International Journal of Energy and Environmental Engineering

Performance of pilot-scale microbial fuel cells treating wastewater with associated

bioenergy production in the Caribbean context
--Manuscript Draft--

Manuscript Number: IJEE-D-14-00406R1

Full Title: Performance of pilot-scale microbial fuel cells treating wastewater with associated
bioenergy production in the Caribbean context

Article Type: Original Research

Abstract: Microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology represents a form of renewable energy that
generates bioelectricity from what would otherwise be considered a waste stream.
MFCs may be ideally suited to the small island developing state (SIDS) context, such
as Trinidad and Tobago where seawater as the main electrolyte is readily available
and economical renewable and sustainable electricity is also deemed a priority. Hence
this project tested two identical laboratory-scaled MFC systems that were specifically
designed and developed for the Caribbean regional context. They consisted of two
separate chambers, an anaerobic anodic chamber inoculated with wastewater and an
aerobic cathodic chamber separated by a proton exchange membrane. Domestic
wastewater from two various wastewater treatment plants inflow (after screening) was
placed into the anodic chamber, and seawater from the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of
Paria placed into the cathodic chambers respectively with the bacteria present in the
wastewater attaching to the anode. Experimental results demonstrated that the
bacterial degradation of the wastewaters as substrate induced an electron flow through
the electrodes producing bioelectricity whilst simultaneously reducing the organic
matter as biochemical oxygen demand and chemical oxygen demand by 30 to 75%.
The average bioenergy output for both systems was 84 mW/m² and 96 mW/m²
respectively. This study demonstrated the potential for simultaneous bioenergy
production and wastewater treatment in the SIDS context.

Corresponding Author: Parneet Paul, BSc(Eng) MSc MRes PhD

Brunel University
Uxbridge, Middlesex UNITED KINGDOM

Corresponding Author Secondary

Information:

Corresponding Author's Institution: Brunel University

Corresponding Author's Secondary

Institution:

First Author: Kiran Tota-Maharaj, BSc MSc PhD PGCHE

First Author Secondary Information:

Order of Authors: Kiran Tota-Maharaj, BSc MSc PhD PGCHE

Parneet Paul, BSc(Eng) MSc MRes PhD

Order of Authors Secondary Information:

Author Comments: All changes as required are in RED text.

Response to Reviewers: All changes as required are in RED text.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
Manuscript
Click here to download Manuscript: Tota-Maharaj_Paul_IJEE.docx
Click here to view linked References

