Microalgae at niches of bioelectrochemical systems: A new platform for sustainable energy production coupled industrial effluent treatment

Accepted Manuscript Microalgae at niches of bioelectrochemical systems: A new platform for sustainable energy production coupled industrial effluent treatment

Surajbhan Sevda, Vijay Kumar Garlapati, Swati Sharma, Sourish Bhattacharya, Sandhya Mishra, T.R. Sreekrishnan, Deepak Pant PII: DOI: Article Number: Reference:

S2589-014X(19)30180-X https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biteb.2019.100290 100290 BITEB 100290

To appear in:

Bioresource Technology Reports

Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

26 May 2019 17 July 2019 17 July 2019

Please cite this article as: S. Sevda, V.K. Garlapati, S. Sharma, et al., Microalgae at niches of bioelectrochemical systems: A new platform for sustainable energy production coupled industrial effluent treatment, Bioresource Technology Reports, https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.biteb.2019.100290

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT MICROALGAE AT NICHES OF BIOELECTROCHEMICAL SYSTEMS: A NEW PLATFORM FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY PRODUCTION COUPLED INDUSTRIAL EFFLUENT TREATMENT *1

Surajbhan Sevda, 2Vijay Kumar Garlapati, 2Swati Sharma, 3Sourish Bhattacharya, 3Sandhya

Department of Biosciences and Biotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati,

Department of Biotechnology and Bioinformatics, Jaypee University of Information

NU

2

SC

Assam-781039, India

RI

1

PT

Mishra, 4T R Sreekrishnan, 5Deepak Pant

Technology (JUIT), Waknaghat, HP -173234, India Division of Biotechnology and Phycology, CSIR- Central Salt and Marine Chemicals

MA

3

Research Institute, Bhavnagar-364002, India Department of Biochemical Engineering and Biotechnology, Indian Institute of Technology

D

4

5

PT E

Delhi, New Delhi-110016, India Separation and Conversion Technology, Flemish Institute for Technological Research

AC

CE

(VITO), Boeretang 200, Mol 2400, Belgium

Type of article: Mini Review *Corresponding author: Dr Surajbhan Sevda Email: [email protected], [email protected] Tel.no/Fax.no: +91-361 2583216

1

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Abstract Bioelectrochemical system represents a novel technology where the microbial catalytic reaction occurs at bioanode and results in bioelectricity generation from waste and renewable biomass. At the current stage, fossil-based fuel is depleting, so newly sustainable form of

PT

renewable energy resources is required, where algal-based biofuel generation provides a new source of energy along with sequestration of atmospheric carbon dioxide, which in turn

RI

decreases the global warming issues. This review emphasizes the potential applications of

SC

microalgae-based bioelectrochemical systems for renewable power generation, wastewater treatment, CO2 sequestration and value-added products. Moreover, this critical review also

MA

current potential challenges and drawbacks.

NU

highlights the current developments in microalgal MFC integrated systems by discussing the

Keywords: Microalgae, Bioelectricity generation, Biological wastewater treatment,

AC

CE

PT E

D

Microbial fuel cell

2

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1. Introduction The global population is estimated to enhance up to nine billion by2050 and forecasts the demand for excess 50% fuel consumption, which is eventually responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions. Presently, one-fifth of world's total energy consumption is in the

PT

form of electricity, while four-fifth is utilized as fuel (Lee, 2017). The depletion of fossil fuels and technological drawbacks associated with the biofuel technology triggers the search

RI

for sustainable energy setup technologies such as bioelectrochemical systems (BES)

SC

(Searchinger et al., 2017; Joshi et al., 2017) .In recent years, microalgae have been explored for different bioenergy commodities due to various positive attributes such as faster growth

NU

rates, fewer media requirements for growth, higher biomass yield with CO2 sequestration

MA

abilities and probable capability towards integrated high-value product chains (Kumar et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2015a; Ho et al., 2011).Various research reports concluded its sustainability for biofuels and industrial commodities production cost-effectively through

PT E

D

biorefinery approach (Yen et al., 2013). After complete extraction of value-added compounds, the spent biomass can be utilized for obtaining biofuels such as natural gas, crude oil or biohydrogen through gasification of thermo-chemical liquefaction (Gonzalez-

CE

Fernandez et al., 2015; Chen et al., 2015b).

AC

The focus is currently directed to utilize the microalgae in BES that has proven a sustainable, economical platform for the production of bioelectricity, biohydrogen and different industrial commodities (Zou and He, 2018). The main drawback associated with the BES's include the high cost of the nutrients utilizing at the anode, energy-intensive supply of oxygen at the cathode, the high cost of the cathode material and undeveloped integrated start-up chains (Nitisoravut et al., 2017; Pasupuleti et al., 2016). Microalgae seem to be a viable solution to tackle the drawback associated with the BES's. Microalgae can grow well even in waste/brackish/marine water by sequestering CO2 from the environment by utilizing the 3

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT sunlight (Baicha et al., 2016). BES is also a proven technology for wastewater treatment by reducing the chemical oxygen demand (COD) along with the removal of nitrogen and phosphorous (Sevda et al., 2018). These nutrients serve as substrates at the anode in Microbial Fuel Cell MFC (MFC) technology towards bioelectricity production (Nguyen et al., 2017). Moreover, utilization of microalgae at cathode also possesses some process

PT

advantages such as sequestering ability of CO2 from anodic compartment which ends up with

RI

the surplus supply of oxygen at the cathode (otherwise the oxygen has to be supplied

SC

externally) (Kumar et al., 2017) . Moreover, feeding of treated wastewater from anode serves as a reliable growth medium for existing microalgae at the cathode, which ends up with the

NU

high-biomass yields. The algal biomass is a viable source for high-value products such as feed, pharmaceutical and industrial compounds (Jha et al., 2017). The utilization of

MA

microalgae in BES's put forth the possibilities for integrated biorefinery approach, which is utmost essential to enhance the economy of the process (Saratale et al., 2017). Figure 1

AC

CE

PT E

D

depicts the possible avenues of microalgae in BES.

Microalgae

By providing the nutrients

Bioelectricity products

At Anode

Treated wastewater

Bioelectrochemical systems

At Cathode

O2 production

Bioelectricity products

CO2sequestration products

4

Biomass production sequestrationseque

High value products

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Figure 1: Possible avenues of microalgae in BES. The present review encompasses the different opportunities and technological interventions with the microalgae-based BES's for sustainable energy technologies with integrated cleaner approaches towards the healthier world

PT

2. Microalgae-based BES's for sustainable and cleaner communities generation In the last decade, BES emerged a new way for energy production by treating wastewater and

RI

nutrient recovery (Colombo et al., 2017; Goglio et al., 2019). There are many new designs, which were developed to achieve high-energy production system. MFC technology is the

SC

well-studied BES technology where exo-electrogenic bacteria play important role utilization of substrate and e-generation at the anode. The generated e- transferred to cathode with the aid

NU

of external circuit. Proton exchange membrane helps in diffusion of protons from anode to cathode (Montpart et al., 2014).

