↓ Skip to main content

Performance of single chamber biocatalyzed electrolysis with different types of ion exchange membranes

Overview of attention for article published in Water Research, March 2007
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
3 patents
f1000
1 research highlight platform

Citations

dimensions_citation
359 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
324 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Performance of single chamber biocatalyzed electrolysis with different types of ion exchange membranes
Published in
Water Research, March 2007
DOI 10.1016/j.watres.2007.01.019
Pubmed ID
Authors

René A. Rozendal, Hubertus V.M. Hamelers, Redmar J. Molenkamp, Cees J.N. Buisman

Abstract

In this paper hydrogen production through biocatalyzed electrolysis was studied for the first time in a single chamber configuration. Single chamber biocatalyzed electrolysis was tested in two configurations: (i) with a cation exchange membrane (CEM) and (ii) with an anion exchange membrane (AEM). Both configurations performed comparably and produced over 0.3 m3 H2/m3 reactor liquid volume/day at 1.0 V applied voltage (overall hydrogen efficiencies around 23%). Analysis of the water that permeated through the membrane revealed that a large part of potential losses in the system were associated with a pH gradient across the membrane (CEM DeltapH=6.4; AEM DeltapH=4.4). These pH gradient associated potential losses were lower in the AEM configuration (CEM 0.38 V; AEM 0.26 V) as a result of its alternative ion transport properties. This benefit of the AEM, however, was counteracted by the higher cathode overpotentials occurring in the AEM configuration (CEM 0.12 V at 2.39 A/m2; AEM 0.27 V at 2.15 A/m2) as a result of a less effective electroless plating method for the AEM membrane electrode assembly (MEA).

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 324 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 4 1%
United States 3 <1%
Netherlands 2 <1%
Belgium 2 <1%
India 2 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Other 3 <1%
Unknown 304 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 71 22%
Student > Master 56 17%
Researcher 51 16%
Student > Bachelor 19 6%
Professor > Associate Professor 13 4%
Other 49 15%
Unknown 65 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 64 20%
Environmental Science 55 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 33 10%
Chemistry 25 8%
Chemical Engineering 22 7%
Other 29 9%
Unknown 96 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 28 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,356,550
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Water Research
#2,661
of 11,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#28,959
of 89,822 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Water Research
#15
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,875 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
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 89,822 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
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 has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.