Creating topsoils and soil conditioners from biosolids and urban residuals

Abstract

A study was conducted to test the suitability of a range of organic and inorganic residuals mixed with municipal biosolids to create a soil amendment effective for a broad range of end uses. Biosolids suitable for unrestricted use were sourced from San Francisco, CA. Residuals including urban wood and yard waste, nut shells, biochar, and sawdust were sourced from nearby producers. Existing biosolids based soil products, peat, and a yard–food compost were used as controls. Experimental mixtures were tested for a range of soil properties, appearance, odor, germination, and growth response. Several mixtures performed as well as or better than the yard–food compost, and several performed comparably to the biosolids soil controls. Yard waste fines blended with biosolids in a 50:50 ratio by volume or yard waste fines blended with biosolids and 20% sand at 40:40:20 were highly effective across all measured indices. Mixed yard and recycled lumber fines blended with biosolids at these same ratios performed similarly well. Blends with a high percentage of char performed poorly in germination and growth response, likely as a result of elevated electrical conductivity. Certain blends such as gypsum and redwood shavings failed to mix well with biosolids to create a uniform looking material and were less visually appealing. In general, blends that met established quality control parameters for compost performed well on the measured indices. These results suggest that blending Class A biosolids with organic and inorganic feedstocks to meet quality criteria developed for compost will create marketable soil products.

Compost Quality Indexes (CQIs) of Biosolids Using Physicochemical, Biological and Ecophysiological Indicators: C and N Mineralization Dynamics

“…The range of T reached in the different treatments was between 45.2 and 19 °C, with an average of 24.6 °C. From the beginning of the mineralization dynamics, temperatures were mesophilic but close to thermophilic [58,60], decreasing in all the treatments up to day 15. Subsequently, there was a gradual increase in T until it reached a range between 20 and 30 °C in all the treatments on day 90, and there were no significant differences 𝑝 0.05 Similarly, the M indicator remained in a range of 39.8 to 62.2% in all the treatments, with an average of 50% and no significant differences between them 𝑝 0.05 .…”

“…Regarding the T indicator, there were significant differences (p ≤ 0.05) between treatments with respect to time, presenting the following order: T1 > T3 > T2 > T4 with values 21.1, 28.0 and 57.3% lower-respectively-compared to T1 (Figure 1A). The range of T reached in the different treatments was between 45.2 and 19 • C, with an average of 24.6 • C. From the beginning of the mineralization dynamics, temperatures were mesophilic but close to thermophilic [58,60], decreasing in all the treatments up to day 15. Subsequently, there was a gradual increase in T until it reached a range between 20 and 30 • C in all the treatments on day 90, and there were no significant differences (p > 0.05) between them during this period.…”

Machine Learning Analysis of Raman Spectra To Quantify the Organic Constituents in Complex Organic–Mineral Mixtures

“…We purchased bentonite, an aluminum phyllosilicate clay, from Sigma-Aldrich, and natural quartz and calcite crystals from EarthLight Gems (Seattle, US). We pulverized the quartz and calcite crystals with a manual steel piston-cylinder rock crusher and filtered the granules through a 2 mm sieve to conform with typical soil particulates. − …”

“…We pulverized the quartz and calcite crystals with a manual steel piston-cylinder rock crusher and filtered the granules through a 2 mm sieve to conform with typical soil particulates. 17 − 19 …”