MA

The well-steady route of biofuels from microalgae paves the way for utilization in MFC technologies towards bioelectricity production. The utilization of microalgae in MFC systems

and

high

value-added

product

chain

streams

(Bajracharya

et

al.,

PT E

CO2capture

D

facilitates the bioelectricity production coupled with the industrial effluent treatment,

2016).Microalgae served as a favourable inclusion in MFC technology due to the electron

CE

acceptor (during photosynthesis) and electron donor (at anode/cathode) tendencies with the nutrient removal abilities (Gude, 2016; Wu et al., 2014 & 2013).

AC

The syntrophic interaction of microalgae and exo-electrogenic bacteria facilitates the Microalgae-based MFC’s to work with the least energy input. The working principle of algal MFC comprises the oxidation of substrates and electrons generations at anodic chamber and evolution of CO2 at cathodic chamber. Production of oxygen at cathodic chamber depends mainly on the oxygenic photosynthesis, which takes place during the electron transfer from water to NADP (with the aid of PS’s I & II, cytochrome b6f complex, plastocyanin and plastoquinone) (Commault et al., 2014). At the cathode, microalgae produce oxygen and

5

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT biomass from available CO2 in presence of light through photosynthesis. The produced oxygen in light phase used by microalgae in the dark phase to produce energy through the direct oxidation of available organic matter (Juang et al., 2012). In some studies, cyanobacteria have been reported to act as a catalyst at anodic chamber for acquired exoelectrogenic activity by dividing the production of O2 (Parlevliet and Moheimani, 2014;

PT

Rosenbaum et al., 2010).Ma et al., (2017) reported the efficiency of Chlorella –driven MFC

RI

in production of electricity along with the biomass production. The potential of alga-based MFC for nitrification/denitrification was reported by Zhu et al., (2016), which highlight the

SC

efficiency of algal MFC’s in removal of nitrogen from various industrial effluents. In another

NU

study by Salar-García et al., (2016), enhanced energy production was reported by utilizing the catholyte from ceramic MFC, which helps in more degradation of algal biomass during light

MA

and dark phases. Saba et al., (2017) studied the effect of different parameters on the MFC performance towards wastewater treatment, bioelectricity and biomass production. The other

D

study by Baicha et al., (2016) showed the efficacy of algal MFC in energy production with

PT E

concomitant usage of CO2 for biomass production in cathodic chamber. Several researchers also investigated intervention of microalgae in BES and microbial

KFe (CN)

6

CE

desalination cells (MDCs). A comparative study on the usage of Nannochloropsis salina and as catholyte was done by Saba et al., (2017) for desalination and power

AC

production with MDC and concluded that enhanced results were obtained with N. salina and KFe (CN) 6for desalination and with KFe (CN) 6 for power production. The effect of light on biomass and electricity production in Desmodesmus driven single chambered membrane less MFC was studied by Wu et al., (2013) and found that enhanced results were obtained with the usage of bright light. The study showed the efficiency of microalgae in catalysing the electron transfer to the respective electrode without the usage of any external circuit. Blue-green microalgae namely Spirulina platensis was also studied in

6

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT membrane MFC and reported the power density outputs of 0.132mW m-2 (under light conditions) and 1.64 mW m-2(under dark conditions) (Fu et al., 2010).

Table 1: Microalgae-based MFC systems for bioelectricity production.

Electrodes

Reference

Anode: Plain Cathode: carbon paper platinum coated carbon paper

(Kakarla and Min, 2014)

Chlorella vulgaris

Double chamber

13.5 mW m-2

Anode: Toray Cathode: (Del Campo carbon cloths 1 Toray carbon et al., 2014) Cloths with 10% Teflon

Chlorella vulgaris

Double chamber

8.79 mW m-2

Anode: Carbon felt

Chlorella vulgaris

Double chamber

1926 mW m-2

Chlorella vulgaris

Double chamber

62.7 mW m-2

Escherichia coli

Single chamber

91 mW m-2

Sludge wastewater

Double chamber

Geobacterspp

Double chamber Single chamber Single chamber

Arthrospira maxima Chlorella vulgaris

Double chamber Single chamber

Scenedesmus obliquus

Double chamber

Cathode: (Zhou et al., Carbon fiber 2012) cloth Cathode: (Cui et al., fiber Carbon cloth 2014)

Anode: Carbon brush Anode: Plain Cathode: Plain (Gouveia Graphite Graphite al., 2014)

D

Anode: Mn4þgraphite

PT E

CE

AC

Chlorella vulgaris Spirulina platensis

RI

Double chamber

SC

Scenedesmus obliquus

PT

Power density 153 mW m-2

NU

MFC design

MA

Algal used

125 mW cm-2

Anode: Graphite carbon

Cathode: graphite

Fe (Park

Cathode: Graphite carbon cathode 0.16e1.14 A Anode: Cathode: m-2 Graphite Graphite -2 0.068 W m Anode: Cathode: Carbon paper Carbon paper 6.5 mW m-2 Anode: Cathode: Platinum Platinum electrodes cathode 20.5 mW m-2 Anode: Cathode: Graphite Graphite -2 2.7 mW m Anode: glassy Cathode: graphite rods Glassy graphite rods 102 mW m-2 Anode: Toray Cathode: carbon paper Toray carbon paper

7

Zeikus, 2003) (Bond Lovley, 2003)

et

and

and

(Zhang et al.,

2011) (Zhang et al., 2011) (Fu et al., 2010) (Inglesby

et

al., 2013) (Powell al., 2011)

et

(Kondaveeti

et al., 2014)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The enhanced results under dark conditions avoids the cost incurring for providing light conditions, the proposed microalgal based single chambered is an ideal choice for long runs. This design also helpful to add the microalgae in immobilized forms on the electrodes, which

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

can serve as a green biocatalyst for bioelectricity production (Fig.2).

PT E

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of a double chamber MFC (bacteria in anode and microalgae in

CE

cathode) incorporated with wastewater handling/hydrogen producing bioreactor.

Some researchers reported the enhanced results with the synergistic action of microalgae with

AC

the bacteria (Lactobacillus/Geobactersp. and Chlamydomonas reinhardtii) towards higher efficiency of the single chambered MFC. In this configuration, initially microalgae produce organic acids with the aid of light conditions, the produced organic acids serve as substrates for the bacteria for further generation of electricity (0.078 W m-2power density) (Nishio et al., 2013).Yuan et al., (2011) reported the efficiency of blue-green driven single chambered MFC for bioremediation of industrial effluents with concomitant electricity. The treatment of industrial effluent with algal driven MFC results in a considerable reduction of COD (78.9%) 8

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT and nitrogen (96.8%) with a resultant of 114 mW m-2power generation. The proposed configuration also removes the algal toxins released by the microalgae. In another research, development of microalgal driven MFC was reported by De Caprariis et al., (2014), where they developed a Chlorella vulgaris driven photovoltaic cell for clean energy generation. The setup comprises the immersed anode in and the cathode exposed to

PT

the contiguous air which omits the usage of organic and mediators. Without any CO2

RI

production, the exo-electrogenic capabilities of C. vulgaris, the developed system generated

SC

the electricity with a14 mW m-2 power density. The study reveals the possible application of microalgae in MFC systems for better process configurations with enhanced electricity

NU

production.

