Next Article in Journal
Solar Radiation on Photovoltaic Systems Deployed near Obscuring Walls
Previous Article in Journal
Contributions to Studying the Quality of Life in Inner Urban Environments Through the Publication of Open Data
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Urban Science
Volume 9
Issue 6
10.3390/urbansci9060210
urbansci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Revegetation of Thermal Power Plant Ash Dumps or Sustainable Urban Development

by
Lyudmila Ivanovna Khudyakova
1,
Natalya Mikhailovna Garkusheva
1,
Pavel Leonidovich Paleev
1,
Irina Yurievna Kotova
2,
Darya Petrovna Khomoksonova
1,*,
Pavel Anatolyevich Gulyashinov
1 and
Inna Germanovna Antropova
1
1
Laboratory of Chemistry and Technology of Natural Raw Materials, Baikal Institute of Nature Management SB RAS, Ulan-Ude 670047, Russia
2
Laboratory of Oxide Systems, Baikal Institute of Nature Management SB RAS, Ulan-Ude 670047, Russia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Urban Sci. 2025, 9(6), 210; https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9060210
Submission received: 17 April 2025 / Revised: 26 May 2025 / Accepted: 3 June 2025 / Published: 5 June 2025
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The goal of this study is to safely reduce dust emissions from ash dumps and create green landscapes at waste storage sites. The most effective way to achieve this is through revegetation, which allows ash dumps to be transformed into green landscapes. Unlike similar studies, this paper examines the revegetation of a sand-covered ash dump under the extreme conditions of a sharply continental climate. The following perennial plant species were selected: Festuca pratensis, Bromus inermis, and Medicago polymorpha. Laboratory studies revealed that Festuca pratensis was the most adapted to the laboratory conditions in an indoor environment, while Medicago polymorpha showed poor development. The maximum height reached by Festuca pratensis was 0.27 m, Bromus inermis reached 0.23 m, and Medicago polymorpha reached 0.10 m. In the field experiments, over three months of vegetation, maximum plant heights were as follows: Festuca pratensis—0.09 m, Bromus inermis—0.11 m, and Medicago polymorpha—0.30 m. Medicago polymorpha exhibited a higher rate of development compared to the grasses. Thus, revegetating ash dumps from thermal power plants presents a promising solution for creating green spaces, aligning with the principles of sustainable urban development.

1. Introduction

The development of the global economy is often accompanied by negative environmental impacts. To mitigate these consequences, the United Nations established the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development in 2015, which is based on 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) [1,2]. In line with these principles, in recent years, Russia has increasingly focused on promoting environmentally sustainable urban development, creating a safe environment, and improving the quality of life for its population [3].
It is well known that electricity generation based on fossil fuel combustion is among the least environmentally friendly sectors of the economy. Coal remains one of the primary sources of electricity production worldwide, accounting for 35.5% of global energy generation [4]. The largest numbers of coal-fired power plants are located in China (1161), India (285), and the United States (204) [4]. In Russia, there are 65 power plants, which generate over 68% of the country’s electricity and heat energy [5]. Coal-fired energy generation contributes about 13% of the national energy balance, and this share could increase to 15% by 2050 [6].
The operation of coal-fired power plants generates large amounts of ash waste, which, in the context of sustainable development, should be reused in other industries [7,8], such as construction [9,10,11,12,13,14], geopolymer production [7,15,16], and agriculture [17,18], among others [19,20,21]. Despite these possibilities, a significant portion of ash remains unutilized, accumulating in dumps, polluting nearby areas, and affecting the quality of life of local populations [22]. Reducing the negative environmental impact of ash dumps is therefore a pressing issue.
Revegetation is the most effective method for mitigating the negative environmental impacts of ash and slag waste, enabling both economically viable and ecologically safe management [23,24]. Given that such substrates are typically unsuitable for plant growth, revegetation commonly involves the application of fertile soil or mineral fertilizers [25,26,27], which improve substrate quality and support vegetation establishment. The selection of suitable plant species further enhances their adaptability to the harsh conditions of ash disposal sites [28]. Cultivating stress-tolerant species can facilitate the development of vegetated landscapes on formerly degraded waste storage areas.
The goal of this study is to safely reduce dust emissions from ash waste and create a green landscape at a waste storage site.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Object

