2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.07.180
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative evaluation of performance and electrochemistry of microbial fuel cells with different anode structures and materials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0
1

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
15
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…CB showed the best current recovery among the three carbon anodes. This agrees with previous reports that demonstrated the superiority of CB over carbon paper (Logan et al, 2007), carbon cloth (Nam et al, 2017), and carbon mesh (Wang et al, 2009). BC yielded a current that was approximately half of that by CB and was comparable to that for PNWG in this study.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…CB showed the best current recovery among the three carbon anodes. This agrees with previous reports that demonstrated the superiority of CB over carbon paper (Logan et al, 2007), carbon cloth (Nam et al, 2017), and carbon mesh (Wang et al, 2009). BC yielded a current that was approximately half of that by CB and was comparable to that for PNWG in this study.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Different strategies related to surface structuration, surface modification and/or activation were developed on carbon-based materials and have recently been reviewed. [3],[4], [5], [6], [7], [8] Among these strategies, the chemical functionalization of the bioanode through diazonium chemistry has been demonstrated to be successful at increasing the current densities, notably in Microbial Fuel Cells (MFCs). [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15] The electron transfer from the electroactive bacteria to the anode is indeed affected by the anode properties and its surface modification.…”
Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A stainless steel plate was used as an electrode connector (1.0 cm 2 of contact area) (P), a stainless steel plate and a rounded-rim current collector were used (4.3 cm 2 of contact area) (PC), and a stainless steel plate and a stainless-steel-mesh current collector were used (6.5 cm 2 of contact area) (PM). and 3-cm diameter [21,[24][25][26]. A brush electrode was made with a carbon fiber brush (25-mm diameter and 50-mm length) twisted between two titanium rods (length 70 mm, 17 gauge; grade 2, Seoul Titanium).…”
Section: Mfc Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%