The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Life Cycle Assessment of High-Rate Anaerobic Treatment, Microbial Fuel Cells, and Microbial Electrolysis Cells
Abstract
Existing wastewater treatment options are generally perceived as energy intensive and environmentally unfriendly. Much attention has been focused on two new approaches in the past years, (i) microbial fuel cells and (ii) microbial electrolysis cells, which directly generate electrical current or chemical products, respectively, during wastewater treatment. These systems are commonly denominated as bioelectrochemical systems, and a multitude of claims have been made in the past regarding the environmental impact of these treatment options. However, an in-depth study backing these claims has not been performed. Here, we have conducted a life cycle assessment (LCA) to compare the environmental impact of three industrial wastewater treatment options, (i) anaerobic treatment with biogas generation, (ii) a microbial fuel cell treatment, with direct electricity generation, and (iii) a microbial electrolysis cell, with hydrogen peroxide production. Our analysis showed that a microbial fuel cell does not provide a significant environmental benefit relative to the "conventional" anaerobic treatment option. However, a microbial electrolysis cell provides significant environmental benefits through the displacement of chemical production by conventional means. Provided that the target conversion level of 1000 A.m(-3) can be met, the decrease in greenhouse gas emissions and other environmentally harmful emissions (e.g., aromatic hydrocarbons) of the microbial electrolysis cell will be a key driver for the development of an industrial standard for this technology. Evidently, this assessment is highly dependent on the underlying assumptions, such as the used reactor materials and target performance. This provides a challenge and an opportunity for researchers in the field to select and develop appropriate and environmentally benign materials of construction, as well as demonstrate the required 1000 A.m(-3) performance at pilot and full scale.
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
Anaerobic digestion without biogas?
Kleerebezem, R., Joosse, B., Rozendal, R., & Van Loosdrecht, M. C. M. (2015) · Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology · doi:10.1007/s11157-015-9374-6 · Cited by 363
Self-citationKralisch, D., Ott, D., & Gericke, D. (2015) · Green Chemistry · doi:10.1039/c4gc01153h · Cited by 288
Health and Environmental Impacts of Drinking Water Choices in Barcelona, Spain: A Modelling Study
Villanueva, C. M., Garfí, M., Milà, C., Olmos, S., Ferrer, I., & Tonne, C. (2021) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148884 · Cited by 49
Industrial Scale-Up Variability and Life Cycle Assessment of Microbial Fuel Cells
Mittal, H. (2024) · doi:10.32388/4ynyhr · Cited by 2
Metadata
- Authors
- Foley, J. M., Rozendal, R. A., Hertle, C. K., Lant, P. A., & Rabaey, K.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2010-03-31
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 3629-3637
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W1980305033
- Cited by
- 295
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.53
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Life Cycle Assessment of High-Rate Anaerobic Treatment, Microbial Fuel Cells, and Microbial Electrolysis Cells. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es100125h
- The paper
- Foley, J. M., Rozendal, R. A., Hertle, C. K., Lant, P. A., & Rabaey, K. (2010). Life Cycle Assessment of High-Rate Anaerobic Treatment, Microbial Fuel Cells, and Microbial Electrolysis Cells. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es100125h
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.