The ash dump under study is located in the southeastern part of Ulan-Ude, Russia, approximately 14 km from Combined Heat and Power Plant No. 1 (CHPP-1, a type of thermal power station), covering an area of over 1.32 km2 (Figure 1). When the ash dump was commissioned in 1984 [29], it was intended to be located in a forested area, outside of settlements, and to pose minimal risk to the health of local residents. Over time, urban expansion has brought the ash dump within the city limits of Ulan-Ude, placing it in close proximity to residential areas (less than 20 m away), thereby threatening the quality of life of the local population.
Over 4 million cubic meters of ash have accumulated at the site during its operation (Figure 2), creating a significant environmental hazard for the city’s residents and even causing social tensions. This volume continues to increase at an average rate of 125,000 tons per year.
The negative environmental impact of the ash dump is exacerbated by the topographical and climatic conditions of the region. Ulan-Ude is situated in a valley lowland area, where strong erosive winds, predominantly from the west, northwest, and east, are common. These conditions result in frequent dust storms in the spring and summer, which contribute to the erosion of the ash waste and light soil particles, further worsening the living conditions of the city’s population [30].
The city lies in a dry-steppe zone with a sharply continental climate, characterized by low annual precipitation (230–260 mm), most of which falls between July and August. Winters are long and relatively snowless, with sharp daily temperature fluctuations. The summer period is relatively short and, in some years, marked by hot and dry weather. A significant part of the spring season is accompanied by strong winds and temperatures dropping below 0 °C. Autumn is typically dry, with early frosts occurring by mid-September. The average annual air temperature is negative, ranging from −1.4 °C to −2.8 °C. The period with temperatures above 10 °C lasts for 110–120 days. January is the coldest month of the year, with an average monthly temperature of −25.4 °C, while July is the hottest month, with an average monthly temperature of 25.5 °C [31].
The topographical and climatic conditions described above, combined with the unfavorable nature of the substrate, are extreme for plants and impose significant limitations on the selection of species suitable for the revegetation of the ash dump.

2.2. Plants for Revegetation

The selection of plant species for revegetation was based on the climatic conditions and specific characteristics of the plant species. Revegetation can be employed to both prevent dust emissions from the ash dump surface and establish green space.
Perennial plants, particularly grasses from the Poaceae family, can be used for revegetation purposes. These grasses have robust root systems that protect the surface layer of the substrate from erosion by wind and water while facilitating the phytoremediation of the substrate [32,33,34]. Perennial legumes (Fabaceae) are also frequently used for this purpose, as they improve substrate fertility by promoting the accumulation of the bioavailable forms of nitrogen [35,36]. Additionally, many species of perennial plants are known for their tolerance to adverse environmental conditions while maintaining rapid growth potential [37,38,39].
Based on a review of the literature, we selected the following perennial plants: Festuca pratensis, Bromus inermis, and Medicago polymorpha. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the seeds. These species are well-adapted to the soil and climatic conditions of the study area. No pretreatment of seeds was performed prior to sowing.
It is important to note that the vegetation established on ash disposal sites was not intended for agricultural use but rather aimed at creating a green zone with potential for future recreational development.

2.3. Methods

In the laboratory experiments, 20 × 60 × 20 cm vegetative containers were used, divided into three sections for triplicate experiments. Each section was filled with 3 kg of ash waste. Seeds were sown in the substrate at a depth of 0.5–1.0 cm, with a planting density of 40 kg/ha, and a sown area of 400 cm2 for each replicate. The plants were watered with tap water as needed (150 mL of water per container).
Field studies were conducted at the ash dump of CHPP-1, where each plant was assigned a 2 m2 plot. The experiment was carried out in triplicate. The distance between plots was 0.5 m. Seeds of the perennial plants were manually sown in early July at a depth of 2 cm, with a row spacing of 7–10 cm and a seed planting density of 40 kg/ha. The plants were not irrigated.
All sowings were carried out in triplicate. Plant growth was monitored through regular visual observations, and plant biomass yield was determined by weighing.
Mean values and standard deviations of the measured parameters were calculated using Microsoft Excel. Results are presented as arithmetic means ± standard deviations.

