Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Large-scale desert ecological restoration is constrained by three coupled problems: aeolian sand aggregates poorly and cannot sustain vegetation; stockpiled phosphogypsum imposes a persistent environmental burden; and importing and ameliorating exogenous topsoil is costly. This study evaluated wet-ground modified phosphogypsum (PG-A), as-received phosphogypsum used as aggregate (PG-B), aeolian sand (AS), and phosphogypsum-based supersulfated cement (PPSC). The liquid–plastic limit, compaction, direct-shear, unconfined compressive strength (UCS), and leaching tests were performed. The plasticity index of the PG-B-AS mixtures ranged from 6.62 to 12.31, and the maximum dry density increased with the AS fraction and with the PPSC content under the tested conditions. For PG-B:AS mass ratios from 1:3 to 3:1, the leachate pH ranged from 6.79 to 7.79. When AS constituted at least 25% of the aggregate, soluble phosphorus met the Class V limit of GB 3838-2002, fluoride met the Class I limit, and the phosphorus stabilization efficiency exceeded 93.5%, reaching 96.9% for GL-16 (PG-B:AS = 25:75, 15% PPSC). Room-temperature 14- and 28-day UCS values ranged from 0.602 to 1.950 MPa and from 0.853 to 2.250 MPa, respectively. The mechanical performance improved with a higher PG-B fraction, whereas the environmental fixation improved in the opposite direction. The XRD and SEM revealed quartz, gypsum, ettringite, and C-S-H development during curing. Within the tested range, PG-B:AS = 25:75 with 12–15% PPSC provided the clearest balance between leachate compliance and retained mechanical improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
贾瑞华 et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: