Heliang Pang, Qiwen Qin, Qiangqiang Jiao et al.

Chemical Engineering Journal • 2024

Sidan Lu, Baiyun Lu, Guangcai Tan et al.

Biosensors and Bioelectronics • 2020

Akshay Jain, Zhen He

Process Biochemistry • 2020

Rahul Gautam, Neil V. Ress, Robert Steinberger Wilckens et al.

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2023

Young-Hyun Song, Syarif Hidayat, Hanki Kim et al.

Bioresource Technology • 2016

Heming Wang, Jidong Liu, Zizhen Zhang et al.

Journal of Environmental Management • 2021

Yong Wang, Beidou Xi, Xuan Jia et al.

The Science of The Total Environment • 2020

Ahmad Hosseinzadeh, John L. Zhou, Ali Altaee et al.

Bioresource Technology • 2020

Lijuan Xiang, Ling Dai, Kexin Guo et al.

Chinese Journal of Chemical Physics • 2020

Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) present an attractive route for energy-saving hydrogen (H2) production along with treatment of various wastewaters, which can convert organic matter into H2 with the assistance of microbial electrocatalysis. However, the development of such renewable technologies for H2 production still faces considerable challenges regarding how to enhance the H2 production rate and to lower the energy and the system cost. In this review, we will focus on the recent research progress of MEC for H2 production. First, we present a brief introduction of MEC technology and the operating mechanism for H2 production. Then, the electrode materials including some typical electrocatalysts for hydrogen production are summarized and discussed. We also highlight how various substrates used in MEC affect the associated performance of hydrogen generation. Finally we presents several key scientific challenges and our perspectives on how to enhance the electrochemical performance.

Yanping Hou, Lingli Tu, Shanming Qin et al.

Process Biochemistry • 2020

Phan Khanh Thinh Nguyen, Jihyeon Kim, Gautam Das et al.

Biochemical Engineering Journal • 2021

Xiaoyu Han, Youpeng Qu, Da Li et al.

Process Biochemistry • 2020

Weiwei Cai, Wenzong Liu, Haishu Sun et al.

Applied Energy • 2017

Yu-Li Yang, Mohan Qin, Xiao-Li Yang et al.

Journal of Power Sources • 2017

Lydia Kyoung-Eun Park, Scott J. Satinover, Sotira Yiacoumi et al.

Renewable Energy • 2018

Amit Kumar Chaurasia, Hemant Goyal, Prasenjit Mondal

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2019

Ivan Ivanov, Yongtae Ahn, Thibault Poirson et al.

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2017

Lakhveer Singh, Andy Miller, Luguang Wang et al.

Bioresource Technology • 2021

Daniel Indiana Carlotta-Jones, Kevin J. Purdy, Kerry Kirwan et al.

Bioresource Technology • 2020

Growing energy demands of wastewater treatment have made it vital for water companies to develop less energy intensive processes for treating wastewater if net zero emissions are to be achieved by 2050. Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) have the potential to do this by treating water and producing renewable hydrogen gas as a product, but capital and operational costs have slowed their deployment. By using recycled carbon fibre mats, commercially viable MECs can brought closer to reality, where recycled carbon fibre anode MECs treating real wastewater (normalised ~3100 L d -1 ) were producing 66.77 L H 2 d -1 while graphite felt anode MECs produced 3.65 L H 2 d -1 per 1 m 3 reactor, anodes costing £5.53 m -2 and £88.36 m -2 respectively, resulting in a total anode cost saving of 93%. This could incentivise the development of larger pilot systems, opening the door for generating greater value and a more sustainable wastewater treatment industry.

Emily Zikmund, Kyoung‐Yeol Kim, Bruce E. Logan

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2018

Thi Thu Ha Tran, Phan Khanh Thinh Nguyen

Bioresource Technology • 2022

Shmuel Rozenfeld, Hanan Teller, Michal Schechter et al.

Bioelectrochemistry • 2018

Emma Roubaud, Rémy Lacroix, Serge Da Silva et al.

Electrochimica Acta • 2018

Wanjun Cui, Guangli Liu, Cuiping Zeng et al.

