Sustainability 14 16847

sustainability
Review
Microbial Fuel Cells (MFC): A Potential Game-Changer in
Renewable Energy Development
Tonni Agustiono Kurniawan 1, * , Mohd Hafiz Dzarfan Othman 2, *, Xue Liang 3 , Muhammad Ayub 2 ,
Hui Hwang Goh 3 , Tutuk Djoko Kusworo 4 , Ayesha Mohyuddin 5 and Kit Wayne Chew 6
1 College of Ecology and the Environment, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361102, China
2 Advanced Membrane Technology Research Centre (AMTEC), School of Chemical and Energy Engineering,
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Skudai, Johor Baru 81310, Malaysia
3 School of Electrical Engineering, Guangxi University, Nanning 530004, China
4 Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Diponegoro University,
Semarang 50275, Indonesia
5 Department Chemistry, School of Science, University of Management and Technology, Lahore 54770, Pakistan
6 School of Chemistry, Chemical Engineering and Biotechnology, Nanyang Technological University,
Singapore 637459, Singapore
* Correspondence: tonni@xmu.edu.cn (T.A.K.); hafiz@petroleum.utm.my (M.H.D.O.)
Abstract: Currently, access to electricity in the cities of the Global South is so limited that electrification
remains low in rural areas. Unless properly tackled, one-third of the world’s cities will suffer from
energy scarcity. The emergence of microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology accelerates the deployment of
decentralized and sustainable energy solutions that can address the looming energy shortage. This
review consolidates scattered knowledge into one article about the performance of MFC in optimizing
electricity generation from phosphorus (P)-laden wastewater, while removing the target nutrient from
wastewater simultaneously. It is obvious from a literature survey of 108 published articles (1999–2022)
Citation: Kurniawan, T.A.; Othman,
that the applications of MFC for building a self-powered municipal water treatment system represents
M.H.D.; Liang, X.; Ayub, M.; Goh,
an important breakthrough, as this enables water treatment operators to generate electricity without
H.H.; Kusworo, T.D.; Mohyuddin, A.;
affecting the atmospheric balance of CO2 . Using a pyrite-based wetland MFC, about 91% of P
Chew, K.W. Microbial Fuel Cells
was removed after operating 180 days, while generating power output of 48 A/m2 . Unlike other
(MFC): A Potential Game-Changer in
Renewable Energy Development.
techniques, MFCs utilize bacteria that act as micro-reactors and allow substrates to be oxidized
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16847. completely. The Earth’s tiniest inhabitants can efficiently transform the chemical energy of organic
https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416847 matter in unused wastewater either into hydrogen gas or electricity. This facilitates wastewater
treatment plants powering themselves in daily operation or selling electricity on the market. This
Academic Editors: Xue Han and
MFC technology radically changes how to treat wastewater universally. By exploring this direction
Yulin Hu
along the water–energy–food nexus, MFC technology could transform wastewater treatment plants
Received: 9 October 2022 into a key sustainability tool in the energy sector. This suggests that MFCs provide a practical solution
Accepted: 9 December 2022 that addresses the need of global society for clean water and electricity simultaneously.
Published: 15 December 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral Keywords: carbon neutrality; circular economy; decarbonization; net-zero; resource recovery
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
1. Introduction
As a hub of global urban systems, cities have recently encountered opportunities and
risks in contributing to carbon neutrality. The United Nations (UN) estimated that by 2050
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors.
about six billion people would inhabit cities due to rapid urbanization [1]. As the urban
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
population increases by 2% annually, squeezing two-thirds of the world’s inhabitants into
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
just one-third of land mass of cities brings global challenges such as energy shortage [2].
conditions of the Creative Commons
Currently, access to electricity in the cities of the Global South is so limited that electrification
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
remains disproportionately low in rural areas. Unless immediately tackled, one-third of the
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ world’s cities will suffer from the energy scarcity [3]. It is projected that the global demand
4.0/).
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16847. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416847 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 21
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16847 Currently, access to electricity in the cities of the Global South is so limited that electrifi- 2 of 20
cation remains disproportionately low in rural areas. Unless immediately tackled, one-
third of the world’s cities will suffer from the energy scarcity [3]. It is projected that the
global demand will
for electricity for electricity
grow by 25% willbygrow
2030,by
as 25% by 2030,for
the demand as energy
the demand for energy
will outgrow will
its supply
outgrow its supply to cities
to cities by the next decade. by the next decade.
AsAsthetheengines
enginesofofeconomic
economicdevelopment,
development,cities
citieshave
havebecome
becomethetheseismographs
seismographsofof
global energy demand due to their mandatory service to provide public
global energy demand due to their mandatory service to provide public with reliable with reliableenergy
en-
ergy supply. Since cities contribute to 85% of global energy demand [4],
supply. Since cities contribute to 85% of global energy demand [4], they have become a they have become
a central
central locus
locus of ofclimate
climatechange
changemitigation
mitigationand andthe
theincubators
incubatorsofofnew
newsolutions forfor
solutions energy
energy
shortage (Figure 1). While cities seek solutions to live up to the 2030 UN
shortage (Figure 1). While cities seek solutions to live up to the 2030 UN Agenda, urban Agenda, urban
development
developmentneeds needstotoprioritize
prioritizetheir
theirneed
needforforrenewable
renewable energy.
energy. To cope with
To cope with the
thelooming
loom-
ing energy shortage, electricity, which can be generated from multiple sources,
energy shortage, electricity, which can be generated from multiple sources, is a key enabler is a key
enabler of the energy transition in contributing to the decarbonization
of the energy transition in contributing to the decarbonization of global economy with of global economy
with benefits
benefits including
including CO2CO 2 reduction,
reduction, energy
energy security,
security, andand enhanced
enhanced efficiency.
efficiency.
Figure 1. Global energy scarcity.

Figure 1. Global energy scarcity.
Global electricity demand has increased by 5000 Terawatt-hours (Twh) in the past
Global
decade, electricityfordemand
accounting one-fifthhas increased
of total energybyconsumption
5000 Terawatt-hours (Twh) in the
[5]. As electrification past
is central
decade, accounting
to climate for one-fifth
conservation, of totalother
uncovering energy consumption
alternatives [5]. As electrification
of renewable is cen-
energy is critical for
tral to climate
cities conservation,
to contribute uncoveringDevelopment
to UN Sustainable other alternativesGoalof renewable
(SDG) energy isand
#7 ‘Affordable critical
clean
forenergy’,
cities towhich
contribute
servestoasUN Sustainable
a marker for the Development
world to achieveGoal (SDG) #7 ‘Affordable
decarbonization goals.andUN
clean
SDGenergy’, which serves
#7 represents the need as aofmarker
universal for the
accessworld to achieve and
to affordable decarbonization
clean energygoals.for all
UN SDG #7
through represents
global the need
cooperation. The of urgency
universaland access to affordable
roadmap and clean
to the carbon energyoffor
neutrality all
global
through
economy global cooperation.
through renewable The urgency
energy is a and roadmap to
top universal the carbon
agenda. neutrality
In 2019, energy of global
sector was
responsible
economy for 40%
through of global
renewable CO2 is
energy emissions (about agenda.
a top universal 13 gigatons) [6]. energy
In 2019, With coal, gas,
sector and
was
oil combined,
responsible the energy
for 40% of global still
COaccounts
2 emissions for (about
two-thirds of the final
13 gigatons) energy
[6]. With consumption
coal, gas, and
oilmix. Therefore,
combined, decarbonizing
the energy the energy
still accounts sector is critical
for two-thirds to meeting
of the final energy climate goals,mix.
consumption while
shifting away
Therefore, from fossil
decarbonizing fuel
the consumption
energy to electricity-driven
sector is critical solutions.
to meeting climate goals,However,
while shift- the
ing away from fossil fuel consumption to electricity-driven solutions. However, the speedits
speed of decarbonization varies, depending on the country’s access to electricity and
ofelectrification
decarbonization rate.varies, depending on the country’s access to electricity and its electri-
ficationTorate.
tackle the challenge of global climate change, the world needs to achieve carbon
neutrality
To tackle between 2050 and
the challenge of 2070.
globalItclimate
needs to accelerate
change, the energy
the world needstransition
to achievetocarbon
achieve
a low-carbon
neutrality betweenand2050
sustainable
and 2070.energyIt needs system. Carbon
to accelerate theneutrality refers totonet-zero
energy transition achieve aan-
thropogenic
low-carbon andemissions
sustainable of energy
greenhousesystem. gasCarbon
(GHG)neutrality
when CO 2 emission
refers is equivalent
to net-zero anthropo-to
its absorption. Hence, energy transformation plays roles in tackling climate change and
achieving net-zero emissions.
In addressing energy issues sustainably, generating alternative sources of energy
without impacting the surrounding environment represents one of the bottlenecks in
mitigating climate change [1]. Generating electricity without emissions is considered
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16847 3 of 20
an ideal measure to reduce GHG emissions, leading to a sustainable environment. As

practical challenges still exist, innovative technologies are vital to reducing the rising
impacts of GHGs and attaining sustainability with a non-hazardous environment. The
world encounters a two-fold energy challenge: meeting growing demand, while lowering
carbon emissions. This decade is decisive for the transition from fossil fuels to renewable
energy [5]. As the gap in GHG emissions reduction is widening, all countries need to
accelerate a low-carbon transition of energy systems, which puts forward a higher standard
of requirements for technology innovation; their comprehensive integration and speedy
application is more urgently required than before.
Since electricity is the core energy vector to reaching decarbonization goals in energy
systems with benefits that go well beyond CO2 reductions, turning municipal wastew-
ater into electricity is a strategic effort to convert unused resources into another option
for energy. The emergence of MFCs offers a window to accelerate the deployment of
decentralized and sustainable energy solutions that can address energy scarcity for urban
populations, while contributing to decarbonization goals. In addition to energy generation
using electrochemically active bacteria, the MFC has evolved into other applications such
as sensors for environmental quality monitoring [6].
A preliminary work undertaken by Nguyen and Babel [7] on MFC mainly focused on
its ability to remove biological nitrogen (N) from wastewater. In spite of its novelty, their
review did not directly elaborate the removal of other macronutrients such as phosphorus
(P). This particular nutrient is critical to the world’s food security, as half of the world’s
fertilizer demand depends on P’s availability as a raw mineral for fertilizer production [8].
In addition, their review did not address the roles of online sensors in MFC applications,
neither for toxicity detection nor for online monitoring of water quality [9].
To bridge the knowledge gaps, this article synthesizes scattered knowledge on the
performance of MFC in removing P from P-laden wastewater, while consolidating the
information into one article about how to optimize bioelectricity generation from the same
source. This work also critically evaluates development trends on the design and operation
of MFCs with efficient electrodes that can be used to generate electricity from wastewater
using bacteria, while simultaneously treating it.
By developing a clean, low-carbon, safe, and efficient energy system through MFCs,
it is expected that this work will advance our scientific understanding towards MFCs as
one of the practical solutions for addressing climate change impacts caused by fossil fuel
dependence, while reducing dependence on fossil fuel consumption and meeting energy
demands in the developing world. It is also anticipated that the scientific community would
have a better understanding of the potential of hydrogen gas as a fuel for decarbonization
in the energy sector, while promoting a sustainable transition to net-zero emissions in
the long-term.
2. MFC: An Option in Renewable Energy Development

