Download - Distilalry Water MFC
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
1/10
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Volume 2, No 1, 2011
Copyright 2010 All rights reserved Integrated Publishing Association
Research article ISSN 0976 4402
Received on April 2011 Published on September 2011 114
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double
chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S1
, Anupama2
, Pradeep N.V3
.1- Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, K.L.E Societys College of
Engineering and Technology, Belgaum, Karnataka.
2, 3- M.Tech Scholar, K.L.E Societys College of Engineering and Technology, Belgaum,
Karnataka.
ABSTRACT
Distillery wastewater was treated in Microbial Fuel Cell (MFC) at ambient room temperature
which varied between 27-32o
C. Microbial Fuel Cells can be simultaneously used for thetreatment of wastewater and generation of electricity. In this study single chamber MFC and
double chambered MFC were compared for the distillery wastewater treatment andgeneration of electricity. Micro-organisms present in distillery wastewater and sewage were
used as inoculum, and distillery wastewater acted as substrate. Single chamber MFC was
efficient and found to be producing maximum current of 0.84 mA, power density of 28.15
mW/m2 where as double chambered MFC produced a maximum current of 0.36 mA and
power density of 17.76 mW/m2. Double chambered MFC was efficient in the removal of
COD (64% removal) when compared with single chamber MFC which attained 61% COD
removal efficiency. The removal of dissolved solids in both single and double chambered
MFC was found to be 48%. Five varied feed concentrations were loaded to both the single
and double chambered MFC and the systems were stable. The COD and dissolved solidsremoval observed in distillery wastewater might be attributed to the microbial catalyzed
electrochemical reactions occurring in the anodic chamber of single and double chambered
MFC.
Keywords: Microbial fuel cell (MFC), bioelectricity, distillery wastewater, organic waste,
energy recovery, air cathode.
1. Introduction
Organic wastes released from many process industries are of prime concern to the
environment. Their handling, treatment and disposal are the major challenges to suchindustries. Distillery spent wash is unwanted residual liquid waste generated during alcohol
production and pollution caused by it is one of the most critical environmental issue. This
poses severe threat to human health and environment when not managed properly. A numberof clean up technologies have been put into practice and novel bioremediation approaches for
treatment of distillery spent wash are being worked out (Mohana et al., 2009). Anaerobic
treatment produces small amount of sludge and energy can be recovered (Hampannavar and
Shivayogimath, 2010).
Microbial fuel cells (MFC) are unique devices that can utilize microorganisms as catalysts for
converting chemical energy directly into electricity, representing a promising technology for
simultaneous energy production and wastewater treatment (Liu et al., 2004 Logan and Regan,2006). To make this technology feasible, power densities should to be increased and reduce
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
2/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
115
the cost of construction materials (Logan et al., 2007 Logan, 2006 Clauwaert et al., 2008).In MFC electrons generated in anode cell reach the cathode and combine with protons that
diffuse from anode through the membrane or agar salt bridge (Logan et al., 2006 Min and
Logan, 2004).
MFCs have wider applications including wastewater treatment, production of electricity,bioremediation, hydrogen production, and as environmental sensors (Logan and Regan,
2006). MFCs have been used to treat various kinds of wastewater such as domestic sewage
(Ahn and Logan, 2010 Liu et al., 2004), brewery (Feng et al., 2008 Abhilasha and Sharma.,
2009), distillery (Mohanakrishna et al., 2010), sugar (Abhilasha and Sharma., 2009), paper
and pulp (Huang and Logan, 2008), rice mill (Behera et al., 2010), swine wastewater (Kim et
al., 2008) and phenolic wastewater (Luoa et al., 2009). An additional advantage of using
MFCs for wastewater treatment is the potential for reducing solids production compared to
aerobic processes (Ahn and Logan, 2010). MFCs have some disadvantages, including the
high costs of materials (platinum-catalyst and proton exchange membrane), the low
efficiency of organic treatment, among others (Kubota et al., 2010). MFCs operated using
mixed microbial cultures currently achieve substantially greater power densities than thosewith pure cultures (Logan et al., 2006). Very less study has been done on the comparison ofsingle and double chambered MFC for distillery wastewater treatment.
In this study, the treatment efficiency and electricity generation using single and doublechambered MFC was undertaken and comparisons were made between single and double
chambered MFC. Both the MFC reactors were operated at identical ambient environmental
conditions.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1 Electrode Materials
Graphite rods from pencils were used as both anode and cathode (Logan and Regan, 2006
Logan et al., 2007). The arrangement of the graphite rods was made in such a way as to
provide the maximum surface area for the development of biofilm on anode. The length and
diameter of the graphite rods were 90 mm and 2mm respectively. Pre-treatment was not
provided for the electrode materials.
