4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Review of high-performance biocathode using stainless steel and carbon-based materials in Microbial Fuel Cell for electricity and water treatment

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
Volume 44, Issue 58, Pages 30772-30787

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2018.11.145

Keywords

Microbial fuel cell; Biocathode; Biocathode materials

Funding

  1. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) [FRGS/1/2014/TK06/UKW03/1, GUP-2015-036]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Biocathode application in Microbial Fuel Cell (MFC) is a promising alternative for sustainable energy production. This recognition is due to its low construction and operation costs as well as the utilization of microbial metabolism in assisting power generation. One of the most crucial factors contributes to the performance of a biocathode MFC is the characteristics and configuration of the biocathode material itself. Hence it requires improvement for a better understanding towards its bioelectrochemical mechanisms as well as improving the MFC performance. However, reports on improving biocathode through support material selection and performance optimization in MFCs are still lacking. Based on previous reports, studies have shown that carbon-based material and stainless steel are possible biocathode materials for high power MFC performance. This review focuses on comparing these potential biocathode materials, regarding the commonly applied biocathode MFC designs and optimization. This review also compares the performance of biocathode materials in MFC based on the bioelectricity production and wastewater treatment. Further studies and understanding can provide a useful basis in fabricating biocathode designs and configurations to produce better sustainable bioelectricity in MFCs. (C) 2018 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available