Performance of pilot-scale microbial fuel cells treating

1
wastewater with associated bioenergy production in the
2
3
Caribbean context
4
5 Kiran Tota-Maharaj1 and Parneet Paul2,*
6
7 1
Department of Engineering Science, Faculty of Engineering and Science, University of Greenwich,
8
9 Medway Campus, Chatham Maritime, Kent, ME4 4TB, UK Email: K.Tota-
10 Maharaj@greenwich.ac.uk
11 2
12 Water Sustainability Research Centre, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace, and Civil
13 Engineering, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, United Kingdom. Email:
14
15 parneet.paul@brunel.ac.uk
16 * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: parneet.paul@brunel.ac.uk;
17
18 Tel.: +44-1895-265-435; Fax: +44-1895-274-000.
19
20
21
22 Abstract: Microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology represents a form of renewable energy
23
24
that generates bioelectricity from what would otherwise be considered a waste stream.
25 MFCs may be ideally suited to the small island developing state (SIDS) context, such as
26
27
Trinidad and Tobago where seawater as the main electrolyte is readily available and
28 economical renewable and sustainable electricity is also deemed a priority. Hence this
29
30
project tested two identical laboratory-scaled MFC systems that were specifically designed
31 and developed for the Caribbean regional context. They consisted of two separate
32
33
chambers, an anaerobic anodic chamber inoculated with wastewater and an aerobic
34 cathodic chamber separated by a proton exchange membrane. Domestic wastewater from
35
36
two various wastewater treatment plants inflow (after screening) was placed into the
37 anodic chamber, and seawater from the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Paria placed into the
38
39
cathodic chambers respectively with the bacteria present in the wastewater attaching to the
40 anode. Experimental results demonstrated that the bacterial degradation of the wastewaters
41
42
as substrate induced an electron flow through the electrodes producing bioelectricity whilst
43 simultaneously reducing the organic matter as biochemical oxygen demand and chemical
44
45
oxygen demand by 30 to 75%. The average bioenergy output for both systems was 84
46 mW/m² and 96 mW/m² respectively. This study demonstrated the potential for
47
48
simultaneous bioenergy production and wastewater treatment in the SIDS context.
49
50 Keywords: Wastewater treatment; bioenergy; bioelectricity; microbial fuel cell (MFC);
51
52
small island developing state (SIDS)
53
54 1. Introduction
55
56
57 Rapid population increase, urbanisation and industrialisation in the major cities of most developing
58 countries have resulted in deterioration of water quality and shortages of fresh water supplies [1]. In
59
60 the African continent alone, 115 people die every hour from diseases linked to poor sanitation, poor
61 hygiene and contaminated water and approximately 1.2 billion people live in areas where drinking
62
63
64
65
 2
water is physically scarce [2]. In a similar manner and again, globally speaking, there has been a rapid
1 increase in energy demand over the last few decades. This has led to a greater interest in the
2 development of sustainable energy production especially and more recently by several Caribbean
3
4 nations over the last few years. Depleting reserves of fossil fuels across Trinidad and Tobago and the
5 environmental impact of their use to produce energy are leading to a search for novel renewable
6
7 energy technologies. Moreover most wastewater generated is discharged without any treatment. Whilst
8 technologies for wastewater treatment are well established in industrialised countries, the same
9
10 technologies have often not been successfully applied in a typical developing country scenario. This
11 situation is further exacerbated for the unique context of a small island developing state (SIDS) such as
12
13 is the case with many nations within the Caribbean region. The reasons are myriad, but key among
14 these are non-enforcement of environmental regulations and the high cost of the installation and
15
16 operation of centralised treatment systems.
17
18 The lack of sustainability of current fossil fuel centred energy strategies and safety issues across
19
20 Trinidad and Tobago will eventually result in a shift in energy policies. Thus the need for alternative
21 non-fossil fuel based technologies is essential as is the need for research along these lines so that
22
23 promising alternatives are developed. Therefore, it is important to investigate novel treatment
24 technologies especially decentralised options that not only effectively treat the influent wastewater
25
26 stream but which are also low-energy usage systems.
27
28
29 It must be remembered that due to global and regional climate change effects and green-house gas
30 emissions, a radical re-think is needed on how global water is abstracted, treated and supplied to
31
32 householders, businesses and industry alike. Current hydrosystems have several constraints meaning
33 that they will become increasingly unsustainable and expensive especially as good quality potable
34
35 water is now universally deemed a human right. These constraints include [2]:
36
37
38 1. Climate change and increased green gas emissions leading to excessive droughts and flooding
