Treatment, Electricity Harvesting and Sulfur Recovery from Flue Gas Pre-Treatment Wastewater Using Microbial Fuel Cells with Sulfate Reduction Bacterial

Mei Yao Yin; Xiao Juan Zhao; Chen Guang Li; Hong Da Cui; Juan Wang

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1073-1076.920

Paper Titles

The Influence Factors on Alkalization-Ceramic Flat Membranes Combination Crafts in Manganese Removal
p.898

Effects of Increasing Alkali Catalysts Concentration on Hydrogen Gas Yield during the Supercritical Water Gasification of Food Waste
p.905

Information Technology Based Municipal Solid Waste Management in Shanghai, China
p.911

Influence of Na₂CO₃ on Thermal Degradation Process of Waste Printed Circuit Board in Air Atmosphere
p.915

Treatment, Electricity Harvesting and Sulfur Recovery from Flue Gas Pre-Treatment Wastewater Using Microbial Fuel Cells with Sulfate Reduction Bacterial
p.920

A Dual Cathode Electro Fe²⁺/S₂O8^2- System Used for Pickle Sauerkraut Wastewater Degradation
p.924

Adjustment Analysis of AIG Spray Ammonia Denitration System Optimization in Coal-Fired Power Plant
p.929

Characterization of Oily Sludge with Different Sources
p.933

Enhancement of Waste Activated Sludge Dewaterability by Potassium Ferrate Pretreatment
p.937

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 1073-1076Treatment, Electricity Harvesting and Sulfur...

Treatment, Electricity Harvesting and Sulfur Recovery from Flue Gas Pre-Treatment Wastewater Using Microbial Fuel Cells with Sulfate Reduction Bacterial

Abstract:

Aiming at the problem of the traditional flue gas desulfurization and effluent disposal, two identical dual-chambered Microbial fuel cells (MFCs) are designed to remove man-made flue gas pre-treatment wastewater (FGPW). Glucose is used as the carbon source of the Sulfate reducing bacteria (SRB). Carbon cloth is used as the material of anodic and cathode. The treatment performance of flue gas pre-treatment wastewater and the possibility of electricity harvesting and sulfur recovery were investigated. The results show that the output voltage is 0.68-0.72V and the maximum current density is 28.12mA/m2 at pH=7.520. The concentration of sulfate measured with ion chromatography is decreased gradually during the operation of MFC. The elemental sulfur is found in carbon cloth (taken from the MFC after working for 58 days) by analysis with XPS. The results suggest that treatment of flue gas pre-treatment wastewater and electricity harvesting and sulfur recovery by MFC is technical feasibility.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Environmental Protection and Resource Utilization IV

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 1073-1076)

Pages:

920-923

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.1073-1076.920

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

December 2014

Authors:

Mei Yao Yin, Xiao Juan Zhao, Chen Guang Li, Hong Da Cui, Juan Wang*

Keywords:

Flue Gas Pre-Treatment Wastewater, Microbial Fuel Cell (MFC), Sulfate Reducing Bacteria (SRB), Sulfur Recovery

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] Q. Zhong: Coal fired flue gas desulphurization and denitrification technology and project case (Chemical industry press，Beijing 2007).

Google Scholar

[2] W. Han: China Environmental Protection Industry (2005), pp.34-36.

Google Scholar

[3] J.P. Maree, E. Hill: Water Science & Technology Vol. 21 (1989), pp.265-276.

Google Scholar

[4] P. Fox, V. Venktasubbiah: Water Science & Technology Vol. 34 (1996), pp.359-366.

Google Scholar

[5] P.N.L. Lens, A. Visser, J.H. Janssen, P.L.W. Hulshoff, G. Lettinga: Crit. Rev. Env. Sci. Tec. Vol. 28 (1998), p.28.

Google Scholar

[6] Y.X. Li, B.Q. Su, Z.Y. Geng, B.B. Yao, Y.Z. Chi: Water & Wastewater Engineering Vol. 26 (2000), pp.28-30.

Google Scholar

[7] O.B.D. Thabet, H. Bouallagui, J. Cayol, B. Olivier, M.L. Fardeau, M. Hamdi: J. Hazard. Mater. Vol. 167 (2009), pp.1133-1140.

Google Scholar

[8] J. Wang, Y. Cao, Q. Zhong: Proceeding of the CSEE Vol. 33 (2013), pp.44-50.

Google Scholar

[9] W. Habermann, E. -H. Pommer: Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. Vol. 35(1991), pp.128-133.

Google Scholar

[10] M. J. Cooney, E. Roschi, I. W. Marison, Ch. Comninellis, U. Stockar: Enzyme Microb. Technol. Vol. 18(1996), p, 358–365.

Google Scholar

[11] K. Rabaey, P. Clauwaert, P. Aelterman, W. Verstraete: Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 39(2005), p.8077–8082.

DOI: 10.1021/es050986i

Google Scholar

[12] K. Rabaey, K. V. Sompel, L. Maignien, N. Boon, P. Aelterman, P. Clauwraet, L. D. Schamphelaire, H. T. Pham: Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 40(2006), p.5218–5224.

DOI: 10.1021/es060382u

Google Scholar

[13] F. Zhao, N. Rahunen, J. R. Varcoe: Environ. Sci. Technol. Vol. 42(2008), pp.4971-4976.

Google Scholar

[14] H. Cai, J. Wang, Y. F. Bu, Q. Zhong: Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology, Vol. 88 (2013), pp.623-628.

Google Scholar