| Title |
Municipal Solid Waste Landfill Leachate Treatment and Electricity Production Using Microbial Fuel Cells
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, March 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12010-014-0854-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisa Damiano, Jenna R. Jambeck, David B. Ringelberg |
| Abstract |
Microbial fuel cells were designed and operated to treat landfill leachate while simultaneously producing electricity. Two designs were tested in batch cycles using landfill leachate as a substrate without inoculation (908 to 3,200 mg/L chemical oxygen demand (COD)): Circle (934 mL) and large-scale microbial fuel cells (MFC) (18.3 L). A total of seven cycles were completed for the Circle MFC and two cycles for the larger-scale MFC. Maximum power densities of 24 to 31 mW/m(2) (653 to 824 mW/m(3)) were achieved using the Circle MFC, and a maximum voltage of 635 mV was produced using the larger-scale MFC. In the Circle MFC, COD, biological oxygen demand (BOD), total organic carbon (TOC), and ammonia were removed at an average of 16%, 62%, 23%, and 20%, respectively. The larger-scale MFC achieved an average of 74% BOD removal, 27% TOC removal, and 25% ammonia reduction while operating over 52 days. Analysis of the microbial characteristics of the leachate indicates that there might be both supportive and inhibiting bacteria in landfill leachate for operation of an MFC. Issues related to scale-up and heterogeneity of a mixed substrate remain. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 95 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 93 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 22% |
| Researcher | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 22 | 23% |
| Environmental Science | 18 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 11% |
| Energy | 5 | 5% |
| Chemical Engineering | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 7% |
| Unknown | 28 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 March 2014.
All research outputs
#18,369,403
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
#1,769
of 2,498 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#162,545
of 224,543 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology
#26
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,498 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 224,543 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.