3. Results and Discussion

The chemical analysis of ash waste revealed the presence of oxides of the following elements (wt.%): silicon—52.9, titanium—0.9, aluminum—21.4, iron—8.1, magnesium—1.0, calcium—2.5, sodium—0.5, potassium—1.6, and phosphorus—0.5 [40] The content of heavy metals was as follows (ppm): copper—92.3, nickel—80.2, lead—30.5, cobalt—21.4, chromium—49.6, zinc—48.8, and cadmium—2.1.
A high silicon content in ash waste can stimulate root development, resulting in a more extensive root system. This, in turn, enhances plant resistance to both abiotic and biotic stresses [41,42].
The concentrations of harmful components in the ash waste studied did not exceed the maximum allowable concentrations, allowing it to be classified as practically non-hazardous waste. The ash waste was found to be highly acidic, with a pH of 1.99.
Since the CHPP-1 ash dump is located in close proximity to residential areas but at a considerable distance from water bodies, the primary negative environmental impact is the airborne transport of fine ash particles (Figure 3).
These particles can be transported over long distances by the wind, becoming potential sources of pollution for various components of the natural environment and posing a threat to public health [43,44,45,46]. The grain-size analysis of ash waste from CHPP-1 (Figure 4) showed that the fraction of particle size less than 0.35 mm was more than 60 wt.%. This finding supported the observations of significant airborne transport of fine particles from the ash dump, as it is well known that fractions with particle sizes ranging from 0.075 mm to 0.4 mm are most susceptible to wind transport [47,48].
Dust emissions increase during the spring and summer due to the prevailing northwesterly winds, which carry ash toward the nearby settlements (Figure 1). To mitigate this effect, the surface of the ash dump was previously partially covered with a sand layer 15–20 cm thick. According to the grain-size analysis of the sand (Figure 4), particles 0.5 mm and larger accounted for 71.5 wt.%. While this measure has been effective in suppressing dust emissions [47], it has not significantly improved the visual quality of the landscape, so revegetation is essential. A distinguishing feature of this study is the revegetation of a sand-covered ash disposal site under the extreme conditions of a sharply continental climate.
A review of the scientific literature indicated that revegetation techniques typically involve applying a surface layer of fertile substrate [28,49], along with organic fertilizers, soil microorganisms, and sewage sludge [50,51]. Previous studies have examined the reclamation of sandy soils at coal ash disposal sites in regions with a moderately continental climate. These efforts involved sowing plants on a mixture of sand, fly ash, and microbial agents [52], demonstrating that the combined use of fly ash and microbial agents improved soil texture and quality. However, no studies have addressed the revegetation of sand-covered ash disposal sites in regions with a sharply continental climate. This study, therefore, aims to evaluate the feasibility of biological reclamation in such environments without additional treatments, with the objective of establishing a green zone.
The experiments were conducted under laboratory and field conditions. In the laboratory experiments, the emergence of the first seedlings of Festuca pratensis and Bromus inermis was observed on the fourth day after sowing, while Medicago polymorpha emerged on the third day. The majority of the planted seeds germinated on the sixth day after sowing.
The maximum and average plant heights were measured based on the time after seed germination, along with the biomass yield per 1 m2. The maximum heights recorded were 0.27 m for Festuca pratensis, 0.23 m for Bromus inermis, and 0.10 m for Medicago polymorpha. Figure 5 shows the plants at their maximum growth stage.
The relationship between the average height, biomass yield, and plant species is presented in Figure 6 and Figure 7.
According to these data, the grasses adapted best to laboratory conditions. Festuca pratensis exhibited the greatest average height, while Medicago polymorpha was about half as tall. However, Medicago polymorpha had the highest plant biomass yield, likely due to the specific characteristics of this species. The biomass yield of Festuca pratensis was higher than that of Bromus inermis.
Festuca pratensis proved to be the most well-adapted to laboratory conditions, while Medicago polymorpha showed signs of stress. Overall, based on the data obtained, all the studied plants can be considered suitable for revegetation purposes.
Field experiments were conducted on the CHPP-1 ash dump, specifically on a plot covered with a layer of sand (Figure 8).
The experimental plots were sown with both single species and their mixtures. The following percentage ratios (by weight) of species were used for the mixtures:
Festuca pratensis + Bromus inermis—50/50;
Festuca pratensis + Medicago polymorpha—60/40;
Bromus inermis + Medicago polymorpha—60/40;
Festuca pratensis + Bromus inermis + Medicago polymorpha—40/40/20.
