Desertification control effect of synergistic utilization of biomass ash brick sand barriers and soil amendments—taking the Alxa photovoltaic base as an example

doi:10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2025.00198

Journal of Desert Research ›› 2026, Vol. 46 ›› Issue (4): 59-65.DOI: 10.7522/j.issn.1000-694X.2025.00198

Previous Articles Next Articles

Desertification control effect of synergistic utilization of biomass ash brick sand barriers and soil amendments—taking the Alxa photovoltaic base as an example

Huiyong Zhuang¹^,²(), Yiming Feng³(), Yanyan Yang³, Yongping Liu⁴, Husen Ning⁴

^1.National Energy Biomass Power Generation Group Co. ，Ltd. ，Beijing 100000，China
^2.Tsinghua University，Beijing 100084，China
^3.Institute of Ecological Protection and Restoration，Chinese Academy of Forestry，Beijing 100091，China
^4.Institute of Afforestation and Desertification Control，Xinjiang Academy of Forestry，Urumqi 830063，China

Received:2025-11-04 Revised:2025-12-08 Online:2026-07-20 Published:2026-08-27
Contact: Yiming Feng

Abstract

Abstract:

Taking the mobile sand dunes of the 100 MW photovoltaic project in Wulan Buh of Alxa League as the research object， a treatment group T （arranging biomass ash brick sand barriers between photovoltaic panels + applying self-made soil amendment + planting 4 shrub species including Hedysarum mongolicum， Hedysarum scoparium， etc.） and a control group CK were set up. By monitoring aeolian sand indicators， soil physical and chemical properties， and vegetation characteristics， the synergistic desertification control effect of biomass ash brick sand barriers and soil amendment was systematically quantified. The results showed that：（1） In terms of vegetation restoration， the comprehensive coverage， shrub survival rate， and total biomass， the treatment group T were significantly better than those of the CK group， with the “Hedysarum scoparium between panels” configuration performing the best， while the survival rate of “Atriplex canescens between panels” was only 8.00%， which is not suitable for planting in this area. （2） In terms of windbreak and sand fixation， the sand transport amount， sand transport rate per unit width， and aeolian sand flux， the treatment group was significantly lower than those in the CK group， among which the sand transport amounts of the configurations “Hedysarum scoparium between panels”， “Hedysarum mongolicum between panels”， and “Calligonum mongolicum between panels” were all less than 18 g. （3） In terms of soil improvement， the sand particle content in the 0-20 cm soil layer of the treatment group T decreased from 99.19%-99.23% in the CK group to 97.61%-98.90%， the silt particle content increased from 0.77%-0.81% to 1.10%-1.80%， clay particles appeared in some configurations， and the soil organic matter and total carbon content were significantly higher than those in the CK group， among which the “Hedysarum scoparium between panels” configuration had the most prominent carbon pool accumulation effect. Moreover， other soil physical and chemical properties such as soil pH value， electrical conductivity （EC）， available nitrogen， available phosphorus， and available potassium have all been significantly improved compared with those in the CK group. In summary， the synergistic effect of biomass ash brick sand barriers and soil amendment can achieve the comprehensive benefits of windbreak and sand fixation， soil improvement， and ecological restoration， realizing the synergistic effect of waste resource utilization-desertification control-ecological restoration. Moreover， this technology has low cost and great market application potential， providing a low-cost and high-ecological-benefit ecological governance technical paradigm for photovoltaic areas in desert and gobi regions.

Key words: biomass ash brick, sand barrier, soil amendment, desertification control effect, Alxa photovoltaic base

CLC Number:

Huiyong Zhuang, Yiming Feng, Yanyan Yang, Yongping Liu, Husen Ning. Desertification control effect of synergistic utilization of biomass ash brick sand barriers and soil amendments—taking the Alxa photovoltaic base as an example[J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2026, 46(4): 59-65.

Figures/Tables 4

References 20

[1]	国家林业和草原局.中国荒漠化和沙化状况公报（2021年）［R］.北京：中国林业出版社，2022.
[2]	刘明洋，王靖.“光伏长城”让“死亡之海”变能源绿洲［N/OL］.新华网，2025-08-26..
[3]	李诗源，徐路遥，李兴财，等.风沙环境下光伏板表面积尘仿真及其透光率研究［J］.宁夏大学学报（自然科学版），2024，45（3）：267-272.
[4]	东方，马玉峰，达布希拉图，等.内蒙古地区光伏发电工程气象灾害风险评估及区划［J］.太阳能学报，2025，46（8）：564-572.
[5]	毛亚娜，薛春晓，刘世忠.酒额铁路不同沙障防沙性能对比［J］.灾害学，2023，38（3）：48-52.
[6]	王学全，卢琦，杨恒华，等.高寒沙区沙障固沙效益与生态功能观测研究［J］.水土保持学报，2009，23（3）：38-41.
[7]	孙涛，刘虎俊，朱国庆，等.３种机械沙障防风固沙功能的时效性［J］.水土保持学报，2012，26（4）：12-16+22.
[8]	石麟，李红悦，赵雨兴，等.毛乌素沙地流动沙丘不同沙障组合措施的防风固沙效益评价［J］.干旱区研究，2023，40（2）：268-279.
[9]	蔡立坤，丁国栋，曲梦雨.基于数值模拟的网格沙障孔隙率-风速耦合机制与防风固沙效能评价［J］.干旱区资源与环境，2025，39（8）：104-115.
[10]	Yuan S N， Hong M F， Li H，et al.Contributions and mechanisms of components in modified biochar to adsorb cadmium in aqueous solution［J］.Science of the Total Environment，2020，733：139320.
[11]	Qiu C C， Xu L W， Geng W J，et al.Evolutionary behaviors of straw-reinforced slurry for sustainable management of dredging sediment：rheological and fertility properties［J］.Waste and Biomass Valorization，2025，16（3）：1057-1071.
[12]	张旺兴，邵吉成.河湖库底泥清除、处置及资源化利用技术研究进展［J］.环境工程学报，2025，19（10）：2363-2373.
[13]	Yang L Y， Cheng Q， Zhuang W E，et al.Seasonal changes in the chemical composition and reactivity of dissolved organic matter at the land-ocean interface of a subtropical river［J］.Environmental Science and Pollution Research，2019，26（24）：24595-24608.
[14]	张磊，刘艳，王栋，等.生物质-矿渣复合生态砖的制备及性能研究［J］.材料导报，2021，35（）：456-460.
[15]	Liang F， Li B Z， Vogt R D，et al.Straw return exacerbates soil acidification in major Chinese croplands［J］.Resources，Conservation and Recycling，2023，198：107176.
[16]	谢宗强，王杨，唐志尧，等.中国常见灌木生物量模型手册［M］.北京：科学出版社，2018.
[17]	王玉才，张恒嘉.五种机械沙障的固沙效果研究［J］.中国水运，2016，16（8）：314-315.
[18]	石炎，薛聪，邱宇平.农林生物质直燃电厂灰渣资源化技术分析与展望［J］.农业资源与环境学报，2019，36（2）：127-139.
[19]	李汉卿，王军，汤政，等.生物质电厂灰渣理化特性及土地利用潜在生态环境风险评价［J］.安徽农业科学，2024，52（22）：54-59.
[20]	赵哈林，周瑞莲，曲浩，等.沙障对流动沙地土壤水分和植被恢复的影响［J］.干旱区研究，2019，36（4）：923-930.

样方	植被模式	草本覆盖度/%	灌木覆盖度/%	综合覆盖度/%	灌木存活率/%	地上生物量/（g·m^-2）	地下生物量/（g·m^-2）	总生物量 /（g·m^-2）
CK 样方	板间对照	2.17^d	0.00^c	2.17^d	—	0.00^d	0.00^d	0.00^d
T处理样方	板间杨柴	49.33^a	27.00^b	76.33^b	79.33^b	23.38^b	28.14^b	51.52^b
	板间沙拐枣	50.33^a	22.00^c	72.33^b	77.67^b	21.50^b	23.56^c	45.06^c
	板间四翅滨藜	27.33^c	0.00^c	27.33^c	8.00^c	5.27^c	7.23^d	12.50^d
	板间花棒	49.00^a	32.00^a	81.00^a	85.00^a	38.32^a	53.75^a	92.07^a

样方	植被模式	草本覆盖度/%	灌木覆盖度/%	综合覆盖度/%	灌木存活率/%	地上生物量/（g·m^-2）	地下生物量/（g·m^-2）	总生物量 /（g·m^-2）
CK 样方	板间对照	2.17^d	0.00^c	2.17^d	—	0.00^d	0.00^d	0.00^d
T处理样方	板间杨柴	49.33^a	27.00^b	76.33^b	79.33^b	23.38^b	28.14^b	51.52^b
	板间沙拐枣	50.33^a	22.00^c	72.33^b	77.67^b	21.50^b	23.56^c	45.06^c
	板间四翅滨藜	27.33^c	0.00^c	27.33^c	8.00^c	5.27^c	7.23^d	12.50^d
	板间花棒	49.00^a	32.00^a	81.00^a	85.00^a	38.32^a	53.75^a	92.07^a

样方	植被模式	输沙量/g	单宽输沙率 /(g·m⁻¹·d⁻¹）	风沙通量 /（g·m⁻²·d⁻¹）
CK样方	板间对照	526.52^a	1 253.02^a	561.10^a
T处理样方	板间杨柴	16.36^c	467.11^b	329.05^b
	板间沙拐枣	17.23^c	44.16^c	16.21^c
	板间四翅滨藜	42.49^b	46.07^c	17.12^c
	板间花棒	15.91^c	102.04^c	45.01^c

样方	植被模式	输沙量/g	单宽输沙率 /(g·m⁻¹·d⁻¹）	风沙通量 /（g·m⁻²·d⁻¹）
CK样方	板间对照	526.52^a	1 253.02^a	561.10^a
T处理样方	板间杨柴	16.36^c	467.11^b	329.05^b
	板间沙拐枣	17.23^c	44.16^c	16.21^c
	板间四翅滨藜	42.49^b	46.07^c	17.12^c
	板间花棒	15.91^c	102.04^c	45.01^c

土层深度	样方	植被模式	砂粒 /%	粉粒 /%	黏粒 /%	有机质 /（g·kg^-1）	有机碳 /（g·kg^-1）	无机碳 /（g·kg^-1）	总碳 /（g·kg^-1）
0~10 cm	CK样方	板间对照	99.23^a	0.77^c	0.00^b	1.25^d	0.72^d	1.13^d	1.85^d
	T处理样方	板间杨柴	98.72^b	1.13^b	0.15^a	3.86^b	2.24^b	1.89^b	4.13^b
		板间沙拐枣	98.78^b	1.22^b	0.00^b	3.37^c	1.97^c	2.59^a	4.56^a
		板间四翅滨藜	98.63^b	1.37^a	0.00^b	3.77^b	2.20^b	1.88^b	4.08^b
		板间花棒	97.77^c	1.80^a	0.43^a	4.53^a	2.63^a	3.42^a	6.05^a
10~20 cm	CK样方	板间对照	99.19^a	0.81^c	0.00^b	1.08^d	0.61^d	0.59^d	1.20^d
	T处理样方	板间杨柴	98.56^b	1.18^b	0.26^a	3.42^b	1.98^b	2.04^b	4.02^b
		板间沙拐枣	98.66^b	1.19^b	0.15^a	2.80^c	1.62^c	2.48^a	4.10^b
		板间四翅滨藜	98.90^b	1.10^b	0.00^b	3.25^b	1.90^b	1.62^c	3.52^c
		板间花棒	97.61^c	1.19^b	0.39^a	4.18a	2.43^a	2.79^a	5.22^a

Desertification control effect of synergistic utilization of biomass ash brick sand barriers and soil amendments—taking the Alxa photovoltaic base as an example

RichHTML

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 4

References 20

Related Articles 15

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments

[1]	Tao Zheng, Jianhua Xiao, Shijun Ma, Chao Qin, Meilin Li, Zhengyi Yao. Wind tunnel simulation of sand fixation efficiency for clustered and horizontally laid Salix psammophila sand barriers [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2026, 46(3): 284-295.
[2]	Xixi Ma, Jianhua Xiao, Zhengyi Yao, Xian Xue. Wind field disturbance induced by tall vertical sand barriers： a wind tunnel simulation [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2026, 46(3): 32-41.
[3]	Ke Meng, Zhongju Meng. Comprehensive benefit assessment of typical grid sand barriers for wind prevention and sand fixation in desert-area photovoltaic power stations [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(5): 360-368.
[4]	Jianjun Qu, Zhihao Zhu, Qihang Li, Yongping Gao, Ting Lin. Wind tunnel test on windbreak and sand-fixing effect of double-layer net shield sand barrier [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(3): 141-151.
[5]	Shengzhong Du, Mingzhu He, Yuanshang Guo, Chunming Xin, Huijun Qin, Guojun Han. Influence of straw checkerboards and high-density polyethylene sand barriers on soil surface temperature [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(3): 191-197.
[6]	Yawen Deng, Ruiping Zu, Yumei Zong, Junzhan Wang, Yi Li. Wind tunnel simulations on windbreak efficiency of sand barriers made of plant fiber nets [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2025, 45(1): 242-248.
[7]	Yu Xiang, Yuqiang Li, Chengzhuo Zheng, Mengqi Yuan, Weiyuan Liu. Advances in the application of biochar in sandy soil remediation [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(4): 315-326.
[8]	Zhengyi Yao, Jianjun Qu, Jianhua Xiao, Ruyan Wang, Shengli Han, Wenfu Lu. Wind tunnel simulation on the sand fixation performance of a kind of brush shaped Salix psammophila sand barrier [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(3): 290-297.
[9]	Zhihao Zhu, Jianjun Qu, Aiguo Zhao, Wenfu Lu, Chen Meng. Wind tunnel test on wind-blown sand prevention effects of two kinds of magnesium cement board sand barriers [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2024, 44(2): 1-10.
[10]	Deren Yan, Ting Yan. Overview of development for mobile sand control technology in Inner Mongolia， China [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2022, 42(1): 66-70.
[11]	Lin Shi, Yuxing Zhao, Eerdun Hasi, Ping Zhang, Yingjun Xu, Zhuoran Wang. Changes of vegetation and soil nutrient on windward slope of dune under sand barrier environment in Mu Us Sandy Land [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2021, 41(5): 140-146.
[12]	Xueying Han, Tao Wang, Wenbin Yang, Guangpu Jia, Jing Liu, Yu Yang. Research progress and hotspot analysis of sand barrier in China Quantitative analysis of atlas based on Vosviewer and Citespace [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2021, 41(2): 153-163.
[13]	Jianjun Qu, Xianliang Hong, Fang Li, Xiao Feng, Yijiang Meng, Yiyang Ding, Mingquan Yang. Aging resistance of polylacticacid sand barriers and its sand fixation effectiveness [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2021, 41(2): 51-58.
[14]	Hong Xianliang, Qu Jianjun, Zhang Jianqing, Meng Yijiang, Yang Mingquan, Huang Luying, Hong Hui. Test and evaluation methods of the useful life for HDPE net sand barriers [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2020, 40(3): 1-6.
[15]	Feng Xiao, Qu Jianjun, Fan Qingbin, Tan Lihai. Impact of plateau pika burrow mounds on grassland desertification and control measures [J]. Journal of Desert Research, 2020, 40(3): 168-176.