Skip to Content
MDPIMDPI

Advanced

BioengineeringBioengineering
PDF
  • Review
  • Open Access

16 March 2024

Advances in Biological Wastewater Treatment Processes: Focus on Low-Carbon Energy and Resource Recovery in Biorefinery Context

,
and
1
Research Center for Innovative Energy and Carbon Optimized Synthesis for Chemicals (Inn-ECOSysChem), Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology, Gwangju 61005, Republic of Korea
2
Biochemical Process Engineering, Division of Chemical Engineering, Department of Civil, Environmental and Natural Resources Engineering, Luleå University of Technology, 971-87 Luleå, Sweden
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Bioengineering2024, 11(3), 281;https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering11030281
This article belongs to the Special Issue Biological Wastewater Treatment and Resource Recovery
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

Advancements in biological wastewater treatment with sustainable and circularity approaches have a wide scope of application. Biological wastewater treatment is widely used to remove/recover organic pollutants and nutrients from a diverse wastewater spectrum. However, conventional biological processes face challenges, such as low efficiency, high energy consumption, and the generation of excess sludge. To overcome these limitations, integrated strategies that combine biological treatment with other physical, chemical, or biological methods have been developed and applied in recent years. This review emphasizes the recent advances in integrated strategies for biological wastewater treatment, focusing on their mechanisms, benefits, challenges, and prospects. The review also discusses the potential applications of integrated strategies for diverse wastewater treatment towards green energy and resource recovery, along with low-carbon fuel production. Biological treatment methods, viz., bioremediation, electro-coagulation, electro-flocculation, electro-Fenton, advanced oxidation, electro-oxidation, bioelectrochemical systems, and photo-remediation, are summarized with respect to non-genetically modified metabolic reactions. Different conducting materials (CMs) play a significant role in mass/charge transfer metabolic processes and aid in enhancing fermentation rates. Carbon, metal, and nano-based CMs hybridization in different processes provide favorable conditions to the fermentative biocatalyst and trigger their activity towards overcoming the limitations of the conventional process. The emerging field of nanotechnology provides novel additional opportunities to surmount the constraints of conventional process for enhanced waste remediation and resource valorization. Holistically, integrated strategies are promising alternatives for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of biological wastewater treatment while also contributing to the circular economy and environmental protection.

1. Introduction

Biological wastewater treatment strategies can contribute to environmental sustainability and green energy by reducing the environmental impact of wastewater discharge, recovering valuable resources from wastewater, and producing renewable energy and bioproducts [1,2]. However, there are also some challenges and limitations that need to be addressed, such as the high capital and operational costs, low stable performance and scalability of the reactors, quality and safety of the products, and regulatory and social barriers. Biological syntropy involves mutual synergism between the metabolic activities of microorganisms that cannot individually catabolize their metabolites [3,4]. Interspecies electron transfer (IET) is a kind of syntrophic mechanism wherein free electrons flow from one cell to another through shared physical and electrical connections [5,6]. The bioprocess efficiency is interlinked with the biocatalyst nature and sensitivity, substrate composition, low productivity/yields, byproduct formation, feedback inhibition, product purity, etc. [7,8]. Metabolic limitations can be addressed by syntrophic regulation with microorganisms or materials or electrodes. When the electrode serves as the electron acceptor (intermediate), an oxidized product is formed in the process referred to as unbalanced microbial metabolism [9,10,11].
Recalcitrant and emerging pollutants (persistent organic pollutants (POPs), nanoparticles, endocrine disruptors) and contaminants (industrial, hospital, domestic, and agricultural discharges and landfill leachate) are usually unregulated in terms of environmental discharge, having potential risks to human health and the environment, and need critical treatment [12]. These pollutants can enter wastewater streams from various sources, such as industrial discharges, agricultural runoff, hospital effluents, and domestic sewage. Emerging pollutants can disrupt biological treatment processes by inhibiting or killing microorganisms, altering microbial metabolism, or producing toxic intermediates [12]. Therefore, it is important to develop effective strategies to remove or degrade emerging pollutants in biological wastewater treatment systems. Conventional bioprocesses have limitations in the complete treatment of wastewater and hence require advanced integrated biological/bioelectrochemical remediation systems. Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) are one of the most promising strategies for the removal of emerging pollutants in wastewater [13]. AOPs can generate highly reactive species, such as hydroxyl radicals, that can oxidize and degrade a wide range of organic compounds. Advanced oxidation processes can also improve the disinfection, color removal, and odor control of the wastewater [14]. The reaction mechanisms and process parameters of AOPs need critical consideration for effective application feasibility [15]. Electro-/bioelectro-/photo-chemical processes could also be effective in advanced wastewater treatment for recalcitrant/emerging pollutant removal. The integration of diverse biological treatment strategies with a broad scope of their individual advantages in a sequential and closed-loop pattern could be a sustainable approach [16,17]. These integrated biological/electrochemical/bioelectrochemical wastewater treatments can also benefit in energy and resource recovery, along with low-carbon generation [6,18]. Resources such as nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur can be removed from wastewater by biological processes, such as nitrification, denitrification, phosphorus accumulation, and sulfate reduction [19,20]. These nutrients can be recovered as valuable products, such as fertilizers, bioplastics, or chemicals, for agricultural or industrial applications. Energy can be recovered from wastewater by anaerobic processes, such as anaerobic digestion, dark fermentation (which involves hydrolysis, acidogenesis, acetogenesis, and methanogenesis), or microbial fuel cells [21,22,23].
These processes can convert the organic matter in wastewater into biogas, hydrogen, or electricity, which can be used for heating, lighting, or powering treatment plants or other facilities [24,25]. Nanotechnology can offer novel materials, such as nanoparticles, nanofibers, or nanocomposites, that can enhance biological treatment processes by providing catalysts, carriers, sensors, or antimicrobials [26,27,28,29]. Integrated biological wastewater treatment strategies can efficiently degrade organic pollutants in wastewater while also recovering valuable resources, such as energy, nutrients, minerals, and salts [16,17,30]. These strategies aim to reduce the environmental impact and operational cost of wastewater treatment, as well as to contribute to the circular economy and carbon neutrality goals [16].
This review elaborates on advances in waste/wastewater treatment to address emerging pollutants toward energy and resource recovery with low-carbon outputs. Biological treatment methods, viz., bioremediation, electro-coagulation, electro-flocculation, electro-Fenton, advanced oxidation, electro-oxidation, bioelectrochemical systems, and photo-remediation, are summarized with respect to non-genetically modified metabolic reactions (Figure 1). Specific emphasis is placed on the challenges and limitations of advanced treatment processes that must be addressed to increase their energetic and economic applicability. Sustainable integrations with other treatment processes that could align with the circular economy perspective in a biorefinery approach are included.
Figure 1. Histogram showing advanced biological wastewater treatment methods (selected keywords: bioremediation, electro-coagulation, electro-flocculation, electro-Fenton, advanced oxidation, electro-oxidation, bioelectrochemical systems) (source: Web of Science).

2. Description of Conventional Methods for Wastewater Treatment

Conventional biological wastewater treatment is widely used for domestic, municipal, and industrial wastewater treatments for organic pollutant and nutrient degradation [12,31]. Biological wastewater treatment is divided into aerobic and anaerobic processes. Aerobic treatment requires oxygen for the microorganisms to breakdown organic matter, whereas anaerobic treatment functions in oxygen-deprived conditions. Aerobic treatment is more common and can be further classified into suspended growth systems (such as activated sludge and oxidation ponds) and attached growth systems (such as trickling filters and rotating biological contactors). Anaerobic treatment is mainly used for high-strength wastewater or sludge digestion and produces biogas as a byproduct [32]. Anaerobic treatment can be performed in anaerobic lagoons or anaerobic bioreactors (such as up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket and anaerobic baffled reactors). The treatment processes are categorized into three categories, viz., physical, chemical, and biological, each having specific advantages depending on the wastewater characteristics [2] (Figure 2). Physical and chemical wastewater treatment processes are often used in conjunction with biological treatment to enhance the removal of pollutants and to meet discharge standards. These bioprocesses are relatively low-cost, efficient, and environmentally friendly in terms of treatment.
Figure 2. Schematic representing types of wastewater treatment methods.
Physical treatment involves the separation of solids, liquids, and gases by using physical forces, such as gravity, filtration, sedimentation, flotation, and screening. Physical treatment methods are usually simple, low-cost, and effective for removing suspended solids, oil and grease, and some metals from wastewater. However, physical treatment methods cannot remove dissolved or colloidal pollutants, such as organic matter, nutrients, pathogens, and toxic substances. Sedimentation involves the settling of solid particles in a tank or basin by gravity, while filtration aids in solid particle removal by passing the wastewater through a porous medium, such as sand, gravel, or a membrane. Flotation aids in solid/liquid particle separation by injecting air bubbles into the wastewater and forming a floating layer of particles that can be skimmed off, whereas, in centrifugation, phase separation is carried out by spinning the wastewater at high speed and creating a centrifugal force.
Chemical treatment involves the addition of chemicals/agents to facilitate pollutants’ removal by altering their physical/chemical properties, such as pH, charge, solubility, and reactivity. Coagulation, flocculation, precipitation, ion exchange, neutralization, adsorption, and disinfection are performed in these treatment strategies using alum, lime, iron salts, polymers, chlorine, ozone, UV light, etc. [33,34]. Chemical treatment methods can be effective for removing dissolved or colloidal pollutants, such as organic matter, nutrients, pathogens, and toxic substances, from wastewater. However, chemical treatment methods can be expensive and complex and generate secondary wastes that require further treatment or disposal. Coagulation and flocculation involve coagulant and flocculant addition, respectively, to wastewater to form larger and heavier particles that can be settled/filtered more easily. Precipitation involves the addition of chemicals to wastewater to form insoluble compounds that can be settled or filtered out. Ion exchange occurs between wastewater and a resin/zeolite that can adsorb or release specific ions for treatment. The adjustment of the pH of wastewater by adding acids or bases leads to neutralization, making it more suitable for biological treatment or effluent discharge. Disinfection helps in the inactivation/destruction of pathogens in wastewater (vibrio and mycobacterium, clostridium, salmonella, acinetobacter, aeromonas, pseudomonas, etc.) by using chemicals such as chlorine, ozone, or hydrogen peroxide [14].
Biological treatment methods are based on the use of microorganisms to degrade or transform the organic matter and nutrients in the wastewater [25]. Some common biological treatment methods are aerobic, anaerobic, anoxic, and facultative processes, bioremediation, phytoremediation, and mycoremediation [35,36]. Aerobic treatment methods include activated sludge, trickling filters, rotating biological contactors, and oxidation ponds, which require oxygen for the breakdown of organic matter for wastewater treatment [37]. Anaerobic treatment methods use anaerobic digesters and up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket reactors, that operate in the absence of oxygen to treat wastewater and leads to methane production [29]. Anoxic treatment methods include denitrification filters and anoxic zones in activated sludge systems, using nitrate as an electron acceptor to reduce nitrate to nitrogen gas. Phytoremediation methods include the use of constructed wetlands, floating aquatic plants, and terrestrial plants to uptake, accumulate, or degrade pollutants in wastewater [38]. Biological treatment methods can be efficient, economical, and environmentally friendly for removing organic matter, nutrients, pathogens, and some toxic substances from wastewater [2,39]. However, biological treatment methods can be sensitive to environmental conditions, such as temperature, pH, oxygen, and toxicity, and require careful monitoring and control.
Biological wastewater treatment methods are advantageous in that they can treat a wide range of pollutants and nutrients, resulting in energy/chemical generation with efficient organic removal, thereby improving the wastewater quality and reducing the environmental impact of wastewater discharge [40]. The disadvantages lie in the large land area required and a long retention time, especially for aerobic treatment. These methods are sensitive to temperature, pH, toxicity, and shock loads, which can affect the performance and stability of the biological process [37]. Anaerobic treatment can produce excess sludge with odor problems, requiring further treatment prior to disposal. Challenges and opportunities for biological wastewater treatment include the optimization of process design and operation with single or integrated processes to achieve higher efficiency, lower cost, and lower energy consumption. Novel strategies with controlled microbial activity and microenvironments need to be developed for the recovery of nutrients, resources, and value-added products from wastewater and sludge to increase sustainability. Tuning diverse microbial communities with specific redox potentials could streamline biological wastewater treatment processes for the efficient removal of multiple pollutants (both conventional and emerging compounds), along with energy recovery and resource recovery/recycling to achieve a sustainable development nexus system [40].
In conclusion, physical, chemical, and biological wastewater treatments are important processes that can be used separately or in combination to treat different types of wastewaters and achieve different treatment goals. The selection of the most suitable treatment method depends on various factors, viz., wastewater characteristics, effluent quality, resource availability, environmental impacts, and economic feasibility. In most cases, a combination of physical, chemical, and biological treatment methods is used to achieve optimal results. Wastewater treatment is a vital process that can protect the environment and human health, conserve water resources, and recover valuable materials from wastewater.

4. Sustainable Intervention

4.1. Resource Recovery

Despite the importance of conducting materials in effectively facilitating electron transfer, it is imperative to note that these materials play a pivotal role in determining the fate of biobased product formation [88]. Though the biocatalyst and the microenvironment dictate metabolic pathways and the corresponding biobased products, the role of electron flux is crucial in the carbon chain length, titer, and switching toward specific products’ formation, viz., short/medium-chain carboxylic acids (acidogenesis/carboxylate platform), short/medium-chain alcohols (solventogenesis), and biopolymers/bioplastics (anoxygenesis) [32,89,90,91]. The carboxylate platform/acidogenesis is comparatively a more advantageous bioprocess than others in terms of generating lower CO2 emissions compared to sugar platforms. Also, it facilitates the efficient utilization of diverse waste/wastewater/biomass streams, resulting in higher levels of short/medium-chain fatty acids along with the co-generation of biogas, biopolymers, and electricity production. The carboxylate platform is also a building block/substrate/precursor in several biological processes [89]. These have an application feasibility/scope in both biological and chemical industries. Platform chemicals and their derivatives are high-value chemicals and have significant importance in various sectors, viz., the food industry, research laboratories, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics/perfumes, polymers, fuel industries, etc. [24,92]. Platform chemicals include acetic acid, ethanol, methanol, butyric acid, caproic acid, lactic acid, acrylic acid, propionic acid, ethanol, butanol, succinic acid, citric acid, adipic acid, etc. [92,93]. Hence, the electrochemical integration of these biological processes using conductive materials and electron flux regulation is a necessity to enhance their productivity. The presence of electron-withdrawing groups on the surface of conducting materials effectively promotes electron transfer, thereby crucially contributing to surface-catalyzed bioelectrochemical reactions [10]. A porous and amenable surface morphology is crucial for biofilm formation, which encourages bioelectrochemical reduction reactions [77,88].
Nevertheless, it must be noted that electrophilic groups/charged groups on the surface of an electrode coupled with the aforesaid morphology will have a greater impact on the overall electron flux/process regulation [94]. The recent literature also focuses on a few carbon/non-carbon conductive materials having electrophilic surface groups, which could be effective in increasing the electron-holding capacity (capacitance) for the regulated electron charge–discharge between the microbe and materials. Capacitance, with respect to charge-holding/electron flux regulation and in situ/applied potential, could further channelize electron movement/utilization toward the redox acceptor/sink that aids in the specified product formation. Both carbon/non-carbon-based conductive materials have the capability of augmenting redox reactions by acting as an electron shuttler/promoter/reservoir. Although the literature illustrates that the utilization of several electrode materials plays a key function in bioelectrochemical redox reactions, the role of conductive materials in electron channeling is limited and deserves attention.

4.2. Circular Economy and Low-Carbon Footprints

Biological wastewater treatment utilizes microorganisms for organic pollutant removal/neutralization from wastewater for environmental restoration. A circular economy aims at maximizing resource recovery with increased carbon utilization efficiency by reusing, recycling, and recovering energy/chemicals from various sources toward zero discharge [16]. Biological wastewater treatment could be aligned with the principles of the circular economy and sustainable development goals (SDGs) by recovering valuable products from wastewater, viz., nutrients, biogas, biofuels, bioplastics, and biosorbents. Carbon capture and utilization can be enhanced by integrating conventional and advanced biological wastewater treatment systems, such as bioelectrochemical systems and anaerobic digestion. Advanced sludge treatment technologies, such as hydrothermal carbonization, pyrolysis, and gasification, also need to be focused on for low-carbon generation. Innovation with respect to energy- and resource-efficient treatment systems for reducing the environmental impact needs to be considered [1]. Integrated and advanced bioremediation strategies could contribute to the reduction in environmental pollutants by aligning with SDGs, such as Goal 3: Good Health and Well-being; Goal 6: Clean Water and Sanitation; Goal 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities; and Goal 13: Climate Action. Bioremediation approaches like chemotaxis, biostimulation, bioaugmentation, biofilm formation, the application of genetically engineered microorganisms, and advanced omics have been widely used. The microbial metabolic potential could be tremendously utilized for the sustainable degradation and remediation of environmental pollution, along with product generation. These strategies can help to transition wastewater treatment plants from being energy consumers to energy producers, and from being waste generators to resource providers, thus contributing to a more sustainable and resilient water sector.

