Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/22741
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorFudge, Thomas-
dc.contributor.authorBulmer, Isabella-
dc.contributor.authorBowman, Kyle-
dc.contributor.authorPathmakanthan, Shangami-
dc.contributor.authorGambier, William-
dc.contributor.authorDehouche, Zahir-
dc.contributor.authorAl-Salem, S. M.-
dc.contributor.authorConstantinou, Achilleas-
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-20T09:27:17Z-
dc.date.available2021-06-20T09:27:17Z-
dc.date.issued2021-02-02-
dc.identifier.citationWater, 2021, vol. 13, no. 4, articl. no. 445en_US
dc.identifier.issn20734441-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/22741-
dc.description.abstractTraditional wastewater treatment methods have become aged and inefficient, meaning alternative methods are essential to protect the environment and ensure water and energy security worldwide. The use of microbial electrolysis cells (MEC) for wastewater treatment provides an innovative alternative, working towards circular wastewater treatment for energy production. This study evaluates the factors hindering industrial adoption of this technology and proposes the next steps for further research and development. Existing pilot-scale investigations are studied to critically assess the main limitations, focusing on the electrode material, feedstock, system design and inoculation and what steps need to be taken for industrial adoption of the technology. It was found that high strength influents lead to an increase in energy production, improving economic viability; however, large variations in waste streams indicated that a homogenous solution to wastewater treatment is unlikely with changes to the MEC system specific to different waste streams. The current capital cost of implementing MECs is high and reducing the cost of the electrodes should be a priority. Previous pilot-scale studies have predominantly used carbon-based materials. Significant reductions in relative performance are observed when electrodes increase in size. Inoculation time was found to be a significant barrier to quick operational performance. Economic analysis of the technology indicated that MECs offer an attractive option for wastewater treatment, namely greater energy production and improved treatment efficiency. However, a significant reduction in capital cost is necessary to make this economically viable. MEC based systems should offer improvements in system reliability, reduced downtime, improved treatment rates and improved energy return. Discussion of the merits of H2 or CH4 production indicates that an initial focus on methane production could provide a stepping-stone in the adoption of this technology while the hydrogen market matures.en_US
dc.formatpdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofWateren_US
dc.rightsThis article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attributionen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/*
dc.subjectWastewater treatmenten_US
dc.subjectMicrobial electrolysis cellen_US
dc.subjectMethane productionen_US
dc.subjectHydrogen productionen_US
dc.subjectWaste managementen_US
dc.subjectCathodeen_US
dc.subjectAnodeen_US
dc.subjectWater researchen_US
dc.subjectRenewable energyen_US
dc.titleMicrobial electrolysis cells for decentralisedwastewater treatment: The next stepsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationBrunel University Londonen_US
dc.collaborationWASE Limiteden_US
dc.collaborationKuwait Institute for Scientific Researchen_US
dc.collaborationLondon South Bank Universityen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity College Londonen_US
dc.collaborationCyprus University of Technologyen_US
dc.subject.categoryChemical Sciencesen_US
dc.journalsOpen Accessen_US
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.countryUnited Kingdomen_US
dc.subject.fieldNatural Sciencesen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.3390/w13040445en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85101217460-
dc.identifier.urlhttps://api.elsevier.com/content/abstract/scopus_id/85101217460-
dc.relation.issue4en_US
dc.relation.volume13en_US
cut.common.academicyear2020-2021en_US
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.openairetypearticle-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Chemical Engineering-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-7763-9481-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.journal.journalissn2073-4441-
crisitem.journal.publisherMDPI-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
water-13-00445-v3.pdfFulltext1.53 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

19
checked on Mar 14, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

15
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Oct 29, 2023

Page view(s) 50

284
Last Week
1
Last month
7
checked on May 25, 2024

Download(s)

176
checked on May 25, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons