Table 2.
Comparisons of FAB–MFC integrated system with other studies
| WW type | CODIN (CODEF) CODRE | MFC type (PEM) HRT | Max. P (I) CE | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standalone MFC | ||||
| Glucose | 1200 (24) 98% | S-MFC (Nafion) – | 262 (−) 55% | Liu and Logan (2004) |
| Synthetic | 1000 (310) 69% | S-MFC (Nafion) – | 81 (−) 30% | Di Lorenzo et al. (2010) |
| Swine | 6500 (3400) 49% | S-MFC (PTFE) 3 days | 0.15 (−) 1.0–15% | Goto and Yoshida (2019) |
| Swine | 7500 (3075) 22% | S-MFC (No PEM) 0.7 days | 750 (1) 23% | Kim et al. (2016) |
| Brewery | 627 (366) 42% | S-MFC (Nafion) 2.13 h | 264 (1.79) 20% | Wen et al. (2009) |
| Domestic | 400 (140) 65% | S-MFC (No PEM) 8.8 h | 300 (−) 36% | Kim et al. (2015) |
| Domestic | 220 (44) 80% | S-MFC (Nafion) 3–33 h | 26 (−) 3–12% | Liu et al. (2004) |
| Domestic | – (–) – | D-MFC (Salt bridge) – | 0.3 (18) 19% | Min et al. (2005) |
| Domestic | 375 (150) 60% | D-MFC (Salt bridge) – | 25 (100) 0.25% | Rodrigo et al. (2007) |
| Domestic | 820 (180) 78% | D-MFC (Nafion) 14 days | 817 (0.55) 32% | Bose et al. (2018) |
| Domestic | 300 (135) 55% | S-MFC (Nafion) 78 h | 28 (85) 28 | Liu and Logan (2004) |
| Domestic | 108 (37) 66% | SE-MFC (Fabric) 6 h | 149 (250) 6% | Yu et al. (2012) |
| Domestic | 500 (371) 26% | S-MFC (No PEM) 0.2 h | 422 (15) 0.7% | Ahn and Logan (2010) |
| Domestic | 299 (87) 71% | S-MFC (No PEM) 2 h | 103 (420) 18% | You et al. (2006) |
| Domestic | 600 (174) 71% | D-MFC (CEM) 0.69 d | 180 (−) – | Ye et al. (2019) |
|
Domestic Domestic |
755 (200) 74% |
MFC-1An (Salt bridge) 1 day FAB-1An (Salt bridge) 1 day |
79 (163) 0.73% 84 (168) 0.69% |
This study This study |
|
Domestic Domestic |
755 (218) 71% |
MFC-1A (Salt bridge) 1 day FAB-1A (Salt bridge) 1 day |
78 (161) 0.80% 87 (171) 0.74% |
This study This study |
| MFC-integrated system | ||||
| Brewery | 708 (103) 80% | IVCW-MFC (No PEM) 2 d | − (50) 0.39% | Liu et al. (2019) |
| Synthetic | 1500 (375) 75% | VCW-MFC (No PEM) 4 d | 16 (70) 0.15% | Yadav et al. (2012) |
| Pulp | 4500 (2970) 66% | MBBR-MFC (Nafion) 3 days | 96 (185) 0.62% | Chen et al. (2019) |
| Domestic | 537 (17) 97% | MBR-MFC (No PEM) 1 day | − (−) 0.05% | Gajaraj and Hu (2014) |
| Domestic | 430 (7) 92% | MFC-MBR (No PEM) 5 days | 51 (0.2) 5.9% | Su et al. (2013) |
| Synthetic | 600 (60) 90% | MBR-MFC (No PEM) 2 h | 140 (0.52) 7% | (Li et al. 2015) |
| Domestic | 1080 (32) 97% | MFC-MBR (No PEM) 3 h | 380 (2000)8.5% | Malaeb et al. (2013) |
|
Domestic Domestic |
755 (129) 83% |
An-MFC-2 (Salt bridge) 2 days An-FAB-2 (Salt bridge) 2 days |
98 (181) 0.80% 104 (187) 0.79% |
This study This study |
|
Domestic Domestic |
755 (66) 91% |
An-MFC-3 (Salt bridge) 3 days An-FAB-3 (Salt bridge) 3 days |
70 (153) 0.90% 70 (153) 0.91% |
This study This study |
|
Domestic Domestic |
755 (100) 87% |
A-MFC-2 (Salt bridge) 2 days A-FAB-2 (Salt bridge) 2 days |
42 (119) 0.57% 59 (140) 0.47% |
This study This study |
|
Domestic Domestic |
755 (39) 95% |
A-MFC-3 (Salt bridge) 3 days A-FAB-3 (Salt bridge) 3 days |
12 (63) 0.50% 18 (78) 0.39% |
This study This study |
WW wastewater, CODIN (CODEF) CODRE COD influent (mg/L), effluent (mg/L) and removal efficiency (%), respectively, Max. P (I) CE maximum power density as mW/m2 (current density, mA/m2) coulombic efficiency (%)
S-MFC single chamber MFC, D-MFC double chambered MFC, SE-MFC submerged-exchangeable-MFC, MFC-1An anaerobic-D-MFC-1, FAB-1An anaerobic-D-FAB–MFC-1, MFC-1A aerobic-MFC-1, FAB-1A aerobic-D-FAB–MFC-1
Bar shows not reported or could not be calculated from the given information; d shows day, h for an hour
PTFE polytetrafluoroethylene, IVCW-MFC integrated vertical flow constructed wetland-MFC, PEM proton exchange membrane, CEM cation; exchange membrane, MBR membrane bioreactor, A-MFC (FAB) aerobic-MFC (FAB), An-MFC (FAB) anaerobic-MFC (FAB), FAB fragmented anode biofilm