The intensive energy requirement of conventional wastewater treatment for aeration
demands an alternative technological option that requires less energy for its operation [10].
Due to its cost-effectiveness, biological processes such as activated sludge have been widely
used for wastewater treatment. However, this technique depends on the ability of bacterial
population to maintain acceptable effluent quality. If the treatment is interfered with, the
bacterial population respond to the varying influents. When this occurs, exceeding effluent
limits lead to environmental damage and costly fines [11]. Consequently, treatment facilities
have to be overhauled, resulting in a loss of time and financial resources [12].
To address this bottleneck, MFC, which has the capability of addressing wastewater
treatment and sustainable energy generation, matches with the UN’s SDG in developing
clean and affordable energy. Its application enables water treatment operators to generate
electricity, which is readily available for use, while treating and recycling wastewater
at the same time without affecting the atmospheric balance of CO2 . As an off gas of
MFC operation, the CO2 can be discharged without further treatment [13]. The emission is
[17,18]. The MFC facilitates electricity generation from organic matter in wastewater by
converting chemical energy in biodegradable substrates through bacterial metabolism.
The wastewater has chemical energy in the form of organic matter [19]. Organic carbon in
the wastewater can be recovered as biogas in sludge digestion.
Sustainability 2022, 14, 16847 The total chemical energy of organic compounds in wastewater is about 10 kWh/m 4 of 20
3
of wastewater effluents, including 30% of extractable energy [20]. Hence, the chemical en-
ergy can fuel the MFC when its reactor generates power through electron flows in an ex-
ternal circuit (Figure
associated with2)
the[21]. This condition
proportion of emissionenables MFC to generate
due to electricity energy from
or heat consumption. a wide
Therefore,
range ofitswastewater
contributionand inexpensive
in the energy sectormaterials of electrodes
is minimum when the[22]. The ability
secondary energy ofsource
the bacte-
has
low
ria to act asCO 2 intensity. Finding
biocatalysts niche applications
for electrochemical of the
energy CO2 from MFC offers
transformation operation can promote
practical solu-
tions tothe world’s
dealing progress
with energy toward carbonresource
shortage, neutralitydepletion,
in the long-term [14–16].
and environmental pollution,
For MFC technology, municipal wastewater is a trove for producing electricity using
thus contributing to climate neutrality and zero-waste paradigm [23,24].
bacteria. The novelty of MFC is reflected by its ability to use bacteria for this purpose [17,18].
An MFC is a unique type of battery—part electrochemical cell, part biological reactor.
The MFC facilitates electricity generation from organic matter in wastewater by converting
Typically, it contains
chemical energytwo electrodes, separated
in biodegradable substrates by an ion
through exchange
bacterial membrane.
metabolism. Electrodes
The wastewater
are usedhasas chemical
acceptorenergy
(anode) and donor electrons (cathode) separated by a separator
in the form of organic matter [19]. Organic carbon in the wastewater such
as membrane and/or salt
can be recovered bridges
as biogas in [25,26]. Each chamber has an electrode as an electron
sludge digestion.
3
conductor and Thebacterial life support.
total chemical energy ofOrganic substrates in
organic compounds arewastewater
filled intoisanode
about chamber
10 kWh/mas
of wastewater
an electron donor. Oneffluents,
the anode including 30% of grow
side, bacteria extractable energy [20].forming
and proliferate, Hence, the chemical
a dense cell
aggregate, known as a biofilm, that adheres to the MFC’s anode. In the course of in
energy can fuel the MFC when its reactor generates power through electron flows an
their
microbialexternal circuit (Figure
metabolism, 2) [21]. This
the bacteria condition
convert enables MFC
the organic to generate
substrate energy
into CO from a wide
2, protons, and
range of wastewater and inexpensive materials of electrodes [22]. The ability of the bacteria
electrons [27]. The MFC’s operation is eco-friendly. Instead of toxic gas in oil or a diesel
to act as biocatalysts for electrochemical energy transformation offers practical solutions
engine, tothedealing
emissions
with from
energythe MFC’s resource
shortage, operation include and
depletion, CO2environmental
, water, and waste heatthus
pollution, that
can be reused [28].
contributing to climate neutrality and zero-waste paradigm [23,24].
Figure 2.Figure
Proof2.ofProof
concept of MFC.
of concept of MFC.
An MFC is a unique type of battery—part electrochemical cell, part biological reactor.

Typically, it contains two electrodes, separated by an ion exchange membrane. Electrodes
are used as acceptor (anode) and donor electrons (cathode) separated by a separator such
as membrane and/or salt bridges [25,26]. Each chamber has an electrode as an electron
conductor and bacterial life support. Organic substrates are filled into anode chamber as
an electron donor. On the anode side, bacteria grow and proliferate, forming a dense cell
aggregate, known as a biofilm, that adheres to the MFC’s anode. In the course of their
microbial metabolism, the bacteria convert the organic substrate into CO2 , protons, and
electrons [27]. The MFC’s operation is eco-friendly. Instead of toxic gas in oil or a diesel
engine, the emissions from the MFC’s operation include CO2 , water, and waste heat that
can be reused [28].
Without requiring a complete overhaul of wastewater treatment processes, electricity
generation using MFCs would recover bioenergy from organic residue in the wastewater
using bacteria as a biocatalyst [29]. By extracting energy from the wastewater, an MFC
exhibits its potential to power sensors in remote areas, where it is not feasible to substitute
batteries. To enable wastewater treatment to be cost-effective, an effective approach of
resource recovery to the existing treatment techniques needs to be developed [30].
When wastewater is used as an anode fuel, an MFC performs water treatment while
recovering energy [31]. MFC utilizes bacteria that act as microreactors and allow substrates
to be oxidized completely. The bacteria can efficiently transform the chemical energy
of organic compounds in the wastewater into power [32]. Electrons flow from anode
to cathode through external wire, resulting in electrical current. The anode-respiring
bacteria oxidize organic pollutants present in waste streams and transfer the electrons
to the anode. With bacterial population attached on the bioreactor’s infrastructure, the
scavenged electrons flow through electrical circuits, terminating at the MFC’s cathode and
generating electricity as a by-product [33]. The ions are transported through the fuel cell’s
ion membrane to maintain electroneutrality, although the membrane is excluded.
Under natural conditions, bacteria use oxygen as an electron acceptor to produce water.
In the oxygen-free environment of the MFC, specialized bacteria that send the electrons
to an insoluble electron acceptor, called the MFC’s anode, play key roles [34–36]. Electron
exchange occurs between the two electrode chambers [37,38]. In the anode chamber,
oxygen-starved organic compounds of the liquid waste are oxidized and generate H+ and
e− , from which the MFC extracts electricity.
During the operation, bacteria consume food from the liquid waste for survival, and
people reciprocally obtain electricity for energy. This represents a win–win collaboration
between humans and nature for environmental conservation [39,40]. While the main
function of an MFC is bioenergy production, with respect to environmental sustainability,
other benefits of MFCs include their contribution to waste reduction and/or the production
of recycled water. For this reason, MFCs may be linked to municipal waste streams in cities
to provide a sustainable energy production system for wastewater treatment [41].
With respect to its significance to the economy, this work contributes to the circularity
of materials and hydrogen economy through wastewater treatment applications. It is ex-
pected that MFC progress could contribute to waste minimization and pollution prevention
due to wastewater, while recovering and reusing macro-nutrients such as P from it for
mineral fertilizer production [42]. This makes MFCs a potential game-changer in renewable
energy development in the future.
3. Mechanism of Electricity Generation by MFC

