Activated carbon nanofibers as an alternative cathode catalyst to platinum in a two-chamber microbial fuel cell

Ghasemi, Mostafa; Shahgaldi, Samaneh; Ismail, Manal; Kim, Byung Hong; Yaakob, Zahira; Daud, Wan Ramli Wan

doi:10.1016/j.ijhydene.2011.07.118

Cited by 173 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Activated carbon with large surface areas can be synthesized by electrospinning and pyrolysis of polyacrylonitrile precursor. It is reported by Ghasemi et al that the power density of activated carbon [67,68] fiber-treated electrodes was increased by more than 75 percent [60].…”

Section: Cathode With Non-pt-based Catalystmentioning

confidence: 93%

Electrode materials for microbial fuel cells: nanomaterial approach

Mustakeem

2015

Mater Renew Sustain Energy

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology has the potential to become a major renewable energy resource by degrading organic pollutants in wastewater. The performance of MFC directly depends on the kinetics of the electrode reactions within the fuel cell, with the performance of the electrodes heavily influenced by the materials they are made from. A wide range of materials have been tested to improve the performance of MFCs. In the past decade, carbon-based nanomaterials have emerged as promising materials for both anode and cathode construction. Composite materials have also shown to have the potential to become materials of choice for electrode manufacture. Various transition metal oxides have been investigated as alternatives to conventional expensive metals like platinum for oxygen reduction reaction. In this review, different carbon-based nanomaterials and composite materials are discussed for their potential use as MFC electrodes.

show abstract

Section: Cathode With Non-pt-based Catalystmentioning

confidence: 93%

Electrode materials for microbial fuel cells: nanomaterial approach

Mustakeem

2015

Mater Renew Sustain Energy

192

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Recently microbial fuel cells (MFCs) have attracted attention as a novel technology for converting the chemical energy in organic compounds into electricity and biohydrogen [90], it is possible to produces energy and treats the wastewater simultaneously using MFC device. However, one of the big obstacles of commercialization of MFC is high capital cost [91] and the proper membrane has not been found yet [92].…”

Section: Wastewater Treatment and Energymentioning

confidence: 99%

A Critical Review on Processes and Energy Profile of the Australian Meat Processing Industry

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review article addresses wastewater treatment methods in the red meat processing industry. The focus is on conventional chemicals currently in use for abattoir wastewater treatment and energy related aspects. In addition, this article discusses the use of cleaning and sanitizing agents at the meat processing facilities and their effect on decision making in regard to selecting the treatment methods. This study shows that cleaning chemicals are currently used at a concentration of 2% to 3% which will further be diluted with the bulk wastewater. For example, for an abattoir that produces 3500 m 3 /day wastewater and uses around 200 L (3%) acid and alkaline chemicals, the final concentration of these chemical will be around 0.00017%. For this reason, the effects of these chemicals on the treatment method and the environment are very limited. Chemical treatment is highly efficient in removing soluble and colloidal particles from the red meat processing industry wastewater. Actually, it is shown that, if chemical treatment has been applied, then biological treatment can only be included for the treatment of the solid waste by-product and/or for production of bioenergy. Chemical treatment is recommended in all cases and especially when the wastewater is required to be reused or released to water streams. This study also shows that energy consumption for chemical treatment units is insignificant while efficient compared to other physical or biological units. A combination of a main (ferric chloride) and an aid coagulant has shown to be efficient and cost-effective in treating abattoir wastewater. The cost of using this combination per cubic meter wastewater treated is 0.055 USD/m 3 compared to 0.11 USD/m 3 for alum and the amount of sludge produced is 77% less than that produced by alum. In addition, the residues of these chemicals in the wastewater and the sludge have a positive or no impact on biological processes. Energy consumption from a small wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) installed to recycle wastewater for a meet facility can be around $500,000.

show abstract

“…SPEEK has been shown to be a good alternative to Nafion in direct methanol fuel cell application (Ghasemi et al, 2011) because its negative fixed charge sulfonate ions (SO 3 À ) allow only cations to pass through but reject the passage of anions (Zhao et al, 2006). SPEEK shares a similar structure with Nafion, where ionic clusters co-exist with hydrophobic domains of the polymer backbone as shown in Fig.…”

Section: Sulfonated Poly-ether Ether Ketone (Speek)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…MFCs using carbon nanofiber (CNF)/Nafion and activated CNF (ACNF)/Nafion nanocomposite membranes generate higher power density (57.6 mW/m 2 ) than those with Nafion (Ghasemi et al, 2011). The CE is better than Nafion because there is less pH gradient between the anode and cathode chamber because CNF and the ASCNF increases the conductivity of the composite membrane.…”

Section: Composite Membranementioning

confidence: 99%