MESSAI.iO

AI summary

70% confidence

This study investigates the effect of substrate type and concentration on the performance of a double chamber microbial fuel cell (DCMFC), finding that acetate is the best substrate and a concentration of 2,000 mg/L yields the best results.

Generated by MESSAI extraction pipeline · review against source PDF

Generic MFCRepresentative model
Click to animate flow
loading 3D model…

Representative MFC — matched on the paper’s system type only, not its reactor or geometry.

Extraction

Reported parameters

7 extracted values

View extracted values

Open in lab for full controls, parameter editing, and template overlays.

Open in lab →

What they did

System
MFC

What worked

No outcome metrics extracted yet.

Abstract

Abstract The microbial fuel cell (MFC) provides new opportunities for energy generation and wastewater treatment through conversion of organic matter into electricity by electrogenic bacteria. This study investigates the effect of different types and concentrations of substrates on the performance of a double chamber microbial fuel cell (DCMFC). Three mediator-less laboratory-scale DCMFCs were used in this study, which were equipped with graphite electrode and cation exchange membrane. The MFCs were fed with three different types of substrates (glucose, acetate and sucrose) at a chemical oxygen demand (COD) concentration of 1,000 mg/L. The selected substrate (acetate) was studied for three different concentrations of 500, 2,000 and 3,000 mg/L of COD. Results demonstrated that acetate was the best substrate among the three different substrates with maximum power density and COD removal of 91 mW/m² and 77%, respectively. Concentration of 2,000 mg/L was the best concentration in terms of performance with maximum power density and COD removal of 114 mW/m² and 79%, respectively. The polarization curve shows that ohmic losses were dominant in DCMFCs established for all three substrates and concentrations.

Key findings

  • [object Object]
  • [object Object]
  • [object Object]

Keywords

Microbial fuel cellChemical oxygen demandSubstrate (aquarium)Power densityWastewaterChromatography

Identifiers

DOI
10.2166/wst.2019.387
Journal
Water Science and Technology
Year
2019