Scientific exploration in MFC results from its ability to operate at varying weather and
pressure using Geobacter sulphurreducens that form biofilms onto electrodes. The biofilms
promote electron flows to electrodes and release a c-type cytochrome that accumulates
at the biofilm–electrode interface to promote electron transfer to electrodes [43]. The
bacteria attached with the MFCs remove the need to isolate costly enzymes, as they provide
inexpensive substrates for its operations. The process occurs in a small bioreactor, where
the microbes are retained in stable conditions for a period of time as biofilms, thus saving
operational and maintenance (O&M) costs [44].
An MFC acts a battery-like energy generator that produces electricity through an
electrochemical process. As MFCs convert chemical energy directly into electricity, they
have the potential to operate at high efficiency. By exploiting their electron transfer abilities,
MFCs produce energy directly, without combusting the organic compounds in wastewater,
while treating them without requiring traditional energy. This facilitates users to comply
with their obligations at a lower cost. However, it has the same ability to eliminate organic
matter as efficiently as conventional wastewater treatment plants do [45].
An MFC is dependent on biofilms for electron transfer. When it is used, a large
surface area is required to accumulate on the anode’s chamber. It is important to develop
bioelectrodes with capability of resisting fouling. A key to the disparity lies in the fact that
MFCs must operate at neutral pH in the anode chamber to maximize growth and activity of
the micro-organisms that catalyze the reactions. At the cathode, OH− causes an increasing
pH due to the limiting rate of their transport. Furthermore, every unit of pH increase at
the cathode leads to an energy loss of 59 mV [45]. The cathode’s pH could reach pH > 12,
implying a major loss [46]. To ensure that they do not re-mix, the membrane is placed to
separate the electrode from the other, while ensuring that there is no leakage from the cell’s
assembly [47].
By harnessing bacterial metabolism for energy generation that can be sold to produce
income for wastewater treatment operators, the income not only defrays the cost of MFC
operations, but also keeps on enhancing its prototype design for operations. The power
produced by the MFC’s operation supplies the need for energy, while the value of energy
produced by the MFC creates a jobs. Decentralized electricity production also makes
cities livable, with low-voltage applications that could be powered using MFCs, supplying
a sustainable energy system for water treatment [48]. This provides an affordable and
practical way to operate the system for a decentralized process using a wide range of
wastewater for water reuse and energy supply [49].
MFCs are eco-friendly because they produce far fewer CO2 emissions. Furthermore,
MFCs can continuously generate electricity as long as the fuel and the oxidant are provided
to the cell. As the fuel in the cells is stored externally, it is not internally depleted. Hence,
the MFC is ideal, as the device does not have moving parts, making it a reliable source of
power [50].
With this paradigm in mind, researchers aim at developing an anaerobic MFC with
efficient electrodes that can be used to generate electricity from wastewater, while at the
same time treating it with a minimum amount of waste generated during its operation.
In the short-term, the MFC represents a temporary solution to the unresolved issue of
providing energy to undeveloped areas without requiring changes to existing network
facilities. By using bioenergy from MFCs, GHG emissions can be reduced substantially. It
would be an important breakthrough in the field of energy recovery if energy produced
from MFCs could be integrated into electricity networks. Successful operation of MFCs
can open the door to their commercialization and deployment. Although the systems
are promising in generating clean energy, there are improvements needed to enable their
widespread application to attain carbon neutrality [51].
MFC utilization contributes to sustainability such as by GHG emission reduction,
energy generation, and reduction of carbon footprints. When applying a certain voltage to
bacteria for biodegradation of organic pollutants, this leads to water electrolysis, generating
H2 from the wastewater (Figure 3). To contribute to decarbonization, MFC can reverse the
process by producing hydrogen (H2 ). One metric ton of H2 contains 33.3 MW·h of clean
energy [52]. Hydrogen may be the safest gas known with high diffusion rate for CO2 , and
it burns in air to form water. For a sustainable zero-emission energy and carbon-neutral
future, hydrogen is considered a next-generation source of energy, which has potential to
replace fossil fuels such as oil, gas, and coal. The annual production of clean hydrogen, a
low-carbon energy carrier, would need to increase more than sevenfold for the world to hit
net-zero emissions in 2050.
Energy production in the recovered H2 would help industries offset the treatment
costs of wastewater. This decarbonization strategy is more beneficial than landfill gas (LFG)
that not only generates a bad odor, but also contains CH4 that contributes to climate change.
As society is benefited from technological revolutions, using H2 gas as a fuel benefits it in
the long-term. Unlike fossil fuels, during its production, H2 does not emit CO2 into the
atmosphere, reducing environmental impacts and protecting the environment [53].
As compared to natural gas that takes millions of years to develop, hydrogen or
electricity can be produced on-site by MFCs for a relatively short time with much less CO2
emission. This provides net GHG savings with respect to carbon neutrality. As compared
to MFCs, hydrogen production from the extraction of natural gas contributes 2% to all
anthropogenic CO2 emissions into the atmosphere, accelerating climate change. With the
hydrogen being produced originating from fossil fuels, there is a growing need for a cleaner
and more environmentally friendly option for its production.
For this reason, the world needs to achieve carbon neutrality between 2050 and 2070
by accelerating the energy transition to achieving a low-carbon and sustainable energy
system. Measures to address climate change have shifted course toward achieving carbon
neutrality by 2050. In 2020, the EU unveiled a long-term strategy with a firm commitment
to climate neutrality by 2050. The roadmap toward decarbonization society has begun not
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 2
only in Japan, China and Korea, but also in Indonesia and Malaysia. This movement will
inevitably lead to carbon neutrality in other countries [54].
Figure 3. Unique selling points of MFC.

Figure 3. Unique selling points of MFC.
4. Technological Strengths of MFC
As compared to natural gas that takes millions of years to develop, hydrogen or elec
Traditionally,
tricity wastewater
can be produced treatment
on-site is costly
by MFCs fordue to energy consumption.
a relatively short time withIn an much
aerobicless CO
process, existing conventional technology using activated sludge consumes 60% of energy
emission. This provides net GHG savings with respect to carbon neutrality. As compared
for aeration (Figure 4). The air cathode of an MFC uses oxygen directly from air, lowering
to MFCs, hydrogen production from the extraction of natural gas contributes 2% to al
energy consumption cost. MFCs also reduce treatment cost by producing electricity on-site
anthropogenic
to power plant’sCO 2 emissions into the atmosphere, accelerating climate change. With the
operation. MFCs can efficiently operate at ambient temperature with
hydrogen
low strengthbeing produced
of wastewater, originating
and from to
yields less solids fossil fuels, there
be disposed is a growing
of in landfills, makingneed
it for a
cleaner and more
economically environmentally
attractive friendly
compared to existing option
water for its production.
technologies [55].
For this
Unlike reason,sludge,
activated the world needs to
MFC-based achievehas
treatment carbon neutrality
the potential between
to treat 2050 and 2070
wastewater
without aeration, but
by accelerating thethrough
energythe growth oftobacteria
transition whileagenerating
achieving low-carbon bioenergy. Although energy
and sustainable
the idea of
system. generating
Measures energy using
to address bacteria
climate change may not shifted
have be new, course
as a practical
towardtechnology
achieving carbon
of energy production, MFC utilization is promising. As a by-product of MFC operations,
neutrality by 2050. In 2020, the EU unveiled a long-term strategy with a firm commitmen
electricity justifies the cost of operating this system by itself [56]. By assuming that con-
to climate neutrality by 2050. The roadmap toward decarbonization society has begun no
tinuous operations of MFCs reach 15 Watts/m3 of wastewater flowing through it, if an
only system
MFC in Japan, China and
is installed at a Korea, but also
wastewater in Indonesia
treatment plant for and
5000Malaysia.
inhabitants,This movement wil
it produces
inevitably
0.75 lead to
MW, enough to carbon neutrality
power about in other
500 homes [57].countries [54].
When calculating the price/Watt installed, power output/m2 and MFC’s lifespan are
4. Technological
important. As MFC’s Strengths of MFC
power outputs range from 0.25 to 3.75 W/m2 , the price/Watt installed
at its Traditionally,
lower limit is over USD 4000treatment
wastewater [58]. If the is higher
costly limit
due tois energy
applied,consumption.
the price wouldIn an aer
decrease to USD 30/m2 , less than USD 6/Watt, including operations and maintenance
obic process, existing conventional technology using activated sludge consumes 60% o
costs [59]. If electrochemical techniques progress and the price of electrodes decrease, this
energy for aeration (Figure 4). The air cathode of an MFC uses oxygen directly from air
treatment method can convert organic materials of wastewater into electricity.
lowering energy consumption cost. MFCs also reduce treatment cost by producing elec
tricity on-site to power plant’s operation. MFCs can efficiently operate at ambient temper
ature with low strength of wastewater, and yields less solids to be disposed of in landfills
making it economically attractive compared to existing water technologies [55].
Sustainability2022,
Sustainability 2022,14,
14,16847
x FOR PEER REVIEW 88 of 20
21
Aeration
60%
Aeration Clarifiers
Grit Screens
Wastewater Pumping Lighting and Buildings
Chlorination Belt Press
Anaerobic Digestion Thickening
Return Sludge Pumping
Sustainability 2022, 14, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9
Figure 4.
Figure 4. Energy
Energy consumption
consumption in
in activated
activated sludge.
sludge.
Unlike activated sludge,ofMFC-based treatment has the potential to treat cost

wastewater
withHowever, the removal
power generated by MFCscontaminants
on-site, in wastewater
where they can at zero
use energy
the energy would
generated fo
without the
warrant aeration,
use of but
MFCs through
for thisthe growth
goal. MFCof bacteria while
technology generating
reflects a frontierbioenergy.
science. SoAlt- far,
erating
only a few
water treatment plants or for market commercialization. Eventually, the app
hough the works
idea ofhave been translated
generating energy usinginto abacteria
practical may configuration
not be new,using an affordable
as a practical tech-
tionsuitable
and
nology ofofanaerobic
material.
energy MFC
An MFC
production, would
reactor,
MFC enable
designedtreatment
utilization iswith low-cost
promising. of wastewater
anda compatible
As by-product with of minimal
MFC op- energ
biomaterials
vestment
for
erations, and less
bioelectricity
electricity carbonthe
production,
justifies footprint
pavescostthe during
of way forward
operating water treatment,
thisforsystem
industrial and[56].recovery
application
by itself of chemica
Byinassuming
the next
ergycontinuous
stage
that laden in
(Figure 5).the
This wastewater
operationstechnology
of MFCs in the form
is reach
expected toof bioenergy
lead
15 Watts/m 3to
ofanother produced
necessary
wastewater flowing through
step toward
through anaerobic
it,
achieving
if an MFC
cesses. carbon
system neutrality.
is installed at a wastewater treatment plant for 5000 inhabitants, it pro-
duces 0.75 MW, enough to power about 500 homes [57].
When calculating the price/Watt installed, power output/m2 and MFC’s lifespan are
important. As MFC’s power outputs range from 0.25 to 3.75 W/m2, the price/Watt installed
at its lower limit is over USD 4000 [58]. If the higher limit is applied, the price would
decrease to USD 30/m2, less than USD 6/Watt, including operations and maintenance costs
[59]. If electrochemical techniques progress and the price of electrodes decrease, this treat-
ment method can convert organic materials of wastewater into electricity.
However, the removal of contaminants in wastewater at zero energy cost would war-
rant the use of MFCs for this goal. MFC technology reflects a frontier science. So far, only
a few works have been translated into a practical configuration using an affordable and
suitable material. An MFC reactor, designed with low-cost and compatible biomaterials
for bioelectricity production, paves the way forward for industrial application in the next
stage (Figure 5). This technology is expected to lead to another necessary step toward
achieving carbon neutrality.
For this purpose, well-designed and cost-effective MFC technology is essential to ac-
celerating electrification in the developing world. If enacted swiftly, favorable climate
technology and energy policy could level the playing field between electricity and other
power sources. This will encourage the adoption of sustainable technologies, leading to
less consumption of polluting fossil fuels.
Principally, anaerobic MFCs are capable of generating electricity from municipal
wastewater and treating wastewater with low oxygen requirements using cost-effective
and ecofriendly processes. Wastewater treatment plant operators can be self-sustaining
Figure 5. MFC among renewable energy.
Figure 5. MFC among renewable energy.
5. Bottlenecks of MFCs
In spite of their potential, a variety of bottlenecks need to be addressed before M
For this purpose, well-designed and cost-effective MFC technology is essential to

accelerating electrification in the developing world. If enacted swiftly, favorable climate
technology and energy policy could level the playing field between electricity and other
power sources. This will encourage the adoption of sustainable technologies, leading to
less consumption of polluting fossil fuels.
Principally, anaerobic MFCs are capable of generating electricity from municipal
wastewater and treating wastewater with low oxygen requirements using cost-effective
and ecofriendly processes. Wastewater treatment plant operators can be self-sustaining with
power generated by MFCs on-site, where they can use the energy generated for operating
water treatment plants or for market commercialization. Eventually, the application of
anaerobic MFC would enable treatment of wastewater with minimal energy investment
and less carbon footprint during water treatment, and recovery of chemical energy laden
in the wastewater in the form of bioenergy produced through anaerobic processes.
5. Bottlenecks of MFCs
In spite of their potential, a variety of bottlenecks need to be addressed before MFCs
are commercialized on the market. Low electricity production, high internal resistance and
high material cost are the major obstacles of MFC technology implementation. This could
be explained due to the fact that MFCs depend on biofilms for promoting mediator-less
electron transfer. When MFC is utilized for wastewater treatment, a large surface area
is vital to biofilm accumulation on the anode chamber [59]. Consequently, this needs
electrodes with the capability to resist fouling, thus enhancing the operational cost of water
treatment plants.
In addition, as the material cost of an MFC is expensive; scientists need to develop
suitable materials that can overcome low energy production [60]. To scale up the reactor,
the cost of MFC components such as anodes, cathodes, and membranes will increase to
maintain its high performance. Stability, long-term performance, efficiency, and scaling
up the process from a lab scale to full scale are future challenges. MFC’s bottlenecks also
include low electricity production, current instability, and high internal resistance. This
makes them difficult to apply due to the high cost of MFC fabrication (electrode, proton
exchange membrane, and mediator), and low power generation. If the bottlenecks can be
solved, potential energy outputs and the MFC’s versatility could transform the method of
wastewater treatment universally. This could generate electricity on-site to treat water off
the grid in remote areas.
6. Development Trends of MFC for Dual Functions

