ArticleScientific reports2022
Physicochemical, structural analysis of coal discards (and sewage sludge) (co)-HTC derived biochar for a sustainable carbon economy and evaluation of the liquid by-product.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Organic Soil Amendment Enhances Ascorbate Peroxidase-Mediated Antioxidant Defense in Water-Stressed Wheat.ACS omega · 2026Article
- Data-driven optimisation of sustainable high-performance concrete incorporating SCMs, biomass ash, and graphene nanoplatelets.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Resource recovery from low-rank coal and livestock manure for sustainable agroecosystems: a review.Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- Molecular signature evolution of coal-derived dissolved organic matter under geothermal conditions: FT-ICR MS and machine learning.PloS one · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study focused on the hydrothermal treatment (HTC) of coal tailings (CT) and coal slurry (CS) and the co-hydrothermal treatment (Co-HTC) of CT, CS and sewage sludge to assess the potential for increasing the carbon content of the hydrochar produced as an enabler for a sustainable carbon economy. The optimal combination methodology and response surface methodology were used to study the relationship between the important process parameters, namely temperature, pressure, residence time, the coal-to-sewage-sludge ratio, and the carbon yield of the produced hydrochar. The optimized conditions for hydrochar from coal tailing (HCT) and hydrochar from coal slurry (HCS) (150 °C, 27 bar, 95 min) increased fixed carbon from 37.31% and 53.02% to 40.31% and 57.69%, respectively, the total carbon content improved from 42.82 to 49.80% and from 61.85 to 66.90% respectively whereas the ash content of coal discards decreased from 40.32% and 24.17% to 38.3% and 20.0% when compared CT and CS respectively. Optimized Co-HTC conditions (208 °C, 22.5bars, and 360 min) for Hydrochar from the blend of coal discards and sewage sludge (HCB) increased the fixed carbon on a dry basis and the total carbon content from 38.67% and 45.64% to 58.82% and 67.0%, when compared CT and CS respectively. Carbonization yields for HCT, HCS, and HCB were, respectively, 113.58%, 102.42%, and 129.88%. HTC and Co-HTC increase the calorific value of CT and CS, to 19.33 MJ/kg, 25.79 MJ/kg, respectively. The results further show that under Co-HTC conditions, the raw biomass undergoes dehydration and decarboxylation, resulting in a decrease in hydrogen from 3.01%, 3.56%, and 3.05% to 2.87%, 2.98%, and 2.75%, and oxygen from 8.79%, 4.78, and 8.2% to 5.83%, 2.75%, and 6.00% in the resulting HCT, HCS, and HCB, respectively. HTC and Co-HTC optimal conditions increased the specific surface area of the feedstock from 6.066 m
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.