scholarly journals Corrigendum to “Hydrogen gas production with Ni, Ni–Co and Ni–Co–P electrodeposits as potential cathode catalyst by microbial electrolysis cells” [Int J Hydrogen Energy 45 (2020) 18250–18265]

Author(s):  
Amit Kumar Chaurasia ◽  
Hemant Goyal ◽  
Prasenjit Mondal
2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 427-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abudukeremu Kadier ◽  
Yibadatihan Simayi ◽  
Peyman Abdeshahian ◽  
Nadia Farhana Azman ◽  
K. Chandrasekhar ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 304 ◽  
pp. 122983 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Indiana Carlotta-Jones ◽  
Kevin Purdy ◽  
Kerry Kirwan ◽  
James Stratford ◽  
Stuart R. Coles

2008 ◽  
Vol 42 (23) ◽  
pp. 8630-8640 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce E. Logan ◽  
Douglas Call ◽  
Shaoan Cheng ◽  
Hubertus V. M. Hamelers ◽  
Tom H. J. A. Sleutels ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 71 ◽  
pp. 466-472 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abudukeremu Kadier ◽  
Yibadatihan Simayi ◽  
Mohd Sahaid Kalil ◽  
Peyman Abdeshahian ◽  
Aidil Abdul Hamid

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (16) ◽  
pp. 8796
Author(s):  
Pooja Dange ◽  
Soumya Pandit ◽  
Dipak Jadhav ◽  
Poojhaa Shanmugam ◽  
Piyush Kumar Gupta ◽  
...  

Carbon constraints, as well as the growing hazard of greenhouse gas emissions, have accelerated research into all possible renewable energy and fuel sources. Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs), a novel technology able to convert soluble organic matter into energy such as hydrogen gas, represent the most recent breakthrough. While research into energy recovery from wastewater using microbial electrolysis cells is fascinating and a carbon-neutral technology that is still mostly limited to lab-scale applications, much more work on improving the function of microbial electrolysis cells would be required to expand their use in many of these applications. The present limiting issues for effective scaling up of the manufacturing process include the high manufacturing costs of microbial electrolysis cells, their high internal resistance and methanogenesis, and membrane/cathode biofouling. This paper examines the evolution of microbial electrolysis cell technology in terms of hydrogen yield, operational aspects that impact total hydrogen output in optimization studies, and important information on the efficiency of the processes. Moreover, life-cycle assessment of MEC technology in comparison to other technologies has been discussed. According to the results, MEC is at technology readiness level (TRL) 5, which means that it is ready for industrial development, and, according to the techno-economics, it may be commercialized soon due to its carbon-neutral qualities.


2008 ◽  
Vol 58 (4) ◽  
pp. 853-857 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaoan Cheng ◽  
Bruce E. Logan

Hydrogen gas can be produced from fermentation end products such as acetic acid through the electrohydrogenesis process in microbial electrolysis cells (MECs). In many MEC reactors, precious metal catalysts and expensive cation exchange membranes are often used. Here we examine Co- and FeCo-based alternatives to Pt, and compare the performance of an anion exchange membrane with that of a cation exchange membrane (Nafion™ 117). It is found that these alternative catalysts have 40–80% better performance than uncatalysed surfaces, but they do not equal the performance of Pt based on our electrochemical tests using cyclic voltammetry. It was also found that the anion exchange membrane (AEM) performance was equal to that of cation exchange membrane (CEM) at applied voltages of 600 mV or less in MEC tests, but that it exceeded performance of the CEM at voltages above 600 mV. These results demonstrate choosing catalysts will require both analysis of performance and materials costs, but that performance is improved for producing H2 gas in MECs using AEMs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document