Synthesis, characterization and performance evaluation of Fe3O4/PES nano composite membranes for microbial fuel cell

Effect of Pretreatment of Nanocomposite PES‐Fe3O4 Separator on Microbial Fuel Cells Performance

“…Rough surfaces tend to foul easily due to increased surface area and when using polymer membranes doped with nanoparticles, the roughness increases with increasing amount of fillers . This was confirmed also in our previous study , where for PES20 this aspect was likely suggested to limit the MFC performance by influencing the fouling tendency and the resulting internal resistance.…”

“…Nanocomposite membranes with PES (Ultrason E3010 from BASF) as matrix and Fe 3 O 4 nanoparticles as filler were prepared using the melt‐blending technique. The chemical procedure adopted for the synthesis of magnetic nanoparticle was the coprecipitation of Fe 2+ and Fe 3+ with a molar ratio of 3:2 in ammonium hydroxide as precipitating agent, as fully described elsewhere . A new formulation with magnetite content of 10 wt% (PES10) in sheet form was prepared using a microextruder DSM Xplore 15 CC Micro Compounder coupled with a DSM Film Device as detailed in Ref.…”

“…A new formulation with magnetite content of 10 wt% (PES10) in sheet form was prepared using a microextruder DSM Xplore 15 CC Micro Compounder coupled with a DSM Film Device as detailed in Ref. .…”

“…In an attempt to reduce the cost of MFC system, other polymer matrices have been proposed as alternatives to Nafion‐based membranes (such as sulfonated polystyrene–ethylene–butylene–polystyrene, sulfonated PEEK, poly(vinylidene fluoride)–poly(styrene sulfonic acid)) and the addition of nanofillers proved to be an effective solution for the enhancement of the electrochemical properties of MFCs . In a previous work, polyethersulfone (PES)‐Fe 3 O 4 nanocomposites were tested in a dual‐chamber MFC as an alternative separator and mechanical, thermal and electrochemical performances of neat PES, PES‐Fe 3 O 4 (5 and 20 wt%) were compared to those observed with commercial membranes (CMI 7000 and Nafion 117) . Positive results in terms of mechanical and thermal stability were obtained, while maximum power and current density values for a PES with 20 wt% of Fe 3 O 4 (PES20) were found to be slightly lower than those of commercial ones.…”

Development and Application of Supported Ionic Liquid Membranes in Microbial Fuel Cell Technology: A Concise Overview

“…As the ultimate aim of manufacturing and testing SILMs for MFC is to provide promising candidates as alternatives to the Nafion PEM (proton exchange membrane), a comparative evaluation can show how far the research on and development of SILMs have reached. As a matter of fact, experiences with Nafion membranes in MFCs (acetate substrate, mixed culture as the seed source, dual-chamber configuration, and batch mode) indicate that the maximum P d could be in a similar range-14.4 [59], 17.7 [60], 38 [61,62], 43.6 [63], 57.5 [64], 65 [65], 118 [66], 126.7 [67], and 173.3 [68]-to that attainable in MFCs with SILMs (1.4-179 mW m −2 ) [23,25,33]. To extend the comparative evaluation of SILMs, it is worth taking a look at the performances of MFCs operated with membrane candidates (such as cation exchange membranes (CEM) and porous (cheap) materials) proposed to compete with Nafion.…”