39 events engendering inconsistency of existing surface and groundwater sources.
40
41 2. Increasing costs of treating water to progressively higher water quality standards.
42 3. Increasing bioconcentration of trace contaminants and synthetic molecules within the water
43
44 cycle and the environment in general (e.g. tri-halomethanes and endrocrine disrupting
45 compounds).
46
47 4. Reducing groundwater levels and subsequent amounts of aquifer storage.
48 5. Ever increasing water demand amongst all consumers (i.e. for domestic, commercial, industrial
49
50 and agricultural use).
51
52
53 In a bid to address all of these issues in a sustainable yet pragmatic manner, this study focuses on one
54
55
of two possible sources of “free” water since all other sources are almost fully utilised to meet current
56 water demand and will not be able to meet future projected demand. The first source of “free” water is
57
58
via rainwater harvesting technologies, whilst the second, which this proposal seeks to focus on, is
59 “wastewater treatment and reuse”. This second source of “free” water is particularly relevant in the
60
61
SIDS situation where they often don’t have large surface water sources to rely on. However, SIDS
62 nations uniquely do often have abundant and easily accessible seawater sources since they are
63
64
65
 3
surrounded by it, and SIDS nations ideally would like a constant supply of cheap, renewable sources of
1 electricity. Therefore, microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology may well be suited as an innovative
2 solution in the unique SIDS context since MFCs represent a developing technology for simultaneous
3
4 sustainable energy production and wastewater treatment [3]. MFCs are a promising technology for
5 sustainable energy generation since they are based on the microbial exocellular electron transfer, and
6
7 the capacity of microbes to transfer electrons produced from the metabolic oxidation of organic
8 substrates to insoluble, extracellular electron-accepting compounds [4]. Hence this project tests two
9
10 identical laboratory-scaled MFC systems that were specifically designed and developed for the
11 Caribbean regional context.
12
13
14 Wastewater within the southern Caribbean islands of Trinidad and Tobago contains various
15
contaminants and pollutants that need to be removed by the regulations of the Environmental
16
17 Management Authority (EMA) by utilising a combination of traditional physical processes coupled to
18
19
biological oxidation processes (with sometimes chemical dosing used as well) before the treated
20 effluent can be discharged to either surface water courses, or within the ground waters or into coastal
21
22
zones. MFC technology represents a novel form of generating renewable energy via bioelectricity from
23 what would otherwise be considered a waste stream. Even though they are still in the early stages of
24
25
their development cycle, they are thought to potentially offer a true alternative to traditional fossil fuel
26 energy generation processes [4]. This technology uses bacteria already present in wastewater as the
27
28
catalysts to generate the electricity whilst simultaneously treating the wastewater. Consequently, a
29 combination of both bioenergy production and wastewater treatment would reduce the downstream
30
31
cost of treating primary effluent wastewater. Hence MFCs present a feasible option for simultaneous
32 wastewater treatment and bioenergy generation in the SIDS context. MFCs use the concept of
33
34
bacterial-led oxidation and reduction processes since the microorganisms are already present in the
35 wastewater, and because in this instance the electrolyte phase would be seawater that is readily
36
37
available for the SIDS situation [5]. MFCs can simultaneously produce bioelectricity and treat
38 wastewater using the naturally occurring bacterial oxidation and reduction processes in the MFC unit.
39
40
The MFC consists of two chambers (i.e. anode and cathode) filled with wastewater in one and
41 seawater in the other as electrolytes, two electrodes, an external wire circuit and a proton exchange
42
43
membrane (PEM) as shown in Figure 1 [6]. In the anodic chamber the wastewater is degraded by the
44 bacterium while in the cathodic chamber the seawater present is diluted into brine as water molecules
45
46
are generated by the application of an external air supply. This whole process generates a bioelectric
47 current.
48
49
50 In summary, the aim of this pilot scale project was to assess bioenergy production for two identical
51
52
MFCs used for wastewater treatment in order to determine the optimal configuration and operational
53 efficiency of these units from both a SIDS water quality and energy production perspective. The
54
55
further objectives of this study were to evaluate microbial fuel cell technology in the Caribbean context
56 by using a pilot bench scale unit treating municipal wastewater that was itself constructed using
57
58
appropriate, sustainable, locally available materials. In this regard the performance of the unit would
59 be measured by expressing the current and power generated from the cells as a continuous function of
60
61
time, whilst observing the relationship between the wastewater treatment achieved with simultaneous
62 power generation.
63
64
65
 4