Any technical challenges in the MFC’s development can be tackled with innovative
research. To respond to a number of engineering challenges found in earlier studies, various
technological interventions set a boundary between status quo and development trends,
while pushing the frontiers of MFC technology toward sustainable development.
6.1. Electrode Development for Enhancing Power Output

While other MFC studies applied synthetic wastewater like that as derived from
sodium acetate, a study [60] used fresh wastewater collected from a wastewater treatment
plant with varying concentrations of organic compounds. MFC designs have been made of
transition metals-based catalysts such as Pt and equipped with configurations that make
retrofitting of the existing water treatment plants become impractical. Alternative electrodes
from biomaterials and MFC configurations can be used for retrofitting wastewater treatment
plants at pilot scale in the next stage of MFC development.
To increase power output, bacterial strains such as G. sulphurreduces were screened.
In addition, anode performance in an earlier study [61] was improved by modifying
substrate or the materials of an anode. This could be due to the fact that the micro-
organisms populating the electrodes depend on carbon source and inoculums. Electrodes
with compatible biomaterials that have capability of resisting fouling and overcoming low
energy production were also investigated [62].
To enhance its power output during operations, the MFC system was developed for
continuous operations of wastewater flowing through it [63]. Hence, MFC electrodes were
produced from corrugated cardboard via a novel carbonization. The corrugated cardboard
electrodes were used as anode and cathode materials. It was essential to develop suitable
materials for the anode and cathode that could be used to overcome low energy production
during operation while maintaining stable performance [53].
To improve anode performance, different chemically modified surfaces were stud-
ied [64] to determine if modifications would facilitate not only a rapid development of
bacteria and their enrichment, but also fast reaction start-up and high electrochemical activ-
ity [65]. Hence, both hydrophilic (-N(CH3 )3 + , -OH and -COOH) and hydrophobic (-CH3 )
self-assembly monolayers were tested for if their presence would promote a synergistic
cooperation between electro-active and fermentative bacteria under anodic conditions [66].
In addition, cathode performance can be enhanced. Normally, a cathode’s performance is
limited by a slow reaction rate of the oxygen reduction reaction. High energy is required to
maintain the reaction rate at neutral pH. To achieve this goal, different low-cost cathodes
were designed to improve the power output in a single chamber of an MFC, in which the
cathode was exposed directly to an anodic solution [67].
The power output in the MFC cathode was also increased using a conductive carbon-
based coating to increase roughness. This generated strong adhesion between the cathode
and ceramic support by utilizing Fe–aminoantipyrine as a catalyst. This catalyst in the
MFC was tested alongside graphene oxide [68]. In this case, the MFC could be installed
without a membrane and the catalyst was directly exposed to the wastewater.
Hou et al. [69] shortened reaction start-up during its operation by immobilizing
bacteria on a carbonaceous surface. This technique for enriching and isolating electroactive
bacteria from wastewater led to the discovery of new electroactive bacteria that could be
efficiently used by the MFC to treat it. For this reason, a silica encapsulation on existing
biofilm was studied for a rapid detection of the entrapped bacteria [70].
Integrating MFC for water treatment purposes can be used to develop online micro-
bial sensors for monitoring the level of organic concentrations in wastewater during its
operations. This sensor took the repeatable patterns of energy clients and made them
into solutions that can be built quickly, providing a short time to the value and lowering
operational costs. The system alerted engineers so that problems could be rectified imme-
diately. If sensors were installed throughout water treatment systems, water treatment
operators could also measure energy outputs, in addition to turbidity, salinity, conductivity,
and pH of the wastewater. The sensor installed during MFC operations helped operators
understand energy demand in real time and effectively managed its supply and demand,
and placed the control of energy consumption in the hands of consumers [71].
6.2. Phosphorus (P) Removal Using MFC

Conventional techniques such as biological processes have been tested for P recovery
from wastewater [72,73]. However, these approaches are cost-ineffective and less produc-
tive due to low-purity products [74,75]. Electrochemical technology is ideal for P recovery
from wastewater, in spite of its massive energy consumption [76–78]. In an MFC reactor,
bioelectrochemical processes took place to remove P from wastewater along with power
generation [79]. Struvite is the predominant form of recovered P from wastewater, which
can be used as an efficient slow-release fertilizer [80]. Struvite results from the reaction of
NH4+ , Mg2+ , PO43− , and six molecules of H2 O [81].
Mg2+ + NH4+ + PO43− + 6H2 O → NH4 MgPO4 .6H2 O ↓ (1)
In an MFC, P can be recovered using precipitation. P is not involved in electron

transfer via redox reactions [82]. Since wastewater is a rich source of PO43− , NH4+ , and
Mg2+ , struvite precipitation represents a strategic approach to recovering P and N from
wastewater. P content in struvite ranges between 10% to 15% (w/w), depending on the
nature of influent [81]. During its operation, struvite solubility decreases at alkaline
pH. As a result, struvite precipitation takes place on the cathode’s surface in an alkaline
environment [73].
Since struvite crystallization occurs at the pH range of 8 to 9, it was found that
pH influences P precipitation. Through the oxygen reduction, the flux of alkali cations
combined with proton consumption. This oxygen reduction leads to the accumulation
of OH− and pH increase at the cathode [59,80]. As a result, the solubility of phosphate
reaches oversaturation resulting in P precipitation.
Ichihashi and Hirooka [73] utilized a single-chamber MFC to treat swine wastewater.
They found that about 30% of P was recovered in the form of struvite. This recovery rate is
attributed to pH buffering that takes place in MFC, since H+ and OH− accumulate at the
chamber of MFC. They used an air–cathode single chamber of MFC using wastewater and
obtained a P removal of 70–82% along with a current density of 6–7 A/m2 . The precipitated
P in struvite formed on the cathode had irregular crystals with hexagonal cross-sectional
surfaces [73].
In previous studies, the cathode adopted metal catalysts (Pt) for P recovery in abi-
otic and biotic electrochemical reactors [77]. Ji et al. [74] investigated an Fe2+ -modified
biochar cathode to recover P from wastewater using a microbial electrolysis cell (MEC). It
significantly increased the electrochemical performance of the MEC, as its current density
increased from 17 to 21 A/m3 and the P removal increased from 29 to 62%. After operation
in MEC reactors, the P- enriched biochar can be used for soil amendment to promote the
growth of plants [74]. A study conducted by Fischer et al. [83] reported that the release of
ortho-phosphate after pH adjustment resulted in P recovery.
Hirooka and Ichihashi [77] found that the performance of the cathode decreased
after struvite formation and removing the precipitates from it. They found that struvite
precipitation at the cathode prevented the transfer of O2 from taking place. They studied
the effects of NH4 and Mg on its precipitation and found that P was precipitated as struvite.
As the amount increased, more precipitates were formed [76].
A low-cost activated carbon (AC) material was used by Santoro et al. [55] as a cathode
to replace Pt. In a membrane-less single chamber of MFC, they treated feeding solutions
(raw wastewater and synthetic wastewater) for power generation and P removal. They
found that solution conductivity and pH affected the cathode and MFC performance.
Xie et al. [84] embedded MFC in anaerobic–anoxic–oxic (AA/O) reactor for water
treatment and enhanced the efficiency of N and P removal. An AA/O reactor is widely
used for nutrient removal. After 50 days of operation in an AA/O reactor using sewage,
MFCs were embedded, and the MFC-AA/O bioreactor was operated for 60 days. The total
nitrogen (TN) and total phosphorus (TP) removal with and without MFCs showed that
after embedding the MFCs, the average TN removal increased from 76% to 90% and that
the TP removal was enhanced from 47% to 67% (Table 1). This shows that MFCs not only
generated power from wastewater, but also enhanced nutrient removal from wastewater.
Table 1. Comparison of phosphorous removal and power generation by various MFCs.
Operational Time Current Density

Type of MFC Influent Used P Removal (%) Reference
(Days) (A/m2 )
Air–cathode single chamber MFC Swine wastewater 76 82 6.0–7.0 [73]
Air–cathode single chamber MFC Artificial wastewater 108 27 4.3 [77]
Microbial electrolysis cell domestic wastewater 3 74 6.6 [78]
Single-chamber MEC Simulated wastewater 23 66 20.7 [74]
Pyrite-based wetland MFC Simulated wastewater 180 91 4.8 [85]
Anaerobic–anoxic–oxic MFC Sewage waste 110 67 - [84]
Two-chamber MFC Synthetic wastewater 20 80 - [76]
In a separate study, Almatouq and Babatunde [81] optimized the conditions for energy
generation and P recovery in a dual-chamber MFC. They used a mathematical modelling
approach and response surface methodology for studying process variables. To optimize
power output and P recovery in an MFC, their study used an integrated modelling with
complete factorial design. The MFC generated a maximum output of 1.62 kWh/m2 and a P
removal of 95% (Table 1).
Li et al. [59] used an airlift-type photosynthetic MFC for power generation and nutrient
removal from swine wastewater. They successfully removed 99% of TP along with COD
removal (96%), total organic carbon (TOC) removal (95%), and NH4 + removal (99%). In a
separate study, Tao et al. [85] studied the effect of dissolved oxygen on P and N recovery
along with electricity generation in a dual chamber MFC. It was found that TP removal
with chemical precipitation was 80% (Table 1).
Ge et al. [86] investigated the recovery of total TN and TP along with bioelectricity
generation using a pyrite-based-constructed wetland-microbial fuel cell (PCW-MFC). The
maximum TP removal in the PCW-MFC was 91% after operation of 180 days along with
N removal. Their process was considered as an eco-friendly and cost-efficient method by
involving microorganisms, wetland plants, and substrates. The precipitated crystalline P
on cathode was treated by immersion in a dissolution solution to remove from the cathode.
For the dissolution of precipitates, pH of the buffer solution should be lower, which
increases the amount of dissolved P from cathode [76]. It is estimated that 27% of the P
added to MFC was recovered in the dissolution solution. Less than 0.01% remained on the
cathode. On the other hand, the amount of P removed from the liquid waste was 40% of
the added P. Table 1 presents that there is a wide variation in MFC performance based on
its type and design, mechanism involved, operational time and the nature of influent used.
6.3. Key Factors for P Removal

