IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p434-d1016498.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison between MICP-Based Bio-Cementation Versus Traditional Portland Cementation for Oil-Contaminated Soil Stabilisation

Author

Listed:
  • Jie Yin

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Jian-Xin Wu

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Ke Zhang

    (Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

  • Mohamed A. Shahin

    (School of Civil and Mechanical Engineering, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6845, Australia)

  • Liang Cheng

    (Institute of Environmental Health and Ecological Security, School of Environment and Safety Engineering, Jiangsu University, Zhenjiang 212013, China)

Abstract

In recent years, oil spills and leakages have often occurred during oil exploration, transportation, handling, usage, and processing, causing serious global environmental problems. Microbially-induced carbonate precipitation (MICP) is an emerging green, environmentally friendly, and sustainable technology that has proven to be a promising alternative for soil stabilisation. This paper provides a comparison between the mechanical performance of oil-polluted sand treated with biocement and traditional Portland cement. A series of laboratory tests, including permeability, unconfined compressive strength (UCS), and triaxial consolidated undrained (CU) tests, was conducted. Even though oil contamination deteriorates the bonding strength of treated soil for both biocement and Portland cement soils, the biocement-treated oil-contaminated sand was found to achieve higher strength (up to four times) than cement-treated soil in the presence of similar content of cementing agent. After eight treatment cycles, the UCS value of oil-contaminated sand treated with biocement reached 1 MPa, demonstrating a high potential for oil-contaminated soil stabilisation in regions of oil spills and leakages.

Suggested Citation

  • Jie Yin & Jian-Xin Wu & Ke Zhang & Mohamed A. Shahin & Liang Cheng, 2022. "Comparison between MICP-Based Bio-Cementation Versus Traditional Portland Cementation for Oil-Contaminated Soil Stabilisation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:434-:d:1016498
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/434/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/434/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dorian, James P. & Franssen, Herman T. & Simbeck, Dale R., 2006. "Global challenges in energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(15), pages 1984-1991, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pin Li & Jinsuo Zhang, 2019. "Is China’s Energy Supply Sustainable? New Research Model Based on the Exponential Smoothing and GM(1,1) Methods," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Lloyd, Bob & Subbarao, Srikanth, 2009. "Development challenges under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM)--Can renewable energy initiatives be put in place before peak oil?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 237-245, January.
    3. Huang, Beijia & Zhang, Long & Ma, Linmao & Bai, Wuliyasu & Ren, Jingzheng, 2021. "Multi-criteria decision analysis of China’s energy security from 2008 to 2017 based on Fuzzy BWM-DEA-AR model and Malmquist Productivity Index," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    4. Baharoon, Dhyia Aidroos & Rahman, Hasimah Abdul & Fadhl, Saeed Obaid, 2016. "Publics׳ knowledge, attitudes and behavioral toward the use of solar energy in Yemen power sector," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 498-515.
    5. Adams, Michelle & Wheeler, David & Woolston, Genna, 2011. "A participatory approach to sustainable energy strategy development in a carbon-intensive jurisdiction: The case of Nova Scotia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2550-2559, May.
    6. Gilbert, Richard & Perl, Anthony, 2007. "Grid-connected vehicles as the core of future land-based transport systems," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 3053-3060, May.
    7. Rath, Badri Narayan & Akram, Vaseem & Bal, Debi Prasad & Mahalik, Mantu Kumar, 2019. "Do fossil fuel and renewable energy consumption affect total factor productivity growth? Evidence from cross-country data with policy insights," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 186-199.
    8. Zhu, Bo & Deng, Yuanyue & Lin, Renda & Hu, Xin & Chen, Pingshe, 2022. "Energy security: Does systemic risk spillover matter? Evidence from China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    9. Tete, Komlan H.S. & Soro, Y.M. & Sidibé, S.S. & Jones, Rory V., 2023. "Assessing energy security within the electricity sector in the West African economic and monetary union: Inter-country performances and trends analysis with policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    10. Mohammad Fazle Rabbi & József Popp & Domicián Máté & Sándor Kovács, 2022. "Energy Security and Energy Transition to Achieve Carbon Neutrality," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-18, October.
    11. Rawan Hakawati & Beatrice Smyth & Helen Daly & Geoffrey McCullough & David Rooney, 2019. "Is the Fischer-Tropsch Conversion of Biogas-Derived Syngas to Liquid Fuels Feasible at Atmospheric Pressure?," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-28, March.
    12. Audenaert, Amaryllis & De Boeck, Liesje & Roelants, Kristof, 2009. "Economic analysis of the profitability of energy-saving architectural measures for the achievement of the EPB-standard," Working Papers 2009/14, Hogeschool-Universiteit Brussel, Faculteit Economie en Management.
    13. Pätäri, Satu & Kyläheiko, Kalevi & Sandström, Jaana, 2011. "Opening up new strategic options in the pulp and paper industry: Case biorefineries," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 456-464, July.
    14. Mohammed, M.A.A. & Salmiaton, A. & Wan Azlina, W.A.K.G. & Mohammad Amran, M.S. & Fakhru'l-Razi, A. & Taufiq-Yap, Y.H., 2011. "Hydrogen rich gas from oil palm biomass as a potential source of renewable energy in Malaysia," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 1258-1270, February.
    15. Rozina, & Asif, Saira & Ahmad, Mushtaq & Zafar, Muhammad & Ali, Nsir, 2017. "Prospects and potential of fatty acid methyl esters of some non-edible seed oils for use as biodiesel in Pakistan," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 687-702.
    16. Avri Eitan & Gillad Rosen & Lior Herman & Itay Fishhendler, 2020. "Renewable Energy Entrepreneurs: A Conceptual Framework," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(10), pages 1-23, May.
    17. Herie Park & Sungwoo Bae, 2021. "Quantitative Assessment of Energy Supply Security: Korea Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, February.
    18. Yao, Lixia & Chang, Youngho, 2014. "Energy security in China: A quantitative analysis and policy implications," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 595-604.
    19. Abdul Mujeebu, Muhammad & Alshamrani, Othman Subhi, 2016. "Prospects of energy conservation and management in buildings – The Saudi Arabian scenario versus global trends," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1647-1663.
    20. Mu Li & Li Li & Wadim Strielkowski, 2019. "The Impact of Urbanization and Industrialization on Energy Security: A Case Study of China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-22, June.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:434-:d:1016498. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.