Throughout the entire vegetation period, a noticeable difference in the adaptability of the plants to unfavorable growing conditions was observed. The first seedlings of Medicago polymorpha appeared on the fourth day following seed sowing, with complete germination observed on the seventh day. In contrast, the germination times for the grasses were longer. The first seedlings of Festuca pratensis and Bromus inermis were observed on the seventh day after sowing, with full germination taking up to 20 days. It was noted that on plots with a thinner sand layer, where moisture-retaining ash was more exposed at the surface, plant growth was more vigorous and synchronized.
The high water-retention capacity of ash can be explained by its small particle size (typically < 75 µm) and porous structure with a large specific surface area [53,54,55,56,57]. It was found that adding 10 wt.% ash to sand increased its water retention capacity by 7.2 to 13.5 times, depending on particle size [57].
Furthermore, the difference in germination times between legumes and grasses was likely also due to the morphological characteristics of their seeds; both are covered by a seed coat, but in grasses dry scales create a barrier between the water and the seed. During the vegetation period, perennial plants exhibited more intensive growth and development, attributable to species-specific traits (Figure 9).
The maximum plant heights after three months of vegetation were 0.09 m for Festuca pratensis, 0.11 m for Bromus inermis, and 0.29 m for Medicago polymorpha. Figure 6 and Figure 7 illustrate the relationship between average plant height and biomass yield for each species at the end of the third month of growth.
Intensive growth was observed for Medicago polymorpha both in single and mixed planting. The biomass yield in single planting reached 2.00 ± 0.35 kg/m2. Among the grasses, Bromus inermis outperformed Festuca pratensis in terms of growth intensity in single planting. However, the biomass yield of both grasses was low, amounting to 0.15 ± 0.05 kg/m2 and 0.13 ± 0.04 kg/m2, respectively. The most adverse factor affecting plant development was insufficient substrate moisture, which had a particularly negative impact on the more moisture-dependent Festuca pratensis. In plots where seed mixtures were planted, Bromus inermis showed more vigorous development. Medicago polymorpha also exhibited strong growth in mixed plantings, with its well-developed aboveground parts shading the substrate surface, thereby improving moisture retention for the other plants.
Before the onset of the winter season, the plants were inspected, and the root system length was measured. A well-developed root system can ensure sufficient nutrient uptake, root dormancy in the winter, and plant re-growth in the spring [58]. Figure 10 shows photographs of the root systems of the studied plants before the start of the winter season.
All inspected plants had well-developed root systems characteristic of their respective species. The fibrous root systems of the grasses formed a dense vegetable layer on the surface of the ash dump, protecting it from wind erosion. The root lengths of Festuca pratensis and Bromus inermis were nearly identical, measuring 0.08 ± 0.01 m and 0.08 ± 0.01 m, respectively. The legumes exhibited a typical taproot system with limited branching in the lower part. The roots of Medicago polymorpha reached a length of 0.20 ± 0.01 m. A few colonies of nitrogen-fixing Rhizobium bacteria were found on the roots, which help fix nitrogen from the atmosphere [59]. The nitrogen-fixing capability of Medicago polymorpha enhances substrate fertility by increasing nitrogen content and promoting nutrient mobilization and solubilization [60,61], thereby facilitating secondary succession.
The development of plants grown under different conditions was analyzed (Figure 6 and Figure 7, Table 2). The grasses showed the most favorable growth in laboratory conditions, while Medicago polymorpha proved to be better adapted to the natural environment. Although Festuca pratensis exhibited the most intensive growth in laboratory experiments, it demonstrated the slowest development under natural conditions.
This behavior was primarily attributed to the experimental conditions. In the laboratory experiments, the plants were grown under controlled settings in growth containers, which did not replicate natural environmental parameters. In contrast, the field conditions reflected the actual stages of plant growth and development. The differences in the plant responses can also be explained by their physiological traits. Legumes exhibit adaptive potential to abiotic stress; their plastic root system architecture allows adjustment to environmental changes, enhancing drought resistance. Their taproot system penetrates deeper soil layers to access moisture [62,63]. Conversely, grasses with fibrous root systems are more vulnerable to water deficit, as their roots are sensitive to prolonged drought, negatively impacting overall plant health [64].
Thus, Medicago polymorpha from the legumes and Bromus inermis from the grasses were the most suited to the extreme conditions of the ash dump. These species proved to be the most effective for the revegetation of the CHPP-1 ash dump in Ulan-Ude.
It should be noted that Festuca pratensis did not survive the harsh winter characteristic of a sharply continental climate. In contrast, Medicago polymorpha exhibited the best adaptation, demonstrating significant growth during the second year under field conditions (Figure 11). Continued monitoring of plant growth and development is planned for the forthcoming years.