For promoting an efficient recovery of nutrients from MFCs, it is important to consider
key factors, which not only enhance struvite formation, but also increase power output [86].
Operational stability of the MFC can also be optimized under these factors to achieve an
optimum performance. They include biological, physicochemical, electrochemical, and
operational factors. The quantities and catalytic activity of the micro-organisms in the
MFC are a few examples of biological factors. The protons moving through an exchange
membrane, the types of electrodes, electrolytic resistance [87], and the rate of reduction
at the cathode represent physicochemical and electrochemical factors [88,89]. Operating
factors include organic loading rates, pH, and the type and concentration of the substrate
with an adequate removal of P [90].
Micro-organisms are crucial in the degradation of substrate and electron transport
from the anode. It has been proven that nature and concentration of denitrifying bacteria
in the MFC play roles in nutrient removal from wastewater. Rheinheimera bacteria show
major progress in P removal along with power generation as they are accumulated on the
cathode’s surface in the bioreactor [84]. P recovery depends on precipitation by substrates,
and assimilation and accumulation by micro-organisms [85]. High amounts of Fe, Al, Mg,
or Ca are typically present in substrates with high P-binding ability [91].
Ge et al. [85] used pyrite, a ubiquitous sulfide mineral containing Fe and S as a substrate
in a constructed wetland MFC, which not only enhances N removal, but also provides Fe3+
and Fe2+ as a metabolic intermediates for removing phosphates from wastewater. Another
study undertaken by Cusick and Logan [90] found that as precipitation is brought on by
an increasing pH; P removal is also dependent on the substrate’s conversion to electricity.
It was found that the longer the electrolysis time, the more P is removed from the abiotic
system. The bioelectrochemical P recovery from P-rich waste streams by MEC-induced
calcium phosphate precipitation was highlighted by Lei et al. [78]. In their study, with
less energy input, PO4 3− was eliminated with coexisting Ca2+ as calcium phosphate at the
cathode’s surface.
Santoro et al. [55] monitored the electrocatalytic activity of synthetic wastewater
containing sodium acetate and phosphate buffer saline solution and compared it with
different wastewaters such as fresh urine and raw wastewater. The cathode’s nutrient
recovery performance was impacted by conductivity and pH. With P concentration of

236 mg/L and NH4 (570 mg/L), the recovery of P was 40% after 7 days of operation.
In MFCs, P recovery requires a certain pH level. Since P is insoluble in alkaline
solutions, P removal depends on pH, which is best suited at pH > 8 for struvite formation.
Cathodic pH was examined to understand the impact of COD concentration and cathodic
aeration flow rate on energy output and P recovery. The findings demonstrated that
raising pH caused an increasing P precipitation from 10% to 85% when cathode pH was
raised from 7.5 to 9. Struvite became crystallized into tubular-shaped crystals under
these circumstances. From the EDS spectrum of recovered precipitate, Mg, P, and O were
identified as key elements [80,91]. Organic loading rate (OLR) also affects the metabolism,
bacterial growth, substrate consumption, nutrient recovery, and electricity generation [81].
Hamza et al. [92] found that high OLR affected the production of energy by improving
nutrient recovery such as P.
In another work undertaken by Almatouq and Babatunde [81], it was revealed that
the cathode’s electricity density, P precipitation rate, and columbic efficiency were affected
by influent COD concentration and aeration flow rate at cathode. Depending on the COD
concentration, cathode aeration flow rates had a varying impact on power density and
P recovery. The generated current had a negative impact on P precipitation at cathode.
Power output and P recovery improved when MFC operated at high COD concentration
and high aeration flow rates. The results also demonstrate the importance of influent COD
concentration and cathode aeration flow rate on power generation and P recovery [90,93].
The formation of struvite was also affected by molar ratio and aeration rate [94,95].
6.4. Feasibility of P Removal Using MFCs

MFCs have gained popularity due to their versatility of applications in the removal of
pollutants, power generation, wastewater treatment, and environmental monitoring [83,87].
Unlike traditional biological wastewater treatment methods such as activated sludge,
the advantages of MFC for water treatment include high efficiency, ambient operating
conditions, small equipment sizes, minimal sludge generation, and rapid start-up. Several
physicochemical, electrochemical, operational, and economic factors affect how well and
efficiently MFC produces electricity and removes P from wastewater [76].
To enhance the overall performance of MFC, it is essential to comprehend the impacts
of the various operational settings and economic variables on electricity generation and P
recovery. Because struvite is drawn to the cathode surface and reduces the cathode’s per-
formance, cathode maintenance is important. The dissolution of accumulated precipitates
on cathode restores its performance to the original level [82,85].
Zhuang et al. [96] determined that the catalyst might become covered if alkali salt
formed in the cathodes, making it difficult to contact with oxygen. They rinsed a cathode
that had been used for 60 days with water to remove alkali salt and uncovered that the
performance reverted to the level of day 20 [97]. The precipitate from the cathode must
be removed from MFCs in a timely manner for effective P recovery while producing
good amounts of electricity. For large-scale applications, it is critical to reduce energy
consumption and electrode costs for electrochemically recovering P from wastewater [83].
New low-cost cathodes and catalysts with large surface area and high commercial
availability should be advantageous for oxygen reduction and P removal. Santoro et al. [55]
used an activated carbon cathode with increased electrocatalytic activity and low cost to
raise the performance of power density and P removal. PVC and graphite are examples
of carbon-based compounds with a strong attraction to microbes. For MFCs to operate
for an extended period of time, further research into electrode materials is required. The
electrode material and the configuration of MFCs directly impact the cost of the process [98].
They need to be able to process wastewater as quickly as traditionally biological waste
treatment systems. MFC power densities are ten times lower than those of chemical fuel
cells [82,99]. The benefit of an MFC is that it produces sufficient power, while removing P
from wastewater at the same time [100].
MFCs have not yet achieved the ideal performance due to short lifespan, low produc-
tion rate, membrane fouling, high cost, and low efficiencies [101,102]. Improvements to
the electrogenicity of micro-organisms, appropriate electrode selection, optimization of
operational factors, effective recovery of by-products, minimization of capital cost, and
maximization of power output are required to pave the way for better performance of
P removal. The performance of MFCs needs to be improved in the future by genetically
engineering microbes or employing mixed microflora to raise their electrogenic activity,
which effectively improves electron transport from wastewater. It is crucial to make design
modifications and to find balance between the operational and capital costs of MFCs for
sustainable wastewater treatment [103].
7. Economic Feasibility Analysis

The economic feasibility of the MFC depends on the electricity output and the costs
of materials used [103]. If its output can be increased for large-scale applications, in the
long-term MFC would economically attract the market due to its practicality. It is expected
that the renewable energy market will grow to USD 15.50 billion by 2030, while the water
market is about USD 20.75 billion. Water industries forecast increasing energy consumption
as the implications if sustainable, reliable, and eco-friendly solutions are not ready for
widespread use by 2050 [74].
As MFC technology is under development, a rapid way of transferring it into the
global market is to apply its technology in an area that is likely to yield maximum profit. A
widespread application of MFCs as a cost-effective way of energy recovery from wastewater
would make water infrastructures in the developing world become self-sufficient and
sustainable. Although the amount of energy that could be captured from wastewater is
insufficient to power a city, it is enough to operate a treatment plant and to attain energy
sustainability of water infrastructures [104].
8. Online pH Monitoring in MFC Operations

Devices for online pH monitoring are practical with respect to their model. Therefore,
pH monitoring is commonly utilized in MFC operations. Online pH sensors are useful for
environmental monitoring and dosing control to meet water quality standards. Due to their
widespread use, pH monitoring devices can perform analysis, maintenance, and operation.
Digital solutions assist wastewater treatment operators in enhancing productivity and
connectivity via online monitoring [59].
The introduction of a digital pH sensor offers accuracy and enhanced signal strength.
Their key benefit over analog pH sensors is a substantial improvement in productivity.
When digital pH sensors are fitted within the sensor body, this assists operators in process-
ing the pH signal by converting it to a robust digital signal. Digital pH sensors can store
not only calibration, but also configuration data in the sensor itself. This enables sensor
commissioning and plug-and-play connectivity. Hence, calibration is not necessary when
commissioning a pH sensor. The sensor can be pre-calibrated to be ready for use anytime.
This could minimize the commissioning time of a pH sensor from 20 min to around 2 min
when using digital platforms [105].
Digitalization also benefits other processes to improve productivity by utilizing pH
sensor monitoring. Online monitors simplify recording requirements by continuously
updating the processes. This enables abnormalities to be detected, alarms raised immedi-
ately, and correction implemented rapidly. Online monitoring can extend MFC operations
via automated calibration, which ensures the accuracy of continuous monitoring without
intervention. One benefit of digitalization with respects to legislative demands is that users
and stakeholders have access to data within the instrument [106].
Traditionally, analog sensors could report issues with a sensor such as a plugged
junction. If operators received an update, it was too late for them, as the probe would
not be in line with the commission. Digital probes enable operators to enhance sensor
monitoring without requiring complicated wiring [107]. The diagnostics can predict end-
of-life by minimizing process downtime and altering maintenance requirements in a timely

