Enhancing biochar properties through doping: A comparative study of sugarcane bagasse and chicken feather

Abstract

This comparative study explores the production and characterization of biochar derived from a combination of sugarcane bagasse (SB) and chicken feathers (CF), with a doping strategy for each biomass in the other. Two biochars, SB92CF-BC (92% SB and 8% CF) and CF92SB-BC (92% CF and 8% SB), were produced using a top-lit updraft reactor, resulting in a yield of 34% and 27%, respectively. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) analysis revealed characteristic functional groups in both biochars, with minimal impact from the doping process. Scanning electron spectroscopy (SEM) analysis showed distinct morphological features, with SB92CF-BC exhibiting a smoother surface and CF92SB-BC displaying an irregular and rough morphology. Energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis confirmed the presence of several elements in both biochars, with a higher nitrogen content in CF92SB-BC. Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) analysis demonstrated significant specific surface areas for both biochars, exceeding those reported for unmodified SB and CF biochars. The findings suggest potential synergistic effects resulting from the doping strategy. The study expands knowledge on biochar production from diverse biomass sources and highlights the potential for utilizing lignocellulosic and non-lignocellulosic biomass waste materials for sustainable biochar production.

Article Highlights

• Comparative study on biochar production from sugarcane bagasse and chicken feathers.

• Unique properties observed in resulting biochars, including functional groups, morphology, and elemental composition.

• Versatile potential applications in soil amendment, carbon sequestration, and wastewater treatment.

Keywords:

• Sustainable waste management
• biochar
• sugarcane bagasse
• chicken feathers
• doping

Acknowledgement

All authors whose works are cited in this article are hereby acknowledged.

Author contributions

Ebuka Chizitere Emenike; Methodology, Data curation, Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing; Victor Temitope Amusa; Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing; Kingsley O. Iwuozor; Methodology, Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing; Taiwo Temitayo Micheal; Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing; Kehinde Temitope Micheal; Writing – original draft; Writing – review and editing; Adewale George Adeniyi; Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - original draft; Writing - review & editing; Validation; Supervision

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study