4.7 Article

Catalytic performance of rGO-Zeolite modified anode in clay biophotovotaics system for effective urine treatment

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF HYDROGEN ENERGY
卷 48, 期 3, 页码 1160-1174

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2022.09.216

关键词

Anode modification; Biophotovoltaics; Clay torch separators; Direct powering; Urine treatment; Struvite recovery

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Low power output in biophotovoltaics (BPV) due to poor anode kinetics is minimized by modifying the anode with rGO-Zeolite, which improves electrochemical redox reactions. Horizontal Torch separator-based urine fed BPV with rGO-Zeolite anodes achieve higher power production and N/P-recovery compared to bare graphite anodes. The modified anode results in a power output of 146.88 mW/m2, redox current of 18.9 mA, and significant recovery of Phosphorous and NH4+-N.
Low power output due to poor anode kinetics is minimized by modifying the anode with rGO-Zeolite to improve the electrochemical redox reactions in biophotovoltaics (BPV). Higher power production and N/P-recovery is successfully achieved in horizontal Torch separator-based urine fed BPV modified with rGO-Zeolite anodes than bare graphite anode. Among the two variants of anodes, modified anode results in power of 146.88 mW/m2, redox current of 18.9 mA, Phosphorous (88 +/- 0.3%), NH4+-N (49 +/- 0.5%), and Coulombic efficiency of 15.16 +/- 0.3%. Improvement in power output is due to the higher electroactive surface area provided by rGO-Zeolite anode for electron transfer. Recovery of clear cath-olyte (8 ml/day) during human-urine treatment and energy recovery for operating the hygro-clock are the main key features of low-cost BPV. Thus, BPV with modified anodes serves as a sustainable technology for recovering energy and resources from human urine and makes it suitable to use for onsite urine treatment and sanitation applications. (c) 2022 Hydrogen Energy Publications LLC. Published by Elsevier Ltd. 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