4. Conclusions

The CHPP-1 ash dump (Ulan-Ude, Russia) is located within a residential zone, in close proximity to housing developments. Although the chemical analysis of the ash waste classifies it as virtually non-hazardous, and the site is located away from water bodies, the airborne dispersal of fine ash particles poses considerable environmental and public health risks. Grain-size analysis of the ash waste revealed that particle fractions smaller than 0.35 mm, which are most susceptible to wind transport, accounted for over 60 wt.%. To mitigate these effects, the surface of the ash dump was previously partially covered with sand.
In this study, the following perennial plant species, adapted to the harsh continental climate, were selected for the revegetation of the CHPP-1 ash dump: Festuca pratensis, Bromus inermis, and Medicago polymorpha.
This research demonstrated that the grass species were most adapted to laboratory conditions in an indoor environment. The highest average plant height was recorded for Festuca pratensis (0.15 ± 0.03 m), while Medicago polymorpha was nearly half this height (0.07.0 ± 0.05 m). However, Medicago polymorpha produced the highest biomass yield (0.52 ± 0.04 kg), which was attributed to the species-specific characteristics. The biomass yield of the grasses was significantly lower, by 2.5–3.1 times.
The opposite pattern was observed in the field studies. Medicago polymorpha had the highest average height and biomass yield—0.17 ± 0.03 m and 2.0 ± 0.1 kg/m2, respectively. Festuca pratensis showed the poorest results, with an average height of 0.06 ± 0.03 m and a biomass yield of 0.13 ± 0.04 kg/m2. Thus, the results of the laboratory and field experiments did not always agree due to species-specific characteristics and varying adaptability to environmental conditions.
The root systems of the examined plants were typical of their respective species. The root lengths of the grasses were almost the same, with Festuca pratensis reaching 0.08 ± 0.01 m and Bromus inermis reaching 0.08 ± 0.01 m. The taproots of Medicago polymorpha extended up to 0.20 ± 0.01 m, with small colonies of nitrogen-fixing Rhizobium bacteria observed on them.
Medicago polymorpha and Bromus inermis were found to be better adapted to the extreme conditions of the ash dump, making them suitable candidates for revegetation in a sharply continental climate.
Thus, the revegetation of the CHPP-1 ash dump could contribute to the creation of a green landscape, enhancing its safety and visual appearance while promoting more sustainable urban development.
Given that the field studies were conducted on sand-covered ash dump areas, similar research on uncovered plots is necessary to compare results and develop effective revegetation guidelines. Moreover, the continuous monitoring of grass plantings throughout different seasons is essential.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, L.I.K.; methodology, N.M.G.; validation, L.I.K.; investigation, N.M.G., P.L.P., I.Y.K., P.A.G. and D.P.K.; data curation, I.G.A.; writing—original draft preparation, L.I.K., N.M.G. and I.Y.K.; writing—review and editing, L.I.K., I.G.A. and D.P.K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was carried out as part of state programs of Baikal Institute of Nature Management Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences no. АААА-А21-121011890003-4.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Sustainable Development GOALS. Available online: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/development-agenda (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  2. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development A/RES/70/1. United Nations. 41p. Sustaina. Available online: https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/70/1 (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  3. Shulga, J. Sustainable Development: What Is It and Why Is It Important? Forbes. Available online: https://www.forbes.ru/obshchestvo/425081-ustoychivoe-razvitie-chto-eto-takoe-i-v-chem-ego-znachimost (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  4. Statista. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/859266/number-of-coal-power-plants-by-country (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  5. SMS-IT. Available online: https://www.sms-it.ru/2015/02/blog-post.html (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  6. VEDOMOSTI. Available online: https://www.vedomosti.ru/business/articles/2023/08/25/991818-v-rossii-k-2050-godu-dolya-uglya-v-generatsii-energii-mozhet-virasti (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  7. Minh, V.T.N.; Pham, V.-H.; Tung, V.H.; Tung, C.T.; Phuong, N.T.H. Firing-associated Recycling of Coal-fired Power Plant Fly Ash. J. Anal. Methods Chem. 2023, 2023, 8597376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Vilakazi, A.Q.; Ndlovu, S.; Chipise, L.; Shemi, A. The Recycling of Coal Fly Ash: A Review on Sustainable Developments and Economic Considerations. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1958. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kosivtsov, Y.Y.; Chalov, K.; Sulman, M.G.; Lugovoy, Y.; Novichenkova, T.; Petropavlovskaya, V.; Gadzhiev, S.; Popel, O. Use of Ash and Slag Waste from Thermal Power Plants as an Active Component of Building Materials. Chem. Eng. Trans. 2021, 88, 337–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Nayak, D.K.; Abhilash, P.P.; Singh, R.; Kumar, R.; Kumar, V. Fly Ash for Sustainable Construction: A Review of Fly Ash Concrete and Its Beneficial Use Case Studies. Clean. Mater. 2022, 6, 100143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Lv, R.; Liang, S.; Li, X.; Hou, H.; Ke, Y.; Li, X.; Tang, M.; Quan, J.; Yuan, S.; Hu, J.; et al. Production of Water-permeable Ceramic Bricks Derived from Fly Ash Via a Simple Pellet Method: Mechanism of Mechanical Strength and Permeability. Constr. Build. Mater. 