The present review emphasizes the new configurations of microalgae driven MFC’s for

MA

electricity production. The major types of designs used in conjunction with microalgae include single- and dual chamber types, photosynthetic sediment MFC, microbial carbon

D

capture cells, anode catalysed MFC, dark anode compartment MFC (using microalgae as a

PT E

substrate) and photo-bio electrochemical integrated systems. All the types of algal driven MFC’s have their merits and demerits in production of bioelectricity with different extents of

CE

power densities. However, the exact mechanism for different mechanistic pathways in the electrochemical environment is not yet elucidated. Revealing the mechanisms for the algal

AC

intervention in MFC systems will helpful to understand the heuristics of the systems with probable optimization of developed algal-MFC configurations. Apart from the mechanistic pathways, the role of ecological parameters on the synergetic action of algae with bacteria in electricity production has to be addressed. The present scenario of lack of substrate in bioenergy sector, microalgal biomass represents a viable substrate and receiving more attention. In near future, the algal applied research extends to utilize in MFC technologies for bioelectricity production research/development.

9

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The proposed research of algal driven MFC technology also needs to aim for well-designed sustainable commercially viable platform for growing market demands of electricity. More research and development efforts have to be made to streamline the microalgae based BES’s for various energy commodities through utilization of isolated / mixed microalgal species. Microalgae at the anode

PT

Xu et al., (2015) investigated the green microalgae Chlorella pyrenoidosa as an electron

RI

donor at the anode of MFC. In this study, light intensity, microalgal cell density and oxygen content was controlled at the anode for the enhanced performance of MFC. The study reveals

SC

the highest current generation (6.03 W/m2) using allows light intensity (2500 lx) and 5 x

NU

106cell/ml of microalgal cell density. Cui et al., (2014) compared the microalgae-based MFC with acetate-based MFC for bioelectricity production. The use of microalgae as biomass

MA

MFC showed better performance compared to acetate based MFC. However, the performed studies were state of the art baseline for using microalgal biomass as a substrate at the MFC

D

anode. The obtained maximum power density and columbic efficiency seemed to be equal to

PT E

1.92 W/m2 and 6.3%, respectively.

2.1. Phototrophic microalgae assisting the cathode process

CE

Biocathodes seems to be possible alternatives for abiotic cathodes used in BES. The process advantages of biocathodes over abiotic cathodes include the less cost, sustainability, easy

AC

assistance, lesser degradation and toxicity (Nitisoravut et al., 2017; Lee et al., 2015). Microalgae at the cathode in the BES put forth multiple benefits such as carbon dioxide reduction, oxygen supply, industrial effluent treatment and biomass production and (, (Luo et al., 2017; Xiao and He, 2014). Microalgae present at cathode chamber of MFC carry out photosynthesis in the presence of light and converts CO2 to generate oxygen and biomass (Wu et al., 2013).

10

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Production of oxygen by algae at the cathode is an energy-intensive process in BES. Usually, the low values of power generation with microalgae at MFC cathode compartment attributed to the reduction of oxygen to water. Utilization of microalgae at MFC’s cathode is the viable strategy to tackle the oxygen reduction (Saba et al., 2017). Microalgae at cathode provide a continuous supply of oxygen which is one of the viable strategies than the proposed strategies

PT

of addition of reducing salt (Lay et al., 2015), catalyst application at cathode (Ren et al.,

RI

2013), sparging of oxygen at cathodic chamber and rotation of electrode (He et al., 2007).

SC

Microalgae as a thin biofilm on cathode surface can limit the diffusion of oxygen, which eventually enhances the MFC performance towards improved power generation (Gajda et al.,

NU

2015). Production of oxygen at cathode also stimulates the power generation in MFC along with the light illumination (del Campo et al., 2013; Lobato et al., 2013; Xiao et al., 2012).

MA

The dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration at cathode compartment assisted with microalgae will be in a range of 0-20 mg L-1 which was equivalent or superior to the mechanical oxygen

D

supply (Xiao et al., 2012 ) . The utilization of Scenedismus obliquus as biocathode of MFC

PT E

results in oxygen generation, which provides the aeration to the system and helps in generating a higher power density (32%) than the mechanical aeration (Kakarla and Min,

CE

2014). The oxygen produced by phototrophic biocathode also provides enough gas for oxygen reduction, which has been revealed through the studies in first stack-biotic-MFCs

AC

using microalgae at cathode compartment (Gajda et al., 2015). Light intensity is also an important parameter, which affects algae-assisted cathodes. The studies on the effect of light and dark conditions on cathodic MFC performance revealed the no power generation under dark conditions (Xiao et al., 2012; Chandra et al., 2012). The effect of light intensity on the biocathodic photo-MFC's comprising the Desmodesmus sp. A8 and Chlorella vulgaris reveal the profound impact of light intensity on cathode and anode resistances subsequently on voltage. The results suggested that a light intensity around 3000 lx, the voltage pattern of

11

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT photo-MFC reaches a plateau (Wu et al., 2013). Liu and Cheng, (2014) also reported a higher power density (187 mW m–2) under light illumination conditions rather than utilizing the dark conditions (21 mW m–2). Lan et al., (2013) studied the effect of different light and its intensities on cathodic MFC microalgae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii transformationF5 and found that better performance with higher light intensities, significant power density (12.95

PT

mW m− 2) with red light illumination and opposing results with blue light illumination.

RI

Moreover, higher power output was reported with continuous mode of photo-MFC with

SC

biocathode (Chlorella vulgaris) rather than with the sequencing- batch mode (del Campo et al., 2013). The oxygen production at cathode assisted with microalgae is reduced by

NU

accepting the electrode from a cathode (Wu et al., 2013). Along with the oxygen production, the cathode assisted microalgae helps in catalysing the cathode reactions such as enhanced

MA

current density than the abiotic cathode utilization. The reactive oxygen species such as H2O2 and superoxide anion radicals serve as electron acceptors for electricity generation (Cai et al.,

D

2013) Apart from Chlorella sp., cyanobacteria and Scenedesmus obliquus utilization at MFC

PT E

cathode results in a power density of 52-100 mW/m2 and 951 W/m³, respectively (Patil et al., 2012; Kokabian and Gude, 2013). The research findings of Zhou et al., (2012) suggested the

CE

utilization of immobilized algal cells at cathode enhanced columbic efficiency up to 88% rather than using suspended algal cells. The better performance of cathode assisted with the

AC

C. vulgaris at abiotic cathode was also reported in microbial desalination (MDS) cell operation which results in twice salt removal (40.1%) than the MDC with the abiotic cathode (Kokabian and Gude, 2013) .

Table 2: Summary of role of different microalgae species as a substrate, cathodic and anodic material in BES’s

12

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

S. No. Species

Outcomes

MFC Configuration/

References

Yield As a substrate As there is formation of algal bloom in

Two chambers / 80%

aeruginosa,

the environment, there is production of

reduction in COD with

Chlorella vulgaris

algal organic matter (AOM).It removes

production of

maxima

waste during anaerobic digestion for

removal and coulombic et al., 2013

production of biogas. For remove and

efficiency

utilization of this effluent in digester,

with

MFC placed below.

power generation.

