Wang 2015

Subscriber access provided by LOCK HAVEN UNIV
Critical Review
Practical Energy Harvesting for Microbial Fuel Cells: A Review

Heming Wang, Jaedo Park, and Zhiyong Jason Ren
Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript DOI: 10.1021/es5047765 Publication Date (Web): 11 Feb 2015
Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on February 17, 2015
Just Accepted
Just Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted
online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical
Society provides Just Accepted as a free service to the research community to expedite the
dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. Just Accepted manuscripts
appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. Just Accepted manuscripts have been
fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all
readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI). Just Accepted is an optional service offered
to authors. Therefore, the Just Accepted Web site may not include all articles that will be published
in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the Just
Accepted Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor
changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers
and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors
or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these Just Accepted manuscripts.
Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society.

1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036
Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright American Chemical Society.
However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works
produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course
of their duties.
Page 1 of 33
Environmental Science & Technology
1
2
3
4
Practical Energy Harvesting for Microbial Fuel Cells: A Review
5
6
Heming Wang, Jae-Do Park, and Zhiyong Jason Ren *
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering,

University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado 80309
Department of Electrical Engineering,
University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado 80204

Wang E-mail: heming.wang@colorado.edu,
14
Park E-mail: jaedo.park@ucdenver.edu,
15
Corresponding author Ren E-mail: jason.ren@colorado.edu
16
Phone: (303) 492-4137; Fax: (303) 492-7317
17
1
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
18
Page 2 of 33
ABSTRACT
19
The microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology offers sustainable solutions for distributed
20
power systems and energy positive wastewater treatment, but the generation of practically usable
21
power from MFCs remains a major challenge for system scale up and application. Commonly
22
used external resistors wont harvest any usable energy, so energy-harvesting circuits are needed
23
for real world applications. This review summarizes, explains, and discusses the different energy
24
harvesting methods, components, and systems that can extract and condition the MFC energy for
25
direct utilization. This study aims to assist environmental scientists and engineers to gain
26
fundamental understandings of these electronic systems and algorithms, and it also offers
27
research directions and insights on how to overcome the barriers, so the technology can be
28
further advanced and applied in larger scale.
29
Keywords:
30
Bioelectrochemical System
Microbial
Fuel
Cell,
Energy
Harvesting,
Power
Management
System,
31
32
TOC ART
High
Voltage/Power
Energy
Power
Management
System
CO2
Low
Voltage/Power
33
H2O
O2
Organics
H+
Bioelectrochemical System
34
2
Page 3 of 33
35
1. INTRODUCTION
36
The microbial fuel cell (MFC) technology has been intensively researched in the recent
37
decade, because it offers a solution for environmental sustainability by simultaneously
38
performing pollutant removal and energy production. MFCs use exoelectrogenic microorganisms
39
to convert the chemical energy stored in biodegradable substances to direct electricity.
40
Furthermore, the electrical current can be utilized for many other functions, including producing
41
value-added chemicals such as H2 in microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) or driving water
42
desalination in microbial desalination cells (MDCs).1, 2 The advancements in reactor architecture,
43
material, and operation optimization of these bioelectrochemical systems (BES) have remarkably
44
relieved the physical and chemical constraints of reactor systems,3,
45
magnitude increase in power output. However, one main challenge for MFCs or BESs to be used
46
in real-world applications is the low energy output, and to overcome this, one key element that
47
has been largely neglected is how to harvest and practically utilize the MFC energy based on the
48
true potential of the system rather than simply reporting the measured power density using
49
external resistors.
leading to orders of
50
Compared to other alternative energy systems such as solar and wind, MFC is a low
51
power system due to its thermodynamic limitation. The theoretical anode and cathode potentials
52
calculated by Nernst equation are -0.3 V (vs. NHE) and 0.8 V (vs. NHE), respectively, when
53
acetate servers as the electron donor and oxygen serves as the electron acceptor. Therefore, the
54
theoretical voltage across the two electrodes is 0.8 V - (-0.3 V) = 1.1 V.5-7 However, the
55
experimentally observed open circuit voltage is only around 0.7-0.8 V (Figure 1) due to the
56
losses on the electrode potential, such as activation polarization, concentration polarization and
57
ohmic losses.6 The potential also varies when different electron donors, electron acceptors, or
3
Page 4 of 33
58
microbial inocula are used in the system. Traditionally, MFC power output is reported by
59
changing the external resistance (Rext) at a 5-30 min interval or conducting a voltammetry
60
sweep.7-10 Figure 1 shows typical polarization and power density curves obtained from a lab
61
scale MFC. The curves demonstrate that MFC voltage is inversely proportional to the output
62
current, and there exists a pair of voltage and current that delivers the maximum power, when
63
Rext is equal to the system internal resistance (Rint). This peak point is called the maximum power
64
point (MPP), which is the ideal operating point for MFCs and reported by most studies as the top
65
power output.7, 11, 12 However, top power may not be the goal of all systems. For MFCs used in
66
wastewater treatment, the primary goal may not be high power output but rather more efficient
67
organic removal, so a balance in operation during different phases needs to be considered
68
whether to operate the system at the MPP for maximum power output or at the high current
69
condition for the fastest substrate oxidation rate.8 Similarly, for H2 production in an MEC, the
70
ideal operating point is not MPP but rather the high current region, because H2 production
71
directly correlates with electron flow (current) in the circuit and proton reduction at the cathode.
72
Because an additional voltage is required for MECs, the operation point of MEC is beyond the
73
limiting current of the polarization curve at negative voltages, and the external energy input, as
74
well as energy content of the produced H2 should be considered in addition to the amount of H2
75
produced, so the actual energy efficiency and energy recovery can be quantified.13 In contrast,
76
the operation of MDCs depends on different needs, because if high energy is desired, the MPP
77
will be the ideal point, but if high salt removal is the primary goal, then high current will be
78
needed (Figure 1).14 Furthermore, the different operational points identified on the power density
79
curve only represent the potential of power output rather than usable energy, as the electricity
80
generated is dissipated into heat through resistors instead of being utilized by electronics. In
4
Page 5 of 33
81
addition, the fixed Rext cannot always match the system Rint and extract energy at the MPP,
82
because the Rint of an MFC varies constantly with changes in microbial activities and operational
83
parameters. Studies showed that MFCs may lose more than 50% of produced power across the
84
Rint if the operating voltage is not at the MPP.15
85
To harvest usable MFC or BES energy, resistors have to be replaced with devices that
86
can capture and store energy and boost voltage for practical usage. The direct outputs of a single
87
MFC are primarily in the level of 700-800 mV and 100-2000 mW/m2, which generally cannot
88
directly power common electronics.16 For example, a single light emitting diode (LED) requires
89
a minimum voltage of 2 V and consumes 30 mW,17, 18 and many wireless sensors need a voltage
90
of 3.3 V and watt-level power for temperature, pressure, and humidity monitoring.19-22 While
91
higher power using single or multiple MFCs has been researched, it was reported that larger
92
power production cannot be easily achieved by just building larger MFCs or simply connecting
93
MFCs in series or in parallel due to the nonlinear nature of MFCs.23, 24 Therefore, developing
94
tailored energy harvesting systems including MPP tracking and power management systems
95
(PMS) are crucial for MFC and BES scale-up and real-world application. Such systems generally
96
composed of multiple electronics, such as off-the-shelf capacitors, rechargeable batteries, charge
97
pumps, and boost converters, but these devices are not designed for MFC conditions so the
98
efficiency was low and initial voltage boosts were needed. Customized harvesting systems have
99
been reported by several groups, including our group, but there is very limited knowledge base
100
for this important area, because it requires understanding of power electronics, circuitry, and
101
programing, which are not provided in traditional environmental science and engineering
102
education. In this paper, we therefore offer a first comprehensive review of energy harvesting
103
strategies and systems for MFCs to assist researchers gain fundamental understandings of such
5
Page 6 of 33
104
methods. We also provide discussions and our insights on the challenges and research needs of
105
this field, so researchers and engineers can help advance the technology development and finally
106
overcome these barriers of MFC application.
107
108
2. ENERGY HARVESTING TECHNOLOGIES
109
Since the direct energy production from MFCs is generally not sufficient for practical
110
applications, various circuit topologies have been developed to interface MFCs with electronic
111
loads. Figure 2A shows a concise flow chart of energy harvesting process from MFCs (energy
112
generator) to electronic devices (energy consumer), where PMS (e.g., capacitor-based systems,
113
charge pump-based systems, boost converter-based systems and unreported systems) as the
114
central command aims to control the MFC at its optimal condition and extracts and stores the
115
energy for the uses by external loads. A PMS is an electronic circuit that is composed of
116
electronic components such as capacitors, charge pumps, boost converters, diodes, inductors,
117
power switches, and potentiometers, with the function of harvesting MFC energy and shaping it
118
to a usable form.25 This is different from external resistances, which have been used in most
119
MFC/BES studies to represent the energy output potential but not capture any usable energy,
120
because the current passed through the resistor is dissipated into heat.
121
Table 1 lists all the commercially available parts that have been used in PMS designs for
122
MFCs including the information of manufacturer/model number and the function of each
123
component. Additionally, Table 2 summarizes the energy harvesting performances that have
124
been reported so far and as well the main electronic components utilized in each study. Each
125
study is also labeled whether or not its PMS needs an external power supply and whether or not
126
the external power is included in the reported efficiency. The tables may serve the readers as an
6
Page 7 of 33
127
index for necessary information needed for PMS components and functions, and in the following
128
sections we elaborate on each specific energy-harvesting regime for MFCs.
129
130
2.1 Capacitor-based systems
131
A capacitor is composed of two conductive terminals separated by a dielectric material,
132
and energy is stored in the electrostatic field. When a capacitor is directly connected to an MFC,
133
it is charged by the reactor and acts like a variable resistor, because the charging current changes
134
as the capacitor voltage varies.26, 27 The required time for a full charge is determined by the
135
charging potential and capacitance.27 The amount of energy W (J) stored in a capacitor when the
136
capacitor is charged from V (V) to (V) can be calculated by
137
=
( ),
(1)
138
where V and V are the voltage across the capacitor at the beginning and end of charging,
139
respectively, and
(F) is the capacitance.
140
In energy harvesting systems, capacitors are widely used as either final energy storage
141
before utilization or transitional energy storage during energy extraction. Different arrangements
142
of multiple capacitors in the circuit can manipulate outputs of current, voltage, and power from
143
MFCs. To date five charging/discharging techniques have been reported: direct charging,
144
intermittent energy harvesting (IEH, a.k.a. intermittent charging (IC)), alternate charging and
145
discharging (ACD), charging capacitors in parallel while discharging in series and charging
146
capacitive electrodes (Figure 2A and Table 2).17, 27-30
147
A capacitor circuit can be a simplest PMS, which charges one or more capacitors until
148
enough energy is accumulated for discharging to power electronic devices. The amount of power
149
extracted and system efficiency vary along with the power curve. Capacitor operation is simple
7
Page 8 of 33
150
and straightforward, but the output voltage is limited at the open circuit potential (OCP) of the
151
MFC because the capacitor stops charging when its voltage reaches the OCP.21 Therefore, MFC
152
stacks with multiple units can be used to charge capacitors and obtain higher voltage outputs. A
153
successful demonstration of such circuitry is the energetically autonomous robot called EcoBot.31
154
From 2003 to 2013, four generations of EcoBots were developed using MFC stack as the power
155
source and capacitors as the harvesting system.31, 32 By using a similar energy harvesting strategy,
156
other studies have been conducted to pulse an artificial heartbeat,33 power a mobile phone,34 and
157
create a self-sustainable MFC stack system.35
158
The IEH or IC approach cumulates energy extracted from MFCs in a capacitor and
159
discharges it to a load. This mode delivers power in intermittent pulses when the source is not
160
capable of supplying continuous power to the load. Compared with the conventional continuous
161
energy harvesting (CEH) in which current is continuously passing through the load, one study
162
showed that the IEH approach harvested 152 W from a 500 mL two-chamber MFC which is
163
111% higher than that in the CEH mode (72 W).27 The results were explained by using an
164
analogy that plug flow reactors (PFR) are more efficient than continuous stirred tank reactors
165
(CSTR). In the IEH mode, the electrical current decreases slowly as the process progresses,
166
similar as a PFR operation, so within a given period of time more electrical charges can be
167
harvested than CEH, in which the reaction rate keeps stable like a CSTR. The effect of charging
168
and discharging frequency during the IC mode can affect system performance, and it was
169
suggested that lower frequency led to higher current output and chemical oxygen demand (COD)
170
removal, though an optimum frequency should also consider charge recovery efficiency.36
171
Similarly, progressively switching MFC units from parallel to serial connection in the stack
8
Page 9 of 33
172
reduced capacitor charging time in half and increased current generation by 35% when
173
comparing with MFC stack with serial connections.37
174
In the ACD mode, an MFC charges capacitors first for energy collection, and then the
175
charged capacitors discharge the energy back to the system for MEC operation. Liang et al.
176
showed that the ACD mode could increase the current by 22-32% compared to the IC mode,
177
which was attributed to the shorter discharging time than the charging time, as well as the higher
178
anode potential caused by discharging the capacitor.29 However, power densities in the ACD
179
mode were lower than those in the IC mode.
180
The voltage output can be increased when charging an array of capacitors connected in
181
parallel and then discharging them in series. By using two groups of capacitors with alternative
182
charging and discharging sequence, Kim et al. found the output voltage was constantly enhanced
183
from 0.7 V to as high as 2.5 V.17 Moreover, this approach does not require a minimum input
184
voltage threshold, so voltage can be increased without using initial boost. It also effectively
185
alleviated voltage reversal problem with negligible energy losses in the circuit. However,
186
external energy supplied to control relay switches was not considered in the energy calculation.
187
Another study used the same array to harvest energy from multiple MFCs and power an MEC,
188
and it was found that energy recovery improved from 9% to 13%, and H2 production rate
189
doubled from 0.31 to 0.72 m3/m3/day.38 A similar study used three capacitors separately charged
190
by three MFCs and then linked them in series to power an electrochemical deposition system
191
(ECD), which obtained a sulfur recovery efficiency up to 46.51.5%.39
192
Another new capacitor-based energy harvesting is quasi-capacitor-based method. In such
193
systems, a capacitive bioanode was constructed by coating a capacitive layer consisted of a
194
mixture of activated carbon and polymer, and then the anode can be used as an internal
9
Page 10 of 33
195
capacitor.30 The MFC equipped with the capacitive bioanode produced a peak current density up
196
to 1.7 A/m2, which almost doubled the output of a control non-capacitive anode (0.9 A/m2).
197
Future studies are needed to investigate the longevity of the capacitive electrodes.
198
199
2.2 Charge pump-based systems
200
Charge pumps are low cost devices with simple circuit topologies. In general, a charge
201
pump is an inductor-less DC/DC converter that uses capacitors to store and transfer energy in
202
order to generate either higher or lower voltages. The capacitors in the charge pump circuit are
203
first charged by the power source and then connected in different combinations to generate
204
various voltages for different applications. The S-882Z series charge pump from Seiko
205
Instruments has been widely used in BES studies, and it requires a minimum input voltage of 0.3