manner. While offering an added layer of security with respect to protected access, online
monitoring can provide a graphical analysis. This facilitates users to visualize data trends
in applications. Audit logs may record any abnormalities by tracking diagnostic faults.
Finally, the capability of transferring data via USB drives enables rapid information access.
9. Concluding Remarks
As climate change is a huge threat faced by all human beings, net-zero emissions/carbon
neutrality has become a global goal for the entire civilization. Achieving carbon neutrality
requires a deep systemic change in global energy consumption. Developing renewable
hydrogen as fuels is crucial to decoupling global industrialization from CO2 emissions.
This offers a huge opportunity for the world to resolve this global issue.
The utilizations of MFC itself as a self-powered water treatment system is a break-
through. Using a pyrite-based wetland MFC, about 91% of P was removed after operating
for 180 days, while generating a power output of 48 A/m2 . A wastewater treatment plant
can power itself in its operation while selling electricity to the market. This radically
changes conventional water technologies, the way wastewater is treated universally, and
its associated energy consumption, substituting the most widely used activated sludge for
wastewater treatment. By exploring this direction along the water–energy–waste nexus,
MFC technology that combines environmental engineering, microbiology, and sustain-
ability into an applicable solution would transform today’s wastewater treatment plants.
Eventually, MFCs provide a practical solution that directly addresses the need of society
for clean water and energy at the same time, shining a light of hope on the road to carbon
neutrality and decarbonization [108].
As the power sector decarbonizes and helps the world prevent the worst effects of
climate change, the adoption of sustainable energy through MFC operations will continue
to expand globally, especially when pressured by rising awareness and environmental con-
cerns from all stakeholders. Nonetheless, the adoption modes still pose intense challenges,
such as costly capital investments, low financial returns, inconsistent energy supplies due
to uncontrollable natural factors and a lack of rudimentary and technical knowledge. It is
of critical importance that all of these challenges be addressed to make sustainable energies
more economically appealing for mass adoption in the future.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, X.L.; methodology, H.H.G.; validation, A.M.; formal

analysis, T.D.K.; investigation, T.A.K.; resources, M.H.D.O.; data curation, M.A.; writing—original
draft preparation, T.A.K.; writing—review and editing, T.A.K.; visualization, K.W.C. All authors have
read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The research was funded by Universiti Teknologi Malaysia’s Research Grants
No. Q.J130000.21A6.00P14 and No. Q.J130000.3809. 22H07.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design
of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or
in the decision to publish the results.
References
1. Kurniawan, T.A.; Liang, X.; O’Callaghan, E.; Goh, H.; Othman, M.H.D.; Avtar, R.; Kusworo, T.D. Transformation of solid waste
management in China: Moving towards sustainability through digitalization-based circular economy. Sustainability 2022, 14, 2374.
[CrossRef]
2. Kurniawan, T.A.; Lo, W.; Singh, D.; Othman, M.H.D.; Avtar, R.; Hwang, G.H.; Albadarin, A.B.; Kern, A.O.; Shirazian, S. A
societal transition of MSW management in Xiamen (China) toward a circular economy through integrated waste recycling and
technological digitization. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 277, 116741. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
3. Zhu, M.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Avtar, R.; Othman, M.H.D.; Ouyang, T.; Yujia, H.; Xueting, Z.; Setiadi, T.; Iswanto, I. Applicability of
TiO2 (B) nanosheets@hydrochar composites for adsorption of tetracycline (TC) from contaminated water. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021,
405, 123999. [CrossRef]
4. Kurniawan, T.A.; Avtar, R.; Singh, D.; Xue, W.; Dzarfan Othman, M.H.; Hwang, G.H.; Iswanto, I.; Albadarin, A.B.; Kern, A.O.
Reforming MSWM in Sukunan (Yogjakarta, Indonesia): A case-study of applying a zero-waste approach based on circular
economy paradigm. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 284, 124775. [CrossRef]
5. Kurniawan, T.A.; Liang, X.; Singh, D.; Othman, M.H.D.; Goh, H.H.; Gikas, P.; Kern, A.O.; Kusworo, T.D.; Shoqeir, J.A. Harnessing
landfill gas (LFG) for electricity: A strategy to mitigate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in Jakarta (Indonesia). J. Environ. Manag.
2022, 301, 113882. [CrossRef]
6. Kurniawan, T.A.; Othman, M.H.D.; Singh, D.; Avtar, R.; Goh, H.H.; Setiadi, T.; Lo, W.H. Technological solutions for long-term
management of partially used nuclear fuel: A critical review. Ann. Nucl. Energy 2022, 166, 108736. [CrossRef]
7. Nguyen, H.D.; Babel, S. Insights on microbial fuel cells for sustainable biological nitrogen removal from wastewater: A review.
Environ. Res. 2022, 204, 112095. [CrossRef]
8. Sniatala, B.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Sobotka, D.; Makinia, J.; Othman, M.H.D. Macro-nutrients recovery from wastewater as a
sustainable resource for synthetic fertilizer: Uncovering alternative options to promote global food security cost-effectively. Sci.
Total Environ. 2022, 856, 159283. [CrossRef]
9. Kurniawan, T.A.; Lo, W.H.; Sillanpää, M. Treatment of contaminated water laden with 4-chlorophenol using coconut shell
waste-based activated carbon modified with chemical agents. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2011, 46, 460–472. [CrossRef]
10. Kurniawan, T.A.; Maiurova, A.; Kustikova, M.; Bykovskaia, E.; Othman, M.H.D.; Goh, H.H. Accelerating sustainability transition
in St. Petersburg (Russia) through digitalization-based circular economy in waste recycling industry: A strategy to promote
carbon neutrality in era of Industry 4.0. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 363, 132452. [CrossRef]
11. Kurniawan, T.A.; Othman, M.H.D.; Hwang, G.H.; Gikas, P. Unlocking digital technology in waste recycling industry in Industry
4.0 era: A transformation towards digitalization-based circular economy in Indonesia. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 357, 131911. [CrossRef]
12. Kurniawan, T.A.; Othman, M.H.D.; Adam, M.R.; Goh, H.H.; Mohyudin, A.; Avtar, R.; Kusworo, T.D. Treatment of pulping
whitewater using membrane filtrations. Chem. Pap. 2022, 76, 5001–5010. [CrossRef]
13. Kurniawan, T.A.; Singh, D.; Avtar, R.; Othman, M.H.D.; Hwang, G.H.; Albadarin, A.B.; Rezakazemi, M.; Setiadi, T.; Shirazian,
S. Resource recovery from landfill leachate: An experimental investigation and perspectives. Chemosphere 2021, 274, 129986.
[CrossRef]
14. Goh, H.H.; Zong, L.; Zhang, D.; Liu, H.; Dai, W.; Lim, C.S.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Teo, K.T.K.; Goh, K.C. Mid-and long-term strategy
based on electric vehicle charging unpredictability and ownership estimation. Int. J. Electr. Power Energy Syst. 2022, 142, 108240.
[CrossRef]
15. Goh, H.H.; Li, C.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Lim, C.S.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C. Application of choosing by advantages to determine
the optimal site for solar power plants. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 4113. [CrossRef]
16. Goh, H.H.; Zong, L.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Lim, C.S.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C. Orderly charging strategy based on optimal time
of use price demand response of electric vehicles in distribution network. Energies 2022, 15, 1869. [CrossRef]
17. Fu, D.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Li, H.; Wang, H.; Wang, Y.; Li, Q. Co-oxidative removal of arsenite and tetracycline based on a
heterogeneous Fenton-like reaction using iron nanoparticles-impregnated biochar. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 290, 118062. [CrossRef]
18. International Energy Agency (IEA). World Energy Outlook; IEA: Paris, France, 2019; Available online: https://www.iea.org/
reports/world-energy-outlook-2019 (accessed on 30 August 2020).
19. Fu, D.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Ouyang, T. Uncovering potentials of integrated TiO2 (B) nanosheets and H2 O2 for
removal of tetracycline from aqueous solution. J. Mol. Liq. 2017, 248, 112–120. [CrossRef]
20. Kurniawan, T.A.; Lo, W.; Othman, M.H.D.; Goh, H.H.; Chong, K.K. Biosorption and adsorption modeling of Cu(II), Zn(II), Pb(II)
and Cd(II) from synthetic wastewater by using activated sludge, Aeromas hydrophyla and/or Branhemella sp. Environ. Res. 2022,
214, 114070. [CrossRef]
21. Fu, D.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Li, H.; Wang, L.; Chen, Z.; Li, W.; Wang, Y.; Wang, H.; Li, Q. Applicability of HDPC-supported Cu
nanoparticles composite synthesized from anaerobically digested wheat straw for octocrylene degradation in aqueous solutions.
Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 355, 650–660. [CrossRef]
22. Goh, H.H.; Lan, Z.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C. Estimation of the state of health (SOH) of batteries using
discrete curvature feature extraction. J. Energy Storage 2022, 50, 104646. [CrossRef]
23. Goh, H.H.; Huang, Y.; Lim, C.S.; Zhang, D.; Liu, H.; Dai, W.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Rahman, S. An assessment of multi-stage reward
function design for deep reinforcement learning-based microgrid energy management. IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 2022, 13, 1–12.
[CrossRef]
24. Liang, X.; Goh, H.H.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Liu, H.; Liu, J.; Goh, K.C. Utilizing landfill gas (LFG) for promoting
digitalization of data center in China to facilitate sustainable energy transition in era of Industrial Revolution 4.0. J. Clean. Prod.
2022, 369, 133297. [CrossRef]
25. Fu, D.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Avtar, R.; Xu, P.; Othman, M.H.D. Recovering heavy metals from electroplating wastewater and their
conversion into Zn2 Cr-layered double hydroxide (LDH) for pyrophosphate removal from industrial wastewater. Chemosphere
2021, 271, 129861. [CrossRef]
26. Kurniawan, T.A.; Singh, D.; Xue, W.; Avtar, R.; Othman, M.H.D.; Hwang, G.H.; Setiadi, T.; Albadarin, A.B.; Shirazian, S. Resource
recovery toward sustainability through nutrient removal from landfill leachate. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 287, 112265. [CrossRef]
27. Goh, H.H.; He, B.; Liu, H.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C. Multi-convolution feature extraction and recurrent
neural network dependent model for short-term load forecasting. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 118528–118540. [CrossRef]
28. Fu, D.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Lin, L.; Li, Y.; Avtar, R.; Dzarfan Othman, M.H.; Li, F. Arsenic removal in aqueous solutions using FeS2 .
J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 286, 112246. [CrossRef]
29. Goh, H.H.; Luo, Q.; Zhang, D.; Liu, H.; Dai, W.; Lim, C.S.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C. A hybrid SDS and WPT-IBBO-DNM based
model for ultra-short term photovoltaic prediction. CSEE J. Power Energy Syst. 2022. [CrossRef]
30. Goh, H.H.; Peng, G.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C.; Cham, C.L. A new wind speed scenario generation method
based on principal component and R-Vine copula theories. Energies 2022, 15, 2698. [CrossRef]
31. Fu, D.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Gui, H.; Li, H.; Wang, Y.; Li, Q. Role of Cux O-anchored pyrolyzed hydrochars on H2 O2 -activated
degradation of tetracycline: Effects of pyrolysis temperature and pH. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2022, 61, 8847–8857. [CrossRef]
32. Zhu, M.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Liang, D.; Song, Y.; Hermanowicz, S.W.; Othman, M.H.D. Advances in BiOX-based ternary photocata-
lysts for energy storage applications: A critical review. Rev. Environ. Sci. Bio/Technol. 2022, 21, 331–370. [CrossRef]
33. Fu, D.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Gui, H.; Feng, S.; Li, Q.; Othman, M.H.D. Treatment of As(III)-laden contaminated water using
iron-coated carbon fiber. Materials 2022, 15, 4365. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Lam, K.L.; Liu, G.; Motelica-Wagenaar, A.M.; van der Hoek, J.P. Toward carbon-neutral water systems: Insights from global cities.
Engineering 2022, 14, 77–85. [CrossRef]
35. Maiurova, A.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Kustikova, M.; Bykovskaia, E.; Othman, M.H.D.; Sing, D.; Goh, H.H. Promoting digital
transformation in waste collection service and waste recycling in a smart city: Applying circular economy in Moscow (Russia) to
mitigate climate change effects on the environment. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 354, 131604. [CrossRef]
36. Ida, T.K.; Mandal, B. Microbial fuel cell design, application, and performance: A review. Mater. Today Proc. 2022. [CrossRef]
37. Jadhav, D.A.; Ray, S.G.; Ghangrekar, M.M. Third generation in bio-electrochemical system research–A systematic review on
mechanisms for recovery of valuable by-products from wastewater. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2017, 76, 1022–1031. [CrossRef]
38. Heidari, F.; Øverland, M.; Hansen, J.Ø.; Mydland, L.T.; Urriola, P.E.; Chen, C.; Shurson, C.G.; Hu, B. Solid-state fermentation of
Pleurotus ostreatus to improve the nutritional profile of mechanically-fractionated canola meal. Biochem. Eng. J. 2022, 187, 108591.
[CrossRef]
39. Sun, M.; Zhai, L.F.; Li, W.W.; Yu, H.Q. Harvest and utilization of chemical energy in wastes by microbial fuel cells. Chem. Soc. Rev.
2016, 45, 2847–2870. [CrossRef]
40. Hasany, M.; Mardanpour, M.M.; Yaghmaei, S. Biocatalysts in microbial electrolysis cells: A review. Int. J. Hydr. Energy 2016, 41,
1477–1493. [CrossRef]
41. Guo, F.; Liu, Y.; Liu, H. Hibernations of electroactive bacteria provide insights into the flexible and robust BOD detection using
microbial fuel cell-based biosensors. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 753, 142244. [CrossRef]
42. Kannan, N.; Donnellan, P. Algae-assisted microbial fuel cells: A practical overview. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2021, 15, 100747.
[CrossRef]
43. Wu, T.; Yang, S.; Zhong, L.; Pang, J.; Zhang, L.; Xia, X.; Yang, F.; Xie, G.; Liu, B.; Ren, N. Simultaneous nitrification, denitrification
and phosphorus removal: What have we done so far and how do we need to do in the future? Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 856, 158977.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. De Vela, R.J. A review of the factors affecting the performance of anaerobic membrane bioreactor and strategies to control
membrane fouling. Rev. Environ. Sci. Biotechnol. 2021, 20, 607–644. [CrossRef]
45. Hernández-Fernández, F.J.; de los Ríos, A.P.; Mateo-Ramírez, F.; Juarez, M.D.; Lozano-Blanco, L.J.; Godínez, C. New application
of polymer inclusion membrane based on ionic liquids as proton exchange membrane in microbial fuel cell. Separ. Purif. Technol.
2016, 160, 51–58. [CrossRef]
46. Vijay, A.; Sonawane, J.M.; Chhabra, M. Denitrification process in microbial fuel cell: A comprehensive review. Bioresour. Technol.
Rep. 2022, 17, 100991. [CrossRef]
47. Zhang, S.; Chen, W. China’s energy transition pathway in a carbon neutral vision. Engineering 2022, 14, 64–76. [CrossRef]
48. Acién, F.G.; Gómez-Serrano, C.; Morales-Amaral, M.M. Wastewater treatment using microalgae: How realistic a contribution
might it be to significant urban wastewater treatment? Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 100, 9013–9022. [CrossRef]
49. Gajda, I.; Greenman, J.; Melhuish, C.; Ieropoulos, I. Self-sustainable electricity production from algae grown in a microbial fuel
cell system. Biomass Bioenergy 2015, 82, 87–93. [CrossRef]
50. Rajalakshmi, N.; Balaji, R.; Ramakrishnan, S. Recent developments in hydrogen fuel cells: Strengths and weaknesses. In Sustainable
Fuel Technologies Handbook; Elsevier: London, UK, 2021; pp. 431–456. [CrossRef]
51. Kokabian, B.; Gude, V.G. Photosynthetic microbial desalination cells (PMDCs) for clean energy, water and biomass production.
Environ. Sci. Process. Impacts 2013, 15, 2178–2185. [CrossRef]
52. Goh, H.H.; Liao, L.; Zhang, D.; Dai, W.; Lim, C.S.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Goh, K.C.; Cham, C.L. Denoising transient power quality
disturbances using an improved adaptive wavelet threshold method based on energy optimization. Energies 2022, 15, 3081.
[CrossRef]
53. Hinkley, J.T.; Heenan, A.R.; Low, A.C.; Watson, M. Hydrogen as an export commodity–Capital expenditure and energy evaluation
of hydrogen carriers. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2022, 47, 35959–35975. [CrossRef]
54. Capodaglio, A.G.; Molognoni, D.; Dallago, E.; Liberale, A.; Cella, R.; Longoni, P.; Pantaleoni, L.; Marceta Kaninski, M.P.; Pei, P.;
Morosuk, T. Microbial fuel cells for direct electrical energy recovery from urban wastewaters. Sci. World J. 2013, 2013, 634738.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
55. Santoro, C.; Artyushkova, K.; Babanova, S.; Atanassov, P.; Ieropoulos, I.; Grattieri, M.; Cristiani, P.; Trasatti, S.; Li, B.; Schuler, A.J.
Parameters characterization and optimization of activated carbon (AC) cathodes for microbial fuel cell application. Bioresour.
Technol. 2014, 163, 54–63. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
56. Mahmoud, R.H.; Samhan, F.A.; Ali, G.H.; Ibrahim, M.K.; Hassan, R.Y. Assisting the biofilm formation of exoelectrogens using
nanostructured microbial fuel cells. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2018, 824, 128–135. [CrossRef]
57. Munoz-Cupa, C.; Hu, Y.; Xu, C.; Bassi, A. An overview of microbial fuel cell usage in wastewater treatment, resource recovery
and energy production. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 754, 142429. [CrossRef]
58. Vilve, M.; Vilhunen, S.; Vepsäläinen, M.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Lehtonen, N.; Isomäki, H.; Sillanpää, M. Degradation of 1,2-
dichloroethane from contaminated water laden with ion-exchange resin using Fenton’s oxidation. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2010,
17, 875–884. [CrossRef]
59. Li, M.; Zhou, M.; Tian, X.; Tan, C.; Gu, T. Enhanced bioenergy recovery and nutrient removal from swine wastewater using an
airlift-type photosynthetic microbial fuel cell. Energy 2021, 226, 120422. [CrossRef]
60. Samrat, M.V.V.N.; Rao, K.K.; Ruggeri, B.; Tommasi, T. Denitrification of water in a microbial fuel cell (MFC) using seawater
bacteria. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 178, 449–456. [CrossRef]
61. Khandelwal, G.; Joseph Raj, N.P.M.; Alluri, N.R.; Kim, S.J. Enhancing hydrophobicity of starch for biodegradable material-based
triboelectric nanogenerators. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 9011–9017. [CrossRef]
62. Liu, N.; Xu, Z.; Morrin, A.; Luo, X. Low fouling strategies for electrochemical biosensors targeting disease biomarkers. Anal.
Methods 2019, 11, 702–711. [CrossRef]
63. Ramya, M.; Kumar, P.S. A review on recent advancements in bioenergy production using microbial fuel cells. Chemosphere 2022,
288, 132512. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
64. Palanisamy, G.; Jung, H.Y.; Sadhasivam, T.; Kurkuri, M.D.; Kim, S.C.; Roh, S.H. A comprehensive review on microbial fuel cell
technologies: Process, utilization, and advanced developments in electrode and membranes. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 221, 598–621.
[CrossRef]
65. Al-Daghistani, H.I.; Mohammad, B.T.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Singh, D.; Rabadi, A.D.; Xue, W.; Avtar, R.; Othman, M.H.D.; Shirazian, S.
Characterization and applications of Thermomonas hydrothermalis isolated from Jordanian hot springs for biotechnological and
medical purposes. Process Biochem. 2021, 104, 171–181. [CrossRef]
66. Mohan, S.V.; Velvizhi, G.; Modestra, J.A.; Srikanth, S. Microbial fuel cell: Critical factors regulating bio-catalyzed electrochemical
process and recent advancements. Renew. Sust. Energy Rev. 2014, 40, 779–797. [CrossRef]
67. Mangwandi, C.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Albadarin, A.B. Comparative biosorption of chromium (VI) using chemically modified date
pits (CM-DP) and olive stone (CM-OS): Kinetics, isotherms and influence of co-existing ions. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2020, 156,
251–262. [CrossRef]
68. Xue, W.; He, Y.; Yumunthama, S.; Udomkittayachai, N.; Hu, Y.; Tabucanon, A.S.; Zhang, X.; Kurniawan, T.A. Membrane cleaning
and operating conditions on performance of an osmotic microbial fuel cell. Chemosphere 2021, 285, 131549. [CrossRef]
69. Hou, H.; Li, Z.; Liu, B.; Liang, S.; Xiao, K.; Zhu, Q.; Hu, S.; Yang, J.; Hu, J. Biogas and phosphorus recovery from waste activated
sludge with protocatechuic acid enhanced Fenton pretreatment, anaerobic digestion and microbial electrolysis cell. Sci. Total
Environ. 2020, 704, 135274. [CrossRef]
70. Wresta, A.; Sintawardani, N.; Adisasmito, S.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Setiadi, T. Characteristics of tofu whey degradation during
self-sustaining batch anaerobic process for methane production. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2021, 9, 106359. [CrossRef]
71. Liu, Z.; Liu, J.; Zhang, S.; Xing, X.H.; Su, Z. Microbial fuel cell based biosensor for in situ monitoring of anaerobic digestion
process. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 10221–10229. [CrossRef]
72. Desmidt, E.; Karel, G.; Yang, Z.; Luc, P.; Bruggen, B.; Verstraete, W.; Rabaey, K.; Meesschaert, B. Global phosphorus scarcity and
full-scale P-recovery techniques: A review. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 45, 336–384. [CrossRef]
73. Ichihashi, O.; Hirooka, K. Removal and recovery of phosphorus as struvite from swine wastewater using microbial fuel cell.
Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 114, 303–307. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
74. International Energy Agency. Global Water Consumption in the Energy Sector by Fuel Type in the Sustainable Development
Scenario, 2016–2030. 2022. Available online: https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/global-water-consumption-in-the-
energy-sector-by-fuel-type-in-the-sustainable-development-scenario-2016-2030# (accessed on 3 September 2022).
75. Shabri, H.A.; Othman, M.H.D.; Mohamed, M.A.; Kurniawan, T.A.; Jamil, S.M. Recent progress in metal-ceramic anode of solid
oxide fuel cell for direct hydrocarbon fuel utilization: A review. Fuel Process. Technol. 2021, 212, 106626. [CrossRef]
76. Tao, Q.; Luo, J.; Zhou, J.; Zhou, S.; Liu, G.; Zhang, R. Effect of dissolved oxygen on nitrogen and phosphorus removal and
electricity production in microbial fuel cell. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 164, 402–407. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
77. Hirooka, K.; Ichihashi, O. Phosphorus recovery from artificial wastewater by microbial fuel cell and its effect on power generation.
Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 137, 368–375. [CrossRef]
78. Lei, Y.; Du, M.; Kuntke, P.; Saakes, M.; Weijden, R.; Buisman, C.J.N. Energy efficient phosphorus recovery by microbial electrolysis
cell induced calcium phosphate precipitation. ACS Sust. Chem. Eng. 2019, 7, 8860–8867. [CrossRef]
79. Wang, Z.; Mei, X.; Ma, J.; Wu, Z. Recent advances in microbial fuel cells integrated with sludge treatment. Chem. Eng. Technol.
2012, 35, 1733–1743. [CrossRef]
80. Ichihashi, O.; Yamamoto, N.; Hirooka, K. Power generation by microbial fuel cell and microbial community structure in microbial
fuel cell treating animal wastewater. J. Jpn. Soc. Water Environ. 2012, 35, 19–26. [CrossRef]
81. Almatouq, A.; Babatunde, A.O. Identifying optimized conditions for concurrent electricity production and phosphorus recovery
in a mediator-less dual chamber microbial fuel cell. Appl. Energ. 2018, 230, 122–134. [CrossRef]
82. Paucar, N.E.; Sato, C. Microbial fuel cell for energy production, nutrient removal and recovery from wastewater: A review.
Processes 2021, 9, 1318. [CrossRef]
83. Fischer, F.; Christèle, B.; Happe, M.; Mabillard, E.; Schmidt, N. Microbial fuel cell enables phosphate recovery from digested
sewage sludge as struvite. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 5824–5830. [CrossRef]
84. Xie, B.; Liu, B.; Yi, Y.; Yang, L.; Liang, D.; Zhu, Y.; Liu, H. Microbiological mechanism of the improved nitrogen and phosphorus
removal by embedding microbial fuel cell in Anaerobic–Anoxic–oxic wastewater treatment process. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 207,
109–117. [CrossRef]
85. Ge, X.; Cao, X.; Song, X.; Wang, Y.; Si, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, W.; Tesfahunegn, A.A. Bioenergy generation and simultaneous
nitrate and phosphorus removal in a pyrite-based constructed wetland-microbial fuel cell. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 296, 122350.
[CrossRef]
86. Marti, N.; Bouzas, A.; Seco, A.; Ferrer, J. Struvite precipitation assessment in anaerobic digestion processes. Chem. Eng. J. 2008,
141, 67–74. [CrossRef]
87. Jatoi, A.S.; Akhter, F.; Mazari, S.A.; Sabzoi, N.; Aziz, S.; Soomro, S.A.; Mubarak, N.M.; Baloch, H.; Memon, A.Q.; Ahmed, S.
Advanced microbial fuel cell for wastewater treatment—A Review. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2021, 28, 5005–5019. [CrossRef]
88. Corbella, C.; Jaume, P. Improving domestic wastewater treatment efficiency with constructed wetland microbial fuel cells:
Influence of anode material and external resistance. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 631, 1406–1414. [CrossRef]
89. Tamta, P.; Neetu, R.; Yadav, A.K. Enhanced wastewater treatment and electricity generation using stacked constructed wetland–
Microbial fuel cells. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2020, 18, 871–879. [CrossRef]
90. Yang, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Liu, R.; Morgan, D. Global development of emerged substrates utilized in constructed wetlands. Bioresour.
Technol. 2018, 261, 441–452. [CrossRef]
91. Cusick, R.D.; Logan, B.E. Phosphate recovery as struvite within a single chamber microbial electrolysis cell. Bioresour. Technol.
2021, 107, 110–115. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
92. Hamza, R.A.; Zaghloul, M.S.; Iorhemen, O.T.; Sheng, Z.; Tay, J.H. Optimization of organics to nutrients (COD: N: P) ratio for
aerobic granular sludge treating high-strength organic wastewater. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 650, 3168–3179. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
93. Le Corre, K.S.; Eugenia, V.J.; Phil, H.; Simon, A.P. Phosphorus recovery from wastewater by struvite crystallization: A review.
Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 39, 433–477. [CrossRef]
94. Doyle, J.D.; Parsons, S.A. Struvite formation, control and recovery. Water Res. 2002, 36, 3925–3940. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
95. Durrant, A.E.; Scrimshaw, M.D.; Stratful, I.; Lester, J.N. Review of the feasibility of recovering phosphate from wastewater for use
as a raw material by the phosphate industry. Environ. Technol. 1999, 20, 749–758. [CrossRef]
96. Zhuang, L.; Zheng, Y.; Zhou, S.; Yuan, Y.; Yuan, H.; Chen, Y. Scalable microbial fuel cell stack for continuous real wastewater
treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 2012, 106, 82–88. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
97. Zhao, F.; Falk, H.; Uwe, S.; Scholz, F.; Bogdanoff, P.; Herrmann, I. Challenges and constraints of using oxygen cathodes in
microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 5193–5199. [CrossRef]
98. Nawaz, A.; Ul Haq, I.; Qaisar, K.; Gunes, B.; Raja, S.I.; Mohyuddin, K.; Amin, H. Microbial fuel cells: Insight into simultaneous
wastewater treatment and bioelectricity generation. Process Saf. Environ. 2022, 161, 357–373. [CrossRef]
99. Aelterman, P.; Korneel, R.; Hai, T.P.; Nico, B.; Willy, V. Continuous electricity generation at high voltages and currents using
stacked microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 3388–3394. [CrossRef]
100. Lanas, V.; Logan, B.E. Evaluation of multi-brush anode systems in microbial fuel cells. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 148, 379–385.
[CrossRef]
101. Daud, S.M.; Daud, W.R.M.; Bakar, M.H.A.; Kim, B.H.; Somalu, M.R.; Jahim, J.M.; Muchtar, A.; Ghasemi, M. A comparison of
long-term fouling performance by zirconia ceramic filter and cation exchange in microbial fuel cells. Int. Biodeter. Biodegrad. 2019,
136, 63–70. [CrossRef]
102. Do, M.H.; Ngo, H.H.; Guo, W.S.; Liu, Y.; Chang, S.W.; Nguyen, D.D.; Nghiem, L.D.; Ni, B.J. Challenges in the application
of microbial fuel cells to wastewater treatment and energy production: A mini review. Sci. Total Environ. 2018, 639, 910–920.
[CrossRef]
103. Futamata, H.; Bretschger, O.; Cheung, A.; Kan, J.; Owen, R.; Nealson, K.H. Adaptation of soil microbes during establishment of
microbial fuel cell consortium fed with lactate. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2013, 115, 58–63. [CrossRef]
104. Premakumara, D.G.J.; Canete, A.L.M.L.; Nagaishi, M.; Kurniawan, T.A. Policy implementation of the Republic Act (RA) No. 9003
in the Philippines on MSW management: A case study of Cebu City. Waste Manag. 2014, 34, 971–979. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
105. Arun Prakash, V.R.; Xavier, J.F.; Ramesh, G.; Maridurai, T.; Kumar, K.S.; Raj, R. Mechanical, thermal and fatigue behavior of
surface-treated novel Caryota urens fibre–reinforced epoxy composite. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 2020, 12, 5451–5461. [CrossRef]
106. Bora, A.; Mohanrasu, K.; Angelin Swetha, T.; Ananthi, V.; Sindhu, R.; Chi, N.T.L.; Pugazhendhi, A.; Arun, A.; Mathimani, T.
Microbial electrolysis cell (MEC): Reactor configurations, recent advances and strategies in biohydrogen production. Fuel 2022,
328, 125269. [CrossRef]
107. Chaturvedi, V.; Verma, P. Microbial fuel cell: A green approach for the utilization of waste for the generation of bioelectricity.
Bioresour. Bioproc. 2016, 3, 1–14. [CrossRef]
108. Kurniawan, T.A.; Meidiana, C.; Othman, M.H.D.; Goh, H.H.; Chew, K.W. Strengthening waste recycling industry in Malang
(Indonesia): Lessons from waste management in the era of Industry 4.0. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 382, 135296. [CrossRef]