2.2 MFC Reactors
Two MFC reactors were constructed, one was single chamber MFC and the other was double
chambered MFC. The reactors were constructed using non-reactive plastic containers withdimensions of 8 X 8 X 12 inches. The electrodes were connected by using copper wire as
reported by Logan (2005). The agar salt bridge was used as the proton exchange medium
(Momoh and Naeyor., 2010). The electrodes were placed in the chambers, then were sealed
and made air tight. Both the reactors were checked for water leakage.
2.2.1 Double chambered MFC
Two non-reactive plastic containers were used for Double chambered MFC. One plastic
container was used as anode chamber (to be fed with wastewater) and the other as cathodechamber as shown in Figure 1. The wastewater was fed to the anode chamber and Potassium
permanganate (catholyte) was fed to the cathode chamber (Lefebvre et al., 2008 Behera et
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
3/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
116
al., 2010). The cathode and anode chambers were connected using agar salt bridge. Thelength and diameter of agar salt bridge was 5 inches and 1.5 inches respectively.
Figure 1: Double chambered MFC.
2.2.2 Single chamber MFC
A plastic container was used as the anode chamber. The agar salt bridge was joined to anodechamber. The length and diameter of agar salt bridge was 5 inches and 1.5 inches
respectively as shown in Figure 2. The graphite rods were placed on the agar salt bridge and
left open to air which acted as cathode (Logan et al., 2007).
Figure 2: Single Chamber Air Cathode MFC.
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
4/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
117
2.3 Distillery Wastewater and Microbial Inoculum
The distillery wastewater was used as substrate and sewage as source of inoculum. No any
additional nutrients were given for micro-organisms except the nutrients present in thedistillery wastewater.
Table 1: Characteristics of distillery wastewater
Characteristics Value
pHColour
BOD (mg/L)COD (mg/L)
Total Solids(mg/L)Dissolved Solids (mg/L)
Chlorides (mg/L)
Conductivity (mS/cm)
4.1Dark Brown
42000102500
7398059740
6900
19.5
2.4 Experimental Conditions
The anode chamber was filled with distillery wastewater so that micro-organisms in thewastewater could colonize the electrodes and produce electricity. The samples were drawn
from the chambers periodically and analysed. The ambient room temperature during most ofthe period of study varied between 27 oC and 32 oC. When the reactor reached steady state
conditions, the reactor was loaded with distillery wastewater of higher concentration.
2.5 Analyses
The voltage (V) and Current (I) in the MFC circuit was monitored at 24hour intervals using a
multimeter (UNI-T , Model Number- DT830D) (Kim et al., 2005). Analytical procedures
followed in this study were those outlined in Standard Methods (1995).
3. Results and Discussions
The single and double chambered MFC were run parallel. The whole study was conducted
under ambient environmental conditions. Different feed concentrations were given for single
and double chambered MFC. The increase in feed concentration showed a positive effect on
the current and voltage. Five feed concentrations from 2.1 g COD/L to 6.1 g COD/L with anincrement of 1g COD/L were given. The study is under progress for higher feed
concentrations.
3.1 COD removal efficiency
At every increment in feed concentration, the improvement in COD removal efficiency was
observed. Distillery wastewater showed its potential for COD removal indicating the
function of microbes, present in wastewaters in metabolizing the carbon source as electron
donors. It is evident from experimental data that current generation and COD removalshowed relative compatibility. Continuous COD removal was observed in both the MFCs. In
double chambered MFC, COD removal efficiency increased from 52% to 64% as the feedconcentration increased from 2.1 g COD/L to 6.1 g COD/L respectively (Figure 3). In the
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
5/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
118
case of single chamber MFC, the COD removal efficiency increased from 55% to 61% forthe same feed concentrations (Figure 4). The findings of this study are near to Feng et al
(2008) who conducted the studies on brewery wastewater treatment using air-cathode MFC.
Liu et al (2004) conducted the studies on domestic wastewater treatment using single
chamber MFC and observed 50% to 70% COD removal efficiency. Liu and Logan (2004)
reported a COD removal efficiency of 55% using the MFC with a proton exchangemembrane (PEM), and 75% using the MFC without a PEM.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time in days
C
ODinmg/L
2.1 g COD/L
3.1 g COD/L
4.1 g COD/L
5.1 g COD/L
6.1 g COD/L
Figure 3: COD reduction in double chambered MFC.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time in days
CODinmg/L 2.1 g COD/L
3.1 g COD/L
4.1 g COD/L
5.1 g COD/L
6.1 g COD/L
Figure 4: COD reduction in single chamber MFC.
The COD removal efficiency was almost similar in single and double chambered MFC but
single chamber MFC showed more consistent COD removal than double chambered MFC.
