Author
Listed:
- Anna Salvian
(School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK
Department of Microbial Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)
- Daniel Farkas
(Department of Microbial Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)
- Marina Ramírez-Moreno
(Department of Microbial Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)
- Claudio Avignone Rossa
(Department of Microbial Sciences, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)
- John R. Varcoe
(School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)
- Siddharth Gadkari
(School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK)
Abstract
The increasing global water pollution leads to the need for urgent development of rapid and accurate water quality monitoring methods. Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) have emerged as real-time biosensors for biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), but they grapple with several challenges, including issues related to reproducibility, operational stability, and cost-effectiveness. These challenges are substantially shaped by the selection of an appropriate air-breathing cathode. Previous studies indicated a critical influence of the cathode on both the enduring electrochemical performance of MFCs and the taxonomic diversity at the electroactive anode. However, the effect of different gas diffusion electrodes (GDE) on 3D-printed single-chamber MFCs for BOD biosensing application and its effect on the bioelectroactive anode was not investigated before. Our study focuses on comparing GDE cathode materials to enhance MFC performance for precise and rapid BOD analysis in wastewater. We examined for over 120 days two Pt-coated air-breathing cathodes with distinct carbonaceous gas diffusion layers (GDLs) and catalyst layers (CLs): cost-effective carbon paper (CP) with hand-coated CL and more expensive woven carbon cloth (CC) with CL pre-applied by the supplier. The results show significant differences in electrochemical characteristics and anodic biofilm composition between MFCs with CP and CC GDE cathodes. CP-MFCs exhibited lower sensitivity (16.6 C L mg −1 m −2 ) and a narrower dynamic range (25 to 600 mg L −1 ), attributed to biofouling-related degradation of the GDE. In contrast, CC-MFCs demonstrated superior performance with higher sensitivity (37.6 C L mg −1 m −2 ) and a broader dynamic range (25 to 800 mg L −1 ). In conclusion, our study underscores the pivotal role of cathode selection in 3D-printed MFC biosensors, influencing anodic biofilm enrichment time and overall BOD assessment performance. We recommend the use of cost-effective CP GDL with hand-coated CL for short-term MFC biosensor applications, while advocating for CC GDL supplied with CL as the preferred choice for long-term sensing implementations with enduring reliability.
Suggested Citation
Anna Salvian & Daniel Farkas & Marina Ramírez-Moreno & Claudio Avignone Rossa & John R. Varcoe & Siddharth Gadkari, 2024.
"Impact of Air-Cathodes on Operational Stability of Single-Chamber Microbial Fuel Cell Biosensors for Wastewater Monitoring,"
Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(14), pages 1-19, July.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:14:p:3574-:d:1439414
Download full text from publisher
Most related items
These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jeners:v:17:y:2024:i:14:p:3574-:d:1439414. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.