Scenedesmus sp.

MA

NU

The biomass contain large amount of

chamber/COD

algal biomass and activated sludge both

voltage

act as feedstock in MFC

generation.

CE

to

the

chamber/0.89V ( Rashid et of

power al., 2013)

Laminaria

The two chamber system in MFC where

saccharina

microbial culture used as biocatalyst and transfer resistance 50 Gadhamshe Laminaria as anode. Different

Two

( Inglesby

enhanced & 2012)

respect

Two

AC

4

Two

For the production of electricity the

PT E

3

al., 2012)

Arthrospira

D

2

(Wang et

electricity.

SC

the trihalomethane (THM) by the MFC.

PT

Microcystis

RI

1

chamber/charge (

fold higher.

pretreatment given to the algal biomass

tty et al., 2013)

to attain maximum power.

5

Scenedesmus

The microalgae Scendesmus biomass act Two chamber/

[41, 69] (

obliquus

as feedstock. The acetate and lactate

electricity production

Kondaveeti

present in the biomass shows max.

276 mA·m−2.

et al., 2014;

Power generation and highly COD

Hur et al.,

removal.

2014)

13

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 6

Chlorella vulgaris,

These algal cultures grow anaerobically

Two chamber/ Butanol

(

Dunaliella

in the waste sludge digester. Both have

2.5 mM-16 mM

Lakaniemi

tertiolecta

capacity to produce the electricity.

et al., 2012)

Mixed algae

The algal biomass because of its growth

Two chamber / removal ( Strik et

and high lipid content make its more

of algal sludge and

al., 2008;

promising to formation of biogas by

power production.

De

PT

7

Schamphel aire and

RI

their anaerobic digestion.

2009)

SC

Chlamydomonas

The production of electricity in MFC

reinhardtii

where chalmydomonas and microbial

NU

8

Verstraete,

Single chamber / Power ( Nishio et production

al., 2013)

consortia such as Lactobacillus and

Single chamber/Power (

vulgaris,Ulva

density and U. lactuca degraded more in

density 0.98 W/m2 and Velasquez‐

lactuca

MFC.

D

The C. vulgaris shows maximum power

0.76 W/m2.

Cyanobacteria

Orta et al., 2009)

There is production of electricity in

Single

MFC with COD and nitrate removal and

Current density 0.55 al., 2011;

bio energy production.

mA/m2

CE

10

Chlorella

PT E

9

MA

Geobacter used as biomass.

chamber/ ( Yuan et

and

power Zhao et al., 2012)

AC

density 11 4 mW/m2.

11

Chlorella vulgaris

The growth conditions of microalgae in

Single

the cathode half-cell remove CO2 and

current level1.0 µA/mg al., 2009)

generate electricity.

cell dry weight

As assisting anode material

14

chamber/ ( Powell et

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The Geobacter and Chlorobium in

Two chamber/ Max. (

limicola

Microbial electrochemical cells produce

power density 84 mW Badalamen

current in the dark condition where

m-3 at anode and 151 ti et al.,

Chlorobium transfer the electron to

mW m-3 in cathode 2014)

Geobacter.

volume.

Rhodopseudomona The A. maxima used as source of carbon

Two

spalustris

for growth of

volumetric power 10.4 et al.,

Rhodopseudomonaspalustris in micro

mW m−3.

MFC for power generation. The mixing of different culture for H-

Two-chamber/ power ( Cao et al.,

SC

Mixed culture

2012)

typed MFC, which has maximum power

density of 2650 mW m- 2008)

output.

2

in H- type MFC.

4

MA

NU

3

chamber/ ( Inglesby

PT

2

Chlorobium

RI

1

Rhodobacter

The solar energy can be considered as

-3

the good source of electricity production

m of power

in MFC. The exposure of light with

generation in light.

D

sphaeroides

Single chamber/ 2.9 W

(Cho et al., 2008)

PT E

nitrogen source enhanced the power generation as compare to dark conditions.

Single

chamber/Max. ( Xing et

spalustris

of substrate to generate electricity

power

density2720 al., 2008)

without light conditions by directly

mW/m2

CE

Rhodopseudomona The purple bacteria use different types

AC

5

transfer of electron.

6.

Chlamydomonas

The formate formed during dark

Single chamber/ 0.1 %

(( Nishio et

reinhardtii

periods in the Chalamydomonas sp. was

energy conversion

al., 2013)

utilized by Geobacter sp. to produce

efficiency in dark.

current by the oxidation process. As an assisting cathode

15

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 1

Chlorella vulgaris

The assessment in microbial

Three chamber/ max. ( Kokabian

desalination cells by the use of chemical

power density up to et al.,

catalyst with no mixing in bio cathode

151 mW m-3

2013)

and air cathode.

The P-MFC produces biomass and

Two chamber/ Power (He et al.,

electricity by use of immobilized

density upgrade upto 2014)

Chlorella vulgaris in the cathode

88.4%

PT

Chlorella vulgaris

RI

2

COD

abolish up to 92% in

SC

chamber.

and

wastewater. Two chamber/ Cathode

A8

enhance the voltage as the modulation

potential increased upto 2014)

intensity reach up to the 1500-3000 lux.

-0.44 to -0.33 V.

MA

NU

Variation in light intensity effectively

Microcystis

The production of reactive oxygen

aeruginosa IPP

species in M. aeruginosa IPP (act as

PT E

4

Desmodesmus sp.

D

3

cathodic microorganism) results in

(Wu et al.,

Two chamber/ increase

(Cai et al.,

in electricity

2013)

production.

increase in con. simultaneously with the

5

CE

density of algal cells Mixed culture

MFC, which had high light intensity

W voltage

AC

capacity, shows elevation in density and

Two chamber/ 6W- 12 (Parlevliet

voltage as compare to algae grow in

and

anode.

Moheimani 2014)

6

Chlorella vulgaris

The microalgae with electro active

Single chamber/

(Ma et al.,

bacteria simultaneously produce

power density 68 ± 5

2017)

electricity and remove nitrogen,

mW m−2

phosphorus and carbon from waste water

16

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 7

Mixed algae

Simultaneously nitrogen removal and

Double chamber/ 0.31

( Kakarla,

increase in the voltage at different

V

and Min,

intensity of the light. The dead microalgal biomass produces

Dual chamber/ Max.

( Cui et al.,

Scendesmus sp.

CO2 used for growth of microalgae at

power density

2014)

cathode.

1926mW/m2

The different intensities of light with

Double chamber/

( Bazdar et

alternate dark and light periods

power density of 126

al., 2018)

Chlorella vulgaris

mW m−3.

The algae grown cathode used for sequestration of CO2 and power

Double chamber/ Max.

( Zhou et

discharge of carbon dioxide and

power density

al., 2012)

MA

PT E

reduction of COD level in wastewater. Cyanobacteria

14

Chlorella vulgaris

2485.35 mW m−3. Double chamber/ max.

