ArticleScientific reports2026
Comprehensive evaluation of the environmental performance and durability of biochar-incorporated concrete.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Waste Material Utilization in Civil Engineering Applications: Advances, Challenges, and Future Directions-A Scoping Review.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To achieve global carbon neutrality, the construction industry is increasingly focused on reducing the carbon footprint of cement-based materials. However, comprehensive evaluations of biochar-incorporated concrete integrating long-term mechanical performance, freeze–thaw durability, and environmental impact remain limited. To address these issues, this study presents a comprehensive experimental evaluation of wood-based biochar as an alternative supplementary cementitious material (ASCM) in concrete. The physical characteristics of the biochar were analyzed using scanning electron microscopy (SEM), SEM–EDX, and Brunauer–Emmett–Teller (BET) analyses, and the chemical characteristics were evaluated using XPS. Concrete performance was evaluated in terms of mechanical properties (compressive strength, flexural strength, and static modulus), freeze–thaw durability with quantitative image-based surface analysis, and a life cycle assessment (LCA) was performed to quantify global warming potential (GWP). The results indicate that concrete containing 5% biochar achieved the target design strength of 24 MPa, whereas 7% replacement resulted in a compressive strength reduction of up to 35.5% compared to the plain mix. After 300 freeze–thaw cycles, the 5% biochar mixture maintained a durability factor of 96.8% and reduced the increase in surface scaling and increase in void count by approximately 74 and 72%, respectively, compared with the plain specimen. LCA results revealed that increasing the biochar replacement ratio reduced GWP, with up to a 27.7% reduction at 7% replacement. Considering both mechanical performance and environmental impact, a biochar replacement range of 3–5% was identified as optimal. These findings demonstrate that wood-based biochar is a viable ASCM for sustainable and low-carbon concrete construction.
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.