206
V in order to generate a discharge voltage of 1.8-2.4 V (Figure 2A). The charge pump consumes
207
a minimum 0.1-0.5 mA current during operation when the input voltage is 0.3-0.6 V, which may
208
limit its charging speed when the current is low and leads to long charging/discharging cycles
209
and low energy harvesting efficiency.20, 40 For example, using a 316 mL air-cathode MFC as the
210
power source, it took 22 h for the charge pump-based circuit to output a voltage of 3.3 V during
211
the start-up phase, but a transformer-based circuit only took 2.5 h to output the same voltage,21
212
suggesting that the energy extraction rate of the charge pump was much slower compared to the
213
transformer. Similar performance was observed by Wang et al., who found that due to charge
214
pumps input current limitation, its operating point was maintained at the low current region of
215
the power curve which was far away from the MPP (Table 2).40 When using a charge pump to
216
conduct capacitive discharge from a microbial capacitive desalination cell for energy production,
10
Page 11 of 33
217
Forrestal et al., found the Coulombic efficiency was only 0.94%, indicating that the charge pump
218
is not sufficient for energy harvesting during desalination regeneration (Table 2).41
219
Therefore, charge pumps can accommodate low-voltage MFC sources and be used for
220
intermittent energy harvesting when low charging rate is acceptable, such as for remote sensors.
221
The performance of the charge pump can be greatly improved when input current increases.
222
Furthermore, charge pumps can also be used as dynamic switches in the circuit to automatically
223
control on/off and prevent reverse current flows.42, 43 S-882Z (Seiko Instruments) has been the
224
most commonly used commercially available charge pump in BES studies, and because its
225
maximum output voltage 2.4 V, sometimes it is not sufficient to power common electronic
226
devices. To further increase the output voltage, another layer of power converter may be placed
227
after the charge pump for voltage boost.
228
229
2.3 Boost converter-based systems
230
A DC/DC converter is an electric circuit to convert direct current (DC) power from one
231
voltage level to another level, so an unregulated DC input can be converted to a controlled output.
232
The input voltage can be stepped down (buck converter), stepped up (boost converter) or
233
inverted. Boost converters are widely used in MFC research (Figure 2A), and the circuit of a
234
boost converter includes both semiconductors, such as diodes and transistors, and energy storage
235
components, such as capacitors and inductors, with a more complex structure than that in the
236
charge pump. While the commonly used charge pump can step up the voltage from 0.3 V to 1.8-
237
2.4 V, the output may still be low for many electronics such as marine sensors (3.3V)19, 44 In such
238
cases, DC/DC boost converters can be used to boost the output voltage further. For example,
11
Page 12 of 33
239
several studies used a boost converter (L6920DB, STMicroelectronics) to obtain an output
240
voltage of 3.3 V with a minimum start up input voltage of 0.8 V.21, 43, 45
Most commercially available low input voltage boost converters require a minimum input
241
242
voltage
of
0.7
(max1797evkit,
Maxim
Semiconductor)
or
0.8
(L6920DB,
243
STMicroelectronics), which are practically beyond the voltage capability of a single air-cathode
244
MFC or a parallel-linked MFC stack. There are two off-the-shelf boost converters that require
245
very low operating input voltages, e.g., LTC3108 (0.02 V, Linear Technologies) and
246
TPS61200/TPS61201 (0.3V, Texas Instruments), but their low input voltages can also limit the
247
output voltages, making it hard to be used for real world applications. Although the OCP of
248
MFCs could be around 0.7-0.8V, the output voltage of a single MFC or parallel-connected MFCs
249
decrease rapidly during current extraction by the boost converter, which is likely the reason of
250
system failure when connecting a boost converter directly with three parallel-connected upflow
251
MDCs (UMDCs).46 Hence the coordination between MFC outputs and electronic components
252
must be carefully controlled to avoid system collapse. Series-connected MFCs could provide a
253
higher input voltage, but it is at the risk of voltage reversal and performance is not stable due to
254
changes in environmental conditions.
255
To bridge the gap between the MFCs and the boost converter, electronic components like
256
capacitors/rechargeable batteries, transformers, charge pumps, etc. are placed before boost
257
converters to cumulate energy and jumpstart the converter. Table 2 summarizes different adopted
258
components in related studies. Capacitors/rechargeable batteries are the most commonly used for
259
storing energy. For example, Bo et al. used three serial-connected UMDCs as a pre-desalination
260
process and harvested their energy into a rechargeable battery or a capacitor, then boosted the
261
voltage via a boost converter to power a electrodialysis (ED) cell for further desalination.46
12
Page 13 of 33
262
Compared with ED, this two-step desalination process can effectively reduce both energy
263
consumption and desalination time. A similar approach was used by a benthic MFC with a
264
biocathode and a sacrificial anode, which firstly charged a capacitor to 1.2 V and then boosted
265
the voltage by a boost converter to 3.3 V, the minimum requirement as an intermittent power
266
source for a wireless sensor.19 A higher efficiency was reported when two capacitors were
267
charged by two MFCs individually, and then linked them in series and further boosted the
268
voltage by the boost converter for higher voltage/current output.47 This method was used to
269
develop a bulk energy storage for more efficient power conversion. By implementing two groups
270
of supercapacitors with one group (12 supercapacitors) charged in parallel and the other switched
271
in series, the harvesting approach was able to boost output voltage to 9V.48 To provide a
272
continuous power supply to sensors such as a submersible ultrasonic receiver (SUR) that listens
273
and records time and signals, Donovan et al. developed a novel SMFC PMS composed of two
274
boost converters to continuously power a real-time clock (RTC) in a sensor system.49
275
The second option is using transformers coupled with boost converter to amplify the
276
voltage by transferring energy through electromagnetic induction. The advantage of transformers
277
is that they extract energy much faster and can take lower input voltage than charge pumps.
278
Yang et al. reported that by connecting an MFC with a capacitor and a transformer, the PMS
279
worked well under a low input voltage of 0.18 V and successfully boosted output to 3.3 V.20
280
Without using capacitors, Thomas et al. connected an MFC directly with a transformer and
281
boosted output voltage to 1.7-3.3 V.50 As discussed in section 2.2, charge pumps can also be
282
used to connect low-voltage MFCs/BESs and the boost converter. A comparative study showed
283
that a charge pump-capacitor-converter PMS had a higher energy efficiency (5.33%) than a
13
Page 14 of 33
284
capacitor-transformer-converter PMS (4.29%), but it also requires a much longer charging time
285
(11.3 h vs. 1.06 h) and a higher minimum input voltage (0.3 V vs. 0.18 V).21
286
To obtain high energy efficiencies, a classic PMS circuit composed of a charge pump, a
287
boost converter, and the load with accessary components, such as capacitors and switches, has
288
been widely adopted by benthic MFCs (BMFCs) (Figure 2B).22, 42-45, 47 BMFCs utilize naturally
289
occurring potential difference between the anoxic sediment and oxic water to generate electricity
290
and therefore provide long-term power source for remote sensors.51-54 One challenge of BMFCs
291
is the low power output due to poor ion transfer between the sediment anode and the air cathode
292
in the natural water body.55, 56 This classic PMS firstly uses charge pumps to harvest energy from
293
the low voltage/current BMFCs and then boosts the voltage via a boost converter to provide
294
intermittent power for wireless sensors, telemetry systems or hydrophones. 44, 45 The intermittent
295
energy harvesting is a practical approach for BMFC operation, as it allows a small power source
296
such as BMFC to power larger electronic devices with higher energy demand, and the energy
297
efficiency is higher than continuous operation. When coupling the PMS with a two-cathode
298
BMFC (one floating and one settling), Zhang et al. found that continuous sensor charging was
299
possible, but the charging rate was faster when only using the floating cathode.42 A multi-anode
300
decoupling circuit could be used to separately connect charge pumps with different anodes, so
301
interactions among anodes with different performances could be avoided.43
302
303
2.4 Maximum power point tracking and active energy harvesting
304
In addition to commercially available devices such as capacitors, charge pumps, and
305
boost converters, customized energy harvesting systems with maximum power point tracking
306
(MPPT) capability have been developed to increase power harvesting. While different systems
14
Page 15 of 33
307
have been reported with various performances, Table 1 shows the common components used in
308
such systems, and each unit has a specific function. For example, inductor stores energy in the
309
magnetic field; transformer transfers and amplifies energy through electromagnetic induction;
310
diode, metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET), and junction gate field-
311
effect transistor (JFET) are utilized as switches to prevent current reverse flow. Figure 2C shows
312
a two-layer energy-harvesting scheme, which can be used in conjunction with various converters
313
such as a boost converter or flyback converter to further increase the output voltage. The energy-
314
harvesting scheme was operated in alternative CHARGE and DISCHARGE phases.40,
315
During the CHARGE phase (the first half of the circuit in Figure 2C), the controller extracts
316
energy from MFCs and temporarily stores it in the inductor; during the DISCHARGE phase (the
317
second half of the circuit in Figure 2C), the controller discharges the energy from the inductor to
318
the capacitor for storage. To increase the harvesting efficiency, the inductor was replaced with a
319
transformer, and the diode was replaced by a MOSFET.59, 60 Adami et al. developed a flyback
320
converter by using a step-up transformer and a normally-on N-channel JFET transistor, and they
321
obtained an output voltage up to 7.5 V, which was much higher than the 3.3-5.0 V obtained from
322
commercial boost converters.61
57, 58
323
An MFC is a dynamic system that its internal resistance and power density curve vary
324
constantly with changes of microbial activities and operational parameters, such as substrate
325
concentration, pH, and temperature. This means that static energy harvesting without adaptation
326
to MFC real time condition cannot capture the peak energy all the time, and therefore the
327
efficiency is low. Great efforts have been made in the MPPT techniques which can successfully
328
track the maximum power production of MFCs in real-time, such as perturb and observe (P&O)
329
method, partial OCP method, and multiunit method, etc.11, 15, 62 An MPPT technique not only
15
Page 16 of 33
330
maximizes the power production of MFCs, but also reduces the start-up time and increases
331
exoelectrogenic activity and Coulombic efficiency.63 Moreover, the control of MPPT can be
332
applied on each MFC separately to achieve a high stack voltage without the issue of voltage
333
reversal.64 However, traditional MPPT techniques still adjust external resistances to demonstrate
334
the power production potential with no actual energy harvested. To actually use the MPPT real
335
time tracking and produce usable energy, Park and Ren built a hysteresis controller based MPPT
336
energy harvesting system, which can track the MPP and maintain the energy harvesting at the
337
peak level in real-time.12 Degrenne et al. developed an original converter system which contains
338
a voltage controller for maintaining the input voltage at the maximum power production stage.65
339
Based on the real-time MPPT, a maximum power point circuit (MPPC) was developed to
340
control a BES at any operation point along the power density curve, especially at the MPP for
341
MFC operation.40 This is a new energy harvesting approach that not only can capture the
342
maximum power from an MFC, but also harvest energy actively without using any external
343
resistance. Compared with traditional circuits using capacitors or charge pumps, which passively
344
receiving electrons from the reactor, this controller can actively extract energy from the MFC at
345
any operating point, especially at the peak power point to maximize energy production. Using
346
this active approach, the MPPC extracted 76 times more energy than the commonly used Seiko
347
charge pump, and the Coulombic efficiency increased by 21 times.40 Despite this dramatic
348
improvement, the efficiency of this diode-based boost converter was only about 36% with nearly
349
60% of energy lost, which means much more potential can be tapped. Follow-up studies showed
350
that by replacing the diode with a P-channel MOSFET or using a newly designed synchronous
351
yback converter, the efficiencies were improved by 37.6% and 73.0%, respectively.15, 59, 60 The
352
effects of inductance, duty ratio, and switching frequency on these power electronic converters
16
Page 17 of 33
353
for MFC energy extraction have also been investigated, and results indicated that these factors
354
play important roles for the performance of MFC and energy harvesting, and their effects can be
355
cross-linked. While current and voltage are generally proportional and inversely proportional to
356
the inductance, respectively, the total harvested energy and efficiency vary significantly by
357
combinations of duty ratio and switching frequency.66
358
359
3. CHALLENGES AND PERSPECTIVES
360
The generation of practically usable power is a critical milestone for further MFC
361
development and application, and how to effectively and efficiently harvest and utilize MFCs
362
energy remains a key challenge. This review discusses the different methods and systems that
363
have been developed for MFC energy extraction and conditions for practical use, but it is very
364
clear that more work needs to be done to optimize the design, improve harvesting efficiency, and
365
reduce the cost. We consider this is a main bottleneck for MFC application and should be a new
366
frontier of MFC research. To put it into perspective and stimulate more interests and research
367
activities, we think the following areas will require more investigations:
368
369 1.
The main challenge for MFC harvesting circuit or PMS design is to build an efficient system
370
that can operate at the low-level voltage/energy supplied by MFCs yet support high-level
371
voltage/energy electronic devices. Energy loss inevitably happens during each conversion
372
process, so it is imperative to develop a circuit with an acceptable complexity but with high
373
efficiency. This is especially critical for long distance distributed power applications such as
374
benthic MFCs, because the transmission loss can be significant. So far, almost all PMSs
375
developed for MFCs are discrete circuits that are built with various electric components,
376
which lead to low efficiency. Integrated circuits (ICs) or chips have been commonly used in
17
Page 18 of 33
377
all common electronic devices nowadays due to their small volume, low cost, low energy
378
consumption, and quick switch among components, so developing ICs for MFC energy
379
harvesting should be a primary task. This would inevitably need interdisciplinary
380
collaboration, and some groups have already started creating the high efficiency and high
381
performance ICs for MFCs16, 67 or adopting commercially available IC energy harvesters.68
382
383 2.
Another main challenge for many developed PMS circuits is that they are not autonomous,
384
which means that they require an external power source to either jumpstart or operate the
385
circuit for energy extraction from MFCs. Although the circuit has a better controllability
386
when supplied by an external power, this is not considered sustainable especially for stand-
387
alone sensor-type systems. SMFC-powered PMSs for monitoring environmental parameters
388
can become autonomous when intermittent operation is possible, which allows long energy
389
harvesting time. Reactor type MFCs used in wastewater treatment and other applications are
390
generally capable of maintaining the PMS operation due to their scale, but the direct voltage
391
or current from the MFC may not always meet the minimum requirements of the circuits to
392
carry out tasks continuously, and inverters requiring grid frequency or voltage maybe needed
393
for practical applications. To solve this problem, the MFC energy output and the PMS
394
operational requirement should be carefully evaluated, and more importantly, self-starting
395
and self-powering systems need to be developed. Several recent studies have reported such
396
systems, which require either a small jump start57 or no extra power16, 61, 65, 67, 69, 70 for self-
397
sustaining operation. The two key factors to develop self-sustaining PMSs are effective
398
energy harvesting strategies and low-power consuming circuits. On one hand, MPPT
399
function might be integrated in the PMSs to dynamically maximize the energy harvesting in
18
Page 19 of 33
400
real time; on the other hand, the PMSs should be managed effectively with minimum power
401
consumed. Further studies are still required to improve the system efficiency, lower the start-
402
up voltage, shorten the start-up time, investigate long-time performance and robustness,
403
implement pilot-scale and full-scale studies on field, etc.
404
405 3.
More on the evaluation of energy harvesting efficiency, we think quantitative methods need
406
to be developed similar as general MFC parameters like Coulombic efficiency. To optimize
407
capacitor charging, an MFC tester (MFCT) was developed to determine the optimum
408
capacitor sizes, charging/discharging potentials, the frequency of charging, the limiting
409
electrode and even the optimum size of the electrodes required to power a particular sensor.26
410
It is also necessary to optimize each component in the circuit to accommodate different MFC
411
capabilities. Wu et al. explained how to determine the value of each component for a voltage
412
boost circuit design.57 In literature, there are two ways to calculate energy harvesting
413
efficiency () (Equations 2 and 3).
414
=
415
=

!
100% (2)
100%
(3)
416
where "#$%&$% is the energy applied on the electronic devices or the energy output at the final
417
step of PMS; "'() is the energy produced by MFC only; "*+&$% is the total energy input into
418
the system including energy produced by BES and the extra energy added on the circuit;
419
Many studies used equation (2) to calculate energy harvesting efficiency, but it actually
420
presents the energy loss through the PMS or harvesting circuit, so cannot reflect the
421
overall energy harvesting efficiency when extra power is supplied. Instead, Equation (3) is
422
suggested to replace "'() with "*+&$% to present the total energy added on the whole
19
Page 20 of 33
423
system. If no extra energy is supplied on the circuit, the two calculations can be the same,
424
that is = . Therefore, focuses on the efficiency of the energy harvesting circuit, while
425
is to emphasize the importance of net energy harvesting.
426
427 4.
The scale up of MFC/BES technology has been largely focused on the reactor itself, while
428
current PMS has primarily focused on benthic MFCs and sediment MFCs because such
429
devices could meet the lower demand of remote sensors in practical operations.22, 48, 49, 71-73
430
Though the efficiency can be low and a long charging time is required, it is still acceptable
431
since most sensors dont need to work continuously. However, for wastewater treatment and
432
bioremediation, multiple MFC units have to be connected as stacks in order to obtain a
433
higher treatment efficiency and applicable power output, which requires high efficiency
434
power harvesting systems. The development of MFC stacks has been very challenging,
435
because the efficiency of MFC stacks was low and the performance was not stable due to the
436
nonlinear nature of MFCs. Unlike traditional fuel cell stacks, which depend on stable
437
chemical reactions in each unit to provide a higher system voltage output, MFCs rely on
438
relatively unstable microbial activity to provide potential and current outputs. The microbial
439
activity and resulted voltage output are very sensitive to environmental and operation
440
condition changes and can fluctuate significantly. Moreover, the overall performance of an
441
MFC-stack is generally limited by the worst performing unit(s), resulting in a reduced
442
efficiency.23 One solution for obtaining and maintaining power output from MFC stacks is to
443
connect each MFC unit with a separate energy harvesting controller and then make different
444
combinations of these pairs as needed.71 Each active harvester stores the captured energy in a
445
common reservoir. Once enough energy is captured in the reservoir, a separate boost
20
Page 21 of 33
446
converter can readily generate an appropriate voltage for the load. Connecting MFCs through
447
controllers allows real-time tracking and harvesting capability, and the power output can
448
avoid the issue of voltage reversal. If necessary, individual units can be simply removed from
449
the stack without affecting other units and the overall system performance.
450
451 5.
While most research focuses on system development, little is known that how energy
452
harvesting will change microbial activity and community. While passive harvesting using
453
charge pumps or capacitors may not affect such parameters much because these devices just
454
receive whatever amount of power provided by the MFC without controllability, power
455
electronics converters use pulse-shaped power extraction in high frequency may lead to
456
microbial community shifts and electron transfer mechanism changes. Our preliminary
457
results support the hypothesis that microbial activity, biofilm viability, and mix culture
458
community may shift and evolve during active power extraction. Such process creates a
459
selective pressure on the microbial community to regulate respiratory pathways for more
460
efficient electron transfer and ATP synthesis. Specifically, cells with multiple extracellular
461
electron transfer mechanisms may shift their mechanisms to more efficient pathways, such as
462
from mediated indirect transfer to direct transfer, while bacteria with more efficient electron
463
transfer mechanisms in a mixed culture may outcompete less efficient species as they are
464
more likely able to meet the requirements of high rate electron delivery. This will be a very
465
interesting topic to investigate.
466
467
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
21
Page 22 of 33
468
We thank the financial support from Dr. Linda Chrisey at the Office of Naval Research (ONR)
469
under Award N000141310901.
470
471
REFERENCES
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
1.
Wang, H.; Ren, Z. J., A comprehensive review of microbial electrochemical systems as a platform
technology. Biotechnol. Adv. 2013, 31, (8), 1796-1807.
2.
Harnisch, F.; Schrder, U., From MFC to MXC: chemical and biological cathodes and their
potential for microbial bioelectrochemical systems. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2010, 39, (11), 4433-4448.
3.
Logan, B. E., Scaling up microbial fuel cells and other bioelectrochemical systems. Appl.
Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2010, 85, (6), 1665-1671.
4.
Hamelers, H. V. M.; Heijne, A. T.; Sleutels, T. H. J. A.; Jeremiasse, A. W.; Strik, D. P. B. T. B.;
Buisman, C. J. N., New applications and performance of bioelectrochemical systems. Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol. 2010, 85, (6), 1673-1685.
5.
Wang, H., Ren, Z., Bioelectrochemical metal recovery from wastewater: A review. Water Res.
2014, 66, 219-232.
6.
Du, Z.; Li, H.; Gu, T., A state of the art review on microbial fuel cells: A promising technology for
wastewater treatment and bioenergy. Biotechnol. Adv. 2007, 25, (5), 464-482.
7.
Logan, B. E.; Hamelers, B.; Rozendal, R.; Schrder, U.; Keller, J.; Freguia, S.; Aelterman, P.;
Verstraete, W.; Rabaey, K., Microbial fuel cells: methodology and technology. Environ. Sci. Technol.
2006, 40, (17), 5181-5192.
8.
Ren, Z.; Yan, H.; Wang, W.; Mench, M. M.; Regan, J. M., Charaterization of microbial fuel cells at
microbially and electrochemically meaningful time scales. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, (6), 24352441.
9.
Lyon, D. Y.; Buret, F.; Vogel, T. M.; Monier, J.-M., Is resistance futile? Changing external
resistance does not improve microbial fuel cell performance. Bioelectrochemistry 2010, 78, (1), 2-7.
10.
Watson, V. J.; Logan, B. E., Analysis of polarization methods for elimination of power overshoot
in microbial fuel cells. Electrochem. Commun. 2011, 13, (1), 54-56.
11.
Degrenne, N.; Buret, F.; Allard, B.; Bevilacqua, P., Electrical energy generation from a large
number of microbial fuel cells operating at maximum power point electrical load. J. Power Sources 2012,
205, 188-193.
12.
Park, J.-D.; Ren, Z., Hysteresis controller based maximum power point tracking energy harvesting
system for microbial fuel cells. J. Power Sources 2012, 205, (9), 151-156.
13.
Logan, B. E.; Call, D.; Cheng, S.; Hamelers, H. V. M.; Sleutels, T. H. J. A.; Jeremiasse, A. W.;
Rozendal, R. A., Microbial electrolysis cells for high yield hydrogen gas production from organic matter.
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, (23), 8630-8640.
14.
Jacobson, K. S.; Drew, D. M.; He, Z., Use of a liter-scale microbial desalination cell as a platform
to study bioelectrochemical desalination with salt solution or artificial seawater. Environ. Sci. Technol.
2011, 45, (10), 4652-4657.
15.
Woodward, L.; Perrier, M.; Srinivasan, B.; Pinto, R. P.; Tartakovsky, B., Comparison of real-time
methods for maximizing power output in microbial fuel cells. AIChE J. 2010, 56, (10), 2742-2750.
16.
Erbay, C.; Bautista, S. C.; Sinencio, E. S.; Han, A., High performance monolithic power
management system with dynamic maximum power point tracking for microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 2014, 48, (23), 13992-13999.
22
Page 23 of 33
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
17.
Kim, Y.; Hatzell, M. C.; Hutchinson, A. J.; Logan, B. E., Capturing power at higher voltages from
arrays of microbial fuel cells without voltage resersal. Energy Environ. Sci. 2011, 4, (11), 4662-4667.
18.
Diamond, D.; Coyle, S.; Scarmagnani, S.; Hayes, J., Wireless sensor networks and chemo/biosensing. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, (2), 652-679.
19.
Shantaram, A.; Beyenal, H.; Raajan, R.; Veluchamy, A.; Lewandowski, Z., Wireless sensors
powered by microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, (13), 5037-5042.
20.
Yang, F.; Zhang, D.; Shimotori, T.; Wang, K.-C.; Huang, Y., Study of transformer-based power
management system and its performance optimizaiton for microbial fuel cells. J. Power Sources 2012,
205, 86-92.
21.
Zhang, D.; Yang, F.; Shimotori, T.; Wang, K.-C.; Huang, Y., Performance evaluation of power
management systems in microbial fuel cell-based energy harvesting applications for driving small
electronic devices. J. Power Sources 2012, 217, 65-71.
22.
Donovan, C.; Dewan, A.; Peng, H.; Heo, D.; Beyenal, H., Power management system for a 2.5 W
remote sensor powered by a sediment microbial fuel cell. J. Power Sources 2011, 196, (3), 1171-1177.
23.
Aelterman, P.; Rabaey, K.; Pham, H. T.; Boon, N.; Verstraete, W., Continuous electricity
generation at high voltages and currents using stacked microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006,
40, (10), 3388-3394.
24.
Dewan, A.; Beyenal, H.; Lewandowski, Z., Scaling up microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol.
2008, 42, (20), 7643-7648.
25.
Dewan, A.; Ay, S. U.; Karim, M. N.; Beyenal, H., Alternative power sources for remote sensors: A
review. J. Power Sources 2014, 245, 129-143.
26.
Dewan, A.; Donovan, C.; Heo, D.; Beyenal, H., Evaluating the performance of microbial fuel cells
powering electronic devices. J. Power Sources 2010, 195, (1), 90-96.
27.
Dewan, A.; Beyenal, H.; Lewandowski, Z., Intermittent energy harvesting improves the
performance of microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, (12), 4600-4605.
28.
Grondin, F.; Perrier, M.; Tartakovsky, B., Microbial fuel cell operation with intermittent
connection of the electrical load. J. Power Sources 2012, 208, (15), 18-23.
29.
Liang, P.; Wu, W.; Wei, J.; Yuan, L.; Xia, X.; Huang, X., Alternate charging and discharging of
capacitor to enhance the electron production of bioelectrochemical systems. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011,
45, (15), 6647-6653.
30.
Deeke, A.; Sleutels, T. H.; Hamelers, H. V. M.; Buisman, C. J. N., Capacitive bioanodes enable
renewable energy storage in microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, (6), 3554-3560.
31.
Ieropoulos, I. A.; Greenman, J.; Melhuish, C.; Horsfield, I., Microbial fuel cells for robotics: energy
autonomy through artificial symbiosis. ChemSusChem 2012, 5, (6), 1020-1026.
32.
http://www.h2fcsupergen.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/EcoBot-IV-a-robotic-energyharvester-George-Papaharalabos-Bristol-Robotics-Laboratory.pdf
33.
Walters, P.; Lewis, A.; Stinchcombe, A.; Stephenson, R.; Ieropoulos, I., Artificial heartbeat: design
and fabrication of a biologically inspired pump. Bioinspir. Biomim. 2013, 8, (4), 046012.
34.
Ieropoulos, I. A.; Ledezma, P.; Stinchcombe, A.; Papaharalabos, G.; Melhuish, C.; Greenman, J.,