Bioelectricity energy
1
2
3
4
5
6
7 Waste Oxygen Seawater
Oxygen
8 water deficit as
A excess C
9 substrate Catholyte
10 N A
11 O T
12 CH3COO3
13 D H
14 E O2 O
15 H+ H+ D
16 E
CO2 H2O
17
18
19
20 Proton exchange
Biofilm
21 membrane
22
23 Figure 1. Schematic of Microbial Fuel Cell based on Direct Bioelectrocatalysis (adapted after [6]).
24
25
26
27 The microbes in a MFC may gain all the energy and carbon required for cellular growth from the
28
29 oxidation of the complex organic material and as such MFC technology has been considered self-
30 sustaining [7]. In other words as long as conditions remain favourable for current production, a MFC
31
32 system has the potential to produce electricity indefinitely.
33
34
35 2. Background theory - Microbial fuel cell technology for simultaneous energy generation and
36 biological wastewater treatment
37
38
39 To assess bioelectricity generation from microbes, metabolic pathways governing microbial electron
40
41 and proton flows must be determined. Typical electrode reactions within MFCs are shown in
42 Equations 1 and 2 [7, 8].
43
44
45 Anodic reaction: CH3COO + 2H2O microbes⟶ 2CO2 + 7H+ + 8e- (1)
46
47 Cathodic reaction: O2 + 4e− + 4H+→2H2O (2)
48
49
50 Microbes in the anodic chamber of a MFC oxidize any added substrates and generate electrons and
51 protons in the process. Carbon dioxide is produced as an oxidation byproduct. The electrons (e-) are
52
53 absorbed by the anode and transported to the cathode through an external circuit. After crossing the
54 proton exchange membrane (PEM) or a salt bridge (Figure 1), the protons enter the cathodic chamber
55
56 where they combine with oxygen to form water (Equation 2). Microbes in the anodic zone extract
57 electrons and protons in a dissimilative process of oxidizing organic substrates. Bioelectricity
58
59 generation occurs by keeping microbes separated from oxygen (i.e. under anaerobic conditions) or via
60 end terminal acceptors other than the anode. This requires an anaerobic anodic chamber. Many
61
62 microorganisms possess the ability to transfer electrons derived from the metabolism of organic matter
63
64
65
 5
to the anode. Wastewater and sludge produced from water and wastewater treatment processes are all
1 rich sources for these specific microorganisms. The ideal performance of a MFC depends on the
2 electrochemical reactions that occur between the organic substrate at a low potential such as with
3
4 wastewater and the final electron acceptor having a high potential such as with oxygen. However, its
5 ideal cell voltage is uncertain because the electrons are transferred to the anode from the organic
6
7 substrate through a complex respiratory chain that varies from microbe to microbe and even for the
8 same microbe when growth conditions differ. Nevertheless, the actual cell potential is always lower
9
10 than its equilibrium potential because of irreversible losses in any system [7, 8].
11
12
13
3. Materials and method
14
15
Figure 2 illustrates the configurations of the two identical MFCs used in this study that consisted of an
16 anode, cathode, the PEM, and a multimeter that measures voltage and current across the unit. Air
17
18
pumps were connected to the cathodic chamber of the fuel cell. The MFCs used graphite for both
19 electrodes and the PEM used was a Nafion ion exchange membrane.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43 Figure 2. Experimental configuration of microbial fuel cells used at laboratory pilot-scale (adapted after [3])
44
45
46
47 Most MFCs have a PEM that separates the anodic and cathodic chambers and acts as a barrier to
48 oxygen, but allows protons (i.e. H+ ions) to pass through and be delivered from the anode to the
49
50 cathode cell. Thus a typical two-chamber MFC consists of an anode and cathode that are placed in
51 separate cells/chambers partitioned by a PEM. The anode is supplied with influent wastewater that
52
53 contains the microorganisms required for the bioelectrocatalysis process [8]. The graphite anode
54 oxidises the substrate producing protons of hydrogen and an effluent of carbon dioxide.
55
56 Simultaneously the graphite cathode receives the protons through the PEM, while reducing the oxygen
57 present in this saltwater chamber that is supplied by an external air pump. Two MFC devices were
58
59 constructed with one using seawater from the Atlantic Ocean and the second system using seawater
60 from the Gulf of Paria. Both MFCs contained the same Nafion PEM and graphite electrodes, and were
61
62 of the same size and scale to allow comparison of results.
63
64
65
 6

