Electricity Production in Microbial Fuel Cell Subjected to Different Operational Modes

doi:10.1007/s40195-016-0412-3

Abstract

Abstract:

The effects of inoculum species, substrate concentration, temperature, and cathodic electron acceptors on electricity production of microbial fuel cells (MFCs) were investigated in terms of start-up time and power output. When inoculated with aeration tank sludge, this MFC outperformed the cell that was inoculated with anaerobic sludge in terms of start-up time and power output. After running for a certain time period, the dominant populations of the two MFCs varied significantly. Within the tested range of substrate concentration (200-1800 mg L^-1), the voltage output increased and the time span of the electricity generation lengthened with increasing substrate concentration. As the temperature declined from 35 to 10 °C, the maximum power density reduced from 2.229 to 1.620 W m^-3, and anodic polarization resistance correspondingly dropped from 118 to 98 Ω. The voltage output of MFC-Cu²⁺ was 0.447 V, which is slightly lower than that achieved with MFC-[Fe(CN)6]^3- (0.492 V), thereby indicating that MFCs could be used to treat wastewater containing Cu2+ pollutant in the cathode chamber with removal of organics in anode chamber and simultaneous electricity generation.

Key words: Microbial fuel cells, Inoculum species, Cathodic electron acceptors, Electricity production

Hong-Yan Dai, Hui-Min Yang, Xian Liu, Xuan Jian, Zhen-Hai Liang. Electricity Production in Microbial Fuel Cell Subjected to Different Operational Modes[J]. Acta Metallurgica Sinica (English Letters), 2016, 29(5): 483-490.

Figures/Tables 6

Fig. 1 Power density curves of MFCs inoculated by different microbials (MFC-A for aeration tank sludge and MFC-B for anaerobic sludge). Polarization curves were obtained by varying the external resistance over a range from 10,000 to 20 Ω

Fig. 2 SEM micrographs (a for MFC-A and b for MFC-B). Rarefaction curves c and the taxonomic classification of pyrosequences from bacterial communities at genus level (d for MFC-A and e for MFC-B). The OTUs were defined 3% distances

Fig. 3 a Discharge curve of MFC with different NaAc concentrations (200, 600, 1000, 1400, 1800 mg L-1). b The maximum voltage output and time span of electricity generation of MFCs with different NaAc concentrations. A load resistor is 1000 Ω. The measurements were taken in triplicate and treated statistically

Fig. 4 Performance of MFCs at different reactor temperatures (35 and 10 °C): a polarization curves and power density curves; b Nyquist plots for anodes. The insert illustrates the high-frequency part of the result. EIS tests were conducted under the condition of open circuit voltage with a potential amplitude of 10 mV over a frequency range of 100 kHz-10 mHz

Fig. 5 Voltage output curves of the MFCs with different electron acceptors (Cu2+ and [Fe(CN)6]3-) in closed circuit mode (load resistor is 1000 Ω)

Fig. 6 EDS spectrum of the deposits on the cathode surface (insert)

References 33

[1]	R. Haase, R. Mu¨ller, D. Landgrebe, P. Scholz, M. Riemer, Acta Metall.Sin. (Engl. Lett.) 28, 1518(2015)
[2]	D. Maheswari, P. Venkatachalam, Acta Metall. Sin.(Engl.Lett.)28, 354 (2015)
[3]	Z.S. Lv, D.H. Xie, F.S. Li, Y. Hu, C.H. Wei, C.H. Feng, J.Power Sources 246, 642 (2014)
[4]	R.D. Cusick, P.D. Kiely, B.E. Logan, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 35,8855 (2010)
[5]	C.T. Wang, W.J. Chen, R.Y. Huang, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 35,7217 (2010)
[6]	B.E. Logan, C. Murano, K. Scott, N.D. Gray, I.M. Head, Water Res. 39, 942(2005)
[7]	D. Juang, APCBEE Proced. 1, 2(2012)
[8]	S.B. Bioresour.Technol. 102, 5105(2011)
[9]	A. Patil Sunil, F. Harnisch, B. Kapadnis, U. Schro¨der, Biosens.Bioelectron. 26, 803(2010)
[10]	S. Puig, M. Serra, M. Coma, M. Cabre´, M.D. Balaguer, J.Colprim, Bioresour. Technol. 101, 9594(2010)
[11]	Y.Q. Wang, B. Li, L.Z. Zeng, D. Cui, X.D. Xiang, W.S. Li,Biosens. Bioelectron. 41, 582(2013)
[12]	S.L. Chen, G.H. He, S.J. He, U. Schro¨der, H.Q. Hou, Biosens.Bioelectron. 34, 282(2012)
[13]	D.A. Jadhav, D.A. Ghadge, D. Mondal, M.M. Ghangrekar,Bioresour. Technol. 154, 330(2014)
[14]	L.L. Wei, H.L. Han, J.Q. Shen, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 37, 12980(2012)
[15]	R.A. Timmers, D.P. Strik, H.V. Hamelers, C.J. Buisman, Electrochim.Acta 72, 165 (2012)
[16]	P.Y. Zhang, Z.L. Liu, J. Power Sources 195, 8013 (2010)
[17]	V.R. Nimje, C.Y. Chen, H.R. Chen, C.C. Chen, Y.M. Huang,M.J. Tseng, K.C. Cheng, Y.F. Chang, Bioresour. Technol. 104,315(2012)
[18]	S.F. Ketep, A. Bergel, M. Bertrand, W. Achouak, E. Fourest,Biochem. Eng. J. 73, 12(2013)
[19]	L.X. Zhang, C.S. Liu, L. Zhuang, W.S. Li, S.G. Zhou, J.T.Zhang, Biosens. Bioelectron. 24, 2825(2009)
[20]	Y.X. Liu, J.Y. Shen, L.P. Huang, D. Wu, J. Hazard. Mater. 262,1(2013)
[21]	L. Lu, D.F. Xing, N.Q. Ren, Water Res. 46, 2425(2012)
[22]	Z.D. Liu, H.R. Li, Biochem. Eng. J. 36, 209(2007)
[23]	Y.P. Mao, L.H. Zhang, D.M. Li, H.F. Shi, Y.D. Liu, L.K. Cai,Electrochim. Acta 55, 7804 (2010)
[24]	J.N. Jia, Y. Tang, B.F. Liu, D. Wu, N.Q. Ren, D.F. Xing,Bioresour. Technol. 144, 94(2013)
[25]	H. Richter, K. McCarthy, K.P. Nevin, J.P. Johnson, V.M.Rotello, D.R. Lovley, Langmuir 24, 4376 (2008)
[26]	V.J. Watson, B.E. Logan, Biotechnol. Bioeng. 105, 489(2010)
[27]	V.B. Oliveira, M. Simo˜es, L.F. Melo, A.M.F.R. Pinto, Biochem.Eng. J. 73, 53(2013)
[28]	A.L. Guerrero, K. Scott, I.M. Head, F. Mateo, A. Ginesta, C.Godinez, Fuel 89, 3985 (2010)
[29]	A.G. Campo, J. Lobato, P. Can˜izares, M.A. Rodrigo, F.J.F. Appl. Energy 101, 213 (2013)
[30]	Z.H. Wen, S.Q. Ci, S. Mao, S.M. Cui, G.H. Lu, K.H. Yu, S.L.Luo, Z. He, J.H. Chen, J. Power Sources 234, 100 (2013)
[31]	L.H. Liu, O. Tsyganova, D.J. Lee, A. Su, J.S. Chang, A.J. Wang,N.Q. Ren, Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 37, 15792 (2012)
[32]	C.H. Feng, Q.Y. Wan, Z.S. Lv, X.J. Yue, Y.F. Chen, C.H. Wei,Biosens. Bioelectron. 26, 3953(2011)
[33]	M. Ghasemi, W.R.W. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 38, 9525 (2013)