5. Way Forward

Biological wastewater treatment has constraints and obstacles due to the fluctuating quality and quantity of wastewater and the toxicity of some molecules [95]. With the inter-dependence of anaerobic–aerobic treatment systems, considering the individual process advantages in designing an efficient treatment system that can simultaneously produce biogas and reduce the organic load can help in low-carbon generation. The combination of biological treatment with membrane filtration is an effective option to produce high-quality effluent and reduce sludge production. Biosorption with biomass/biochar adsorbents could be effective for removing heavy metals/dyes/other contaminants from wastewater. Biocatalysts with enzyme/microalgae utilization are effective in degrading or transforming recalcitrant pollutants, such as endocrine disruptors, pharmaceuticals, or textile dyes. Therefore, integrated strategies that combine biological treatment with other physical, chemical, or biotechnological methods could benefit in enhancing the performance and sustainability of wastewater treatment.
Futuristic emerging trends need to emphasize widening the application feasibility of these integrated bioprocesses. Hybridized strategies with genetic engineering and synthetic biology could be thoroughly aligned to enhance the capabilities and performance of microorganisms, such as improving their resistance, specificity, or productivity. Nanotechnology/nanomaterial applications could help to improve the properties and functions of membranes, adsorbents, or biocatalysts, such as increasing their selectivity, stability, or reusability [26]. The integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning to optimize the design, operation, and control of wastewater treatment systems, such as predicting the behavior, performance, or quality of systems, is widely recommended for the practical and economic viability of bioremediation strategies toward environmental sustainability [95]. Artificial intelligence is revolutionizing the wastewater treatment sector, presenting intriguing opportunities to enhance effectiveness, eco-friendliness, and robustness. Overall, integrated advancements in biological wastewater treatment could lead to the development of efficient, robust, and adaptable systems that can manage the increasing complexity and diversity of wastewater while recovering valuable energy/chemicals/resources to minimize the environmental impact and the economic cost of wastewater treatment.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, J.S.S. and O.S.; writing—original draft preparation, J.S.S., L.M. and O.S.; writing—review and editing, J.S.S., O.S. and L.M.; supervision, J.S.S. and O.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

ASPActivated sludge process
AOPsAdvanced oxidation processes
BETBioelectrochemical treatment
ClO2Chlorine dioxide
CODChemical oxygen demand
CWsConstructed wetlands
DIETDirect interspecies electron transfer
DAODirect anodic oxidation
EESEcologically engineered systems
EOElectrochemical oxidation
EABsElectrochemically active bacteria
EETExtracellular electron transfer
HRTHydraulic retention time
H2O2Hydrogen peroxide
OH *Hydroxyl radicals
OCl−Hypochlorite
IAOIndirect anodic oxidation
IETInterspecies electron transfer
O *Nascent oxygen
O3Ozone
POPsPersistent organic pollutants
SBRSequential batch process
SDGsSustainable development goals

