4.7 Article

Investigating the performance of constructed wetland microbial fuel cells using three indigenous South African wetland plants

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.100930

关键词

Bio-electricity; Cyperus prolifer; Phosphorus; Wastewater

资金

  1. University of Cape Town [K5/2772/3]
  2. Water Research Commission [K5/2772/3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Constructed wetland microbial fuel cells (CW-MFC) can be used to treat wastewater while also generating bioelectricity. Most research on CW-MFCs have focused on cell configuration rather than the influence different wetland plants have on bio-electricity production. In this study, three different indigenous wetland plants were investigated: Cyperus prolifer, Wachendorfia thyrsiflora, and Phragmites australis. Bio-electricity production was assessed in terms of maximum power density and voltage variation. The highest power density and voltage was obtained from the C. prolifer plant species (229 +/- 52 mW/m(3); 510 mV). The removal efficiency of chemical oxygen demand was 97 +/- 1% for C. prolifer, which was higher than W. thyrsiflora (94 +/- 1%), P. australis (94 +/- 1%) and the control (unplanted) system (90 +/- 2%). Phosphorus removal was measured in terms of orthophosphate removal efficiency. The C. prolifer plant species achieved higher orthophosphate removal efficiency (98 +/- 0%) than the control (72 +/- 7%), W. thyrsiflora (58 +/- 6%) and P. australis (81 +/- 4%). It was determined that a high root specific area and biomass were advantageous to power production. It was also found that rapid acclimatisation to the wastewater was an important factor for generating power. From this study, it was determined that C. prolifer was the most suitable wetland plant in terms of bioelectricity, organic matter, ammonia and phosphate removal among the investigated plant species. Hence, in the design of a CW-MFC it would be advisable to use C. prolifer to simultaneously treat wastewater and produce bio-electricity.

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