4.7 Article

Removal of copper from aqueous solution by electrodeposition in cathode chamber of microbial fuel cell

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 189, 期 1-2, 页码 186-192

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2011.02.018

关键词

Microbial fuel cell; Copper; Cathodic metal reduction

资金

  1. Shenzhen Bureau of Science Technology & Information, Shenzhen, PR China
  2. National Water Pollution Control and Management Technology Major Project of China [2009ZX07212-001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Based on energetic analysis, a novel approach for copper electrodeposition via cathodic reduction in microbial fuel cells (MFCs) was proposed for the removal of copper and recovery of copper solids as metal copper and/or Cu2O in a cathode with simultaneous electricity generation with organic matter. This was examined by using dual-chamber MFCs (chamber volume, 1 L) with different concentrations of CuSO4 solution (50.3 +/- 5.8, 183.3 +/- 0.4, 482.4 +/- 9.6, 1007.9 +/- 52.0 and 6412.5 +/- 26.7 mg Cu2+/L) as catholyte at pH 4.7, and different resistors (0, 15, 390 and 1000 Omega) as external load. With glucose as a substrate and anaerobic sludge as an inoculum, the maximum power density generated was 339 mW/m(3) at an initial 6412.5 +/- 26.7 mg Cu2+/L concentration. High Cu2+ removal efficiency (> 99%) and final Cu2+ concentration below the USA EPA maximum contaminant level (MCL) for drinking water (1.3 mg/L) was observed at an initial 196.2 +/- 0.4 mg Cu2+/L concentration with an external resistor of 15 Omega, or without an external resistor. X-ray diffraction analysis confirmed that Cu2+ was reduced to cuprous oxide (Cu2O) and metal copper (Cu) on the cathodes. Non-reduced brochantite precipitates were observed as major copper precipitates in the MFC with a high initial Cu2+ concentration (0.1 M) but not in the others. The sustainability of high Cu2+ removal (> 96%) by MFC was further examined by fed-batch mode for eight cycles. (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据