Sustainability 14 16847

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 14 16847

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 14 16847

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 16847. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142416847 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Figure 1. Global energy scarcity.

an ideal measure to reduce GHG emissions, leading to a sustainable environment. As

2. MFC: An Option in Renewable Energy Development

An MFC is a unique type of battery—part electrochemical cell, part biological reactor.

3. Mechanism of Electricity Generation by MFC

Figure 3. Unique selling points of MFC.

Unlike activated sludge,ofMFC-based treatment has the potential to treat cost

For this purpose, well-designed and cost-effective MFC technology is essential to

6. Development Trends of MFC for Dual Functions

6.1. Electrode Development for Enhancing Power Output

6.2. Phosphorus (P) Removal Using MFC

Mg2+ + NH4+ + PO43− + 6H2 O → NH4 MgPO4 .6H2 O ↓ (1)

In an MFC, P can be recovered using precipitation. P is not involved in electron

Table 1. Comparison of phosphorous removal and power generation by various MFCs.

Operational Time Current Density

6.3. Key Factors for P Removal

recovery performance was impacted by conductivity and pH. With P concentration of

6.4. Feasibility of P Removal Using MFCs

7. Economic Feasibility Analysis

8. Online pH Monitoring in MFC Operations

of-life by minimizing process downtime and altering maintenance requirements in a timely

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, X.L.; methodology, H.H.G.; validation, A.M.; formal

You might also like