4.8 Article

Key operational parameters assessment for a chromium (VI)-reducing annular upflow microbial fuel cell

期刊

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
卷 590, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2023.233794

关键词

Microbial fuel cell configuration; Trivalent chromium precipitation; Recycle ratio; Microbial cell growth; Economical feasibility

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study assessed the key operational parameters of a hexavalent chromium reducing MFC and found that a parallel configuration has higher current and power density compared to a series configuration. The study also showed that the precipitation of Cr(III) can potentially decrease MFC performance and operating at high Cr(VI) pHs should be avoided.
Development of upflow microbial fuel cells (MFCs) is of importance since these types of MFCs can be integrated in wastewater treatment plants for the provision of continuous treatment and energy recovery. In this study, key operational parameters were assessed for a hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] reducing annular upflow MFC (approximately 5 L total liquid volume). The optimized operational parameters were cathode and anode hy-draulic retention times of 2 days, temperature of 34 degrees C, influent Cr(VI) concentration of 800 mg L-1, and anode and cathode pH of 7 and 4 respectively. This study demonstrated that a parallel configuration is advantageous since it leads to a high current and power density operation due to low internal resistance when compared to series configuration. The precipitation of Cr(III) over time was demonstrated to have a potential to reduce MFC performance and operating at high influent Cr(VI) pHs (7-10) should be avoided. The optimized peak output potential difference and maximum power density achieved under parallel configuration were 896 mV and 994 mW m- 3 respectively, at a current density of 1191 mA m- 3. This study provides a step into developing continuous metal reducing MFCs for use in simultaneous treatment of heavy metals in wastewater and energy recovery.

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

4.8
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