4.8 Article

Scalable multi-electrode microbial electrolysis cells for high electric current and rapid organic removal

期刊

JOURNAL OF POWER SOURCES
卷 391, 期 -, 页码 67-72

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpowsour.2018.04.075

关键词

Bioelectrochemical system; Electrode stack; Multi-electrode design; COD removal rate; Cathode materials; MEC start-up

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [435547-2013]
  2. Canada Research Chairs Program (Governmental of Canada) [950-2320518]
  3. Leaders Opportunity Fund (Canada Foundation for Innovation) [31604]
  4. Ontario Research Fund: Research Infrastructure (Ministry of Research and Innovation) [31604]
  5. International Excellence Award (McMaster University)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) can be used to produce hydrogen gas from wastewater. A novel multi-electrode stack design was proposed and examined under various operating conditions to maximize electric current in MECs without precious metal catalysts. For the cathode in the electrode stack, stainless steel mesh generated higher electric current than activated carbon cloth. The electric current density increased in proportion to the number of electrode pairs as the maximum current density was 520 A m(-3) in MEC-10 (10 electrode pairs), 270 Am-3 in MEC-5 (5 electrode pairs), and 45 Am-3 with a single electrode pair. The stacked MEC was not ideal for fed-batch operation due to the short inter-electrode distance (similar to 2 mm); consequently, continuous-recycle and-flow operation resulted in the high electric current generation. During continuous-flow operation, individual electrodes in MEC-10 and MEC-5 showed a variation in electric current capacity (0.9-2.7 mA for 0.6 mL min(-1)). The COD (chemical oxygen demand) removal rate increased from 45.7 to 128.8 mg-COD L-1 h(-1) with increasing flow rate from 0.1 to 0.6 mL min(-1). These findings indicate that the stacked multi-electrode design can magnify the current generation and COD removal rate in MECs.

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