References

  1. Sathya, R.; Arasu, M.V.; Al-Dhabi, N.A.; Vijayaraghavan, P.; Ilavenil, S.; Rejiniemon, T.S. Towards Sustainable Wastewater Treatment by Biological Methods—A Challenges and Advantages of Recent Technologies. Urban Clim. 2023, 47, 101378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  2. Saini, S.; Tewari, S.; Dwivedi, J.; Sharma, V. Biofilm Mediated Wastewater Treatment: A Comprehensive Review. Mater. Adv. 2023, 4, 1415–1443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. González, J.; Sánchez, M.E.; Gómez, X. Enhancing Anaerobic Digestion: The Effect of Carbon Conductive Materials. C J. Carbon Res. 2018, 4, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  4. Moscoviz, R.; Toledo-Alarcón, J.; Trably, E.; Bernet, N. Electro-Fermentation: How To Drive Fermentation Using Electrochemical Systems. Trends Biotechnol. 2016, 34, 856–865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  5. Wu, Y.; Wang, S.; Liang, D.; Li, N. Conductive Materials in Anaerobic Digestion: From Mechanism to Application. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 298, 122403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  6. Zhao, Z.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Lovley, D.R. Sparking Anaerobic Digestion: Promoting Direct Interspecies Electron Transfer to Enhance Methane Production. Iscience 2020, 23, 101794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  7. Sravan, J.S.; Tharak, A.; Modestra, J.A.; Chang, I.S.; Mohan, S.V. Emerging Trends in Microbial Fuel Cell Diversification-Critical Analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 326, 124676. [Google Scholar]
  8. Gong, Z.; Yu, H.; Zhang, J.; Li, F.; Song, H. Microbial Electro-Fermentation for Synthesis of Chemicals and Biofuels Driven by Bi-Directional Extracellular Electron Transfer. Synth. Syst. Biotechnol. 2020, 5, 304–313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  9. Prévoteau, A.; Carvajal-Arroyo, J.M.; Ganigué, R.; Rabaey, K. Microbial Electrosynthesis from CO2: Forever a Promise? Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2020, 62, 48–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. Sharma, M.; Alvarez-Gallego, Y.; Achouak, W.; Pant, D.; Sarma, P.M.; Dominguez-Benetton, X. Electrode Material Properties for Designing Effective Microbial Electrosynthesis Systems. J. Mater. Chem. A 2019, 7, 24420–24436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  11. Vassilev, I.; Hernandez, P.A.; Batlle-Vilanova, P.; Freguia, S.; Krömer, J.O.; Keller, J.J.; Ledezma, P.; Virdis, B.; Krömer, J.O.; Keller, J.J.; et al. Microbial Electrosynthesis of Isobutyric, Butyric, Caproic Acids, and Corresponding Alcohols from Carbon Dioxide. ACS Sustain. Chem. Eng. 2018, 6, 8485–8493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  12. Yang, L.; Xu, X.; Wang, H.; Yan, J.; Zhou, X.; Ren, N.; Lee, D.-J.; Chen, C. Biological Treatment of Refractory Pollutants in Industrial Wastewaters under Aerobic or Anaerobic Condition: Batch Tests and Associated Microbial Community Analysis. Bioresour. Technol. Rep. 2022, 17, 100927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Ma, D.; Yi, H.; Lai, C.; Liu, X.; Huo, X.; An, Z.; Li, L.; Fu, Y.; Li, B.; Zhang, M. Critical Review of Advanced Oxidation Processes in Organic Wastewater Treatment. Chemosphere 2021, 275, 130104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  14. Saravanan, A.; Deivayanai, V.C.; Kumar, P.S.; Rangasamy, G.; Hemavathy, R.V.; Harshana, T.; Gayathri, N.; Alagumalai, K. A Detailed Review on Advanced Oxidation Process in Treatment of Wastewater: Mechanism, Challenges and Future Outlook. Chemosphere 2022, 308, 136524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Priyadarshini, M.; Das, I.; Ghangrekar, M.M.; Blaney, L. Advanced Oxidation Processes: Performance, Advantages, and Scale-up of Emerging Technologies. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 316, 115295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  16. Sravan, J.S.; Hemalatha, M.; Mohan, S.V. Cascading Integration of Electrofermentation and Photosynthesis—Low-Carbon Biorefinery in Closed Loop Approach. Adv. Sustain. Syst. 2023, 7, 2300142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  17. Hemalatha, M.; Sravan, J.S.; Yeruva, D.K.; Mohan, S.V. Integrated Ecotechnology Approach towards Treatment of Complex Wastewater with Simultaneous Bioenergy Production. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 242, 60–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  18. Yang, G.; Wang, J. Various Additives for Improving Dark Fermentative Hydrogen Production: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 95, 130–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. Chen, H.; Dong, F.; Minteer, S.D. The Progress and Outlook of Bioelectrocatalysis for the Production of Chemicals, Fuels and Materials. Nat. Catal. 2020, 3, 225–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  20. Velvizhi, G.; Modestra, J.A.; Yeruva, D.K.; Sravan, J.S.; Mohan, S.V. Bioelectrochemical Treatment: Present Trends and Prospective. In Microbial Electrochemical Technologies; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2020; pp. 402–421. [Google Scholar]
  21. Burboa-Charis, V.A.; Alvarez, L.H. Methane Production from Antibiotic Bearing Swine Wastewater Using Carbon-based Materials as Electrons’ Conduits during Anaerobic Digestion. Int. J. Energy Res. 2020, 44, 10996–11005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Sravan, J.S.; Sarkar, O.; Mohan, S.V. Electron-Regulated Flux towards Biogas Upgradation—Triggering Catabolism for an Augmented Methanogenic Activity. Sustain. Energy Fuels 2020, 4, 700–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  23. Zhao, Z.; Li, Y.; Quan, X.; Zhang, Y. Towards Engineering Application: Potential Mechanism for Enhancing Anaerobic Digestion of Complex Organic Waste with Different Types of Conductive Materials. Water Res. 2017, 115, 266–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  24. Dahiya, S.; Kumar, A.N.; Sravan, J.S.; Chatterjee, S.; Sarkar, O.; Mohan, S.V. Food Waste Biorefinery: Sustainable Strategy for Circular Bioeconomy. Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 248, 2–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  25. Madondo, N.I.; Tetteh, E.K.; Rathilal, S.; Bakare, B.F. Synergistic Effect of Magnetite and Bioelectrochemical Systems on Anaerobic Digestion. Bioengineering 2021, 8, 198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  26. Srivastava, N.; Srivastava, M.; Mishra, P.K.; Kausar, M.A.; Saeed, M.; Gupta, V.K.; Singh, R.; Ramteke, P.W. Advances in Nanomaterials Induced Biohydrogen Production Using Waste Biomass. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 307, 123094. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  27. Brown, K.A.; King, P.W. Coupling Biology to Synthetic Nanomaterials for Semi-Artificial Photosynthesis. Photosynth. Res. 2020, 143, 193–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  28. Baniamerian, H.; Isfahani, P.G.; Tsapekos, P.; Alvarado-Morales, M.; Shahrokhi, M.; Vossoughi, M.; Angelidaki, I. Application of Nano-Structured Materials in Anaerobic Digestion: Current Status and Perspectives. Chemosphere 2019, 229, 188–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  29. Abdelsalam, E.; Samer, M.; Attia, Y.A.; Abdel-Hadi, M.A.; Hassan, H.E.; Badr, Y. Effects of Co and Ni Nanoparticles on Biogas and Methane Production from Anaerobic Digestion of Slurry. Energy Convers. Manag. 2017, 141, 108–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  30. Johnson, M.B.; Mehrvar, M. Waste Activated Sludge-High Rate (WASHR) Treatment Process: A Novel, Economically Viable, and Environmentally Sustainable Method to Co-Treat High-Strength Wastewaters at Municipal Wastewater Treatment Plants. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  31. Sravan, J.S.; Kumar, A.N.; Mohan, S.V. Multi-Pollutant Treatment of Crystalline Cellulosic Effluent: Function of Dissolved Oxygen on Process Control. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 217, 245–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  32. Sarkar, O.; Venkata Mohan, S. Synergy of Anoxic Microenvironment and Facultative Anaerobes on Acidogenic Metabolism in a Self-Induced Electrofermentation System. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 313, 123604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  33. Nabgan, W.; Saeed, M.; Jalil, A.A.; Nabgan, B.; Gambo, Y.; Ali, M.W.; Ikram, M.; Fauzi, A.A.; Owgi, A.H.K.; Hussain, I. A State of the Art Review on Electrochemical Technique for the Remediation of Pharmaceuticals Containing Wastewater. Environ. Res. 2022, 210, 112975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  34. Alam, R.; Sheob, M.; Saeed, B.; Khan, S.U.; Shirinkar, M.; Frontistis, Z.; Basheer, F.; Farooqi, I.H. Use of Electrocoagulation for Treatment of Pharmaceutical Compounds in Water/Wastewater: A Review Exploring Opportunities and Challenges. Water 2021, 13, 2105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  35. Martins, R.A.; Salgado, E.M.; Gonçalves, A.L.; Esteves, A.F.; Pires, J.C.M. Microalgae-Based Remediation of Real Textile Wastewater: Assessing Pollutant Removal and Biomass Valorisation. Bioengineering 2024, 11, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  36. Raffa, C.M.; Chiampo, F. Bioremediation of Agricultural Soils Polluted with Pesticides: A Review. Bioengineering 2021, 8, 92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  37. Shen, Y.; Yang, D.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, X. Operation Mode of a Step-Feed Anoxic/Oxic Process with Distribution of Carbon Source from Anaerobic Zone on Nutrient Removal and Microbial Properties. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  38. Yeruva, D.K.; Ranadheer, P.; Venkata Mohan, S. Eco-Electrogenic Engineered Flow through Wetland System for Tertiary Treatment of Acidogenic Effluents from Biohydrogen Production. J. Hazard. Toxic Radioact. Waste 2020, 24, 4020020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  39. Yang, G.; Wang, J. Enhanced Antibiotic Degradation and Hydrogen Production of Deacetoxycephalosporin C Fermentation Residue by Gamma Radiation Coupled with Nano Zero-Valent Iron. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 424, 127439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  40. Wu, G.; Yin, Q. Microbial Niche Nexus Sustaining Biological Wastewater Treatment. npj Clean Water 2020, 3, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  41. Frontistis, Z. Current and Future Trends in Environmental Electrochemistry for Wastewater Treatment. Water 2022, 14, 1817. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  42. Yang, K.; Ji, M.; Liang, B.; Zhao, Y.; Zhai, S.; Ma, Z.; Yang, Z. Bioelectrochemical Degradation of Monoaromatic Compounds: Current Advances and Challenges. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020, 398, 122892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  43. Yadav, R.K.; Das, S.; Patil, S.A. Are Integrated Bioelectrochemical Technologies Feasible for Wastewater Management? Trends Biotechnol. 2023, 41, 484–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  44. Xu, L.; Yu, W.; Graham, N.; Zhao, Y.; Qu, J. Application of Integrated Bioelectrochemical-Wetland Systems for Future Sustainable Wastewater Treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2019, 53, 1741–1743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  45. Giannakopoulos, S.; Kokkinos, P.; Hasa, B.; Frontistis, Z.; Katsaounis, A.; Mantzavinos, D. Electrochemical Oxidation of Pharmaceuticals on a Pt–SnO2/Ti Electrode. Electrocatalysis 2022, 13, 363–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  46. Huang, Z.; Zhang, F.; Tang, Y.; Wen, Y.; Wu, Z.; Fang, Z.; Tian, X. Rapid Degradation of Rhodamine B through Visible-Photocatalytic Advanced Oxidation Using Self-Degradable Natural Perylene Quinone Derivatives—Hypocrellins. Bioengineering 2022, 9, 307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  47. Pueyo, N.; Ormad, M.P.; Miguel, N.; Kokkinos, P.; Ioannidi, A.; Mantzavinos, D.; Frontistis, Z. Electrochemical Oxidation of Butyl Paraben on Boron Doped Diamond in Environmental Matrices and Comparison with Sulfate Radical-AOP. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 269, 110783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  48. Petala, A.; Bampos, G.; Frontistis, Z. Using Sawdust Derived Biochar as a Novel 3D Particle Electrode for Micropollutants Degradation. Water 2022, 14, 357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  49. Mousazadeh, M.; Alizadeh, S.M.; Frontistis, Z.; Kabdaşlı, I.; Karamati Niaragh, E.; Al Qodah, Z.; Naghdali, Z.; Mahmoud, A.E.D.; Sandoval, M.A.; Butler, E. Electrocoagulation as a Promising Defluoridation Technology from Water: A Review of State of the Art of Removal Mechanisms and Performance Trends. Water 2021, 13, 656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  50. Zou, H.; Wang, Y. Azo Dyes Wastewater Treatment and Simultaneous Electricity Generation in a Novel Process of Electrolysis Cell Combined with Microbial Fuel Cell. Bioresour. Technol. 