3.2 Dissolved solids removal efficiency
Distillery-based wastewater characteristically contains higher concentration of solids. During
the operation considerable reduction in dissolved solids concentration was observed in both
the reactors. The reduction of dissolved solids increased with the increase in feedconcentration. As the feed concentration increased from 2.1 g COD/L to 6.1 g COD/L, the
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
6/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
119
dissolved solids removal efficiency increased from 41% to 48% respectively in both of thereactors (Figure 5 and Figure 6). Mohanakrishna et al(2010) have reported 24% reduction in
total dissolved solids (TDS) while treating distillery wastewater using continuous flow single
chamber air-cathode MFC.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time in days
DS
m
g/L
2.1 g COD/L
3.1 g COD/L
4.1 g COD/L
5.1 g COD/L
6.1 g COD/L
Figure 5: Dissolved solids reduction in double chambered MFC.
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time in days
DS
inm
g/L
2.1 g COD/L
3.1g COD/L
4.1 g COD/L
5.1 g COD/L
6.1 g COD/L
Figure 6: Dissolved solids reduction in single chamber MFC.
In single and double chambered MFC, the dissolved solids reduction was efficient and almostsimilar.
3.3 Current and Power Density
The average values of current and power density for each feed concentration are as given in
the Figure 7 and Figure 8 respectively. The current and power density showed a gradual
increase with respect to the increase in feed concentration. The similar observation was
reported during the treatment of distillery wastewater by Mohanakrishna et al(2010).
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
7/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
120
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0 2 4 6 8
Feed concentration in g COD/L
Currentinm
A
Double Chamber MFC
Single Chamber MFC
Figure 7: Average values of current obtained at each feed concentration.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8
Feed concentration in g COD/L
PowerDen
sitymW/m2
Double Chamber MFC
Single Chamber MFC
Figure 8: Average power density obtained at each feed concentration.
The current and power densities were much higher in single chamber MFC when compared
with double chambered MFC. Logan et al., (2007) have reported the advantage of air-cathode
MFC (compared with the cathode suspended in water) as oxygen transfer to the cathode
occurs directly from air, and thus oxygen does not have to be dissolved in water. The
abundant electron acceptors i.e., oxygen availability in air is the reason for the higher currentgeneration.
The current and power density of MFCs with various types of wastewaters and the presentstudy are as given in Table 2.
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
8/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
121
Table 2: Performance of MFCs with various types of wastewaters.
Type of
wastewater
MFC
Configuration
Operating
pH
Current
in mA(Max)
Power
density inmW/m2
Reference
Domesticwastewater Singlechamber aircathode
7.3 to 7.6 0.92 28 Liu andLogon., 2004
Domestic
wastewater Two chamber 6 to 7 1.03 72
Min and
Logon., 2004
Rice mill
wastewater
Dual chamber
(PEM) 7 1.07 15.57
Behera et al.,
2010
Two chamber 6 0.34 17.76Present study
Distillery
wastewater(Different feedconcentrations)
Singlechamber air
Cathode6 0.84 28.15
Present study
4. Conclusions
The study demonstrated effective treatment of distillery wastewater of feed concentrationsfrom 2.1 g COD/L to 6.1 g COD/L simultaneously generating electricity. The single chamber
air cathode MFC proves to be more reliable because of the reduced cost of construction, low
maintenance and higher electricity generation when compared with double chambered MFC.Both the reactors exhibited stable operation.
5. References
1. Abhilasha S. M and Sharma V. N., (2009). Bioelectricity production from
various wastewaters through microbial fuel cell technology, Journal ofBiochemical Technology, 2(1), pp133-137.
2. Abhilasha S. M and Sharma V.N., (2010). Treatment of Brewery Wastewater andproduction of electricity through Microbial Fuel Cell Technology, International
Journal of Biotechnology and Biochemistry, 6(1), pp 7180.
3. Ahn Y and Logan B. E., (2010). Effectiveness of domestic wastewater treatment
using microbial fuel cells at ambient and mesophilic temperatures, BioresourceTechnology, 101, pp 469475.
4. Behera M., Jana P. S., More T. T., Ghangrekar M. M., (2010). Rice mill
wastewater treatment in microbial fuel cells fabricated using proton exchange
membrane and earthen pot at different pH, Bioelectrochemistry, 79, pp 228233.
5. Clauwaert P., Aelterman P., Pham T. H., Schamphelaire L.D., Carballa M.,
Rabaey K., Verstraete W., (2008). Minimizing losses in bio-electrochemical
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
9/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
122
systems: the road to applications, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 79,pp 901913.
6. Feng Y., Wang X., Logan B. E., Lee H., (2008). Brewery wastewater treatmentusing air-cathode microbial fuel cells, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology,
78, pp 873880.
7. Hampannavar U.S and Shivayogimath C.B., (2010). Anaerobic treatment of
sugar industry wastewater by Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor at ambient
temperature, International Journal of Environmental Sciences, 1(4), pp 631639.
8. Huang L and Logan B. E., (2008). Electricity generation and treatment of paper
recycling wastewater using a microbial fuel cell, Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 80, pp 349355.
9. Kim J. R., Min, B., Logan B. E., (2005). Evaluation of procedures to acclimate a
microbial fuel cell for electricity production, Applied Microbiology andBiotechnology, 68, pp 2330.
10. Kim J. E., Dec J., Bruns M. E., Logan B.E., (2008). Reduction of Odors from
Swine Wastewater by Using Microbial Fuel Cells, Applied and Environmental
Microbiology, 74(8), pp 25402543.
11. Kubota K., Yoochatchaval W., Yamaguchi T., Syutsubo K., (2010). Application
of a Single-Chamber Microbial Fuel Cell (MFC) for organic wastewater
treatment: Influence of changes in wastewater composition on the process
performance, Sustainable Environment Research, 20(6), pp 347-351.
12. Lefebvre O., Al-Mamun A., and Ng H. Y., (2008). A microbial fuel cell
equipped with a biocathode for organic reduction and denitrification, WaterScience & Technology, 58(4), pp 881-885.
13. Liu H and Logan B. E., (2004). Electricity Generation Using an Air-CathodeSingle Chamber Microbial Fuel Cell in the Presence and Absence of a Proton
Exchange Membrane, Environmental Science and Technology, 38, pp 4040-4046.
14. Liu H., Ramnarayanan R., Logan B. E., (2004). Production of electricity during
wastewater treatment using a single chamber microbial fuel cell, Environmental
Science and Technology, 38, pp 2281-2285.
15. Logan B. E and Regan J. M., (2006). Microbial fuel cells - challenges and
applications, Environmental Science and Technology, 40, pp 5172-5180.
16. Logan B. E., Aelterman P., Hamelers B., Rozendal R., Schroder U., Keller J.,
Freguiac S., Verstraete W., Rabaey K., (2006). Microbial fuel cells: methodology
and technology, Environmental Science and Technology, 40(17), pp 5181-5192.
17. Logan B. E., Cheng S., Watson V., Estadt G., (2007). Graphite Fiber Brush
Anodes for Increased Power Production in Air-Cathode Microbial Fuel Cells,
Environmental Science and Technology, 41, pp 3341-3346.
-
7/28/2019 Distilalry Water MFC
10/10
Treatment of distillery wastewater using single chamber and double chambered MFC
Hampannavar U.S, Anupama, Pradeep N.VInternational Journal of Environmental Sciences Volume 2 No.1, 2011
123
18. Logan B.E., (2005). Simultaneous wastewater treatment and biological electricitygeneration, Water Science & Technology, 52, pp 3137.
19. Logan B. E., (2009). Exoelectrogenic bacteria that power microbial fuel cells,Nature Reviews Microbiology, 7, pp 375-381.
20. Logan B. E., (2010). Scaling up microbial fuel cells and other bioelectrochemicalsystems, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 85, pp 16651671.
21. Luoa H., Liua G., Zhanga R., Jin S., (2009). Phenol degradation in microbial fuel
cells, Chemical Engineering Journal, 147, pp 259264.
22. Min B and Logan B. E., (2004). Continuous Electricity Generation from
Domestic Wastewater and Organic Substrates in a Flat Plate Microbial Fuel Cell,
Environmental Science and Technology, 38, pp 5809-5814.
23. Mohana S., Bhavik K. A., Madamwar D., (2009). Distillery spent wash:
Treatment technologies and potential applications, Journal of Hazardous
Materials, 163, pp 1225.
24. Mohanakrishna G., Venkata Mohan S., Sarma P. N., (2010). Bio-electrochemical
treatment of distillery wastewater in microbial fuel cell facilitating decolorization
and desalination along with power generation, Journal of Hazardous Material,
177, pp 487494.
25. Momoh O. L and Naeyor B.A., (2010). A novel electron acceptor for microbial
fuel cells: Nature of circuit connection on internal resistance, Journal of
Biochemical Technology, 2(4), pp 216-220.
26. Rabaey K and Verstraete W., (2005). Microbial fuel cells: novel biotechnology
for energy generation, Trends in Biotechnology, 23(6), pp 291- 298.
27. Standard Methods for Examination of Water and Wastewater, (1995). 19 th
Edition. Prepared and Published by American Public Health Association,American Water Works Association, Water Pollution Control Federation.