Phytoremediation, a sustainable remediation technology? Conclusions from a case study. I: Energy production and carbon dioxide abatement

Growth and metal uptake of energy sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) in different metal mine tailings with soil amendments

“…Alternatively, planting energy crops which can adapt to adverse conditions is considered to be a good choice, as it could potentially mitigate the soil contamination and the gradual reduction of fossil fuels at the same time (Olivares et al, 2013). As seen in reports, several researchers have postulated this new strategy of cultivating energy plants, including rapeseed, wheat, corn, castor bean, vetiver grass and willow in metalcontaminated soils for bioenergy production (Hargreaves et al, 2012;Liu et al, 2012;Luu Thai et al, 2011;Van Danh et al, 2007;Witters et al, 2012).…”

Chelant-Assisted Accumulation of Cd, Cu, and Zn in Rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) Biomass as a Renewable Energy Feedstock

“…Due to the fact that agronomic technologies for B. napus cultivation allow for separate harvesting of seeds and straw, it is possible to use different conversion technologies for different plant parts, i.e., combustion of straw biomass and production of biodiesel from seeds. In general, a holistic approach -including not only occupation of contaminated land and removal of toxic metals, but also plant cultivation, harvesting, and postharvest technologies -is gaining ground [8,[49][50].…”

Plants to harvest rhenium: scientific and economic viability

“…In addition, the harvestable amount of the Indian mustard increased significantly from 45 to 75 days Environ Chem Lett 2014b), a 98 % efficiency on the Re extraction process from plant mass (Bozhkov et al 2012), a moderate plant density (50 plant m -2 ) (Liu et al 2012), the energy production income from biomass incineration (215 US$ tonne -1 ) (Harris et al 2009), the typical agricultural costs (1000 US$ ha -1 , including fertilizers, irrigation, and seed costs) (Sheoran et al 2013), and a projected cost of 1000 US$ ha -1 for the extraction and purification process (Abisheva and Zagorodnyaya 2002;Harris et al 2009;Tagami and Uchida 2010;Bozhkov et al 2012;WilsonCorral et al 2012), then a profit of 3906 US$ ha -1 harvest -1 would be expected from the recovered Re. In the light of this result, the profitability of Re phytomining could be used to finance the phytoremediation of soils with coexisting and often toxic metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Mn, Pb, Se, and Zn) (Stankovic et al 2014) that can be concurrently removed by the Indian mustard (Vamerali et al 2009) and promote carbon dioxide abatement (Witters et al 2012;Yang et al 2012). Moreover, the earnings from Re phytomining may be of particular interest for developing countries, not only because of its simplicity, low cost, and potential economic impact, but also due to the vast areas of tailings from commercial and artisanal mining found in these nations ( …”