RSC Advances • 2019

The aim of this study was to investigate hydrogen production enhanced by methanogenesis inhibition in the single-chamber microbial electrolysis cell (MEC) under alkaline conditions. With 50 mM bicarbonate buffer and 1 g L -1 acetate, the MEC was tested at pH = 8.5, 9.5, 10.5, and 11.2, respectively, within 124 d operation. Effective methanogenesis inhibition in the MEC increased with pH from 8.5 to 11.2. At pH 11.2, Methanobacteriaceae reached the lowest absolute quantity ( i.e. , biomass and mcrA gene copy number of methanogens) within the microbial community in the cathodic biofilm among the pH values. Under the alkaline conditions, a hydrogen percentage of 85-90% and a methane percentage < 15% were achieved within 25 cycles (50 d) of operation. The maximum current density in the MEC reached 83.7 ± 1.5 A m -3 with the average electrical recovery of 171 ± 18% and overall energy recovery of 72 ± 3%. The excellent performance of the MEC at pH = 11.2 was attributed to the low abundance of methanogens within the cathodic biofilm (2.23 ± 0.46 copy per cm 2 ), low cathodic biomass (0.12 ± 0.01 mg protein per g), and low anode potential (-0.228 mV vs. saturated calomel electrode). Results from this study should be valuable to expand applications of the MEC with methanogenesis inhibition in alkaline wastewater treatment.

Ling Wang, Wenzong Liu, Zhang-Wei He et al.

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2017

Ashutosh Gupta, Sovik Das, Makarand M. Ghangrekar

Chemical Physics Letters • 2020

Xu Wang, Ruggero Rossi, Zhifei Yan et al.

Environmental Science & Technology • 2019

Hydrogen production using two-chamber microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) is usually adversely impacted by a rapid rise in catholyte pH because of proton consumption for the hydrogen evolution reaction. While using a bipolar membrane (BPM) will maintain a more constant electrolyte pH, the large voltage loss across this membrane reduces performance. To overcome these limitations, we used an acidic catholyte to compensate for the potential loss incurred by using a BPM. A hydrogen production rate of 1.2 ± 0.7 L-H 2 /L/d ( j max = 10 ± 0.4 A/m 2 ) was obtained using a Pt cathode and BPM with a pH difference (ΔpH = 6.1) between the two chambers. This production rate was 2.8 times greater than that of a conventional MEC with an anion exchange membrane (AEM, 0.43 ± 0.1 L-H 2 /L/d, j max = 6.5 ± 0.3 A/m 2 ). The catholyte pH gradually increased to 11 ± 0.3 over 9 days using the BPM and Pt/C, which decreased current production ( j max = 2.5 ± 0.3 A/m 2 ). However, this performance was much better than that obtained using an AEM as the catholyte pH increased to 10 ± 0.4 after just one day. The use of an activated carbon cathode with the BPM enabled stable performance over a longer period of 12 days, although it reduced the hydrogen production rate (0.45 ± 0.1 L-H 2 /L/d).

Samuel Raj Babu Arulmani, Junxi Dai, Han Li et al.

The Science of The Total Environment • 2021

Luguang Wang, Kevin Linowski, Hong Liu

Chemical Engineering Journal • 2022

Mi‐Jin Choi, Euntae Yang, Hye-Weon Yu et al.

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2018

Kazuki Fujinawa, Misa Nagoya, Atsushi Kouzuma et al.

Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology • 2019

Luguang Wang, Lakhveer Singh, Hong Liu

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy • 2018

Jingnan Zhang, Yan-Xia Bai, Yaoting Fan et al.

Journal of Bioscience and Bioengineering • 2016

Raphaël Rousseau, Stéphanie F. Ketep, Luc Etcheverry et al.

Bioresource Technology Reports • 2020

Jose Antonio Magdalena, María Fernanda Pérez‐Bernal, Nicolas Bernet et al.

Bioresource Technology • 2023

Lina Xu, Wei Li, Jiaqin Luo et al.

Chemical Engineering Journal • 2023

Zhen Li, Anran Fang, Han Cui et al.

Chemical Engineering Journal • 2020

Fabrice Ndayisenga, Zhisheng Yu, Bobo Wang et al.

Chemical Engineering Journal • 2023

Luguang Wang, Ye Chen, Fei Long et al.

Chemical Engineering Journal • 2020

Jinyue Jiang, Juan A. Lopez‐Ruiz, Yanhong Bian et al.

Water Research • 2023