2017, 235, 167–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  51. Bampos, G.; Petala, A.; Frontistis, Z. Recent Trends in Pharmaceuticals Removal from Water Using Electrochemical Oxidation Processes. Environments 2021, 8, 85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  52. Naderi, A.; Hasham Firooz, M.; Gharibzadeh, F.; Giannakis, S.; Ahmadi, M.; Rezaei Kalantary, R.; Kakavandi, B. Anchoring ZnO on Spinel Cobalt Ferrite for Highly Synergic Sono-Photo-Catalytic, Surfactant-Assisted PAH Degradation from Soil Washing Solutions. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 326, 116584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  53. Pareek, A.; Sravan, J.S.; Mohan, S.V. Fabrication of Three-Dimensional Graphene Anode for Augmenting Performance in Microbial Fuel Cells. Carbon Resour. Convers. 2019, 2, 134–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  54. Pareek, A.; Sravan, J.S.; Mohan, S.V. Exploring Chemically Reduced Graphene Oxide Electrode for Power Generation in Microbial Fuel Cell. Mater. Sci. Energy Technol. 2019, 2, 600–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  55. Yeruva, D.K.; Sravan, J.S.; Butti, S.K.; Modestra, J.A.; Mohan, S.V. Spatial Variation of Electrode Position in Bioelectrochemical Treatment System: Design Consideration for Azo Dye Remediation. Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 256, 374–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  56. Jain, P.; Sharma, M.; Dureja, P.; Sarma, P.M.; Lal, B. Bioelectrochemical Approaches for Removal of Sulfate, Hydrocarbon and Salinity from Produced Water. Chemosphere 2017, 166, 96–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  57. Molognoni, D.; Chiarolla, S.; Cecconet, D.; Callegari, A.; Capodaglio, A.G. Industrial Wastewater Treatment with a Bioelectrochemical Process: Assessment of Depuration Efficiency and Energy Production. Water Sci. Technol. 2018, 77, 134–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  58. Sravan, J.S.; Venkata Mohan, S. Bioelectrocatalytic Reduction of Tellurium Oxyanions toward Their Cathodic Recovery: Concentration Dependence and Anodic Electrogenic Activity. ACS ES&T Water 2021, 2, 40–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  59. Bagchi, S.; Behera, M. Assessment of Heavy Metal Removal in Different Bioelectrochemical Systems: A Review. J. Hazard. Toxic Radioact. Waste 2020, 24, 4020010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  60. Xu, C.; Lu, J.; Zhao, Z.; Lu, X.; Zhang, Y.; Cheng, M.; Zhang, J. Simultaneous Bioelectricity Generation, Desalination, Organics Degradation, and Nitrogen Removal in Air—Cathode Microbial Desalination Cells. SN Appl. Sci. 2020, 2, 212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  61. Yao, H.; Xiao, J.; Tang, X. Microbial Fuel Cell-Based Organic Matter Sensors: Principles, Structures and Applications. Bioengineering 2023, 10, 886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  62. Olabi, A.G.; Wilberforce, T.; Sayed, E.T.; Elsaid, K.; Rezk, H.; Abdelkareem, M.A. Recent Progress of Graphene Based Nanomaterials in Bioelectrochemical Systems. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 749, 141225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  63. Wilberforce, T.; Sayed, E.T.; Abdelkareem, M.A.; Elsaid, K.; Olabi, A.G. Value Added Products from Wastewater Using Bioelectrochemical Systems: Current Trends and Perspectives. J. Water Process Eng. 2021, 39, 101737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  64. Sravan, J.S.S.; Mohan, S.V.V. Hybrid Electrosynthesis as Non-Genetic Approach for Regulating Microbial Metabolism towards Waste Valorization in Circular Framework. Microb. Biotechnol. 2022, 16, 184–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  65. Leicester, D.; Amezaga, J.; Heidrich, E. Is Bioelectrochemical Energy Production from Wastewater a Reality? Identifying and Standardising the Progress Made in Scaling up Microbial Electrolysis Cells. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020, 133, 110279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  66. Wang, X.; Li, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Pan, Y.R.; Li, L.; Liu, J.; Butler, D. Stepwise PH Control to Promote Synergy of Chemical and Biological Processes for Augmenting Short-Chain Fatty Acid Production from Anaerobic Sludge Fermentation. Water Res. 2019, 155, 193–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  67. Sravan, J.S.; Tharak, A.; Mohan, S.V. Chapter 1—Status of Biogas Production and Biogas Upgrading: A Global Scenario. In Emerging Technologies and Biological Systems for Biogas Upgrading; Aryal, N., Mørck Ottosen, L.D., Wegener Kofoed, M.V., Eds.; Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 3–26. ISBN 978-0-12-822808-1. [Google Scholar]
  68. Kaushik, A.; Singh, A. Metal Removal and Recovery Using Bioelectrochemical Technology: The Major Determinants and Opportunities for Synchronic Wastewater Treatment and Energy Production. J. Environ. Manag. 2020, 270, 110826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  69. Jain, A.; He, Z. Cathode-Enhanced Wastewater Treatment in Bioelectrochemical Systems. npj Clean Water 2018, 1, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  70. Naderi, A.; Kakavandi, B.; Giannakis, S.; Angelidaki, I.; Rezaei Kalantary, R. Putting the Electro-Bugs to Work: A Systematic Review of 22 Years of Advances in Bio-Electrochemical Systems and the Parameters Governing Their Performance. Environ. Res. 2023, 229, 115843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  71. Altamirano-Corona, M.F.; Anaya-Reza, O.; Durán-Moreno, A. Biostimulation of Food Waste Anaerobic Digestion Supplemented with Granular Activated Carbon, Biochar and Magnetite: A Comparative Analysis. Biomass Bioenergy 2021, 149, 106105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  72. Qiu, L.; Deng, Y.F.; Wang, F.; Davaritouchaee, M.; Yao, Y.Q. A Review on Biochar-Mediated Anaerobic Digestion with Enhanced Methane Recovery. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019, 115, 109373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  73. Aryal, N.; Halder, A.; Tremblay, P.-L.; Chi, Q.; Zhang, T. Enhanced Microbial Electrosynthesis with Three-Dimensional Graphene Functionalized Cathodes Fabricated via Solvothermal Synthesis. Electrochim. Acta 2016, 217, 117–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  74. Tian, N.; Giannakis, S.; Akbarzadeh, L.; Hasanvandian, F.; Dehghanifard, E.; Kakavandi, B. Improved Catalytic Performance of ZnO via Coupling with CoFe2O4 and Carbon Nanotubes: A New, Photocatalysis-Mediated Peroxymonosulfate Activation System, Applied towards Cefixime Degradation. J. Environ. Manag. 2023, 329, 117022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  75. Yellappa, M.; Sravan, J.S.; Sarkar, O.; Reddy, Y.V.R.; Mohan, S.V. Modified Conductive Polyaniline-Carbon Nanotube Composite Electrodes for Bioelectricity Generation and Waste Remediation. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 284, 148–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  76. Martins, G.; Salvador, A.F.; Pereira, L.; Alves, M.M. Methane Production and Conductive Materials: A Critical Review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2018, 52, 10241–10253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  77. Choi, O.; Sang, B.-I. Extracellular Electron Transfer from Cathode to Microbes: Application for Biofuel Production. Biotechnol. Biofuels 2016, 9, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  78. Baek, G.; Kim, J.; Kim, J.; Lee, C. Role and Potential of Direct Interspecies Electron Transfer in Anaerobic Digestion. Energies 2018, 11, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  79. Olfatmehr, N.; Kakavandi, B.; Khezri, S.M. Peroxydisulfate Activation by Enhanced Catalytic Activity of CoFe2O4 Anchored on Activated Carbon: A New Sulfate Radical-Based Oxidation Study on the Cefixime Degradation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022, 302, 121991. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  80. Rathour, R.; Patel, D.; Shaikh, S.; Desai, C. Eco-Electrogenic Treatment of Dyestuff Wastewater Using Constructed Wetland-Microbial Fuel Cell System with an Evaluation of Electrode-Enriched Microbial Community Structures. Bioresour. Technol. 2019, 285, 121349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  81. Mohammadi, T.; Esmaeelifar, A. Wastewater Treatment Using Ultrafiltration at a Vegetable Oil Factory. Desalination 2004, 166, 329–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  82. Wang, Y.; Chen, X.; Zhang, J.; Yin, J.; Wang, H. Investigation of Microfiltration for Treatment of Emulsified Oily Wastewater from the Processing of Petroleum Products. Desalination 2009, 249, 1223–1227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  83. Yellappa, M.; Sarkar, O.; Reddy, Y.V.R.; Mohan, S.V. Municipal Landfill Leachate Remediation Coupling Acidogenesis and Bioelectrogenesis for Biohydrogen and Volatile Fatty Acids Production. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 2023, 172, 716–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  84. Petrinic, I.; Korenak, J.; Povodnik, D.; Hélix-Nielsen, C. A Feasibility Study of Ultrafiltration/Reverse Osmosis (UF/RO)-Based Wastewater Treatment and Reuse in the Metal Finishing Industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 101, 292–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  85. Salahi, A.; Badrnezhad, R.; Abbasi, M.; Mohammadi, T.; Rekabdar, F. Oily Wastewater Treatment Using a Hybrid UF/RO System. Desalination Water Treat. 2011, 28, 75–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  86. Krishna, K.V.; Sarkar, O.; Venkata Mohan, S. Bioelectrochemical Treatment of Paper and Pulp Wastewater in Comparison with Anaerobic Process: Integrating Chemical Coagulation with Simultaneous Power Production. Bioresour. Technol. 2014, 174, 142–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  87. Sarkar, O.; Matsakas, L.; Rova, U.; Christakopoulos, P. Ultrasound-Controlled Acidogenic Valorization of Wastewater for Biohydrogen and Volatile Fatty Acids Production: Microbial Community Profiling. iScience 2023, 26, 106519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  88. Mostafazadeh, A.K.; Drogui, P.; Brar, S.K.; Tyagi, R.D.; Le Bihan, Y.; Buelna, G. Microbial Electrosynthesis of Solvents and Alcoholic Biofuels from Nutrient Waste: A Review. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2017, 5, 940–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  89. Rozmysłowicz, B.; Yeap, J.H.; Elkhaiary, A.M.I.; Amiri, M.T.; Shahab, R.L.; Questell-Santiago, Y.M.; Xiros, C.; Le Monnier, B.P.; Studer, M.H.; Luterbacher, J.S. Catalytic Valorization of the Acetate Fraction of Biomass to Aromatics and Its Integration into the Carboxylate Platform. Green Chem. 2019, 21, 2801–2809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  90. Atilano-Camino, M.M.; Luévano-Montaño, C.D.; García-González, A.; Olivo-Alanis, D.S.; Álvarez-Valencia, L.H.; García-Reyes, R.B. Evaluation of Dissolved and Immobilized Redox Mediators on Dark Fermentation: Driving to Hydrogen or Solventogenic Pathway. Bioresour. Technol. 2020, 317, 123981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  91. Puyol, D.; Batstone, D.J.; Hülsen, T.; Astals, S.; Peces, M.; Krömer, J.O. Resource Recovery from Wastewater by Biological Technologies: Opportunities, Challenges, and Prospects. Front. Microbiol. 2017, 7, 2106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  92. Cheng, Y.S.; Mutrakulcharoen, P.; Chuetor, S.; Cheenkachorn, K.; Tantayotai, P.; Panakkal, E.J.; Sriariyanun, M. Recent Situation and Progress in Biorefining Process of Lignocellulosic Biomass: Toward Green Economy. Appl. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2020, 13, 299–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  93. Sarkar, O.; Katakojwala, R.; Mohan, S.V.; Venkata Mohan, S. Low Carbon Hydrogen Production from a Waste-Based Biorefinery System and Environmental Sustainability Assessment. Green Chem. 2021, 23, 561–574. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  94. Reiner, J.E.; Geiger, K.; Hackbarth, M.; Fink, M.; Lapp, C.J.; Jung, T.; Dötsch, A.; Hügler, M.; Wagner, M.; Hille-Reichel, A. From an Extremophilic Community to an Electroautotrophic Production Strain: Identifying a Novel Knallgas Bacterium as Cathodic Biofilm Biocatalyst. ISME J. 2020, 14, 1125–1140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  95. Muduli, M.; Chanchpara, A.; Choudhary, M.; Saravaia, H.; Haldar, S.; Ray, S. Critical Review on Sustainable Bioreactors for Wastewater Treatment and Water Reuse. Sustain. Water Resour. Manag. 2022, 8, 159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.
The Effect of a New Generation of Ankle Foot Orthoses on Sloped Walking in Children with Hemiplegia Using the Gait Real Time Analysis Interactive Lab (GRAIL)
Previous
Biohydrogen Production from Waste Black Cumin (Nigella Sativa) Extract Liquid
Next