4.4 Article

Construction and Operation of Microbial Fuel Cell with Chlorella vulgaris Biocathode for Electricity Generation

Journal

APPLIED BIOCHEMISTRY AND BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 171, Issue 8, Pages 2082-2092

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12010-013-0476-8

Keywords

Chlorella vulgaris; Microbial fuel cell; Biocathode; Light/dark cycle

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51209116]
  2. State Key Laboratory of Materials-Oriented Chemical Engineering [ZK201204]
  3. Major State Basic Research Development Program of China (973 Program) [2009CB724700]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, a modified microbial fuel cell (MFC) with a tubular photobioreactor (PHB) configuration as a cathode compartment was constructed by introducing Chlorella vulgaris to the cathode chamber used to generate oxygen in situ. Two types of cathode materials and light/dark cycles were used to test the effect on MFC with algae biocathode. Results showed that the use of algae is an effective approach because these organisms can act as efficient in situ oxygenators, thereby facilitating the cathodic reaction. Dissolved oxygen and voltage output displayed a clear light positive response and were drastically enhanced compared with the abiotic cathode. In particular, carbon paper-coated Pt used as a cathode electrode increased voltage output at a higher extent than carbon felt used as an electrode. The maximum power density of 24.4 mW/m(2) was obtained from the MFC with algae biocathode which utilized the carbon paper-coated Pt as the cathode electrode under intermittent illumination. This density was 2.8 times higher than that of the abiotic cathode. Continuous illumination shortened the algal lifetime. These results demonstrated that intermittent illumination and cathode material-coated catalyst are beneficial to a more efficient and prolonged operation of MFC with C. vulgaris biocathode.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available