2022, 351, 128989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Húlan, T.; Štubna, I.; Ondruška, J.; Trník, A. The Influence of Fly Ash on Mechanical Properties of Clay-Based Ceramics. Minerals 2020, 10, 930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Hoa, N.V.; Thuy, N.B.T.; Anh, N.L. Application of Waste Fly Ash in Roadbed Construction. IJERT 2023, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Woszuk, A.; Bandura, L.; Franus, W. Fly Ash As Low Cost and Environmentally Friendly Filler and Its Effect on the Properties of Mix Asphalt. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 235, 493–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Pedro, M.P.S.; Samuel, C.M.; Mercedes, D.G.C.; Irina, D.R.; Guillermo, R.G.C. Use of Fly Ash in the Production of Geopolymers: A Literature Review. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 2022, 7, 236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Luhar, I.; Luhar, S. A Comprehensive Review on Fly Ash-Based Geopolymer. J. Compos. Sci. 2022, 6, 219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hussain, A.; Ali, J.; Faizan, S. Exploring the Scientific Research on Coal Fly Ash and Agriculture: Knowledge Mapping and Future Research Directions. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 2023, 30, 121292–121305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Dhadse, S. Utilization of Fly Ash in Agriculture: Perspectives and Challenges. J. Mater. Environ. Sci. 2024, 15, 1038–1050. [Google Scholar]
  19. Thomas, B.S.; Dimitriadis, P.; Kundu, C.; Vuppaladadiyam, S.S.V.; Raman, R.K.S.; Bhattacharya, S. Extraction and Separation of Rare Earth Elements from Coal and Coal Fly Ash: A Review on Fundamental Understanding and On-going Engineering Advancements. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2024, 12, 112769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Fuks, L.; Miśkiewicz, A.; Herdzik-Koniecko, I.; Zakrzewska-Kołtuniewicz, G. Fly Ash as a Potential Adsorbent for Removing Radionuclides from Aqueous Solutions in an Adsorption-Membrane Assisted Process Compared to Batch Adsorption. Membranes 2023, 13, 572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yadav, V.K.; Modi, T.; Alyami, A.Y.; Gacem, A.; Choudhary, N.; Yadav, K.K.; Invati, G.K.; Wanale, S.G.; Abbas, M.; Ji, M.-K.; et al. Emerging Trends in the Recovery of Ferrospheres and Plerospheres from Coal Fly Ash Waste and Their Emerging Applications in Environmental Cleanup. Front. Earth Sci. 2023, 11, 1160448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Vig, N.; Ravindra, K.; Mor, S. Environmental Impacts of Indian Coal Thermal Power Plants and Associated Human Health Risk to the Nearby Residential Communities: A Potential Review. Chemosphere 2023, 341, 140103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Sahu, R.; Patil, G.; Dubey, P.; Sharma, D.; Kamesh, A.M. Impacts of Fly Ash on Different Vegetation Near Industrial Areas: A Review. Environ. Ecol. 2024, 42, 470–478. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Chowdhury, S.; Kain, J.-H.; Adelfio, M.; Volchko, Y.; Norrman, J. Greening the Browns: A Bio-Based Land Use Framework for Analysing the Potential of Urban Brownfields in an Urban Circular Economy. Sustainability 2020, 12, 6278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Myszura-Dymek, M.; Zukowska, G. The Influence of Sewage Sludge Composts on the Enzymatic Activity of Reclaimed Post-Mining Soil. Sustainability 2023, 15, 4749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gunathunga, S.U.; Gagen, E.J.; Evans, P.N.; Erskine, P.D.; Southam, G. Anthropedogenesis in coal mine overburden; the need for a comprehensive, fundamental biogeochemical approach. Sci. Total Environ. 2023, 892, 164515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Żukowska, G.; Myszura-Dymek, M.; Durczyńska, Z. The Impact of Exogenous Organic Matter on the Properties of Humus Compounds of Soils Developing on a Reclaimed Fly Ash Landfill. Sustainability 2024, 16, 10579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Bostenaru Dan, M.; Bostenaru-Dan, M.M. Greening the Brownfields of Thermal Power Plants in Rural Areas, an Example from Romania, Set in the Context of Developments in the Industrialized Country of Germany. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. MKRU Ulanude. Available online: https://ulan.mk.ru/social/2020/12/15/v-ulanude-kardinalno-razberutsya-s-zolootvalom.html (accessed on 14 October 2024).
  30. Sochava, V.B. Atlas of Transbaikalia (Buryat ASSR and Chita Region); Sochava, V.B., Ed.; GUGK: Moscow–Irkutsk, Russia, 1967; 176p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  31. Snitsarenko, N.I.; Shver, T.A. (Eds.) Climate of Ulan-Ude; Gidrometeoizdat: Leningrad, Russia, 1983; 240p. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
  32. Duan, J.; Liu, Y.-J.; Wang, L.-Y.; Yang, J.; Tang, C.-J.; Zheng, H.-J. Importance of Grass Stolons in Mitigating Runoff and Sediment Yield Under Simulated Rainstorms. Catena 2022, 213, 106132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Randelovic, D.; Pandey, V.C. Bioenergy Crop-Based Ecological Restoration of Degraded Land. Bio-Inspired Land Remediation, Environmental Contamination Remediation and Management; Pandey, V.C., Ed.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Ghosh, I.; Ghosh, M.; Mukherjee, A. Remediation of Mine Tailings and Fly Ash Dumpsites: Role of Poaceae Family Members and Aromatic Grasses. Enhancing Cleanup of Environmental Pollutants; Anjum, N., Gill, S., Tuteja, N., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kumar, R.; Yadav, M.R.; Arif, M.; Mahala, D.M.; Kumar, D.; Ghasal, P.C.; Yadav, K.C.; Verma, R.K. Multiple Agroecosystem Services of Forage Legumes Towards Agriculture Sustainability: An Overview. Indian J. Agric. Sci. 2020, 90, 1367–1377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Kocira, A.; Staniak, M.; Tomaszewska, M.; Kornas, R.; Cymerman, J.; Panasiewicz, K.; Lipińska, H. Legume Cover Crops as One of the Elements of Strategic Weed Management and Soil Quality Improvement. A Review. Agriculture 2020, 10, 394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Pandey, V.C.; Sahu, N.; Singh, D.P. Physiological Profiling of Invasive Plant Species for Ecological Restoration of Fly Ash Deposits. Urban For. Urban Green. 