Comparison of alternative membranes to replace high cost Nafion ones in microbial fuel cells. (28th December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hernández-Flores, G.; Poggi-Varaldo, H.M.; Solorza-Feria, O.
• Is Part Of: International journal of hydrogen energy. Volume 41:Number 48(2016)
• Page Start: 23354
• Page End: 23362
• Publication Date: 2016-12-28
• Subjects: Leachate -- Low cost membrane -- Microbial fuel cell -- Power/cost ratio -- Proton exchange membrane; Hydrogen as fuel -- Periodicals; Hydrogène (Combustible) -- Périodiques; Hydrogen as fuel; Periodicals; 665.81
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ijhydene.2016.08.206
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0360-3199

Abstract

Abstract: The aim of this work was to compare the performance of microbial fuel cell ( MFC ) fitted with alternative, low cost membranes ( AM s). Lab scale single chamber MFC s were loaded with sulphate-reducing inocula as biocatalyst and leachate from dark fermentation of organic wastes as substrate. The MFC s were fitted with either hybrid membrane made of agar and Nafion MH, agar membrane M6 (6% agar), agar membrane M2 (2% agar) or the control Nafion 117 membrane ( NF-117 ). We found that the internal resistances ( R int ) were generally low for all the cells. The lowest R int corresponded to alternative membranes M6 and MH with a value ca. 90 Ω. So, results of R int tend to favour the AM s. The costs of these membranes were only 2.5–6% of the cost of the NF-117 one. However, the powers delivered by MFC fitted with AM s were 4–40% (weighed average 28%) of the power of the cell fitted with the conventional NF-117 . In spite of the reduced power, the AM s still exhibited a higher Power/Cost ratio (0.9–4.4. mW/US$) than that of the NF membrane (0.23 mW/US$.) We should highlight that the AM s do not require the conditioning treatment with hazardous chemicals typical of NF-117 . Therefore, there is another competitive edge of AM s in the form of avoided costs of chemicals and hazardous waste disposal. Highlights: We compared the performance of MFC fitted with alternative, low cost membranes ( AM s). Tested AM s were: hybrid MH (agar and Nafion), 6 and 2% agar membranes M2 and M6 . Lowest R int corresponded to M6 and MH with values ca. 90 Ω. Costs of these membranes were only 2.5–6% of that of the Nafion one. In spite of lower power the AM s had a Power/Cost 5–80-fold of that of Nafion. AM s did not require treatment with hazardous chemicals typical of Nafion.