Comparison of the Chemical Composition of Natural Fertilizers and Organic Waste †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3. Results
4. Conclusions
- (1)
- All of the tested fertilizers and waste materials are a valuable source of basic nutrients for plants.
- (2)
- The materials tested contained a safe amount of heavy metals and could be used for fertilization.
- (3)
- Municipal and dairy sewage sludge contained more PAHs than natural fertilizers and other waste.
Author Contributions
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Bień, J.B. Sewage Sludg-Theory and Practice; Częstochowa University of Technology: Czestochowa, Poland, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Gondek, K. The content of various heavy metal forms in sewage sludge and compost. Acta Agrophys. 2006, 8, 825–838. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, X.-Y.; Zhang, T.; Fang, H. H-P. Bacteria–mediated PAH degradation in soil and sediment. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2011, 89, 1357–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ociepa-Kubicka, A.; Pachura, P. The Use of Sewage Sludge and Compost in the Fertilization of Energy Plants on the Example of Miscanthus and mallow. Central-Pomeranian Society for Environmental Protection, Annual Set of Environmental Protection. Available online: https://ros.edu.pl/images/roczniki/2013/pp_2013_148.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2018).
- Rosik-Dulewska, C.; Karwaczyńska, U.; Ciesielczuk, T.; Głowala, K. Possibilities of Non-Industrial Use of Waste Taking into Account the Rules Applicable in Environmental Protection, Central-Pomeranian Society for Environmental Protection, Annual Set of Environmental Protection. 2009. Available online: https://ros.edu.pl/images/roczniki/archive/pp_2009_061.pdf (accessed on 26 May 2018).
No. | Zn | Cu | Cr | Ni | Pb | Cd | Ca | Mg | K |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Unit | mg/kg s.m. | mg/kg s.m. | mg/kg s.m. | mg/kg s.m. | mg/kg s.m. | µg/kg s.m. | g/kg s.m. | mg/kg s.m. | g/kg s.m. |
1 | 14.73 | 1.41 | 0.93 | 0.41 | 1.43 | 128.98 | 2.39 | 842.35 | 2.34 |
2 | 55.21 | 5.53 | 1.88 | 1.03 | 1.69 | 163.47 | 7.92 | 900.48 | 2.60 |
3 | 24.92 | 4.32 | 0.69 | 0.80 | 1.51 | 152.41 | 39.41 | 947.28 | 1.98 |
4 | 59.91 | 11.22 | 2.46 | 1.26 | 1.02 | 243.66 | 7.08 | 932.33 | 2.35 |
5 | 73.40 | 14.29 | 5.05 | 3.74 | 8.46 | 220.45 | 61.01 | 960.51 | 2.62 |
6 | 260.44 | 73.32 | 32.66 | 12.54 | 8.64 | 563.87 | 53.70 | 1648.61 | 3.15 |
7 | 78.38 | 5.22 | 5.51 | 5.23 | 2.07 | 487.11 | 36.42 | 1869.49 | 4.49 |
8 | 237.37 | 53.16 | 12.13 | 7.36 | 7.184 | 698.5 | 25.93 | 1788.15 | 3.65 |
9 | 117.85 | 22.67 | 3.54 | 2.32 | 2.45 | 110.68 | 10.54 | 1832.04 | 5.27 |
10 | 131.03 | 24.77 | 3.63 | 2.25 | 3.144 | 169.33 | 11.96 | 2158.52 | 5.49 |
No. | ||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Compound | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
NAFTALEN | 310.64 | 64.59 | 24.24 | 5.84 | 8.14 | 19.37 | 29.82 | 28.15 | 10.90 | 6.00 |
ACENAFTYLEN | 1030.80 | 1.96 | 0.72 | 0.29 | 0.25 | - | - | 220.41 | - | - |
ACENAFTEN | 741.12 | 25.14 | 9.68 | 5.74 | 25.98 | 3.98 | 34.81 | 913.95 | - | - |
FLUOREN | 187.25 | 21.98 | 3.02 | 0.58 | 0.66 | 8.44 | 34.68 | 36.22 | - | - |
FENANTREN | 932.77 | 100.75 | 22.01 | 4.93 | 4.30 | 33.48 | 118.24 | 45.83 | 12.58 | - |
ANTRACEN | 141.65 | 9.75 | 2.02 | 5.64 | 0.35 | 7.77 | 30.71 | 4.72 | - | - |
FLUORANTEN | 1209.12 | 60.19 | 30.93 | 11.31 | 3.60 | 28.84 | 116.80 | 55.42 | 12.84 | 7.49 |
PIREN | 1064.81 | 52.76 | 30.95 | 10.74 | 4.10 | 27.06 | 96.59 | 50.26 | 12.70 | 7.04 |
BENZO[A] ANTRACEN | 375.98 | 28.30 | 20.00 | 6.55 | 1.71 | 24.56 | 54.96 | 37.14 | 10.26 | 8.33 |
CHRYZEN | 487.04 | 40.15 | 29.52 | 8.19 | 3.40 | 22.77 | 57.20 | 37.47 | 10.85 | 7.43 |
BENZO[B] FLUORANTEN | 232.63 | - | 15.20 | - | - | 18.09 | 59.50 | 35.56 | 10.88 | 8.96 |
BENZO[K] FLUORANTEN | 239.02 | 25.70 | 25.01 | 3.26 | 1.84 | 31.64 | 54.52 | 55.21 | 13.05 | 8.76 |
BENZO[A]PIREN | 140.18 | 497.07 | 438.61 | 90.88 | - | 56.29 | 30.87 | 13.16 | - | |
INDENO [1,2,3,C,D]PIREN | 80.12 | - | - | 1.50 | - | 23.22 | 131.52 | 30.55 | 61.73 | 12.08 |
DIBENZO[A,H] ANTRACEN | 6.87 | - | - | - | 16.91 | - | - | - | - | - |
BENZO[G,H,I] PERYLEN | 97.24 | - | - | - | - | - | 49.46 | 24.76 | 19.85 | - |
∑ | 7277.25 | 928.33 | 651.90 | 64.56 | 162.14 | 249.21 | 925.09 | 1606.53 | 188.79 | 66.08 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Łapiński, D.; Wiater, J. Comparison of the Chemical Composition of Natural Fertilizers and Organic Waste. Proceedings 2019, 16, 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2019016045
Łapiński D, Wiater J. Comparison of the Chemical Composition of Natural Fertilizers and Organic Waste. Proceedings. 2019; 16(1):45. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2019016045
Chicago/Turabian StyleŁapiński, Dawid, and Józefa Wiater. 2019. "Comparison of the Chemical Composition of Natural Fertilizers and Organic Waste" Proceedings 16, no. 1: 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2019016045
APA StyleŁapiński, D., & Wiater, J. (2019). Comparison of the Chemical Composition of Natural Fertilizers and Organic Waste. Proceedings, 16(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/proceedings2019016045