The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Electricity Generation from Artificial Wastewater Using an Upflow Microbial Fuel Cell
Abstract
The upflow microbial fuel cell (UMFC) was developed to generate electricity while simultaneously treating wastewater. During a five-month period of feeding a sucrose solution as the electron donor, the UMFC continuously generated electricity with a maximum power density of 170 mW/m2. To achieve this power density, the artificial electron-mediator hexacyanoferrate was required in the cathode chamber. The power density increased with increasing chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading rates up to 2.0 g COD/ L/day after which no further increases in power density were observed, indicating the presence of limiting factors. The overarching limiting factor for the UMFC in this study was the internal resistance, which was estimated as 84 omega at the maximum power density, and restricted the power output by causing a significant decrease in operating potential. Low Coulombic efficiencies varying from 0.7 to 8.1% implied that the electron-transfer bacteria were incapable of converting all of the available organics into electricity, so the excessive substrate created niches for the growth of methanogens. We found that the soluble COD (SCOD) removal efficiencies remained over 90% throughout the operational period, mainly because of methanogenic activity, which accounted for 35 to 58% of the SCOD removed at a loading rate of 1.0 g COD/L/ day. Additionally, transport limitation due to insufficient substrate diffusion was shown by cyclic voltammetry (CV).
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A comprehensive review of microbial electrochemical systems as a platform technology
Wang, H., & Ren, Z. J. (2013) · Biotechnology Advances · doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2013.10.001 · Cited by 835
Cathodic limitations in microbial fuel cells: An overview
Rismani-Yazdi, H., Carver, S. M., Christy, A. D., & Tuovinen, O. H. (2008) · Journal of Power Sources · doi:10.1016/j.jpowsour.2008.02.074 · Cited by 734
Kim, J. R., Cheng, S., Oh, S.-E., & Logan, B. E. (2007) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es062202m · Cited by 699
Advances in Microbial Fuel Cells for Wastewater Treatment
He, L., Du, P., Chen, Y., Lu, H., Cheng, X., Chang, B., & Wang, Z. (2017) · Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.rser.2016.12.069 · Cited by 408
Munoz-Cupa, C., Hu, Y., Xu, C., & Bassi, A. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142429 · Cited by 363
Zhang, F., Ge, Z., Grimaud, J., Hurst, J., & He, Z. (2013) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/es400631r · Cited by 332
Self-citationChong, S., Sen, T. K., Kayaalp, A., & Ang, H. M. (2012) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2012.03.066 · Cited by 317
Zou, Y., Xiang, C., Yang, L., Sun, L.-X., Xu, F., & Cao, Z. (2008) · International Journal of Hydrogen Energy · doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2008.06.061 · Cited by 314
The electric picnic: synergistic requirements for exoelectrogenic microbial communities
Kiely, P. D., Regan, J. M., & Logan, B. E. (2011) · Current Opinion in Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2011.03.003 · Cited by 295
Jourdin, L., Freguia, S., Donose, B. C., Chen, J., Wallace, G. G., Keller, J., & Flexer, V. (2014) · J. Mater. Chem. A · doi:10.1039/c4ta03101f · Cited by 276
Technologies for Biofuel Production: Current Development, Challenges, and Future Prospects
Kour, D., Rana, K. L., Yadav, N., Yadav, A. N., Rastegari, A. A., Singh, C., Negi, P., Singh, K., & Saxena, A. K. (2019) · Biofuel and Biorefinery Technologies · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14463-0_1 · Cited by 121
Ahmed, S., Rozaik, E., & Abdelhalim, H. (2015) · Water, Air, & Soil Pollution · doi:10.1007/s11270-015-2567-3 · Cited by 28
Safwat, S. M., Rozaik, E., & Abdel‐Halim, H. (2019) · Water and Environment Journal · doi:10.1111/wej.12413 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- He, Z., Minteer, S. D., & Angenent, L. T.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2005-06-09
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 5262-5267
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W1496753869
- Cited by
- 781
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 32.48
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