( Pandit et

CO2 air mixture sparging for production

power

al., 2012)

production100.1 mW/

The algae grown in pond used for

Single chamber/ max.

(Gajda et

electricity production and wastewater

power in algal cathode

al., 2015)

treatment within MFC.

128µW.

The MFC produces electricity and

Single chamber/Max.

( Logroño

simultaneously enhances the removal of

power density123.2

et al.,

textile wastewater and abolish the COD

mW m−3.

2017)

m2 .

AC

Mixed culture

to 5.6W/m3.

Microbial carbon captured cells with

of electricity and wastewater treatment.

13

and power density 4.1

CE

12

al., 2010)

Immobilized microalgae with negligible

D

Chlorella vulgaris

(Wang et

Voltage output 610 mV

generation.

11

Double chamber/

NU

Chlorella vulgaris

SC

effectively produced electricity. 10

PT

9

Chlorella vulgaris,

RI

8

2019

level up to 92-98%.

17

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Biocathode of microalgae was also utilized to capture the CO2 generated at anodic compartment of MFC through the oxidation of carbon sources, known as “microbial carbon capture (MCC)” cell. The captured CO2 is utilized by microalgae (C. vulgaris) for photosynthesis purpose i.e. reduction of carbon dioxide (Cui et al., 2014). Development of MCC with CO2sequestration by microalgae and further utilization for CO2 reduction

PT

sustainably imposes a carbon-neutral technology (Table 2).

RI

Microalgae at cathode were also reported for the accumulation of suspended biomass and different industrial commodities because of photosynthesis (Cao et al., 2009). The highest

SC

biomass concentrations of 4060mgL-1 and 2800mgL-1 were achieved with the sediment type

NU

single-and two-chambered MFC, respectively (Gouveia et al., 2014; Zhang et al., 2011). Hydraulic retention time (HRT) also plays an important role in biomass production as more

MA

biomass accumulation with higher HRT’s (Kokabian et al., 2013; Jeon et al., 2012). The accumulated biomass serves as the source for algal lipids, high-value carotenoids and

D

pharmaceuticals. The range of industrial commodities from the accumulated algal biomass

PT E

mainly dictated by the supplied light intensities and nutrient supply (Gouveia et al., 2014). Design of integrated photobioreactor (IPB) allows the production of higher energy content

CE

from the algal biomass conversion than the direct electricity generation by the MFC (Xiao et al., 2012). The concurrent supply of treated wastewater from the anode to cathode facilitates

AC

the heterotrophic bacterial growth and organic compounds, which may act as electron donors by competing with the cathode electrode that eventually hampers the electricity generation efficiency of the MFC. A possible strategy to tackle the problem includes direct feeding of treated wastewater (by anode) into the cathode compartment which provides required nitrogen and phosphorus for algal growth and subsequent removal of organic residues and nutrients ( Olguín, 2012; Subhadra and Edwards, 2011).The feasibility of IPB system with algal biocathode towards the wastewater treatment and nutrient removal was put forth by one

18

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT of the studies where 96% and 55% removal of nitrogen and phosphorous contents, respectively were achieved with a slight reduction of organic concentration (Xiao et al., 2012) . The positive results encourage the further utilization of algal biocathodes for wastewater treatment without the requirement of additional nutrients/water (El Mekawya et al., 2014). The algal-microbial community at cathodes also reported for treatment of landfill

PT

leachate wastewater by removing the COD and nutrient removal along with the power

RI

generation through integrated photobioreactor system (Luo et al., 2017; Nguyen et al., 2017).

SC

3. Future perspectives

NU

Microalgae-based BES could be a viable technology for production of bioelectricity and biohydrogen by integrating the options of biomass production and industrial effluent

MA

treatment. However, to reach the commercialization stage, this platform has to address the different challenging tasks such as selection of algal strain, its performance under harsh

D

conditions, lower yields, and economic viability. Heterotrophic cultivation facilitates large-

PT E

scale culturing of microalgae under dark conditions while, handling the waste waters fed to the BES’s but, this technology is impeding due to the less explored heterotrophic microalgal

CE

strains. To achieve this, genome search is one of the options to screen the putative microalgal strains based on the sugar transport abilities towards the suitability for heterotrophic growth.

AC

Genome editing approaches (such as CRISPR/Cas9, ZFN (zinc-finger nuclease) and TALEN) are some of the recent metabolic approaches to modify the algal genomic DNA for further utilization in BES’s for enhanced biomass and biofuel products (Maeda et al., 2018). Moreover, more studies are needed to overcome the obstacles encountered due to the produced oxygen and allowed illumination on anodic activities (Xiao et al., 2014). More research focus has to be done to tackle the encountered problems on a large scale, such as built of intra- and extra- cellular mass transfer gradients in the anodic biofilm. Bio-cathodes have to study further for enhanced power generation with less dependence on illumination by 19

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT selecting a suitable biocatalyst species and increasing the cathode surface area (Lee et al., 2015). Moreover, the advent of different integrated biorefinery approaches has to bring into the picture towards an economic process to commercialize (Baicha et al., 2016). Another noteworthy future study is the performance of microalgal BES’s with seasonal variations. Finally, for successful commercialization, a rigorous life cycle analysis (LCA) of microalgal

PT

BES’s was necessary by considering the land and water resources with the GHG emission

RI

profiles. At last, encouragement from national and state subsidies have to be developed for

SC

the successful establishment of microalgae BES’s on an industrial scale. 4. Conclusion

NU

This review represents an overview and development of the combination of microalgae and

MA

BES. The integrated system considered a self-sustainable process by providing the simultaneous treatment wastewater treatment and energy production with low cost and energy expenditures. Hence, the critical review represents the key aspects of the usage of new

PT E

D

algal biomass-based BES’s for production of bioelectricity and wastewater treatment. The synergy between both the technologies has more economic value for the overall system. Still, more research is needed to be streamlined and concentrated towards more scale up

CE

experiment and validation before commercialization of this technique.

AC

Acknowledgement

Authors are grateful to IIT Guwahati, India; IIT Delhi, India; CSIR-CSMCR, India; JUIT, India and VITO, Belgium for providing the facilities to execute the proposed review article.

20

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT References Badalamenti, J.P., Torres, C.I., Krajmalnik‐Brown, R., 2014. Coupling dark metabolism to electricity generation using photosynthetic cocultures. Biotechnol. Bioeng.111, 223-231. Baicha, Z., Salar-García, M.J., Ortiz-Martínez, V.M., Hernández-Fernández, F.J., De los Ríos, A.P., Labjar, N., Lotfi, E. and Elmahi, M., 2016. A critical review on microalgae

microbial fuel cells. Fuel Process Technol. 154, 104-116.

PT

as an alternative source for bioenergy production: A promising low cost substrate for

Bajracharya, S., Sharma, M., Mohanakrishna, G., Benneton, X.D., Strik, D.P., Sarma, P.M.