Waste to real energy: the first MFC powered mobile phone. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2013, 15, (37),
15312.
35.
Ledezma, P.; Stinchcombe, A.; Greenman, J.; Ieropoulos, I., The first self-sustainable microbial
fuel cell stack. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2013, 15, (7), 2278-2281.
36.
Ren, S.; Xia, X.; Yuan, L.; Liang, P.; Huang, X., Enhancing charge harvest from microbial fuel cells
by controlling the charging and discharging frequency of capacitors. Bioresour. Technol. 2013, 146, 812815.
23
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
Page 24 of 33
37.
Papaharalabos, G.; Greenman, J.; Stinchcombe, A.; Horsfield, I.; Melhuish, C.; Ieropoulos, I.,
Dynamic electrical reconfiguration for improved capacitor charging in microbial fuel cell stacks. J. Power
Sources 2014, 272, 34-38.
38.
Hatzell, M. C.; Kim, Y.; Logan, B. E., Powering microbial electrolysis cells by capacitor circuits
charged using microbial fuel cell. J. Power Sources 2013, 229, 198-202.
39.
Liu, J.; Feng, Y.; He, W.; Gong, Y.; Qu, Y.; Ren, N., A novel boost circuit design and in situ
electricity application for elemental sulfur recovery. J. Power Sources 2014, 248, 317-322.
40.
Wang, H.; Park, J.-D.; Ren, Z., Active energy harvesting from microbial fuel cells at the maximum
power point without using resistors. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2012, 46, (9), 5247-5252.
41.
Forrestal, C.; Stoll, Z.; Xu, P.; Ren, Z. J., Microbial capacitive desalination for integrated organic
matter and salt removal and energy production from unconventional natural gas produced water.
Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol. 2015.
42.
Zhang, F.; Tian, L.; He, Z., Powering a wireless temperature sensor using sediment microbial fuel
cells with vertical arrangement of electrodes. J. Power Sources 2011, 196, (22), 9568-9573.
43.
Karra, U.; Muto, E.; Umaz, R.; Kllna, M.; Santoro, C.; Wang, L.; Li, B., Performance evaluation of
activated carbon-based electrodes with novel power management system for long-term benthic
microbial fuel cells. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2014, 39, (36), 21847-21856.
44.
Donovan, C.; Dewan, A.; Heo, D.; Beyenal, H., Batteryless, wireless sensor powered by a
sediment microbial fuel cell. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, (22), 8591-8596.
45.
Meehan, A.; Gao, H.; Lewandowski, Z., Energy harvesting with microbial fuel cell and power
management system. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2011, 26, (1), 176-181.
46.
Zhang, B.; He, Z., Energy production, use and saving in a bioelectrochemical desalination system.
RSC Adv. 2012, 2, (28), 10673-10679.
47.
Gao, H.; Meehan, A.; Lewandowski, Z., New microbial fuel cell power system for efficiency
improvement. In 2011 International Conference on Electrical Machines and Systems (ICEMS), Beijing,
2011; pp 1-5.
48.
McBride, L. R.; Girguis, P.; Reimers, C. E. In Power storage and conversion from an ocean
microbial energy source, OCEANS, Boston, Massachusetts, 2006; IEEE: Boston, Massachusetts, 2006; pp
1-5.
49.
Donovan, C.; Dewan, A.; Heo, D.; Lewandowski, Z.; Beyenal, H., Sediment microbial fuel cell
powering a submersible ultrasonic receiver: new approach to remote monitoring. J. Power Sources 2013,
233, 79-85.
50.
Thomas, Y. R. J.; Picot, M.; Carer, A.; Berder, O.; Sentieys, O.; Barrire, F., A single sedimentmicrobial fuel cell powering a wireless telecommunication system. J. Power Sources 2013, 241, 703-708.
51.
Tender, L. M.; Gray, S. A.; Groveman, E.; Lowy, D. A.; Kauffman, P.; Melhado, J.; Tyce, R. C.;
Flynn, D.; Petrecca, R.; Dobarro, J., The first demonstration of a microbial fuel cell as a viable power
supply: powering a meteorological buoy. J. Power Sources 2008, 179, (2), 571-575.
52.
Reimers, C. E.; Girguis, P.; III, H. A. S.; Tender, L. M.; Ryckelynck, N.; Whaling, P., Microbial fuel
cell energy from an ocean cold seep. Geobiology 2006, 4, (2), 123-136.
53.
Reimers, C. E.; Tender, L. M.; Fertig, S.; Wang, W., Harvesting energy from the marine sedimentwater interface. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2001, 35, (1), 192-195.
54.
Nielsen, M. E.; Wu, D. M.; Girguis, P. R.; Reimers, C. E., Influence of substrate on electron
transfer mechanisms in chambered benthic microbial fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 43, (22),
8671-8677.
55.
Tender, L. M.; Reimers, C. E.; III, H. A. S.; Holmes, D. E.; Bond, D. R.; Lowy, D. A.; Pilobello, K.;
Fertig, S. J.; Lovley, D. R., Harnessing microbially generated power on the seafloor. Nat. Biotechnol.
2002, 20, (8), 821-825.
24
Page 25 of 33
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
56.
Nielsen, M. E.; Reimers, C. E.; III, H. A. S., Enhanced power from chambered benthic microbial
fuel cells. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2007, 41, (22), 78957900.
57.
Wu, P. K.; Biffinger, J. C.; Fitzgerald, L. A.; Ringeisen, B. R., A low power DC/DC booster circuit
designed for microbial fuel cells. Process Biochem. 2012, 47, (11), 1620-1626.
58.
Park, J.-D.; Ren, Z., Hysteresis-controller-based energy harvesting scheme for microbial fuel cells
with parallel operation capability. IEEE Trans. Energy Conver. 2012, 27, (3), 715-724.
59.
Alaraj, M.; Ren, Z. J.; Park, J.-D., Microbial fuel cell energy harvesting using synchronous yback
converter. J. Power Sources 2014, 247, 636-642.
60.
Park, J.-D.; Ren, Z., High efficiency energy harvesting from microbial fuel cells using a
synchronous boost converter. J. Power Sources 2012, 208, 322-327.
61.
Adami, S. E.; Degrenne, N.; Vollaire, C.; Allard, B.; Buret, F.; Costa, F., Autonomous ultra-low
power DC/DC converter for microbial fuel cells. In 2011 18th IEEE International Conference on
Electronics, Circuits and Systems (ICECS), IEEE: Beirut 2011; pp 398-401.
62.
Pinto, R. P.; Srinivasan, B.; Guiot, S. R.; Tartakovsky, B., The efffect of real-time external
resistance optimization on microbial fuel cell performance. Water Res. 2011, 45, (4), 1571-1578.
63.
Molognoni, D.; Puig, S.; Balaguer, M. D.; Liberale, A.; Capodaglio, A. G.; Callegari, A.; Colprim, J.,
Reducing start-up time and minimizing energy losses of microbial fuel cells using maximum power point
tracking strategy. J. Power Sources 2014, 269, 403-411.
64.
Boghani, H. C.; Papaharalabos, G.; Michie, I.; Fradler, K. R.; Dinsdale, R. M.; Guwy, A. J.; Ioannis
Ieropoulos, D.; Greenman, J.; Premier, G. C., Controlling for peak power extraction from microbial fuel
cells can increase stack voltage and avoid cell reversal. J. Power Sources 2014, 269, 363-369.
65.
Degrenne, N.; Allard, B.; Buret, F.; Adami, S.-E.; Labrousse, D.; Vollaire, C.; Morel, F., A 140 mV
self-starting 10 mW DC/DC converter for powering low-power electronic devices from low-voltage
microbial fuel cells. J. Low Power Electron. 2012, 8, (4), 1-13.
66.
Wang, H.; Ren, Z.; Park, J.-D., Power electronic converters for microbial fuel cell energy
extraction: effects of inductance, duty ratio, and switching frequency. J. Power Sources 2012, 220, 89-94.
67.
Zhang, X.; Ren, H.; Pyo, S.; Lee, J.-I.; Kim, J.; Chae, J., A high-efficiency DC-DC boost converter for
a miniaturized microbial fuel cell. IEEE Trans. Power Electron. 2015, 30, (4), 2041-2049.
68.
Winfield, J.; Chambers, L. D.; Stinchcombe, A.; Rossiter, J.; Ieropoulos, I., The power of glove:
Soft microbial fuel cell for low-power electronics. J. Power Sources 2014, 249, 327-332.
69.
Degrenne, N.; Allard, B.; Buret, F.; Morel, F.; Adami, S.-E.; Labrousse, D., Comparison of 3 selfstarting step-up DC:DC converter topologies for harvesting energy from low-voltage and low-power
microbial fuel cells. In Proceedings of the 2011-14th European Conference on Power Electronics and
Applications (EPE 2011), IEEE Birmingham, 2011; pp 1-10.
70.
Degrenne, N.; Buret, F.; Morel, F.; Adami, S.-E.; Labrousse, D.; Allard, B.; Zaoui, A., Self-starting
DC:DC boost converter for low-power and low-voltage microbial electric generators. In Energy
Conversion Congress and Exposition (ECCE), 2011 IEEE, Phoenix, AZ, 2011; pp 889-896.
71.
Ewing, T.; Ha, P. T.; Babauta, J. T.; Tang, N. T.; Heo, D.; Beyenal, H., Scale-up of sediment
microbial fuel cells. J. Power Sources 2014, 272, 311-319.
72.
Wotawa-Bergen, A. Q.; Chadwick, D. B.; Richter, K. E.; Tender, L. M.; Reimers, C. E.; Gong, Y. In
Operational testing of sediment microbial fuel cells in San Diego Bay, OCEANS, Seattle, Washington,
2010; IEEE: Seattle, Washington, 2010; pp 1-6.
73.
Gong, Y.; Radachowsky, S. E.; Wolf, M.; Nielsen, M. E.; Girguis, P. R.; Reimers, C. E., Benthic
microbial fuel cell as direct power source for an acoustic modem and seawater oxygen/temperature
sensor system. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2011, 45, (11), 5047-5053.
74.
Anderson, I. A.; Ieropoulos, I. A.; McKay, T.; OBrien, B.; Melhuish, C., Power for robotic artificial
muscles. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 2011, 16, (1), 107-111.
25
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
Page 26 of 33
75.
Ieropoulos, I.; Melhuish, C.; Greenman, J. In Artificial metabolism: towards true energetic
autonomy in artificial life, European conference on artificial life-ECAL, Dortmund, Germany, 2003;
Dortmund, Germany, 2003; pp 792-799.
76.
Melhuish, C.; Ieropoulos, I.; Greenman, J.; Horsfield, I., Energetically autonomous robots: Food
for thought. Auton. Robot 2006, 21, (3), 187-198.
77.
Ieropoulos, I.; Melhuish, C.; Greenman, J.; Horsfield, I., EcoBot-II: An artificial agent with a
natural metabolism. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2006, 2, (4), 295-300.
78.
Ieropoulos, I.; Greenman, J.; Melhuish, C.; Horsfield, I. In EcoBot-III: a robot with guts,
Proceedings of the Alife XII Conference, Odense, Denmark, 2010; Odense, Denmark, 2010.
79.
Anderson, I. A.; Ieropoulos, I.; McKay, T.; OBrien, B.; Melhuish, C. In A hybrid microbial dielectric
elastomer generator for autonomous robots, Proc. of SPIE, San Diego, California, USA, 2010; Bar-Cohen,
Y., Ed. San Diego, California, USA, 2010; pp 76421Y-1.
663
26
800
700
Voltage (mV)
1000
MFC
MDC
600
800
500
400
600
300
400
200
100
High voltage,
low current
0
0
664
665
666
667
668
669
1200
Maximum
power points
MDC
2
3
4
5
Current density (A/m2)
Low
voltage,
high
current
200
Power density (mW/m2)
Page 27 of 33
0
7
Figure 1 Ideal operation conditions for different BESs, including microbial fuel cells (MFCs) and
microbial desalination cells (MDCs). The typical polarization (red) and power density curves (blue) were
generated using a lab scale recirculation-flow MFC. Microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) are not shown in
the figure because their operation points are beyond this range.
670
27
Page 28 of 33
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
Figure 2 Schematics of energy harvesting processes: (A) a concise process from MFCs (energy
generator) to electronic devices (energy consumer); (B) a classic and widely-adopted PMS
circuit composed of a charge pump and a boost converter with accessary components; (C) a twolayer energy-harvesting scheme, which is operated in alternative CHARGE and DISCHARGE
phases.
28
Page 29 of 33
Table 1 Key electronic components used in energy harvesting systems
686
Electronic components
Capacitor
Manufacturer & model number
Functions
Energy storage in an electric field
Ref.
46
Rechargeable battery
Duracell (DC2400 NiMH rechargeable

AAA battery)
Energy storage through electrochemical reactions
Charge pump
Seiko Instruments (S-882Z)
A DC/DC converter to step the voltage up or down
21, 22, 40,
Boost converter
Inductor
Transformer
Diode
Metaleoxideesemicondu
ctor feld-effect transistor
(MOSFET)
Junction gate field-effect
transistor (JFET)
43, 45, 47
21, 43, 45
STMicroelectronics (L6920DB)
Linear Technologies (LTC3108)
Texas Instruments (TPS61200)
Texas Instruments (TPS61201)
Maxim Semiconductor (max1797evkit)
AMI Electronics (T3005P)
Triad Magnetics (RC-7)
Triad Magnetics (CST206-1A)
Triad Magnetics (CST206-3A)
Coilcraft (LPR6235-253PML)
Coilcraft (LPR6235-752SML)
Wrth Elektronik (WE749197301)
Micro Commercial Components
(1N5711)
Fairchild Semiconductor (1N755A)
Fairchild Semiconductor (BAT54)
Avago Technologies (HSMS-286x)
Vishay (Si3460BDV)
Vishay (Si3499DV)
Advanced Linear Device (ALD110800)
ON Semiconductor (4906NG)
Diodes Incorporated (DMG6968)
Energy transfer through electromagnetic induction
Vishay (2N4338)
A transistor that amplifies electronic signals
20, 21, 50
48
A DC/DC converter to step up the voltage
42, 46
47
19
74
Energy storage in a magnetic field
66
61
20
65, 69
40, 66
A switch that blocks reverse current flow
59
65
65
21, 45, 66
21, 45
A transistor that switches electronic signals
20
59
65
61
29
Comparator
Oscillators
Energy harvesting board

Advanced Linear Devices (ALD1502)
Advanced Linear Devices (EH4295)
Compare a voltage/current against a reference and

output a digital signal indicating whether the
voltage/current reaches the set level
Produces a periodic and oscillating signal, such as
square waves
An integrated circuit ready for energy harvesting
Page 30 of 33
57
68
687
30
Page 31 of 33
Table 2 Summary of Studies Reported Energy Harvesting Systems for BESs
688
689
NO.
BES
Main electronic
components
Input
voltage (V)
Input power
(mW)
Capacitor-based systems
Direct charging
40 single-chamber
1
4.2-4.55
MFC-stack
8 single-chamber
2
MFC-stack
8 single-chamber
3
MFC-stack
Capacitor
8 single-chamber
4
MFC-stack
24 single-chamber
5
MFC-stack
24 single-chamber
6
MFC-stack
24 single-chamber
Rechargeable
7
MFC-stack
battery
Intermittent energy harvesting (IEH, a.k.a. intermittent charging (IC))
8
Two-chamber MFC
9
Single-chamber MFC
Capacitor
10
Single-chamber MFC
Alternate charging and discharging (ACD)
Two-chamber
11
Capacitor
MFC/MEC
Charging capacitors in parallel and discharging in series
12
Single-chamber MFC
0.7
0.73-0.78
Capacitor
13
Single-chamber MFC
0.3
14
Single-chamber MFC
Charging capacitive electrodes
Quasi-capacitor
15
Two-chamber MFC
(capacitive
electrode)
Charge pump-based systems
16
Two-chamber MFC
0.633
Charge pump,
Three-chamber
17
Capacitor
MCDC
Output
voltage (V)
Output power
(mW)
Efficiency
(%)
Need external
power (Y/N)
Maximum power
point (Y/N)
95.2b
35
75
76, 77
78
32
33
34
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
27
29
Y
Y
Y
N
N
N
17
30
4.3b
40
0.94b
41
0.152
>90
2.5
0.48
0.73-0.78
1.0
100a
90a
Ref.
36
37
38
39
31
Boost converter-based systems

Capacitor -boost converter systems
Rechargeable
Upflow MDC
18
battery, DC/DC
(UMDC)
boost converter
19
Benthic MFC
Upflow MDC
20
(UMDC)
21
Benthic MFC
22
23
Sediment MFC
Capacitor,
DC/DC boost
converter
Sediment MFC
12 two-chamber MFC24
stack
12 two-chamber MFC25
stack
26
Sediment-MFC
Capacitor-transformer-boost converter systems
Capacitor,
27
Single-chamber MFC
transformer
28
Single-chamber MFC
Capacitor,
transformer,
29
Single-chamber MFC
DC/DC boost
30
Sediment MFC
converter
Capacitor-charge pump-boost converter systems
31
Single-chamber MFC
32
Sediment MFC
33
Sediment MFC
Capacitor,
34
Benthic MFC
charge pump,
35
Sediment MFC
DC/DC boost
36
Benthic MFC
converter
37
Benthic MFC
38
Sediment-MFC
Custom-designed systems
39
Two-chamber MFC
Capacitor,
40
Two-chamber MFC
inductor, diode
Maximum power point-based systems
Capacitor,
41
Two-chamber MFC
inductor, diode
3.25
72
2.1
Page 32 of 33
86.6a
3.3
3.3
46
19
72
3.3
41.8a
46
79b
47
3-10.4
75.3b
49
0.5
3.3
2.85
3.6
9
48
1800
74
3-5
1800
79
0.4
55b
72
0.475
2-7.5
58b
61
N
N
N
N
20
50
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
21
43
N
N
N
N
73
3-13a
<67.7a
Y
Y
N
N
57
36.0a
40
3.25
0.7
0.7
0.79
0.18
0.37
3.3
3.3
0.6
1.7-3.3
0.3
3.3
0.052-0.32
0.6
0.5
0.174
3.3
3.3
3.3
1.12-1.44
3.3
0.4
3.52
36.97
95
95
95
2500
4.29
5.33b
<70
0.3160.372
95
22.5437.80b
60
0.2-0.4
>3
2.5
21
22
44
45
42
71
66
32
Page 33 of 33
42
Two-chamber MFC
43
Two-chamber MFC
44
Two-chamber MFC
45
Single-chamber MFC
46
Single-chamber MFC
47
Single-chamber MFC
48
Benthic MFC
Integrated circuit-based systems
49
Single-chamber MFC
50
Two-chamber MFC
51
Two-chamber
miniaturized MFC
690
691
692
Capacitor,
transformer
Capacitor,
inductor
Capacitor,
transformer,
diode
unknown
Commercial IC,
capacitors
Customdesigned IC
0.3
2.2
0.28-0.33
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.35
0.06-0.17
0.36
0.4
0.6-0.7
59
75.9a
Y
Y
N
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
60
68
17b
30b
16
<85b
67
0.6-2
46.1a
18
73
66.5-80.6b
74b
85b
>3
0.328
0.512
2.5
85
0.9-1.2
12
65
69
70
51
The efficiency presents the circuit efficiency ( ) only. External power was provided but not included in the calculation.
The efficiency presents both the circuit efficiency ( ) and the overall system efficiency ( ). No external power was provided or
external power is included in the calculation.
b
33

Wang 2015

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Wang 2015

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Subscriber access provided by LOCK HAVEN UNIV

Practical Energy Harvesting for Microbial Fuel Cells: A Review

Environmental Science & Technology is published by the American Chemical Society.

Environmental Science & Technology

Practical Energy Harvesting for Microbial Fuel Cells: A Review

Heming Wang, Jae-Do Park, and Zhiyong Jason Ren *

Department of Civil, Environmental, and Architectural Engineering,

Department of Electrical Engineering,

University of Colorado Denver, Denver, Colorado 80204

Park E-mail: jaedo.park@ucdenver.edu,

Corresponding author Ren E-mail: jason.ren@colorado.edu

Phone: (303) 492-4137; Fax: (303) 492-7317

Environmental Science & Technology

further advanced and applied in larger scale.

Environmental Science & Technology

decade, because it offers a solution for environmental sustainability by simultaneously

to convert the chemical energy stored in biodegradable substances to direct electricity.

value-added chemicals such as H2 in microbial electrolysis cells (MECs) or driving water

desalination in microbial desalination cells (MDCs).1, 2 The advancements in reactor architecture,

relieved the physical and chemical constraints of reactor systems,3,

Environmental Science & Technology

organic removal, so a balance in operation during different phases needs to be considered

Environmental Science & Technology

Rint if the operating voltage is not at the MPP.15

composed of multiple electronics, such as off-the-shelf capacitors, rechargeable batteries, charge

Environmental Science & Technology

overcome these barriers of MFC application.

2. ENERGY HARVESTING TECHNOLOGIES

Environmental Science & Technology

sections we elaborate on each specific energy-harvesting regime for MFCs.

2.1 Capacitor-based systems

A capacitor is composed of two conductive terminals separated by a dielectric material,

capacitor is charged from V (V) to  (V) can be calculated by

capacitive electrodes (Figure 2A and Table 2).17, 27-30

Environmental Science & Technology

create a self-sustainable MFC stack system.35

Environmental Science & Technology

comparing with MFC stack with serial connections.37

mode were lower than those in the IC mode.

(ECD), which obtained a sulfur recovery efficiency up to 46.51.5%.39

Another new capacitor-based energy harvesting is quasi-capacitor-based method. In such

systems, a capacitive bioanode was constructed by coating a capacitive layer consisted of a

Environmental Science & Technology

2.2 Charge pump-based systems

Environmental Science & Technology

after the charge pump for voltage boost.

2.3 Boost converter-based systems

Environmental Science & Technology

several studies used a boost converter (L6920DB, STMicroelectronics) to obtain an output

changes in environmental conditions.

Environmental Science & Technology

boost converters to continuously power a real-time clock (RTC) in a sensor system.49

voltage by transferring energy through electromagnetic induction. The advantage of transformers

Environmental Science & Technology

interactions among anodes with different performances could be avoided.43

2.4 Maximum power point tracking and active energy harvesting

In addition to commercially available devices such as capacitors, charge pumps, and

Environmental Science & Technology

diode, metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET), and junction gate field-

harvesting scheme was operated in alternative CHARGE and DISCHARGE phases.40,

commercial boost converters.61

Environmental Science & Technology

Environmental Science & Technology

combinations of duty ratio and switching frequency.66

capacitor is charged from V (V) to (V) can be calculated by

is to emphasize the importance of net energy harvesting.