2020, 54, 126773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Halli, H.M.; Govindasamy, P.; Choudhary, M.; Srinivasan, R.; Prasad, M.; Wasnik, V.K.; Yadav, V.K.; Singh, A.K.; Kumar, S.; Vijay, D.; et al. Range Grasses to Improve Soil Properties, Carbon Sustainability, and Fodder Security in Degraded Lands of Semi-Arid Regions. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 851, 158211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gajić, G.; Djurdjević, L.; Kostić, O.; Jarić, S.; Mitrović, M.; Pavlović, P. Ecological Potential of Plants for Phytoremediation and Ecorestoration of Fly Ash Deposits and Mine Wastes. Front. Environ. Sci. 2018, 6, 124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Khudyakova, L.I.; Garkusheva, N.M.; Kotova, I.Y.; Paleev, P.L. Possibility of Reclamation of Ash Dumps. Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University. Geo Assets Eng. 2024, 335, 37–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Khan, A.L. Silicon: A valuable soil element for improving plant growth and CO2 sequestration. J. Adv. Res. 2025, 71, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tripathi, P.; Subedi, S.; Khan, A.L.; Chung, Y.-S.; Kim, Y. Silicon Effects on the Root System of Diverse Crop Species Using Root Phenotyping Technology. Plants 2021, 10, 885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Luo, C.; Pajala, G.; Yekta, S.S.; Sarkar, S.; Klump, J.V.; Pujari, P.; Routh, J. Soil Contamination Caused by Fly Ash from Coal-Fired Thermal Power Plants in India: Spatiotemporal Distribution and Elemental Leaching Potential. Appl. Geochem. 2024, 170, 106080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Ju, T.; Han, S.; Meng, Y.; Jiang, J. High-end Reclamation of Coal Fly Ash Focusing on Elemental Extraction and Synthesis of Porous Materials. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 6894–6911. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Ramakrishna, V.; Tejaswi, A.A.; Reddy, M.V.; Harika, K.; Reddy, B.R. Environmental Impact of Ash Pond of a Thermal Power Plant on Groundwater Quality. Indian J. Environ. Prot. 2022, 42, 660–669. [Google Scholar]
  46. Gajaje, K.; Duelang, M.; Ultra, V.U.; Marenga, W.; Rantong, G. Impact of Fly Ash Deposition on Plants Diversity, Metal Content, and Associated Risk on Grazing Ruminants in the Vicinity of Morupule Power Station, Botswana. Arid Land Res. Manag. 2024, 38, 624–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Voevod, M.; Dîrja, M.; Moldovan, M.O.; Arion, I.D.; Radu Țenter, A.; Topan, C.G. Wind Erosion–Causes and Effects. ProEnvironment 2019, 12, 193–197. [Google Scholar]
  48. Shi, P.; Ping, Y.; Yuan, Y.; Nearing, M.A. Wind Erosion Research in China: Past, Present and Future. Prog. Phys. Geog. 2004, 28, 366–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Szadek, P.; Pajak, M.; Michalec, K.; Wasik, R.; Otremba, K.; Kozłowski, M.; Pietrzykowski, M. The Impact of the Method of Reclamation of the Coal Ash Dump from the “Adamów” Power Plant on the Survival, Viability, and Wood Quality of the Introduced Tree Species. Forests 2023, 14, 848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Jain, S.; Tembhurkar, A.R. Sustainable Amelioration of Fly Ash Dumps Linking Bio-energy Plantation, Bioremediation and Amendments: A Review. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 314, 11512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Juwarkar, A.A.; Jambhulkar, H.P. Restoration of Fly Ash Dump Through Biological Interventions. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2008, 139, 355–365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Shao, L.; Chen, S.; Zhang, Q.; Li, J.; Jia, Z. Effects of Soil Modification Materials on the Quality of Sandy Soil in Mine Dumps. Sustainability 2025, 17, 1201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Vig, N.; Mor, S.; Ravindra, K. The Multiple Value Characteristics of Fly Ash from Indian Coal Thermal Power Plants: A Review. Environ. Monit. Assess. 2022, 195, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Haynes, R.J. Reclamation and Revegetation of Fly Ash Disposal Sites–Challenges and Research Needs. J. Environ. Manag. 2009, 90, 43–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Tejasvi, A.; Kumar, S. Impact of Fly Ash on Soil Properties. Natl. Acad. Sci. Lett. 2012, 35, 13–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Song, M.; Lin, S.; Takahashi, F. Coal Fly Ash Amendment to Mitigate Soil Water Evaporation in Arid/Semi-arid Area: An Approach Using Simple Drying Focusing on Sieve Size and Temperature. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2020, 156, 104726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Campbell, D.J.; Fox, W.E.; Aitken, R.L.; Bell, L.C. Physical Characteristics of Sands Amended with Fly Ash. Aust. J. Soil Res. 1983, 21, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Sun, K.; McCormack, M.L.; Li, L.; Ma, Z.; Guo, D. Fast-Cycling Unit of Root Turnover in Perennial Herbaceous Plants in a Cold Temperate Ecosystem. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 19698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhao, Y.J.; Liu, X.J.; Tong, C.C.; Wu, Y. Effect of Root Interaction on Nodulation and Nitrogen Fixation Ability of Alfalfa in the Simulated Alfalfa/Triticale Intercropping in Pots. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 4269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Stefan, A.; Van Cauwenberghe, J.; Rosu, C.M.; Stedel, C.; Chan, C.; Simms, E.L.; Iticescu, C.; Tsikou, D.; Flemetakis, E.; Efrose, R.C. Nodules of Medicago spp. Host a Diverse Community of Rhizobial Species in Natural Ecosystems. Agronomy 2024, 14, 2156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Banda, M.F.; Matabane, D.L.; Munyengabe, A. A phytoremediation approach for the restoration of coal fly ash polluted sites: A review. Heliyon 2024, 10, 40741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ye, H.; Roorkiwal, M.; Valliyodan, B.; Zhou, L.; Chen, P.; Varshney, R.K.; Nguyen, H.T. Genetic diversity of root system architecture in response to drought stress in grain legumes. J. Exp. Bot. 2018, 69, 3267–3277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Afonso, P.; Castro, I.; Couto, P.; Leal, F.; Carnide, V.; Rosa, E.; Carvalho, M. Root Phenotyping: A Contribution to Understanding Drought Stress Resilience in Grain Legumes. Agronomy 2025, 15, 798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Dao, J.; Xing, Y.; Chen, C.; Chen, M.; Wang, Z.; Chen, Y. Changes in shoot and root adaptations of fibrous-root and taproot crops in response to different drought types: A meta-analysis. Agric. Water Manag. 2025, 309, 109320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Urbansci 09 00210 g001
Figure 1. Location of the ash dump and dominant winds.
Figure 1. Location of the ash dump and dominant winds.
Urbansci 09 00210 g001
Urbansci 09 00210 g002
Figure 2. Ash dump of CHPP-1 (Ulan-Ude, Russia).
Figure 2. Ash dump of CHPP-1 (Ulan-Ude, Russia).
Urbansci 09 00210 g002
Urbansci 09 00210 g003
Figure 3. Dust emission from the ash dump of CHPP-1.
Figure 3. Dust emission from the ash dump of CHPP-1.
Urbansci 09 00210 g003
Urbansci 09 00210 g004
Figure 4. Grain-size analysis of ash waste from CHPP-1.
Figure 4. Grain-size analysis of ash waste from CHPP-1.
Urbansci 09 00210 g004
Urbansci 09 00210 g005
Figure 5. Plants in the phase of maximum growth: (a) Festuca pratensis, (b) Bromus inermis, (c) Medicago polymorpha.
Figure 5. Plants in the phase of maximum growth: (a) Festuca pratensis, (b) Bromus inermis, (c) Medicago polymorpha.
Urbansci 09 00210 g005
Urbansci 09 00210 g006
Figure 6. Dependence of average height on plant species and experimental conditions.
Figure 6. Dependence of average height on plant species and experimental conditions.
Urbansci 09 00210 g006
Urbansci 09 00210 g007
Figure 7. Dependence of biomass yield on plant species and experimental conditions.
Figure 7. Dependence of biomass yield on plant species and experimental conditions.
Urbansci 09 00210 g007
Urbansci 09 00210 g008
Figure 8. Field research plot for ash dump revegetation: (a) ash dump area covered with a layer of sand, (b) Research plots on the sandy area of the ash dump.
Figure 8. Field research plot for ash dump revegetation: (a) ash dump area covered with a layer of sand, (b) Research plots on the sandy area of the ash dump.
Urbansci 09 00210 g008
Urbansci 09 00210 g009
Figure 9. Perennial plants growing on the ash dump: (a) Festuca pratensis, (b) Bromus inermis, (c) Medicago polymorpha.
Figure 9. Perennial plants growing on the ash dump: (a) Festuca pratensis, (b) Bromus inermis, (c) Medicago polymorpha.
Urbansci 09 00210 g009
Urbansci 09 00210 g010
Figure 10. Root system of perennial plants growing on the experimental site: (a) Festuca pratensis, (b) Bromus inermis, (c) Medicago polymorpha.
Figure 10. Root system of perennial plants growing on the experimental site: (a) Festuca pratensis, (b) Bromus inermis, (c) Medicago polymorpha.
Urbansci 09 00210 g010
Urbansci 09 00210 g011
Figure 11. Medicago polymorpha plants growing under field conditions during the second year.
Figure 11. Medicago polymorpha plants growing under field conditions during the second year.
Urbansci 09 00210 g011
Table 1. Characteristics of the seeds.
Table 1. Characteristics of the seeds.
Crop/VarietySupplierGermination Rate, %Purity, %
Festuca pratensis/
“Sverdlovskaya—37”		“Agrozashchita”, LLC (Oryol, Russia)85.096.6
Bromus inermis/
“Sibniiskhoz—189”		76.092.1
Medicago polymorpha/
“Nakhodka”		90.098.0
Table 2. Comparison of plant growth parameters.
Table 2. Comparison of plant growth parameters.
Plant SpeciesParameter (Mean Value)
Height, mRoot Length, mPhytomass, kg/m2
LaboratoryFieldLaboratoryFieldLaboratoryField
Festuca pratensis0.15 ± 0.030.06 ± 0.030.10 ± 0.020.08 ± 0.010.21 ± 0.040.13 ± 0.04
Bromus inermis0.12 ± 0.040.06 ± 0.010.10 ± 0.020.08 ± 0.010.17 ± 0.060.15 ± 0.05
Medicago polymorpha0.07 ± 0.050.17 ± 0.030.08 ± 0.010.20 ± 0.010.52 ± 0.042.00 ± 0.35
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Khudyakova, L.I.; Garkusheva, N.M.; Paleev, P.L.; Kotova, I.Y.; Khomoksonova, D.P.; Gulyashinov, P.A.; Antropova, I.G. Revegetation of Thermal Power Plant Ash Dumps or Sustainable Urban Development. Urban Sci. 2025, 9, 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9060210

AMA Style

Khudyakova LI, Garkusheva NM, Paleev PL, Kotova IY, Khomoksonova DP, Gulyashinov PA, Antropova IG. Revegetation of Thermal Power Plant Ash Dumps or Sustainable Urban Development. Urban Science. 2025; 9(6):210. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9060210

Chicago/Turabian Style

Khudyakova, Lyudmila Ivanovna, Natalya Mikhailovna Garkusheva, Pavel Leonidovich Paleev, Irina Yurievna Kotova, Darya Petrovna Khomoksonova, Pavel Anatolyevich Gulyashinov, and Inna Germanovna Antropova. 2025. "Revegetation of Thermal Power Plant Ash Dumps or Sustainable Urban Development" Urban Science 9, no. 6: 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9060210

APA Style

Khudyakova, L. I., Garkusheva, N. M., Paleev, P. L., Kotova, I. Y., Khomoksonova, D. P., Gulyashinov, P. A., & Antropova, I. G. (2025). Revegetation of Thermal Power Plant Ash Dumps or Sustainable Urban Development. Urban Science, 9(6), 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci9060210

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop