soil pH, which limits the ion exchange effect for anions [145]. Second, RHB is rich in substances such as silicon that compete with arsenic for adsorption sites, thereby increasing the mobility of arsenic [146].

6.5. Effect on Organic Pollutants in Soil

Applying RHB to soil can immobilize organic pollutants via adsorption. Adsorption mechanisms include partitioning, surface adsorption, and pore retention [147]. Partitioning is based on the principle of similar solubility for organic pollutants between the hydrophilic and hydrophobic phases. Surface adsorption is both physical and chemical. The physical process mainly involves van der Waals forces. The chemical process involves the formation of chemical bonds such as hydrogen, ionic dipole, coordination, and π–π bonds as well as intermolecular interactions. Pore retention involves RHB trapping of organic matter passing through its micropores. The organic matter is effectively isolated, which reduces the organic matter content of the soil [148].

6.6. Effect on Plant Growth

Applying RHB to soil generally improves crop yields. RHB directly provides crops with nutrients owing to its abundance of various minerals. RHB can also indirectly increase crop yield by improving the physicochemical properties of the soil, including the pH, cation exchange capacity, effective potassium, soil organic carbon, and soil bulk density [149]. Dong et al. [150] showed that applying RHB increased the rice yield from 6.66 ± 0.21 to 7.98 ± 0.55 t/ha. Similarly, Singh et al. [36] found that adding RHB increased the rice seed yield from 2.57 to 4.55 t/ha and the rice straw yield from 6.28 to 8.43 t/ha.
The high silica content of RHB facilitates the growth of crops than other biochar. Figure 3 shows that RHB is richer in amorphous silica than other biochar. Among the types of silicon, amorphous silica is most readily absorbed by crops [151]. In general, silicon in soil or biochar must be dissolved into silicic acid before it can be absorbed by crops [152]. When silicon from RHB enters the soil, it is absorbed by crop roots. At the same time, either –SiO(OH) is formed by interaction with hydrophilic compounds or silica gel is formed and precipitated upon hydrolysis. Then, the –SiO(OH) is absorbed and transported through the root cells to the stem via certain transporter proteins (Lsi1 and Lsi2), where it accumulates [153]. At this time, the silicon in the stem mainly exists in the form of monosilicic acids and, to a lesser extent, disilicate. Finally, the silicon (mainly monosilicic acids) in the stem is transferred to the branches via transpiration and is deposited as amorphous silica [154]. The Si in RHB absorbed by crops has the following effects. First, when plants do not receive the nutrients they need for growth, they can use Si [155]. Second, Si helps with crop growth, enhances disease resistance, promotes photosynthesis, and mitigates the production of reactive oxygen species, which can mitigate the harm caused by toxic and harmful substances [156]. Azhar et al. [157] found that applying RHB to cadmium-contaminated soil increased the chlorophyll content and photosynthesis rate by 12% and 122%, respectively. Third, Si reduces plant collapse and improves the mechanical strength of crop tissues and uprightness of rice plant stems and leaves [16]. Fourth, Si helps reduce crop water stress because it helps produce hemicellulose in the cell wall, which plays a crucial role in alleviating the water deficit in crops. Finally, Si reduces the uptake of heavy metals by crops. Si stimulates the production of certain substances in the crop root system that can chelate heavy metals and thus reduce their uptake [158].

7. Conclusions and Future Perspectives

Herein, we focused on the preparation and modification of RHB for the remediation of water and soil environments. Through an extensive examination of numerous studies on RHB production, we revealed that the parameters in the RHB preparation process have a considerable influence on the adsorption behavior of RHB. The adsorption capacity of unmodified biochar is limited. Generally, the specific surface area and functional groups of RHB can be enhanced through physical, chemical, and biological modification. RHB can remove pollutants from the environment through adsorption, ion exchange, electrostatic interaction, complexation, and cation exchange. However, RHB tends to be poor at adsorbing heavy metals when multiple heavy metals coexist in an environment. Moreover, RHB is an effective soil conditioner because it not only adsorbs heavy metals and organic matter but also improves crop growth by improving soil conditions and releasing beneficial elements (such as: silicon, potassium, calcium and magnesium). However, the pollutant adsorption capacity and remediation effectiveness of RHB can be affected by various factors in complex environments. This adds uncertainty to the results reported in the literature, and the mechanisms by which the effectiveness of RHB is affected require further investigation. Figure 4 shows the future perspectives of RHB.
(1)
There is a necessity to strengthen the risk assessment and toxicology experiments on RHB as it is an adsorbent material with potential health hazards [161].
(2)
In the study of new RHB modification methods, the adsorption performance and secondary pollution characteristics of RHB must be comprehensively evaluated to design a nonpolluting modification method.
(3)
The natural environment often contains many different types of pollutants. Therefore, future research should focus on the comprehensive study of the sorption mechanism of RHB on one or several specific pollutants under coexistence of different types of pollutants (e.g., organic–inorganic composite pollutants and multiple heavy metal solutions).
(4)
To better utilize RHB in soil improvement, it is necessary to conduct pot trial studies to evaluate interactions between soil microorganisms and RHB, such as antagonistic and synergistic effects [162].
(5)
Long-term and regional field trials are required to study the value of RHB in agricultural applications to provide an accurate assessment of the use of RHB in this field.
Plants 12 01524 g004 550
Figure 4. Future perspectives of rice husk biochar.
Figure 4. Future perspectives of rice husk biochar.
Plants 12 01524 g004

Author Contributions

Conception: Z.L. and Z.Z. Writing-original draft preparation: Z.L., Z.Z., X.L., H.L. and D.X. Writing-review and editing: Z.L. and Z.Z. Supervision: Z.L. Project management: Z.L., L.X. and S.T. Funding acquisition: L.X. and S.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Hubei Province of China (2022CFB972).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the supported of Huazhong Agricultural University and Hubei Research Centre for Environment Pollution and Remediation in providing a comfortable working environment.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Sun, X.; Xu, L.; Jiang, W.; Xuan, Y.; Lu, W.; Li, Z.; Yang, S.; Gu, Z. Adsorption mechanism of rhein-coated Fe3O4 as magnetic adsorbent based on low-field NMR. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 1052–1060. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Ke, W.; Zeng, J.; Zhu, F.; Luo, X.; Feng, J.; He, J.; Xue, S. Geochemical partitioning and spatial distribution of heavy metals in soils contaminated by lead smelting. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 307, 119486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Gholizadeh, M.; Hu, X. Removal of heavy metals from soil with biochar composite: A critical review of the mechanism. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 105830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Patra, J.; Panda, S.; Dhal, N. Biochar as a low-cost adsorbent for heavy metal removal: A review. Int. J. Res. Biosci. 2017, 6, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  5. Qiu, B.; Tao, X.; Wang, H.; Li, W.; Ding, X.; Chu, H. Biochar as a low-cost adsorbent for aqueous heavy metal removal: A review. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2021, 155, 105081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Sun, H.; Chen, Y.; Yi, Z. After-Effects of Hydrochar Amendment on Water Spinach Production, N Leaching, and N2O Emission from a Vegetable Soil under Varying N-Inputs. Plants 2022, 11, 3444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Tomczyk, A.; Sokołowska, Z.; Boguta, P. Biochar physicochemical properties: Pyrolysis temperature and feedstock kind effects. Rev. Environ. Sci. Bio/Technol. 2020, 19, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Wang, L.; Wang, Y.; Ma, F.; Tankpa, V.; Bai, S.; Guo, X.; Wang, X. Mechanisms and reutilization of modified biochar used for removal of heavy metals from wastewater: A review. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 668, 1298–1309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Jjagwe, J.; Olupot, P.W.; Menya, E.; Kalibbala, H.M. Synthesis and Application of Granular Activated Carbon from Biomass Waste Materials for Water Treatment: A Review. J. Bioresour. Bioprod. 2021, 6, 292–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Palansooriya, K.N.; Shaheen, S.M.; Chen, S.S.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Hashimoto, Y.; Hou, D.; Bolan, N.S.; Rinklebe, J.; Ok, Y.S. Soil amendments for immobilization of potentially toxic elements in contaminated soils: A critical review. Environ. Int. 2020, 134, 105046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wang, L.; Rinklebe, J.; Tack, F.M.; Hou, D. A review of green remediation strategies for heavy metal contaminated soil. Soil Use Manag. 2021, 37, 936–963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kumar, A.; Bhattacharya, T. Biochar: A sustainable solution. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2021, 23, 6642–6680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yang, X.; Zhang, S.; Ju, M.; Liu, L. Preparation and modification of biochar materials and their application in soil remediation. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 1365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Obey, G.; Adelaide, M.; Ramaraj, R. Biochar derived from non-customized matamba fruit shell as an adsorbent for wastewater treatment. J. Bioresour. Bioprod. 2022, 7, 109–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lin, H.; Wang, Z.; Liu, C.; Dong, Y. Technologies for removing heavy metal from contaminated soils on farmland: A review. Chemosphere 2022, 305, 135457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Muthayya, S.; Sugimoto, J.D.; Montgomery, S.; Maberly, G.F. An overview of global rice production, supply, trade, and consumption. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2014, 1324, 7–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Fleig, O.P.; Raymundo, L.M.; Trierweiler, L.F.; Trierweiler, J.O. Study of Rice Husk Continuous Torrefaction as a Pretreatment for Fast Pyrolysis. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2020, 154, 104994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Vieira, F.R.; Luna, C.M.R.; Arce, G.L.; Ávila, I. Optimization of slow pyrolysis process parameters using a fixed bed reactor for biochar yield from rice husk. Biomass Bioenergy 2020, 132, 105412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Satbaev, B.; Yefremova, S.; Zharmenov, A.; Kablanbekov, A.; Yermishin, S.; Shalabaev, N.; Satbaev, A.; Khen, V. Rice husk research: From environmental pollutant to a promising source of organo-mineral raw materials. Materials 2021, 14, 4119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Mohammadi, A.; Cowie, A.; Mai, T.L.A.; de la Rosa, R.A.; Kristiansen, P.; Brandao, M.; Joseph, S. Biochar use for climate-change mitigation in rice cropping systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 116, 61–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sadeghi Afjeh, M.; Bagheri Marandi, G.; Zohuriaan-Mehr, M.J. Nitrate removal from aqueous solutions by adsorption onto hydrogel-rice husk biochar composite. Water Environ. Res. 2020, 92, 934–947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Alvarez, J.; Lopez, G.; Amutio, M.; Bilbao, J.; Olazar, M. Upgrading the rice husk char obtained by flash pyrolysis for the production of amorphous silica and high quality activated carbon. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 170, 132–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Liou, T.-H.; Wang, P.-Y. Utilization of rice husk wastes in synthesis of graphene oxide-based carbonaceous nanocomposites. Waste Manag. 2020, 108, 51–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Qu, J.; Li, B.; Wei, T.; Li, C.; Liu, B. Effects of rice-husk ash on soil consistency and compactibility. Catena 2014, 122, 54–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Khalid, Z.B.; Siddique, M.N.I.; Nayeem, A.; Adyel, T.M.; Ismail, S.B.; Ibrahim, M.Z. Biochar application as sustainable precursors for enhanced anaerobic digestion: A systematic review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 105489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Janu, R.; Mrlik, V.; Ribitsch, D.; Hofman, J.; Sedláček, P.; Bielská, L.; Soja, G. Biochar surface functional groups as affected by biomass feedstock, biochar composition and pyrolysis temperature. Carbon Resour. Convers. 2021, 4, 36–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Teng, F.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, D.; Shen, M.; Hu, D. Iron-modified rice husk hydrochar and its immobilization effect for Pb and Sb in contaminated soil. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 398, 122977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Selvaranjan, K.; Navaratnam, S.; Gamage, J.; Thamboo, J.; Siddique, R.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, G. Thermal and environmental impact analysis of rice husk ash-based mortar as insulating wall plaster. Constr. Build. Mater. 2021, 283, 122744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Venkatanarayanan, H.K.; Rangaraju, P.R. Evaluation of sulfate resistance of Portland cement mortars containing low-carbon rice husk ash. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 2014, 26, 582–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Godlewska, P.; Ok, Y.S.; Oleszczuk, P. The dark side of black gold: Ecotoxicological aspects of biochar and biochar-amended soils. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 403, 123833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhang, C.; Zeng, G.; Huang, D.; Lai, C.; Chen, M.; Cheng, M.; Tang, W.; Tang, L.; Dong, H.; Huang, B. Biochar for environmental management: Mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, contaminant treatment, and potential negative impacts. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 373, 902–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ndirangu, S.M.; Liu, Y.; Xu, K.; Song, S. Risk evaluation of pyrolyzed biochar from multiple wastes. J. Chem. 2019, 2019, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  33. Chatzimichailidou, S.; Xanthopoulou, M.; Tolkou, A.K.; Katsoyiannis, I.A. Biochar Derived from Rice by-Products for Arsenic and Chromium Removal by Adsorption: A Review. J. Compos. Sci. 2023, 7, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Samsuri, A.W.; Sadegh-Zadeh, F.; Seh-Bardan, B.J. Characterization of biochars produced from oil palm and rice husks and their adsorption capacities for heavy metals. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2014, 11, 967–976. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Severo, F.F.; da Silva, L.S.; Moscôso, J.S.C.; Sarfaraz, Q.; Rodrigues Júnior, L.F.; Lopes, A.F.; Marzari, L.B.; Molin, G.D. Chemical and physical characterization of rice husk biochar and ashes and their iron adsorption capacity. SN Appl. Sci. 2020, 2, 1286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Singh, C.; Tiwari, S.; Gupta, V.K.; Singh, J.S. The effect of rice husk biochar on soil nutrient status, microbial biomass and paddy productivity of nutrient poor agriculture soils. Catena 2018, 171, 485–493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Shackley, S.; Carter, S.; Knowles, T.; Middelink, E.; Haefele, S.; Sohi, S.; Cross, A.; Haszeldine, S. Sustainable gasification–biochar systems? A case-study of rice-husk gasification in Cambodia, Part I: Context, chemical properties, environmental and health and safety issues. Energy Policy 2012, 42, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Adebajo, S.O.; Oluwatobi, F.; Akintokun, P.O.; Ojo, A.E.; Akintokun, A.K.; Gbodope, I.S. Impacts of rice-husk biochar on soil microbial biomass and agronomic performances of tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 1787. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. V Varela Milla, O.; Rivera, E.B.; Huang, W.-J.; Chien, C.; Wang, Y.-M. Agronomic properties and characterization of rice husk and wood biochars and their effect on the growth of water spinach in a field test. J. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 2013, 13, 251–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Prakongkep, N.; Gilkes, R.J.; Wiriyakitnateekul, W.; Duangchan, A.; Darunsontaya, T. The effects of pyrolysis conditions on the chemical and physical properties of rice husk biochar. Int. J. Mater. Sci. 2013, 3, 97–103. [Google Scholar]
  41. Asadi, H.; Ghorbani, M.; Rezaei-Rashti, M.; Abrishamkesh, S.; Amirahmadi, E.; Chengrong, C.; Gorji, M. Application of rice husk biochar for achieving sustainable agriculture and environment. Rice Sci. 2021, 28, 325–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Malyan, S.K.; Kumar, S.S.; Fagodiya, R.K.; Ghosh, P.; Kumar, A.; Singh, R.; Singh, L. Biochar for environmental sustainability in the energy-water-agroecosystem nexus. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021, 149, 111379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Qian, K.; Kumar, A.; Zhang, H.; Bellmer, D.; Huhnke, R. Recent advances in utilization of biochar. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 42, 1055–1064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Lewandowski, W.M.; Ryms, M.; Kosakowski, W. Thermal biomass conversion: A review. Processes 2020, 8, 516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Fernandes, I.J.; Calheiro, D.; Kieling, A.G.; Moraes, C.A.M.; Rocha, T.L.A.C.; Brehm, F.A.; Modolo, R.C.E. Characterization of rice husk ash produced using different biomass combustion techniques for energy. Fuel 2016, 165, 351–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Cha, J.S.; Park, S.H.; Jung, S.-C.; Ryu, C.; Jeon, J.-K.; Shin, M.-C.; Park, Y.-K. Production and utilization of biochar: A review. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2016, 40, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Khalil, U.; Shakoor, M.B.; Ali, S.; Rizwan, M.; Alyemeni, M.N.; Wijaya, L. Adsorption-reduction performance of tea waste and rice husk biochars for Cr (VI) elimination from wastewater. J. Saudi Chem. Soc. 2020, 24, 799–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Dunnigan, L.; Ashman, P.J.; Zhang, X.; Kwong, C.W. Production of biochar from rice husk: Particulate emissions from the combustion of raw pyrolysis volatiles. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 172, 1639–1645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Cai, W.; Dai, L.; Liu, R. Catalytic fast pyrolysis of rice husk for bio-oil production. Energy 2018, 154, 477–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Zhang, X.; Zhang, S.; Yang, H.; Shao, J.; Chen, Y.; Feng, Y.; Wang, X.; Chen, H. Effects of hydrofluoric acid pre-deashing of rice husk on physicochemical properties and CO2 adsorption performance of nitrogen-enriched biochar. Energy 2015, 91, 903–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Rajapaksha, A.U.; Vithanage, M.; Ahmad, M.; Seo, D.-C.; Cho, J.-S.; Lee, S.-E.; Lee, S.S.; Ok, Y.S. Enhanced sulfamethazine removal by steam-activated invasive plant-derived biochar. J. Hazard. Mater. 2015, 290, 43–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Paethanom, A.; Yoshikawa, K. Influence of pyrolysis temperature on rice husk char characteristics and its tar adsorption capability. Energies 2012, 5, 4941–4951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  53. Abrishamkesh, S.; Gorji, M.; Asadi, H.; Bagheri-Marandi, G.; Pourbabaee, A. Effects of rice husk biochar application on the properties of alkaline soil and lentil growth. Plant Soil Environ. 2015, 61, 475–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Naqvi, S.R.; Uemura, Y.; Osman, N.; Yusup, S. Production and evaluation of physicochemical characteristics of paddy husk bio-char for its C sequestration applications. BioEnergy Res. 2015, 8, 1800–1809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Shen, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, M.; Rinklebe, J.; Ma, Y.; Hou, D. Effect of production temperature and particle size of rice husk biochar on mercury immobilization and erosion prevention of a mercury contaminated soil. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 420, 126646. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Abbas, Q.; Liu, G.; Yousaf, B.; Ali, M.U.; Ullah, H.; Munir, M.A.M.; Liu, R. Contrasting effects of operating conditions and biomass particle size on bulk characteristics and surface chemistry of rice husk derived-biochars. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2018, 134, 281–292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Wei, L.; Huang, Y.; Li, Y.; Huang, L.; Mar, N.N.; Huang, Q.; Liu, Z. Biochar characteristics produced from rice husks and their sorption properties for the acetanilide herbicide metolachlor. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 4552–4561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Shi, J.; Fan, X.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Wang, F.; Shen, Z.; Hou, D.; Alessi, D.S. Removal of lead by rice husk biochars produced at different temperatures and implications for their environmental utilizations. Chemosphere 2019, 235, 825–831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Liao, W.; Zhang, X.; Ke, S.; Shao, J.; Yang, H.; Zhang, S.; Chen, H. Effect of different biomass species and pyrolysis temperatures on heavy metal adsorption, stability and economy of biochar. Ind. Crops Prod. 2022, 186, 115238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Pariyar, P.; Kumari, K.; Jain, M.K.; Jadhao, P.S. Evaluation of change in biochar properties derived from different feedstock and pyrolysis temperature for environmental and agricultural application. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 713, 136433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Pratiwi, E.P.A.; Hillary, A.K.; Fukuda, T.; Shinogi, Y. The effects of rice husk char on ammonium, nitrate and phosphate retention and leaching in loamy soil. Geoderma 2016, 277, 61–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Yi, S.; Gao, B.; Sun, Y.; Wu, J.; Shi, X.; Wu, B.; Hu, X. Removal of levofloxacin from aqueous solution using rice-husk and wood-chip biochars. Chemosphere 2016, 150, 694–701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Mayakaduwa, S.; Herath, I.; Ok, Y.S.; Mohan, D.; Vithanage, M. Insights into aqueous carbofuran removal by modified and non-modified rice husk biochars. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 22755–22763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Huang, F.; Gao, L.-Y.; Wu, R.-R.; Wang, H.; Xiao, R.-B. Qualitative and quantitative characterization of adsorption mechanisms for Cd2+ by silicon-rich biochar. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 731, 139163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Mohammadi, A.; Cowie, A.L.; Mai, T.L.A.; Brandao, M.; de la Rosa, R.A.; Kristiansen, P.; Joseph, S. Climate-change and health effects of using rice husk for biochar-compost: Comparing three pyrolysis systems. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 162, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Phuong, H.T.; Uddin, M.; Kato, Y. Characterization of biochar from pyrolysis of rice husk and rice straw. J. Biobased Mater. Bioenergy 2015, 9, 439–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Angn, D. Effect of pyrolysis temperature and heating rate on biochar obtained from pyrolysis of safflower seed press cake. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 128, 593–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Tripathi, M.; Sahu, J.N.; Ganesan, P. Effect of process parameters on production of biochar from biomass waste through pyrolysis: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 55, 467–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Xu, Y.; Luo, G.; He, S.; Deng, F.; Pang, Q.; Xu, Y.; Yao, H. Efficient removal of elemental mercury by magnetic chlorinated biochars derived from co-pyrolysis of Fe(NO3)3 -laden wood and polyvinyl chloride waste. Fuel 2019, 239, 982–990. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Liu, Z.; Xu, Z.; Xu, L.; Buyong, F.; Chay, T.C.; Li, Z.; Cai, Y.; Hu, B.; Zhu, Y.; Wang, X. Modified biochar: Synthesis and mechanism for removal of environmental heavy metals. Carbon Res. 2022, 1, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Bushra, B.; Remya, N. Biochar from pyrolysis of rice husk biomass—Characteristics, modification and environmental application. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2020, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Han, X.; He, Y.; Zhao, H.; Wang, D. Optimization of preparation conditions of activated carbon from the residue of desilicated rice husk using response surface methodology. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2014, 31, 1810–1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Menya, E.; Olupot, P.; Storz, H.; Lubwama, M.; Kiros, Y. Production and performance of activated carbon from rice husks for removal of natural organic matter from water: A review. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2018, 129, 271–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Akhil, D.; Lakshmi, D.; Kartik, A.; Vo, D.-V.N.; Arun, J.; Gopinath, K.P. Production, characterization, activation and environmental applications of engineered biochar: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2021, 19, 2261–2297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Xiao, Y.; Lyu, H.; Tang, J.; Wang, K.; Sun, H. Effects of ball milling on the photochemistry of biochar: Enrofloxacin degradation and possible mechanisms. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 384, 123311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Lee, J.-H.; Heo, Y.-J.; Park, S.-J. Effect of silica removal and steam activation on extra-porous activated carbons from rice husks for methane storage. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2018, 43, 22377–22384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Rajapaksha, A.U.; Chen, S.S.; Tsang, D.C.; Zhang, M.; Vithanage, M.; Mandal, S.; Gao, B.; Bolan, N.S.; Ok, Y.S. Engineered/designer biochar for contaminant removal/immobilization from soil and water: Potential and implication of biochar modification. Chemosphere 2016, 148, 276–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Panwar, N.; Pawar, A. Influence of activation conditions on the physicochemical properties of activated biochar: A review. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2020, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhao, L.; Zheng, W.; Mašek, O.; Chen, X.; Gu, B.; Sharma, B.K.; Cao, X. Roles of phosphoric acid in biochar formation: Synchronously improving carbon retention and sorption capacity. J. Environ. Qual. 2017, 46, 393–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Amen, R.; Bashir, H.; Bibi, I.; Shaheen, S.M.; Niazi, N.K.; Shahid, M.; Hussain, M.M.; Antoniadis, V.; Shakoor, M.B.; Al-Solaimani, S.G. A critical review on arsenic removal from water using biochar-based sorbents: The significance of modification and redox reactions. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 396, 125195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. He, R.; Yuan, X.; Huang, Z.; Wang, H.; Jiang, L.; Huang, J.; Tan, M.; Li, H. Activated biochar with iron-loading and its application in removing Cr (VI) from aqueous solution. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 2019, 579, 123642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Goswami, R.; Shim, J.; Deka, S.; Kumari, D.; Kataki, R.; Kumar, M. Characterization of cadmium removal from aqueous solution by biochar produced from Ipomoea fistulosa at different pyrolytic temperatures. Ecol. Eng. 2016, 97, 444–451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Tsai, C.-Y.; Lin, P.-Y.; Hsieh, S.-L.; Kirankumar, R.; Patel, A.K.; Singhania, R.-R.; Dong, C.-D.; Chen, C.-W.; Hsieh, S. Engineered mesoporous biochar derived from rice husk for efficient removal of malachite green from wastewaters. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 347, 126749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Xiang, J.; Lin, Q.; Cheng, S.; Guo, J.; Yao, X.; Liu, Q.; Yin, G.; Liu, D. Enhanced adsorption of Cd(II) from aqueous solution by a magnesium oxide–rice husk biochar composite. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2018, 25, 14032–14042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Liu, T.; Lawluvy, Y.; Shi, Y.; Ighalo, J.O.; He, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yap, P.-S. Adsorption of cadmium and lead from aqueous solution using modified biochar: A review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 106502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Liang, M.; Lu, L.; He, H.; Li, J.; Zhu, Z.; Zhu, Y. Applications of biochar and modified biochar in heavy metal contaminated soil: A descriptive review. Sustainability 2021, 13, 14041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Zhou, Y.; Zhang, H.; Cai, L.; Guo, J.; Wang, Y.; Ji, L.; Song, W. Preparation and characterization of macroalgae biochar nanomaterials with highly efficient adsorption and photodegradation ability. Materials 2018, 11, 1709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Sizmur, T.; Fresno, T.; Akgül, G.; Frost, H.; Moreno-Jiménez, E. Biochar modification to enhance sorption of inorganics from water. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 246, 34–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Zhang, A.; Li, X.; Xing, J.; Xu, G. Adsorption of potentially toxic elements in water by modified biochar: A review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2020, 8, 104196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. O′Connor, D.; Peng, T.; Li, G.; Wang, S.; Duan, L.; Mulder, J.; Cornelissen, G.; Cheng, Z.; Yang, S.; Hou, D. Sulfur-modified rice husk biochar: A green method for the remediation of mercury contaminated soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 621, 819–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Chen, M.; Wang, F.; Zhang, D.-L.; Yi, W.-M.; Liu, Y. Effects of acid modification on the structure and adsorption NH4+-N properties of biochar. Renew. Energy 2021, 169, 1343–1350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Yang, G.-X.; Jiang, H. Amino modification of biochar for enhanced adsorption of copper ions from synthetic wastewater. Water Res. 2014, 48, 396–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Gai, C.; Guo, Y.; Peng, N.; Liu, T.; Liu, Z. N-Doped biochar derived from co-hydrothermal carbonization of rice husk and Chlorella pyrenoidosa for enhancing copper ion adsorption. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 53713–53722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Bhatnagar, A.; Hogland, W.; Marques, M.; Sillanpää, M. An overview of the modification methods of activated carbon for its water treatment applications. Chem. Eng. J. 2013, 219, 499–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Cheng, H.; Sun, Y.; Wang, X.; Zou, S.; Ye, G.; Huang, H.; Ye, D. Hierarchical porous carbon fabricated from cellulose-degrading fungus modified rice husks: Ultrahigh surface area and impressive improvement in toluene adsorption. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 392, 122298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Narzari, R.; Bordoloi, N.; Chutia, R.S.; Borkotoki, B.; Gogoi, N.; Bora, A.; Kataki, R. Biochar: An overview on its production, properties and potential benefits. Biol. Biotechnol. Sustain. Dev. 2015, 1, 13–40. [Google Scholar]
  97. Ahmad, M.; Rajapaksha, A.U.; Lim, J.E.; Zhang, M.; Bolan, N.; Mohan, D.; Vithanage, M.; Lee, S.S.; Ok, Y.S. Biochar as a sorbent for contaminant management in soil and water: A review. Chemosphere 2014, 99, 19–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Sun, C.; Chen, T.; Huang, Q.; Wang, J.; Lu, S.; Yan, J. Enhanced adsorption for Pb (II) and Cd (II) of magnetic rice husk biochar by KMnO 4 modification. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2019, 26, 8902–8913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Yin, Q.; Zhang, B.; Wang, R.; Zhao, Z. Biochar as an adsorbent for inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus removal from water: A review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2017, 24, 26297–26309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Yrjälä, K.; Ramakrishnan, M.; Salo, E. Agricultural waste streams as resource in circular economy for biochar production towards carbon neutrality. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sci. Health 2022, 26, 100339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Sanka, P.M.; Rwiza, M.J.; Mtei, K.M. Removal of Selected Heavy Metal Ions from Industrial Wastewater Using Rice and Corn Husk Biochar. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2020, 231, 244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Amen, R.; Yaseen, M.; Mukhtar, A.; Klemeš, J.J.; Saqib, S.; Ullah, S.; Al-Sehemi, A.G.; Rafiq, S.; Babar, M.; Fatt, C.L.; et al. Lead and cadmium removal from wastewater using eco-friendly biochar adsorbent derived from rice husk, wheat straw, and corncob. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2020, 1, 100006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Higashikawa, F.S.; Conz, R.F.; Colzato, M.; Cerri, C.E.P.; Alleoni, L.R.F. Effects of feedstock type and slow pyrolysis temperature in the production of biochars on the removal of cadmium and nickel from water. J. Clean. Prod. 2016, 137, 965–972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Jia, Y.; Shi, S.; Liu, J.; Su, S.; Liang, Q.; Zeng, X.; Li, T. Study of the effect of pyrolysis temperature on the Cd2+ adsorption characteristics of biochar. Appl. Sci. 2018, 8, 1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Wang, L.; Bolan, N.S.; Tsang, D.C.W.; Hou, D. Green immobilization of toxic metals using alkaline enhanced rice husk biochar: Effects of pyrolysis temperature and KOH concentration. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 720, 137584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Liu, X.; Zhang, Y.; Li, Z.; Feng, R.; Zhang, Y. Characterization of corncob-derived biochar and pyrolysis kinetics in comparison with corn stalk and sawdust. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 170, 76–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Suwunwong, T.; Hussain, N.; Chantrapromma, S.; Phoungthong, K. Facile synthesis of corncob biochar via in-house modified pyrolysis for removal of methylene blue in wastewater. Mater. Res. Express 2020, 7, 015518. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Jing, F.; Sohi, S.P.; Liu, Y.; Chen, J. Insight into mechanism of aged biochar for adsorption of PAEs: Reciprocal effects of ageing and coexisting Cd2+. Environ. Pollut. 2018, 242, 1098–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Pipíška, M.; Krajčíková, E.K.; Hvostik, M.; Frišták, V.; Ďuriška, L.; Černičková, I.; Kaňuchová, M.; Conte, P.; Soja, G. Biochar from Wood Chips and Corn Cobs for Adsorption of Thioflavin T and Erythrosine B. Materials 2022, 15, 1492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Wan, S.; Hua, Z.; Sun, L.; Bai, X.; Liang, L. Biosorption of nitroimidazole antibiotics onto chemically modified porous biochar prepared by experimental design: Kinetics, thermodynamics, and equilibrium analysis. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2016, 104, 422–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Xu, D.; Cao, J.; Li, Y.; Howard, A.; Yu, K. Effect of pyrolysis temperature on characteristics of biochars derived from different feedstocks: A case study on ammonium adsorption capacity. Waste Manag. 2019, 87, 652–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Cheng, S.; Liu, Y.; Xing, B.; Qin, X.; Zhang, C.; Xia, H. Lead and cadmium clean removal from wastewater by sustainable biochar derived from poplar saw dust. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 314, 128074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Mierzwa-Hersztek, M.; Wolny-Koładka, K.; Gondek, K.; Gałązka, A.; Gawryjołek, K. Effect of Coapplication of Biochar and Nutrients on Microbiocenotic Composition, Dehydrogenase Activity Index and Chemical Properties of Sandy Soil. Waste Biomass Valorization 2020, 11, 3911–3923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  114. Manna, S.; Singh, N.; Purakayastha, T.J.; Berns, A.E. Effect of deashing on physico-chemical properties of wheat and rice straw biochars and potential sorption of pyrazosulfuron-ethyl. Arab. J. Chem. 2020, 13, 1247–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Rajabi, H.; Hadi Mosleh, M.; Prakoso, T.; Ghaemi, N.; Mandal, P.; Lea-Langton, A.; Sedighi, M. Competitive adsorption of multicomponent volatile organic compounds on biochar. Chemosphere 2021, 283, 131288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Chen, D.; Wang, X.; Wang, X.; Feng, K.; Su, J.; Dong, J. The mechanism of cadmium sorption by sulphur-modified wheat straw biochar and its application cadmium-contaminated soil. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 714, 136550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Tofan, L. Polymeric Biomass Derived Adsorbents for Co (II) Remediation, Recycling and Analysis. Polymers 2022, 14, 1647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Wang, Y.; Liu, R. Comparison of characteristics of twenty-one types of biochar and their ability to remove multi-heavy metals and methylene blue in solution. Fuel Process. Technol. 2017, 160, 55–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Bansal, M.; Garg, R.; Garg, V.K.; Garg, R.; Singh, D. Sequestration of heavy metal ions from multi-metal simulated wastewater systems using processed agricultural biomass. Chemosphere 2022, 296, 133966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Xu, X.; Cao, X.; Zhao, L. Comparison of rice husk-and dairy manure-derived biochars for simultaneously removing heavy metals from aqueous solutions: Role of mineral components in biochars. Chemosphere 2013, 92, 955–961. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Zhang, X.; Gao, Z.; Fan, X.; Tan, L.; Jiang, Y.; Zheng, W.; Han, F.X.; Liang, Y. A comparative study on adsorption of cadmium and lead by hydrochars and biochars derived from rice husk and Zizania latifolia straw. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  122. Dai, Y.; Zhang, N.; Xing, C.; Cui, Q.; Sun, Q. The adsorption, regeneration and engineering applications of biochar for removal organic pollutants: A review. Chemosphere 2019, 223, 12–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  123. Wu, W.; Min, Y.; Feng, Q.; Mcgrouther, K.; Wang, H.; Lu, H.; Chen, Y. Chemical characterization of rice straw-derived biochar for soil amendment. Biomass Bioenergy 2012, 47, 268–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Román, S.; Ledesma, B.; González, J.F.; Al-Kassir, A.; Engo, G.; Álvarez-Murillo, A. Two stage thermal regeneration of exhausted activated carbons. Steam gasification of effluents. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2013, 103, 201–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Gul, S.; Whalen, J.K.; Thomas, B.W.; Sachdeva, V.; Deng, H. Physico-chemical properties and microbial responses in biochar-amended soils: Mechanisms and future directions. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2015, 206, 46–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Lingamdinne, L.P.; Roh, H.; Choi, Y.-L.; Koduru, J.R.; Yang, J.-K.; Chang, Y.-Y. Influencing factors on sorption of TNT and RDX using rice husk biochar. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2015, 32, 178–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Xu, G.; Wei, L.; Sun, J.; Shao, H.; Chang, S. What is more important for enhancing nutrient bioavailability with biochar application into a sandy soil: Direct or indirect mechanism? Ecol. Eng. 2013, 52, 119–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Dai, Z.; Zhang, X.; Tang, C.; Muhammad, N.; Wu, J.; Brookes, P.C.; Xu, J. Potential role of biochars in decreasing soil acidification-a critical review. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 581, 601–611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Oladele, S.O. Changes in physicochemical properties and quality index of an Alfisol after three years of rice husk biochar amendment in rainfed rice–Maize cropping sequence. Geoderma 2019, 353, 359–371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Kartika, K.; Lakitan, B.; Wijaya, A.; Kadir, S.; Widuri, L.I.; Siaga, E.; Meihana, M. Effects of particle size and application rate of rice-husk biochar on chemical properties of tropical wetland soil, rice growth and yield. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 2018, 12, 817–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Zhang, J.; Zhang, S.; Niu, C.; Jiang, J.; Sun, H. Positive Effects of Biochar on the Degraded Forest Soil and Tree Growth in China: A Systematic Review. Phyton-Int. J. Exp. Bot. 2022, 91, 1601–1616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Ghorbani, M.; Asadi, H.; Abrishamkesh, S. Effects of rice husk biochar on selected soil properties and nitrate leaching in loamy sand and clay soil. Int. Soil Water Conserv. Res. 2019, 7, 258–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Quilliam, R.S.; Glanville, H.C.; Wade, S.C.; Jones, D.L. Life in the ‘charosphere’—Does biochar in agricultural soil provide a significant habitat for microorganisms? Soil Biol. Biochem. 2013, 65, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Gao, X.; Cheng, H.Y.; Valle, I.D.; Liu, S.; Masiello, C.A.; Silberg, J.J. Charcoal Disrupts Soil Microbial Communication through a Combination of Signal Sorption and Hydrolysis. ACS Omega 2016, 1, 226–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  135. Stefaniuk, M.; Oleszczuk, P. Addition of biochar to sewage sludge decreases freely dissolved PAHs content and toxicity of sewage sludge-amended soil. Environ. Pollut. 2016, 218, 242–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Sohi, S.P.; Krull, E.; Lopez-Capel, E.; Bol, R. A review of biochar and its use and function in soil. Adv. Agron. 2010, 105, 47–82. [Google Scholar]
  137. Li, H.; Dong, X.; da Silva, E.B.; de Oliveira, L.M.; Chen, Y.; Ma, L.Q. Mechanisms of metal sorption by biochars: Biochar characteristics and modifications. Chemosphere 2017, 178, 466–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Bian, R.; Shi, W.; Luo, J.; Li, W.; Wang, Y.; Joseph, S.; Gould, H.; Zheng, J.; Zhang, X.; Liu, X.; et al. Copyrolysis of food waste and rice husk to biochar to create a sustainable resource for soil amendment: A pilot-scale case study in Jinhua, China. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 347, 131269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Derakhshan Nejad, Z.; Jung, M.C. The effects of biochar and inorganic amendments on soil remediation in the presence of hyperaccumulator plant. Int. J. Energy Environ. Eng. 2017, 8, 317–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  140. Singh Karam, D.; Nagabovanalli, P.; Sundara Rajoo, K.; Fauziah Ishak, C.; Abdu, A.; Rosli, Z.; Melissa Muharam, F.; Zulperi, D. An overview on the preparation of rice husk biochar, factors affecting its properties, and its agriculture application. J. Saudi Soc. Agric. Sci. 2022, 21, 149–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Duwiejuah, A.B.; Abubakari, A.H.; Quainoo, A.K.; Amadu, Y. Review of biochar properties and remediation of metal pollution of water and soil. J. Health Pollut. 2020, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  142. Zheng, R.-L.; Cai, C.; Liang, J.-H.; Huang, Q.; Chen, Z.; Huang, Y.-Z.; Arp, H.P.H.; Sun, G.-X. The effects of biochars from rice residue on the formation of iron plaque and the accumulation of Cd, Zn, Pb, As in rice (Oryza sativa L.) seedlings. Chemosphere 2012, 89, 856–862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Ibrahim, M.; Khan, S.; Hao, X.; Li, G. Biochar effects on metal bioaccumulation and arsenic speciation in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) grown in contaminated soil. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 13, 2467–2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  144. Zheng, R.; Chen, Z.; Cai, C.; Wang, X.; Huang, Y.; Xiao, B.; Sun, G. Effect of biochars from rice husk, bran, and straw on heavy metal uptake by pot-grown wheat seedling in a historically contaminated soil. BioResources 2013, 8, 5965–5982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  145. Yang, F.; Zhao, L.; Gao, B.; Xu, X.; Cao, X. The interfacial behavior between biochar and soil minerals and its effect on biochar stability. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 2264–2271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  146. Zama, E.F.; Reid, B.J.; Arp, H.P.H.; Sun, G.-X.; Yuan, H.-Y.; Zhu, Y.-G. Advances in research on the use of biochar in soil for remediation: A review. J. Soils Sediments 2018, 18, 2433–2450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  147. Oni, B.A.; Oziegbe, O.; Olawole, O.O. Significance of biochar application to the environment and economy. Ann. Agric. Sci. 2019, 64, 222–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Qiu, M.; Liu, L.; Ling, Q.; Cai, Y.; Yu, S.; Wang, S.; Fu, D.; Hu, B.; Wang, X. Biochar for the removal of contaminants from soil and water: A review. Biochar 2022, 4, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Singh, C.; Tiwari, S.; Singh, J. Impact of rice husk biochar on nitrogen mineralization and methanotrophs community dynamics in paddy soil. Int. J. Pure Appl. Biosci. 2017, 5, 428–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Dong, D.; Feng, Q.; Mcgrouther, K.; Yang, M.; Wang, H.; Wu, W. Effects of biochar amendment on rice growth and nitrogen retention in a waterlogged paddy field. J. Soils Sediments 2015, 15, 153–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Tubaña, B.S.; Heckman, J.R. Silicon in soils and plants. Silicon Plant Dis. 2015, 6, 7–51. [Google Scholar]
  152. Wang, Y.; Xiao, X.; Zhang, K.; Chen, B. Effects of biochar amendment on the soil silicon cycle in a soil-rice ecosystem. Environ. Pollut. 2019, 248, 823–833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  153. Farooq, M.A.; Dietz, K.-J. Silicon as versatile player in plant and human biology: Overlooked and poorly understood. Front. Plant Sci. 2015, 6, 994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  154. Souri, Z.; Khanna, K.; Karimi, N.; Ahmad, P. Silicon and plants: Current knowledge and future prospects. J. Plant Growth Regul. 2021, 40, 906–925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Rizwan, M.; ur Rehman, M.Z.; Ali, S.; Abbas, T.; Maqbool, A.; Bashir, A. Biochar is a potential source of silicon fertilizer: An overview. Biochar Biomass Waste 2019, 225–238. [Google Scholar]
  156. Natasha, N.; Shahid, M.; Khalid, S.; Bibi, I.; Naeem, M.A.; Niazi, N.K.; Tack, F.M.; Ippolito, J.A.; Rinklebe, J. Influence of biochar on trace element uptake, toxicity and detoxification in plants and associated health risks: A critical review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 52, 2803–2843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Azhar, M.; ur Rehman, M.Z.; Ali, S.; Qayyum, M.F.; Naeem, A.; Ayub, M.A.; ul Haq, M.A.; Iqbal, A.; Rizwan, M. Comparative effectiveness of different biochars and conventional organic materials on growth, photosynthesis and cadmium accumulation in cereals. Chemosphere 2019, 227, 72–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Adrees, M.; Ali, S.; Rizwan, M.; Zia-ur-Rehman, M.; Ibrahim, M.; Abbas, F.; Farid, M.; Qayyum, M.F.; Irshad, M.K. Mechanisms of silicon-mediated alleviation of heavy metal toxicity in plants: A review. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2015, 119, 186–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Wang, Y.; Xiao, X.; Chen, B. Biochar impacts on soil silicon dissolution kinetics and their interaction mechanisms. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8, 8040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  160. Wang, Y.; Xiao, X.; Xu, Y.; Chen, B. Environmental effects of silicon within biochar (sichar) and carbon–silicon coupling mechanisms: A critical review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 13570–13582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Quilliam, R.S.; Rangecroft, S.; Emmett, B.A.; Deluca, T.H.; Jones, D.L. Is biochar a source or sink for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds in agricultural soils? Gcb Bioenergy 2013, 5, 96–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Mukherjee, S.; Sarkar, B.; Aralappanavar, V.K.; Mukhopadhyay, R.; Basak, B.B.; Srivastava, P.; Marchut-Mikołajczyk, O.; Bhatnagar, A.; Semple, K.T.; Bolan, N. Biochar-microorganism interactions for organic pollutant remediation: Challenges and perspectives. Environ. Pollut. 2022, 308, 119609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Plants 12 01524 g001 550
Figure 1. Thermochemical conversion modes of biomass fuels and their products [44,46].
Figure 1. Thermochemical conversion modes of biomass fuels and their products [44,46].
Plants 12 01524 g001
Plants 12 01524 g002 550
Figure 2. Removal mechanisms for rice husk biochar.
Figure 2. Removal mechanisms for rice husk biochar.
Plants 12 01524 g002
Plants 12 01524 g003 550
Figure 3. Silica contents of rice husk biochar and other biochar [152,159,160].
Figure 3. Silica contents of rice husk biochar and other biochar [152,159,160].
Plants 12 01524 g003
Table
Table 1. Characteristics and partial elemental composition of rice husk biochar.
Table 1. Characteristics and partial elemental composition of rice husk biochar.
Al (mg/kg)Ca (mg/kg)Si (mg/kg)Mg (mg/kg)As (mg/kg)Reference
0.02% 0.08%0.55Chatzimichailidou et al., 2023 [33]
189.00691.0011%357.00 Samsuri et al., 2014 [34]
0.8135%0.50 Severo et al., 2020 [35]
225168184 Singh et al., 2018 [36]
92–543 66–199162–6581.79–2.50Shackley et al., 2012 [37]
8.24 cmol/kg36.236.29 cmol/kg Adebajo et al., 2022 [38]
220171182 Varela et al., 2013 [39]
7932245166,3389003Prakongkep et al., 2013 [40]
5007804149,4491840
2121340193,74816833
Table
Table 2. Characteristics of rice husk biochar at different pyrolysis temperatures.
Table 2. Characteristics of rice husk biochar at different pyrolysis temperatures.
Temperature (°C)pHH/CO/CSSA (m2/kg)Reference
250–3007.40.790.22 Abrishamkesh et al., 2015 [53]
3005.70.090.428.0Shen et al., 2021 [55]
5009.80.040.1425.0
70010.80.020.06195
3008.651.1920.2646.54Abbas et al., 2018 [56]
40010.280.7170.13412.50
50011.360.5780.06720.11
60012.190.4160.03422.47
3007.470.890.612.57Wei et al., 2017 [57]
50010.470.420.5318.4
75010.510.01990.67953.08
3007.10.06950.31450.632Shi et al., 2019 [58]
5009.50.04590.133445.274
7009.80.02360.0848193.149
400 0.910.124.589Liao et al., 2022 [59]
600 0.540.0634.782
3506.411.100.5211.61Pariyar et al., 2020 [60]
4506.920.910.3018.58
5507.890.650.17248.99
6507.970.580.11280.97
6009.70.110.15179.0Pratiwi et al., 2016 [61]
300 0.07450.4621.39Yi et al., 2016 [62]
600 0.03960.201168.0
3006.240.750.3868.77Mayakaduwa et al., 2017 [63]
5007.170.510.37169.81
7009.870.320.12236.74
70010.720.470.24242.53Huang et al., 2020 [64]
Table
Table 3. Physical and chemical properties of RHB, corncob biochar, and pomelo peel biochar.
Table 3. Physical and chemical properties of RHB, corncob biochar, and pomelo peel biochar.
BiomassSSA (m2/g)H/CO/CAsh (%)Reference
Rice husk292.5950.050.3566.56Jia et al., 2018 [104]
Rice husk118.2 0.42235.4Severo et al., 2020 [35]
Rice husk193.140.0230.08454.0Shi et al., 2019 [58]
Rice husk280.970.580.11 Pariyar et al., 2020 [60]
Rice husk181.90.0210.05238.26Wang et al., 2020 [105]
Corn cob180.10.150.60 Liu et al., 2014 [106]
Corn cob655.800.1331.0421.25Suwunwong et al., 2020 [107]
Corn cob14.5890.1360.7728.30Liao et al., 2022 [59]
Corn cob 0.370.144.0Jing et al., 2018 [108]
Corn cob10.380.0250.1125.25Pipíška et al., 2022 [109]
sawn wood243.10.080.29 Liu et al., 2014 [106]
sawn wood32.80.350.11 Wan et al., 2016 [110]
sawn wood2.9460.080.711.2Xu et al., 2019 [111]
sawn wood86.590.1471.2051.42Cheng et al., 2021 [112]
Wheat straw0.670.0720.286118 g/kgMierzwa-Hersztek et al., 2020 [113]
Wheat straw20.380.4300.15622.5Manna et al., 2020 [114]
Wheat straw58.380.0400.443 Rajabi et al., 2021 [115]
Wheat straw2.940.730.1916.12Chen et al., 2020 [116]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Li, Z.; Zheng, Z.; Li, H.; Xu, D.; Li, X.; Xiang, L.; Tu, S. Review on Rice Husk Biochar as an Adsorbent for Soil and Water Remediation. Plants 2023, 12, 1524. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12071524

AMA Style

Li Z, Zheng Z, Li H, Xu D, Li X, Xiang L, Tu S. Review on Rice Husk Biochar as an Adsorbent for Soil and Water Remediation. Plants. 2023; 12(7):1524. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12071524

Chicago/Turabian Style

Li, Zheyong, Zhiwei Zheng, Hongcheng Li, Dong Xu, Xing Li, Luojing Xiang, and Shuxin Tu. 2023. "Review on Rice Husk Biochar as an Adsorbent for Soil and Water Remediation" Plants 12, no. 7: 1524. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12071524

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop