ArticleScientific reports2026
Rice straw and single-use plastic waste co-pyrolyzed plastic-char composite for the partial replacement of cement in concrete: a life cycle perspective.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines the valorization of single-use plastic and rice straw waste via co-pyrolysis to produce a plastic-char composite (PRSB) and rice straw biochar (RSB) for sustainable building applications. The generated biochars were thoroughly analyzed for their physicochemical characteristics using SEM, FTIR, XRD, and Raman spectroscopy. RSB and PRSB were utilized as partial cement substitutes (1–7% w/w) in M30-grade concrete to produce high-strength and durable composites. Optimization of mechanical performance was executed via a Box–Behnken design, focusing on compressive, split tensile, and flexural strength, with curing time as a critical variable. Experimental results indicated that a substitution of up to 3% markedly improved mechanical characteristics relative to ordinary concrete. The algorithm forecasted an ideal combination with 3.8% substitution and 28 days of curing, optimizing strength across all metrics. Sustainability was evaluated by a cradle-to-gate Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). With a 1% substitution of PRSB, the Global Warming capacity (GWP 500) from fossil emissions decreased from 80% to 72%, while biogenic emissions declined from 78% to 60%. However, substitution levels over 5% elevated total GWP due to increased processing, resource, and durability-related stresses. The findings indicate that minimal PRSB integration (< 5%) can enhance mechanical performance while providing substantial environmental benefits, thereby promoting the circular economy by upcycling agricultural and plastic waste into sustainable, low-carbon concrete.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.