RI

Pant, D., 2016. An overview on emerging bioelectrochemical systems (BESs):

SC

technology for sustainable electricity, waste remediation, resource recovery, chemical production and beyond. . Renew. Energy. 98, 153-170.

NU

Bazdar, E., Roshandel, R., Yaghmaei, S., Mardanpour, M. M., 2018. The effect of different light intensities and light/dark regimes on the performance of photosynthetic microalgae

MA

microbial fuel cell. Bioresour. Technol. 261, 350-360. Bond, D.R., Lovley, D.R., 2003. Electricity production by Geobacter sulfurreducens attached to electrodes. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 69, 1548-1555.

D

Cai, P.J., Xiao, X., He, Y.R., Li, W.W., Zang, G.L., Sheng, G.P., Lam, M.H.W., Yu, L., Yu,

PT E

H.Q., 2013. Reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated by cyanobacteria act as an electron acceptor in the biocathode of a bio-electrochemical system. Biosens. Bioelectron. 39, 306-310.

CE

Cao, X., Huang, X., Boon, N., Liang, P., Fan, M., 2008. Electricity generation by an enriched phototrophic consortium in a microbial fuel cell. Electrochem. commun. 10,

AC

1392-1395.

Cao, X., Huang, X., Liang, P., Boon, N., Fan, M., Zhanga, L., 2009. A completely anoxic microbial fuel cell using a photo-biocathode for cathodic carbondioxide reduction. Energy Environ. Sci. 2, 498–01 Chandra, R., Subhash, G.V., Mohan, S.V., 2012. Mixotrophic operation of photobioelectrocatalytic fuel cell under anoxygenic microenvironment enhances the light dependent bioelectrogenic activity. Bioresour. Technol.109, 46-56. Chen, W. H., Lin, B. J., Huang, M. Y., Chang, J. S., 2015a. Thermochemical conversion of microalgal biomass into biofuels: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 184, 314-327. 21

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Chen, H., Qiu, T., Rong, J., He, C., Wang, Q., 2015b. Microalgal biofuel revisited: an informatics-based analysis of developments to date and future prospects. Appl. Energy. 155, 585-598. Cho, Y. K., Donohue, T. J., Tejedor, I., Anderson, M. A., McMahon, K. D., Noguera, D. R., 2008. Development of a solar powered microbial fuel cell. J. Appl. Microbiol. 104, 640650.

PT

Colombo, A., Marzorati, S., Lucchini, G., Cristiani, P., Pant, D., Schievano, A., 2017. Assisting cultivation of photosynthetic microorganisms by microbial fuel cells to

RI

enhance nutrients recovery from wastewater. Bioresour Technol. 237, 240-248.

SC

Commault, A.S., Lear, G., Novis, P., Weld, R.J., 2014. Photosynthetic biocathode enhances the power output of a sediment-type microbial fuel cell. New Zeal. J. Bot.52, 48-59. Cui, Y., Rashid, N., Hu, N., Rehman, M.S.U., Han, J.I., 2014. Electricity generation and

NU

microalgae cultivation in microbial fuel cell using microalgae-enriched anode and biocathode. Energy Convers. Manage. 79, 674-680.

MA

De Caprariis, B., De Filippis, P., Di Battista, A., Di Palma, L., Scarsella, M., 2014. Exoelectrogenic activity of a green microalgae, Chlorella vulgaris, in a bio-

D

photovoltaic cells (BPVs). Chem. Eng. Trans. 38, 523-528.

PT E

De Schamphelaire, L., Verstraete, W., 2009. Revival of the biological sunlight‐to‐biogas energy conversion system. Biotechnol Bioeng. 103, 296-304. Del Campo, A.G., Cañizares, P., Rodrigo, M.A., Fernández, F.J., Lobato, J., 2013. Microbial

CE

fuel cell with an algae-assisted cathode: a preliminary assessment. J. Power Sources. 242, 638-645.

Del Campo, A.G., Perez, J.F., Cañizares, P., Rodrigo, M.A., Fernandez, F.J., Lobato, J.,

AC

2014. Study of a photosynthetic MFC for energy recovery from synthetic industrial fruit juice wastewater. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy.39, 21828-21836. El Mekawya, A., Hegab, H. M., Vanbroekhoven, K., Pant, D., 2014. Techno-productive potential of photosynthetic microbial fuel cells through different configurations. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 39, 617–27 Fu, C.C., Hung, T.C., Wu, W.T., Wen, T.C., Su, C.H., 2010. Current and voltage responses in instant photosynthetic microbial cells with Spirulina platensis. Biochem. Eng. J.52,175180.

22

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Gadhamshetty, V., Belanger, D., Gardiner, C.J., Cummings, A., Hynes, A., 2013. Evaluation of Laminaria-based microbial fuel cells (LbMs) for electricity production. Bioresour. Technol. 127, 378-385. Gajda, I., Greenman, J., Melhuish, C., Ieropoulos, I., 2015. Self-sustainable electricity production from algae grown in a microbial fuel cell system. Biomass Bioenergy. 82, 87-93.

PT

Goglio, A., Marzorati, S., Rago, L., Pant, D., Cristiani, P., Schievano, A., 2019. Microbial recycling cells: First steps into a new type of microbial electrochemical technologies,

RI

aimed at recovering nutrients from wastewater. Bioresour Technol. 277, 117-127. Gonzalez-Fernandez, C., Sialve, B., Molinuevo-Salces, B., 2015. Anaerobic digestion of

SC

microalgal biomass: challenges, opportunities and research needs. Bioresour. Technol. 198, 896-906.

NU

Gouveia, L., Neves, C., Sebastião, D., Nobre, B.P., Matos, C.T., 2014. Effect of light on the production of bioelectricity and added-value microalgae biomass in a photosynthetic

MA

alga microbial fuel cell. Bioresour. Technol. 154, 171-177. Gude, V.G., 2016. Wastewater treatment in microbial fuel cells–an overview. J. Clean.

D

Prod.122, 287-307.

PT E

He, H., Zhou, M., Yang, J., Hu, Y. and Zhao, Y., 2014. Simultaneous wastewater treatment, electricity generation and biomass production by an immobilized photosynthetic algal microbial fuel cell. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 37, 873-880. He, Z., Shao, H., Angenent, L.T., 2007. Increased power production from a sediment

CE

microbial fuel cell with a rotating cathode. Biosens. Bioelectron. 22, 3252-3255. Ho, S. H., Chen, C. Y., Lee, D. J., Chang, J. S., 2011. Perspectives on microalgal CO2-

AC

emission mitigation systems—a review. Biotechnol. Adv. 29,189-198. Hur, J., Lee, B.M., Choi, K.S., Min, B., 2014. Tracking the spectroscopic and chromatographic changes of algal derived organic matter in a microbial fuel cell. Environ. Sci. Pollut. R. 21, 2230-2239. Inglesby, A. E., Beatty, D. A., Fisher, A. C., 2012. Rhodopseudomonas palustris purple bacteria fed Arthrospira maxima cyanobacteria: demonstration of application in microbial fuel cells. RSC Adv. 2, 4829-4838.

23

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Inglesby, A.E., Yunus, K., Fisher, A.C., 2013. In situ fluorescence and electrochemical monitoring of a photosynthetic microbial fuel cell. Phys. Chem. Phys. 15, 6903-6911. Jeon, H. J., Seo, K. W., Lee, S. H., Yang, Y.H., Kumaran, R. S., Kim, S., 2012. Production of algal biomass (Chlorella vulgaris) using sediment microbial fuel cells. Bioresour. Technol. 109, 308-311. Jha, D., Jain, V., Sharma, B., Kant, A., Garlapati, V. K., 2017. Microalgae‐based

PT

Pharmaceuticals and Nutraceuticals: An Emerging Field with Immense Market Potential. Chem. BioEng. Rev. 4, 257-272.

RI

Joshi, G., Pandey, J. K., Rana, S., Rawat, D. S., 2017. Challenges and opportunities for the application of biofuel. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 79, 850-866.

SC

Juang, D.F., Lee, C.H., Hsueh, S.C., 2012. Comparison of electrogenic capabilities of microbial fuel cell with different light power on algae grown cathode. Bioresour.

NU

Technol. 123, 23-29.

Kakarla, R., Min, B., 2014. Photoautotrophic microalgae Scenedesmus obliquus attached on a

MA

cathode as oxygen producers for microbial fuel cell (MFC) operation. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy. 39, 10275-10283.

Kakarla, R., Min, B., 2019. Sustainable electricity generation and ammonium removal by

D

microbial fuel cell with a microalgae assisted cathode at various environmental

PT E

conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 284, 161-167. Kokabian, B., Gude, V.G., 2013. Photosynthetic microbial desalination cells (PMDCs) for

CE

clean energy, water and biomass production. Environ. Sci. Process.Impact.15, 2178–85. Kondaveeti, S., Choi, K.S., Kakarla, R., Min, B., 2014. Microalgae Scenedesmus obliquus as

AC

renewable biomass feedstock for electricity generation in microbial fuel cells (MFCs). Front. Environ. Sci. Eng. 8, 784-791. Kumar, S.P, J., Garlapati, V.K., Dash, A., Scholz, P., Banerjee, R., 2017. Sustainable green solvents and techniques for lipid extraction from microalgae: A review. Algal Res. 21, 138-147. Lakaniemi, A.M., Tuovinen, O.H., Puhakka, J.A., 2012. Production of electricity and butanol from microalgal biomass in microbial fuel cells. BioEnergy Res. 5, 481-489. Lan, J.C.W., Raman, K., Huang, C.M., Chang, C.M., 2013. The impact of monochromatic blue and red LED light upon performance of photo microbial fuel cells (PMFCs) using

24

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Chlamydomonas reinhardtii transformation F5 as biocatalyst. Biochem. Eng. J. 78, 3943. Lay, C.H., Kokko, M.E., Puhakka, J.A., 2015. Power generation in fed-batch and continuous up-flow microbial fuel cell from synthetic wastewater. Energy. 91, 235-241. Lee, D. H., 2017. Econometric assessment of bioenergy development. Int. J. of Hydrogen Energy. 42, 27701-27717.

PT

Lee, D.J., Chang, J.S., Lai, J.Y., 2015. Microalgae–microbial fuel cell: a mini review. Bioresour. Technol.198, 891-895.

Liu, W.F., Cheng, S.A., 2014. Microbial fuel cells for energy production from wastewaters:

RI

the way toward practical application. J. Zhejiang Univ. SciA. 15, 841-861.

SC

Lobato, J., del Campo, A.G., Fernández, F.J., Cañizares, P. and Rodrigo, M.A., 2013. Lagooning microbial fuel cells: a first approach by coupling electricity-producing

NU

microorganisms and algae. Appl.energy. 110, 220-226.

Logroño, W., Pérez, M., Urquizo, G., Kadier, A., Echeverría, M., Recalde, C., Rákhely, G., 2017. Single chamber microbial fuel cell (SCMFC) with a cathodic microalgal biofilm:

MA

A preliminary assessment of the generation of bioelectricity and biodegradation of real dye textile wastewater. Chemosphere. 176, 378-388.

D

Luo, S., Berges, J.A., He, Z., Young, E.B., 2017. Algal-microbial community collaboration

PT E

for energy recovery and nutrient remediation from wastewater in integrated photobioelectrochemical systems. Algal Res. 24, 527-539. Ma, J., Wang, Z., Zhang, J., Waite, T.D. Wu, Z., 2017. Cost-effective Chlorella biomass

CE

production from dilute wastewater using a novel photosynthetic microbial fuel cell (PMFC). Water Res. 108, 356-364.

AC

Maeda, Y., Yoshino, T., Matsunaga, T., Matsumoto, M., Tanaka, T., 2018. Marine microalgae for production of biofuels and chemicals. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 50, 111– 120.

Montpart, N., Ribot-Llobet, E., Garlapati, V.K., Rago, L., Baeza, J.A. Guisasola, A., 2014. Methanol opportunities for electricity and hydrogen production in bioelectrochemical systems. Int. J. HydrogEnergy. 39, 770-777.

25

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Nguyen, H.T., Kakarla, R., Min, B., 2017. Algae cathode microbial fuel cells for electricity generation and nutrient removal from landfill leachate wastewater. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy. 42, 29433-29442. Nishio, K., Hashimoto, K., Watanabe, K., 2013. Light/electricity conversion by defined cocultures of Chlamydomonas and Geobacter. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 115, 412-417.

PT

Nitisoravut, R., Thanh, C. N., Regmi, R., 2017. Microbial fuel cells: Advances in electrode modifications for improvement of system performance. Int. J. Green Energy. 14, 712-

RI

723.

Olguín, E. J., 2012. Dual purpose microalgae–bacteria-based systems that treat waste- water

SC

and produce biodiesel and chemical products within a Biorefinery. Biotechnol. Adv. 30, 1031–46.

NU

Pandit, S., Nayak, B. K., Das, D., 2012. Microbial carbons capture cell using cyanobacteria for simultaneous power generation, carbon dioxide sequestration and wastewater

MA

treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 107, 97-102.

Park, D.H., Zeikus, J.G., 2003. Improved fuel cell and electrode designs for producing

D

electricity from microbial degradation. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 81, 348-355.

PT E

Parlevliet, D., Moheimani, N.R., 2014. Efficient conversion of solar energy to biomass and electricity. Aquatic biosyst. 10, 4. Pasupuleti, S.B., Srikanth, S., Dominguez‐Benetton X, Mohan, S.V., 2016. Dual gas

CE

diffusion cathode design for microbial fuel cell (MFC): optimizing the suitable mode of operation in terms of bioelectrochemical and bioelectro‐kinetic evaluation. J. Chem.

AC

Technol. Biotechnol. 91(3), 624-639. Patil, S.A., Hägerhäll, C., Gorton, L., 2012. Electron transfer mechanisms between microorganisms and electrodes in bioelectrochemical systems. Bioanal Rev. 4, 159-192. Powell, E. E., Mapiour, M. L., Evitts, R. W., Hill, G. A., 2009. Growth kinetics of Chlorella vulgaris and its use as a cathodic half cell. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 269-274. Powell, E.E., Evitts, R.W., Hill, G.A., Bolster, J.C., 2011. A microbial fuel cell with a photosynthetic microalgae cathodic half cell coupled to a yeast anodic half cell. Energy SourcA Recovery Util. Environ. Effects. 33, 440-448.

26

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Rashid, N., Rehman, M.S.U., Han, J.I., 2013. Recycling and reuse of spent microalgal biomass for sustainable biofuels. Biochem. Eng. J. 75, 101-107. Ren, Y., Pan, D., Li, X., Fu, F., Zhao, Y., Wang, X., 2013. Effect of polyaniline‐graphene nanosheets modified cathode on the performance of sediment microbial fuel cell. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 88, 1946-1950. Rosenbaum, M., He, Z., Angenent, L.T., 2010. Light energy to bioelectricity: photosynthetic

PT

microbial fuel cells. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 21, 259-264. Saba, B., Christy, A.D., Yu, Z. Co, A.C., 2017. Sustainable power generation from bacterio-

RI

algal microbial fuel cells (MFCs): An overview. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 73,75-84. Saba, B., Christy, A.D., Yu, Z., Co, A.C., 2017. Sustainable power generation from bacterio-

SC

algal microbial fuel cells (MFCs): An overview. Renew. Sust. Energ. Rev. 73, 75-84. Salar-García, M.J., Gajda, I., Ortiz-Martínez, V.M., Greenman, J., Hanczyc, M.M., de Los

NU

Ríos, A.P., Ieropoulos, I.A., 2016. Microalgae as substrate in low cost terracotta-based microbial fuel cells: novel application of the catholyte produced. Bioresour. Technol.

MA

209, 380-385.

Saratale, R.G., Kuppam, C., Mudhoo, A., Saratale, G.D., Periyasamy, S., Zhen, G., Koók, L., Bakonyi, P., Nemestóthy, N. Kumar, G., 2017. Bioelectrochemical systems using

D

microalgae–A concise research update. Chemosphere, 177 35-43.

PT E

Searchinger, T. D., Beringer, T., Strong, A., 2017. Does the world have low-carbon bioenergy potential from the dedicated use of land? Energy Policy, 110, 434-446. Sevda, S., Sreekishnan, T.R., Pous, N., Puig, S., Pant, D., 2018. Bioelectroremediation of

CE

perchlorate and nitrate contaminated water: A review. Bioresour. Technol. 255, 331339.

AC

Strik, D.P., Terlouw, H., Hamelers, H.V., Buisman, C.J., 2008. Renewable sustainable biocatalyzed electricity production in a photosynthetic algal microbial fuel cell (PAMFC). Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 81, 659-668. Subhadra, B. G., Edwards, M., 2011. Coproduct market analysis and water footprint of simulated commercial algal biorefineries. Appl. Energy. 88, 3515–23. Velasquez‐Orta, S.B., Curtis, T.P., Logan, B.E., 2009. Energy from algae using microbial fuel cells. Biotechnol Bioeng. 103, 1068-1076. Wang, H., Liu, D., Lu, L., Zhao, Z., Xu, Y., Cui, F., 2012. Degradation of algal organic matter using microbial fuel cells and its association with trihalomethane precursor removal.

Bioresour. Technol. 116, 80-85. 27

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Wang, X., Feng,Y., Liu, J., Lee, H., Li, C., Li, N., 2010. Sequestration of CO2 discharged from anode by algal cathode in microbial carbon capture cells (MCCs). Biosens. Bioelectron. 25, 2639–43. Wu, X.Y., Song, T.S., Zhu, X.J., Wei, P. Zhou, C.C., 2013. Construction and operation of microbial fuel cell with Chlorella vulgaris biocathode for electricity generation. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 171, 2082-2092.

PT

Wu, X.Y., Song, T.S., Zhu, X.J., Wei, P., Zhou, C.C., 2013. Construction and operation of microbial fuel cell with Chlorella vulgaris biocathode for electricity generation. Appl.

RI

Biochem. Biotechnol. 171, 2082-2092.

Wu, Y.C., Wang, Z.J., Zheng, Y., Xiao, Y., Yang, Z.H., Zhao, F., 2014. Light intensity

SC

affects the performance of photo microbial fuel cells with Desmodesmus sp. A8 as cathodic microorganism. Appl. Energy. 116, 86–90.

NU

Xiao, L., He, Z., 2014. Applications and perspectives of phototrophic microorganisms for electricity generation from organic compounds in microbial fuel cells. . Renew. Sust.

MA

Energ. Rev. 37, 550-559.

Xiao, L., Young, E. B., Berges, J. A., He, Z., 2012. Integrated photo−bioelectrochemical system for contaminants removal and bioenergy production. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46,

D

11459–11466.

PT E

Xing, D., Zuo, Y., Cheng, S., Regan, J.M., Logan, B.E., 2008. Electricity generation by Rhodopseudomonas palustris DX-1. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 4146-4151. Xu, C., Poon, K., Choi, M.M., Wang, R., 2015. Using live algae at the anode of a microbial

CE

fuel cell to generate electricity. Environ Sci Pollut R. 22, 15621-15635. Yen, H. W., Hu, I. C., Chen, C. Y., Ho, S. H., Lee, D. J., Chang, J. S., 2013. Microalgae-

AC

based biorefinery–from biofuels to natural products. Bioresour. Technol. 135, 166-174. Yuan, Y., Chen, Q., Zhou, S., Zhuang, L., Hu, P., 2011. Bioelectricity generation and microcystins removal in a blue-green algae powered microbial fuel cell. J. Hazard. Mater.187, 591-595. Zhang, Y., Noori, J.S., Angelidaki, I., 2011. Simultaneous organic carbon, nutrients removal and energy production in a photomicrobial fuel cell (PFC). Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 4340-4346. Zhao, J., Li, X.F., Ren, Y.P., Wang, X.H., Jian, C., 2012. Electricity generation from Taihu Lake cyanobacteria by sediment microbial fuel cells. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 87, 1567-1573. 28

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Zhou, M., He, H., Jin, T., Wang, H., 2012. Power generation enhancement in novel microbial carbon capture cells with immobilized Chlorella vulgaris. J. Power Sources. 214, 216219. Zhu, G., Chen, G., Yu, R., Li, H., Wang, C., 2016. Enhanced simultaneous nitrification/denitrification in the biocathode of a microbial fuel cell fed with cyanobacteria solution. Process Biochem. 51, 80-88.

PT

Zou, S., He, Z., 2018. Efficiently “pumping out” value-added resources from wastewater by bioelectrochemical systems: A review from energy perspectives. Water Res. 131, 62-

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

73.

29

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Conflict of Interest

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

30

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Highlights:

 Algal-based BES are idle for power and value-added products generation and WWT  Current developments in microalgal-BES have been discussed  Highlighted the potential challenges and drawbacks of the Algal-BES’s

AC

CE

PT E

D

MA

NU

SC

RI

PT

 Put forth the future prospects for integration towards industrial operations.

31