Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
of RSSBC-2 was articulated by BET analysis. XPS and FESEM analyses revealed the chemical state of surface elements and surface morphology, respectively of the biochar samples. XRD patterns assured the amorphous nature of biochar samples, and functional groups were well depicted by FTIR analysis. DLS showed a larger average hydrodynamic diameter for RSSBC-2 (248.68 nm) with a zeta potential of -14.91 mV compared to RSSBC-1 (115.23 nm) with a heterogeneous charge distribution (-16.72 mV and +37.61 mV). TGA analysis revealed the thermal stability of both biochar samples. Overall, the results explicitly depict a distinction in the properties of biochar samples prepared in two different reactors, where RSSBC-1, with its superior properties suggests the in-house built reactor as a promising alternative to expensive pyrolytic reactors for waste valorization.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mobarak et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: