In Press (Winter)
Back to the articles list |
Back to browse issues page
Associate Professor, Department of Arid and Desert Areas Management, Faculty of Natural Resources and Desert Studies, University of Yazd, Yazd, Iran , s.ghasemi@yazd.ac.ir
Abstract: (352 Views)
1. Introduction
Wind erosion and dust emission pose significant environmental challenges, particularly in arid and semi-arid regions, affecting over 41 percentage of the Earth's land surface and nearly two billion people, primarily in developing nations (Komaei et al., 2023). Unsustainable agricultural practices, deforestation, and climate change have exacerbated soil degradation, leading to annual dust emissions of up to 3000 million tons, which adversely impact air quality, water resources, and agricultural productivity (de Farias et al., 2020). Traditional soil stabilization methods, such as Portland cement and lime, are energy-intensive and contribute substantially to CO₂ emissions (Shariatmadari et al., 2021). As an eco-friendly alternative, geopolymers—aluminosilicate-based materials activated by alkaline or acidic solutions—have emerged as sustainable binders for soil stabilization (Tchakouté et al., 2017). Acidic geopolymers, particularly those activated by phosphoric acid, exhibit superior mechanical strength and thermal stability due to the formation of Si-Al-P networks (Tchakouté et al., 2017)
Industrial by-products, such as ceramic tile waste (CTW) and iron ore tailings (IOT), are promising precursors for geopolymer synthesis, offering both economic and environmental benefits (Behforouz et al., 2020). CTW, rich in amorphous silica and alumina, and IOT, containing iron oxides and aluminosilicates, are ideal for geopolymer production (Prates et al., 2023). This study investigates the feasibility of using CTW and IOT-based acidic geopolymers for sand dune stabilization, focusing on their compressive strength, microstructure, and ecological impact.
2. Methodology
In this study, phosphoric acid was combined with different ratios of IOT and CTW, and five types of acidic geopolymers were prepared, including CTW100, CTW75IOT25, CTW50IOT50, CTW25IOT75, and IOT100. The compressive strength of sand treated with 10 and 20 percent levels of acidic geopolymers was determined, and finally the polymer with the highest compressive strength was selected for further tests. The surface morphology of the geopolymer selected based on the compressive strength results was obtained by SEM. The chemical composition and mineral phase composition of the geopolymers were also determined using XRF and XRD, respectively. The pH value, electrical conductivity (EC), seed germination, microbial population and wind erosion resistance of the geopolymer-treated sand were also investigated.
3. Results
The results of the compressive strength evaluation for sand treated with 10% and 20% levels of acid-geopolymers synthesized from IOT and CTW showed that in all treatments except CTW100, increasing the geopolymer percentage from 10% to 20% led to a significant increase in compressive strength. At the 20% level, with an increase in the proportion of IOT in the geopolymer composition, the compressive strength increased significantly. The highest compressive strength values were observed in the CTW25IOT75 (2.2 kg/cm²) and IOT100 (3.2 kg/cm²) treatments, which were above the minimum standard (2 kg/cm²) set by the Environmental Protection Agency. Accordingly, these two geopolymers were selected for further testing.
X-ray diffraction (XRD) results of the IOT100 geopolymer revealed the formation of antigorite, chlorite, and iron phases. In the CTW25IOT75 geopolymer, albite, chlorite, and quartz phases were identified. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images confirmed a dense and cohesive structure in both geopolymers, indicating the presence of an aluminosilicate gel and the formation of compact tetrahedral phases with low porosity. These microstructural characteristics are the primary reason for achieving high compressive strength.
The application of both geopolymers resulted in a significant decrease in the pH of the sand compared to the control sample. While the CTW25IOT75 geopolymer had no significant effect on EC, IOT100 caused a significant increase. However, the values of both parameters remained within the acceptable range of environmental standards. The results of the sorghum seed germination test showed that the application of these geopolymers had no negative effect on the germination percentage. Furthermore, the microbial population of the sand was significantly affected by the geopolymers, with the microbial population increasing by 400% and 275% in the CTW25IOT75 and IOT100 treatments, respectively, compared to the control. The most significant outcome was the geopolymers' remarkable effect on controlling wind erosion; the wind erosion rate in sand stabilized with either geopolymer was reduced to nearly zero compared to the control sample, which had no resistance.
4. Discussion & Conclusions
The discussion centers on the critical role of acidic activation and precursor composition in developing the cohesive and dense microstructure of geopolymers, which is fundamental to their performance. The formation of a consolidated geopolymer matrix, as observed in SEM micrographs, is attributed to the phosphoric acid-driven reaction that creates aluminosilicate gels, effectively binding sand particles together (Nikolov, 2020). The high reactivity of IOT, characterized by their silica, iron oxide content, and high Si/Al ratio, facilitates the development of dense, compact tetrahedral structures with low porosity through reactions with the acidic activator. This dense structuring is a key factor in achieving excellent mechanical properties and is consistent with the mechanisms described in the literature for acid-based geopolymerization (dos Santos et al., 2019; Lazorenko et al., 2021). The observed microstructural integrity provides a scientific basis for the material's effectiveness, aligning with findings from other studies on acid-activated systems (de Carvalho et al., 2023; Kaze et al., 2021).
The efficacy of the synthesized geopolymers is further discussed in the context of their environmental compatibility and functional performance beyond mere mechanical strength. The significant increase in microbial population in treated sand is theorized to be a direct result of the mulch's ability to retain moisture, thereby creating a more favorable habitat for microorganisms and mitigating moisture stress, which is a critical constraint in arid environments (Długosz et al., 2024; Qu et al., 2023). This highlights a beneficial ecological side effect of the treatment. Furthermore, the near-zero wind erosion rates observed are directly linked to the formation of a resistant and stable surface crust by the geopolymer, which effectively shields the soil from displacement by wind forces (Komaei et al., 2023; Shahnavaz et al., 2017). The absence of a negative impact on seed germination underscores the potential environmental safety of these materials for use in soil stabilization projects, as they do not introduce phytotoxic conditions (Banedjschafie et al., 2021; Abtahi, 2019).
Received: 2025/08/3
References
1. Abtahi, M. (2019). Investigation of Biodegradable Polymer-Cellulosic Mulch Persistence and Effects on Seed Germination and Establishment of Desert. Iranian Rangeland and Desert Research, 26(3), 517-530. doi:10.22092/ijrdr.2019.119986 (In Persian)
2. Banedjschafie, S., Khosroshahi, M., Kashi Zenouzi, L., & Jafari, A. (2021). Investigation of the effect of Nucleus Mulch (MA-19) on seed germination and seedlings growth of Holoxylon and Qara-Dagh Nitraria. Iranian Rangeland and Desert Research, 28(1), 106-117. doi:10.22092/ijrdr.2021.123877 (In Persian)
3. Behforouz, B., Balkanlou, V., Naseri, F., Kasehchi, E., Mohseni, E., & Ozbakkaloglu, T. (2020). Investigation of eco-friendly fiber-reinforced geopolymer composites incorporating recycled coarse aggregates. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 17(6), 3251-3260. [DOI:10.1007/s13762-020-02643-x]
4. Bhavsar, J. K., & Panchal, V. (2022). Ceramic waste powder as a partial substitute of fly ash for geopolymer concrete cured at ambient temperature. Civ. Eng. J, 8, 1369-1387. [DOI:10.28991/CEJ-2022-08-07-05]
5. Bohlouli, M., Imam, M., & Khaleghi, M. (2023). Stabilization of a dune sandy soil with steel-slag-based geopolymer and nanosilica. Transportation infrastructure engineering, 9(3), 119-137. doi:10.22075/jtie.2023.29893.1637 (In Persian)
6. Canarini, A., Schmidt, H., Fuchslueger, L., Martin, V., Herbold, C. W., Zezula, D., . . . Bahn, M. (2021). Ecological memory of recurrent drought modifies soil processes via changes in soil microbial community. Nature Communications, 12(1), 5308. [DOI:10.1038/s41467-021-25675-4]
7. de Carvalho, A. R., da Silva Calderón-Morales, B. R., Júnior, J. C. B., de Oliveira, T. M., & Silva, G. J. B. (2023). Proposition of geopolymers obtained through the acid activation of iron ore tailings with phosphoric acid. Construction and Building Materials, 403, 133078. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.133078]
8. de Farias, L. M., & Marinho, J. L. A. (2020). Construções sustentáveis: Perspectivas sobre práticas utilizadas na construção civil. Brazilian Journal of Development, 6(3), 16023-16033. [DOI:10.34117/bjdv6n3-466]
9. Demo AH and Asefa Bogale G (2024) Enhancing crop yield and conserving soil moisture through mulching practices in dryland agriculture. Front. Agron. 6:1361697. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2024.1361697 [DOI:10.3389/fagro.2024.1361697]
10. Dihaji, H., Azerkane, D., Bih, L., Essaddek, A., & Haily, E. M. (2025). Comparative study of geopolymers synthesized with alkaline and acid reactants at various liquid-to-solid ratios using Moroccan kaolin clay. Construction and Building Materials, 468, 140453. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2025.140453]
11. Długosz, J., Piotrowska-Długosz, A., & Breza-Boruta, B. (2024). The effect of differences in soil water content on microbial and enzymatic properties across the soil profiles. Ecohydrology & Hydrobiology, 24(3), 547-556. [DOI:10.1016/j.ecohyd.2023.06.010]
12. dos Santos, L. F., de Carvalho, J. M. F., Peixoto, R. A. F., & Brigolini, G. J. (2019). Iron ore tailing-based geopolymer containing glass wool residue: A study of mechanical and microstructural properties. Construction and Building Materials, 220, 375-385. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.05.181]
13. El-Dieb, A. (2018). From landfill to sustainable concrete. MOJ Civil Engineering, 4(4), 136-136. [DOI:10.15406/mojce.2018.04.00110]
14. El-Beltagi, H. S., Basit, A., Mohamed, H. I., Ali, I., Ullah, S., Kamel, E. A., ... & Ghazzawy, H. S. (2022). Mulching as a sustainable water and soil saving practice in agriculture: A review. Agronomy, 12(8), 1881. [DOI:10.3390/agronomy12081881]
15. Guan, H., Mu, Y., Song, R., Lan, Y., Du, X., Li, J., . . . Sang, W. (2022). Soil microbial communities in desert grassland around rare earth mine: Diversity, variation, and response patterns. Sustainability, 14(23), 15629. [DOI:10.3390/su142315629]
16. Haily, E., Ait Ousaleh, H., Zari, N., Faik, A., Bouhfid, R., & Qaiss, A. (2023). Use of a form-stable phase change material to improve thermal properties of phosphate sludge-based geopolymer mortar. Construction and Building Materials, 386, 131570. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2023.131570]
17. Hanegbi, N., & Katra, I. (2020). A clay-based geopolymer in loess soil stabilization. Applied Sciences, 10(7), 2608. [DOI:10.3390/app10072608]
18. Kasehchi, E., Arjomand, M. A., & Elizei, M. H. A. (2024). Experimental investigation of the feasibility of stabilizing inshore silty sand soil using geopolymer based on ceramic waste powder: An approach to upcycling waste material for sustainable construction. Case Studies in Construction Materials, 20, e02979. [DOI:10.1016/j.cscm.2024.e02979]
19. Katra, I. (2022). A clay-based geopolymer in loess stabilization to water and wind soil erosion. . In EGU General Assembly Conference Abstracts pp. EGU22-8329. [DOI:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-8329]
20. Kaze, C. R., Lecomte-Nana, G. L., Kamseu, E., Camacho, P. S., Provis, J. L., Duttine, M., . . . Melo, U. C. (2021). Mechanical and physical properties of inorganic polymer cement made of iron-rich laterite and lateritic clay: A comparative study. Cement and Concrete Research, 140, 106320. [DOI:10.1016/j.cemconres.2020.106320]
21. Komaei, A., Soroush, A., Fattahi, S. M., & Ghanbari, H. (2023). Wind erosion control using alkali-activated slag cement: Experimental investigation and microstructural analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 344, 118633. [DOI:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.118633]
22. Koohestani, B., Darban, A. K., Mokhtari, P., Darezereshki, E., & Yilmaz, E. (2021). Geopolymerization of soil by sodium silicate as an approach to control wind erosion. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 18(7), 1837-1848. [DOI:10.1007/s13762-020-02943-2]
23. Lalruatsangi, E., Hazarika, B., & Raja, P. (2019). Effect of organic and inorganic mulching on soil microbial population in acid lime (Citrus aurantifolia Swingle). International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences, 8(7), 2062-2064. [DOI:10.20546/ijcmas.2019.807.247]
24. Lazorenko, G., Kasprzhitskii, A., Shaikh, F., Krishna, R., & Mishra, J. (2021). Utilization potential of mine tailings in geopolymers: Physicochemical and environmental aspects. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 147, 559-577. [DOI:10.1016/j.psep.2020.12.028]
25. Louati, S., Baklouti, S., & Samet, B. (2016). Geopolymers Based on Phosphoric Acid and Illito‐Kaolinitic Clay. Advances in Materials Science and Engineering, 2016(1), 2359759. [DOI:10.1155/2016/2359759]
26. Mahmoodi, O., Siad, H., Lachemi, M., Dadsetan, S., & Sahmaran, M. (2021). Development of optimized binary ceramic tile and concrete wastes geopolymer binders for in-situ applications. Journal of Building Engineering, 43, 102906. [DOI:10.1016/j.jobe.2021.102906]
27. Merrikhpour, H., Azimi, S. B., Badamfirooz, J., & Montazami, S. (2022). Investigating the effects of two emulsion mulch types on soil properties: a case study of Aran and Bidgol desert areas. Desert Ecosystem Engineering, 10(33), 13-26.
28. Middleton, N., & Kang, U. (2017). Sand and dust storms: Impact mitigation. Sustainability, 9(6), 1053. [DOI:10.3390/su9061053]
29. Nikolov, A. (2020). Alkali and acid activated geopolymers based on iron-silicate fines-by-product from copper industry. International scientific journal" machines. Technologies. Materials, 14(1). [DOI:10.1088/1757-899X/951/1/012006]
30. Planning and Budget Organization of Iran & Department of Environment. (2019). Technical Instruction for Evaluating the Efficiency of Soil Stabilizers (Mulch) (Regulation No. 783). Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
31. Polignano, M. V., & Lemos, R. S. (2020). Rompimento da barragem da vale em brumadinho: impactos socioambientais na bacia do rio paraopeba. Ciência e Cultura, 72(2), 37-43. [DOI:10.21800/2317-66602020000200011]
32. Prates, C. D., Lima, A. S., Ferreira, I. C., Paula, F. G. d., Pinto, P. S., Ardisson, J. D., . . . Teixeira, A. P. C. (2023). Use of iron ore tailing as raw material for two products: sodium silicate and geopolymers. Journal of the Brazilian Chemical Society, 34(6), 809-818. [DOI:10.21577/0103-5053.20220149]
33. Provis, J. L. (2018). Alkali-activated materials. Cement and Concrete Research, 114, 40-48. [DOI:10.1016/j.cemconres.2017.02.009]
34. Qu, Q., Wang, Z., Gan, Q., Liu, R., & Xu, H. (2023). Impact of drought on soil microbial biomass and extracellular enzyme activity. Frontiers in plant science, 14, 1221288. [DOI:10.3389/fpls.2023.1221288]
35. Quintana, J. R., Martín-Sanz, J. P., Valverde-Asenjo, I., & Molina, J. A. (2023). Drought differently destabilizes soil structure in a chronosequence of abandoned agricultural lands. Catena, 222, 106871. [DOI:10.1016/j.catena.2022.106871]
36. Rezaie, A. (2009). Comparison between Polylatice polymer and petroleum mulch on seed germination and plant establishment in sand dune fixation. Iranian Rangeland and Desert Research, 16(1), 124-136. Retrieved from https://ijrdr.areeo.ac.ir/article_103249_c944f788f1e0aa9821ea32785793f2c2.pdf (In Persian)
37. Sabohi, R., Heidari Morchekhorti, F., Khodagholi, M., & Salehpour, S. (1400). Investigating the possibility of using Asia's safe polymer to reduce wind erosion and fine dust. Iranian Journal of Rangeland and Desert Research, 28(2), 280-295. (In Persian)
38. Sahoo, S., & Singh, S. P. (2022). Strength and durability properties of expansive soil treated with geopolymer and conventional stabilizers. Construction and Building Materials, 328, 127078. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2022.127078]
39. Shahnavaz, M., Nourzadeh Haddad, M., Gholami, A., & Panahpoor, I. (2017). Study of Performance polymer and plant mulch to reduce soil loss in areas prone to wind erosion in Khuzestan. Iranian Journal of Soil and Water Research, 48(3), 651-658.
40. Sharma, S. K. (2020). ~ i~ High Density Planting of Subtropical Fruits-I Litchi An Introduction to Contemporary Orchard Management (Vol. 1). Nitya Publications.
41. Shariatmadari, N., Mohebbi, H., & Javadi, A. A. (2021). Surface stabilization of soils susceptible to wind erosion using volcanic ash-based geopolymer. Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, 33(12), 04021345. [DOI:10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0003981]
42. Tchakouté, H. K., & Rüscher, C. H. (2017). Mechanical and microstructural properties of metakaolin-based geopolymer cements from sodium waterglass and phosphoric acid solution as hardeners: A comparative study. Applied Clay Science, 140, 81-87. [DOI:10.1016/j.clay.2017.02.002]
43. Tchakouté, H. K., Rüscher, C. H., Kamseu, E., Djobo, J. N., & Leonelli, C. (2017). The influence of gibbsite in kaolin and the formation of berlinite on the properties of metakaolin-phosphate-based geopolymer cements. Materials Chemistry and Physics, 199, 280-288. [DOI:10.1016/j.matchemphys.2017.07.020]
44. Valente, M., Sambucci, M., Chougan, M., & Ghaffar, S. H. (2022). Reducing the emission of climate-altering substances in cementitious materials: A comparison between alkali-activated materials and Portland cement-based composites incorporating recycled tire rubber. Journal of cleaner production(333), 130013. [DOI:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.130013]
45. van Riessen, A., Jamieson, E., Gildenhuys, H., Skane, R., & Allery, J. (2025). Using XRD to Assess the Strength of Fly-Ash-and Metakaolin-Based Geopolymers. Materials, 18(9), 2093. [DOI:10.3390/ma18092093]
46. Wang, Y., Liu, L., Luo, Y., Awasthi, M. K., Yang, J., Duan, Y., ... & Zhao, Z. (2020). Mulching practices alter the bacterial-fungal community and network in favor of soil quality in a semiarid orchard system. Science of the total environment, 725, 138527. [DOI:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138527]
47. Zeng, H., Pu, S., Cai, G., Duan, W., Shen, Z., Xu, B., . . . Xu, Y. (2024). Comparative study on the preparation of phosphate-based geopolymers using different activators. Construction and Building Materials, 437, 137000. [DOI:10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2024.137000]
48. Zhang, S., Wang, Y., Sun, L., Qiu, C., Ding, Y., Gu, H., ... & Ding, Z. (2020). Organic mulching positively regulates the soil microbial communities and ecosystem functions in tea plantation. BMC microbiology, 20(1), 103. [DOI:10.1186/s12866-020-01794-8]
49. Zhao, X., Ma, X., Chen, B., Shang, Y., & Song, M. (2022). Challenges toward carbon neutrality in China: Strategies and countermeasures. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 176, 105959 [DOI:10.1016/j.resconrec.2021.105959]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