1 Full-strength domestic wastewater was collected as influent once per week from two of the Trinidad
2 and Tobago Water and Sewerage Authority’s (WASA) municipal wastewater treatment plants
3
4 (WWTPs) whose characteristics are depicted in Table 1. The wastewater used as inoculum into the
5 MFCs had no modifications made such as pH adjustment, addition of nutrients, or even dilution. The
6
7 entire setup was left for one hour for stabilisation to occur, and the reading of the multimeter was noted
8 down twice daily for a maximum of twelve days when wastewater would be exchanged.
9
10
11
12 Table 1. Characteristics of Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plants (WWTPs) from the Water and Sewerage Authority
13 (WASA), Trinidad (October 2012 to July 2013)
14
15 Characteristics Unit WWTP (A) WWTP (B)
16 pH _ 7.83 7.89
17
18 Total solids mg/l 1140 1856
19 Total dissolved solids mg/l 980 974
20
21 BOD5 mg/l 260 192
22 COD mg/l 954 878
23
24 Chlorides mg/l 262 232
25
26
27 Regular water quality analysis was completed for the wastewater influent into the MFC and for the
28 treated outflow from October 2012 to August 2013 including the measurement of pH, temperature,
29
30 suspended solids, ammonia, nitrites, nitrates, phosphates, chlorides, chemical oxygen demand (COD)
31 and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD). The concentrations of ammonia, nitrite, nitrate,
32
33 orthophosphate, COD, and suspended solids were determined using a Hach Lange DR 2800
34 spectrophotometer according to United Stated Environment Protections Agency approved standards
35
36 for wastewater analysis [9, 10].
37
38
39 Water sample temperature and pH were measured immediately after collecting the samples (i.e. from
40 influent and effluent) with model WTW Var meter handheld pH/mV/Temperature meter manufactured
41
42 by Wissenschaftlich-Technische Werkstätten GmbH, Weilheim Germany.
43
44
45 COD was measured using Hach's USEPA-approved dichromate COD Method [9,10]. Globally it is
46 one of the most widely used methods as it allows easy process monitoring and reporting of wastewater
47
48 samples. The Hach Lange DRB200 Reactor (Heating block) is preheated to 150 °C. 100 ml of inflow
49 and outflow water samples are mixed for 30 seconds. Thereafter 2.0 ml are pipetted into a vial. The
50
51 vial is inverted gently several times and placed into the DRB200 reactor to be heated for
52
approximately two hours. Next the sample is cooled for 20 minutes to approximately 120 °C or less.
53
54 The outside of the vial is cleaned with ethanol using a tissue and then inserted into the
55 spectrophotometer whereby the instrument reads the barcode and results are coded as mg/l of COD.
56
57
58
The biochemical oxygen demand (BOD5) was determined using the OxiTOP IS 12-6 system supplied
59
60 by WTW (Wissenschaftlich-Technische-Werkstatten GmbG, Wielheim, Germany). The system uses a
61
piezo-resistive measure of pressure differences from a respirometric method based on carbon dioxide
62
63
64
65
 7
produced within the bottle. A nutrient inhibitor was added to suppress the oxidation of ammonia to
1 nitrates/nitrites (i.e. nitrification inhibitor N-Allylthiourera). The pressure changes when sodium
2 hydroxide transforms into sodium carbonate. Generated carbon dioxide is then removed by adding
3
4 sodium hydroxide tablets. The pressure changes are recorded by an electronic data logger and
5 measured over a five-day period at a constant temperature of 20°C. The water sample volume used
6
7 was approximately 0.5 litres for the influent and effluents respectively. After 30 minutes of aeration by
8 air pumps, a nutrient inhibitor was added to the samples, and bottles were incubated at a constant
9
10 temperature for five days. This method proved to be simple to operate, allowed improved
11 controllability and non-toxicity of samples, and had a broad measurement range up to 4000 mg/l BOD.
12
13 Since the measured pressure is automatically converted, the values can be directly read as mg/l BOD.
14
15 4. Results and discussion
16
17
18 Both of the dual chambered MFC units were run in parallel and simultaneously. The MFCs were
19 operated by separately feeding domestic wastewater with similar but fluctuating concentrations. The
20
21 effects of wastewater concentrations on COD, BOD and ammonia-nitrogen removal efficiency and
22 current generation was observed.
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46 Figure 3. Mean Chemical oxygen demand (mg/l), Ammonium-Nitrogen (NH4-N, mg/l), and Biochemical oxygen demand
47 (mg/l) with standard deviations for influent and effluent for both MFC units (October 2012 to August 2013, sample number
48 = 90).
49
50
51 Figure 3 shows the water quality analysis results for both MFC units. In terms of the mean COD
52
53 inflow and outflow values, it can be clearly seen that on average a 50% reduction in COD is achieved
54 consistently for both units. Thus these early results indicate that even with weakly loaded systems, a
55
56 MFC system has great potential as a wastewater treatment process since organic loadings of COD can
57 be easily converted into electricity with a concomitant reduction of excess sludge production.
58
59
60 Ammonia removal was consistent and occurred for both MFC systems. Figure 3 also presents the
61
62 mean inflow and outflow of ammonium ion concentrations and shows average decreasing
63
64
65
 8
concentrations of approximately 50% for this weakly loaded system. Ammoniacal-nitrogen (NH4-N)
1 as a nutrient is another key wastewater quality parameter. This determinant is used to efficiently
2 control water and wastewater treatment processes and to demonstrate compliance to EMA imposed
3
4 discharge consents in the Trinidad and Tobago situation. It can also be used to indicate the presence of
5 untreated sewage at points of abstraction and infer associated risk from pathogens. As can be seen the
6
7 mean removal efficiency for MFC 1 was only very slightly greater than that of MFC 2.
8
9
10 Again in Figure 3, the mean inflow and outflow BOD concentration was determined and showed
11 average decreasing concentrations of approximately 50% for both MFCs, with MFC 2 performing the
12
13 best. In fact a linear correlation existed between the strength of the influent organic matter as BOD in
14 the wastewater and the energy yielded from both MFCs since the bacteria adhering to the anode
15
16 surface degrade organic matter under anaerobic conditions using bacterial growth and decay kinetics
17 (e.g. Monod reactions). As a consequence of the degradation reaction, carbon dioxide, protons and
18
19 electrons were produced [5,11]. The electrons flow through the circuit and the protons pass through the
20 salt-bridge (i.e. the PEM) that is attached to the cathode. The protons and electrons react with oxygen
21
22 on the cathode and become water molecules thereby diluting the seawater to brine [12]. Since the
23 influent BOD ranged from 150 to 300 mg/l (i.e. a weak domestic sewage) and as both MFCs showed
24
25 an average removal rate ranging from 40 to 60 % respectively, it can be inferred that a typical normal
26
sewage strength as influent ranging from 300 to 600 mg/l would achieve improved BOD removal rates
27
28 with subsequent higher levels of bioelectricity generated due to greater electron transfer to the anode.
29
30
31 The variation in the pH of the inflow conditions and outflow conditions was also measured and is
32
33 shown in Table 2. As is apparent and as is expected, there is a mean drop in pH from slightly alkaline
34 conditions down to neutral conditions as the nutrient load is exhausted.
35
36
37 Table 2. Mean pH values and standard deviations for inflow and both MFC units from October 2012 to July 2013.
38
39 Direction of Flow Mean pH (90 samples) Standard deviation of range
40 Inflow 7.83 0.21
41
42 Outflow MFC 1 6.97 0.53
43 Outflow MFC 2 6.84 0.41
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 9

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 Figure 4. Mean monthly power generated (mW/m2) for both microbial fuel cells (MFCs) from October 2012 to July 2013.
23
24
25 Figure 4 illustrates the mean monthly power produced from the two identical MFC units. The
26
27 fluctuation of the power generated is a direct relation to the presence and behaviour of microorganisms
28 and the associated electron flow across the fuel cells. In general and as anticipated a higher bioenergy
29
30 production was recorded for higher BOD and COD loadings, although localised microbial community
31 variations in individual cells does seem to have a greater impact. The average monthly power output
32
33 for MFC 1 ranged from 27.2 to 115.8 mW/m2 with an overall mean power output of 84 mW/m2 whilst
34 MFC 2 ranged from 26.2 to 175.9 mW/m2 for power generation monthly with an overall average of 96
35
36 mW/m².
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58 Figure 5. Daily electric current (mA) generation for both MFCs treating domestic wastewater from October 2012 to
59 January 2014 (Sample number, n=90).
60
61
62
63
64
65
 10
Coulombic efficiency and power output for MFCs have been reviewed by several authors such as Lee
1 et al. [13], Niessen et al. [14], Pant et al. [15], and Zuo et al. [16]. In summary, they found that
2 domestic wastewater at a chemical organic loading strength of 600 mg/l had a mean current density of
3
4 0.06 mA/cm2, whilst brewery wastewater with an organic strength of 2240 mg/l had a corresponding
5 average current density of 0.2 mA/cm2. The current generation for MFC 1 and MFC 2 is illustrated in
6
7 Figure 5. Both MFC 1 and MFC 2 were batch fed with wastewater samples at similar conditions in
8 order to support the formation of biomass and subsequent electricity. The MFCs were continuously
9
10 monitored during the entire experimental period and readings were logged at the end of each twenty
11 four period with the inoculation time being considered as time zero. The readings were noted down for
12
13 90 days of MFC operation. Higher bioelectricity generation can be as a result of more abundant
14 electron acceptors (i.e. oxygen availability). The full strength wastewater used in the anodic chambers
15
16 showed that the current gradually increased for a few days, and then there was a decline in electric
17 current production. The range of current produced was 0.1 to 0.67 mA respectively with variations in
18
19 current (mA) generation due to the availability of less oxidisable substrates within the wastewater
20 samples.
21
22
23 The difference in power generation for identical MFC units illustrates the bioelectricity generated was
24
25 directly proportional to both the variability in wastewater inflow quality and the salt-content of the
26 seawater source used. Furthermore, small differences in lab-scale system setup can considerably
27
28 influence energy production rates although the substrate degradation rates were not greatly impacted
29 upon. For a large-scale MFC setup this situation may not arise since economies-of-scale issues may
30
31 mean localised biofilm fouling may be regularised on the anode and especially on the PEM as it
32 dictates proton passage.
33
34
35
36 5. Conclusions and future outlook
37
38
39 Experimental results of this research demonstrated that the bacteria present in two various sources of
40 domestic wastewater allowed for an electron flow through the electrodes producing bioelectricity and
41
42 subsequently reduced 30-80% of organic matter (as BOD and COD) present. The MFC technology has
43 shown to be a viable technology at laboratory scale for treating urban wastewater of varying strengths
44
45 and produced a constant but variable production of bioenergy for the SIDS context. The project
46 expands the knowledge of existing technologies in the hopes of improving and optimising water
47
48 consumption, treatment and energy generation and usage in the Caribbean region. Performance of the
49 two chamber MFC system demonstrated its effectiveness for simultaneous wastewater treatment and
50
51 bioelectricity production. It is envisaged that future developments of MFCs can lead to more promising
52 results and the technology eventually made feasible for combined large-scale wastewater treatment and
53
54 sustainable energy generation.
55
56
57 Follow-on research should focus on two main areas:
58
59
60  Optimisation of the bioelectricity energy generation mechanism so that the wastewater
61 treatment process can be largely self-sustaining. This would mean comparing the typical energy
62
63
64
65
 11
needs of traditional wastewater treatment processes in the Caribbean region using typical
1 municipal and industrial waste streams with possible MFC bioelectricity generation setups to
2 ascertain if a zero-energy system could be eventually developed.
3
4
5  Measuring microbial species diversity and biofilm make-up on the anode and PEM to ascertain
6
7 their impact, if any, on bioelectricity generation rates and simultaneous organic substrate
8 removal rates.
9
10
11  Using the abundance of solar energy in the Caribbean SIDS scenario to pre-heat the wastewater
12
13 influent via simple glass tubes coupled with aluminium reflector solar collector/heat exchanger
14 systems, so that bacterial species obtained would be in the thermophillic range to ascertain if
15
16 bioelectricity generation rates could be improved upon.
17
18 Acknowledgments
19
20
21 The authors would like to thank Dr Denver Cheddie, Head of the Department of Utilities Engineering
22 at the University of Trinidad and Tobago, for providing support and partially funding this research
23
24 initiative. The project was also supported by Key North Engineering, St. Augustine, Trinidad, West
25 Indies.
26
27
28 References
29
30 1. Tayler, K.: Strategies for improved water supply in India and Pakistan, Proceedings of the ICE
31
32 - Municipal Engineer 161(4), 239–246 (2008)
33 2. UN.: International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005-2015, UNESDA website.
34
35 Available online: http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/africa.shtml (2014). (assessed on 20th
36 March 2014)
37
38 3. Logan, B.E.: Microbial fuel cells. Wiley Interscience: New Jersey, USA (2008)
39 4. Parthasarathy, V. and Chellaram, C.: Microbial Fuel Cells as an Alternate Strategy for
40
41 Sustainable Energy Generation. Biosciences Biotechnology Research Asia 11(1), 249-252
42
(2014)
43
44 5. Feng, Y., Wang, X., Logan, B.E., and Lee, H.: Brewery wastewater treatment using air-cathode
45 microbial fuel cells. Applied Microbiology and biotechnology 78(5), 873-880 (2008)
46
47 6. Huang, L.P., and Logan, B.E.: Electricity generation and treatment of paper recycling
48 wastewater using microbial fuel cells. Applied Microbiology and biotechnology 80(2), 349-355
49
50 (2008)
51
7. Lovley, D.R.: Bug juice: harvesting electricity with microorganisms. Nature Reviews
52
53 Microbiology 4, 497-508 (2006)
54 8. Min, B., and Logan, B.E.: Continuous electricity generation from domestic wastewater and
55
56 organic substrates in a flat plate Microbial fuel cell. Environmental Science and Technology
57
38(21), 5809-5814 (2004)
58
59 9. Hach.: Hach Company DR 2800 Portable Spectrophotometer User’s manual. Available online:
60
http://www.hach.com/asset-get.download.jsa?id=7639982019 (2014). (Assessed on 17/07/14)
61
62
63
64
65
 12
10. US EPA.: United Stated Environmental Protections Agency (Analytical Methods and
1 Laboratories. Available online: http://water.epa.gov/scitech/methods/ (2011)
2 11. Logan, B.E., and Regan, J.M.: Electricity-productions bacterial communities in microbial fuel
3
4 cells. Trends in Microbiology 14(12), 512-518 (2006)
5 12. Mohan, S.V., Saravanan, R., Veer Raghavulu, S., Mohanakrishna, G., and Sarmaet, P.N. al.:
6
7 Bioelectricity production from wastewater treatment in dual chambered microbial fuel cell
8 (MFC) using selectively enriched mixed microflora: Effect of catholyte. Bioresource
9
10 Technology 99(3) 596-603 (2008)
11 13. Lee, H.S., Parameswaran, P., Kato-Marcus, A., Torres, C.I., and Rittmann, B.E.: Evaluation of
12
13 energy-conversion efficiencies in microbial fuel cells (MFCs) utilizing fermentable and non-
14 fermentable substrates. Water Research 42(6-7), 1501-1510 (2008)
15
16 14. Niessen, J., Schröder, U., and Scholz, F.: Exploiting complex carbohydrates for microbial
17 electricity generation – a bacterial fuel cell operating on starch. Electrochemistry
18
19 Communications 6, 955-958 (2004)
20 15. Pant, D., Van Bogaert, G., Diels, L., and Vanbroekhoven, K.: A review of the substrates used
21
22 in microbial fuel cells (MFCs) for sustainable energy production. Bioresource Technology
23 101(6), 1533-1543 (2010)
24
25 16. Zuo, Y., Maness, P. C., and Logan, B.E.: Electricity Production from Steam-Exploded Corn
26 Stover Biomass. Energy & Fuels 20, 1716-1721 (2006)
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65